A Literature Review of Empirical Studies of Philanthropy: Eight Mechanisms That Drive Charitable Giving
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
The authors present an overview of the academic literature on charitable giving based on a literature review of more than 500 articles. They structure their review around the central question of why people donate money to charitable organizations. They identify eight mechanisms as the most important forces that drive charitable giving: (a) awareness of need; (b) solicitation; (c) costs and benefits; (d) altruism; (e) reputation; (f) psychological benefits; (g) values; (h) efficacy. These mechanisms can provide a basic theoretical framework for future research explaining charitable giving.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Various other considerations, such as reputational concerns and ingroup favoritism, may also explain observed differences in morally relevant behavior.
“Various other considerations, such as reputational concerns and ingroup favoritism, may also explain observed differences in morally relevant behavior [16, 17].”
From The amoral atheist? A cross-national examination of cultural, motivational, and cognitive antecedents of disbelief, and their implications for morality (2021) · cites this paper as [17]
Cites
Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving
Andreoni, J. (1990) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2234133 · Cited by 5,825 · see citing works
Compliance without pressure: The foot-in-the-door technique.
Freedman, J. L., & Fraser, S. C. (1966) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0023552 · Cited by 1,637 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Compliance with the first request makes people feel helpful, which creates a pressure to comply with the second, larger request (Freedman & Fraser, 1996; Rittle, 1981).”
BackgroundSocial exclusion decreases prosocial behavior
Twenge, J. M., Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Ciarocco, N. J., & Bartels, J. M. (2007) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.56 · Cited by 1,271 · see citing works
Normative explanations of helping behavior: a critique, proposal, and empirical test.
Schwartz, S. H. (1973) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/0022-1031(73)90071-1 · Cited by 763 · see citing works
List, J. A., & Lucking‐Reiley, D. (2002) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/324392 · Cited by 560 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…is a likely explanation for the effects of leadership donations and seed money that have been studied extensively by economists (Andreoni & Petrie, 2004; Bac & Bag, 2003; Chen et al., 2006; Landry et al., 2006; List & Lucking-Reiley, 2002; List & Rondeau, 2003; Potters, Sefton, & Vesterlund, 2005).”
BackgroundThe Scrooge Effect: Evidence that mortality salience increases prosocial attitudes and behavior
Jonas, E., Schimel, J., Greenberg, J., & Pyszczynski, T. (2002) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/014616702236834 · Cited by 420 · see citing works
Perceptual determinants of nonprofit giving behavior
Sargeant, A., Ford, J. B., & West, D. C. (2006) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2005.04.006 · Cited by 331 · see citing works
Karremans, J. C., Van Lange, P. A. M., & Holland, R. W. (2005) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167205274892 · Cited by 158 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Kraut (1973) found that if a canvasser labeled donors to one charity as “charitable” but did not make such a comment to other donors, a consecutive fundraising campaign was more successful among those who had been labeled charitable.”
BackgroundWidening the appeal of charity
Sargeant, A., Ford, J., & West, D. C. (2000) · International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing · doi:10.1002/nvsm.123 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2011) · Voluntary Sector Review · doi:10.1332/204080511x6087712 · Cited by 457 · see citing works
Self-citationBeyond sacrificial harm: a two-dimensional model of utilitarian psychology
Kahane, G., Everett, J. A. C., Earp, B. D., Caviola, L., Faber, N. S., Crockett, M. J., & Savulescu, J. (2018) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/rev0000093 · Cited by 434 · see citing works
Geographical differences in subjective well-being predict extraordinary altruism
Brethel-Haurwitz, K. M., & Marsh, A. A. (2014) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797613516148 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Guo, Q., Sun, P., Cai, M., Zhang, X., & Song, K. (2019) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2019.02.006 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Organizational Factors Affecting Charitable Giving in the Environmental Nonprofit Context
Leardini, C., Rossi, G., & Landi, S. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12218947 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Lee, S. J., Paas, L., & Ahn, H. S. (2024) · International Journal of Market Research · doi:10.1177/14707853241261248 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
“However, continuous exposure to negative emotions or information may lead to emotional fatigue or compassion fatigue, where individuals become less responsive to emotional appeals due to the overwhelming amount of negative information (Bekkers & Wiepking, 2011).”
- Authors
- Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P.
- Affiliations
- Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Bekkers, René
- Venue
- Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2010-09-10
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 924-973
- ISSN
- 0094-0607 (ISSN-L)
- 0899-7640
- 1552-7395
- OpenAlex
- W2143389784
- Cited by
- 1,503
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 111 · 2025: 161 · 2024: 112 · 2023: 128 · 2022: 116 · 2021: 136 · 2020: 130 · 2019: 108 · 2018: 88 · 2017: 107 · 2016: 76 · 2015: 70 · 2014: 74 · 2013: 41 · 2012: 24
- FWCI
- 89.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- research.vu.nl
- Locations
- Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly (publishedVersion)
- VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- John Templeton Foundation
- Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (451-04-110)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Nonprofit Sector and Volunteering
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Blood donation and transfusion practices
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting
- Keywords
- charitable giving, philanthropy, solicitation, altruism, organizational reputation, personal values
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
