Literature DB >> 25359974

Behavioral economics. Avoiding overhead aversion in charity.

Uri Gneezy1, Elizabeth A Keenan2, Ayelet Gneezy2.   

Abstract

Donors tend to avoid charities that dedicate a high percentage of expenses to administrative and fundraising costs, limiting the ability of nonprofits to be effective. We propose a solution to this problem: Use donations from major philanthropists to cover overhead expenses and offer potential donors an overhead-free donation opportunity. A laboratory experiment testing this solution confirms that donations decrease when overhead increases, but only when donors pay for overhead themselves. In a field experiment with 40,000 potential donors, we compared the overhead-free solution with other common uses of initial donations. Consistent with prior research, informing donors that seed money has already been raised increases donations, as does a $1:$1 matching campaign. Our main result, however, clearly shows that informing potential donors that overhead costs are covered by an initial donation significantly increases the donation rate by 80% (or 94%) and total donations by 75% (or 89%) compared with the seed (or matching) approach.
Copyright © 2014, American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25359974     DOI: 10.1126/science.1253932

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Science        ISSN: 0036-8075            Impact factor:   47.728


  11 in total

1.  Demotivating incentives and motivation crowding out in charitable giving.

Authors:  Matthew Chao
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Good Samaritans in Networks: An Experiment on How Networks Influence Egalitarian Sharing and the Evolution of Inequality.

Authors:  Yen-Sheng Chiang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-10       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Clustering consumers based on trust, confidence and giving behaviour: data-driven model building for charitable involvement in the Australian not-for-profit sector.

Authors:  Natalie Jane de Vries; Rodrigo Reis; Pablo Moscato
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Mental Imagery, Impact, and Affect: A Mediation Model for Charitable Giving.

Authors:  Stephan Dickert; Janet Kleber; Daniel Västfjäll; Paul Slovic
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Too cold for warm glow? Christmas-season effects in charitable giving.

Authors:  Stephan Müller; Holger A Rau
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-05-22       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Using virtual reality to increase charitable donations.

Authors:  Kirk Kristofferson; Michelle E Daniels; Andrea C Morales
Journal:  Mark Lett       Date:  2022-01-20

7.  Increased generosity under COVID-19 threat.

Authors:  Ariel Fridman; Rachel Gershon; Ayelet Gneezy
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Another reason for the counterintuitive effects of thank-you gifts on charitable giving.

Authors:  Zhou Fang; Yong Bian
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-07-29

9.  Funds allocation in NPOs: the role of administrative cost ratios.

Authors:  Christian Burkart; Tina Wakolbinger; Fuminori Toyasaki
Journal:  Cent Eur J Oper Res       Date:  2017-12-27       Impact factor: 2.345

10.  Charity Misconduct on Public Health Issues Impairs Willingness to Offer Help.

Authors:  Lijun Yin; Ruzhen Mao; Zijun Ke
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-12-10       Impact factor: 3.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.