Responsibility: The tie that binds

People share significantly more money with others in common lab paradigms like the dictator game than they do in real life. What accounts for this difference? Paradigms like the dictator game link each recipient to a single dictator with the implication that each recipient can receive funds from only one person. We argue that this “burden” of responsibility to a single recipient helps to explain high levels of laboratory sharing. In two experiments—a modified dictator game experiment and a charitable giving experiment—participants donated significantly more to others when they were solely responsible for a recipient's outcome than when the responsibility for a recipient was potentially shared. Taken together with past findings from social psychology and experimental economics, the results show how unambiguous responsibility for a single recipient increases generosity.

► People share significantly more money in common lab paradigms like the dictator game than they do in real life. Why?
► The dictator game links each recipient to a single dictator so that each recipient can receive funds from only one person.
► We hypothesize that this “burden” of responsibility helps to explain high laboratory sharing.
► Two experiments—a modified dictator game and a charitable giving experiment—show that participants donate more when they are solely responsible for a recipient's outcome.