New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Human First Impulse Is Generosity

When people have to make a choice instantly of being more or less generous, their first impulse is toward cooperation. Sophie Bushwick reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Are human beings inherently generous or selfish? A new study finds that when people have to make the choice instantly, their first impulse is cooperation—which indicates that generosity is innate. Only when they have more time to consider their choice do they behave more selfishly. The research is in the journal Nature. [David G. Rand, Joshua D. Greene and Martin A. Nowak, Spontaneous giving and calculated greed]

In the study, researchers ran several tests in which each participant in a small group received money and then had to decide how much to invest in a shared group fund. The more time people had to choose how much to donate, the less they gave. Subjects told they had to make a decision within 10 seconds even gave more than others who were told they had to wait the same 10 seconds before deciding.

Because snap decisions are based on intuition, the researchers concluded that generosity is the intuitive human response. But given time, we can reason our way to a more selfish decision.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


This intuitive cooperation might be either genetically hardwired, or a cultural construct. Either way, next time I run a fundraiser, I'm bringing a stopwatch.

—Sophie Bushwick

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

[Scientific American is part of Nature Publishing Group.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe