For decades, researchers have debated how social class affects a person’s likelihood of helping others.
There are two main schools of thought on the topic. One hypothesizes that because lower-income individuals rely more on social networks, they are more likely to be generous. The other hypothesizes that because higher-income individuals have more resources, they are more likely to be generous.
A global team of researchers from China, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom pulled together a large body of data to determine which theory is more supported.
Their meta-analysis combines results from 471 studies with more than 2.3 million total participants from 60 different communities across the globe between 1968 and 2024.
The researchers adopted a broad definition of prosociality—or participants’ willingness to help others. This included charitable giving, volunteering, cooperation in economic games, and self-reported intentions to help others. The researchers also accounted for a wide range of variables, such as whether the help occurred publicly or privately, the value or cost of the help, and the demographic characteristics of participants.
Their analysis determined that higher social class individuals were slightly but consistently more inclined to help others when compared to lower social class individuals.
This correlation was small but consistent across people of all ages and geographic locations. Other factors, such as the levels of income inequality or population density of individual communities, had no impact on the results.
Drilling deeper into the data, researchers found that wealthier individuals were more likely to help compared to lower-income participants when their contribution required a real commitment of time or resources, which may be scarce for them, compared with simply an intention to help or a non-material cost, such as offering to babysit someone else’s children.
The commitment to help was also stronger in public settings, which may suggest that wealthier individuals are motivated to maintain a positive social image. And higher-class individuals were more likely to help those with fewer resources.
It’s important to note that the vast majority of the studies were conducted in affluent, Western societies. Also, the studies in the analysis were correlational in nature; even when two variables are strongly correlated, it doesn’t mean one causes the other.
The researchers added another caveat: Their analysis was not able to measure the generosity in proportion to participants’ income and resources. Therefore, it’s possible that lower-income participants earmarked a greater share of their income or wealth for the benefit of others compared to higher-income participants.
The take-home message: While the evidence is complicated, there is a body of data that demonstrates that higher-income individuals are more likely to give generously and act cooperatively compared to lower-income individuals. This is likely because they have more resources to spare.
Visit Cornell University’s Bronfenbrenner Center for Translational Research’s website for more information on our work solving human problems.
