Consistent Kindness: Money Allocation and Kind Act Decisions Are Regulated by a ‘Welfare Trade-Off Ratio’

Authors

  • Oliver Scott Curry Orcid
    School of Anthropology and Museum Ethnography, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom; kindness.org, New York, NY, USA
  • Chloe San Miguel Orcid
    kindness.org, New York, NY, USA
  • James Wilkinson Orcid
    Department of Work and Social Psychology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
  • Mehmet Necip Tunç Orcid
    Department of Social Psychology, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands

Abstract

Is kindness regulated by a cost-benefit ratio? Previous research suggests that money allocation decisions are regulated by a ‘welfare trade-off ratio’ (WTR) that reflects the weight attached to the actor’s welfare relative to the recipient’s welfare. Here we replicate this research, and extend it by creating a new measure—The Kindness Questionnaire—which asks which real-world acts of kindness, previously rated for cost and benefit, participants would perform for others. In Study 1 (n = 6,601) money allocation (MA) and Kindness Questionnaire (KQ) decisions for family, friends, colleagues and strangers were highly consistent with an underlying WTR (~92%); more consistent than would be expected by chance; and generally more consistent than with cost or benefit alone. WTRs were high (~0.81); and, for money allocation, declined with social distance. In Study 2 (n = 8,492) MA and KQ decisions for neighbors were highly consistent with an underlying WTR (~89%); more consistent than would be expected by chance; and generally more consistent than with cost or benefit alone. WTRs were high (~0.75). In both studies, The Kindness Questionnaires showed good convergent, divergent and incremental validity. These studies corroborate ‘welfare tradeoff ratio’ theory, establish proof of principle for a new way of measuring kindness, and provide new tools for measuring kindness to colleagues, strangers and neighbors.