In a recent study that delves into the complex psychology behind altruistic behavior and social sharing, researchers have uncovered a paradoxical emotional dilemma faced by individuals who perform good deeds. Jerry Richardson, a doctoral candidate in psychology at Cornell University, recalls a simple act of kindness that sparked this groundbreaking investigation. On his way to a dinner party in Ithaca, N.Y., Richardson encountered a man outside a grocery store who asked for food. Richardson responded by purchasing $7 worth of groceries for him. Despite the warmth and satisfaction this gesture brought, Richardson soon found himself wrestling with a nagging discomfort about sharing his good deed with others, including refraining from posting about it on social media platforms.
This emotional conflict propelled Richardson and his colleagues, including prominent scholars Paul Bloom, Shaun Nichols, and David Pizarro, to systematically explore the psychological costs associated with self-reporting acts of kindness. Their findings, published in the November issue of the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, reveal a nuanced picture of how people anticipate feeling when they broadcast their own altruistic actions compared to how they might feel sharing personal successes unrelated to morality, such as professional achievements.
Through five methodologically rigorous studies, the research team asked several hundred participants to reflect upon previous instances where they engaged either in a good deed or attained a personal milestone. Participants rated their feelings of pride, happiness, shame, and embarrassment concerning these actions. Crucially, they were then asked to imagine how disclosing these acts to friends or posting about them on social media would impact their emotional state.
The results were striking. Participants consistently predicted that sharing good deeds with others would elicit feelings of shame and embarrassment, a stark contrast to the anticipated pride and happiness associated with disclosing personal achievements. This suggests a deeply ingrained social calculus, where individuals weigh the potential reputational backlash of appearing self-promotional or insincere against the intrinsic satisfaction of the act itself. The researchers coined this the “do-gooder dilemma,” highlighting an internal conflict driven by reputational concerns.
One insightful interpretation posited by Richardson and colleagues focuses on the reputational signaling that accompanies publicizing good deeds. Rather than purely celebrating their kindness, individuals anticipate that others might perceive their motivations as self-serving attempts at social credit or reputation enhancement. This perceived reputational cost generates an emotional toll, especially pronounced when the disclosure occurs in the inherently performative arena of social media. The virtual amplification of audience and scrutiny magnifies the risk of social judgment, thereby intensifying feelings of embarrassment or shame.
Interestingly, the research also revealed an asymmetry in how people gauge their own emotional responses compared to those of others. While participants foresaw a personal emotional penalty in sharing their altruistic acts, they assumed that others would experience considerable joy and pride in publicizing their good deeds. This self-other discrepancy likely stems from the limited access we have to others’ internal experiences, leading to shallow mental simulations when attempting to predict others’ emotions.
This discrepancy has broader implications for social behavior and online culture. It suggests that while people are cautious and even reticent about showcasing their kindness, they simultaneously hold idealized views of how others engage in self-presentation. This asymmetry may fuel misunderstandings and reinforce social norms that stigmatize overt displays of altruism, potentially discouraging the public reporting of actions that benefit society.
Beyond its theoretical contributions, the study touches on practical considerations for individuals and organizations seeking to promote prosocial behavior. The researchers caution that encouraging people to share their good deeds as a strategy for inspiring others might backfire if it triggers feelings of shame or embarrassment. Instead, the findings echo the sentiments of Oscar Wilde, who famously posited that “the nicest feeling in the world is to do a good deed anonymously—and have somebody find out.” This underscores the enduring value of humility and discretion in moral actions.
From a psychological standpoint, the study enriches our understanding of self-conscious emotions—particularly shame and embarrassment—in the context of morality and social signaling. These findings intersect with broader research on the complexities of social identity, reputation management, and the role of digital platforms in shaping human interaction and self-expression.
The methodological depth of the investigation, spanning multiple studies and involving nuanced measures of emotional forecasting, lends robustness to the conclusions. It invites further inquiry into the neurocognitive processes underlying these emotional predictions and their modulation by cultural norms and individual differences. Additionally, investigating how these dynamics play out across different social media platforms or cultural contexts could provide valuable insights into the universality versus specificity of the do-gooder dilemma.
Ultimately, the research champions a more reflective and compassionate understanding of the intricate emotions that coalesce around acts of kindness and their social disclosure. It challenges simplistic assumptions about the benefits of publicizing good behavior and calls for sensitivity to the emotional costs that individuals navigate in their moral lives. As digital platforms continue to mediate much of our social interactions, grappling with the do-gooder dilemma becomes ever more relevant for fostering authentic generosity and community cohesion.
The “do-gooder dilemma” speaks to a profound human tension: the desire to be recognized for goodness, counterbalanced by the fear of social judgment. Unpacking this tension is essential for developing psychological theories that accurately reflect the interplay between morality, self-presentation, and social emotion in the 21st century.
Subject of Research: People
Article Title: The do-gooder dilemma: A self/other asymmetry in the perceived emotional costs of self-reporting good deeds
News Publication Date: 1-Nov-2025
Web References: 10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104808
Keywords: Altruistic behavior, Philanthropy
