IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jeborg/v222y2024icp446-460.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Instantaneous positive reinforcement does not increase donations: Evidence from online experiments

Author

Listed:
  • Grodeck, Ben
  • Grossman, Philip J.

Abstract

Historically, positive reinforcement (PRI) for charitable giving happens after the fact, e.g., thank-you letters and gifts from the charities to donors. With the increasing prevalence of online giving, there exists an opportunity for less costly instantaneous PRI. Our study attempts to provide proof of concept of the effectiveness of instantaneous PRI. We report evidence from two large-scale online experiments. We conducted Experiment 1 on MTurk using Cloud Research (n = 2,375) and a conceptual replication on Prolific (n = 1,572). Participants are randomly assigned to either receive no PRI, or PRI in the form of a thumbs up emoji that is either static (same size), or dynamic (varies in size with the size of the donation). Consistent with much of the findings on after-the-fact PRI, in both experiments we do not find evidence that instantaneous PRI increases donation behavior compared to the baseline. These results suggest that organizations and policymakers should be cautious when deciding to use instantaneous PRI.

Suggested Citation

  • Grodeck, Ben & Grossman, Philip J., 2024. "Instantaneous positive reinforcement does not increase donations: Evidence from online experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 446-460.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:222:y:2024:i:c:p:446-460
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2024.04.032
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268124001677
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jebo.2024.04.032?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. Anya Samek & Chuck Longfield, 2023. "Do Thank-You Calls Increase Charitable Giving? Expert Forecasts and Field Experimental Evidence," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 103-124, April.
    2. Damgaard, Mette Trier & Gravert, Christina, 2018. "The hidden costs of nudging: Experimental evidence from reminders in fundraising," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 15-26.
    3. Stefano DellaVigna & John A. List & Ulrike Malmendier, 2012. "Testing for Altruism and Social Pressure in Charitable Giving," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 127(1), pages 1-56.
    4. Jean Tirole & Roland Bénabou, 2006. "Incentives and Prosocial Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1652-1678, December.
    5. Todd L. Cherry & Peter Frykblom & Jason F. Shogren, 2002. "Hardnose the Dictator," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1218-1221, September.
    6. Michalis Drouvelis & Benjamin M. Marx, 2021. "Dimensions of donation preferences: the structure of peer and income effects," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(1), pages 274-302, March.
    7. Newman, George E. & Jeremy Shen, Y., 2012. "The counterintuitive effects of thank-you gifts on charitable giving," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 973-983.
    8. Michalis Drouvelis & Brit Grosskopf, 2021. "The impact of smiling cues on social cooperation," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 87(4), pages 1390-1404, April.
    9. Maja Adena & Steffen Huck, 2020. "Online Fundraising, Self-Image, and the Long-Term Impact of Ask Avoidance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(2), pages 722-743, February.
    10. Gandullia, Luca & Lezzi, Emanuela, 2018. "The price elasticity of charitable giving: New experimental evidence," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 88-91.
    11. Neeraja Gupta & Luca Rigotti & Alistair Wilson, 2021. "The Experimenters' Dilemma: Inferential Preferences over Populations," Papers 2107.05064, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2021.
    12. Stephan Meier, 2007. "Do Subsidies Increase Charitable Giving in the Long Run? Matching Donations in a Field Experiment," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 5(6), pages 1203-1222, December.
    13. Carpenter, Jeffrey, 2021. "The shape of warm glow: Field experimental evidence from a fundraiser," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 555-574.
    14. Noor, Jawwad & Ren, Linxia, 2023. "Temptation and guilt," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 272-295.
    15. John A. List & Azeem M. Shaikh & Yang Xu, 2019. "Multiple hypothesis testing in experimental economics," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(4), pages 773-793, December.
    16. Gandullia, Luca, 2019. "The price elasticity of warm-glow giving," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 30-32.
    17. Burrows, Paul & Loomes, Graham, 1994. "The Impact of Fairness on Bargaining Behaviour," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 201-221.
    18. Grodeck, Ben & Schoenegger, Philipp, 2023. "Demanding the morally demanding: Experimental evidence on the effects of moral arguments and moral demandingness on charitable giving," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    19. Bittschi, Benjamin & Dwenger, Nadja & Rincke, Johannes, 2021. "Water the flowers you want to grow? Evidence on private recognition and donor loyalty," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    20. , & ,, 2012. "Ashamed to be selfish," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 7(1), January.
    21. James Andreoni & Marta Serra-Garcia, 2021. "The Pledging Puzzle: How Can Revocable Promises Increase Charitable Giving?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(10), pages 6198-6210, October.
    22. Andreoni, James, 1989. "Giving with Impure Altruism: Applications to Charity and Ricardian Equivalence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(6), pages 1447-1458, December.
    23. Andreoni, James, 1990. "Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(401), pages 464-477, June.
    24. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 1996. "Altruism in Anonymous Dictator Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 181-191, October.
    25. Das, Gopal & Wiener, Hillary J.D. & Kareklas, Ioannis, 2019. "To emoji or not to emoji? Examining the influence of emoji on consumer reactions to advertising," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 147-156.
    26. Marcus Giamattei & Kyanoush Seyed Yahosseini & Simon Gächter & Lucas Molleman, 2020. "LIONESS Lab: a free web-based platform for conducting interactive experiments online," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 6(1), pages 95-111, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ben Grodeck & Philip J. Grossman, 2022. "Thumbs Down for the Thumbs Up Emoji: Experimental Evidence on the Impact of Instantaneous Positive Reinforcement on Charitable Giving," Monash Economics Working Papers 2022-01, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    2. James Andreoni & Marta Serra-Garcia, 2021. "The Pledging Puzzle: How Can Revocable Promises Increase Charitable Giving?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(10), pages 6198-6210, October.
    3. Andreoni, James & Serra-Garcia, Marta, 2021. "Time inconsistent charitable giving," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    4. Andrew Luccasen & Philip J. Grossman, 2017. "Warm-Glow Giving: Earned Money And The Option To Take," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(2), pages 996-1006, April.
    5. Maximilian Späth, 2021. "It’s me again… Ask Avoidance and the Dynamics of Charitable Giving," CEPA Discussion Papers 38, Center for Economic Policy Analysis.
    6. Luca Zarri, 2013. "Altruism," Chapters, in: Luigino Bruni & Stefano Zamagni (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Reciprocity and Social Enterprise, chapter 1, pages 9-19, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Gandullia, Luca & Lezzi, Emanuela & Parciasepe, Paolo, 2020. "Replication with MTurk of the experimental design by Gangadharan, Grossman, Jones & Leister (2018): Charitable giving across donor types," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    8. Sautua, Santiago I., 2022. "Donation requests following a pay rise," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    9. Wubeshet Regasa & Umberto Galmarini & Giuseppe Porro, 2024. "Victim’s identification and social categorization: first- and second-order effects on altruistic behavior," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 71(4), pages 959-988, December.
    10. Deb, Rahul & Gazzale, Robert S. & Kotchen, Matthew J., 2014. "Testing motives for charitable giving: A revealed-preference methodology with experimental evidence," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 181-192.
    11. Butera, Luigi & Houser, Daniel, 2018. "Delegating altruism: Toward an understanding of agency in charitable giving," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 99-109.
    12. Feine, Gregor & Groh, Elke D. & von Loessl, Victor & Wetzel, Heike, 2023. "The double dividend of social information in charitable giving: Evidence from a framed field experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    13. Kee, Jennifer & Segovia, Michelle S. & Saboury, Piruz & Palma, Marco A., 2022. "Appealing to generosity to reduce food calorie intake: A natural field experiment," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    14. Butera, Luigi & Horn, Jeffrey, 2020. "“Give less but give smart”: Experimental evidence on the effects of public information about quality on giving," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 59-76.
    15. Grodeck, Ben & Schoenegger, Philipp, 2023. "Demanding the morally demanding: Experimental evidence on the effects of moral arguments and moral demandingness on charitable giving," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    16. 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.
    17. Ben Grodeck & Philipp Schoenegger, 2022. "Demanding the Morally Demanding: Experimental Evidence on the Effects of Moral Arguments and Moral Demandingness on Charitable Giving," Monash Economics Working Papers 2022-03, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    18. Lata Gangadharan & Philip J. Grossman & Nina Xue, 2022. "Stepping Stone: Identifying self-image concerns from motivated beliefs: Does it matter how and whom you ask?," Monash Economics Working Papers 2022-05, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    19. Johannes Diederich & Catherine C. Eckel & Raphael Epperson & Timo Goeschl & Philip J. Grossman, 2022. "Subsidizing unit donations: matches, rebates, and discounts compared," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(2), pages 734-758, April.
    20. Lata Gangadharan & Philip J. Grossman & Nina Xue, 2021. "Identifying self-image concerns from motivated beliefs: Does it matter how and whom you ask?," Monash Economics Working Papers 2021-17, Monash University, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Positive reinforcement; Charitable giving; Experiment; Fundraising;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C90 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - General
    • H40 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - General
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:222:y:2024:i:c:p:446-460. 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.