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. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 1996. "Altruism in Anonymous Dictator Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 181-191, October.
    4. 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.
    5. Christine L. Exley, 2020. "Using Charity Performance Metrics as an Excuse Not to Give," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(2), pages 553-563, February.
    6. 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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. van Rijn, Jordan & Barham, Bradford & Sundaram-Stukel, Reka, 2017. "An experimental approach to comparing similarity- and guilt-based charitable appeals," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 25-40.
    4. Chen, Josie I. & Foster, Andrew & Putterman, Louis, 2019. "Identity, trust and altruism: An experiment on preferences and microfinance lending," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    5. Zachary Halberstam & James R. Hines Jr., 2023. "Quality-Aware Tax Incentives for Charitable Contributions," CESifo Working Paper Series 10250, CESifo.
    6. Catherine C. Eckel & Benjamin A. Priday & Rick K. Wilson, 2018. "Charity Begins at Home: A Lab-in-the-Field Experiment on Charitable Giving," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-22, November.
    7. Tom Lane, 2019. "The differential effects of Jesus and God on distributive behaviour," Discussion Papers 2019-05, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    8. 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.
    9. Lane, Tom, 2021. "The effects of Jesus and God on pro-sociality and discrimination," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    10. Umer, Hamza, 2020. "Revisiting generosity in the dictator game: Experimental evidence from Pakistan," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    11. Robson, Matthew, 2021. "Inequality aversion, self-interest and social connectedness," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 744-772.
    12. Sule Alan & Seda Ertac, 2017. "Belief in Hard Work and Altruism: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment," Working Papers 2017-053, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    13. Stephen Knowles & Maroš Servátka, 2014. "Transaction Costs, the Opportunity Cost of Time and Inertia in Charitable Giving," Working Papers in Economics 14/05, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
    14. 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.
    15. van Rijn, Jordan & Barham, Bradford & Sundaram-Stukel, Reka, 2016. "An Experimental Approach to Comparing Similarity- and Guilt-Based Charitable Appeals," Staff Paper Series 584, University of Wisconsin, Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    16. Burks, Stephen V. & Carpenter, Jeffrey P. & Verhoogen, Eric, 2003. "Playing both roles in the trust game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 195-216, June.
    17. Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Tosun, 2022. "Endogenous Game Choice and Giving Behavior in Distribution Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-32, November.
    18. Bruno S. Frey & Stephan Meier, "undated". "Pro-Social Behavior, Reciprocity or Both?," IEW - Working Papers 107, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    19. 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.

    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.