The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Crowding Out in Blood Donation: Was Titmuss Right?
Abstract
In his seminal 1970 book, The Gift Relationship, Richard Titmuss argued that monetary compensation for donating blood might crowd out the supply of blood donors. To test this\nclaim we carry out a field experiment with three different treatments. In the first treatment subjects are given the opportunity to become blood donors without any compensation. In the second treatment subjects receive a payment of SEK 50 (≈ $7) for becoming blood donors, and in the third treatment subjects can choose between a SEK 50 payment and donating SEK 50 to charity. The results differ markedly between men and women. For men the supply of blood donors is not significantly different among the three experimental groups. For women\nthere is a significant crowding out effect. The supply of blood donors decreases by almost half when a monetary payment is introduced. There is also a significant effect of allowing individuals to donate the payment to charity, and this effect fully counteracts the crowding out effect.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7 · Cited by 26,772
Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior
Miller, K. A., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1988) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2070638 · Cited by 15,312
(2019) · AEA Papers and Proceedings · doi:10.1257/pandp.109.612 · Cited by 10,902
Gender Differences in Preferences
Croson, R., & Gneezy, U. (2009) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.47.2.448 · Cited by 5,694
Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction
Camerer, C. F. (2003) · Cited by 3,722
Incentives and Prosocial Behavior
Bénabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2006) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.96.5.1652 · Cited by 3,357
Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation
Benabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2003) · Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.1111/1467-937x.00253 · Cited by 2,913
Philosophy and Public Affairs: A Philosopher’s Perspective on Government Committees of Inquiry
Warnock, M., & Journal, I. P. (1990) · Irish Philosophical Journal · doi:10.5840/irishphil199071/21 · Cited by 2,576
Pay Enough or Don't Pay at All*
Gneezy, U., & Rustichini, A. (2000) · Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355300554917 · Cited by 2,175
Gneezy, U., & Rustichini, A. (2000) · The Journal of Legal Studies · doi:10.1086/468061 · Cited by 1,816
Cited by
Gender Differences in Preferences
Croson, R., & Gneezy, U. (2009) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.47.2.448 · Cited by 5,694
Incentives and Prosocial Behavior
Bénabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2006) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.96.5.1652 · Cited by 3,357
Doing Good or Doing Well? Image Motivation and Monetary Incentives in Behaving Prosocially
Ariely, D., Bracha, A., & Meier, S. (2009) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.99.1.544 · Cited by 1,753
When and Why Incentives (Don't) Work to Modify Behavior
Gneezy, U., Meier, S., & Rey-Biel, P. (2011) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.25.4.191 · Cited by 1,735
Falk, A., & Kosfeld, M. (2006) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.96.5.1611 · Cited by 1,040
Metadata
- Authors
- Mellström, C., & Johannesson, M.
- Venue
- Journal of the European Economic Association
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2008-06
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 845-863
- ISSN
- 1542-4766 (ISSN-L)
- 1542-4774
- OpenAlex
- W2115615950
- Cited by
- 684
- References
- 30
- FWCI
- 51.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Crowding Out in Blood Donation: Was Titmuss Right? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1162/jeea.2008.6.4.845
- The paper
- Mellström, C., & Johannesson, M. (2008). Crowding Out in Blood Donation: Was Titmuss Right? Journal of the European Economic Association. https://doi.org/10.1162/jeea.2008.6.4.845
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.
