Prosocial Spending and Happiness 45 doing so,charities can maximize the emotional benefits feelings.For example,prosocial spending might promote r donor thereby potentially increasing ngof powe feel when reflectin ngiother than ers'gral sp ding als more likely they are to spend on others in the future predict happiness (e.g.,volunteering:Thoits Hewitt (Aknin.Dunn.Norton.2012). 2001),researchers could explore whether different path ways- rent antecedents quences Beyond Happiness might exp with the Although happiness is most frequently assessed though Most of our research has focused on common forms of simple self-report measures,the benefits of prosocial spending,such as treating a friend to coffee or making a d in the brain and e body.As also would be interesting to inves of the br spe (Ha ing proh nd to the happ which et al..2006:Zaki Mitchell.2011).And the emotional goal of adng so of physica consequences. hapeniosn consequences of prosocial spending produce a cascade mental causes while also reaping a financial return.In in the addition,future chers shoul amine mor hat the uld doa eo wished to another student in the class who had not happiness,it may be possible to hamess research on the received any money (Dunn,Ashton-James,Hanson, emotional benefits of prosocial spending to improv taxes.Indeed,para when we controlle mhat the students kept for themselves,the more shame they ex choice (einstein Rvan.2010).and new rese rienced.And the more ashamed they felt,the higher thei suggested that injecting an element of choice into tax l,a stres hat has been linke payments increases taxpayer satisfaction (Lamberton. 2013 ese Although any one spending decision likely has short- cial spending initiatives within teams and organizations lived effects on biological processes these For example,Google provides employees with an oper may compound over tim shap important health taton to apply for a 013).0 and other res search has provided initil evidence that givin health -from fewer sleep disorders to better hearing- employees the opportunity to engage in prosocial spenc even after a wide range of variables are controlled ing can potentially enhance job satisfaction and perfo for (c.gg mo unn,o ach.2013 shown that p cial spendine se n aniale strength;participants who had donated to a charity Finally,many fascinating questions remain unan were able to squeeze a handgrip for more than 20 se 51 n the proclivit were con ray,2010 engag in pr rive joy fron ing but their enha ed st h did not st from involved in bonding elevated happiness.Thus,prosocial spending may have explain why s ome people get a bigger boost from pro independen positive effects on both emotional and cial spending than do others?Do enjoyable early child physical vitality nces with giving lead people to seek Future Directions chan the individ ual-level factors that alter the emotional impact of giving Res chers should further examine the pathways that will offer further insight into the psychology of prosocia explain how good deeds are transformed into good spending. u2014 Prosocial Spending and Happiness 45 doing so, charities can maximize the emotional benefits of giving for their donors, thereby potentially increasing the likelihood of repeat donations; the happier people feel when reflecting on previous prosocial spending, the more likely they are to spend on others in the future (Aknin, Dunn, & Norton, 2012). Beyond Happiness Although happiness is most frequently assessed though simple self-report measures, the benefits of prosocial spending can be detected in the brain and the body. As noted earlier, prosocial spending produces activation in reward areas of the brain (Harbaugh et al., 2007; Moll et al., 2006; Zaki & Mitchell, 2011). And the emotional consequences of prosocial spending produce a cascade of physical consequences. In a previous study, in the context of a large classroom, we gave students $10 and informed them that they could donate as much as they wished to another student in the class who had not received any money (Dunn, Ashton-James, Hanson, & Aknin, 2010). The more money students gave away, the happier their moods afterward, when we controlled for their happiness beforehand. Conversely, the more money students kept for themselves, the more shame they expe￾rienced. And the more ashamed they felt, the higher their levels of cortisol, a stress hormone that has been linked to a variety of health problems. These results suggested that everyday spending decisions can get under the skin to influence health. Although any one spending decision likely has short￾lived effects on biological processes, these decisions may compound over time to shape important health outcomes. Older adults who report giving more money and other resources to others exhibit better overall health—from fewer sleep disorders to better hearing— even after a wide range of variables are controlled for (e.g., gender, income, physical mobility; Brown, Consedine, & Magai, 2005). Experimental research has shown that prosocial spending can increase physical strength; participants who had donated to a charity were able to squeeze a handgrip for more than 20 sec￾onds longer than were control participants (Gray, 2010). Participants also reported happier moods after donat￾ing, but their enhanced strength did not stem from their elevated happiness. Thus, prosocial spending may have independent positive effects on both emotional and physical vitality. Future Directions Researchers should further examine the pathways that explain how good deeds are transformed into good feelings. For example, prosocial spending might promote happiness by endowing givers with a feeling of power or by enabling them to witness others’ gratitude. Given that forms of generosity other than prosocial spending also predict happiness (e.g., volunteering; Thoits & Hewitt, 2001), researchers could explore whether different path￾ways—with different antecedents and consequences— might explain the emotional benefits of giving money compared with the giving of other resources. Most of our research has focused on common forms of spending, such as treating a friend to coffee or making a charitable donation. It also would be interesting to inves￾tigate whether the happiness benefits of prosocial spend￾ing extend to “impact investments,” in which people invest money with the goal of aiding social or environ￾mental causes—while also reaping a financial return. In addition, future researchers should examine more diverse forms of prosocial spending, including its most dreaded form: taxation. Although taxes are rarely associated with happiness, it may be possible to harness research on the emotional benefits of prosocial spending to improve people’s feelings about paying their taxes. Indeed, paral￾lel research has suggested that the benefits of prosocial spending are most likely to emerge if donors are given a choice (Weinstein & Ryan, 2010), and new research has suggested that injecting an element of choice into tax payments increases taxpayer satisfaction (Lamberton, 2013). In addition to research on individual happiness, researchers should examine the broader benefits of proso￾cial spending initiatives within teams and organizations. For example, Google provides employees with an open invitation to apply for a bonus—not for themselves, but for a deserving coworker (Dunn & Norton, 2013). Our most recent research has provided initial evidence that giving employees the opportunity to engage in prosocial spend￾ing can potentially enhance job satisfaction and perfor￾mance (Anik, Aknin, Norton, Dunn, & Quiodbach, 2013). The time is ripe for exploring how “prosocial bonuses” can improve organizational success. Finally, many fascinating questions remain unan￾swered regarding individual differences in the proclivity to engage in prosocial spending and to derive joy from doing so. For example, could genetic differences in sen￾sitivity to oxytocin (a hormone involved in bonding) explain why some people get a bigger boost from proso￾cial spending than do others? Do enjoyable early child￾hood experiences with giving lead people to seek out prosocial spending opportunities, perhaps as a result of changes in the self-concept? Understanding the individ￾ual-level factors that alter the emotional impact of giving will offer further insight into the psychology of prosocial spending. Downloaded from cdp.sagepub.com by Cai Xing on February 9, 2014