IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0294186.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The influencing factor model and empirical research of TikTok charity live streaming impact users’ online charitable donation

Author

Listed:
  • Yujing Shi
  • Chenyang Wu

Abstract

The "live streaming + charity" model is a new model for China’s philanthropy, accelerating the new development of China’s philanthropy, but there is still a relative paucity of research in the academic community on how charity live streaming affects online charitable donations. In this sense, this study aims to identify the construction of a model of the factors influencing charity live streaming on online charitable donations. This study selected TikTok Live, based on the UTAUT model, combining perceived risk and perceived interactivity, recovered 607 valid questionnaires, and concluded and structural equation modeling to construct an influence factor model to analyze their correlation. The results show that users’ performance expectancy, effort expectancy, perceived interactivity, facilitating conditions, and social influence are significantly positively correlated with online charitable donations, and perceived risk does not negatively affect users’ intentions to make online charitable donations. Our findings can provide a basis for live-streaming platforms and relevant social organizations and government departments to develop charity communication strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Yujing Shi & Chenyang Wu, 2023. "The influencing factor model and empirical research of TikTok charity live streaming impact users’ online charitable donation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(11), pages 1-19, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0294186
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0294186
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0294186
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0294186&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0294186?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dean Karlan & John A. List, 2007. "Does Price Matter in Charitable Giving? Evidence from a Large-Scale Natural Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 1774-1793, December.
    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. Andreas Lange & Andrew Stocking, 2009. "Charitable Memberships, Volunteering, and Discounts: Evidence from a Large-Scale Online Field Experiment," NBER Working Papers 14941, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Leonardo Becchetti & Vittorio Pelligra, 2014. "Information & belief elicitation effects on charitable giving: An artefactual field experiment," AICCON Working Papers 132-2014, Associazione Italiana per la Cultura della Cooperazione e del Non Profit.
    3. Jinyong Hahn & Keisuke Hirano & Dean Karlan, 2011. "Adaptive Experimental Design Using the Propensity Score," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(1), pages 96-108, January.
    4. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John List, 2016. "Field Experiments in Markets," Artefactual Field Experiments j0002, The Field Experiments Website.
    5. Nicola Lacetera & Mario Macis & Angelo Mele, 2012. "Viral altruism? A natural field experiment of social contagion in on-line networks," Working Papers 12-16, NET Institute.
    6. Kate Ambler & Diego Aycinena & Dean Yang, 2015. "Channeling Remittances to Education: A Field Experiment among Migrants from El Salvador," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 207-232, April.
    7. Catherine Eckel, 2005. "Subsidizing Charitable Contributions: A Field Test Comparing Matching and Rebate Subsidies," Working Papers 2098, The Field Experiments Website.
    8. Almunia, Miguel & Guceri, Irem & Lockwood, Ben & Scharf, Kimberley, 2020. "More giving or more givers? The effects of tax incentives on charitable donations in the UK," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    9. Alpizar, Francisco & Carlsson, Fredrik & Johansson-Stenman, Olof, 2008. "Anonymity, reciprocity, and conformity: Evidence from voluntary contributions to a national park in Costa Rica," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1047-1060, June.
    10. Martin Huber, 2010. "Identification of average treatment effects in social experiments under different forms of attrition," University of St. Gallen Department of Economics working paper series 2010 2010-22, Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen.
    11. Perroni, Carlo & Scharf, Kimberley & Talavera, Oleksandr & Vi, Linh, 2022. "Does online salience predict charitable giving? Evidence from SMS text donations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 134-149.
    12. Alistair Munro & Marieta Valente, 2016. "Green Goods: Are They Good or Bad News for the Environment? Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment on Impure Public Goods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(2), pages 317-335, October.
    13. Levin, Tova & Levitt, Steven D. & List, John A., 2023. "A Glimpse into the world of high capacity givers: Experimental evidence from a university capital campaign," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 644-658.
    14. Gallier, Carlo & Goeschl, Timo & Kesternich, Martin & Lohse, Johannes & Reif, Christiane & Römer, Daniel, 2023. "Inter-charity competition under spatial differentiation: Sorting, crowding, and spillovers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 216(C), pages 457-468.
    15. Asatryan, Zareh & Joulfaian, David, 2022. "Taxes and Business Philanthropy in Armenia," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 914-930.
    16. Kling, Jeffrey R., 2007. "Methodological Frontiers of Public Finance Field Experiments," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 60(1), pages 109-127, March.
    17. Adalberto Rangone & Luca Busolli, 2021. "Managing charity 4.0 with Blockchain: a case study at the time of Covid-19," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 18(4), pages 491-521, December.
    18. G�nther Fink & Margaret McConnell & Sebastian Vollmer, 2014. "Testing for heterogeneous treatment effects in experimental data: false discovery risks and correction procedures," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 44-57, January.
    19. Karlan, Dean & List, John A., 2020. "How can Bill and Melinda Gates increase other people's donations to fund public goods?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    20. Kesternich, Martin & Löschel, Andreas & Römer, Daniel, 2016. "The long-term impact of matching and rebate subsidies when public goods are impure: Field experimental evidence from the carbon offsetting market," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 70-78.

    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:plo:pone00:0294186. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.