[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ukc/ukcedp/0924.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does category reporting increase donations to charity? A signalling game approach

Author

Listed:
  • Edward Cartwright
  • Amrish Patel
Abstract
Many charities report donations using categories. We question whether such category reporting increases donations in a signalling game where a donor is either generous or not generous. Conditions are derived under which category reporting will increase giving or decrease giving. Category reporting will increase giving if the probability a donor is generous is low and/or donor preferences depend a lot on type.

Suggested Citation

  • Edward Cartwright & Amrish Patel, 2009. "Does category reporting increase donations to charity? A signalling game approach," Studies in Economics 0924, School of Economics, University of Kent.
    • Handle: RePEc:ukc:ukcedp:0924
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.kent.ac.uk/economics/repec/0924.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amihai Glazer & Kai A. Konrad, 2008. "A Signaling Explanation for Charity," Springer Books, in: Roger D. Congleton & Kai A. Konrad & Arye L. Hillman (ed.), 40 Years of Research on Rent Seeking 2, pages 713-722, Springer.
    2. Harbaugh, William T., 1998. "What do donations buy?: A model of philanthropy based on prestige and warm glow," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 269-284, February.
    3. 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.
    4. Harbaugh, William T, 1998. "The Prestige Motive for Making Charitable Transfers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(2), pages 277-282, May.
    5. Benny Moldovanu & Aner Sela & Xianwen Shi, 2007. "Contests for Status," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(2), pages 338-363.
    6. Andreoni, James & Petrie, Ragan, 2004. "Public goods experiments without confidentiality: a glimpse into fund-raising," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(7-8), pages 1605-1623, July.
    7. Arieh Gavious & Benny Moldovanu & Aner Sela, 2002. "Bid Costs and Endogenous Bid Caps," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(4), pages 709-722, Winter.
    8. Yeon-Koo Che & Ian L. Gale, 2008. "Caps on Political Lobbying," Springer Books, in: Roger D. Congleton & Kai A. Konrad & Arye L. Hillman (ed.), 40 Years of Research on Rent Seeking 2, pages 337-345, Springer.
    9. Kyung Baik, 2008. "Contests with group-specific public-good prizes," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 30(1), pages 103-117, January.
    10. Soetevent, Adriaan R., 2005. "Anonymity in giving in a natural context--a field experiment in 30 churches," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(11-12), pages 2301-2323, December.
    11. Edward Cartwright & Amrish Patel, 2010. "Public Goods, Social Norms, and Naïve Beliefs," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 12(2), pages 199-223, April.
    12. Drazen, Allan & Limao, Nuno & Stratmann, Thomas, 2007. "Political contribution caps and lobby formation: Theory and evidence," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(3-4), pages 723-754, April.
    13. Adriaan Soetevent, 2005. "Anonymity in giving in a natural context-a field experiment in thirty churches," Framed Field Experiments 00198, The Field Experiments Website.
    14. Kevin F. McCardle & Kumar Rajaram & Christopher S. Tang, 2009. "A Decision Analysis Tool for Evaluating Fundraising Tiers," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 4-13, March.
    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. Cartwright, Edward & Patel, Amrish, 2013. "How category reporting can improve fundraising," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 73-90.
    2. Lambarraa, Fatima & Riener, Gerhard, 2015. "On the norms of charitable giving in Islam: Two field experiments in Morocco," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 69-84.
    3. Astrid Dannenberg & Olof Johansson‐Stenman & Heike Wetzel, 2022. "Status for the good guys: An experiment on charitable giving," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(2), pages 721-740, April.
    4. Feine, Gregor & Groh, Elke D. & von Loessl, Victor & Wetzel, Heike, 2023. "The double dividend of social information in charitable giving: Evidence from a framed field experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    5. Emel Filiz-Ozbay & Erkut Y. Ozbay, 2010. "Social Image in Public Goods Provision with Real Effort," Koç University-TUSIAD Economic Research Forum Working Papers 1026, Koc University-TUSIAD Economic Research Forum.
    6. Emel Filiz-Ozbay & Erkut Ozbay, 2014. "Effect of an audience in public goods provision," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(2), pages 200-214, June.
    7. Britta Butz & Christine Harbring, 2021. "The Effect of Disclosing Identities in a Socially Incentivized Public Good Game," Games, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-31, April.
    8. Fatima Lambarraa & Gerhard Riener, 2012. "On the Norms of Charitable Giving in Islam: A Field Experiment," Courant Research Centre: Poverty, Equity and Growth - Discussion Papers 111, Courant Research Centre PEG.
    9. David Reinstein & Gerhard Riener, 2012. "Reputation and influence in charitable giving: an experiment," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(2), pages 221-243, February.
    10. Jingping Li & Yohanes E. Riyanto, 2017. "Category Reporting In Charitable Giving: An Experimental Analysis," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(1), pages 397-408, January.
    11. Guttman, Joel M. & Goette, Lorenz, 2015. "Reputation, volunteering, and trust: Minimizing reliance on taste-based explanations," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 375-386.
    12. Anya Savikhin & Roman Sheremeta, 2010. "Visibility of Contributions and Cost of Information: An Experiment on Public Goods," Working Papers 10-22, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    13. Reinstein, David & Hugh-Jones, David, 2010. "The Benefit of Anonymity in Public Goods Games," Economics Discussion Papers 2933, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
    14. Fang, Xing, 2022. "Why we hide good deeds? The selfless and anonymous donation behavior in crowdfunding," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    15. Thomas Aronsson & Olof Johansson-Stenman & Ronald Wendner, 2019. "Charity, Status, and Optimal Taxation: Welfarist and Paternalist Approaches," Graz Economics Papers 2019-04, University of Graz, Department of Economics.
    16. Anya Savikhin Samek & Roman Sheremeta, 2014. "Recognizing contributors: an experiment on public goods," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(4), pages 673-690, December.
    17. Dan Ariely & Anat Bracha & Stephan Meier, 2009. "Doing Good or Doing Well? Image Motivation and Monetary Incentives in Behaving Prosocially," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(1), pages 544-555, March.
    18. Wang, Xia & Tong, Luqiong, 2015. "Hide the light or let it shine? Examining the factors influencing the effect of publicizing donations on donors’ happiness," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 418-424.
    19. Attanasi, Giuseppe & Dessí, Roberta & Moisan, Frédéric & Robertson, Donald, 2024. "Public goods and future audiences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 224(C), pages 580-597.
    20. Britta Butz & Christine Harbring, 2022. "Tipping for charity: a field experiment in charitable giving on free walking tours," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 92(5), pages 781-808, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Public good; charity; category reporting; signalling.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods

    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:ukc:ukcedp:0924. 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: Dr Anirban Mitra (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.kent.ac.uk/economics/ .

    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.