File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Rewards of kindness? A meta-analysis of the link between prosociality and well-being

TitleRewards of kindness? A meta-analysis of the link between prosociality and well-being
Authors
KeywordsMental health
Meta-analysis
Physical health
Prosocial behavior
Well-being
Issue Date2020
PublisherAmerican Psychological Association. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.apa.org/journals/bul.html
Citation
Psychological Bulletin, 2020, v. 146 n. 12, p. 1084-1116 How to Cite?
AbstractIn recent decades, numerous studies have suggested a positive relationship between prosociality and well-being. What remains less clear are (a) what the magnitude of this relationship is, and (b) what the moderators that influence it are. To address these questions, we conducted a meta-analysis to examine the strength of the prosociality to well-being link under different operationalizations, and how a set of theoretical, demographic, and methodological variables moderate the link. While the results revealed a modest overall mean effect size (r = .13, K = 201, N = 198,213) between prosociality and well-being, this masked the substantial variability in the effect as a function of numerous moderators. In particular, the effect of prosociality on eudaimonic well-being was stronger than that on hedonic well-being. Prosociality was most strongly related to psychological functioning-showing a more modest relationship with psychological malfunctioning and physical health. Using prosociality scales was more strongly associated with well-being than using measures of volunteering/helping frequency or status. In addition, informal helping (vs. formal helping) was linked to more well-being benefits. Demographically, younger givers exhibited higher levels of well-being other than physical health, while older and retired givers reported better physical health only. Female givers showed stronger relationships between prosociality and eudaimonic well-being, psychological malfunctioning, and physical health. Methodologically, the magnitude of the link was stronger in studies using primary (vs. secondary) data and with higher methodological rigor (i.e., measurement reliability and validity). We discussed all of these results and implications and suggested directions for future research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/288158
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 17.3
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 8.412
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHui, BPH-
dc.contributor.authorNg, JCK-
dc.contributor.authorBerzaghi, E-
dc.contributor.authorCunningham-Amos, LA-
dc.contributor.authorKogan, A-
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-05T12:08:43Z-
dc.date.available2020-10-05T12:08:43Z-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.citationPsychological Bulletin, 2020, v. 146 n. 12, p. 1084-1116-
dc.identifier.issn0033-2909-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/288158-
dc.description.abstractIn recent decades, numerous studies have suggested a positive relationship between prosociality and well-being. What remains less clear are (a) what the magnitude of this relationship is, and (b) what the moderators that influence it are. To address these questions, we conducted a meta-analysis to examine the strength of the prosociality to well-being link under different operationalizations, and how a set of theoretical, demographic, and methodological variables moderate the link. While the results revealed a modest overall mean effect size (r = .13, K = 201, N = 198,213) between prosociality and well-being, this masked the substantial variability in the effect as a function of numerous moderators. In particular, the effect of prosociality on eudaimonic well-being was stronger than that on hedonic well-being. Prosociality was most strongly related to psychological functioning-showing a more modest relationship with psychological malfunctioning and physical health. Using prosociality scales was more strongly associated with well-being than using measures of volunteering/helping frequency or status. In addition, informal helping (vs. formal helping) was linked to more well-being benefits. Demographically, younger givers exhibited higher levels of well-being other than physical health, while older and retired givers reported better physical health only. Female givers showed stronger relationships between prosociality and eudaimonic well-being, psychological malfunctioning, and physical health. Methodologically, the magnitude of the link was stronger in studies using primary (vs. secondary) data and with higher methodological rigor (i.e., measurement reliability and validity). We discussed all of these results and implications and suggested directions for future research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherAmerican Psychological Association. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.apa.org/journals/bul.html-
dc.relation.ispartofPsychological Bulletin-
dc.rights©American Psychological Association, [Year]. This paper is not the copy of record and may not exactly replicate the authoritative document published in the APA journal. Please do not copy or cite without author's permission. The final article is available, upon publication, at: [ARTICLE DOI]-
dc.subjectMental health-
dc.subjectMeta-analysis-
dc.subjectPhysical health-
dc.subjectProsocial behavior-
dc.subjectWell-being-
dc.titleRewards of kindness? A meta-analysis of the link between prosociality and well-being-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailHui, BPH: bryant09@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityHui, BPH=rp02495-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1037/bul0000298-
dc.identifier.pmid32881540-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85090317874-
dc.identifier.hkuros315324-
dc.identifier.volume146-
dc.identifier.issue12-
dc.identifier.spage1084-
dc.identifier.epage1116-
dc.identifier.eissn1939-1455-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000592900400002-
dc.publisher.placeUnited States-
dc.identifier.issnl0033-2909-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats