She researched whether the increased altruism to donate to an identified compared with an anonymous child in need is out of genuine concern or due to feelings of guilt. 'We found that when people are asked to contribute and are fully aware of how their choices impact the children, over 90 per cent act altruistically.'

The publication Giving (in) to help an identified person emerged from her initial research project Ignorance by Choice: A Meta-analytic Review of the Underlying Motives of Wilful Ignorance and Its Consequences. 'People sometimes give out of a sense of obligation or societal expectation,' comments Vu. 'My colleagues and I wanted to investigate a scenario when giving is particularly common: when you know who you are giving to. We wanted to know if people give more to children whose identities and background are known out of genuine concern for the children or out of guilt.'

Giving behaviour and decision-making

Vu wants to understand the psychology behind people’s altruistic behaviour. Why can some people happily donate to children in need, while others are reluctant or turn a blind eye? 'Through our research, we aimed to ascertain whether the increased giving to identified children stems from genuine care or guilt for not giving.' The ‘identifiable victim effect’ suggests that people are inclined to give more and more often when they know the recipient. For example their name, age, gender, nationality. Or if they see their photo. Surprisingly, the study reveals that people do not donate more to children who are identified compared to those who remain anonymous.

But, more importantly, people do not always donate out of genuine concern for the children in need, but at times feel obliged to do so. 'We observed instances of reluctant giving behaviour. We found that when people are asked to contribute and are fully aware of how their choices impact the children, over 90 per cent chose the option that benefited the children at their own cost. But when given the option to avoid this knowledge, more than half of the participants opted out. They chose the option that benefited themselves at the expense of the children.'

The PhD student plans to systematically explore how the effect of identifiability changes depending on how much people have to give up to give to other people. 'We have several hypotheses as to why we did not observe the effect of identifiability. It could be that the cost for participants to donate was quite low. Our participants only had to give up 10 pence to increase the donation to the children by 40 pence. What we can firmly state is that providing a transparent donation environment significantly boosts contributions.'

Donation based on information

Giving to charity is often seen as a good and selfless act. Acts of kindness can stem from genuine concern but also from societal norms, as noted by Vu. How can organisations make it easier for people to donate to charity? 'In our study, we found that people contribute more in a transparent environment with clear information. Other research has shown another approach is to make the altruistic choice more noticeable and easier to choose. For example, highlighting the altruistic choice as the default option, while allowing people to opt-out if desired.'

Extending a helping hand

Understanding the psychology underlying economic decisions can promote positive behaviours, which forms an important aspect of Vu’s ongoing PhD programme. 'In my recent studies, I’ve focused on any decision-making scenarios where there’s a conflict of interest for people. At times, people would rather avoid learning the impact of their actions. Transparency can persuade some people to do the right thing. Sometimes, information is all it takes.'