又是我…询问回避和慈善捐赠的动态

IF 1 4区 经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS Oxford Economic Papers-New Series Pub Date : 2023-06-26 DOI:10.25932/PUBLISHUP-52099
Maximilian Späth
{"title":"又是我…询问回避和慈善捐赠的动态","authors":"Maximilian Späth","doi":"10.25932/PUBLISHUP-52099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Charities typically ask potential donors repeatedly for a donation. These repeated requests might trigger avoidance behaviour. Considering that, this article analyses the impact of offering the option to opt-out of receiving future fundraising asks on charitable giving. In a proposed utility framework, any opt-out option decreases the social pressure to donate. At the same time, an unconditional opt-out option induces feelings of gratitude toward the fundraiser, which may lead to a reciprocal increase in donations. The results of a lab experiment designed to disentangle the two channels show no negative impact of the option to avoid repeated asking for donations. Instead, the full model indicates a positive impact of the reciprocity channel. This finding suggests that it might be beneficial for charities to introduce an unconditional opt-out option during high-frequency fundraising campaigns.","PeriodicalId":48092,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Economic Papers-New Series","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"It’s me again… Ask avoidance and the dynamics of charitable giving\",\"authors\":\"Maximilian Späth\",\"doi\":\"10.25932/PUBLISHUP-52099\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Charities typically ask potential donors repeatedly for a donation. These repeated requests might trigger avoidance behaviour. Considering that, this article analyses the impact of offering the option to opt-out of receiving future fundraising asks on charitable giving. In a proposed utility framework, any opt-out option decreases the social pressure to donate. At the same time, an unconditional opt-out option induces feelings of gratitude toward the fundraiser, which may lead to a reciprocal increase in donations. The results of a lab experiment designed to disentangle the two channels show no negative impact of the option to avoid repeated asking for donations. Instead, the full model indicates a positive impact of the reciprocity channel. This finding suggests that it might be beneficial for charities to introduce an unconditional opt-out option during high-frequency fundraising campaigns.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48092,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oxford Economic Papers-New Series\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-26\",\"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/10.25932/PUBLISHUP-52099\",\"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/10.25932/PUBLISHUP-52099","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

慈善机构通常会反复要求潜在的捐赠者捐款。这些重复的请求可能会引发回避行为。考虑到这一点,本文分析了提供选择不接受未来筹款请求的选项对慈善捐赠的影响。在拟议的公用事业框架中,任何选择退出的选项都会减少捐赠的社会压力。与此同时,无条件选择退出会引发对筹款人的感激之情,这可能会导致捐款的互惠增加。一项旨在解开这两个渠道的实验室实验结果表明,避免重复要求捐款的选择没有负面影响。相反,完整的模型表明了互惠渠道的积极影响。这一发现表明,慈善机构在高频筹款活动中引入无条件退出选项可能是有益的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
It’s me again… Ask avoidance and the dynamics of charitable giving
Charities typically ask potential donors repeatedly for a donation. These repeated requests might trigger avoidance behaviour. Considering that, this article analyses the impact of offering the option to opt-out of receiving future fundraising asks on charitable giving. In a proposed utility framework, any opt-out option decreases the social pressure to donate. At the same time, an unconditional opt-out option induces feelings of gratitude toward the fundraiser, which may lead to a reciprocal increase in donations. The results of a lab experiment designed to disentangle the two channels show no negative impact of the option to avoid repeated asking for donations. Instead, the full model indicates a positive impact of the reciprocity channel. This finding suggests that it might be beneficial for charities to introduce an unconditional opt-out option during high-frequency fundraising campaigns.
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.
期刊最新文献
Endogenous learning in international environmental agreements: the impact of research spillovers and the degree of cooperation International co-movements of inflation, 1851–1913 Banking structural reforms and top income shares: regulate or deregulate? Public- and private-sector jobs: a cross-country perspective Identifying literacy and numeracy skill mismatch in OECD countries using the job analysis method
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1