Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41938368›Full record

ArticleJMR, Journal of marketing research2025

Retributive Philanthropy.

Ethan Milne, Kirk Kristofferson, Miranda R Goode

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMR, Journal of marketing research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prosocial behavior research has historically considered altruistic or self-interested motives as the primary drivers for charitable giving. Recently, however, there have been many high-profile cases wherein consumers use their donations to harm others. The authors define this behavior, characterized by a desire for retribution resulting from witnessing or experiencing volitional wrongdoing, as "retributive philanthropy" and examine this phenomenon using a multimethod approach. Qualitative interviews with perpetrators and targets of retributive philanthropy reveal key themes of blameworthiness judgments, strong negative affect, and a desire to harm as a terminal goal of donation-none which are typically associated with prosocial behaviors. Analysis of real-world antivaccine protestor donation data finds similar themes of perceived wrongdoing and outrage related to retributive donations in a large-scale context. Five lab studies and five supplementary studies then demonstrate the effects of perceived volitional wrongdoing, harm, efficacy, and authoritarianism on willingness to make retributive donations. Together, these findings offer critical insight into an emerging mode of donation that is emotionally, motivationally, and behaviorally distinct from traditional prosocial behavior and has important implications for consumers and charitable marketers.

Indexed as

consumer aggressiondonationsprosocial behaviorretribution

Identifiers

PMID41938368
PMCPMC13046273

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.