IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/hal/journl/hal-00699366.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Time Is Not Money

Citations

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


Cited by:

  1. Alexander L. Brown & Jonathan Meer & J. Forrest Williams, 2019. "Why Do People Volunteer? An Experimental Analysis of Preferences for Time Donations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1455-1468, April.
  2. Cappellari, Lorenzo & Ghinetti, Paolo & Turati, Gilberto, 2011. "On time and money donations," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 853-867.
  3. Angela C.M. de Oliveira & Sarah Jacobson, 2017. "(Im)patience by Proxy: Making Intertemporal Decisions for Others," Department of Economics Working Papers 2017-01, Department of Economics, Williams College, revised Oct 2018.
  4. Carbone, Jared C. & Gazzale, Robert S., 2017. "A shared sense of responsibility: Money versus effort contributions in the voluntary provision of public goods," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 74-87.
  5. Linardi, Sera & McConnell, Margaret A., 2011. "No excuses for good behavior: Volunteering and the social environment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(5), pages 445-454.
  6. Wenzlaff, Ferdinand & Kimmich, Christian & Koudela, Thomas & Richters, Oliver & Freydorf, Christoph & Schuster, Ludwig, 2012. "Wachstumszwang in der Geldwirtschaft? Theoretische Erwägungen," EconStor Research Reports 237053, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
  7. Thomas Neumann & Sabrina Kierspel & Ivo Windrich & Roger Berger & Bodo Vogt, 2018. "How to Split Gains and Losses? Experimental Evidence of Dictator and Ultimatum Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-19, October.
  8. Wenzlaff, Ferdinand & Kimmich, Christian & Richters, Oliver, 2014. "Theoretische Zugänge eines Wachstumszwangs in der Geldwirtschaft," ZÖSS-Discussion Papers 45, University of Hamburg, Centre for Economic and Sociological Studies (CESS/ZÖSS).
  9. Godwin Kofi Vondolia & Håkan Eggert & Ståle Navrud & Jesper Stage, 2014. "What do respondents bring to contingent valuation? A comparison of monetary and labour payment vehicles," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(3), pages 253-267, November.
  10. Sarah Brown & Karl Taylor, 2019. "Charitable Behaviour and Political Ideology: Evidence for the UK," Working Papers 2019002, The University of Sheffield, Department of Economics.
  11. Kshetri, Nir, 2015. "Success of Crowd-based Online Technology in Fundraising: An Institutional Perspective," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 100-116.
  12. Brown, Sarah & Taylor, Karl, 2015. "Charitable Behaviour and the Big Five Personality Traits: Evidence from UK Panel Data," IZA Discussion Papers 9318, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  13. Anastasia Danilov & Timo Vogelsang, 2016. "Time for helping," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 2(1), pages 36-47, May.
  14. Nicholas Wilson & Wentao Xiong & Christine Mattson, 2011. "Is Sex Like Driving? Risk Compensation Associated with Male Circumcision in Kisumu, Kenya," Department of Economics Working Papers 2011-14, Department of Economics, Williams College, revised Jan 2012.
  15. Toussaert, Séverine, 2018. "Eliciting temptation and self-control through menu choices: a lab experiment," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 88107, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  16. Bauer, Thomas K. & Bredtmann, Julia & Schmidt, Christoph M., 2013. "Time vs. money — The supply of voluntary labor and charitable donations across Europe," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 80-94.
  17. Alexander L. Davis & Nadja R. Jehli & John H. Miller & Roberto A. Weber, 2011. "Generosity across contexts," ECON - Working Papers 050, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Mar 2015.
  18. Godwin Kofi Vondolia & Håkan Eggert & Ståle Navrud & Jesper Stage, 2014. "What do respondents bring to contingent valuation? A comparison of monetary and labour payment vehicles," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(3), pages 253-267, November.
  19. de Oliveira, Angela C.M. & Jacobson, Sarah, 2021. "(Im)patience by proxy: Making intertemporal decisions for others," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 83-99.
  20. Vanessa Mertins & Christian Walter, 2021. "In absence of money: a field experiment on volunteer work motivation," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(3), pages 952-984, September.
  21. Erkut, Hande, 2022. "Social norms and preferences for generosity are domain dependent," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 121-140.
  22. Kshetri, Nir, 2018. "Informal Institutions and Internet-based Equity Crowdfunding," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 33-51.
  23. Hartman, John Lawrence, 2007. "The Relevance of Heterogeneity in a Congested Route Network with Tolls: An Analysis of Two Experiments Using Actual Waiting Times and Monetized Time Costs," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt22b46341, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
  24. Kroll, Eike B. & Morgenstern, Ralf & Neumann, Thomas & Schosser, Stephan & Vogt, Bodo, 2014. "Bargaining power does not matter when sharing losses – Experimental evidence of equal split in the Nash bargaining game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 261-272.
  25. Kübler, Dorothea & Erkut, Hande, 2022. "Repugnant Transactions: The Role of Agency and Extreme Consequences," VfS Annual Conference 2022 (Basel): Big Data in Economics 264052, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
  26. Christine L. Exley & Judd B. Kessler, 2018. "Equity Concerns are Narrowly Framed," NBER Working Papers 25326, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.