Forecasted vs. Actual Generosity in Image-Concern Interventions

References

• Aaker JL, Akutsu S (2009) Why do people give? The role of identity in giving. J. Consumer Psych. 19(3):267–270.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Akerlof GA, Kranton RE (2000) Economics and identity. Quart. J. Econom. 115:715–753. Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ali SN, Bénabou R (2016) Image versus information: Changing societal norms and optimal privacy. NBER Working Paper No. 22203, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Alpizar F, Carlsson F, Johansson-Stenman O (2008) Anonymity, reciprocity, and conformity: Evidence from voluntary contributions to a national park in Costa Rica. J. Public Econom. 92:1047–1060.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Andreoni J, Bernheim BD (2009) Social image and the 50-50 norm: A theoretical and experimental analysis of audience effects. Econometrica 77:1607–1636.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Andreoni J, Petrie R (2004) Public goods experiments without confidentiality: A glimpse into fund-raising. J. Public Econom. 88:1605–1623.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. 125:625–653.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ariely D, Bracha A, Meier S (2009) Doing good or doing well? Image motivation and monetary incentives in behaving prosocially. Amer. Econom. Rev. 99:544–555.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ashraf N, Field E, Lee J (2014) Household bargaining and excess fertility: An experimental study in Zambia. Amer. Econom. Rev. 104:2210–2237.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baca-Motes K, Brown A, Gneezy A, Keenan EA, Nelson LD (2013) Commitment and behavior change: Evidence from the field. J. Consumer Res. 39:1070–1084.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bem DJ (1972) Self-Perception Theory, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 6 (Academic Press, New York), 1–62.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bénabou R, Tirole J (2006) Incentives and prosocial behavior. Amer. Econom. Rev. 96(5):1652–1678.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berger J (2019) Signaling can increase consumers’ willingness to pay for green products. Theoretical model and experimental evidence. J. Consumer Behav. 18:233–246.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Birke DJ (2020) Anti-bunching: A new test for signaling motives in prosocial behavior. Working paper, University of Chicago, Chicago.Google Scholar
• Bodner R, Prelec D (2003) Self-signaling and diagnostic utility in everyday decision making. Psych. Econom. Decisions 1:26.Google Scholar
• Bosson JK, Swann WB Jr, Pennebaker JW (2000) Stalking the perfect measure of implicit self-esteem: The blind men and the elephant revisited? J. Personality Soc. Psych. 79:631.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bracha A, Heffetz O, Vesterlund L (2009) Charitable giving: The effects of exogenous and endogenous status, Penn State University, University Park, PA.Google Scholar
• Bradler C, Dur R, Neckermann S, Non A (2016) Employee recognition and performance: A field experiment. Management Sci. 62:3085–3099.Link, Google Scholar
• Brody I, Dai H, Saccardo S, Milkman KL, Duckworth A, Patel MS, Gromet D (2023) Targeting behavioral interventions based on baseline motivation increases vaccine uptake. Preprint, submitted February 28, https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ywzja.Google Scholar
• Bryan CJ, Tipton E, Yeager DS (2021) Behavioural science is unlikely to change the world without a heterogeneity revolution. Nature Human Behav. 5(8):980–989.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bryan CJ, Walton GM, Rogers T, Dweck CS (2011) Motivating voter turnout by invoking the self. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108:12653–12656.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bursztyn L, Jensen R (2017) Social image and economic behavior in the field: Identifying, understanding, and shaping social pressure. Annual Rev. Econom. 9:131–153.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bursztyn L, Ferman B, Fiorin S, Kanz M, Rao G (2018) Status goods: Experimental evidence from platinum credit cards. Quart. J. Econom. 133:1561–1595.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Butera L, Metcalfe R, Morrison W, Taubinsky D (2022) Measuring the welfare effects of shame and pride. Amer. Econom. Rev. 112:122–168.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Conway P, Peetz J (2012) When does feeling moral actually make you a better person? Conceptual abstraction moderates whether past moral deeds motivate consistency or compensatory behavior. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 38(7):907–919.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dana J, Cain DM, Dawes RM (2006) What you don’t know won’t hurt me: Costly (but quiet) exit in dictator games. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 100:193–201.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dana J, Weber RA, Kuang JX (2007) Exploiting moral wiggle room: Experiments demonstrating an illusory preference for fairness. Econom. Theory 33:67–80.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DellaVigna S, Linos E (2022) RCTs to scale: Comprehensive evidence from two nudge units. Econometrica 90:81–116.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DellaVigna S, Pope D (2018a) Predicting experimental results: Who knows what? J. Political Econom. 126:2410–2456.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DellaVigna S, Pope D (2018b) What motivates effort? Evidence and expert forecasts. Rev. Econom. Stud. 85:1029–1069.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DellaVigna S, List JA, Malmendier U (2012) Testing for altruism and social pressure in charitable giving. Quart. J. Econom. 127:1–56.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DellaVigna S, Pope D, Vivalt E (2019) Predict science to improve science. Science (1979) 366:428–429.Google Scholar
• DellaVigna S, List JA, Malmendier U, Rao G (2016) Voting to tell others. Rev. Econom. Stud. 84:143–181.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Diener E, Wallbom M (1976) Effects of self-awareness on antinormative behavior. J. Res. Personality 10:107–111.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dimant E, Gesche T (2023) Nudging enforcers: How norm perceptions and motives for lying shape sanctions. PNAS Nexus 2(7):pgad224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ekström M (2012) Do watching eyes affect charitable giving? Evidence from a field experiment. Experiment. Econom. 15:530–546.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Exley CL (2016) Excusing selfishness in charitable giving: The role of risk. Rev. Econom. Stud. 83(2):587–628.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Exley C (2018) Incentives for prosocial behavior: The role of reputations. Management Sci. 64:2460–2471.Link, Google Scholar
• Ferguson R, Kaufmann L, Brown A, de la Piedad Garcia X (2024) Influences of past moral behavior on future behavior: A review of sequential moral behavior studies using meta-analytic techniques. Psych. Bull. 150(6):694.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Filiz-Ozbay E, Ozbay EY (2014) Effect of an audience in public goods provision. Experiment. Econom. 17:200–214.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Franco A, Malhotra N, Simonovits G (2014) Publication bias in the social sciences: Unlocking the file drawer. Science (1979) 345:1502–1505.Google Scholar
• Frederick S (2012) Overestimating others’ willingness to pay. J. Consumer Res. 39(1):1–21.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gerber AS, Green DP, Larimer CW (2008) Social pressure and voter turnout: Evidence from a large-scale field experiment. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 102:33–48.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gerber AS, Huber GA, Fang AH (2023) Voting behavior is unaffected by subtle linguistic cues: Evidence from a psychologically authentic replication. Behav. Public Policy 7(2):380–394.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gerber AS, Huber GA, Biggers DR, Hendry DJ (2016) A field experiment shows that subtle linguistic cues might not affect voter behavior. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 113(26):7112–7117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Glazer A, Konrad KA (1996) A signaling explanation for charity. Amer. Econom. Rev. 86:1019–1028.Google Scholar
• Gneezy A, Gneezy U, Nelson LD, Brown A (2010) Shared social responsibility: A field experiment in pay-what-you-want pricing and charitable giving. Science (1979) 329:325–327.Google Scholar
• Gneezy A, Gneezy U, Riener G, Nelson LD (2012) Pay-what-you-want, identity, and self-signaling in markets. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109(19):7236–7240.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gneezy U, Saccardo S, Serra-Garcia M, van Veldhuizen R (2020) Bribing the self. Games Econom. Behav. 120:311–324.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gneezy A, Imas A, Brown A, Nelson LD, Norton MI (2012) Paying to be nice: Consistency and costly prosocial behavior. Management Sci. 58:179–187.Link, Google Scholar
• Goswami I, Urminsky O (2016) When should the ask be a nudge? The effect of default amounts on charitable donations. J. Marketing Res. 53:829–846.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grossman Z (2015) Self-signaling and social-signaling in giving. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 117:26–39.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grossman Z, Van Der Weele JJ (2017) Self-image and willful ignorance in social decisions. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 15:173–217.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hsee CK (1996) The evaluability hypothesis: An explanation for preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of alternatives. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 67:247–257.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Imas A (2014) Working for the “warm glow”: On the benefits and limits of prosocial incentives. J. Public Econom. 114:14–18.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Imas A, Jung MH, Saccardo S, Vosgerau J (2022) The impact of joint versus separate prediction mode on forecasting accuracy. NBER Working Paper No. 30611, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Jee E, Karing A, Naguib K (2024) Optimal policy with social image concerns: Experimental evidence from deworming. Working paper, University of Chicago, Chicago.Google Scholar
• Jung MH, Moon A, Nelson LD (2020) Overestimating the valuations and preferences of others. J. Experiment. Psych. General 149(6):1193.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jung MH, Perfecto H, Nelson LD (2016) Anchoring in payment: Evaluating a judgmental heuristic in field experimental settings. J. Marketing Res. 53:354–368.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jung MH, Nelson LD, Gneezy A, Gneezy U (2014) Paying more when paying for others. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 107:414.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jung MH, Nelson LD, Gneezy U, Gneezy A (2017) Signaling virtue: Charitable behavior under consumer elective pricing. Marketing Sci. 36:187–194.Link, Google Scholar
• Karing A (2024) Social signaling and childhood immunization: A field experiment in Sierra Leone. Quart. J. Econom. 139(4):2083–2133.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karlan D, List JA (2007) Does price matter in charitable giving? Evidence from a large-scale natural field experiment. Amer. Econom. Rev. 97:1774–1793.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kenny DA, Judd CM (2019) The unappreciated heterogeneity of effect sizes: Implications for power, precision, planning of research, and replication. Psych. Methods 24:578.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kessler JB, Milkman KL (2018) Identity in charitable giving. Management Sci. 64:845–859.Link, Google Scholar
• Kim J-Y, Natter M, Spann M (2009) Pay what you want: A new participative pricing mechanism. J. Marketing 73:44–58.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim J-Y, Natter M, Spann M (2014) Sampling, discounts or pay-what-you-want: Two field experiments. Internat. J. Res. Marketing 31:327–334.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kirgios EL, Chang EH, Levine EE, Milkman KL, Kessler JB (2020) Forgoing earned incentives to signal pure motives. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 117(29):16891–16897.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kitayama S, Karasawa M (1997) Implicit self-esteem in Japan: Name letters and birthday numbers. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 23:736–742.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kraft-Todd G, Yoeli E, Bhanot S, Rand D (2015) Promoting cooperation in the field. Current Opinion Behav. Sci. 3:96–101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kristal AS, Whillans AV, Bazerman MH, Gino F, Shu LL, Mazar N, Ariely D (2020) Signing at the beginning versus at the end does not decrease dishonesty. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 117:7103–7107.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kristensson P, Wästlund E, Söderlund M (2017) Influencing consumers to choose environment friendly offerings: Evidence from field experiments. J. Bus. Res. 76:89–97.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kristofferson K, White K, Peloza J (2014) The nature of slacktivism: How the social observability of an initial act of token support affects subsequent prosocial action. J. Consumer Res. 40:1149–1166.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lacetera N, Macis M (2010) Social image concerns and prosocial behavior: Field evidence from a nonlinear incentive scheme. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 76:225–237.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lakens D (2017) Equivalence tests: A practical primer for t tests, correlations, and meta-analyses. Soc. Psych. Personality Sci. 8:355–362.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lakens D, Scheel AM, Isager PM (2018) Equivalence testing for psychological research: A tutorial. Adv. Methods Practice Psych. Sci. 1:259–269.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leary MR, Kowalski RM (1990) Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psych. Bull. 107:34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Linardi S, McConnell MA (2008) Volunteering and image concerns. Working paper, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA.Google Scholar
• Linos E (2023) Translating behavioral economics evidence into policy and practice. Report, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Harvard Kennedy School, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• List JA (2024) Optimally generate policy-based evidence before scaling. Nature 626(7999):491–499.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meier S (2007) Do subsidies increase charitable giving in the long run? Matching donations in a field experiment. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 5:1203–1222.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Milkman KL, Gromet D, Ho H, Kay JS, Lee TW, Pandiloski P, Duckworth AL (2021a) Megastudies improve the impact of applied behavioural science. Nature 600(7889):478–483.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Milkman KL, Patel MS, Gandhi L, Graci HN, Gromet DM, Ho H, Duckworth AL (2021b) A megastudy of text-based nudges encouraging patients to get vaccinated at an upcoming doctor’s appointment. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 118(20):e2101165118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Munz KP, Jung MH, Alter AL (2020) Name similarity encourages generosity: A field experiment in email personalization. Marketing Sci. 39(6):1071–1091.Link, Google Scholar
• Nuttin JM Jr (1985) Narcissism beyond Gestalt and awareness: The name letter effect. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. 15:353–361.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nuttin JM Jr (1987) Affective consequences of mere ownership: The name letter effect in twelve European languages. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. 17:381–402.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pallak MS, Cummings W (1976) Commitment and voluntary energy conservation. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 2:27–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pelham BW, Mirenberg MC, Jones JT (2002) Why Susie sells seashells by the seashore: Implicit egotism and major life decisions. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 82:469.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Perez-Truglia R, Troiano U (2018) Shaming tax delinquents. J. Public Econom. 167:120–137.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rege M, Telle K (2004) The impact of social approval and framing on cooperation in public good situations. J. Public Econom. 88:1625–1644.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Riener G, Traxler C (2012) Norms, moods, and free lunch: Longitudinal evidence on payments from a Pay-What-You-Want restaurant. J. Socioeconom. 41:476–483.Google Scholar
• Saccardo S, Li CX, Samek A, Gneezy A (2021) Nudging generosity in consumer elective pricing. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 163:91–104.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Saccardo S, Dai H, Han M, Raja N, Vangala S, Croymans D (2022) Scaling nudges: Who moves and how. Preprint, submitted January 20, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3971192.Google Scholar
• Saccardo S, Dai H, Han MA, Vangala S, Hoo J, Fujimoto J (2024) Field testing the transferability of behavioural science knowledge on promoting vaccinations. Nature Human Behav. 8(5):878–890.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schlenker BR (1980) Impression Management (Brooks/Cole, Monterey, CA).Google Scholar
• Schmidt KM, Spann M, Zeithammer R (2015) Pay what you want as a marketing strategy in monopolistic and competitive markets. Management Sci. 61:1217–1236.Link, Google Scholar
• Simmons JP, Nelson LD, Simonsohn U (2013) Life after p-hacking. Preprint, submitted January 22, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2205186.Google Scholar
• Simmons JP, Nelson LD, Simonsohn U (2016) False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psych. Sci. 22(11):1359–1366.Google Scholar
• Simonsohn U, Nelson LD, Simmons JP (2014) p-curve and effect size: Correcting for publication bias using only significant results. Perspect. Psych. Sci. 9:666–681.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Soetevent AR (2011) Payment choice, image motivation and contributions to charity: Evidence from a field experiment. Amer. Econom. J. Econom. Policy 3:180–205.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van der Weele JJ, Von Siemens FA (2020) Bracelets of pride and guilt? An experimental test of self-signaling. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 172:280–291.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yoeli E, Hoffman M, Rand DG, Nowak MA (2013) Powering up with indirect reciprocity in a large-scale field experiment. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110:10424–10429.Crossref, Google Scholar