The impact of recipient list size and priority signs on electronic helping behavior

Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of recipient list size and priority signs on electronic helping behavior. Participants were sent an e-mailed request to complete a Web-based survey in one of the following conditions: alone, with 1 other person, with 14 others, or with 49 others. A high priority symbol (!) was attached to the e-mail message sent to half of the participants in each of the preceding conditions. We predicted that as the number of the people in the recipient list increased, (a) the number of individuals who completed the surveys would decrease and (b) the time that elapsed between the participant reading the e-mail request and completing the survey would increase. We also predicted that people who were sent the high priority request for help would (a) be particularly inclined to respond and (b) respond more quickly than those in the normal priority condition. Although no statistically significant results were obtained, the data did reveal notable concerns with the commonly used read receipt function. This research has important implications regarding the utility of read receipts, priority symbols, and personalized e-mail messages.

[1]  P. Markey.  Bystander intervention in computer-mediated communication , 2000 .

[2]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  IMPACT OF ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR ON ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE: A REVIEW AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH , 1997 .

[3]  Walter C. Borman,et al.  Investigating the Underlying Structure of the Citizenship Performance Domain , 2000 .

[4]  Curt J. Dommeyer,et al.  Comparing Two Forms of an E-mail Survey: Embedded vs Attached , 2000 .

[5]  Don A. Dillman,et al.  Development of a Standard E-Mail Methodology: Results of an Experiment , 1998 .

[6]  J. P. Near,et al.  ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR: ITS NATURE AND ANTECEDENTS , 1983 .

[7]  Peter L. Sheras,et al.  "From Jerusalem to Jericho": A study of situational and dispositional variables in helping behavior. , 1973 .

[8]  K. Williams,et al.  Cyberostracism: effects of being ignored over the Internet. , 2000, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[9]  Bibb Latané,et al.  A lady in distress: Inhibiting effects of friends and strangers on bystander intervention ☆ , 1969 .

[10]  D. Dillman.  The Design and Administration of Mail Surveys , 1991 .

[11]  B. Latané,et al.  The Unresponsive Bystander: Why Doesn't He Help? , 1972 .

[12]  J. Pittam,et al.  Strangers in a Strange Land Interaction Management on Internet Relay Chat , 1997 .

[13]  Mohammad Muzahid Akbar,et al.  ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR: ITS NATURE AND ANTECEDENTS , 2004 .

[14]  D. Organ.  Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. , 1988 .

[15]  L. Bickman,et al.  The Effect of Race and Need on Helping Behavior , 1973 .

[16]  A. Isen,et al.  The effect of feeling good on a helping task that is incompatible with good mood , 1978 .

[17]  B. Latané,et al.  Bystander intervention in emergencies: diffusion of responsibility. , 1968, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[18]  J. McGrath,et al.  Bystander effect in a demand-without-threat situation. , 1972 .

[19]  M. Diehl,et al.  Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. , 1987 .

[20]  Kipling D. Williams,et al.  Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes Social Loafing: a Meta-analytic Review and Theoretical Integration , 2022 .

[21]  K. Sheehan.  Response Variation in E-Mail Surveys: An Exploration , 1999 .

[22]  P. Amato,et al.  Helping behavior in urban and rural environments: Field studies based on a taxonomic organization of helping episodes. , 1983 .

[23]  E. Hall,et al.  The bystander effect. , 2003, Health physics.