Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Eliciting donor preferences

Contents:

Author Info

  • Maren Bachke
  • Frode Alfnes
  • Mette Wik
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    Most charity organizations depend on contributions from the general public, but little research is conducted on donor preferences. Do donors have geographical, recipient, or thematic preferences? We designed a conjoint analysis experiment in which people rated development aid projects by donating money in dictator games. We find that our sample show strong age, gender, regional, and thematic preferences. Furthermore, we find significant differences between segments. The differences in donations are consistent with differences in donors’ attitudes toward development aid and their beliefs about differences in poverty and vulnerability of the recipients. The method here used for development projects can easily be adapted to elicit preferences for other kinds of projects that rely on gifts from private donors.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://karlan.yale.edu/fieldexperiments/papers/00098.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by The Field Experiments Website in its series Artefactual Field Experiments with number 00098.

    as in new window
    Length:
    Date of creation: 2012
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:feb:artefa:00098

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.fieldexperiments.com

    Related research

    Keywords:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. repec:feb:framed:0087 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Armin Falk & James J. Heckman, 2009. "Lab Experiments are a Major Source of Knowledge in the Social Sciences," Working Papers, Geary Institute, University College Dublin 200935, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    3. Supphellen, Magne & Nelson, Michelle R., 2001. "Developing, exploring, and validating a typology of private philanthropic decision making," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 573-603, October.
    4. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 2008. "Differences in the Economic Decisions of Men and Women: Experimental Evidence," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, Elsevier, Elsevier.
    5. George A. Akerlof & Rachel E. Kranton, 2000. "Economics And Identity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, MIT Press, vol. 115(3), pages 715-753, August.
    6. Jae Bong Chang & Jayson L. Lusk & F. Bailey Norwood, 2007. "How Closely Do Hypothetical Surveys and Laboratory Experiments Predict Field Behavior?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(2), pages 518-534.
    7. Jeffrey Carpenter & Cristina Connolly & Caitlin Myers, 2008. "Altruistic behavior in a representative dictator experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 282-298, September.
    8. Matthias Benz & Stephan Meier, . "Do People Behave in Experiments as in the Field? – Evidence from Donations," IEW - Working Papers 248, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    9. Stefano DellaVigna & John A. List & Ulrike Malmendier, 2009. "Testing for Altruism and Social Pressure in Charitable Giving," NBER Working Papers 15629, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 1996. "Altruism in Anonymous Dictator Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 181-191, October.
    11. Todd L. Cherry & Peter Frykblom & Jason F. Shogren, 2002. "Hardnose the Dictator," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1218-1221, September.
    12. Eckel, Catherine C & Grossman, Philip J, 1998. "Are Women Less Selfish Than Men? Evidence from Dictator Experiments," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(448), pages 726-35, May.
    13. F. Bailey Norwood & Jayson L. Lusk, 2011. "Social Desirability Bias in Real, Hypothetical, and Inferred Valuation Experiments," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(2), pages 528-534.
    14. Rege, Mari & Telle, Kjetil, 2004. "The impact of social approval and framing on cooperation in public good situations," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 88(7-8), pages 1625-1644, July.
    15. Min Ding & Rajdeep Grewal & John Liechty, 2005. "Incentive-aligned conjoint analysis," Framed Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00139, The Field Experiments Website.
    16. Craig Landry & Andreas Lange & John List & Michael Price & Nicholas Rupp, 2006. "Toward an understanding of the economics of charity: Evidence from a field experiment," Natural Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00292, The Field Experiments Website.
    17. John A. List, 2007. "On the Interpretation of Giving in Dictator Games," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115, pages 482-493.
    18. Brekke, Kjell Arne & Hauge, Karen Evelyn & Lind, Jo Thori & Nyborg, Karine, 2011. "Playing with the good guys. A public good game with endogenous group formation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 95(9), pages 1111-1118.
    19. James Andreoni & John Miller, 2002. "Giving According to GARP: An Experimental Test of the Consistency of Preferences for Altruism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 737-753, March.
    20. Christina M. Fong & Erzo F. P. Luttmer, 2009. "What Determines Giving to Hurricane Katrina Victims? Experimental Evidence on Racial Group Loyalty," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 1(2), pages 64-87, April.
    21. Alexander W. Cappelen & Astri D. Hole & Erik Ø. Sørensen & Bertil Tungodden, 2005. "The Pluralism of Fairness Ideals: An Experimental Approach," CESifo Working Paper Series 1611, CESifo Group Munich.
    22. John List & David Lucking-Reiley, 2002. "The effects of seed money and refunds on charitable giving: Experimental evidence from a university capital campaign," Natural Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00301, The Field Experiments Website.
    23. Bolton, Gary E. & Katok, Elena, 1995. "An experimental test for gender differences in beneficent behavior," Economics Letters, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 48(3-4), pages 287-292, June.
    24. Christoph Engel, 2010. "Dictator Games: A Meta Study," Working Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2010_07, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, revised Jan 2011.
    25. Dufwenberg, Martin & Muren, Astri, 2006. "Generosity, anonymity, gender," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 42-49, September.
    26. Laury, Susan K. & Taylor, Laura O., 2008. "Altruism spillovers: Are behaviors in context-free experiments predictive of altruism toward a naturally occurring public good," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 9-29, January.
    27. Micklewright, John & Schnepf, Sylke V., 2007. "Who Gives for Overseas Development?," IZA Discussion Papers 3057, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    28. Kessels, Roselinde & Goos, Peter & Vandebroek, Martina, 2008. "Optimal designs for conjoint experiments," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 52(5), pages 2369-2387, January.
    29. Hoffman, Elizabeth & McCabe, Kevin & Smith, Vernon L, 1996. "Social Distance and Other-Regarding Behavior in Dictator Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 653-60, June.
    30. Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter, 2001. "Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments?: Application to the Valuation of the Environment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 179-192, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:feb:artefa:00098. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Joe Seidel).

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.