IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0223169.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Engaging in prosocial behavior explains how high self-control relates to more life satisfaction: Evidence from three Chinese samples

Author

Listed:
  • Kai Dou
  • Jian-Bin Li
  • Yu-Jie Wang
  • Jing-Jing Li
  • Zi-Qin Liang
  • Yan-Gang Nie

Abstract

High levels of self-control are found to be associated with greater life satisfaction. To further understand this relationship, the current study examined two questions: (1) whether too much self-control reduces, rather than increases, life satisfaction, as argued by some scholars; and (2) whether engaging in prosocial behavior explains the “self-control–life satisfaction” link. To this end, we conducted survey research among adolescents (N = 1,009), university students (N = 2,620), and adult workers (N = 500). All participants answered the same self-control and life satisfaction measures, whereas prosocial behavior was assessed using different scales across samples. Results of two-line regressions failed to reveal significant inverted-U shaped association between self-control and life satisfaction across samples. Moreover, results of mediation analyses showed that across samples, high levels of self-control were related to greater life satisfaction and this association was partly mediated by prosocial behavior. In conclusion, there is no evidence showing that too much self-control impairs life satisfaction. Engaging in prosocial behavior partly explains how high self-control relates to greater well-being.

Suggested Citation

  • Kai Dou & Jian-Bin Li & Yu-Jie Wang & Jing-Jing Li & Zi-Qin Liang & Yan-Gang Nie, 2019. "Engaging in prosocial behavior explains how high self-control relates to more life satisfaction: Evidence from three Chinese samples," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-14, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0223169
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223169
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0223169
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0223169&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0223169?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Capraro, Valerio, 2017. "Does the truth come naturally? Time pressure increases honesty in one-shot deception games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 54-57.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Antonio Cabrales & Michalis Drouvelis & Zeynep Gurguy & Indrajit Ray, 2017. "Transparency is Overrated: Communicating in a Coordination Game with Private Information," CESifo Working Paper Series 6781, CESifo.
    2. Alain Cohn & Tobias Gesche & Michel André Maréchal, 2022. "Honesty in the Digital Age," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 827-845, February.
    3. Song Wu & Jingyuan Liang & Jing Lin & Wei Cai, 2019. "Oneself is more important: Exploring the role of narcissism and fear of negative evaluation in the relationship between subjective social class and dishonesty," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-10, June.
    4. Christian P Janssen & Emma Everaert & Heleen M A Hendriksen & Ghislaine L Mensing & Laura J Tigchelaar & Hendrik Nunner, 2019. "The influence of rewards on (sub-)optimal interleaving," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-25, March.
    5. Jantsje M. Mol & Eline C. M. Heijden & Jan J. M. Potters, 2020. "(Not) alone in the world: Cheating in the presence of a virtual observer," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(4), pages 961-978, December.
    6. Lohse, Tim & Simon, Sven A. & Konrad, Kai A., 2018. "Deception under time pressure: Conscious decision or a problem of awareness?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 31-42.
    7. repec:jdm:journl:v:17:y:2022:i:5:p:1072-1093 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Valerio Capraro, 2018. "Gender differences in lying in sender-receiver games: A meta-analysis," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(4), pages 345-355, July.
    9. Aksoy, Billur & Palma, Marco A., 2019. "The effects of scarcity on cheating and in-group favoritism," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 100-117.
    10. Cheng, Yuanyuan, 2023. "A method of 3R to evaluate the correlation and predictive value of variables," OSF Preprints c79tu, Center for Open Science.
    11. Dickinson, David L. & Masclet, David, 2023. "Unethical decision making and sleep restriction: Experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 484-502.
    12. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:5:p:1072-1093 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Dickinson, David L. & McEvoy, David M., 2020. "Further from the Truth: The Impact of In-Person, Online, and mTurk on Dishonest Behavior," IZA Discussion Papers 13686, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Zhang, Can & Rao, Yulei & Houser, Daniel & Wang, Jianxin, 2023. "Trusting promises under pressure," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 225(C).
    15. Capraro, Valerio & Schulz, Jonathan & Rand, David G., 2019. "Time pressure and honesty in a deception game," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 93-99.
    16. Dickinson, David L. & McEvoy, David M., 2020. "Further from the Truth: The Impact of In-Person, Online, and mTurk on Dishonest Behavior," IZA Discussion Papers 13686, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Crosetto, Paolo & Güth, Werner, 2021. "What are you calling intuitive? Subject heterogeneity as a driver of response times in an impunity game," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    18. Billur Aksoy & Marco A. Palma, "undated". "The Effects of Scarcity on Cheating and In-Group Favoritism," Working Papers 20180918-001, Texas A&M University, Department of Economics.
    19. Edward Cartwright & Lian Xue & Charlotte Brown, 2020. "Are People Willing to Tell Pareto White Lies? A Review and New Experimental Evidence," Games, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-23, December.
    20. Dickinson, David L & McEvoy, David M, 2021. "Further from the truth: The impact of moving from in-person to online settings on dishonest behavior," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    21. repec:cup:judgdm:v:13:y:2018:i:4:p:345-355 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Cabrales, Antonio & Drouvelis, Michalis & Gurguc, Zeynep & Ray, Indrajit, 2018. "Do we need to listen to all stakeholders?: communicating in a coordination game with private information," Cardiff Economics Working Papers E2018/23, Cardiff University, Cardiff Business School, Economics Section.

    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:plo:pone00:0223169. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.