IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/econjl/v133y2023i656p2925-2948..html

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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 1996. "Altruism in Anonymous Dictator Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 181-191, October.
    2. John A. List & Azeem M. Shaikh & Yang Xu, 2019. "Multiple hypothesis testing in experimental economics," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(4), pages 773-793, December.
    3. 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.
    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. 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.
    7. 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).
    8. M. Fong, Christina & Oberholzer-Gee, Felix, 2011. "Truth in giving: Experimental evidence on the welfare effects of informed giving to the poor," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(5), pages 436-444.
    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. Ni, Jian & Xin, Yi & Yang, Fangzhu, 2025. "Financing micro-entrepreneurship in online crowdfunding markets: What drives local bias?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 238(C).
    2. Ashworth, Madison & Thunström, Linda & van't Veld, Klaas & Thompson, Robin A. & Johnson, David, 2025. "Perceived agency and paternalism: Increasing support for people with substance use disorder," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 119(C).

    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. Ashworth, Madison & Thunström, Linda & van't Veld, Klaas & Thompson, Robin A. & Johnson, David, 2025. "Perceived agency and paternalism: Increasing support for people with substance use disorder," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    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. Zachary Halberstam & James R. Hines Jr., 2023. "Quality-Aware Tax Incentives for Charitable Contributions," CESifo Working Paper Series 10250, CESifo.
    4. Sadoff, Sally & Samek, Anya, 2019. "The effect of recipient contribution requirements on support for social programs," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 1-16.
    5. Adena, Maja & Alizade, Jeyhun & Bohner, Frauke & Harke, Julian & Mesters, Fabio, 2019. "Quality certification for nonprofits, charitable giving, and donor's trust: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 75-100.
    6. Billur Aksoy & Silvana Krasteva, 2020. "When does less information translate into more giving to public goods?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(4), pages 1148-1177, December.
    7. 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.
    8. Lisette Ibanez & Sébastien Roussel, 2022. "The impact of nature video exposure on pro-environmental behavior: An experimental investigation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(11), pages 1-24, November.
    9. Mickael Beaud & Mathieu Lefebvre & Julie Rosaz, 2023. "Other-regarding preferences and giving decision in a risky environment: experimental evidence," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 27(2), pages 359-385, June.
    10. 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).
    11. Chambers, Catherine & Chambers, Paul & Johnson, David, 2025. "Charismatic species, matching, and demographics in conservation donations: An experimental investigation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    12. Johannes Diederich & Timo Goeschl, 2013. "To Give or Not to Give: The Price of Contributing and the Provision of Public Goods," NBER Working Papers 19332, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Wubeshet Regasa & Umberto Galmarini & Giuseppe Porro, 2024. "Victim’s identification and social categorization: first- and second-order effects on altruistic behavior," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 71(4), pages 959-988, December.
    14. 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.
    15. 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).
    16. Tanushree Jhunjhunwala, 2023. "Searching to avoid regret in charitable giving," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(2), pages 207-226, December.
    17. Matteo M. Galizzi & Daniel Navarro-Martinez, 2019. "On the External Validity of Social Preference Games: A Systematic Lab-Field Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 976-1002, March.
    18. 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.
    19. 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).
    20. Krasteva, Silvana & Yildirim, Huseyin, 2013. "(Un)Informed charitable giving," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 14-26.

    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.