IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/soecon/v72y2006i4p794-807.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Subsidizing Charitable Giving with Rebates or Matching: Further Laboratory Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Catherine C. Eckel
  • Philip J. Grossman

Abstract

We examine two different ways to subsidize charitable giving: by a rebate (returning a portion of the donation to the giver) or by a match (adding additional donations to the giver's donation). In previous experimental research, we have shown that participants give more to charity under the match than under an equivalent rebate. The previous within‐subject experimental design required participants to make a series of decisions under both types of subsidy. Each decision consisted of an allocation of an endowment between the subject and a charity chosen by the subject from a specified list. This article examines whether that result is an artifact of the previous within‐subjects design: subjects may have failed to fully distinguish the two types of subsidy. In the current article, we report results from a between‐subjects design, where participants are required to make only one type of decision—involving rebates or involving matching subsidies. Our results confirm previous findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Catherine C. Eckel & Philip J. Grossman, 2006. "Subsidizing Charitable Giving with Rebates or Matching: Further Laboratory Evidence," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 72(4), pages 794-807, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:soecon:v:72:y:2006:i:4:p:794-807
    DOI: 10.1002/j.2325-8012.2006.tb00738.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2325-8012.2006.tb00738.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/j.2325-8012.2006.tb00738.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Douglas D. Davis & Edward L. Millner, 2005. "Rebates, Matches, and Consumer Behavior," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 72(2), pages 410-421, October.
    2. Eckel, Catherine C & Grossman, Philip J, 1998. "Are Women Less Selfish Than Men? Evidence from Dictator Experiments," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(448), pages 726-735, May.
    3. Douglas Davis & Edward Millner & Robert Reilly, 2005. "Subsidy Schemes and Charitable Contributions: A Closer Look," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 8(2), pages 85-106, June.
    4. Clotfelter, Charles T, 1980. "Tax Incentives and Charitable Giving: Evidence from a Panel of Taxpayers," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 319-340, June.
    5. Catherine Eckel, 2005. "Subsidizing Charitable Contributions: A Field Test Comparing Matching and Rebate Subsidies," Working Papers 2098, The Field Experiments Website.
    6. Clotfelter, Charles T., 1980. "Tax incentives and charitable giving: evidence from a panel of taxpayers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 319-340, June.
    7. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 2003. "Rebate versus matching: does how we subsidize charitable contributions matter?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(3-4), pages 681-701, March.
    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. Teng Ye & Jingnan Zheng & Junhui Jin & Jingyi Qiu & Wei Ai & Qiaozhu Mei, 2024. "Using Artificial Intelligence to Unlock Crowdfunding Success for Small Businesses," Papers 2407.09480, arXiv.org.
    2. Emmanuel Saez, 2009. "Details Matter: The Impact of Presentation and Information on the Take-Up of Financial Incentives for Retirement Saving," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 204-228, February.
    3. Livingston, Jeffrey A. & Rasulmukhamedov, Rustam, 2023. "On the Interpretation of Giving in Dictator Games When the Recipient is a Charity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 275-285.
    4. Marriott, Lisa, 2010. "The Science of Taxing the Arts," Working Paper Series 19143, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    5. Eiji Yamamura & Yoshiro Tsutsui & Fumio Ohtake, 2023. "An analysis of altruistic and selfish motivations underlying hometown tax donations in Japan," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 29-55, January.
    6. Rapheal Andrew Luccasen III, 2012. "Individual Differences In Contributions And Crowding-Out Of A Public Good," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 59(4), pages 419-441, September.
    7. 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.
    8. Jan Schmitz, 2021. "Is Charitable Giving a Zero-Sum Game? The Effect of Competition Between Charities on Giving Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(10), pages 6333-6349, October.
    9. Fielding, David & Knowles, Stephen & Peeters, Ronald, 2023. "Timing of rebates and generosity," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    10. Seiyoun Kim & Vjollca Sadiraj & Yongsheng Xu, 2024. "Tax Framing in Matching and Rebate Subsidy," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2023-01, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    11. Sophia Belghiti-Mahut & Anne-Laurence Lafont & Angélique Rodhain & Florence Rodhain & Leila Temri & Ouidad Yousfi, 2016. "Genre et innovateur frugal : 4 cas de femmes innovatrices," Innovations, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(3), pages 69-93.
    12. Davis, Douglas D., 2006. "Rebate subsidies, matching subsidies and isolation effects," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 13-22, July.
    13. Chan, Nathan W. & Knowles, Stephen & Peeters, Ronald & Wolk, Leonard, 2024. "On generosity in public good and charitable dictator games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 224(C), pages 624-640.
    14. repec:vuw:vuwscr:19143 is not listed 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. Catherine C. Eckel & Philip J. Grossman, 2006. "Subsidizing Charitable Contributions in the Field: Evidence from a Non-Secular Charity," Monash Economics Working Papers archive-44, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    2. Catherine Eckel, 2005. "Subsidizing Charitable Contributions: A Field Test Comparing Matching and Rebate Subsidies," Working Papers 2098, The Field Experiments Website.
    3. Emmanuel Saez, 2009. "Details Matter: The Impact of Presentation and Information on the Take-Up of Financial Incentives for Retirement Saving," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 204-228, February.
    4. Catherine C. Eckel & Philip J. Grossman, 2006. "Do Donors Care about Subsidy Type? An Experimental Study," Research in Experimental Economics, in: Experiments Investigating Fundraising and Charitable Contributors, pages 157-175, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    5. Deck, Cary & Murphy, James J., 2019. "Donors change both their level and pattern of giving in response to contests among charities," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 91-106.
    6. Catherine C. Eckel & Philip J. Grossman, 2000. "Volunteers and Pseudo-Volunteers: The Effect of Recruitment Method in Dictator Experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 3(2), pages 107-120, October.
    7. Axsen, Jonn & Mountain, Dean C. & Jaccard, Mark, 2009. "Combining stated and revealed choice research to simulate the neighbor effect: The case of hybrid-electric vehicles," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 221-238, August.
    8. repec:cup:judgdm:v:1:y:2006:i::p:13-22 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. John List, 2008. "Introduction to field experiments in economics with applications to the economics of charity," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 11(3), pages 203-212, September.
    10. Roman M. Sheremeta & Neslihan Uler, 2021. "The impact of taxes and wasteful government spending on giving," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(2), pages 355-386, June.
    11. Diederich, Johannes & Eckel, Catherine C. & Epperson, Raphael & Goeschl, Timo & Grossman, Philip J., 2019. "Subsidizing Quantity Donations: Matches, Rebates, and Discounts Compared," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203650, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    12. Davis, Douglas D., 2006. "Rebate subsidies, matching subsidies and isolation effects," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 13-22, July.
    13. repec:jdm:journl:v:17:y:2022:i:5:p:1058-1071 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Backus, Peter, 2010. "Is charity a homogeneous good?," Economic Research Papers 270773, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    15. Shusaku Sasaki & Hirofumi Kurokawa & Fumio Ohtake, 2022. "An experimental comparison of rebate and matching in charitable giving: The case of Japan," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 73(1), pages 147-177, January.
    16. John A. List, 2011. "The Market for Charitable Giving," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(2), pages 157-180, Spring.
    17. Eckel, Catherine & Grossman, Philip J., 2017. "Comparing rebate and matching subsidies controlling for donors’ awareness: Evidence from the field," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 88-95.
    18. Backus, Peter, 2010. "Is charity a homogeneous good?," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 951, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    19. Stephan Meier, 2007. "Do Women Behave Less or More Prosocially than Men?," Public Finance Review, , vol. 35(2), pages 215-232, March.
    20. 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.
    21. Douglas D. Davis, 2006. "Rebate subsidies, matching subsidies and isolation effects," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 1, pages 13-22, July.
    22. Rigdon, Mary L. & Levine, Adam Seth, 2009. "The Role of Expectations and Gender in Altruism," MPRA Paper 19372, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:wly:soecon:v:72:y:2006:i:4:p:794-807. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2325-8012 .

    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.