2. Using Experimental Methods to Understand Why and How We Give to Charity

Vesterlund, Lise

doi:10.1515/9781400883172-003

Cited by 32 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 235 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our review is related to that of Vesterlund (), who tackles the more general question of why people give to charities and provides an overview on different fundraising mechanisms. Although her broad review considers short‐ and long‐term effects of matching subsidies, these are addressed rather briefly.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although her broad review considers short‐ and long‐term effects of matching subsidies, these are addressed rather briefly. Devoting a complete literature review to the effectiveness of matching in the charitable giving context allows us to extend the important work of Vesterlund () in several dimensions. First, we offer a more comprehensive picture on the impact of matching, for example, by classifying and structuring results according to the different outcome variables considered, taking into account contextual factors and incorporating new evidence.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Matching Subsidies and Voluntary Contributions: A Review

Epperson

Reif

2019

Journal of Economic Surveys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides a synthesis of the experimental literature on matching subsidies in the context of charitable giving. We classify results according to four different outcome variables frequently considered in the literature and address (i) short‐term effects of linear matching, (ii) the role of the matching rate, (iii) context‐dependence of behavioural responses, (iv) the relevance of the price of giving, (v) long‐term effects and (vi) nonlinear matching schemes. Based on this comprehensive review, we highlight several avenues for future research, such as putting stronger emphasis on competition in fundraising, long‐term effects or heterogeneity in responses.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Matching Subsidies and Voluntary Contributions: A Review

Epperson

Reif

2019

Journal of Economic Surveys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However generosity can be affected by social and strategic influence (e.g., via conformity seeking, reputation formation, etc. see Vesterlund [3] for a survey). Our aim is to shed new light on how others' intentions can affect one's own generosity when wanting to help.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intention-Based Sharing

Cagno

Galliera

Güth

et al. 2018

Games

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How are allocation results affected by information that another anonymous participant intends to be more or less generous? We explore this experimentally via two participants facing the same allocation task with only one actually giving after possible adjustment of own generosity based on the other's intended generosity. Participants successively face three game types, the ultimatum, yes-no and impunity game, or (between subjects) in the reverse order. Although only the impunity game appeals to intrinsic generosity, we confirm conditioning even when sanctioning is possible. Based on our data, we distinguish two major types of participants in all three games: one yielding to the weakest social influence and the other immune to it and offering much less. This is particularly interesting in the impunity game where other-regarding concerns are minimal.

show abstract

“…A previous literature review by Vesterlund (2016) is related to our review as it provides a comprehensive overview of experimental results on the motives of charitable giving and different fundraising mechanisms aiming to increase giving. Her survey includes a basic summary on matching and rebates with a particular focus on comparing these two.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Matching Schemes and Public Goods: A Review

Epperson

Reif

2017

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Die Dis cus si on Pape rs die nen einer mög lichst schnel len Ver brei tung von neue ren For schungs arbei ten des ZEW. Die Bei trä ge lie gen in allei ni ger Ver ant wor tung der Auto ren und stel len nicht not wen di ger wei se die Mei nung des ZEW dar.Dis cus si on Papers are inten ded to make results of ZEW research prompt ly avai la ble to other eco no mists in order to encou ra ge dis cus si on and sug gesti ons for revi si ons. The aut hors are sole ly respon si ble for the con tents which do not neces sa ri ly repre sent the opi ni on of the ZEW. Abstract: Matching schemes and public goods: A reviewMatching schemes, where a party matches the contribution of others, reduce the effective price of a good and aim to foster its demand. We review the empirical literature on the effectiveness of these schemes in the context of public goods, especially in the field of charitable giving. As different measures of effectiveness are used, we classify results according to (i) the level of public good provision, (ii) the amount of individuals' contributions, (iii) the likelihood to give and (iv) the contribution conditional on contributing a positive amount. Generalizing results is challenging, since context specific factors matter. Predominantly, a match is found to create a significant increase in public good provision without crowding out individuals' contributions, while the effect on the likelihood of giving and contribution condition on contributing a positive amount is nonnegative. The discussion reveals several avenues for future research, as putting stronger emphasizes on long term effects, public good competition or heterogeneity in responses. JEL-Code: D01, D64, H41, L31

show abstract

2. Using Experimental Methods to Understand Why and How We Give to Charity

Cited by 32 publications

References 235 publications

Matching Subsidies and Voluntary Contributions: A Review

Matching Subsidies and Voluntary Contributions: A Review

Intention-Based Sharing

Matching Schemes and Public Goods: A Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About