IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bjn/evalua/e1fundraisingcharitablegivingcapitan.html

Evaluation 1 of "Does online fundraising increase charitable giving? A nationwide field experiment on Facebook"

Author

Listed:
  • Tabar Capitn

Abstract

This is a large-scale, well-executed field experiment on Facebook ads for charitable giving in Germany. Randomized at the postal code level, the study finds that the campaign increased donations both short- and medium-term, without reducing future giving to the same charity"but possibly crowding out donations to others. Content and delivery method had no differential effect. The design is strong and materials are fully replicable.

Suggested Citation

  • Tabar Capitn, 2025. "Evaluation 1 of "Does online fundraising increase charitable giving? A nationwide field experiment on Facebook"," The Unjournal Evaluations 2025-64, The Unjournal.
    • Handle: RePEc:bjn:evalua:e1fundraisingcharitablegivingcapitan
    DOI: 10.21428/d28e8e57.bcefd737/03a7d816
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://unjournal.pubpub.org/pub/e1fundraisingcharitablegivingcapitan
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.21428/d28e8e57.bcefd737/03a7d816?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. Adena, Maja & Hager, Anselm, 2025. "Does Online Fundraising Increase Charitable Giving? A Nationwide Field Experiment on Facebook," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 71(4), pages 3216-3231.
    2. Maja Adena & Anselm Hager, 2025. "Does Online Fundraising Increase Charitable Giving? A Nationwide Field Experiment on Facebook," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 71(4), pages 3216-3231, April.
    3. Imbens,Guido W. & Rubin,Donald B., 2015. "Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521885881, Enero-Abr.
    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. Dimitris Bertsimas & Agni Orfanoudaki & Rory B. Weiner, 2020. "Personalized treatment for coronary artery disease patients: a machine learning approach," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 482-506, December.
    2. Bruno Ferman & Cristine Pinto & Vitor Possebom, 2020. "Cherry Picking with Synthetic Controls," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(2), pages 510-532, March.
    3. Peydró, José-Luis & Jiménez, Gabriel & Kenan, Huremovic & Moral-Benito, Enrique & Vega-Redondo, Fernando, 2020. "Production and financial networks in interplay: Crisis evidence from supplier-customer and credit registers," CEPR Discussion Papers 15277, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    4. Hairu Wang & Yukun Liu & Haiying Zhou, 2025. "Score test for unconfoundedness under a logistic treatment assignment model," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 77(4), pages 517-533, August.
    5. Satarupa Bhattacharjee & Bing Li & Xiao Wu & Lingzhou Xue, 2025. "Doubly robust estimation of causal effects for random object outcomes with continuous treatments," Papers 2506.22754, arXiv.org.
    6. Jonne Y. Guyt & Arjen van Lin & Kristopher O. Keller, 2025. "Banning Unsolicited Store Flyers: Does Helping the Environment Hurt Retailing?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(5), pages 1104-1124, September.
    7. Davide Viviano & Jelena Bradic, 2019. "Synthetic learner: model-free inference on treatments over time," Papers 1904.01490, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.
    8. Chenchuan (Mark) Li & Ulrich K. Müller, 2021. "Linear regression with many controls of limited explanatory power," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(2), pages 405-442, May.
    9. Jeon, Sung-Hee & Pohl, R. Vincent, 2019. "Medical innovation, education, and labor market outcomes of cancer patients," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    10. Johnsen, Åshild A. & Kvaløy, Ola, 2021. "Conspiracy against the public - An experiment on collusion11“People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.” (Adam," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    11. Pedro H. C. Sant'Anna & Xiaojun Song & Qi Xu, 2022. "Covariate distribution balance via propensity scores," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(6), pages 1093-1120, September.
    12. Sung Jae Jun & Sokbae Lee, 2024. "Causal Inference Under Outcome-Based Sampling with Monotonicity Assumptions," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(3), pages 998-1009, July.
    13. Caloffi, Annalisa & Freo, Marzia & Ghinoi, Stefano & Mariani, Marco & Rossi, Federica, 2022. "Assessing the effects of a deliberate policy mix: The case of technology and innovation advisory services and innovation vouchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    14. Reizer, Balázs, 2022. "Employment and Wage Consequences of Flexible Wage Components," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    15. Jiannan Lu & Peng Ding & Tirthankar Dasgupta, 2018. "Treatment Effects on Ordinal Outcomes: Causal Estimands and Sharp Bounds," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 43(5), pages 540-567, October.
    16. Ashesh Rambachan & Rahul Singh & Davide Viviano, 2024. "Program Evaluation with Remotely Sensed Outcomes," Papers 2411.10959, arXiv.org, revised May 2026.
    17. Cappelletti, Matilde & Giuffrida, Leonardo M., 2022. "Targeted bidders in government tenders," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-030, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    18. Art B. Owen & Hal Varian, 2018. "Optimizing the tie-breaker regression discontinuity design," Papers 1808.07563, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2020.
    19. Ajayi, Kehinde F. & Dao,Aziz & Koussoube,Mousson Estelle Jamel, 2022. "The Effects of Childcare on Women and Children : Evidence from a Randomized Evaluation inBurkina Faso," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10239, The World Bank.
    20. Shengyu Cao & Ming Hu, 2026. "Collusive Pricing Under LLM," Papers 2601.01279, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2026.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:bjn:evalua:e1fundraisingcharitablegivingcapitan. 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: Davit Jintcharadze (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://unjournal.org/ .

    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.