是什么导致了慈善机构的间接厌恶?来自筹款成本变化的实地实验证据

IF 1 4区 经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS
Tobias Cagala, Johannes Rincke, Amanda Tuset Cueva
{"title":"是什么导致了慈善机构的间接厌恶?来自筹款成本变化的实地实验证据","authors":"Tobias Cagala, Johannes Rincke, Amanda Tuset Cueva","doi":"10.1093/oep/gpad021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article explores donors’ aversion to financing charities’ fundraising expenses. We hypothesize that such expenses can signal a charity’s efficiency, or affect the donors’ perception of the impact a donation has on the cause. Using data from a randomized field experiment, we disentangle both effects, differentiating between weakly and strongly committed donors. Among potential donors who are weakly committed to the cause, information on the charity’s efficiency does not affect donation behavior. Signaling an increased impact leaves unaffected the average donation among weakly committed donors, but diminishes their likelihood to give. Regarding strongly committed donors, we find that impact-related information does not affect behavior, but a signal of improved efficiency strongly increases donations along the intensive margin. We conclude that information on fundraising expenses plays little role for weakly committed donors. In contrast, strongly committed donors are averse to financing fundraising expenses mostly due to efficiency concerns.","PeriodicalId":48092,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Economic Papers-New Series","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What drives overhead aversion in charity? Evidence from field-experimental variation in fundraising costs\",\"authors\":\"Tobias Cagala, Johannes Rincke, Amanda Tuset Cueva\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oep/gpad021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This article explores donors’ aversion to financing charities’ fundraising expenses. We hypothesize that such expenses can signal a charity’s efficiency, or affect the donors’ perception of the impact a donation has on the cause. Using data from a randomized field experiment, we disentangle both effects, differentiating between weakly and strongly committed donors. Among potential donors who are weakly committed to the cause, information on the charity’s efficiency does not affect donation behavior. Signaling an increased impact leaves unaffected the average donation among weakly committed donors, but diminishes their likelihood to give. Regarding strongly committed donors, we find that impact-related information does not affect behavior, but a signal of improved efficiency strongly increases donations along the intensive margin. We conclude that information on fundraising expenses plays little role for weakly committed donors. In contrast, strongly committed donors are averse to financing fundraising expenses mostly due to efficiency concerns.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48092,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oxford Economic Papers-New Series\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oxford Economic Papers-New Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpad021\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Economic Papers-New Series","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpad021","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了捐赠者对资助慈善机构筹款费用的厌恶。我们假设,这些费用可以表明慈善机构的效率,或者影响捐赠者对捐赠对慈善事业影响的看法。利用一项随机现场实验的数据,我们将这两种影响区分开来,区分弱捐赠者和强捐赠者。在对慈善事业承诺不足的潜在捐赠者中,慈善机构效率的信息不会影响捐赠行为。影响增加的信号使承诺较弱的捐赠者的平均捐款不受影响,但降低了他们捐款的可能性。关于坚定的捐赠者,我们发现与影响相关的信息不会影响行为,但效率提高的信号会沿着集约边际大幅增加捐赠。我们得出的结论是,关于筹款费用的信息对承诺不足的捐助者几乎没有作用。相比之下,坚定的捐助者主要出于效率考虑,不愿为筹资费用提供资金。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What drives overhead aversion in charity? Evidence from field-experimental variation in fundraising costs
This article explores donors’ aversion to financing charities’ fundraising expenses. We hypothesize that such expenses can signal a charity’s efficiency, or affect the donors’ perception of the impact a donation has on the cause. Using data from a randomized field experiment, we disentangle both effects, differentiating between weakly and strongly committed donors. Among potential donors who are weakly committed to the cause, information on the charity’s efficiency does not affect donation behavior. Signaling an increased impact leaves unaffected the average donation among weakly committed donors, but diminishes their likelihood to give. Regarding strongly committed donors, we find that impact-related information does not affect behavior, but a signal of improved efficiency strongly increases donations along the intensive margin. We conclude that information on fundraising expenses plays little role for weakly committed donors. In contrast, strongly committed donors are averse to financing fundraising expenses mostly due to efficiency concerns.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: Oxford Economic Papers is a general economics journal, publishing refereed papers in economic theory, applied economics, econometrics, economic development, economic history, and the history of economic thought. It occasionally publishes survey articles in addition to original papers. Books are not reviewed, but substantial review articles are considered. The journal occasionally publishes survey articles in addition to original papers, and occasionally publishes special issues or symposia.
×
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