Prosociality from the perspective of environmental psychology.

Pro-environmental behavior, a form of prosocial behavior that ultimately benefits all humanity, is essential for addressing climate change. This review presents pro-environmental behavior in a social dilemma framework describing how non-aligned interests in nested groups (e.g. smaller groups with interests opposing the interests of a superordinate group entailing the smaller groups) and unequal opportunities (e.g. differential access to resources) constitute barriers to pro-environmental behavior. We then summarize recent literature on three ways in which these barriers could be addressed. Specifically, we review how individual and conflicting interests might be overcome and benefits for the collective can be achieved by (1) collective action and global identities, (2) applying insights from another global crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic, and (3) a shift to research methods that consider the nested structure of and unequal opportunities within global crises as well as high-impact actions. Taken together, these approaches might foster one form of prosociality, pro-environmental behavior, that is desperately needed in the pursuit of sustainability.

Intuitive decision-making promotes rewarding prosocial others independent of the personality trait Honesty-Humility.

Although past research has convincingly shown that rewarding prosocial individuals helps to establish high levels of cooperation, research investigating factors that promote rewarding others has been surprisingly rare. The present research addresses this gap and examines two factors that were shown in past research to play a role in prosocial behaviour. In a well-powered study (total N = 1003), we tested the impact of (a) a basic prosocial personality trait (the Honesty-Humility dimension from the HEXACO personality model) and (b) intuitive decision-making, as well as (c) their interaction, in rewarding prosocial individuals. We found that (1) intuition promotes rewarding prosocial others; (2) Honesty-Humility was not significantly related to rewarding prosocial others; and (3) that Honesty-Humility did not significantly moderate the effect of intuition on reward. Implications for the understanding of reciprocating others' prosocial behaviour are discussed.

The Emotional Path to Action: Empathy Promotes Physical Distancing and Wearing of Face Masks During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic presents a major challenge to societies all over the globe. Two measures implemented in many countries to curb the spread of the disease are (a) minimizing close contact between people ("physical distancing") and (b) wearing of face masks. In the present research, we tested the idea that physical distancing and wearing of face masks can be the result of a prosocial emotional process-empathy for people most vulnerable to the virus. In four preregistered studies (N = 3,718, Western population), we found that (a) empathy indeed relates to the motivation to adhere to physical distancing and to wearing face masks and (b) inducing empathy for people most vulnerable to the virus promotes the motivation to adhere to these measures (whereas merely providing information about the importance of the measures does not). In sum, the present research provides a better understanding of the factors underlying the willingness to follow two important measures during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Collective choice fosters sustainable resource management in the presence of asymmetric opportunities.

Asymmetric distribution of opportunities among actors can reinforce the conflict between individual and collective interests in social dilemma situations. The present study investigates the interplay of asymmetric distribution of opportunities to consume resources and three choice systems: individual choice, median choice, and majority voting. Participants (N = 248) took part in a common resource game in groups of four under each of the three choice systems. We examined the average percentage taken of the resource as well as satisfaction and fairness ratings depending on the choice system in interaction with (a) whether the distribution of opportunities among group members was symmetric versus asymmetric, and (b) the status of an actor (advantaged versus disadvantaged) within asymmetric groups. Both implemented collective choice systems (median choice and majority voting) increased sustainable resource management, especially in asymmetric groups, by restricting overconsumption of advantaged individuals, as well as satisfaction and fairness ratings. Collective choice increased collective welfare by increasing profits of disadvantaged individuals and members of symmetric groups. The results indicate that in the presence of asymmetric distribution of opportunities, collective choice is a means to reconcile the conflict between individual and collective interests in social dilemmas and to foster sustainable resource management.