magazine issue 3 2025 / Issue 59

Left-wing vs. right-wing: who is more likely to help others?

• written by Bernhard Schubach
• edited by Rinat Meerson

This article was reviewed by Julia Sasse and Alexander Ehlert.

Are supporters of the political left more prosocial and altruistic than their right-wing counterparts? In theory, this link is very plausible. This article summarizes the empirical research on the link between political orientation and prosocial behaviors and personality traits.

Introduction

Have you ever wondered if your political views affect how you look at and treat others? Our political beliefs are often more than just opinions—they reflect our values, priorities, and how we see our role in society. In a world where political divides are growing, people have become increasingly aware of how these views influence not only their votes but also impact their daily lives and interactions [1]. The rise in political interest can, for example, be seen in the 2020 U.S. election, which saw the highest voter turnout in the U.S. in decades [2], and the Brexit referendum, which had the highest voter turnout in the United Kingdom in over 20 years [3].

The Vote for the Brexit saw the highest voter turnout in the U.K. in over 20 years.

One plausible reason for this rising political interest is the increasing polarization between political groups. A prime example is the U.S., where Democrats and Republicans often struggle to find common ground on political issues, and cooperation between the parties has become a rarity. Developments such as this have inspired researchers to investigate whether there are fundamental differences in how individuals from opposing political sides think, feel, and act.

Various studies investigate this subject and find differences between people who support left-wing ideologies and parties (e.g., the Democratic Party in the U.S.) and those who support right-wing ideologies (e.g., the Republican Party). For example, left-wing people are more open to new experiences and perspectives, whereas right-wing people work more conscientiously and tend to be more structured in their task approach [4]. Another example is an international study that found that people differed in their willingness to donate money to different organizations depending on their political orientation. Namely, people with a left-wing political orientation donated more money to a hypothetical global organization. In contrast, people with a right-wing political orientation decided more often to give money to a hypothetical local or national organization [5]. Applying this to everyday life, left-wing supporters might donate more money to the International Red Cross or UNICEF, whereas right-wing supporters might support their local sports clubs more.

Donating money to others can be seen as an instance of prosocial behavior. Prosocial behavior describes behavior meant to benefit others, even if it comes at a cost for the actor (such as money or time; [6]). Donating undoubtedly fulfills this definition: A person gives money to someone else to improve their situation and, as a result, has less money left for themselves.

Donating money is the most prominent example of prosocial behavior.

Of course, prosocial behavior is not limited to donating money. Mentoring school kids, looking out for elderly neighbors, or donating blood are all examples of the many prosocial actions that exist. We find something similar to prosocial behavior in politics, namely social welfare policies. This class of policies focuses on the overall well-being of a society. Examples are the endorsement of minimum wages and the support of unemployed people. These policies are meant to help people in need, and by doing that, they increase the well-being of society as a whole. However, as with prosocial behavior, these policies can come at personal costs for individuals, e.g., through higher taxation. Usually, the left-wing political parties support this type of policy more so than the right-wing political parties. A prominent example is the Democratic Party in the U.S., which supports social security for all U.S. residents, whereas the Republican Party opposes such policies. Due to the parallel nature of prosocial behavior and social welfare policies, it seems reasonable to assume that people with a more left-wing political orientation (who are arguably in favor of social welfare policies) will show more prosocial behavior than those on the more right-wing side of the spectrum.

Empirical findings

When psychologists study this type of question, they usually employ two types of measures of prosociality: Questionnaires to ask participants what they think, feel, or believe, or games in which participants are, for example, asked to split windfall money between themselves and some other party (e.g., another unknown person). Questionnaires include statements such as: “I try to help others.” or “I am concerned with the overall best interest of everyone.” [7], [8]. Participants are asked to what extent they agree or disagree with these and similar statements. In games, in turn, interacting participants are usually given a certain amount of money and allowed to distribute it among themselves, following specific rules. One prominent example is the “dictator game”, a commonly used game to measure prosocial behavior. Here, one person (the “dictator”) is given a certain amount (e.g., $ 10), whereas the other participant (the “recipient”) is not given any money. The dictator decides how to split the money between the two. Giving money to the other person (e.g., splitting the money equally or even transferring all $ 10 to the other person) is considered to indicate prosociality. Keeping all the money as the “dictator” is considered as selfish, as the other person would receive $ 0 [9].

Scientists started investigating the link between political orientation and prosocial behavior using such instruments roughly 20 years ago. The first study, conducted in 2005 in the U.S., used the game approach and tested whether supporters of the Democrats would send more money to another participant than supporters of the Republicans. However, the scientists did not find differences between both groups. Political orientation was unrelated to prosocial behavior [10]. Another study in the U.S. also failed to find differences in prosocial behavior between Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. [11]. A similar study investigated this question across several countries and found only a link between political orientation and prosocial behavior in some countries but not in others [12].

Another example study used a questionnaire approach to prosociality. Instead of measuring specific behavior, they assessed a personality trait related to prosociality, namely empathy. Empathetic individuals tend to consider other people's perspectives and show concern for their needs. This study found no meaningful link between empathy and political orientation [13].

Based on these findings, does that mean political orientation and prosocial behavior are not correlated? Well, there is also evidence in favor of the link. One study assessed the link in Italy and the Netherlands using games, and they found that left-wing individuals showed more prosocial behavior. In contrast, right-wing individuals showed more selfish behavior [14]. Another study in New Zealand even used multiple games and found the same results [15]. Furthermore, similar results were obtained using representative samples in the U.S. and Austria [16], [17].

Another study, using the questionnaire approach, found differences in trait altruism, which refers to a tendency to show greater compassion and concern for others in need [18]. Participants who identified as left-wing scored significantly higher on altruism than those with a right-wing political orientation [19]. Therefore, there is quite some evidence that political orientation and prosociality are linked to each other.

All the studies mentioned above focused either on prosocial behavior in games or measured prosocial traits. However, they did not combine both types of prosocial behavior, which makes it difficult to evaluate the differences in findings. In a recent study, researchers measured prosocial behavior with various tools, including six games and ten traits. They found a consistent link between political orientation and prosociality in personality traits. People with a left-wing political orientation scored significantly higher on altruism, empathy, and similar traits than those with a right-wing political orientation. However, when looking at the specific prosocial behavior shown in games, few differences emerged between supporters of left-wing and right-wing policies [20].

How can it be explained that in many studies, people with a left-wing political orientation score higher on prosocial traits than people with a right-wing political orientation, but at the same time, their behavior in games is very similar? One might argue that left-leaning individuals claim to be more prosocial in principle but do not always translate these values into action. This pattern aligns with a well-known psychological phenomenon: the gap between intentions and behavior. Across various domains, people often endorse certain values or express behavioral intentions but fail to act consistently with them in real-world situations. This inconsistency is not unique to political ideology or prosocial tendencies – it is a broader characteristic of human behavior [21]. Although the intention-behavior gap offers one possible interpretation, a somewhat more convincing explanation lies in the distinction between general beliefs and specific situational responses. Political orientation and personality traits often reflect broad, abstract ideals—such as the importance of helping others or cooperating rather than competing. However, other factors come into play when it comes to concrete actions in specific situations. In experimental games, for instance, prosocial behavior depends not only on personal values but also on the immediate context, the game’s rules, and potential costs. As a result, while general prosocial traits may provide a rough prediction of behavior, they do not always align perfectly with real-time decisions.

Conclusion

Returning to our central question: are left-leaning people more prosocial than right-leaning people? The answer appears to be yes but with caution. Left-leaning people tend to have stronger prosocial attitudes than right-leaning people. However, these differences in attitudes do not always translate into differences in actual behavior. Moreover, even those differences that arise are small or medium at best. Therefore, one can conclude that prosocial behavior cannot be explained solely by one’s political orientation. Prosocial behavior is shaped by a mix of personal, social, and situational factors that can amplify or limit these tendencies. Nonetheless, there are differences, and the political views one supports are not entirely irrelevant to prosocial behavior.

This conclusion leads us to new questions to be researched. For example, left-wing and right-wing individuals might not differ greatly in their overall prosocial behavior. Still, people with a right-wing political orientation might differentiate more strongly towards those with whom they act prosocially. They might be very prosocial towards people belonging to their social group but less prosocial towards strangers. In contrast, for left-wing supporters, the beneficiary might not be as relevant for their decision to act prosocially. To speak figuratively, political orientation might serve as a reference point for prosocial behavior, much like a compass: For left-wing people, it broadly points to all people, whereas for right-wing people, it points specifically to familiar groups and communities.

One’s own political orientation might be compared to compass which shows to whom one is prosocial.

Another unanswered question is the cause-effect relationship of the link: Does a left-wing political orientation push people to show more prosocial behavior? Or does showing prosocial behavior make people more aware of other people and thereby make them more susceptible to left-wing ideologies? Or are both concepts the result of a more basic tendency, such as a moral belief about when helping behavior is appropriate? None of the findings above answers why political orientation and prosocial behavior correlate. Hence, there are still many open questions.

As a takeaway message: Our overall political beliefs can influence our everyday behavior, including prosocial behavior.

 

Pictures

PICTURE 1: https://pixabay.com/de/photos/brexit-gro%C3%9Fbritannien-3941742/

PICTURE 2: https://pixabay.com/de/photos/dollar-geld-geldbeutel-finanzen-4516000/

PICTURE 3: https://pixabay.com/de/photos/kompass-hand-see-abenteuer-4891499/

 

Bibliography

[1] M. Helbling and S. Jungkunz, "Social divides in the age of globalization," West Eur. Polit., vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 1187-1210, 2020, doi: 10.1080/01402382.2019.1674578.

[2] U.S. Elections Project, "2020 November general election turnout rates," 2020. Accessed: Feb. 20, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.electproject.org/2020g

[3] Statista, "Voter turnout in general elections and in the Brexit referendum in the United Kingdom from 1918 to 2024," 2024. Accessed: Feb. 20, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1050929/voter-turnout-in-the-uk/

[4] J. Sibley, C. Osborne, and S. Duckitt, "Personality and political orientation: Meta-analysis and test of a threat-constraint model," J. Res. Pers., vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 664-677, 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2012.08.002.

[5] V. Pizziol, X. Demaj, R. Di Paolo, and V. Capraro, "Political ideology and generosity around the globe," Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, vol. 120, no. 15, p. e2219676120, 2023. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2219676120.

[6] N. Eisenberg and P. A. Miller, "The relation of empathy to prosocial and related behaviors," Psychol. Bull., vol. 101, no. 1, pp. 91-119, 1987, doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.101.1.91.

[7] G. V. Caprara, P. Steca, A. Zelli, and C. Capanna, "A new scale for measuring adults' prosocialness," Eur. J. Psychol. Assess., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 77-89, 2005, doi: 10.1027/1015-5759.21.2.77.

[8] M. E. Gerbasi and D. A. Prentice, "The self- and other-interest inventory," J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., vol. 105, no. 3, pp. 495-514, 2013, doi: 10.1037/a0033483.

[9] N. Bardsley, "Dictator game giving: Altruism or artefact?," Exp. Econ., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 122-133, 2008, doi: 10.1007/s10683-007-9172-2.

[10] L. R. Anderson, J. M. Mellor, and J. Milyo, "Do liberals play nice? The effects of party and political ideology in public goods and trust games," in Adv. Appl. Microecon.: Exp. Behav. Econ., vol. 13, J. Morgan, Bingley, United Kingdom: Ed. Elsevier JAI, 2005, pp. 107-131. doi: 10.1016/S0278-0984(05)13005-3.

[11] P. Hernández-Lagos and D. Minor, "Political identity and trust," Q. J. Polit. Sci., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 337-367, 2020, doi: 10.1561/100.00018063.

[12] C. T. Dawes et al., "Generosity and political preferences," SSRN Electron. J., 2012. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2179522.

[13] S. Schieman, A. Bierman, and L. Upenieks, "Beyond 'heartless conservative' and 'bleeding heart liberal' caricatures: How religiosity shapes the relationship between political orientation and empathy," J. Sci. Study Relig., vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 360-377, 2019, doi: 10.1111/jssr.12595.

[14] P. van Lange, R. Bekkers, A. Schuyt, and M. Vugt, "Political ideology and prosocial behavior: Social value orientation as a mediating variable," J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., vol. 103, no. 5, pp. 827-844, 2012, doi: 10.1037/a0029367.

[15] S. Claessens, C. G. Sibley, A. Chaudhuri, and Q. D. Atkinson, "Cooperative and conformist behavioural preferences predict the dual dimensions of political ideology," Sci. Rep., vol. 13, no. 1, p. 4886, 2023, doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-31721-6.

[16] A. Ehlert, R. Böhm, J. Fleiß, H. Rauhut, R. Rybnicek, and F. Winter, "The development of prosociality: Evidence for a negative association between age and prosocial value orientation from a representative sample in Austria," Games, vol. 12, no. 3, p. 67, 2021. doi: 10.3390/g12030067.

[17] R. Fisman, P. Jakiela, and S. Kariv, "Distributional preferences and political behavior," J. Public Econ., vol. 155, pp. 1-10, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2017.08.010.

[18] C. D. Batson, M. H. Bolen, J. A. Cross, and H. E. Neuringer-Benefiel, "Where is the altruism in the altruistic personality?," J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 212-220, 1986, doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.50.1.212.

[19] T. Zettler, B. Hilbig, and J. Haubrich, "Attitudes towards economic redistribution and personality: Evidence from Germany," Eur. J. Pers., vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 102-110, 2011, doi: 10.1002/per.775.

[20] B. Schubach and I. Thielmann, “Does a left-wing political orientation really go along with greater prosociality? A large-scale empirical investigation,” Soc. Psychol. Pers. Sci., early access, 2024, doi: 10.1177/19485506241298341.

[21] P. Sheeran and T. L. Webb, "The intention–behavior gap," Soc. Pers. Psychol. Compass, vol. 10, no. 9, pp. 503-518, 2016, doi: 10.1111/spc3.12265.