Hostname: page-component-7b9c58cd5d-7g5wt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-16T13:38:09.863Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Can you spare some change for charity? Experimental evidence on verbal cues and loose change effects in a Dictator Game

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2025

David Fielding  and
Stephen Knowles
David Fielding*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New Zealand
Stephen Knowles
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New Zealand
*
david.fielding@otago.ac.nz
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We use a simple laboratory experiment to measure the effect on altruism of (i) whether the participants’ choices are presented verbally or non-verbally, and (ii) whether the participants have a large amount of loose change. We find strong evidence for the first effect and weaker evidence for the second. These effects may explain some of the variation in the average level of generosity found in different Dictator Game results.

Keywords

Charitable givingDictator GamePower of askingLoose change effects

JEL classification

D64: Altruism • Philanthropy • Intergenerational Transfers C91: Laboratory, Individual Behavior
Type
Original Paper
Information
Experimental Economics , Volume 18 , Issue 4 , December 2015 , pp. 718 - 730
Copyright
Copyright © 2014 Economic Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-014-9424-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

References

Andreoni, J, & Rao, JM (2011). The power of asking: how communication affects selfishness, empathy, and altruism. Journal of Public Economics, 95(7–8), 513–520. 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.12.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreoni, J, Rao, JM, & Trachtman, H (2011). Avoiding the ask: A field experiment on altruism, empathy, and charitable giving, New York: Mimeo 10.3386/w17648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benz, M, & Meier, S (2008). Do people behave in experiments as in the field? Evidence from donations. Experimental Economics, 11(3), 268–281 1151.91390 10.1007/s10683-007-9192-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, A. L., Meer, J., & Williams, J. F. (2013). Why do people volunteer? An experimental analysis of preferences for time donations. NBER working paper 19066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlsson, F, He, H, & Martinsson, P (2013). Easy come, easy go. The role of windfall money in lab and field experiments. Experimental Economics, 16, 190–207. 10.1007/s10683-012-9326-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dana, J, Cain, DM, & Dawes, RM (2006). What you don’t know won’t hurt me: Costly (but quiet) exit in dictator games. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100, 193–201. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.10.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dana, J, Weber, RA, & Kuang, JX (2007). Exploiting moral wiggle room: experiments demonstrating an illusory preference for fairness. Economic Theory, 33, 67–80 1121.91327 2335841 10.1007/s00199-006-0153-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diamond, WD, & Noble, SM (2001). Defensive response to charitable direct mail solicitations. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 15(3), 2–12. 10.1002/dir.1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Etang, A, Fielding, D, & Knowles, S (2012). Giving to Africa and perceptions of poverty. Journal of Economic Psychology, 33(4), 819–832. 10.1016/j.joep.2012.03.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fielding, D., & Knowles, S. (2013). Can you spare some change for charity? Experimental evidence on verbal cues and loose change effects in a dictator game. University of Otago Department of Economics Working Paper 1318.Google Scholar
Gazzola, V, Aziz-Zadeh, L, & Keysers, C (2006). Empathy and the somatotopic auditory mirror system in humans. Current Biology, 16(18), 1824–1829 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD28Xps1OnsrY%3D 10.1016/j.cub.2006.07.072 16979560CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gottfried, MA, & Johnson, EL (2006). Solicitation and donation: An econometric evaluation of alumni generosity in higher education. International Journal of Educational Advancement, 8(4), 268–281. 10.1057/palgrave.ijea.2150034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heath, C, & Soll, J (1996). Mental budgeting and consumer decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 23(1), 40–52. 10.1086/209465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohler, E, Keysers, C, Umiltá, MA, Fogassi, L, Gallese, V, & Rizzolatti, G (2002). Hearing sounds, understanding actions: Action representation in mirror neurons. Science, 297(5582), 846–848 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38XlvV2jsb0%3D 10.1126/science.1070311 12161656 2002Sci...297..846KCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Landry, CE, Lange, A, List, JA, Price, MK, & Rupp, NG (2006). Toward an understanding of the economics of charity: evidence from a field experiment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(2), 747–782. 10.1162/qjec.2006.121.2.747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leslie, LL, & Ramey, G (1988). Donor behaviour and voluntary support for higher education institutions. Journal of Higher Education, 59(2), 115–132. 10.2307/1981689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
List, J, Berrens, R, Bohara, A, & Kerkvilet, J (2004). Examining the role of social isolation on stated preferences. American Economic Review, 94, 741–752. 10.1257/0002828041464614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meer, J (2011). Brother, can you spare a dime? Peer pressure in charitable solicitation. Journal of Public Economics, 95(7–8), 926–941. 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.11.026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meer, J, & Rosen, HS (2011). The ABCs of charitable solicitation. Journal of Public Economics, 95(5–6), 363–371. 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.07.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mishra, H, Mishra, A, & Nayakankuppam, D (2006). A bias for the whole. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(4), 541–549. 10.1086/500484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raghubir, P, & Srivastava, J (2009). The denomination effect. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(4), 701–713. 10.1086/599222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinstein, D, & Riener, G (2012). Decomposing desert and tangibility effects in a charitable giving experiment. Experimental Economics, 15, 229–240. 10.1007/s10683-011-9298-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schervish, PG, & Havens, JJ (1997). Social participation and charitable giving A multivariate analysis. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 8(3), 235–260. 10.1007/BF02354199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M (2008). Origins of human communication, Boston: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tonin, M., & Vlassopoulos, M. (2013). Sharing one’s fortune? An experimental study on earned income and giving, IZA Discussion Paper No. 7294.Google Scholar
Van Diepen, M, Donkers, B, & Franses, PH (2009). Does irritation induced by charitable direct mailings reduce donations?. International Journal of Marketing Research, 26(3), 180–188. 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2009.03.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Diepen, M, Donkers, B, & Franses, PH (2009). Dynamic and competitive effects of direct mailings: a charitable giving approach. Journal of Marketing Research, 46(1), 120–133. 10.1509/jmkr.46.1.120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vandoros, S (2013). My five pounds are not as good as yours, so I will spend them. Experimental Economics, 16(4), 546–559. 10.1007/s10683-013-9351-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yörük, BK (2009). How responsive are charitable donors to requests to give?. Journal of Public Economics, 93(9–10), 1111–1117. 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2009.06.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Fielding and Knowles supplementary material

Appendix A-C
Download Fielding and Knowles supplementary material(File)
File 19.8 KB