IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/feb/natura/00659.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

When should the ask be a nudge? The Effect of Default Amounts on Charitable Donations

Citations

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


Cited by:

  1. Saccardo, Silvia & Li, Charis X. & Samek, Anya & Gneezy, Ayelet, 2021. "Nudging generosity in consumer elective pricing," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 91-104.
  2. Lemken, Dominic, 2020. "When do defaults stick and when are they ethical? Taxonomy, sytematic review and design recommendations," DARE Discussion Papers 2005, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
  3. Steffen Altmann & Armin Falk & Paul Heidhues & Rajshri Jayaraman & Marrit Teirlinck, 2019. "Defaults and Donations: Evidence from a Field Experiment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(5), pages 808-826, December.
  4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:2:p:551-565 is not listed on IDEAS
  5. Crow, Kellie & Mathmann, Frank & Greer, Dominique, 2019. "Got a dollar? Locomotion orientation decreases the effect of defaults on charitable giving," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 1-6.
  6. Borzino, Natalia & Fatas, Enrique & Peterle, Emmanuel, 2023. "In transparency we trust an experimental study of reputation, transparency, and signaling," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
  7. Yuanyuan Liu & Timothy B. Heath & Ayse Onculer, 2020. "The Future Ambiguity Effect: How Narrow Payoff Ranges Increase Future Payoff Appeal," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(8), pages 3754-3770, August.
  8. Ioannis Evangelidis & Jonathan Levav, 2019. "Process Utility and the Effect of Inaction Frames," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 2328-2341, May.
  9. 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).
  10. 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.
  11. Li, Xilin & Hsee, Christopher K., 2021. "Free-riding and cost-bearing in discrimination," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 80-90.
  12. Perez, Dikla & Munichor, Nira & Buskila, Gadi, 2023. "Help yourself: Pictures of donation recipients engaged in physical self-help enhance donations on crowdfunding platforms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
  13. Claire van Teunenbroek & René Bekkers, 2020. "Follow the crowd: Social information and crowdfunding donations in a large field experiment," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(1).
  14. Giorgos Meramveliotakis & Manolis Manioudis, 2024. "Default Nudge and Street Lightning Conservation: Towards a Policy Proposal for the Current Energy Crisis," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(2), pages 9228-9237, June.
  15. Wachner, Jonas & Adriaanse, Marieke & Hoven, Mariette van den & de Ridder, Denise, 2022. "Does default organ donation registration compromise autonomous choice? Public responses to a new donor registration system," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(9), pages 899-905.
  16. Jaehyeon Ju & Daegon Cho & Jae Kyu Lee & Jae‐Hyeon Ahn, 2021. "Can It Clean Up Your Inbox? Evidence from South Korean Anti‐spam Legislation," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(8), pages 2636-2652, August.
  17. Bruns, Hendrik & Kantorowicz-Reznichenko, Elena & Klement, Katharina & Luistro Jonsson, Marijane & Rahali, Bilel, 2016. "Can Nudges Be Transparent and Yet Effective?," WiSo-HH Working Paper Series 33, University of Hamburg, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences, WISO Research Laboratory.
  18. 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.
  19. Li, Jing, 2023. "I’m feeling lucky: How randomly drawn suggested donations affect donation choice," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
  20. Bronwyn Coate & Robert Hoffmann, 2022. "The behavioural economics of culture," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 46(1), pages 3-26, March.
  21. Schulz, Jonathan F. & Thiemann, Petra & Thöni, Christian, 2018. "Nudging generosity: Choice architecture and cognitive factors in charitable giving," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 139-145.
  22. Briscese, Guglielmo, 2019. "Generous by default: A field experiment on designing defaults that align with past behaviour on charitable giving," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
  23. 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.
  24. Fasolo, Barbara & Heard, Claire & Scopelliti, Irene, 2024. "Mitigating cognitive bias to improve organizational decisions: an integrative review, framework, and research agenda," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 125404, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  25. Sudbury, Adrienne W. & Vossler, Christian A., 2022. "Checking out checkout charity: A study of point-of-sale donation campaigns," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 252-270.
  26. Bruns, Hendrik & Perino, Grischa, 2023. "The role of autonomy and reactance for nudging — Experimentally comparing defaults to recommendations and mandates," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
  27. Eugen Dimant, 2020. "Hate Trumps Love: The Impact of Political Polarization on Social Preferences," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 029, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
  28. Hoover, Hanna, 2022. "Nudges as norms: Evidence from the NYC taxi cab industry," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
  29. Park, Sohyeon & Yoon, Song Oh, 2022. "The effects of solicitation and target amounts on consumers’ charitable giving decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 279-289.
  30. Indranil Goswami & Oleg Urminsky, 2018. "No Substitute for the Real Thing: The Importance of In-Context Field Experiments In Fundraising," Natural Field Experiments 00660, The Field Experiments Website.
  31. Lemken, Dominic, 2020. "When do defaults stick and when are they ethical? - taxonomy, systematic review and design recommendations," Key Food Choices and Climate Change Project 307568, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
  32. Enrico Rubaltelli & Lorella Lotto, 2021. "Nudging freelance professionals to increase their retirement pension fund contributions," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(2), pages 551-565, March.
  33. von Zahn, Moritz & Bauer, Kevin & Mihale-Wilson, Cristina & Jagow, Johanna & Speicher, Max & Hinz, Oliver, 2022. "The smart green nudge: Reducing product returns through enriched digital footprints & causal machine learning," SAFE Working Paper Series 363, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2022.
  34. Alt, Marius & Gallier, Carlo, 2022. "Incentives and intertemporal behavioral spillovers: A two-period experiment on charitable giving," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 959-972.
  35. Claudia Keser & Maximilian Späth, 2021. "Charitable Giving: Framing and the Role of Information," CIRANO Working Papers 2021s-23, CIRANO.
  36. Hendrik Bruns & Grischa Perino, 2021. "Point at, nudge, or push private provision of a public good?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(3), pages 996-1007, July.
  37. Simon, Mark & Stanton, Steven J. & Townsend, Janell D. & Kim, John, 2019. "A multi-method study of social ties and crowdfunding success: Opening the black box to get the cash inside," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 206-214.
  38. Keser, Claudia & Späth, Maximilian, 2021. "Charitable giving: Framing and the role of information," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 424, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
  39. 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.
  40. Bruns, Hendrik & Kantorowicz-Reznichenko, Elena & Klement, Katharina & Luistro Jonsson, Marijane & Rahali, Bilel, 2018. "Can nudges be transparent and yet effective?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 41-59.
  41. Coby Morvinski & Silvia Saccardo & On Amir, 2023. "Mis-Nudging Morality," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(1), pages 464-474, January.
  42. Yunjeong Ahn & Jieun Lee, 2019. "The Effect of Participation Effort on CSR Participation Intention: The Moderating Role of Construal Level on Consumer Perception of Warm Glow and Perceived Costs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, December.
  43. Di Domenico, Giandomenico & Premazzi, Katia & Cugini, Antonella, 2022. "“I will pay you more, as long as you are transparent!”: An investigation of the pick-your-price participative pricing mechanism," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 403-419.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.