Exposure to the COVID-19 pandemic environment and generosity

Assessing the effects of pandemic risk on cooperation and social norms using a before-after Covid-19 comparison in two long-term experiments

How does threat from disease shape our cooperative actions and the social norms that guide such behaviour? To study these questions, we draw on a collective-risk social dilemma experiment that we ran before the emergence of the Covid-19 pandemic (Wave 1, 2018) and compare this to its exact replication, sampling from the same population, that we conducted during the first wave of the pandemic (Wave 2, 2020). Tightness-looseness theory predicts and evidence generally supports that both cooperation and accompanying social norms should increase, yet, we mostly did not find this. Contributions, the probability of reaching the threshold (cooperation), and the contents of the social norm (how much people should contribute) remained similar across the waves, although the strength of these social norms were slightly greater in Wave 2. We also study whether the results from Wave 1 that should not be affected by the pandemic-the relationship between social norms and cooperation and specific behavioural types-replicate in Wave 2 and find that these results generally hold. Overall, our work demonstrates that social norms are important drivers of cooperation, yet, communicable diseases, at least in the short term, have little or no effects on either.

Generosity during the COVID-19 pandemic: The role of collective narcissism

This study analyzes how a novel psychological factor-collective narcissism-affects giving behavior to national and international charities during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that collective narcissists tended to keep more resources for themselves or national charities while giving less to international charities. In line with the group threat theory, this tendency is more pronounced in countries with a high share of foreign population. Our findings suggest that the shared experience of the global COVID-19 public health crisis did not blur the boundaries between ingroups and outgroups for collective narcissists. These results imply that mitigating outgroup hostility associated with collective narcissism is critical to strengthening cross-national solidarity during unprecedented crises. However, more contact with foreign nationals might not reduce the negative impact of collective narcissism.

Exploring the relationship between exposure to COVID-19 and donations during the COVID-19 pandemic: The mediating roles of emotions and risk perception

Objective

Public emergency events like the COVID-19 pandemic are special occasions that need immediate massive funding from public donations. Thus, understanding the determinants of donation behaviors under public emergencies is important for both researchers and practitioners. This study investigated the effect of personal and local exposure to incidences of COVID-19 on donation behaviors. Specifically, we examined the mediating effects of risk perception and emotions on the relationship between exposure to COVID-19 and donation behaviors.

Methods

The data were from a survey distributed in China between March 20 and 30th, 2020. Participants' donation choice at the end of the survey was used to measure their donation behaviors. Participants' emotions, risk perception, and personal exposure were assessed in the questionnaire. Local exposure was the 30-day confirmed cases obtained from the National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China. A total of 8,720 participants (Mean age = 28.91, 43.6% females) completed the online survey.

Results

Based on the results from the mediation analysis, we found that people with stronger positive and negative emotions, higher risk perception, and more personal exposure to COVID-19 were more likely to donate. Furthermore, the effects of both personal and local exposure on donations are mediated by risk perception and negative emotion. Both higher personal and local exposure led to stronger negative emotions and higher risk perception, which in turn led to more donation behaviors.

Discussion

This study extends our knowledge of donation behaviors during public emergencies. Our results suggest that policymakers and charity organizations should elicit stronger emotions and risk perception by exposing the severity of the disaster in advertisements to promote donations.

Stability of pro-sociality and trust amid the Covid-19: panel data from the Netherlands

The Covid-19 has impacted most spheres of life and continues to influence the future course of socio-economic decisions. The effects of pandemic and virus contraction on the stability of social preferences are however relatively less know. This study examines the effects of the Covid-19 on pro-sociality and general trust by using the LISS panel data (time frame: 2019-2020) from the Netherlands. The fixed effects panel regressions show that pro-social behavior and general trust do not differ pre-and-after the Covid-19. The article further analyzes the stability of pro-sociality and general trust among people who unfortunately contracted the Covid-19 virus and the uninfected ones (time frame: 2019-2020) using difference-in-differences (DD) method to infer a causal effect of infections on preferences. The DD analysis also leads to insignificant causal effect of virus contractions on pro-sociality and trust. However, the sub-group analysis shows a positive causal impact of infections on trust for respondents above 60 years. Overall, both fixed effects regressions and DD analysis suggest that pro-sociality and to a large extent general trust in the Netherlands are stable despite the negative Covid-19 shock.

Prosocial behavior in the time of COVID-19: The effect of private and public role models

In public good provision and other collective action problems, people are uncertain about how to balance self-interest and prosociality. Actions of others may inform this decision. We conduct an experiment to test the effect of watching private citizens and public officials acting in ways that either increase or decrease the spread of the coronavirus. For private role models, positive examples lead to a 34% increase in donations to the CDC Emergency Fund and a 20% increase in learning about COVID-19-related volunteering compared to negative examples. For public role models these effects are reversed. Negative examples lead to a 29% and 53% increase in donations and volunteering, respectively, compared to positive examples.

Does pro-sociality or trust better predict staying home behavior during the Covid-19?

Voluntary compliance of preventive and mitigation measures due to social concerns can play a crucial role in slowing down the spread of the Covid-19. The existing economic models for disease spread however do not direct a lot of focus on the possible role of pro-social behavior and general trust in predicting preventive behaviors amid the Covid-19. Therefore, this study analyzes whether pro-sociality and general trust measured in the short run (2020 and 2019) and in the long run (2015 and 2010) predict attitudes towards the stay home behavior and the intended stay home behavior in case the government mandates it due to the Covid-19 in the Netherlands. The results suggest that these preferences positively influence attitudes towards staying home behavior. However, trust in comparison to pro-sociality is a stable and robust predictor of stay home attitudes both in the short as well as long run. On the other hand, neither trust nor pro-sociality influences the intended stay home behavior in case the government mandates the lockdown, and it is most likely due to the timing of the survey coinciding with a significant drop in the Covid-19 infections and easing out of the lockdown restrictions by the Dutch government.

Prosociality predicts individual behavior and collective outcomes in the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic induces a social dilemma: engaging in preventive health behaviors is costly for individuals but generates benefits that also accrue to society at large. The extent to which individuals internalize the social impact of their actions may depend on their prosociality, i.e. the willingness to behave in a way that mostly benefits other people. We conduct a nationally representative online survey in Germany (n = 5843) to investigate the role of prosociality in reducing the spread of COVID-19 during the second coronavirus wave. At the individual level, higher prosociality is strongly positively related to compliance with public health behaviors such as mask wearing and social distancing. A one standard deviation (SD) increase in prosociality is associated with a 0.3 SD increase in compliance (p < 0.01). At the regional (NUTS-2) level, a one SD higher average prosociality is associated with an 11% lower weekly incidence rate (p < 0.01), and a 2%p lower weekly growth rate (p < 0.01) of COVID-19 cases, controlling for a host of demographic and socio-economic factors. This association is driven by higher compliance with public health behaviors in regions with higher prosociality. Our correlational results thus support the common notion that voluntary behavioral change plays a vital role in fighting the pandemic and, more generally, that social preferences may determine collective action outcomes of a society.

COVID-19 and pro-sociality: How do donors respond to local pandemic severity, increased salience, and media coverage?

Has the COVID-19 pandemic affected pro-sociality among individuals? After the onset of the pandemic, many charitable appeals were updated to include a reference to COVID-19. Did donors increase their giving in response to such changes? In order to answer these questions, we conducted a real-donation online experiment with more than 4200 participants from 149 local areas in England and over 21 weeks. First, we varied the fundraising appeal to either include or exclude a reference to COVID-19. We found that including the reference to COVID-19 in the appeal increased donations. Second, in a natural experiment-like approach, we studied how the relative local severity of the pandemic and media coverage about local COVID-19 severity affected giving in our experiment. We found that both higher local severity and more related articles increased giving of participants in the respective areas. This holds for different specifications, including specifications with location fixed effects, time fixed effects, a broad set of individual characteristics to account for a potentially changing composition of the sample over time and to account for health- and work-related experiences with and expectations regarding the pandemic. While negative experiences with COVID-19 correlate negatively with giving, both approaches led us to conclude that the pure effect of increased salience of the pandemic on pro-sociality is positive. Despite the shift in public attention toward the domestic fight against the pandemic and away from developing countries' challenges, we found that preferences did not shift toward giving more to a national project and less to developing countries.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10683-022-09753-y.

Willingness to give amid pandemics: a contingent valuation of anticipated nongovernmental immunization programs

Given that altruism is crucial in assisting impoverished households to cope with health and economic crises, it is important to improve our understanding of how preferences and motives for giving differ during a pandemic. We implemented a web-based, contingent valuation survey to estimate Americans' willingness to give for nongovernmental immunization programs in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our results indicate that the median person is willing to give a one-time donation of $26, or at least $13 when willingness-to-give estimates are corrected for uncertainty regarding future donations. We find that willingness to give is related to income, concern levels, vaccine usage, and sociodemographic characteristics. Our findings also shed light on purely and impurely altruistic motives underlying the willingness to fund immunization programs.

COVID-19-Related Studies of Nonprofit Management: A Critical Review and Research Agenda

During crises such as the present coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic, nonprofits play a key role in ensuring support to improve the most vulnerable individuals' health, social, and economic conditions. One year into the COVID-19 pandemic, an extensive automated literature analysis was conducted of 154 academic articles on nonprofit management during the pandemic-all of which were published in 2020. This study sought to identify and systematize academics' contributions to knowledge about the crisis's impact on the nonprofit sector and to ascertain the most urgent directions for future research. The results provide policymakers, nonprofit practitioners, and scholars an overview of the themes addressed and highlight the important assistance academic researchers provide to nonprofits dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11266-021-00432-9.

Solidarity and fairness in times of crisis

In a large-scale pre-registered survey experiment with a representative sample of more than 8000 Americans, we examine how a reminder of the COVID-19 pandemic causally affects people's views on solidarity and fairness. We randomly manipulate whether respondents are asked general questions about the crisis before answering moral questions. By making the pandemic particularly salient for treated respondents, we provide causal evidence on how the crisis may change moral views. We find that a reminder about the crisis makes respondents more willing to prioritize society's problems over their own problems, but also more tolerant of inequalities due to luck. We show that people's moral views are strongly associated with their policy preferences for redistribution. The findings show that the pandemic may alter moral views and political attitudes in the United States and, consequently, the support for redistribution and welfare policies.