Reminders of mortality increase concern for environmental legacy

When we turn on the A/C in the summer, our first thought is probably one of relief. If it's 100 degrees in the shade, we're probably not thinking about how our decision might influence the environmental legacy we leave for future generations. It's not that we don't care, it's just that we typically don't think about our behavior in terms of long-term, inter-generational tradeoffs. But new research suggests that reminders of our own mortality may encourage us to keep future generations in mind as we make decisions.

In a study published in , a publication of the Association for Psychological Science, Kimberly Wade-Benzoni, of Duke University Fuqua School of Business, and her colleagues decided to focus on a kind of problem they call an "intergenerational ," examining whether certain factors might lead the current generation to make sacrifices on behalf of future generations, even when there aren't any material or to do so.

When people make decisions, they often focus on rewards in the present at the expense of rewards in the future – a phenomenon called 'intertemporal discounting.' The hurdle to overcome with intergenerational dilemmas is that they require us to focus on future rewards that will be enjoyed by someone else. These dilemmas are unique because there isn't just a temporal distance between decision-maker and beneficiary, there's a social distance, too.

Wade-Benzoni and her colleagues hypothesized that reminding people of their might be one way to strengthen their connection to future others, activating what the researchers call a 'legacy motivation.' They theorized that thoughts of death might be enough to motivate people to want to leave a positive legacy, even when that legacy spans several generations, effectively overcoming the temporal and social hurdles involved in intergenerational dilemmas. The researchers decided to test their hypothesis in several experiments.

In the first experiment, were entered into a lottery, in which they had the chance to win $1000. Some participants were asked to read a newspaper article about an airplane passenger's death in a freak accident – priming their thoughts of death and mortality – while others read an emotionally neutral story. All the participants were told that they could designate a portion of their lottery winnings to a charity that serves impoverished communities. Some were told that the donations would serve the needy now, while others were told that their donations would go to the needy at a future date.

The researchers found that those participants who had been primed with thoughts of mortality gave more money to the future-oriented charity than to the present-oriented charity. The findings suggest, in line with the original hypothesis, that thinking about death motivated participants to behave in ways that ensured their personal legacy, leaving their mark by channeling their lottery donations toward needy others in the future.

"Creating a positive legacy offers people a means of symbolic immortality," says Wade-Benzoni. "This psychosocial benefit is powerful enough to overcome very basic human tendencies to discount the value of benefits that will be enjoyed by others in the future."

Wade-Benzoni and her colleagues wanted to know more about the specific factors that drive the relationship between mortality and legacy motivation, so they decided to conduct a second experiment in which they created a hypothetical scenario related to energy and the environment.

Participants were asked to play the role of VP for a large energy company. The company had supposedly discovered a new source of efficient, inexpensive energy, and the participant's task as VP was to decide how much of the energy should be used by the company today versus how much should be allocated to another recipient. Some participants were given the option of donating to another organization that would benefit immediately; some were given the option of donating to another group that would benefit in the future; and some were given the option of donating to their own organization in the future. The participants were told that all of the other beneficiaries would make better use of the new energy supply than thier own company would in the present.

As in the first experiment, some participants were primed with thoughts of mortality, and then all the participants were asked to make their energy allocation. To get at the possible connection to future others, the researchers asked participants whether they felt an affinity with the other group.

Just as they expected, the researchers found that participants who were primed with thoughts of mortality were more likely to allocate the energy toward future beneficiaries. Furthermore, this desire to help future others was related to their sense of connection to the beneficiary.

In light of findings from the well-established literature on intertemporal choice, the behavior demonstrated in these studies under conditions of mortality salience is strikingly counter-intuitive. And that is exactly why this research is important, says Wade-Benzoni – these new studies examine how people make decisions across both temporal and social distances.

"Acting on the behalf of future generations can paradoxically represent a dramatic form of self-interest – immortality striving," she explains. "Believing that we have made a difference by leaving a group, an organization, a professional field, or the world a better place helps us to gain a sense of purpose in our lives and buffer the threat of meaninglessness posed by death."

The key to effective environmental policies, then, may be to help citizens see their day-to-day decisions as trade-offs between current and and remind them, subtly, that none of us will live forever. We will all, as Shakespeare put it, shuffle off this mortal coil; the question is what legacy will we leave?

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Your culture may influence your perception of death

May 24, 2011

Contemplating mortality can be terrifying. But not everyone responds to that terror in the same way. Now, a new study which will be published in an upcoming issue of Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Ps ...

Shopping with the Grim Reaper in mind

Feb 22, 2011

Fear of death is a universal human emotion, but does it influence our behaviour as consumers? A new study, conducted by a graduate student at Concordia University's John Molson School of Business, has explored ...

Recommended for you

"Body recognition" compares with fingerprint ID

8 hours ago

(Medical Xpress)—University of Adelaide forensic anatomy researchers are making advances in the use of "body recognition" for criminal and missing persons cases, to help with identification when a face ...

Some people may be pre-wired to be bilingual

17 hours ago

(HealthDay)—Some people's brains seem pre-wired to acquire a second language, new research suggests. But anyone who tries to move beyond their mother tongue will likely gain a brain boost, the small study ...

User comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

freethinking
not rated yet Jun 26, 2012
Progressives live to manipulate. Since people are smart enough to see through their lies, they need to make sure people use emotion instead of logic when making decisions. Only by using emotion can they convince people tp live in misery so people in the future can benefit.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.