The Benefactor's Brain Dilemma: Helping is Easy, Telling is Hard

Performing good deeds often brings positive feelings. However, many people are afraid to share their good deeds because they think they might be seen as arrogant or insincere. In five studies, participants said they believed they would feel worse recounting a good deed than recounting a personal achievement, especially on social media. Interestingly, they think others would feel better than they would by sharing the same type of story. This conflict is called the "benefactor's dilemma."

Many people who perform good deeds say they feel good afterward. This can happen when someone donates money, helps someone on the street, does volunteer work, or performs another generous gesture. Besides the positive feeling, when other people discover these actions, the author's public image can improve. Therefore, it's not surprising that some people who do something good like the idea of ​​telling others about it.

However, even with these benefits, there are difficulties when someone shares their own good deed. Research shows that many people negatively judge those who talk about the good they have done. This is because, in many cultures, there is a social rule of modesty: we shouldn't promote ourselves or show ourselves to be superior. Therefore, when someone speaks of their own goodness, it can seem arrogant.

Furthermore, there is another important point: when someone recounts a good deed, listeners may believe it wasn't done for the right reasons. Instead of seeing the act as altruistic, others may think the person did it only to receive praise or attention. Some studies show that when this happens, the moral value of the action may seem less than a common action, and even less positive than doing nothing.

Another consequence is social discomfort. When someone talks about their good deeds, even unintentionally, it can make others feel guilty for not having done something similar. This creates moral comparison, and this type of comparison can generate negative feelings such as irritation, shame, or rejection.

All of this creates an emotional conflict. On the one hand, people like to be recognized for doing good; after all, being seen as an ethical person is important in most societies. On the other hand, the fear of judgment makes many people prefer to keep their good deeds silent. This conflict is called the "benefactor's dilemma."

To better understand this dilemma, five studies were conducted with hundreds of participants. First, participants recalled a good deed they had done or a personal achievement (such as an award, promotion, or goal reached). Then, they imagined how they would feel if they told a friend about it or posted it on social media.

The results showed that people believe they would feel worse recounting a good deed than an achievement. They also thought that sharing on social media would be even more uncomfortable than telling just one friend, likely because social networks expose the content to many unknown people, increasing the risk of judgment.

Interestingly, when participants tried to predict how other people would feel doing the same, they imagined that others would feel less embarrassed and more proud than they themselves would. In other words, people think they would be more criticized and observed than they actually would be.

The researchers also compared situations where the person chose to share voluntarily with situations where they were forced to share. Overall, participants believed they would be judged less if someone else forced them to share, perhaps because it would lessen the impression of self-promotion.

In the end, studies showed that, even though sharing good deeds can encourage positive behaviors and inspire others, many people believe that recounting what they did can bring negative emotional consequences.

They fear appearing vain, fake, or morally superior. Therefore, many prefer silence, even while desiring recognition.

As Oscar Wilde said: “The best feeling in the world is to do a good deed anonymously, and then have someone find out about it.”

READ MORE:

The do-gooder dilemma: A self/other asymmetry in the perceived emotional costs of self-reporting good deeds

Jerry Richardson, Paul Bloom, Shaun Nichols, and David Pizarro 

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 121, November 2025, 104808

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104808 

Abstract:

Recent research in which individuals are encouraged to share stories of their own charitable giving on social media suggests that such sharing facilitates perceptions of prosocial norms and increases charitable donations. However, we predicted that this sharing might also incur unforeseen emotional costs, diminishing the “warm glow” of altruism. Across 5 preregistered experiments (N = 2840), participants reported that they would feel worse when sharing their own good deeds compared to their achievements, and substantially worse when sharing these stories on social media (compared to telling a friend or not sharing). In contrast, participants reported that others would feel better (i.e., less shame and embarrassment, more happiness and pride) after reporting their own good deeds. These studies suggest that individuals believe that (1) reporting their own good deeds will leave them feeling worse, and (2) others will not suffer similar negative feelings.