Mental Budgeting and Charitable Giving: Matching Motives with Budgets to Maximize Giving

2014 ◽  
pp. 91-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey L. Stinson ◽  
Monica LaBarge
Keyword(s):  
Charitable Giving ◽  
Mental Budgeting

The Effect of Social Capital on Charitable Giving in Nonprofit Marketing

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jen Shang ◽  
Rachel Croson
Keyword(s):  
Social Capital ◽  
Charitable Giving ◽  
Nonprofit Marketing

Income source effects and mental budgeting

1992 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne O'Curry
Keyword(s):  
Income Source ◽  
Source Effects ◽  
Mental Budgeting

Practical Approach towards Charitable Giving via Interactive Web Application for Online Philanthropy

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saurabh Mahajan ◽  
Pranati Paidipat ◽  
Rasika Khangarle ◽  
Mona Mulchandani
Keyword(s):  
Web Application ◽  
Charitable Giving ◽  
Practical Approach

Are Political and Charitable Giving Substitutes? Evidence from the United States

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Petrova ◽  
Ricardo Perez-Truglia ◽  
Andrei Simonov ◽  
Pinar Yildirim
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Charitable Giving ◽  
The United States

23. What Influences Charitable Giving?

2020 ◽  
pp. 543-557
Keyword(s):  
Charitable Giving

Victim Number Effects in Charitable Giving: Joint Evaluations Promote Egalitarian Decisions

2021 ◽  
pp. 014616722098273
Author(s):  
Alexander Garinther ◽  
Holly Arrow ◽  
Pooya Razavi
Keyword(s):  
Bayesian Estimation ◽  
Charitable Giving ◽  
Random Order ◽  
Single Individual ◽  
Temporal Window ◽  
Opposite Pattern ◽  
Online Experiments ◽  
Joint Evaluation

Studies of victim number effects in charitable giving consistently find that people care more and help more when presented with an appeal to help an individual compared with an appeal to help multiple people in need. Across three online experiments ( N = 1,348), Bayesian estimation revealed the opposite pattern when people responded to multiple appeals to help targets of different sizes (1, 2, 5, 7, and 12). In this joint evaluation context, participants donated more to larger groups, when appeals were presented in both ascending order (Study 1) and random order (Study 2). The pattern held whether or not participants saw an overview of all appeals at the start of the study and when a single individual was added to the array (Study 3). These results clarify how compassion fade findings typical of separate evaluations may not generalize to contexts in which people encounter multiple appeals within a short temporal window.

Subsidizing Charitable Giving with Rebates or Matching: Further Laboratory Evidence

2006 ◽  
Vol 72 (4) ◽  
pp. 794-807
Author(s):  
Catherine C. Eckel ◽  
Philip J. Grossman
Keyword(s):  
Charitable Giving ◽  
Laboratory Evidence
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document