IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nav/ecupna/1004.html

Attitudes towards blood and living organ donations

Author

Listed:

Abstract

We model the decision of whether or not to become a blood/living organ donor. The expected utility for becoming a donor is a function of the degree of altruism, the consumption of goods, the costs of donation, the very pleasure of giving, and the recipient’s utility associated to donation. Empirically, we observe differences in the expected costs and benefits from donation between blood and non-blood donors, and between individuals with different willingness to donate living organs. Looking at benefits/costs of donation through reasons for donating/not donating, we conclude policies to encourage donation should focus on raising awareness and provide information.

Suggested Citation

  • Juan M. Cabasés Hita & María Errea Rodríguez, 2010. "Attitudes towards blood and living organ donations," Documentos de Trabajo - Lan Gaiak Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra 1004, Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra.
    • Handle: RePEc:nav:ecupna:1004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www2.unavarra.es/gesadj/depEconomia/repec/DocumentosTrab/DT1004.PDF
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lacetera, Nicola & Macis, Mario, 2008. "Social Image Concerns and Pro-Social Behavior," IZA Discussion Papers 3771, IZA Network @ LISER.
    2. Wildman, John & Hollingsworth, Bruce, 2009. "Blood donation and the nature of altruism," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 492-503, March.
    3. Weber, Roberto A., 2003. "'Learning' with no feedback in a competitive guessing game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 134-144, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. How to best increase organ donations
      by Economic Logician in Economic Logic on 2011-02-21 22:15:00

    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. Joan Costa-Font & Mireia Jofre-Bonet & Steven T. Yen, 2013. "Not All Incentives Wash Out the Warm Glow: The Case of Blood Donation Revisited," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(4), pages 529-551, November.
    2. Johannesson Magnus & Östling Robert & Ranehill Eva, 2010. "The Effect of Competition on Physical Activity: A Randomized Trial," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-31, September.
    3. Urs Fischbacher & Simon Gaechter, 2008. "Heterogeneous Social Preferences And The Dynamics Of Free Riding In Public Good Experiments," Discussion Papers 2008-07, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    4. Robert Slonim, 2005. "Competing Against Experienced and Inexperienced Players," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 8(1), pages 55-75, April.
    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. Joachim P. Hasebrook & Leonie Michalak & Anna Wessels & Sabine Koenig & Stefan Spierling & Stefan Kirmsse, 2022. "Green Behavior: Factors Influencing Behavioral Intention and Actual Environmental Behavior of Employees in the Financial Service Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-35, August.
    7. Bodo Herzog & Stefanie Schnee, 2022. "Exploring a Dualism of Human Rationality: Experimental Study of a Cheating Contest Game," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-13, June.
    8. Feltovich, Nick & Swierzbinski, Joe, 2011. "The role of strategic uncertainty in games: An experimental study of cheap talk and contracts in the Nash demand game," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 554-574, May.
    9. Christian Thoeni & Simon Gaechter, 2011. "Peer Effects and Social Preferences in Voluntary Cooperation," Discussion Papers 2011-09, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    10. C. Mónica Capra, 2019. "Understanding decision processes in guessing games: a protocol analysis approach," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(1), pages 123-135, August.
    11. Antonio Cabrales & Irma Clots-Figueras & Roberto Hernán-Gonzalez & Praveen Kujal, 2020. "Instiutions, Opportunism and Prosocial Behavior: Some Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 20-17, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    12. Urs Fischbacher & Simon Gachter, 2010. "Social Preferences, Beliefs, and the Dynamics of Free Riding in Public Goods Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 541-556, March.
    13. David Danz & Dietmar Fehr & Dorothea Kübler, 2012. "Information and beliefs in a repeated normal-form game," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 15(4), pages 622-640, December.
    14. David L. Dickinson & Todd McElroy, 2009. "Naturally-occurring sleep choice and time of day effects on p-beauty contest outcomes," Working Papers 09-03, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    15. Michael Haylock & Patrick Kampkötter & Mario Macis & Jürgen Sauter & Susanne Seitz & Robert Slonim & Daniel Wiesen & Alexander H. Schmidt, 2022. "Improving the Availability of Unrelated Stem Cell Donors: Evidence from a Major Donor Registry," NBER Working Papers 29857, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Silvester Van Koten & Andreas Ortmann & Vitezslav Babicky, 2013. "Fairness in Risky Environments: Theory and Evidence," Games, MDPI, vol. 4(2), pages 1-35, May.
    17. Duffy, John & Ochs, Jack & Vesterlund, Lise, 2007. "Giving little by little: Dynamic voluntary contribution games," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(9), pages 1708-1730, September.
    18. Urs Fischbacher & Simon Gachter, 2010. "Social Preferences, Beliefs, and the Dynamics of Free Riding in Public Goods Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 541-556, March.
    19. Simon Gaechter & Georg von Krogh & Stefan Haefliger, 2006. "Private-Collective Innovation and the Fragility of Knowledge Sharing," Discussion Papers 2006-21, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    20. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2008-026 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Shu-Heng Chen & Ye-Rong Du & Lee-Xieng Yang, 2014. "Cognitive capacity and cognitive hierarchy: a study based on beauty contest experiments," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 9(1), pages 69-105, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D6 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics
    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
    • D9 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics
    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Lists

    This item is featured on the following reading lists, Wikipedia, or ReplicationWiki pages:
    1. Economic Logic blog

    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:nav:ecupna:1004. 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: Javier Puértolas (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.unavarra.es/departamento-economia .

    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.