Discussion Paper No. 96
November 4, 2021
God Does Not Play Dice, but Do We?
Author:
Abstract:
When do we cooperate and why? This question concerns one of the most persistent divides between "theory and practice", between predictions from game theory and results from experimental studies. For about 15 years, theoretical analyses predict completely-mixed "behavior" strategies, i.e. strategic randomization rendering "when" and "why" questions largely moot, while experimental analyses seem to consistently identify pure strategies, suggesting long-run interactions are deterministic. Reanalyzing 145,000 decisions from infinitely repeated prisoner's dilemma experiments, and using data-mining techniques giving pure strategies the best possible chance, we conclude that subjects play semi-grim behavior strategies similar to those predicted by theory.
Keywords:
C72; C73; C92; D12;
JEL-Classification:
Download:
Discussion Paper No. 86
Online Fundraising, Self-Image, and the Long-Term Impact of Ask Avoidance
Author:
Abstract:
We provide the first field evidence for the role of pure self-image, independent of social image, in charitable giving. In an online fundraising campaign for a social youth project run on an opera ticket booking platform we document how individuals engage in self-deception to preserve their self-image. In addition, we provide evidence on stark adverse long-run effects of the fundraising campaign for ticket sales. "Avoiding the ask," opera customers who faced more insistent online fundraising buy fewer tickets in the following season. Our results suggest that fundraising management should not decide in isolation about their campaigns, even if very successful. Rather broader operational concerns have to be considered.
Keywords:
online fundraising; quasi-experiment; self-image;
JEL-Classification:
Download:
Discussion Paper No. 54
Testing Consumer Theory: Evidence From a Natural Field Experiment
Author:
Abstract:
We present evidence from a natural field experiment designed to shed light on whether individual behavior is consistent with a neoclassical model of utility maximization subject to budget constraints. We do this through the lens of a field experiment on charitable giving. We find that the behavior of at least 80% of individuals, on both the extensive and intensive margins, can be rationalized within a standard neoclassical choice model in which individuals have preferences, defined over own consumption and their contribution towards the charitable good, satisfying the axioms of revealed preference.
Keywords:
natural field experiment; revealed preference;
JEL-Classification:
Download:
Discussion Paper No. 16
November 3, 2021
Matching Donations Without Crowding Out?
Author:
Abstract:
Is there a way of matching donations that avoids crowding out? We introduce a novel matching method where the matched amount is allocated to a different project, present some simple theoretical considerations that predict reduced crowding out or crowding in (depending on the degree of substitutability between the two projects) and present evidence from a large- scale natural field experiment and a laboratory experiment. Similar to findings in the literature, conventional matching for the same project results in partial crowding out in the field experiment and, as predicted, crowding out is reduced under the novel matching scheme. The lab experiment provides more fine-tuned evidence for the change in crowding and yields further support for the theory: the novel matching method works best when the two projects are complements rather than substitutes.
Keywords:
charitable giving; matched fundraising; natural field experiment;
JEL-Classification: