of objects because the object that is given is actually a part of another person. the interest over the life of the object includes an interest over the life of the individual who provided it as well. this has been documented by researchers examining the processes through which organ procurers select donors. as sharp has indicated, "through organ procurement, human bodies are commodified and codified following a relatively strict hierarchy of medical value and social worth". age, race and ethnicity all play a role in the identification of ideal candidates. organ receivers are also interested in obtaining information about donors. as lock has mentioned, "organ recipients worry about the gender, ethnicity, skin color, personality and social status of their donors, and many believe that their mode of being-in-the-world is radically changed after a transplant, thanks to the power of diffusing form the organ they have received". altruism altruism is constantly referenced by proponents of organ gifting. authors such as sahlins (1972), incorporated maussian concepts of gifting and reciprocity and expanded them to describe three different types of transactions: generalized reciprocity (system of giving without taking account of how much is given), balanced reciprocity (direct exchange, expectation of equal value), and negative reciprocity (obtaining something for nothing). individuals engage in each one of these transaction depending on the person they are exchanging with and the social distance involved. sahlins' (1972) work has pointed to the need to examine the different types of relationships behind gift-giving and the characteristics of the transaction. in the case of generalized reciprocity, altruistic relationships are present and the expectation of reciprocity is indefinite. the value of the object can be increased by the way in which it is given and several authors have pointed to the fact that organs given in altruistic manner acquire greater social worth. organs given in altruistic manner are thought to say something about the moral character of the people who give them. furthermore, the giving of organs without any form of compensation erases the possibility that the giver will have any form of vested interest in the transaction. munson has presented a list of the common claims made by individuals arguing against the selling of kidneys: "a paid donor loses the psychological benefits that reward a voluntary donor; the practice reduces altruism in the society; the quality of donated kidneys will decline; the donor may suffer harm and become a burden to society; selling a kidney involves putting a price on the priceless; organ selling treats the human body as a commodity and thus reduces our respect for people". it is believed that the commodification of organ donations could lead the organ donors to lie on issues pertaining to their health in order to obtain money in exchange for their organs, thus making the quality of the organ questionable. a direct relationship between commodification and quality is thus created where the social trust present in altruistic relationships is missing. goodwin has argued that this distinction between commodification and altruism is based on a common assumption socially maintained regarding altruism where it is thought as "pure and unspoiled by secondary or spurious motivations". anonymity anonymity is an important component of organ gifting and it is thought to foster the social well-being of donors, recipients, and close kin. anonymity is related to the eradication of reciprocal relations between giver and receiver where the origin of the object that is exchanged is erased by eliminating the identity of the giver. according to some authors, this is currently done to promote better coping mechanisms for the recipient and close kin as well as to maintain standardized operating procedures by organ procurers. the idea is that anonymity will protect organ procurers "from close encounters with the animistic, magic-infused thinking about transplanted organs in which the givers and receivers of cadaver organs often engage". however, other authors have argued that the use of the gift-giving metaphor in conjunction with the enforcement of anonymous donations lead to the obscuring of the origins of body parts and the unequal power relations behind their donation and reception.