New social experiments in New York and Chicago revealed a paradox that causes homelessness.
The real-world study showed that pedestrians were more likely than others to give money to the homeless if the person holding the cup was dressed in a business suit.
If the person asking for money was simply wearing a t-shirt and jeans, people passing by donated less money less often – half as much in total.
Even when unofficially giving to charity – which the researchers describe as “an ostensibly selfless behavior” – they ArgumentUnknowingly, some pedestrians may perpetuate economic inequalities by donating to those who have more than they do.
“As economic inequality increases in many areas of the globe, and countries like the United States reduce social safety net programmes, the responsibility for dealing the inequality’s adverse effects has increased fallen to economically precarious individuals or private citizens exercising compassion.” WritesThe team was led by Bennett Callaghan, a social psychologist from the City University of New York.
Researchers are working to find ways to improve charitable giving in light of the extreme shift in responsibility.
One of the major limitations of the experiment was the fact that the person who approached the police and asked for money (the first researcher of the study) didn’t claim to be experiencing homelessness. This was in order not to mislead charitable passersby.
Instead, he was holding a sign that said, “At minimum 1,700 Chicagoans slept in the streets in January 2011”. Although it’s not yet cold, winter is on its way. Any donation will be appreciated. Thank you. New York is being given a different sign.
He would answer any question about his activities if asked.
Only two variables were important: whether the charity collector wanted money in Chicago or New York and whether he was wearing a business suit with slicked-back hair or jeans with a tee-shirt and unruly hair.
According to the findings, pedestrians in busy cities judge the social status of people asking for money based only on their appearance and then give accordingly.
Research has shown that how we perceive others can be affected by our social class perceptions. Signs of poverty may include: In fact, it elicits lower levelsa lack of empathy and warmth towards others can lead to further alienation and dehumanization.
Some experiments In the 1970sResearch shows that people with higher status are more likely to receive financial or other aid than those with lower status.
“Thus,” said the authors of the current study. Write, “the ability to perceive social class in others not only allows humans to identify social hierarchies – and their own place within them – but it also allows for patterns of social perception that implicitly justify these hierarchies, portraying those at the bottom as incompetent or undeserving.”
Although the experiments currently being conducted in New York and Chicago cannot tell us what pedestrians might have thought if they dropped some money in a cup, they suggest that quick assessments of social status may be at work.
Over several hours, the first author of the study was wearing a business suit and attracted more donations.
His upper-class outfit was twice as effective together as a pair jeans and a shirt.
The charity collector collected just over US$54 in a business-suit within 3.5 hours. In just four hours, he had collected just over US$21 for a tee-shirt.
These results were followed up by an online survey that asked 486 people to view images from the previous experiment and then report their impressions of the charity collector.
Both the t-shirt and suit attire were judged to be lower in status. However, the latter was more so. Respondents rated the charity collector’s t-shirt attire comparatively lower in warmth, competence, humanity and relatability.
Perhaps, the authors ExplanationThis is why charity collectors were less generous to pedestrians who were dressed in t-shirts. This outfit may have made the man less deserving, trustworthy, or approachable.
These are only possibilities. Pedestrians who gave money weren’t surveyed.
The authors acknowledge that street-goers might have mistakenly believed that the charity collector was actually collecting charity money. This may explain why they gave less to the professional-dressed person.
However, the team believes this perception is unlikely. It’s not a sign for a professional institution. This would lead most people to assume that the collector is taking the money for his own use.
The man was rarely seen, and he is not the type of person that people would want to interact with, even if they were dropping money in his cup.
The study was published in Frontiers in Psychology.
