IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nathum/v7y2023i11d10.1038_s41562-023-01681-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the relationship between economic inequality and prosocial behaviour

Author

Listed:
  • Yongzheng Yang

    (Renmin University of China)

  • Sara Konrath

    (Indiana University, University Hall)

Abstract

How does economic inequality relate to prosocial behaviour? Existing theories and empirical studies from multiple disciplines have produced mixed results. Here we conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to systematically synthesize empirical studies. Results from 192 effect sizes and over 2.5 million observations in 100 studies show that the relationship varies from being negative to positive depending upon the study (95% prediction interval −0.450 to 0.343). However, on average, there is a small, negative relationship between economic inequality and prosocial behaviour (r = −0.064, P = 0.004, 95% confidence interval −0.106 to −0.021). There is generally no evidence that results depend upon characteristics of the studies, participants, the way prosocial behaviour and inequality were assessed, and the publication discipline. Given the prevalence of economic inequality and the importance of prosocial behaviour, this systematic review and meta-analysis provides a timely study on the relationship between economic inequality and prosocial behaviour.

Suggested Citation

  • Yongzheng Yang & Sara Konrath, 2023. "A systematic review and meta-analysis of the relationship between economic inequality and prosocial behaviour," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(11), pages 1899-1916, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:7:y:2023:i:11:d:10.1038_s41562-023-01681-y
    DOI: 10.1038/s41562-023-01681-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-023-01681-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41562-023-01681-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:7:y:2023:i:11:d:10.1038_s41562-023-01681-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.