Optimal Design of Default Donations

References

• Adena M, Huck S, Rasul I (2014) Charitable giving and nonbinding contribution-level suggestions: Evidence from a field experiment. Rev. Behav. Econom. 1(3):209–221.Google Scholar
• Akchen YC, Caro F (2026) On size substitution and its role in assortment and inventory planning. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 28(2):624–642.Link, Google Scholar
• Alexander D, Boone C, Lynn M (2021) The effects of tip recommendations on customer tipping, satisfaction, repatronage, and spending. Management Sci. 67(1):146–165.Link, Google Scholar
• Altmann S, Falk A, Heidhues P, Jayaraman R, Teirlinck M (2019) Defaults and donations: Evidence from a field experiment. Rev. Econom. Statist. 101(5):808–826.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Andreoni J (2006) Chapter 18 Philanthropy. Kolm SC, Ythier JM, eds. Handbook of the Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity, vol. 2 (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 1201–1269.Google Scholar
• Athey S, Byambadalai U, Cersosimo M, Koutout K, Nath S (2024) The heterogeneous impact of changes in default gift amounts on fundraising. Preprint, submitted April 5, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4785704.Google Scholar
• Barlow RE, Marshall AW, Proschan F (1963) Properties of probability distributions with monotone hazard rate. Ann. Math. Statist. 34(2):375–389.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bekkers R, Wiepking P (2011) A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit Voluntary Sector Quart. 40(5):924–973.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bergemann D, Castro F, Weintraub G (2022) Third-degree price discrimination versus uniform pricing. Games Econom. Behav. 131:275–291.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blackbaud Institute (2025) Blackbaud institute spotlight: 2024 trends in giving. Accessed December 1, 2025, https://institute.blackbaud.com/resources/2024-trends.Google Scholar
• Blanchet J, Gallego G, Goyal V (2016) A Markov chain approximation to choice modeling. Oper. Res. 64(4):886–905.Link, Google Scholar
• Carpenter J, Holmes J, Matthews PH (2008) Charity auctions: A field experiment. Econom. J. 118(525):92–113.Google Scholar
• Chao M, Fisher G (2022) Self-interested giving: The relationship between conditional gifts, charitable donations, and donor self-interestedness. Management Sci. 68(6):4537–4567.Link, Google Scholar
• Chen DZ, Wang H (2014) New algorithms for facility location problems on the real line. Algorithmica 69:370–383.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen F, Lai G, Xiao W (2016) Provision of incentives for information acquisition: Forecast-based contracts vs. menus of linear contracts. Management Sci. 62(7):1899–1914.Link, Google Scholar
• Conitzer V, Sandholm T (2004) Expressive negotiation over donations to charities. Proc. 5th ACM Conf. Electronic Commerce (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 51–60.Google Scholar
• Croson R, Shang J (2008) The impact of downward social information on contribution decisions. Experiment. Econom. 11:221–233.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Bruyn A, Prokopec S (2013) Opening a donor’s wallet: The influence of appeal scales on likelihood and magnitude of donation. J. Consumer Psych. 23(4):496–502.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Desmet P, Feinberg FM (2003) Ask and ye shall receive: The effect of the appeals scale on consumers’ donation behavior. J. Econom. Psych. 24(3):349–376.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Donkor K (2019) The economic value of norm conformity and menu opt-out costs. Preprint, submitted October 1, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3955553.Google Scholar
• Doob AN, McLaughlin DS (1989) Ask and you shall be given: Request size and donations to a good cause 1. J. Appl. Soc. Psych. 19(12):1049–1056.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Du L, Hu M, Wu J (2022) Contingent stimulus in crowdfunding. Production Oper. Management 31(9):3543–3558.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edwards JT, List JA (2014) Toward an understanding of why suggestions work in charitable fundraising: Theory and evidence from a natural field experiment. J. Public Econom. 114:1–13.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elmachtoub AN, Gupta V, Hamilton ML (2021) The value of personalized pricing. Management Sci. 67(10):6055–6070.Link, Google Scholar
• Feldman M, Fiat A, Golomb I (2016) On voting and facility location. Proc. 2016 ACM Conf. Econom. Comput. (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 269–286.Google Scholar
• Ghosh A, Mahdian M (2008) Charity auctions on social networks. Proc. Nineteenth Annual ACM-SIAM Sympos. Discrete Algorithms (SIAM, Philadelphia), 1019–1028.Google Scholar
• Giving USA Foundation (2025) Giving USA 2025: The annual report on philanthropy for the year 2024. Report, Giving USA, McLean, VA.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(5):829–846.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haggag K, Paci G (2014) Default tips. Amer. Econom. J. Appl. Econom. 6(3):1–19.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hartline JD (2013) Mechanism design and approximation. Accessed December 1, 2025, https://jasonhartline.com/MDnA/.Google Scholar
• Hartline J, Mirrokni V, Sundararajan M (2008) Optimal marketing strategies over social networks. Proc. 17th Internat. Conf. World Wide Web (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 189–198.Google Scholar
• Hassin R, Tamir A (1991) Improved complexity bounds for location problems on the real line. Oper. Res. Lett. 10(7):395–402.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hu M, Li X, Shi M (2015) Product and pricing decisions in crowdfunding. Marketing Sci. 34(3):331–345.Link, Google Scholar
• Hu M, Peng J, Wang R (2024) Default or dare: The impact of defaults on consumer choice, assortment, pricing, and estimation. Preprint, submitted May 1, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4802033.Google Scholar
• Jachimowicz JM, Duncan S, Weber EU, Johnson EJ (2019) When and why defaults influence decisions: A meta-analysis of default effects. Behav. Public Policy 3(2):159–186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lei YM, Jiang ZZ, Zhang D, Zhang R (2023) Joint optimization of pricing and personalized recommendations in online retailing. Preprint, submitted December 21, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4672673.Google Scholar
• Leszczyc PTP, Rothkopf MH (2010) Charitable motives and bidding in charity auctions. Management Sci. 56(3):399–413.Link, Google Scholar
• Light B, Johari R, Weintraub G (2024) Quality selection in two-sided markets: A constrained price discrimination approach. Oper. Res. 72(5):1928–1957.Link, Google Scholar
• Liu Q, Liu X, Balachander S (2021) Crowdfunding project design: Optimal product menu and funding target. Production Oper. Management 30(10):3800–3811.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McCardle KF, Rajaram K, Tang CS (2009) A decision analysis tool for evaluating fundraising tiers. Decision Anal. 6(1):4–13.Link, Google Scholar
• Moon A, VanEpps EM (2023) Giving suggestions: Using quantity requests to increase donations. J. Consumer Res. 50(1):190–210.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nemhauser GL, Wolsey LA, Fisher ML (1978) An analysis of approximations for maximizing submodular set functions—I. Math. Programming 14:265–294.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Özer Ö, Urrea G, Villa S (2024) To earmark or to nonearmark? The role of control, transparency, and warm-glow. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 26(2):739–757.Link, Google Scholar
• Pedraza-Martinez AJ, Stapleton O, Van Wassenhove LN (2011) Field vehicle fleet management in humanitarian operations: A case-based approach. J. Oper. Management 29(5):404–421.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Peng K, Raghavan M, Pierson E, Kleinberg J, Garg N (2024) Reconciling the accuracy-diversity trade-off in recommendations. Proc. ACM Web Conf. 2024 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 1318–1329.Google Scholar
• Procaccia AD, Tennenholtz M (2013) Approximate mechanism design without money. ACM Trans. Econom. Comput. 1(4):1–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reiley D, Samek A (2019) Round giving: A field experiment on suggested donation amounts in public-television fundraising. Econom. Inquiry 57(2):876–889.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rios I, Saban D, Zheng F (2023) Improving match rates in dating markets through assortment optimization. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 25(4):1304–1323.Link, Google Scholar
• Rogerson WP (2003) Simple menus of contracts in cost-based procurement and regulation. Amer. Econom. Rev. 93(3):919–926.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rusmevichientong P, Topaloglu H (2012) Robust assortment optimization in revenue management under the multinomial logit choice model. Oper. Res. 60(4):865–882.Link, Google Scholar
• Schibrowsky JA, Peltier JW (1995) Decision frames and direct marketing offers: A field study in a fundraising context. J. Direct Marketing 9(1):8–16.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schoeffer J, Ritchie A, Naggita K, Monachou F, Finocchiaro J, Juarez M (2023) Online platforms and the fair exposure problem under homophily. Proc. AAAI Conf. Artificial Intelligence, vol. 37 (AAAI, Washington, DC), 11899–11908.Google Scholar
• Shang J, Croson R (2009) A field experiment in charitable contribution: The impact of social information on the voluntary provision of public goods. Econom. J. 119(540):1422–1439.Google Scholar
• Shi P (2022) Optimal match recommendations in two-sided marketplaces with endogenous prices. Proc. 23rd ACM Conf. Econom. Comput. (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 794–794.Google Scholar
• Singhvi D, Singhvi S (2022) Online learning with sample selection bias. Preprint, submitted February 28, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4045779.Google Scholar
• Song Y, Li Z, Sahoo N (2022) Matching returning donors to projects on philanthropic crowdfunding platforms. Management Sci. 68(1):355–375.Link, Google Scholar
• Sumida M, Gallego G, Rusmevichientong P, Topaloglu H, Davis J (2021) Revenue-utility tradeoff in assortment optimization under the multinomial logit model with totally unimodular constraints. Management Sci. 67(5):2845–2869.Link, Google Scholar
• Talluri K, Van Ryzin G (2004) Revenue management under a general discrete choice model of consumer behavior. Management Sci. 50(1):15–33.Link, Google Scholar
• Verhaert GA, Van den Poel D (2011) Improving campaign success rate by tailoring donation requests along the donor lifecycle. J. Interactive Marketing 25(1):51–63.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Von Neumann J, Morgenstern O (1947) Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, 2nd rev. (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Weyant JM, Smith SL (1987) Getting more by asking for less: The effects of request size on donations of charity 1. J. Appl. Soc. Psych. 17(4):392–400.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wilks SS (1938) The large-sample distribution of the likelihood ratio for testing composite hypotheses. Ann. Math. Statist. 9(1):60–62.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhang D (2011) An improved dynamic programming decomposition approach for network revenue management. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 13(1):35–52.Link, Google Scholar