Stochastic Income and Conditional Generosity

Kellner, Christian; Reinstein, David; Riener, Gerhard

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2691027

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Credit growth plays an important role in stimulating economic growth and is strongly associated with faster economic growth [68,69]. An interesting experiment by Kellner et al [70] showed that when people knew their income would increase, their donations would be higher. This means that credit growth indirectly increases the generosity of society by stimulating economic growth.…”

Section: Moderating Hypothesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Does the Credit Cycle Have an Impact on Happiness?

Zhong

2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 2008 international financial crisis triggered a heated discussion of the relationship between public health and the economic environment. We test the relationship between the credit cycle and happiness using the fixed effects model and explore the transmission channels between them by adding the moderating effect. The results show the following empirical regularities. First, the credit cycle has a negative correlation with happiness. This means that credit growth will reduce the overall happiness score in a country/region. Second, the transmission channels between the credit cycle and happiness are different during credit expansion and recession. Life expectancy and generosity can moderate the relationship between the credit cycle and happiness only during credit expansion. GDP per capita can moderate this relationship only during credit recession. Social support, freedom, and positive affect can moderate this relationship throughout the credit cycle. Third, the total impact of the credit cycle on happiness will become positive by the changes in the moderating effects. In general, we can improve subjective well-being if one of the following five conditions holds: (1) with the adequate support from the family and society, (2) with enough freedom, (3) with social generosity, (4) with a positive and optimistic outlook, and (5) with a high level of GDP per capita.

show abstract

Section: Moderating Hypothesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Does the Credit Cycle Have an Impact on Happiness?

Zhong

2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It may also be possible to combine such strategies. Just as Thaler and Benartzi (2004) found that participants increased retirement savings contributions dramatically when allowed to (1) pledge in advance to contribute (2) a share of potential future raises, so Kellner et al (2015) found that participants increased charitable contributions when allowed to (1) pledge in advance to contribute (2) a share of a potential future winnings.…”

Section: "Manage Decision Avoidance" [Relative To Its Alternatives]mentioning

confidence: 99%

Natural philanthropy: a new evolutionary framework explaining diverse experimental results and informing fundraising practice

James

2017

Palgrave Commun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Philanthropic decision-making is important both for its potential to provide insight into human behaviour and for its economic significance. In recent years, investigations of charitable-giving behaviour have expanded substantially, including explorations from a variety of disciplinary perspectives such as economics, marketing, sociology, public administration, anthropology, evolutionary biology, political science and psychology. These investigations have resulted in a wealth of experimental results with each investigation accompanied by a discussion of potential theoretical implications. Most commonly, the various theories employed are helpful with regard to the narrow result of the investigation, but are not always useful in explaining the wider universe of results. Taking a comprehensive view of charitable-giving behaviour is thus limited to either employing a wide assortment of overlapping theoretical models, selectively applying each to fit individual phenomena, or merely referencing an ad hoc assortment of potential motivations. This circumstance suggests the value of a more unified, comprehensive approach to understanding the complete range of experimental and empirical results in charitable giving. This article proposes a comprehensive framework for philanthropic decision-making using a simple evolutionary approach incorporating interrelated fitness-enhancing strategies. The framework is then used in an extensive review of experimental and other empirical results in philanthropic decisionmaking. This review supports the framework proposition that giving depends on the tangibility of a gift's impact on altruism (direct or code), reciprocity (transactional or friendship) and possessions relative to its alternatives. Five example principles of fundraising practice demonstrate the practical applicability of this proposition: advance the donor hero story (tangibility of direct or code altruism); make the charity like family (friendship reciprocity); provide compatible publicity and benefits (transactional reciprocity); minimize perceived loss (possessions); and manage decision avoidance (relative to its alternatives). Understanding philanthropic behaviour from this perspective provides explanation and guidance for a wide range of charitable-giving behaviours and fundraising practices even in areas less amenable to traditional experimental investigation, such as charitable bequests and major gifts.

show abstract

“…It has been run in more than one hundred published papers over the last three decades (Engel, 2011), consistently demonstrating violations of the selfishness axiom. Moreover, given that dictator games are susceptible to numerous types of framing effects (Brañas-Garza, 2007;Zizzo, 2010), we contend that any test of invariance to framing effects should include a dictator game, especially in the light of several recent contributions that suggest that people's choices in dictator games change when the probability of realizing the decision changes (e.g., Kellner et al, 2015;Brock et al, 2013). In this work, we analyse how certainty in regard to the realization of expected pay-offs impacts pro-social behaviour.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shall we pay all? An experimental test of Random Incentivized Systems

Clot

Grolleau

Ibanez

2018

Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study seeks to investigate the impact of payment procedures on behavior in a standard Dictator game. Although the Between-subjects Random Incentivized System (BRIS) is increasingly utilized in experimental economics, its use could be contested from a purely theoretical point of view. In the BRIS, all subjects play the Dictator game, but only a percentage of subjects (e.g., 1 out of 10) are paid. The aim of this article is to test whether the results obtained using this system are consistent with those obtained using a conventional full payment system in which every subject receives payment. An additional, hypothetical treatment is also run. Results show a very similar pattern between the BRIS and the full payment treatment, whereas the hypothetical payment mechanism leads to far fewer egoistic players and far more egalitarians. These findings lend support to the use of BRIS as a valid experimental methodology.

show abstract

Stochastic Income and Conditional Generosity

Cited by 4 publications

References 50 publications

Does the Credit Cycle Have an Impact on Happiness?

Does the Credit Cycle Have an Impact on Happiness?

Natural philanthropy: a new evolutionary framework explaining diverse experimental results and informing fundraising practice

Shall we pay all? An experimental test of Random Incentivized Systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About