IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/econjl/v133y2023i656p2925-2948..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Persuadable or Dissuadable Altruists? The Impact of Information of Recipient Characteristics on Giving

Author

Listed:
  • Lata Gangadharan
  • Philip J Grossman
  • Lingbo Huang
  • C Matthew Leister
  • Erte Xiao

Abstract

We investigate how information about recipients’ characteristics affects donors’ giving as opposed to when no information is available. In a rational model in which information causes a donor to update their assessment of the recipient's deservingness, we introduce the idea that altruism can be ‘persuadable’ (‘dissuadable’) by information about positive (negative) characteristics. We report data from three experiments in which donors are provided information regarding three recipient characteristics: alcoholism, attending courses, and disability. Across different characteristics, our results are broadly consistent with the predictions of persuadable altruism. Overall, we find a positive net impact of providing information on aggregate giving.

Suggested Citation

  • Lata Gangadharan & Philip J Grossman & Lingbo Huang & C Matthew Leister & Erte Xiao, 2023. "Persuadable or Dissuadable Altruists? The Impact of Information of Recipient Characteristics on Giving," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 133(656), pages 2925-2948.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:econjl:v:133:y:2023:i:656:p:2925-2948.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ej/uead062
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Fong, Christina M. & Luttmer, Erzo F.P., 2011. "Do fairness and race matter in generosity? Evidence from a nationally representative charity experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(5-6), pages 372-394, June.
    2. Borodin A. D., 2016. "World experience of state influence on the economy," Visnyk of National University of Civil Protection of Ukraine. Public Administration series., National University of Civil Protection of Ukraine, vol. 4(1), pages 37-43, January.
    3. Natalia Candelo & Catherine Eckel & Cathleen Johnson, 2018. "Social Distance Matters in Dictator Games: Evidence from 11 Mexican Villages," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-13, October.
    4. Christine L. Exley, 2020. "Using Charity Performance Metrics as an Excuse Not to Give," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(2), pages 553-563, February.
    5. Abhishek Bhati & Ruth K. Hansen, 2020. "A literature review of experimental studies in fundraising," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(1).
    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. Natalia Candelo & Angela C. M. de Oliveira & Catherine Eckel, 2019. "Worthiness versus Self‐Interest in Charitable Giving: Evidence from a Low‐Income, Minority Neighborhood," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 85(4), pages 1196-1216, April.
    2. Tetsuo Yamamori & Kazuyuki Iwata, 2023. "Wage claim detracts reciprocity in labor relations: experimental study of gift exchange games," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 18(3), pages 573-597, July.
    3. Rodríguez Chatruc, Marisol & Rozo, Sandra, 2021. "How Does it Feel to Be Part of the Minority?: Impacts of Perspective Taking on Prosocial Behavior," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 11599, Inter-American Development Bank.
    4. Helland, Leif & Iachan, Felipe S. & Juelsrud, Ragnar E. & Nenov, Plamen T., 2021. "Information quality and regime change: Evidence from the lab," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 538-554.
    5. Gauriot, Romain & Heger, Stephanie A. & Slonim, Robert, 2020. "Altruism or diminishing marginal utility?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 24-48.
    6. Ingela Alger & Laura Juarez & Miriam Juarez-Torres & Josepa Miquel-Florensa, 2023. "Do Women Contribute More Effort than Men to a Real Public Good?," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 37(2), pages 205-220.
    7. Garcia, Thomas & Massoni, Sébastien & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2020. "Ambiguity and excuse-driven behavior in charitable giving," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    8. Zizzo, Daniel John, 2013. "Claims and confounds in economic experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 186-195.
    9. Philipp Doerrenberg & Andreas Peichl, 2022. "Tax Morale and the Role of Social Norms and Reciprocity - Evidence from a Randomized Survey Experiment," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 78(1-2), pages 44-86.
    10. Kim Lehrer & Catherine Porter, 2018. "Charitable Dictators? Determinants of Giving to NGOs in Uganda," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 80-101, January.
    11. Müller, Daniel, 2019. "The anatomy of distributional preferences with group identity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 785-807.
    12. Iman Parsa & Mahyar Eftekhar & Charles J Corbett, 2022. "Does governance ease the overhead squeeze experienced by nonprofits?," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(8), pages 3288-3303, August.
    13. Marta Serra-Garcia & Nora Szech, 2022. "The (In)Elasticity of Moral Ignorance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(7), pages 4815-4834, July.
    14. Duchêne, Sébastien & Guerci, Eric & Hanaki, Nobuyuki & Noussair, Charles N., 2019. "The effect of short selling and borrowing on market prices and traders’ behavior," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 1-1.
    15. Diederich, Johannes & Epperson, Raphael & Goeschl, Timo, 2021. "How to Design the Ask? Funding Units vs. Giving Money," Working Papers 0698, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    16. Jonathan Meer & Oren Rigbi, 2012. "Transactions Costs and Social Distance in Philanthropy: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Working Papers 1205, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    17. Gani Aldashev & Esteban Jaimovich & Thierry Verdier, 2023. "The Dark Side of Transparency: Mission Variety and Industry Equilibrium in Decentralised Public Good Provision," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 133(654), pages 2085-2109.
    18. Adena, Maja & Hakimov, Rustamdjan & Huck, Steffen, 2019. "Charitable giving by the poor: A field experiment on matching and distance to charitable output in Kyrgyzstan," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economics of Change SP II 2019-305, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    19. Zhao, Eric Yanfei & Lounsbury, Michael, 2016. "An institutional logics approach to social entrepreneurship: Market logic, religious diversity, and resource acquisition by microfinance organizations," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 643-662.
    20. Vanessa Valero, 2022. "Redistribution and beliefs about the source of income inequality," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 876-901, June.

    More about this item

    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:oup:econjl:v:133:y:2023:i:656:p:2925-2948.. 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: Oxford University Press or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.html .

    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.