Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

In defence of charity which benefits both giver and receiver

Nature Human Behaviour volume 4, pages 670–672 (2020)Cite this article

Subjects

Selfless motivations for charitable giving are often represented as being superior to selfish ones. But, we argue, evidence from the behavioural sciences suggests that such a ‘hierarchy of charity’ may stand in the way of what ultimately matters: generating the most impactful giving overall.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: The world’s most generous countries.
Fig. 2: US charitable giving over time.

References

  1. Sawyer, P. David Beckham furious at claims he does charity work ‘to win a knighthood’. The Telegraph https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/04/david-beckham-furious-claims-does-charity-work-win-knighthood/ (4 February 2017).

  2. Spratt, V. Is giving to charity actually a bit selfish? Grazia https://graziadaily.co.uk/life/opinion/giving-to-charity-and-happiness/ (30 March 2018).

  3. Filkowski, M. M., Cochran, R. N. & Haas, B. W. Neurosci. Neuroecon. 5, 65–75 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Karlan, D. & McConnell, M. A. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 106, 402–412 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Dolan, P. & Galizzi, M. M. J. Econ. Psychol. 47, 1–16 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Meijers, M. H., Verlegh, P. W., Noordewier, M. K. & Smit, E. G. Soc. Influ. 10, 250–263 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Jordan, J., Mullen, E. & Murnighan, J. K. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 37, 701–713 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. White, K. & Peloza, J. J. Mark. 73, 109–124 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Charities Aid Foundation. CAF World Giving Index. CAF https://www.cafonline.org/about-us/publications/2018-publications/caf-world-giving-index-2018 (2018).

  10. Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. Philanthropy Panel Study Fact Sheets. Generosity for Life http://generosityforlife.org/generosity-data/fact-sheets/ (2007–2017).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Geary Institute for Public Policy and the School of Economics, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

    Kate M. Laffan

  2. The Psychological and Behavioural Science Department, The London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK

    Kate M. Laffan & Paul H. Dolan

Authors
  1. Kate M. Laffan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paul H. Dolan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kate M. Laffan.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Laffan, K.M., Dolan, P.H. In defence of charity which benefits both giver and receiver. Nat Hum Behav 4, 670–672 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0855-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0855-4

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing