@phdthesis{Pollerhoff2024,
  author    = {Pollerhoff, Lena Katharina},
  title     = {Age differences in prosociality across the adult lifespan: Insights from self-reports, experimental paradigms, and meta-analyses},
  doi       = {10.25972/OPUS-35944},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-359445},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2024},
  abstract  = {Human prosociality, encompassing generosity, cooperation, and volunteering, holds a vital role in our daily lives. Over the last decades, the question of whether prosociality undergoes changes over the adult lifespan has gained increased research attention. Earlier studies suggested increased prosociality in older compared to younger individuals. However, recent meta-analyses revealed that this age effect might be heterogeneous and modest. Moreover, the contributing factors and mechanisms behind these age-related variations remain to be identified. To unravel age-related differences in prosociality, the first study of this dissertation employed a meta-analytical approach to summarize existing findings and provide insight into their heterogeneity by exploring linear and quadratic age effects on self-reported and behavioral prosociality. Additionally, two empirical research studies investigated whether these age-related differences in prosociality were observed in real life, assessed through ecological momentary assessment (Study 2), and in a controlled laboratory setting by applying a modified dictator game (Study 3). Throughout these three studies, potential underlying behavioral and computational mechanisms were explored. The outcome of the meta-analysis (Study 1) revealed small linear age effects on prosociality and significant age group differences between younger and older adults, with higher levels of prosociality in older adults. Explorative evidence emerged in favor of a quadratic age effect on behavioral prosociality, indicating the highest levels in midlife. Additionally, heightened prosocial behavior among middle-aged adults was observed compared to younger adults, whereas no significant differences in prosocial behavior were noted between middle-aged and older adults. Situational and contextual features, such as the setting of the study and specific paradigm characteristics, moderated the age-prosociality relationship, highlighting the importance of the (social) context when studying prosociality. For Study 2, no significant age effect on real-life prosocial behavior was observed. However, evidence for a significant linear and quadratic age effect on experiencing empathy in real life emerged, indicating a midlife peak. Additionally, across all age groups, the link between an opportunity to empathize and age significantly predicted real-life prosocial behavior. This effect, indicating higher levels of prosocial behavior when there was a situation possibly evoking empathy, was most pronounced in midlife. Study 3 presented age differences in how older and younger adults integrate values related to monetary gains for self and others to make a potential prosocial decision. Younger individuals effectively combined both values in a multiplicative fashion, enhancing decision-making efficiency. Older adults showed an additive effect of values for self and other and displayed increased decision-making efficiency when considering the values separately. However, among older adults, individuals with better inhibitory control were better able to integrate information about both values in their decisions. Taken together, the findings of this dissertation offer new insights into the multi-faceted nature of prosociality across adulthood and the mechanisms that help explain these age-related disparities. While this dissertation observed increasing prosociality across the adult lifespan, it also questions the assumption that older adults are inherently more prosocial. The studies highlight midlife as a potential peak period in social development but also emphasize the importance of the (social) context and that different operationalizations might capture distinct facets of prosociality. This underpins the need for a comprehensive framework to understand age effects of prosociality better and guide potential interventions.},
  subject      = {Altersunterschied},
  language  = {en}
}