This article was downloaded by: [University of Glasgow] On: 01 January 2015, At: 23:14 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
The Journal of Social Psychology Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vsoc20
The Effects of Confession on Altruism a
a
Mary B. Harris , Sheldon M. Benson & Carroll L. Hall
a
a
Ohio State University , USA Published online: 30 Jun 2010.
To cite this article: Mary B. Harris , Sheldon M. Benson & Carroll L. Hall (1975) The Effects of Confession on Altruism, The Journal of Social Psychology, 96:2, 187-192, DOI: 10.1080/00224545.1975.9923284 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1975.9923284
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 23:14 01 January 2015
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
The Journal of Social Psychology, 1975, 96, 187-192.
T H E EFFECTS O F CONFESSION ON ALTRUISM* Ohio State University
MARYB. HARRIS, SHELDONM. BENSON,AND CARROLL L. HALL
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 23:14 01 January 2015
SUMMARY
To test the hypothesis that confession serves to reduce guilt and thus to decrease subsequent altruism, 74 adult men and 99 adult women, alone or accompanied by other men and women, were observed entering or leaving a Catholic church during confession hours and asked to donate to the March of Dimes. Both the number of people donating and the amount given were recorded. Subjects were significantly more likely to donate prior to confession, and men gave significantly more money prior to than after confession. Women, however, donated larger amounts postconfession. Men and women were significantly more likely to donate when with a woman than when alone, and women gave significantly more money when with another woman than when alone. Men, however, gave significantly less money when with a woman than when alone. Men also donated more money overall than women. The results suggest that confession may serve to reduce altruism, at least for men, and that the presence of a woman may serve to increase it, at least for women. A.
INTRODUCTION
A substantial amount of research on transgression has led to the conclusion that transgression tends to increase subsequent compliance with a request for help. One possible explanation for this ( 2 ) is that transgression creates an unpleasant state called guilt, which altruism then relieves. Although this explanation in terms of guilt has been criticized (e.g., l ) , it does lead to a prediction which has been supported in two experiments: that confession, a time-honored way of reducing guilt, should reduce subsequent altruism. Carlsmith, Ellsworth, and Whiteside [see Freedman ( 2 ) ] found that subjects who were given the opportunity to confess that they had cheated on a test were less likely to volunteer to serve in future experiments than subjects who had no chance to confess their cheating. Regan ( 5 ) found that discussing one’s wrongdoing (confession) reduced subsequent donations to a charity. These studies
* Received in
the Editorial Office, Provincetown, Massachusetts, on October 25, 1974,
and given special consideration in accordance with our policy for field research. Copyright, 1975, by The Journal Press.
187
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 23:14 01 January 2015
188
JOURNAL O F SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
were carried out in laboratory situations, with subjects induced to transgress and then confess their transgression. The present study was carried out in a field situation without inducing guilt experimentally. Instead, subjects entering and leaving a Catholic church during confession hours were compared. It was predicted that if confession not only alleviates sin but also reduces guilt and if guilt motivates altruism, then persons leaving the church should donate less to the March of Dimes than persons entering. A second puaose of the study was to see whether the presence of another person would affect altruism in a nonemergency situation. Although a number of studies have shown that bystander intervention in an emergency tends to be reduced by the presence of another individual, it is not clear what effect the presence of another person in a nonemergency situation would have. Rosenhan and White ( 6 ) found that children were more likely to give to charity when observed than when alone. However, Konecni and Ebbesen ( 4 ) found that women alone were more likely to help an “injured” confederate than when accompanied by another woman or, especially, another man. The present study attempted to see whether men and women, alone or accompanied by a man or a woman, would differ in their donating behavior. B. METHOD 1. Subjects
‘Ss were all people who appeared to be adults, who were either alone ot accompanied by only one other adult, who entered or left a Catholic church in an inner city neighborhood during the advertised confessional hours of 3:OO-4:00 p.m. on six Saturdays in a two-month period. Frequently, the priest left early, and the observations were then terminated for the day. Ss were 74 men and 99 women, over half of whom appeared to the Es (two male graduate students in education) to be Spanish American.
Procedure During the confessional hour the first experimenter ( E l ) stood on the sidewalk near the only entrance to the church holding a March of Dimes container. As an S or pair of Ss approached, El said, “Would you care to donate to the March of Dimes?’’ and held out the container. Ss were then thanked, regardless of whether or not they donated, but no further communication was held. Following each donation, when no Ss or potential Ss were watching, El counted the donation in the jar and signaled the amount to E2, who was 2.
189
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 23:14 01 January 2015
MARY B. HARRIS ET AL.
standing close enough to observe the Ss but far enough from them and El apparently not to be noticed. E2 then recorded the amount of donation, sex of S, and who was with him, if anyone. Because of the sparse attendance, it was possible to request donations from each potential S either on the way in or out and to remember who had previously been solicited, so that no person would be solicited twice. Ss were solicited on the way in unless El had not yet had a chance to count the money, other potential Ss were visible, or an S who had not yet been solicited was seen to be leaving the church. Assignment of Ss to preconfession or postconfession conditions was thus very close to random. However, no male pairs of Ss were seen to enter the church, and thus there were no Ss in this cell. Presumably, this is either because all men with other men entered prior to confession hours or because no men actually went to church together but some met each other there and walked out together. The general tendency for fewer people to be seen while going into the church may also be due to the fact that some people entered the church prior to confession hours and waited to confess before leaving. Previous observation in the church and discussion with several priests had confirmed that essentially all persons who entered the church during these hours did so for the purpose of confession. However, no attempt was made to confirm this directly, as it was felt this would be an invasion of privacy. All money was later turned over to the March of Dimes.
C . RESULTS The number of Ss and percentages donating in each condition, as well as the mean donations (including those people who did not donate), are presented in Table 1. TABLE 1 PERCENTAGES OF PEOPLE DONATING AND MEAN DONATIONS IN CENTSBY TIMEOF DONATION WHEN ACCOMPANIED OR ALONE Time of donation
%
Alone Mean
n
%
Men Before confession After confession
100 11
29.0 5.4
3 35
-
-
21
2.5
0 14
71 50
11.7 4.4
14 8
21
1.2 8.5
14 35
0 0
0 0
14 8
50 50
3.2 2.3
14 14
Women Before confession After confession
11
With a man Mean n
With a woman Mean n
%
190
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 23:14 01 January 2015
1. Pre-Post Confession Chi square analyses revealed that a higher percentage of people donated before confession (39%) than after (19%; x2 = 6.84, dj = 1, p < .01). The difference in frequency of preconfession (76% ) and postconfession (19%) donations was significant for men (2’ = 17.01, d j = 1, p < .001) but not for women (24% and 19%, respectively; x2 < 1, d j = 1). An 11 group unweighted means analysis of variance revealed that the mean amounts of money given in the different conditions were significantly different (F = 3.623, df = 10/162, p < .05). Post hoc comparisons revealed that the difference in donations before and after confession was not significant (F = 3.52, dj = 1/162), nor was it when men accompanied by men were excluded (F = .76, d j = 1/162); however it was significant when only Ss who were alone were considered ( F = 19.13, d j = 1/162, p < .05). Men gave significantly more prior to confession than afterwards, whether including (F = 63.62, dj z 1/162, p < .001) or excluding (F = 68.08, d j = 1/162, p < .001) those accompanied by other men; however, women gave significantly less on their way into confession (F = 63.77, d f = 1/162, p < .OOl). 2. Alone vs. accompanied Overall, 17% of the Ss gave when alone, 8% when accompanied by a man, and 56% when accompanied by a woman (x2 = 33.66, dj = 2 , p < .001). Of the men, 18% gave when alone, 21% when accompanied by another man, and 56% when accompanied by a woman; 14% of the women gave when alone, 0% when accompanied by a man, and 50% when accompanied by a woman. Men accompanied by a woman were significantly more likely to donate than men alone ( x 2 = 10.61, d j = 1, p < .001), but men alone and those with another man did not differ significantly ( x 2 < 1, dj = 1 ) . Women accompanied by another woman were also more likely to donate than females who were alone (x2 = 9.73, dj = 1, p < .Ol) ; but women alone and those with a man did not differ significantly (x2 = 2.06, dj = 1, p < .01). Men gave significantly more when alone than when with another man (F = 53.00, dj = 1/162, p < .001), but not when including only postconfession giving (F = 3.34, dj = 1/162), and they also gave more when alone than when with a woman (F = 23.85, d j = 1/162, p < .05). Women gave nonsignificantly more when alone than with a man (F = 12.61, dj = 1/162) and significantly more when accompanied by another woman than when alone (F = 74.08, d j = 1/162, p < .001).
MARY B. HARRIS ET AL.
191
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 23:14 01 January 2015
3. Sex Difierences There was no significant difference between the percentages of men (32%) and women ( 2 1"/o ) who donated ( x2 = 1.63, df = 1). Men alone, however, gave significantly more money than women alone (F = 52.43, df = 1/162, p < .001), and the difference between men and women was also significant when all men and women were considered (F = 23.41, df = 1/162, p < .05).
D. DISCUSSION The results of the study are not completely clear-cut because of the somewhat different pattern found for frequencies and amounts of donation, the unequal ns, and the lack of any male-male pairs entering the church. In general, the frequency data suggest that more people donated to charity prior to confession than afterwards; this pattern is also found when size of donations is considered for men or for people alone, but the opposite pattern is found when size of donation for women across all conditions is considered. The findings are thus only partially consistent with the theory that confession serves to reduce guilt and thus lower the chances of someone's being altruistic. It also appears that women who donated after confessing were likely to give larger donations. Perhaps this is because the act of confession served also to raise women's self-esteem and cause them to feel good, and feeling good, as Isen and Levin (3) have suggested, can lead to subsequent altruism. A second somewhat inconsistent set of findings concerns the effects of being accompanied by another person. The literature on bystander intervention, which suggests that the presence of another serves to reduce helping, is supported only by the nonsignificant tendency for the presence of a man to reduce subsequent helping (significant only when the man alone preconfession group, which has no corresponding male-male preconfessional cell, is included), although the other frequency and amount data are completely consistent with this finding and not a single woman gave when accompanied by a man. On the other hand, more men and women gave when accompanied by a woman than alone and women gave significantly larger amounts when with another woman than alone; yet men gave a smaller amount when with a woman than when alone, although they were significantly more likely to donate. It thus appears generally that the presence of a man may have served to reduce giving and the presence of a woman to increase it, with the sole exception being the smaller size of the donation given by a man with a woman companion. The reasons for this are not completely clear, but are apparently not due to sex-stereotyped roles, since the patterns hold for Ss of both 'sexes. Konecni
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 23:14 01 January 2015
192
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
and Ebbesen ( 4 ) did find that a companion of either sex, but particularly a man companion, reduced the amount of help given in an emergency situation. Diffusion of responsibility coupled with a tendency for people to feel that men are more responsible for helping in an emergency could explain that result but not the present ones. Perhaps it is simply that women are believed to be more sympathetic to the March of Dimes, a charity dealing with birth defects of children, and people are more likely to donate with a woman companion because they feel it will gain her approval. Since, in fact, men gave more money than women in this study, this belief appears to be unfounded.
REFERENCES BROCK,T. C. On interpreting the effects of transgression upon compliance. Psychol. Bull., 1969, 72, 138-145. 2. FREEDMAN, J. L. Transgression, compliance and guilt. In J. Macaulay & L. Ber1.
kowitz (Eds.), Altruism and Helping Behavior. New York: Academic Press, 1970. ISEN,A. M., & LEVIN,P. F. The effect of feeling good on helping: Cookies and kindness. J. Personal. & SOC.Psychol., 1972, 21, 384-388. 4. KONECNI,V. J., & EBBESEN,E. Effects of the presence of children on adult’s helping behavior and compliance: Two field studies. J . SOC.Psychol., 1975, 97, in press. 5. REGAN,J. W. Guilt, perceived injustice and altruistic behavior. J . Personal. & SOC. Psychol., 1971, 18, 124-132. 6. ROSENHAN, D., & WHITE, G. M. Observation and rehearsal as determinants of prosocial behavior. J. Personal. & SOC.Psychol., 1967, 5, 424-431. 3.
Department of Educational Foundations University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131
The Journal of Social Psychology Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vsoc20
The Effects of Confession on Altruism a
a
Mary B. Harris , Sheldon M. Benson & Carroll L. Hall
a
a
Ohio State University , USA Published online: 30 Jun 2010.
To cite this article: Mary B. Harris , Sheldon M. Benson & Carroll L. Hall (1975) The Effects of Confession on Altruism, The Journal of Social Psychology, 96:2, 187-192, DOI: 10.1080/00224545.1975.9923284 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1975.9923284
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 23:14 01 January 2015
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
The Journal of Social Psychology, 1975, 96, 187-192.
T H E EFFECTS O F CONFESSION ON ALTRUISM* Ohio State University
MARYB. HARRIS, SHELDONM. BENSON,AND CARROLL L. HALL
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 23:14 01 January 2015
SUMMARY
To test the hypothesis that confession serves to reduce guilt and thus to decrease subsequent altruism, 74 adult men and 99 adult women, alone or accompanied by other men and women, were observed entering or leaving a Catholic church during confession hours and asked to donate to the March of Dimes. Both the number of people donating and the amount given were recorded. Subjects were significantly more likely to donate prior to confession, and men gave significantly more money prior to than after confession. Women, however, donated larger amounts postconfession. Men and women were significantly more likely to donate when with a woman than when alone, and women gave significantly more money when with another woman than when alone. Men, however, gave significantly less money when with a woman than when alone. Men also donated more money overall than women. The results suggest that confession may serve to reduce altruism, at least for men, and that the presence of a woman may serve to increase it, at least for women. A.
INTRODUCTION
A substantial amount of research on transgression has led to the conclusion that transgression tends to increase subsequent compliance with a request for help. One possible explanation for this ( 2 ) is that transgression creates an unpleasant state called guilt, which altruism then relieves. Although this explanation in terms of guilt has been criticized (e.g., l ) , it does lead to a prediction which has been supported in two experiments: that confession, a time-honored way of reducing guilt, should reduce subsequent altruism. Carlsmith, Ellsworth, and Whiteside [see Freedman ( 2 ) ] found that subjects who were given the opportunity to confess that they had cheated on a test were less likely to volunteer to serve in future experiments than subjects who had no chance to confess their cheating. Regan ( 5 ) found that discussing one’s wrongdoing (confession) reduced subsequent donations to a charity. These studies
* Received in
the Editorial Office, Provincetown, Massachusetts, on October 25, 1974,
and given special consideration in accordance with our policy for field research. Copyright, 1975, by The Journal Press.
187
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 23:14 01 January 2015
188
JOURNAL O F SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
were carried out in laboratory situations, with subjects induced to transgress and then confess their transgression. The present study was carried out in a field situation without inducing guilt experimentally. Instead, subjects entering and leaving a Catholic church during confession hours were compared. It was predicted that if confession not only alleviates sin but also reduces guilt and if guilt motivates altruism, then persons leaving the church should donate less to the March of Dimes than persons entering. A second puaose of the study was to see whether the presence of another person would affect altruism in a nonemergency situation. Although a number of studies have shown that bystander intervention in an emergency tends to be reduced by the presence of another individual, it is not clear what effect the presence of another person in a nonemergency situation would have. Rosenhan and White ( 6 ) found that children were more likely to give to charity when observed than when alone. However, Konecni and Ebbesen ( 4 ) found that women alone were more likely to help an “injured” confederate than when accompanied by another woman or, especially, another man. The present study attempted to see whether men and women, alone or accompanied by a man or a woman, would differ in their donating behavior. B. METHOD 1. Subjects
‘Ss were all people who appeared to be adults, who were either alone ot accompanied by only one other adult, who entered or left a Catholic church in an inner city neighborhood during the advertised confessional hours of 3:OO-4:00 p.m. on six Saturdays in a two-month period. Frequently, the priest left early, and the observations were then terminated for the day. Ss were 74 men and 99 women, over half of whom appeared to the Es (two male graduate students in education) to be Spanish American.
Procedure During the confessional hour the first experimenter ( E l ) stood on the sidewalk near the only entrance to the church holding a March of Dimes container. As an S or pair of Ss approached, El said, “Would you care to donate to the March of Dimes?’’ and held out the container. Ss were then thanked, regardless of whether or not they donated, but no further communication was held. Following each donation, when no Ss or potential Ss were watching, El counted the donation in the jar and signaled the amount to E2, who was 2.
189
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 23:14 01 January 2015
MARY B. HARRIS ET AL.
standing close enough to observe the Ss but far enough from them and El apparently not to be noticed. E2 then recorded the amount of donation, sex of S, and who was with him, if anyone. Because of the sparse attendance, it was possible to request donations from each potential S either on the way in or out and to remember who had previously been solicited, so that no person would be solicited twice. Ss were solicited on the way in unless El had not yet had a chance to count the money, other potential Ss were visible, or an S who had not yet been solicited was seen to be leaving the church. Assignment of Ss to preconfession or postconfession conditions was thus very close to random. However, no male pairs of Ss were seen to enter the church, and thus there were no Ss in this cell. Presumably, this is either because all men with other men entered prior to confession hours or because no men actually went to church together but some met each other there and walked out together. The general tendency for fewer people to be seen while going into the church may also be due to the fact that some people entered the church prior to confession hours and waited to confess before leaving. Previous observation in the church and discussion with several priests had confirmed that essentially all persons who entered the church during these hours did so for the purpose of confession. However, no attempt was made to confirm this directly, as it was felt this would be an invasion of privacy. All money was later turned over to the March of Dimes.
C . RESULTS The number of Ss and percentages donating in each condition, as well as the mean donations (including those people who did not donate), are presented in Table 1. TABLE 1 PERCENTAGES OF PEOPLE DONATING AND MEAN DONATIONS IN CENTSBY TIMEOF DONATION WHEN ACCOMPANIED OR ALONE Time of donation
%
Alone Mean
n
%
Men Before confession After confession
100 11
29.0 5.4
3 35
-
-
21
2.5
0 14
71 50
11.7 4.4
14 8
21
1.2 8.5
14 35
0 0
0 0
14 8
50 50
3.2 2.3
14 14
Women Before confession After confession
11
With a man Mean n
With a woman Mean n
%
190
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 23:14 01 January 2015
1. Pre-Post Confession Chi square analyses revealed that a higher percentage of people donated before confession (39%) than after (19%; x2 = 6.84, dj = 1, p < .01). The difference in frequency of preconfession (76% ) and postconfession (19%) donations was significant for men (2’ = 17.01, d j = 1, p < .001) but not for women (24% and 19%, respectively; x2 < 1, d j = 1). An 11 group unweighted means analysis of variance revealed that the mean amounts of money given in the different conditions were significantly different (F = 3.623, df = 10/162, p < .05). Post hoc comparisons revealed that the difference in donations before and after confession was not significant (F = 3.52, dj = 1/162), nor was it when men accompanied by men were excluded (F = .76, d j = 1/162); however it was significant when only Ss who were alone were considered ( F = 19.13, d j = 1/162, p < .05). Men gave significantly more prior to confession than afterwards, whether including (F = 63.62, dj z 1/162, p < .001) or excluding (F = 68.08, d j = 1/162, p < .001) those accompanied by other men; however, women gave significantly less on their way into confession (F = 63.77, d f = 1/162, p < .OOl). 2. Alone vs. accompanied Overall, 17% of the Ss gave when alone, 8% when accompanied by a man, and 56% when accompanied by a woman (x2 = 33.66, dj = 2 , p < .001). Of the men, 18% gave when alone, 21% when accompanied by another man, and 56% when accompanied by a woman; 14% of the women gave when alone, 0% when accompanied by a man, and 50% when accompanied by a woman. Men accompanied by a woman were significantly more likely to donate than men alone ( x 2 = 10.61, d j = 1, p < .001), but men alone and those with another man did not differ significantly ( x 2 < 1, dj = 1 ) . Women accompanied by another woman were also more likely to donate than females who were alone (x2 = 9.73, dj = 1, p < .Ol) ; but women alone and those with a man did not differ significantly (x2 = 2.06, dj = 1, p < .01). Men gave significantly more when alone than when with another man (F = 53.00, dj = 1/162, p < .001), but not when including only postconfession giving (F = 3.34, dj = 1/162), and they also gave more when alone than when with a woman (F = 23.85, d j = 1/162, p < .05). Women gave nonsignificantly more when alone than with a man (F = 12.61, dj = 1/162) and significantly more when accompanied by another woman than when alone (F = 74.08, d j = 1/162, p < .001).
MARY B. HARRIS ET AL.
191
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 23:14 01 January 2015
3. Sex Difierences There was no significant difference between the percentages of men (32%) and women ( 2 1"/o ) who donated ( x2 = 1.63, df = 1). Men alone, however, gave significantly more money than women alone (F = 52.43, df = 1/162, p < .001), and the difference between men and women was also significant when all men and women were considered (F = 23.41, df = 1/162, p < .05).
D. DISCUSSION The results of the study are not completely clear-cut because of the somewhat different pattern found for frequencies and amounts of donation, the unequal ns, and the lack of any male-male pairs entering the church. In general, the frequency data suggest that more people donated to charity prior to confession than afterwards; this pattern is also found when size of donations is considered for men or for people alone, but the opposite pattern is found when size of donation for women across all conditions is considered. The findings are thus only partially consistent with the theory that confession serves to reduce guilt and thus lower the chances of someone's being altruistic. It also appears that women who donated after confessing were likely to give larger donations. Perhaps this is because the act of confession served also to raise women's self-esteem and cause them to feel good, and feeling good, as Isen and Levin (3) have suggested, can lead to subsequent altruism. A second somewhat inconsistent set of findings concerns the effects of being accompanied by another person. The literature on bystander intervention, which suggests that the presence of another serves to reduce helping, is supported only by the nonsignificant tendency for the presence of a man to reduce subsequent helping (significant only when the man alone preconfession group, which has no corresponding male-male preconfessional cell, is included), although the other frequency and amount data are completely consistent with this finding and not a single woman gave when accompanied by a man. On the other hand, more men and women gave when accompanied by a woman than alone and women gave significantly larger amounts when with another woman than alone; yet men gave a smaller amount when with a woman than when alone, although they were significantly more likely to donate. It thus appears generally that the presence of a man may have served to reduce giving and the presence of a woman to increase it, with the sole exception being the smaller size of the donation given by a man with a woman companion. The reasons for this are not completely clear, but are apparently not due to sex-stereotyped roles, since the patterns hold for Ss of both 'sexes. Konecni
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 23:14 01 January 2015
192
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
and Ebbesen ( 4 ) did find that a companion of either sex, but particularly a man companion, reduced the amount of help given in an emergency situation. Diffusion of responsibility coupled with a tendency for people to feel that men are more responsible for helping in an emergency could explain that result but not the present ones. Perhaps it is simply that women are believed to be more sympathetic to the March of Dimes, a charity dealing with birth defects of children, and people are more likely to donate with a woman companion because they feel it will gain her approval. Since, in fact, men gave more money than women in this study, this belief appears to be unfounded.
REFERENCES BROCK,T. C. On interpreting the effects of transgression upon compliance. Psychol. Bull., 1969, 72, 138-145. 2. FREEDMAN, J. L. Transgression, compliance and guilt. In J. Macaulay & L. Ber1.
kowitz (Eds.), Altruism and Helping Behavior. New York: Academic Press, 1970. ISEN,A. M., & LEVIN,P. F. The effect of feeling good on helping: Cookies and kindness. J. Personal. & SOC.Psychol., 1972, 21, 384-388. 4. KONECNI,V. J., & EBBESEN,E. Effects of the presence of children on adult’s helping behavior and compliance: Two field studies. J . SOC.Psychol., 1975, 97, in press. 5. REGAN,J. W. Guilt, perceived injustice and altruistic behavior. J . Personal. & SOC. Psychol., 1971, 18, 124-132. 6. ROSENHAN, D., & WHITE, G. M. Observation and rehearsal as determinants of prosocial behavior. J. Personal. & SOC.Psychol., 1967, 5, 424-431. 3.
Department of Educational Foundations University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131
