"We examined people's charity contributions while in the presence of an observer of the same sex, opposite sex, or no observer... We hypothesized that men would be more generous in the presence of a potential mate... Our results show that men contribute more to charity when observed by a member of the opposite sex than by a member of the same sex or no observer. Conversely, female charity donations did not significantly vary across the three observer conditions. Findings support the notion that men's generosity might have evolved as a mating signal."
The article goes on to talk about men tipping more especially when on a date, donating to pan-handlers more often when the beggar was female or if they were walking with a female, and other such statistics. Whereas females donate equally across all circumstances. My male readers may try to argue that while women donate equally, they probably donate less and therefore men are more generous. To you I say, check out this graph from the study:
The study tells us that the two groups contributed the same amount of money overall ($119). The point here, of course, is that women donate indiscriminately while men donate more when observed by the opposite sex. This was a study done in a lab, so whether in real life men and women wind up donating the same amount to charities is unknown.
So men donate to show off and get a good mate while women donate because they're... good people. (yes I'm purposefully imposing moral judgments on these poor subjects, but it's certainly more entertaining to read the data my way than some lame "we're all equal" sort of way!)
Science I can get behind!
Article citation:
Iredale, W., Van Vugt, M. & Dunbar, R., 2008. Showing Off in Humans: Male Generosity as a Mating Signal. Evolutionary Psychology 6(3): 386-392.
