The Andrew Carnegie Effect: Legacy Motives Increase the Intergenerational Allocation of Wealth to Collective Causes
Abstract
Andrew Carnegie was known for proclaiming that people have an obligation to leave their wealth to collective causes that benefit society. Yet, people tend to think of legacy within the constraints of their familial circles. In our work, we show that a simple reflection task that activates legacy motives can lead people to overcome this restricted way of construing legacy, expanding their circle of moral concern when considering how to allocate their wealth between different types of beneficiaries. Across four preregistered studies (N = 3,656), we found that when people are prompted to consider how their lives will impact future generations, they allocate more of their wealth to collectivistic beneficiaries (e.g., charities) and less of their wealth to relational beneficiaries (e.g., family members). We call this the “Andrew Carnegie Effect.”
Get full access to this article
View all access and purchase options for this article.
References
Abbate C. S., Isgró A., Wicklund R. A., Boca S. (2006). A field experiment on perspective-taking, helping, and self-awareness. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 28(3), 283–287. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp2803_7
Andreoni J., Serra-Garcia M. (2021). Time inconsistent charitable giving. Journal of Public Economics, 198, Article 104391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2021.104391
Bang H. M., Zhou Koval C., Wade-Benzoni K. A. (2017). It’s the thought that counts over time: The interplay of intent, outcome, stewardship, and legacy motivations in intergenerational reciprocity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 197–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.07.006
Becker E. (1973). The denial of death. Free Press.
Becker E. (1975). Escape from evil. Free Press.
Carnegie A. (1889). Wealth. North American Review, 148, 653–664.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021). Fourth report on human exposure to environmental chemicals, updated tables. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/exposurereport/
Chen H., Cohen P., Chen S. (2010). How big is a big odds ratio? Interpreting the magnitudes of odds ratios in epidemiological studies. Communications in Statistics—Simulation and Computation, 39(4), 860–864. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610911003650383
Cialdini R. B., Trost M. R. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity and compliance. In Gilbert D. T., Fiske S. T., Lindzey G. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 151–192). McGraw-Hill.
Cioffi D., Garner R. (1996). On doing the decision: Effects of active versus passive choice on commitment and self-perception. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(2), 133–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167296222003
Crimston C. R., Bain P. G., Hornsey M. J., Bastian B. (2016). Moral expansiveness: Examining variability in the extension of the moral world. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(4), 636–653. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000086
Crimston C. R., Blessing S., Gilbert P., Kirby J. N. (2022). Fear leads to suffering: Fears of compassion predict restriction of the moral boundary. British Journal of Social Psychology, 61(1), 345–365. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12483
Crimston C. R., Hornsey M. J., Bain P. G., Bastian B. (2018a). Moral expansiveness short form: Validity and reliability of the MESx. PLOS ONE, 13(10), Article e0205373. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0205373
Crimston C. R., Hornsey M. J., Bain P. G., Bastian B. (2018b). Toward a psychology of moral expansiveness. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27(1), 14–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417730888
Fosgaard T., Soetevent A. R. (2018). Promises undone: How committed pledges impact donations to charity. Tinbergen Institute discussion paper 2018/044-VII. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3173585
Fox M., Tost L. P., Wade-Benzoni K. A. (2010). The legacy motive: A catalyst for sustainable decision making in organizations. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(2), 153–185. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq201020214
Fox M., Wade-Benzoni K. (2017). The creation of opportunity is an opportunity to create: Entrepreneurship as an outlet for the legacy motive. Research in Organizational Behavior, 37, 167–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2017.10.003
George G., Howard-Grenville J., Joshi A., Tihanyi L. (2016). Understanding and tackling societal grand challenges through management research. Academy of Management Journal, 59(6), 1880–1895. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.4007
Graham J., Haidt J., Nosek B. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029–1046. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015141
Graham J., Waytz A., Meindl P., Iyer R., Young L. (2017). Centripetal and centrifugal forces in the moral circle: Competing constraints on moral learning. Cognition, 167, 58–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.12.001
Hamilton W. D. (1964). The genetical evolution of social behavior, Part I and II. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7, 1–52.
Harvey C., Maclean M., Gordon J., Shaw E. (2011). Andrew Carnegie and the foundations of contemporary entrepreneurial philanthropy. Business History, 53(3), 425–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/00076791.2011.565516
Hershfield H. E., Goldstein D. G., Sharpe W. F., Fox J., Yeykelis L., Carstensen L. L., Bailenson J. N. (2011). Increasing saving behavior through age-progressed renderings of the future self. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(SPL), S23–S37. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.48.SPL.S23
Judge D. S., Hrdy S. B. (1992). Allocation of accumulated resources among close kin: Inheritance in Sacramento, California, 1890–1984. Ethology and Sociobiology, 13(5–6), 495–522. https://doi.org/10.1016/0162-3095(92)90014-U
Kotre J. (1984). Outliving the self: Generativity and the interpretation of lives. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Kotre J. (1999). Make it count. Free Press.
Kraus M. W., Rucker J. M., Richeson J. A. (2017). Americans misperceive racial economic equality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(39), 10324–10331. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1707719114
Laham S. M. (2013). Ease of retrieval and the moral circle. Social Psychology, 44(1), 33–36. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000099
Matz S. C., Gladstone J. J., Stillwell D. (2017). In a world of big data, small effects can still matter: A reply to Boyce, Daly, Hounkpatin, and Wood (2017). Psychological Science, 28(4), 547–550. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617697445
O’Neill A. (2022). Life expectancy (from birth) in the United States, from 1860 to 2020 [Data set]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1040079/life-expectancy-united-states-all-time/#:∼:text=Over%20the%20past%20160%20years,to%2078.9%20years%20in%202020
Philanthropy of Andrew Carnegie. (n.d.). Rare books & manuscript library. Columbia University Libraries. https://library.columbia.edu/libraries/rbml/units/carnegie/andrew.html
Rutchick A. M., Slepian M. L., Reyes M. O., Pleskus L. N., Hershfield H. E. (2018). Future self-continuity is associated with improved health and increases exercise behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 24(1), 72–80. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000153
Smith M. S., Kish B. J., Crawford C. B. (1987). Inheritance of wealth as human kin investment. Ethology and Sociobiology, 8(3), 171–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/0162-3095(87)90042-2
Steverman B. (2019). Trillions will be inherited over the coming decades, further widening the wealth gap. L.A. Times, November 29.
Sutton A. (2016). Measuring the effects of self-awareness: Construction of the Self-Awareness Outcomes Questionnaire. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 12(4), 645–658. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v12i4.1178
van Gelder J.-L., Hershfield H. E., Nordgren L. F. (2013). Vividness of the future self predicts delinquency. Psychological Science, 24(6), 974–980. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612465197
Wade-Benzoni K. A., Sondak H., Galinsky A. D. (2010). Leaving a legacy: Intergenerational allocations of benefits and burdens. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(1), 7–34.
Wade-Benzoni K. A., Tost L. P. (2009). The egoism and altruism of intergenerational behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13(3), 165–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868309339317
Wade-Benzoni K. A., Tost L. P., Hernandez M., Larrick R. P. (2012). It’s only a matter of time: Death, legacies, and intergenerational decisions. Psychological Science, 23(7), 704–709. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612443967
Weber E. P., Khademian A. M. (2008). Wicked problems, knowledge challenges, and collaborative capacity builders in network settings. Public Administration Review, 68(2), 334–349. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00866.x
Webster G. D. (2003). Prosocial behavior in families: Moderators of resource sharing. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(6), 644–652. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00055-6
Zaval L., Markowitz E. M., Weber E. U. (2015). How will I be remembered? Conserving the environment for the sake of one’s legacy. Psychological Science, 26(2), 231–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614561266
Biographies
Jessica J. W. Paek is a Ph.D. candidate in Management & Organizations at Duke University's Fuqua School of Business. Her research focuses on motivation, goal pursuit, and prosocial behavior.
Daniela Goya-Tocchetto is an Assistant Professor of Organizational Behavior at the University at Buffalo, SUNY. Her research focuses on inequality perceptions, social class and racial biases, and moral and political decision-making.
Kimberly A. Wade-Benzoni is a Professor of Management & Organizations and Center of Leadership & Ethics Scholar at the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University. Her research focuses on intergenerational decisions and the psychology of legacies.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
Cite article
Cite article
Cite article
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published online: January 23, 2024
Issue published: March 2025
Keywords
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Journals metrics
This article was published in Social Psychological and Personality Science.
View All Journal MetricsArticle usage*
Total views and downloads: 646
*Article usage tracking started in December 2016
Altmetric
See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores
Articles citing this one
Receive email alerts when this article is cited
Web of Science: 2 view articles Opens in new tab
Crossref: 2
- Bridging the intergenerational gap: boosting recycling behavior and policy support through eliciting concerns for future others
- Caring for present and future generations alike: Longtermism and moral regard across temporal and social distance
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
I am signed in as:
View my profileSign out
I can access personal subscriptions, purchases, paired institutional access and free tools such as favourite journals, email alerts and saved searches.
loading institutional access options
ARP and EASP members can access this journal content using society membership credentials.
ARP and EASP members can access this journal content using society membership credentials.
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
