Newman,Cain Results Experiment 3:Counterfactuals Results ant3.we tested the mechanism ofco ual rea the c porate condition C $59.090.SE $25459) (tainted altruism).observers spontancously consider 91)=2.10,p=.039 (see Fig.1).In addition,as observed counterfactual situation of giving for selfless reasons. in the previous However,epon a purely selfish casof server n9 condition (M=6.24,SE=0.19),9D=2.22.p=.029.and less moral in the case of tainted altruism. they rated his actions as equally beneficial across the two On the basis of this hypothesis,we predicted that pro conditions (M=6.00 for the charity condition and M= viding information regarding an alte ative state of the 5.72 for the corporate condition,p=.38). the enect: Discussion of morality,whereas in the other case,reminding them In this experiment,the presence of self-interest in a chari- that the selfish person could have do nated money to table domain s context)mad charity shoul of th ngs of morality .1o p vide hl%of the the potential earnings).In addition,participants in the charity behaved as charitably as he could have),and we expected that answers to this item would mediate the effect of con- e corporate h dition on ratings of morality. nditic Uhlmann,Diermeier,2011).This result is informative Metbod because it demonstrates that taints ,328e orts but also can change the lling to make regarding them same online subject pool as that used in the previous vere randomly ass signed to one of fou ....Charitable Condition ng) 100 additional adults completed the sur 多90 responses in less than 20s (the same criteria as used in the previous studies).Data from these participants were not 量70 60 owner who wanted to g 。hgi sfor his stores.To do so,he either donated millions of dollars to charity (charity condition)or invested millions in adver 40 counterfactual con 30 20 Keep in mind that if he wanted to.Mulberry could 10 have instead invested the money in advertising Idonated the money to charity Extra Amount Earned by Daniel's Firm (in thousands) Participants then used 9-point scales to indicate how ethical and moral they thought the arget (M Derry)was ems were averaged 4 Newman, Cain Results Results from this experiment indicated that participants in the charity condition were willing to forgo significantly more money (M = $173,470, SE = $48,161) than those in the corporate condition (M = $59,090, SE = $25,459), t(91) = 2.10, p = .039 (see Fig. 1). In addition, as observed in the previous experiment, participants in the charity condition rated the target as significantly less moral (M = 5.53, SE = 0.25) than did the participants in the corporate condition (M = 6.24, SE = 0.19), t(91) = 2.22, p = .029, and they rated his actions as equally beneficial across the two conditions (M = 6.00 for the charity condition and M = 5.72 for the corporate condition, p = .38). Discussion In this experiment, the presence of self-interest in a chari￾table domain (as opposed to a business context) made participants more willing to forgo the opportunity to make more money for the charity (roughly 11% of the potential earnings). In addition, participants in the charity condition rated the target as less moral than did the par￾ticipants in the corporate condition, which suggests that participants did not generally view seeking profit as mor￾ally bad across both conditions (see Tannenbaum, Uhlmann, & Diermeier, 2011). This result is informative because it demonstrates that self-interest not only taints evaluations of prosocial efforts but also can change the decisions people are willing to make regarding them. Experiment 3: Counterfactuals In Experiment 3, we tested the mechanism of counterfac￾tual reasoning. Specifically, we hypothesized that when someone benefits personally from behaving charitably (tainted altruism), observers spontaneously consider a counterfactual situation of giving for selfless reasons. However, we hypothesized that in a purely selfish case, observers fail to consider the counterfactual situation of donating to charity. Therefore, the target is perceived as less moral in the case of tainted altruism. On the basis of this hypothesis, we predicted that pro￾viding information regarding an alternative state of the world should essentially reverse the effect: In the case of the charitable benefit, reminding people that the target could have not donated to charity should increase ratings of morality, whereas in the other case, reminding them that the selfish person could have donated money to charity should reduce ratings of morality. To provide a converging test of the mechanism, we asked participants directly about the counterfactual (i.e., whether the target behaved as charitably as he could have), and we expected that answers to this item would mediate the effect of con￾dition on ratings of morality. Method Participants were 145 adults (mean age = 32.8 years; 64% female, 36% male) who were recruited from the same online subject pool as that used in the previous experiments and were randomly assigned to one of four conditions in a 2 (domain: charity, advertising) × 2 (coun￾terfactual: present, absent) between-subjects design. An additional 7 adults completed the survey but submitted responses in less than 20 s (the same criteria as used in the previous studies). Data from these participants were not analyzed further. In this experiment, participants read about a business owner who wanted to generate more business for his stores. To do so, he either donated millions of dollars to charity (charity condition) or invested millions in adver￾tising (advertising condition). In the counterfactual con￾ditions, participants also read the following text: Keep in mind that if he wanted to, Mulberry could have instead invested the money in advertising [donated the money to charity]. This would have also increased the reputation of his company, but none [all] of the money would have gone to charity. Participants then used 9-point scales to indicate how ethical and moral they thought the target (Mulberry) was, how much they approved of his behavior, and how much they liked him. Ratings on these items were averaged to 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Participants Who Chose Daniel’s Firm (%) Extra Amount Earned by Daniel’s Firm (in thousands) Charitable Condition Corporate Condition $100 $0 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 $800 $900 $1,000 Fig. 1. Results from Study 2: percentage of participants who chose Daniel’s firm as a function of the extra amount earned by Daniel’s firm and experimental condition. Downloaded from pss.sagepub.com by Cai Xing on January 21, 2014