IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceco/v66y2017icp66-71.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A field experiment on directed giving at a public university

Author

Listed:
  • Eckel, Catherine C.
  • Herberich, David H.
  • Meer, Jonathan

Abstract

The use of directed giving – allowing donors to target their gifts to specific organizations or functions – is pervasive in fundraising, yet little is known about its effectiveness. We conduct a field experiment at a public university in which prospective donors are presented with either an opportunity to donate to the unrestricted Annual Fund, or an opportunity of donating to the Annual Fund and directing some or all of their donation towards the academic college from which they graduated. While there is no effect on the probability of giving, donations are significantly larger when there is the option of directing. However, the value of the option does not come directly from use, as very few donors choose to direct their gift.

Suggested Citation

  • Eckel, Catherine C. & Herberich, David H. & Meer, Jonathan, 2017. "A field experiment on directed giving at a public university," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 66-71.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:66:y:2017:i:c:p:66-71
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2016.04.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804316300210
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socec.2016.04.007?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Batista, Catia & Silverman, Dan & Yang, Dean, 2015. "Directed giving: Evidence from an inter-household transfer experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 2-21.
    2. Small, Deborah A & Loewenstein, George, 2003. "Helping a Victim or Helping the Victim: Altruism and Identifiability," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 5-16, January.
    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. Ashley V Whillans & Elizabeth W Dunn, 2018. "Agentic appeals increase charitable giving in an affluent sample of donors," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-10, December.
    2. Catherine C. Eckel & Benjamin A. Priday & Rick K. Wilson, 2018. "Charity Begins at Home: A Lab-in-the-Field Experiment on Charitable Giving," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-22, November.
    3. Abraham, Diya & Corazzini, Luca & Fišar, Miloš & Reggiani, Tommaso, 2023. "Coordinating donations via an intermediary: The destructive effect of a sunk overhead cost," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 287-304.
    4. Batista, Catia & Silverman, Dan & Yang, Dean, 2015. "Directed giving: Evidence from an inter-household transfer experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 2-21.
    5. Tatarnikova, Olga & Duchêne, Sébastien & Sentis, Patrick & Willinger, Marc, 2023. "Portfolio instability and socially responsible investment: Experiments with financial professionals and students," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    6. Jürgen Fleiß & Kurt A. Ackermann & Eva Fleiß & Ryan O. Murphy & Alfred Posch, 2020. "Social and environmental preferences: measuring how people make tradeoffs among themselves, others, and collective goods," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 28(3), pages 1049-1067, September.
    7. John A. List & James J. Murphy & Michael K. Price & Alexander G. James, 2019. "Do Appeals to Donor Benefits Raise More Money than Appeals to Recipient Benefits? Evidence from a Natural Field Experiment with Pick.Click.Give," NBER Working Papers 26559, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Preeti Narwal & J. K. Nayak & Shivam Rai, 2022. "Assessing Customers' Moral Disengagement from Reciprocity Concerns in Participative Pricing," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 178(2), pages 537-554, June.
    9. Christine L. Exley, 2020. "Using Charity Performance Metrics as an Excuse Not to Give," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(2), pages 553-563, February.
    10. 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.
    11. Sébastien Duchêne & Adrien Nguyen-Huu & Dimitri Dubois & Marc Willinger, 2022. "Risk-return trade-offs in the context of environmental impact: a lab-in-the-field experiment with finance professionals," Working Papers hal-03883121, HAL.
    12. Chang, Chia-Chi & Chen, Po-Yu, 2019. "Which maximizes donations: Charitable giving as an incentive or incentives for charitable giving?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 65-75.
    13. 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.
    14. Portillo, Javier E. & Stinn, Joseph, 2018. "Overhead aversion: Do some types of overhead matter more than others?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 40-50.
    15. repec:grz:wpsses:2014-02 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Sébastien Duchêne & Adrien Nguyen-Huu & Dimitri Dubois & Marc Willinger, 2021. "Why finance professionals hold green and brown assets? A lab-in-the-field experiment [Pourquoi investir dans le vert et le brun ? Une expérience sur des professionnels de la finance]," Working Papers hal-03285376, HAL.
    17. Heist, H. Daniel & Cnaan, Ram A., 2018. "Price and agency effects on charitable giving behavior," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 129-138.
    18. Metzger, Laura & Günther, Isabel, 2019. "Making an impact? The relevance of information on aid effectiveness for charitable giving. A laboratory experiment," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 18-33.
    19. Ernan Haruvy & Peter Popkowski Leszczyc & Greg Allenby & Russell Belk & Catherine Eckel & Robert Fisher & Sherry Xin Li & John A. List & Yu Ma & Yu Wang, 2020. "Fundraising design: key issues, unifying framework, and open puzzles," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 371-380, December.
    20. Gee, Laura K. & Kiyawat, Anoushka & Meer, Jonathan & Schreck, Michael J., 2024. "Pivotal or popular: The effects of social information and feeling pivotal on civic actions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 404-413.
    21. Diya Elizabeth Abraham & Luca Corazzini & Miloš Fišar & Tommaso Reggiani, 2021. "Delegation and Overhead Aversion with Multiple Threshold Public Goods," MUNI ECON Working Papers 2021-14, Masaryk University, revised Feb 2023.
    22. Martin Spann & Robert Zeithammer & Marco Bertini & Ernan Haruvy & Sandy D. Jap & Oded Koenigsberg & Vincent Mak & Peter Popkowski Leszczyc & Bernd Skiera & Manoj Thomas, 2018. "Beyond Posted Prices: the Past, Present, and Future of Participative Pricing Mechanisms," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 5(1), pages 121-136, March.
    23. Judd B. Kessler & Katherine L. Milkman & C. Yiwei Zhang, 2019. "Getting the Rich and Powerful to Give," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(9), pages 4049-4062, September.
    24. Chandrayee Chatterjee & James C. Cox & Michael K. Price & Florian Rundhammer, 2020. "Competition Among Charities: Field Experimental Evidence from a State Income Tax Credit for Charitable Giving," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2020-01, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.

    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. Abraham, Diya & Corazzini, Luca & Fišar, Miloš & Reggiani, Tommaso, 2023. "Coordinating donations via an intermediary: The destructive effect of a sunk overhead cost," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 287-304.
    2. Diya Elizabeth Abraham & Luca Corazzini & Miloš Fišar & Tommaso Reggiani, 2021. "Delegation and Overhead Aversion with Multiple Threshold Public Goods," MUNI ECON Working Papers 2021-14, Masaryk University, revised Feb 2023.
    3. Ni, Dan & Jiwen Song, Lynda & Zheng, Xiaoming & Zhu, Jinlong & Zhang, Mengyi & Xu, Lingxiao, 2022. "Extending a helping hand: How receiving gratitude makes a difference in employee performance during a crisis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 967-982.
    4. Robinson, Angela & Covey, Judith & Spencer, Anne & Loomes, Graham, 2010. "Are some deaths worse than others? The effect of 'labelling' on people's perceptions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 444-455, June.
    5. Catia Batista & Janis Umblijs, 2016. "Do migrants send remittances as a way of self-insurance?," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 68(1), pages 108-130.
    6. Rai, Tage S. & Diermeier, Daniel, 2015. "Corporations are Cyborgs: Organizations elicit anger but not sympathy when they can think but cannot feel," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 18-26.
    7. Al-Ubaydli, Omar & Yeomans, Mike, 2017. "Do people donate more when they perceive a single beneficiary whom they know? A field experimental test of the identifiability effect," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 96-103.
    8. Kristian Ove R. Myrseth & Gerhard Riener & Conny Wollbrant, 2013. "Tangible temptation in the social dilemma: Cash, cooperation, and self-control," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-13-04, ESMT European School of Management and Technology.
    9. Cátia Batista & Marcel Fafchamps & Pedro C Vicente, 2022. "Keep It Simple: A Field Experiment on Information Sharing among Strangers [Changing Saving and Investment Behavior: The Impact of Financial Literacy Training and Reminders on Micro-Businesses]," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 36(4), pages 857-888.
    10. Chang, Chia-Chi & Chen, Po-Yu, 2019. "Which maximizes donations: Charitable giving as an incentive or incentives for charitable giving?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 65-75.
    11. Farai Jena, 2016. "The remittance behaviour of Kenyan sibling migrants," IZA Journal of Migration and Development, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 5(1), pages 1-19, December.
    12. Larney, Andrea & Rotella, Amanda & Barclay, Pat, 2019. "Stake size effects in ultimatum game and dictator game offers: A meta-analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 61-72.
    13. Bazerman, Max H. & Sezer, Ovul, 2016. "Bounded awareness: Implications for ethical decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 95-105.
    14. Kirill Gavrilov, 2013. "Risk, psychophysical numbing and value of individual and community lives: an empirical study," HSE Working papers WP BRP 09/PSY/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    15. Ben Greiner & Werner Güth & Ro’i Zultan, 2012. "Social communication and discrimination: a video experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 15(3), pages 398-417, September.
    16. Yucel-Aybat, Ozge & Hsieh, Meng-Hua, 2021. "Consumer mindsets matter: Benefit framing and firm–cause fit in the persuasiveness of cause-related marketing campaigns," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 418-427.
    17. Heizler, Odelia & Israeli, Osnat, 2021. "The identifiable victim effect and public opinion toward immigration; a natural experiment study," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    18. Lunn, Peter D. & Timmons, Shane & Belton, Cameron A. & Barjaková, Martina & Julienne, Hannah & Lavin, Ciarán, 2020. "Motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic: An online experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    19. Dunning, David & Fetchenhauer, Detlef & Schlösser, Thomas M., 2012. "Trust as a social and emotional act: Noneconomic considerations in trust behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 686-694.
    20. Catia Batista & Gaia Narciso, 2018. "Migrant Remittances and Information Flows: Evidence from a Field Experiment," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 32(1), pages 203-219.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Field experiment; Charitable giving; Directed giving;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D64 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Altruism; Philanthropy; Intergenerational Transfers

    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:soceco:v:66:y:2017:i:c:p:66-71. 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/inca/620175 .

    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.