Beliefs, observability and donation revision in charitable giving: evidence from an online experiment

IF 5.1 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED
Guanlin Gao, Xinyan Shi
{"title":"Beliefs, observability and donation revision in charitable giving: evidence from an online experiment","authors":"Guanlin Gao, Xinyan Shi","doi":"10.1017/bpp.2023.36","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This study examines how beliefs interact with heterogeneous donation preferences in determining people's donation decisions and choices of revision and observability. We conducted an online experiment eliciting participants’ first-order beliefs, that is, beliefs about an average donor's contribution, with the opportunity of being recognized. We also provided the opportunity for donation revision to a group of randomly selected participants. Our study results show that people's first-order beliefs are positively correlated with their willingness to donate and their actual donations. Moreover, first-order beliefs also interact with people's heterogeneous donation preferences in jointly determining their decisions of donation revision and observability – their tendency to opt in for public recognition. Donors with low first-order beliefs and high donation preferences are most likely to opt in for recognition, but they are unlikely to revise their donations. Donors with high first-order beliefs and low donation preferences are most likely to revise their donations, but they are less likely to choose to be recognized. Donors with low first-order beliefs and low donation preferences display the lowest tendency toward revision and observability.","PeriodicalId":29777,"journal":{"name":"Behavioural Public Policy","volume":"57 38","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioural Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2023.36","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study examines how beliefs interact with heterogeneous donation preferences in determining people's donation decisions and choices of revision and observability. We conducted an online experiment eliciting participants’ first-order beliefs, that is, beliefs about an average donor's contribution, with the opportunity of being recognized. We also provided the opportunity for donation revision to a group of randomly selected participants. Our study results show that people's first-order beliefs are positively correlated with their willingness to donate and their actual donations. Moreover, first-order beliefs also interact with people's heterogeneous donation preferences in jointly determining their decisions of donation revision and observability – their tendency to opt in for public recognition. Donors with low first-order beliefs and high donation preferences are most likely to opt in for recognition, but they are unlikely to revise their donations. Donors with high first-order beliefs and low donation preferences are most likely to revise their donations, but they are less likely to choose to be recognized. Donors with low first-order beliefs and low donation preferences display the lowest tendency toward revision and observability.
慈善捐赠中的信念、可观察性和捐赠修正:来自在线实验的证据
本研究探讨了信念如何与异质性捐赠偏好相互作用,从而决定人们的捐赠决策以及对修订和可观察性的选择。我们进行了一项在线实验,激发参与者的一阶信念,即对捐赠者平均捐赠额的信念,并使其有机会得到认可。我们还为一组随机抽取的参与者提供了修改捐款的机会。我们的研究结果表明,人们的一阶信念与他们的捐赠意愿和实际捐赠量呈正相关。此外,一阶信念还与人们的异质性捐赠偏好相互影响,共同决定了他们修改捐赠的决定和可观察性--他们选择接受公众认可的倾向。一阶信念低而捐赠偏好高的捐赠者最有可能选择接受认可,但他们不太可能修改自己的捐赠。一阶信念高而捐赠偏好低的捐赠者最有可能修改其捐赠,但他们不太可能选择被认可。低一阶信念和低捐赠偏好的捐赠者对修改和可观察性的倾向最低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
2.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信