consort to new inquiry , 40 percent of people would favour not to know the consequence of their actions – choosing ignorance – so that they have an excuse to act selfishly .

“ object lesson of such headstrong ignorance abound in everyday liveliness , such as when consumers ignore info about the problematic origins of the products they buy , ” lead author Linh Vu , MS , a doctorial candidate at the University of Amsterdam in the Netherlands say in astatement . “ We wanted to recognise just how prevalent and how harmful willful ignorance is , as well as why people engage in it . ”

Vu and colleagues conducted a meta - analysis of 22 previously published studies that had a total of 6,531 participant . Each subject field took place either in a research laboratory or online , and all of them include some variety of arranging where some participant learned the consequence of their actions , while others were able to decline this information if they wished .

For model , in oneimportant cogitation , participant could prefer to find $ 6 for themselves and $ 1 for another recipient . or else , the player , known as the “ conclusion Almighty ” could elect to receive $ 5 and the same amount would be paid to another recipient . patently , the first option is far lessaltruisticthan the 2nd .

In the control condition , whereby participants know the consequences of their decision , 74 percent acted altruistically and pick out the 2nd option that provided great benefits for another recipient at the price of $ 1 for themselves . However , in a situation where the participants did not know how their pick would impact others – where they only understood there was a 50 percentage chance their decision would negatively bear upon the other recipient – things were different .

In this setup , participants could on the QT select to learn the consequence of selecting the first or second option . The study launch that around 44 percent of the decision - shaper chose ignorance . The written report showed that some people were actively avoid info , especially if that information related directly to their choices .

This , the authors argued , allowed these participants to continue to act selfishly while still maintain a sense of themselves as altruistic individuals .

The new meta - analysis stake up this version . According to Shaul Shalvi , a co - generator and professor of behavioral ethical motive at the University of Amsterdam , those who prefer to learn the consequences of their actions were 7 percent points more likely to be altruistic when compared to participant who were give the information by default . This suggest that truly generous people prefer to instruct about the consequence of their option .

“ The findings are bewitching as they suggest a muckle of the selfless behaviors we keep an eye on are driven by a desire to behave as others look us to , ” Shalvi explained .

“ While most people are willing to do the right matter when they are full informed of the moment of their actions , this willingness is not always because people worry for others . A part of the reasons why multitude act selflessly is due to societal pressures as well as their desire to watch themselves in a beneficial light . Since being righteous is often dear , demanding people to give up their time , money , and effort , ignorance offers an easy way out . ”

Further enquiry is needed to research how willful ignorance manifests in other options and cultures , and how this can be gainsay .

The subject field is published inPsychological Bulletin .