IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jeborg/v175y2020icp1-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does positive feedback of social impact motivate prosocial behavior? A field experiment with blood donors

Author

Listed:
  • Goette, Lorenz
  • Tripodi, Egon

Abstract

Positive feedback about the outcome of volunteers’ prosocial actions is often thought to help motivate continued volunteers’ engagement. In the context of blood donations, various collection systems have begun to provide blood donors feedback on successful utilization of their blood donation. An experiment conducted by the main NGO that supports the collection of blood in Italy studies how such feedback affects subsequent blood donations. From a sample of over 8’000 blood donors, we find that providing feedback of successful utilization decreases donations. Though surprising, these results are consistent with theoretical models in which individuals engage in prosocial behavior to sustain a positive self-image: feedback about the outcome of a recent donation can act as reminders that boost self-image and reduce the need for re-engaging soon in prosocial activities. Interestingly for policy, we also show that combining the feedback with an explicit request to sign up for a new donation can eliminate, but not overturn, the negative effect of the feedback.

Suggested Citation

  • Goette, Lorenz & Tripodi, Egon, 2020. "Does positive feedback of social impact motivate prosocial behavior? A field experiment with blood donors," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 1-8.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:175:y:2020:i:c:p:1-8
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2020.04.014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016726812030127X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jebo.2020.04.014?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Huck Steffen & Rasul Imran, 2010. "Transactions Costs in Charitable Giving: Evidence from Two Field Experiments," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-35, April.
    2. Tiefenbeck, Verena & Staake, Thorsten & Roth, Kurt & Sachs, Olga, 2013. "For better or for worse? Empirical evidence of moral licensing in a behavioral energy conservation campaign," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 160-171.
    3. Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2011. "Identity, Morals, and Taboos: Beliefs as Assets," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(2), pages 805-855.
    4. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    5. Benabou, Roland & Falk, Armin & Tirole, Jean, 2018. "Narratives, Imperatives, and Moral Reasoning," IZA Discussion Papers 11665, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Lacetera, Nicola & Macis, Mario, 2010. "Social image concerns and prosocial behavior: Field evidence from a nonlinear incentive scheme," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 225-237, November.
    7. Sun, Tianshu & Lu, Susan Feng & Jin, Ginger Zhe, 2016. "Solving shortage in a priceless market: Insights from blood donation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 149-165.
    8. Bruhin, Adrian & Goette, Lorenz & Haenni, Simon & Jiang, Lingqing, 2020. "Spillovers of prosocial motivation: Evidence from an intervention study on blood donors," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    9. Axel Sonntag & Daniel John Zizzo, 2015. "On Reminder Effects, Drop-Outs and Dominance: Evidence from an Online Experiment on Charitable Giving," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-17, August.
    10. Gerber, Alan S. & Green, Donald P. & Larimer, Christopher W., 2008. "Social Pressure and Voter Turnout: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(1), pages 33-48, February.
    11. Rogers, Todd T, 2011. "Motivating Voter Turnout by Invoking the Self," Scholarly Articles 8052150, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Meyer, Christian Johannes & Tripodi, Egon, 2021. "Image concerns in pledges to give blood: Evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    2. Ehrlich, David & Szech, Nora, 2022. "How to start a grassroots movement," Working Paper Series in Economics 157, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Department of Economics and Management.
    3. Rehse, Dominik & Tremöhlen, Felix, 2022. "Fostering participation in digital contact tracing," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    4. Harrell, Stephen & Simons, Andrew M. & Clasen, Peter, 2022. "Promoting blood donation through social media: Evidence from Brazil, India and the USA," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 315(C).
    5. Rehse, Dominik & Tremöhlen, Felix, 2020. "Fostering participation in digital public health interventions: The case of digital contact tracing," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-076, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    6. Grieder, Manuel & Schmitz, Jan & Schubert, Renate, 2024. "Asking to give: coordinated fundraising and giving," VfS Annual Conference 2024 (Berlin): Upcoming Labor Market Challenges 302438, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. te Velde, Vera L., 2022. "Heterogeneous norms: Social image and social pressure when people disagree," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 319-340.
    2. Anya Samek & Roman M. Sheremeta, 2017. "Selective Recognition: How to Recognize Donors to Increase Charitable Giving," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(3), pages 1489-1496, July.
    3. Goette, Lorenz & Stutzer, Alois, 2020. "Blood donations and incentives: Evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 52-74.
    4. John A. List & Fatemeh Momeni, 2021. "When Corporate Social Responsibility Backfires: Evidence from a Natural Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(1), pages 8-21, January.
    5. Astrid Dannenberg & Olof Johansson‐Stenman & Heike Wetzel, 2022. "Status for the good guys: An experiment on charitable giving," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(2), pages 721-740, April.
    6. Dolan, Paul & Galizzi, Matteo M., 2015. "Like ripples on a pond: Behavioral spillovers and their implications for research and policy," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 1-16.
    7. John List & Fatemeh Momeni, 2017. "When Corporate Social Responsibility Backfires: Theory and Evidence from a Natural Field Experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00618, The Field Experiments Website.
    8. Jana Gallus, 2016. "Fostering Voluntary Contributions to a Public Good: A Large-Scale Natural Field Experiment at Wikipedia," Natural Field Experiments 00552, The Field Experiments Website.
    9. Jana Gallus, 2017. "Fostering Public Good Contributions with Symbolic Awards: A Large-Scale Natural Field Experiment at Wikipedia," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(12), pages 3999-4015, December.
    10. Gary E. Bolton & Eugen Dimant & Ulrich Schmidt, 2020. "When a Nudge Backfires: Combining (Im)Plausible Deniability with Social and Economic Incentives to Promote Behavioral Change," CESifo Working Paper Series 8070, CESifo.
    11. Goette, Lorenz & Tripodi, Egon, 2024. "The limits of social recognition: Experimental evidence from blood donors," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    12. Gary Bolton & Eugen Dimant & Ulrich Schmidt, 2018. "When a Nudge Backfires. Using Observation with Social and Economic Incentives to Promote Pro-Social Behavior," PPE Working Papers 0017, Philosophy, Politics and Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    13. Andreoni, James & Serra-Garcia, Marta, 2021. "Time inconsistent charitable giving," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    14. Marie Claire Villeval, 2019. "Comportements (non) éthiques et stratégies morales," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 70(6), pages 1021-1046.
    15. Falco, Paolo & Zaccagni, Sarah, 2020. "Promoting social distancing in a pandemic: Beyond the good intentions," OSF Preprints a2nys, Center for Open Science.
    16. Anya Savikhin & Roman Sheremeta, 2010. "Visibility of Contributions and Cost of Information: An Experiment on Public Goods," Working Papers 10-22, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    17. Cattaneo, Cristina & D’Adda, Giovanna & Tavoni, Massimo & Bonan, Jacopo, 2019. "Can We Make Social Information Programs More Effective? The Role of Identity and Values," RFF Working Paper Series 19-21, Resources for the Future.
    18. Nicola Lacetera & Mario Macis & Angelo Mele, 2012. "Viral altruism? A natural field experiment of social contagion in on-line networks," Working Papers 12-16, NET Institute.
    19. Mitesh Kataria & Tobias Regner, 2015. "Honestly, why are you donating money to charity? An experimental study about self-awareness in status-seeking behavior," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(3), pages 493-515, November.
    20. Stoetzer, Lasse S. & Zimmermann, Florian, 2024. "A note on motivated cognition and discriminatory beliefs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 554-562.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:175:y:2020:i:c:p:1-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jebo .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.