Charity Begins at Home but How Far Does It Extend?

In the face of threats from a global health crisis, liberals are more generous and extend their generosity more broadly than conservatives. That is one conclusion to be drawn from the results of our research on charitable giving during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study was conducted in the U.S. and Italy at the height of the first phase of the pandemic, before the availability of vaccines, when rates of hospitalization and death were high and the economic impact of COVID-19 restrictions was being widely felt. In this context, the question of interest to us was whether individuals would sacrifice personal resources to aid others and whether that generosity would be restricted to socially close others or extended to more socially distant recipients.

Participants in the study were responding to an online survey on the impact of COVID-19 and learned that they would receive an unexpected bonus payment of $5.00(€4). They were then given the opportunity to donate some or all their bonus money to a welfare organization providing assistance to those most affected by the pandemic. If participants chose to donate, they could direct their donation to one of three different charities—a local charity serving the needs of people in the participant's own state or region, a national charity serving the needs of people all over the participant's country, or an international charity serving the needs of people in countries throughout the world. 

Across both countries, 889 respondents identified themselves as politically liberal and 363 identified as conservative, and we compared the donation decisions between these two groups. Overall, 70% of liberals donated at least some of their bonus money compared to 56% of conservatives. Liberals and conservatives were equivalent in the average amount of money they contributed at the local level. However, liberals were significantly more likely to direct their donations to the national or international charities. Thus, although both groups showed a preference to donate to the local charity, conservatives showed a greater tendency to limit their charitable donations to the least inclusive level, whereas liberals donate more evenly across the levels and give significantly more than conservatives to a broader circle of more inclusive charities.

One explanation for this difference in the pattern of donations is that the value system associated with liberal ideology is more universalistic than the values underlying conservative ideology.  Consistent with this idea, liberals in our study scored significantly higher than conservatives on a measure of global social identity (identifying with all of humanity). When asked to rate the degree to which they felt closely identified with their local, national, or global community, 39% of liberals indicated they identified most as members of the global community, compared to only 8% of conservatives. Those who scored high on this measure were also the ones most likely to donate to the international charity. On the other hand, conservatives scored higher on a measure of national identity, with 45% of conservatives scoring highest on identifying as members of their nation, compared to 18% of liberals.  National identity, however, did not predict donation decisions.

Caring for others close to home is consistent with both liberal and conservative values. Appeals to collective needs at the local level are likely to be effective for both liberals and conservatives. Appeals to our common humanity, however, are only effective for those with more universalistic worldviews. In an era when nations have become increasingly polarized and nationalistic sentiments have gained popularity, it is important to carefully consider how to bolster public support to battle global problems. Rather than trying to mobilize global social cohesion directly, it may be necessary to link global cooperation to local welfare in order to engage communal motives and appeal to conservative values.

For Further Reading

Brewer, M. B., Buchan, N. R., Ozturk, O. D., & Grimalda, G. (2022). Parochial altruism and political ideology. Political Psychology, http://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12852

Grimalda, G., Buchan, N. R., Ozturk, O. D., Pinate, A. C., Urso, G., & Brewer, M. B. (2021). Exposure to COVID-19 is associated with increased altruism, particularly at the local level. Scientific Reports, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-97234-2

Romano, A., Sutter, M., Liu, J., & Balliet, D. (2021). Political ideology, cooperation and national parochialism across 42 nations. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences, 376, 2020146. https:/doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2020.0146

Marilynn B. Brewer is Professor Emeritus at The Ohio State University. Her primary areas of research are the study of social identity and intergroup relations, collective decision-making, and social evolution. 

Nancy R. Buchan is an Associate Professor of International Business at the Darla Moore School of Business at the University of South Carolina. She studies social identity and trust in cross-cultural relationships as well as cross-cultural communication and interaction styles.