Why Do People Volunteer? An Experimental Analysis of Preferences for Time Donations

References

• Andreoni J (1989) Giving with impure altruism: Applications to charity and Ricardian equivalence. J. Political Econom. 97(6):1447–1458.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Andreoni J (2006) Philanthropy. Kolm S-C, Ythier JM, eds. Handbook on the Economics of Giving, Reciprocity, and Altruism, Vol. 2. Handbooks in Economics 23 (North-Holland, Amsterdam), 1201–1269.Google Scholar
• Andreoni J, Payne A (2011) Is crowding out due entirely to fundraising? Evidence from a panel of charities. J. Public Econom. 95(5–6): 334–343.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Andreoni J, Rao JM, Trachtman H (2017) Avoiding the ask: A field experiment on altruism, empathy, and charitable giving. J. Political Econom. 125(3):625–653.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Andreoni J, Gale WG, Scholz JK (1996) Charitable contributions of time and money Working paper, University of California, San Diego, San Diego.Google Scholar
• Apinunmahakul A, Barham V, Devlin RA (2009) Charitable giving, volunteering, and the paid labor market. Nonprofit Voluntary Sector Quart. 38(1):77–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Araujo FA, Carbone E, Conell-Price L, Dunietz MW, Jaroszewicz A, Landsman R, Lamé D, Vesterlund L, Wang SW, Wilson AJ (2016) The slider task: An example of restricted inference on incentive effects. J. Econom. Sci. Assoc. 2(1):1–12.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bauer TK, Bredtmann J, Schmidt CM (2013) Time vs. money: The supply of voluntary labor and charitable donations across Europe. Eur. J. Political Econom. 32:80–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Breman A (2011) Give more tomorrow: Two field experiments on altruism and intertemporal choice. J. Public Econom. 95(11–12): 1349–1357.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brown AL, Meer J, Williams JF (2013) Why do people volunteer? An experimental analysis of preferences for time donations. Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Brown AL, Meer J, Williams JF (2016) Social distance and quality rating in charity choice. J. Behavioral Experiment. Econom. 66:9–15.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brown E, Lankford H (1992) Gifts of money and gifts of time: Estimating the effects of tax prices and available time. J. Public Econom. 47(3):321–341.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camerer CF (1988) Gifts as economic signals and social symbols. Amer. J. Sociol. 94(Suppl.):S180–S214.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camerer CF (2005) Three cheers—psychological, theoretical, empirical—for loss aversion. J. Marketing Res. 42(2):129–133.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University (2010) The 2010 study of high net worth philanthropy: Issues driving charitable activities among affluent households. Report, https://philanthropy.iupui.edu/files/research/2010baml_highnetworthphilanthropy.pdf.Google Scholar
• Corporation for National & Community Service (2011) Volunteering in America. 2011 research highlights. Report, https://www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/livable-communities/learn/civic/volunteering-in-america-research-highlights-2011-aarp.pdf.Google Scholar
• Crumpler H, Grossman PJ (2008) An experimental test of warm glow giving. J. Public Econom. 92(5–6):1011–1021.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeJarnette P (2017) Effort momentum. Working paper, National Taiwan University, Taipei City.Google Scholar
• DellaVigna S, List JA, Malmendier U (2012) Testing for altruism and social pressure in charitable giving. Quart. J. Econom. 127(1): 1–56.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Duncan B (1999) Modeling charitable contributions of time and money. J. Public Econom. 72(2):213–242.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ellingsen T, Johannesson M (2009) Time is not money. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 72(1):96–102.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ellingsen T, Johannesson M (2011) Conspicuous generosity. J. Public Econom. 95(9–10):1131–1143.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Feldman NE (2010) Time is money: Choosing between charitable activities. Amer. Econom. J. Econom. Policy 2(1):103–130.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fielding D, Knowles S (2015) Can you spare some change for charity? Experimental evidence on verbal cues and loose change effects in a dictator game. Experiment. Econom. 18(4):718–730.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fischbacher U (2007) z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Experiment. Econom. 10(2):171–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fisman R, Kariv S, Markovits D (2007) Individual preferences for giving. Amer. Econom. Rev. 97(5):1858–1876.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Frank DH, Smith C (2016) Will employees pay to work for a more socially responsible organization? Acad. Management Proc. 2016(1):13413.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gill D, Prowse V (2012) A structural analysis of disappointment aversion in real effort competition. Amer. Econom. Rev. 102(1): 469–503.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Giving USA Foundation (2011) Giving USA 2011: The annual report on philanthropy for the year 2010 executive summary, June 20, https://www.issuelab.org/resource/giving-usa-2011-the-annualreport-on-philanthropy-for-the-year-2010-executive-summary.html.Google Scholar
• Greiner B (2015) Subject pool recruitment procedures: organizing experiments with ORSEE. J. Econom. Sci. Assoc. 1(1):114–125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harbaugh WT (1998a) The prestige motive for making charitable transfers. Amer. Econom. Rev. 88(2):277–282.Google Scholar
• Harbaugh WT (1998b) What do donations buy? A model of philanthropy based on prestige and warm glow. J. Public Econom. 67(2):269–284.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Imas A (2014) Working for the “warm glow”: On the benefits and limits of prosocial incentives. J. Public Econom. 114(June):14–18.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kessler JB (2017) Announcements of support and public good provision. Amer. Econom. Rev. 107(12):3760–3787.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Knowles S, Servatka M (2014) Transaction costs, the opportunity cost of time and inertia in charitable giving. Working paper, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.Google Scholar
• Lacetera N, Macis M (2010) Do all material incentives for pro-social activities backfire? The response to cash and non-cash incentives for blood donations. J. Econom. Psych. 31(4):738–348.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Landry CE, Lange A, List JA, Price MK, Rupp NG (2006) Toward an understanding of the economics of charity: Evidence from a field experiment. Quart. J. Econom. 121(2):747–782.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li J, Riyanto YE (2017) Category reporting in charitable giving: An experimental analysis. Econom. Inquiry 55(1):397–408.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lilley A, Slonim R (2014) Microfoundations and experimental evidence on the price of warm glow. J. Public Econom. 114:58–74.Crossref, Google Scholar
• List JA, Shaikh AM, Xu Y (2016) Multiple hypothesis testing in experimental economics. NBER Working Paper 21875, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Meer J (2011) Brother, can you spare a dime? Peer pressure in charitable solicitation. J. Public Econom. 95(7–8):926–941.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meer J (2013) The habit of giving. Econom. Inquiry 51(4):2002–2017.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meer J, Rigbi O (2013) The effects of transactions costs and social distance: Evidence from a field experiment. B.E. J. Econom. Anal. Policy 13(1):271–296.Google Scholar
• Meer J, Rosen HS (2011) The ABCs of charitable solicitation. J. Public Econom. 95(5–6):363–371.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Null C (2011) Warm glow, information, and inefficient charitable giving. J. Public Econom. 95(5–6):455–465.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Olivola CY (2011) When noble means hinder noble ends: The benefits and cost of a preference for martyrdom in altruism. Oppenheimer DM, Olivola CY, eds. The Science of Giving: Experimental Approaches to the Study of Charity (Psychology Press, New York), 49–64.Google Scholar
• Plott CR, Zeiler K (2005) The willingness to pay—Willingness to accept gap, the “endowment effect,” subject misconceptions, and experimental procedures for eliciting valuations. Amer. Econom. Rev. 95(3):530–545.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Prendergast C, Stole L (2001) The non-monetary nature of gifts. Eur. Econom. Rev. 45(10):1793–1810.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Preston AE (1989) The nonprofit worker in a for-profit world. J. Labor Econom. 7(4):438–463.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rasul I, Huck S (2010) Transactions costs in charitable giving: Evidence from two field experiments. B.E. J. Econom. Anal. Policy 10(1):1935–1682.Google Scholar
• Reinstein D, Riener G (2012) Decomposing desert and tangibility effects in a charitable giving experiment. Experiment. Econom. 15(1):229–240.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ruhm CJ, Borkoski C (2003) Compensation in the nonprofit sector. J. Human Resources 38(4):992–1021.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Samek AS, Sheremeta RM (2014) Recognizing contributors: An experiment on public goods. Experiment. Econom. 17(4):673–690.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Samuelson W, Zeckhauser R (1988) Status quo bias in decision making. J. Risk Uncertainty 1(1):7–59.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tonin M, Vlassopoulos M (2010) Disentangling the sources of pro-socially motivated effort: A field experiment. J. Public Econom. 94(11–12):1086–1092.Crossref, Google Scholar
• United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (2010) American time use survey (ATUS). Accessed September 7, 2014, https://www.bls.gov/tus/datafiles_2010.htm.Google Scholar
• Waldfogel J (1993) The deadweight loss of Christmas. Amer. Econom. Rev. 83(5):1328–1336.Google Scholar
• Waldfogel J (2002) Gifts, cash, and stigma. Econom. Inquiry 40(3):415–427.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wilcox NT (2006) Theories of learning in games and heterogeneity bias. Econometrica 74(5):1271–1292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Xiao E, Houser D (2015) Sign me up! A model and field experiment on volunteering. (April 10), https://ssrn.com/abstract=2378038.Google Scholar