People are more likely to act with generosity when they are confronted with the consequences of their behaviour and anticipate the guilt they would feel if they made a selfish choice. This is the conclusion of a new international study that surveyed nearly 8,000 participants across 20 countries. The researchers also discovered that individuals often try to avoid guilt by deliberately ignoring how their decisions might affect others. In contrast, shame—the concern about how others judge one’s actions—proved to have little impact on behaviour.
In well-functioning societies, people must consider others even when such actions come at a personal cost. Yet levels of prosocial behaviour differ widely across the globe, prompting important questions. Are these differences the product of cultural upbringing, or are they rooted in more universal psychological mechanisms? The research team, including scholars from the University of Amsterdam, set out to investigate whether guilt or shame plays the stronger role in shaping prosocial decisions.
To explore this question, the researchers designed a large-scale experiment using financial decision-making tasks. Participants were asked to divide a sum of money between themselves and strangers. They could choose a self-serving option that left the stranger worse off, or a fairer option that sacrificed some personal benefit. Crucially, some participants were told exactly how their choice would affect the other person, exposing them to potential feelings of guilt, while others were permitted to remain in ignorance. In a further variation, some participants were informed that their decisions would be made public, placing them at risk of shame.
The results were consistent across every country: guilt was the most powerful motivator of prosocial behaviour. When participants were informed of the consequences of their choice, 60 per cent opted for the fairer option. Those with stronger guilt-prone personalities were even more responsive. By contrast, when participants could avoid knowing how their actions would affect others, prosocial choices dropped sharply, with only 41 per cent acting generously. The researchers note that this mirrors real-world tendencies to ignore uncomfortable truths, such as the social or environmental consequences of purchasing decisions, investments, or policy support.
Interestingly, shame had little measurable effect on behaviour. Even when people knew others might observe their choices, they were not significantly more likely to act prosocially. This held even among participants who were otherwise more sensitive to feelings of shame. The findings suggest that internal moral discomfort, rather than external judgment, is the key driver in encouraging people to act reasonably towards others.
For the researchers, these results offer valuable insight into how societies can encourage more considerate behaviour. According to behavioural economist Shaun Salvi of the University of Amsterdam, policies and interventions should make the consequences of actions clear and harder to ignore. “Situations that allow people to disregard the negative consequences of their behaviour, towards others or the environment, encourage selfishness,” he notes. “By highlighting the tangible impact of individual choices, we can foster greater kindness and cooperation—an outcome that benefits everyone.”
More information: Catherine Molho et al, Guilt drives prosociality across 20 countries, Nature Human Behaviour. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-025-02286-3
Journal information: Nature Human Behaviour Provided by Universiteit van Amsterdam
Leave a Reply