Government or charity? Preferences for welfare provision by ethnicity

Jones, Kristy

doi:10.1016/j.socec.2016.04.011

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The belief that government spending is effective is positively correlated with imposing the condition on Indigenous Australians ( P < 0.05). One possible reason may be due a perception that government programs such as the Intervention which have imposed restrictions on alcohol in Indigenous communities, have been effective (Jones, ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Paternalism and Ethnicity in Giving

Jones

2017

Economic Record

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates paternalism and ethnicity in giving. In this experiment donors choose to donate to one of three recipient types, varying by ethnicity. In one treatment, donors can impose a costly restriction on their donation. I find a higher proportion of donors choose to donate to a commonly negatively stereotyped recipient (Indigenous Australians) when they are able to act paternalistically. Even when paternalism is costly, almost 60 per cent chose to restrict their donation. Paternalism is also found to be related to recipient type. The results indicate that to increase donations, charities may need to reduce donors’ perceptions of misuse.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Paternalism and Ethnicity in Giving

Jones

2017

Economic Record

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although Eckel and Grossman (1996) initially developed the "real-donation" experiment to measure altruism, scholars from various disciplinary backgrounds have begun implementing similar techniques to examine other topics. To date, these topics have included private charitable giving (Charness et al, 2018;Eckel et al, 2018;Jones, 2017;Umer, 2020); pro-social behavior (Butz & Harbring, 2020;Happ et al, 2015); pro-environmental behavior (Clements et al, 2015); political ideology (Haas & Morton, 2018;van Esch et al, 2021); spiteful pleasure (Luccasen & Grossman, 2016); children's giving and moral reasoning (Ongley et al, 2014); support for diversification in policing (Peyton et al, 2022); policies to address racial discrimination (Haaland & Roth, 2023); and voluntary giving to government agencies 9 (Jones, 2017;Li et al, 2011Li et al, , 2015López-Pérez, et al, 2024;Luccasen & Thomas, 2020). As the number of scholars utilizing this method has expanded, so has the number of variations of the donation task.…”

Section: The Donation Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The donation method: A new behavioral measure for white collar crime?

Constantin,

Reese,

Boyett

2024

Sociology Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To comprehensively grasp, predict, and address the complexity of white collar crime, robust measurement tools are imperative. The burgeoning interdisciplinary interest in this domain has spurred the development of diverse assessment tools aimed at capturing offending behavior and its proxies. In the present paper, we provide an overview of the strengths and weaknesses of several commonly employed measures, including official statistics, victimization surveys, self‐report surveys, and (quasi)experimental measures. Drawing insights from this review, we then introduce a novel behavioral measure: the donation method. Although the task was originally designed to examine behaviors of interest to behavioral economists, we carefully outline strategies to refine and implement the donation method to assess white collar crime, addressing challenges such as task suitability and controlling for respondent behavior. Additionally, we provide a sample task to illustrate how such a tool could be used within this field. We conclude by underlining the appeal of adopting innovative measurement tools like the donation method to advance our collective understanding of white collar crime. By advocating for its widespread adoption and providing guidance for its use, we endeavor to catalyze progress in the field, facilitating unique insights and, potentially, more efficacious strategies for confronting and surmounting the methodological obstacles inherent in studying this elusive form of criminal activity.

show abstract

“…Using a design with a series of donation decisions, Li et al (2011) compare giving to specific US government agencies and private charities with similar missions (e.g., Cancer Research or Parks and Wildlife). Subjects were undergraduate students and donated on average 22% of their endowment to government agencies, significantly lower than the 27% to private charities (see also Jones, 2017, andLuccasen &Thomas, 2020). Li et al (2011) report that organizations are more likely to attract funds if they are perceived as serving an important cause, being trustworthy and efficient, and providing a high quality of service.…”

Section: E X Pl a I N I Ng T H E Act Of Gi V I Ng: T H E De Bat E I N...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(2011) compare giving to specific US government agencies and private charities with similar missions (e.g., Cancer Research or Parks and Wildlife). Subjects were undergraduate students and donated on average 22% of their endowment to government agencies, significantly lower than the 27% to private charities (see also Jones, 2017, and Luccasen & Thomas, 2020). Li et al.…”

Section: Explaining the Act Of Giving: The Debate In The Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Why do people give to their governments? Lab‐in‐the‐field evidence on the role of norms, social information, and political support

López‐Pérez,

Ramirez‐Zamudio,

Cruz‐Martínez

2023

Swiss Political Sci Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although factors leading to selfless acts, such as charitable donations, have been a central concern in political sciences, voluntary donations are among the most atypical and less well‐known public revenue‐raising sources. In this article, we explore which factors influence people's donations to their government. We conduct an artefactual field experiment in Peru where subjects anonymously decide how much of an endowment they freely donate to the government. We run six sessions with a sample that is representative of the taxpayer population of Metropolitan Lima regarding age, gender, and socioeconomic conditions. Our results suggest that donations depend on the subject's support to the government, the average donation by other subjects (social information) and their beliefs about the average donation of others (perceived social norms).

show abstract

Government or charity? Preferences for welfare provision by ethnicity

Cited by 9 publications

References 13 publications

Paternalism and Ethnicity in Giving

Paternalism and Ethnicity in Giving

The donation method: A new behavioral measure for white collar crime?

Why do people give to their governments? Lab‐in‐the‐field evidence on the role of norms, social information, and political support

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About