Attentional mechanisms in the generation of sympathy
Download
1 / 22

Attentional Mechanisms in the Generation of Sympathy - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 177 Views
  • Uploaded on

Attentional Mechanisms in the Generation of Sympathy. Stephan Dickert Paul Slovic Max-Planck Institute for Decision Research Collective Goods University of Oregon. Affect and Deliberation in Donations and Charitable Behavior.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Attentional Mechanisms in the Generation of Sympathy' - bertille


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Attentional mechanisms in the generation of sympathy l.jpg

Attentional Mechanisms in the Generation of Sympathy

Stephan Dickert Paul Slovic

Max-Planck Institute for Decision Research

Collective Goods

University of Oregon


Affect and deliberation in donations and charitable behavior l.jpg
Affect and Deliberation in Donations and Charitable Behavior

  • Emotional reactions are a key ingredient in the decision to help others / donate money

    • Slovic (2007)

  • Empathy

    • e.g., Batson (1990)

  • Sympathy, Compassion, Distress

    • Loewenstein & Small, 2007; Kogut & Ritov, 2005a, 2005b

  • Anticipated Regret

    • e.g., Dickert (2008)


  • Affect and deliberation in donations and charitable behavior3 l.jpg
    Affect and Deliberation in Donations and Charitable Behavior

    • Deliberation can interfere with emotional reactions to victims

      • Calculation prime reduced contributions for identified victims and predictive strength of emotions on contributions

        • Small, Loewenstein, & Slovic, 2007

      • Availability of deliberative resources reduced contributions and predictive strength of sympathy on donations

        • Dickert (2008)


    Antecedants of feelings in pro social behavior l.jpg
    Antecedants of Feelings in Pro-social Behavior

    Slovic (2007)


    Imagery and affect l.jpg
    Imagery and Affect

    • Imagery:

      • Identified Victim Effect

        • Kogut & Ritov (2005a); Small & Loewenstein (2003)

    • Singularity Effect

      • Kogut & Ritov (2005b)

  • Entitativity

    • Hamilton & Sherman (1996)


  • Antecedants of feelings in pro social behavior6 l.jpg
    Antecedants of Feelings in Pro-social Behavior

    Slovic (2007)


    Affect and attention l.jpg
    Affect and Attention

    • Emotions guide attentional focus

      • Affective stimuli attract attention

        • (e.g., fearful faces, Fox, 2002)

    • Affective stimuli can direct attention even before conscious recognition

      • (e.g., Vuilleumier, 2005)


    Attention and affect l.jpg
    Attention and Affect

    • Attention a possible ingredient in affective reactions to victims

      • Slovic (2007)

  • Distractor devaluation effect

    • Unattended stimuli are affectively devalued

      • Closer proximity to a target  more devaluation

        • Fenske & Raymond (2006)


  • Attentional mechanisms in the generation of sympathy9 l.jpg
    Attentional Mechanisms in the Generation of Sympathy

    • Rationale and Hypotheses:

      • If presented together, other victims may act as distractors

      • Lower sympathy for victims presented with distractors

      • Ability to pay attention to a single victim may increase sympathy



    Method l.jpg
    Method

    • N = 61

    • 2 (distractors vs. no distractors) x

      2 (cue before vs. cue after) within-subjects

    • 64 trials total (16 in each condition)

    • DV = sympathy, RT


    Cue before no distractors l.jpg

    A lot of sympathy

    No sympathy at all

    Cue-before, no distractors


    Cue before distractors l.jpg

    A lot of sympathy

    No sympathy at all

    Cue-before, distractors


    Cue after no distractors l.jpg

    A lot of sympathy

    No sympathy at all

    Cue-after, no distractors


    Cue after distractors l.jpg

    A lot of sympathy

    No sympathy at all

    Cue-after, distractors


    Time course per trial l.jpg

    Cue-Before:

    Single Picture

    Cue-Before:

    Eight Pictures

    150 ms

    Fixation Cross

    500 ms

    Cue

    Picture(s)

    3000 ms

    Sympathy

    Rating

    ~ ms

    Time course per trial


    Results l.jpg
    Results

    No Distractors

    Distractors

    No Distractors

    Distractors


    Results18 l.jpg
    Results

    .08

    .01

    .05

    No Distractors

    Distractors

    No Distractors

    Distractors

    p =


    Summary l.jpg
    Summary

    • Single target evoked higher sympathy when presented without distractors

    • This effect was stronger when participants were not able to focus on the location where the target victim appeared

    • Sympathy ratings lowest when presenting distractor victims and participants were not able to focus on the location of the target


    Discussion l.jpg
    Discussion

    • Attention seems to be one ingredient in the generation of sympathy for victims

    • Inability to focus (on a single victim) lowers sympathy judgments

    • Attentional Evaluation Hypothesis:

      • Attentional focus may increase affect evaluation of target

    • Singularity Effect revisited:

      • Attentional mechanisms contribute to the singularity effect


    Future research l.jpg
    Future Research

    • Attention and other Emotions

      • E.g., anticipated regret?

    • Attention and Donations

      • Does attention increase donations?

    • Visual vs. other forms of attention?


    Thank you l.jpg
    Thank you!

    • Collaborators:

      • Paul Slovic

      • Michael Posner

      • Ellen Peters

      • Namika Sagara

    • Special thanks to:

      • Tehila Kogut & Ilana Ritov


    ad