Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,218

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Donations to Charity as Purchase Incentives: How Well They Work May Depend on What You Are Trying to Sell

Open access
Strahilevitz, Michal, Myers, John G.·1998·Journal of Consumer Research
DOI 10.1086/209519
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article focuses on the bundling of products with promised contributions to charity. Two lab experiments and one field study are conducted that compare the effectiveness of promised donations to charity in promoting “practical necessities” (e.g., a box of laundry detergent) to their effectiveness in promoting “frivolous luxuries” (e.g., a hot fudge sundae). The results suggest that charity incentives are more effective in promoting frivolous products than in promoting practical products. This research extends prior work on the effects of bundling complementary positive outcomes into the domain of affect-based complementarity with product-charity bundles.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/209519

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Strahilevitz, M., & Myers, J. G.
Venue
Journal of Consumer Research
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
1998-03
Volume
24
Issue
4
Pages
434-446
ISSN
  • 0093-5301 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5277
DOI
10.1086/209519
OpenAlex
W1983638567
Cited by
1,218
References
1
FWCI
29.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.