REVIEW JURNAL

(Martela & Ryan, 2016)Martela, F., & Ryan, R. M. (2016). The Benefits of Benevolence:
Basic Psychological Needs, Beneficence, and the Enhancement of Well-Being. Journal of
Personality, 84(6), 750–764. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12215

The Benefits of Benevolence: Basic Psychological Needs,

Judul Beneficence,
and the Enhancement of Well-Being
Jurnal The Benefits of Benevolence
Volume & Halaman Journal of
Personality, 84(6), 750–764.
Tahun 2016
Penulis Frank Martela And Richard M.Ryan
Reviewer Muhammad Mudzakkir Abdul Hakim
Tanggal 1 november 2020

Here we simultaneously assess these

two explanations. Study 1 (N 5 335) used a cross-sectional survey
with an Internet sample to develop a measure to assess
beneficence satisfaction. The next two cross-sectional Internet-
sample studies tested mediators between pro-social behavior
and general well-being (Study 2, N 5 332) and situational peak
moment well-being (Study 3, N 5 180). A fourth study (N 5 85)
used a diary method with university students to assess daily
fluctuations in well-being associated with needs and beneficence.
It was shown across all studies that both the three psychological
introduction needs and beneficence satisfaction mediate the relations
between pro-social actions and well-being, with all four factors
emerging as independent predictors. Together, these studies
underscore the role of autonomy, competence, and relatedness in
explaining the well-being benefits of benevolence, and they
also point to the independent role of beneficence as a source of
human wellness.
Method 1. Participant and Procedure
Participants were recruited
through Amazon Mechanical Turk. A total of 388 people
answered the survey. To assess pro-social behavior, we
used a six-item scale (Pavey, Greitemeyer, & Sparks, 2012;
Rushton, Chrisjohn, & Fekken, 1981) that included items such
as “I have given money to charity” and “I have gone out of my
way to help a stranger in need.” The participants were asked to
rate the extent to which they had carried out these behaviors in
the previous 2 weeks on a scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5
(very often). The reliability of this scale was .90
2. Measure
The participants were asked to
rate the extent to which they had carried out these behaviors in
 the previous 2 weeks on a scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5
(very often). The reliability of this scale was .90.
3. Agreeableness
Agreeableness was measured with the
Agreeableness scale from the Big Five Inventory (John & Sri-
vastava, 1999).
4. Empathy
Empathy was assessed with the Empathic Con-
cern subscale from the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (Davis,
1983).
5. Pro-social Asporations
Pro-social aspirations were
assessed by the Community Involvement subscale of the
Aspira-
tions Index (Kasser & Ryan, 1996).
6. Vitality
Vitality was assessed with five items (e.g., “I feel
alive and vital”) from the Subjective Vitality Scale (SVS; Ryan
& Frederick, 1997) identified by Bostic, Rubio, and Hood
(2000) as the most internally consistent.
7. Self-Esteem
8. Subjective Well-Being
Result In psychological need research, there has been a continuing
openness to examine the possibility of alternative psychological
needs beyond the need for autonomy, competence, and
connectedness.Ryan and Deci argue that, among other
characteristics, "To qualify as a need, a motivating force must have
a direct relationship with well-being." Current results suggest that
generosity does predict unique variants in well-being, even when
controlling for three pre-existing needs.Therefore, having a
positive effect on well-being apart from other well-established
needs is a necessary, but so far insufficient, condition for basic
psychological needs.Although this article raises the question of the
philanthropist as a candidate's psychological need, defining it as a
basic need is a task for the future.Current research is also relevant
to evolutionary psychology, which attempts to understand the
potential selective benefits of pro-social action and the emergence
of proximal support needed to promote behaviors that will produce
these benefits.
STUDY 1
Basic psychological need satisfaction, there basic needs for
autonomy,competence, and relatedness the satisfaction items from
the Basic Need Satisfac-
tion and Frustration Scales (Chen et al., 2015) were used.
Beneficence. For sense of beneficence, we used the scale
developed in Study 1 (a 5 .83).
Pro-Social Behavior. For pro-social behavior, the same
scale was used as in Study 1 (a 5 .91).
Results and Discussion
Factor Analysis. Before the main analyses, we conducted a
 principal-component analysis of the 12 need satisfaction varia-
bles and four beneficence variables to see whether beneficence
was psychometrically independent of the other three needs.
Discussion The purpose of the present series of studies was to affirm and

extend research showing the strong importance of human benev-

olence on well-being and happiness, as well as to examine more
closely why pro-social or benevolent behavior feels good and
enhances well-being. Existing research has shown that benevo-
lent giving is indeed important for well-being (e.g., Aknin,
Barrington-Leigh, et al., 2013; Harbaugh et al., 2007), but little
research had focused on the question of why benevolent giving
leads to well-being.
Toward that end, we developed a brief scale to assess benefi-
cence satisfaction, or the feeling that one has been benevolent.
This was to capture what has been called the immediate “warm
glow” attending acts of kindness (Andreoni, 1990). In Studies 1
and 2, we showed that this sense of beneficence fully mediated
the relations between pro-social behavior and well-being. In
addition, we wanted to see if this direct experiential satisfaction
might independently impact well-being when controlling for the
three psychological need satisfactions associated with
autonomy, competence, and relatedness as specified in self-
determination theory.