Estimates of need, benefit, and personal connection explain monetary transfers to absolute strangers, identifiable needy others, and charitable organizations

People often share resources with non-relatives, even strangers. Researchers have not fully illuminated the cognitive appraisals (e.g., appraisals of the beneficiary's needs, the likelihood that the beneficiary will benefit from our help, and subjective connection to the beneficiary) that motivate such instances of impersonal generosity. Researchers' understanding of whether those appraisals account for people's elevated willingness to share with identifiable needy others and charities is even dimmer. In the two experiments presented here (total N = 677), Mturk and Prolific participants allocated money to three types of beneficiaries: anonymous others, real identifiable needy individuals, and real charities. On each trial, we measured participants' appraisals of the beneficiary's need and likely benefit from the donation (and, in Experiment 2, their sense of personal connection with the beneficiary), which we used to explain these beneficiary-type differences in giving. On average, participants allocated 27 % of their stakes to anonymous beneficiaries. Changing the identity from an anonymous beneficiary to an identifiable needy individual or charity raised transfers to 41 % and 40 %, respectively. All three appraisals were positively and significantly correlated with allocations. Finally, consistent with a mediational account, the effects of beneficiary type on allocations could be fully explained by the intermediate effect of the three appraisals. People may be more generous with identifiable needy others because they seem to need the help more and are more likely to benefit from it, and because they instill a greater sense of personal connection. These results shed new light on the foundations of human generosity. They also have implications for charitable organizations.