Hostname: page-component-7b9c58cd5d-nzzs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-17T07:37:34.862Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Introduction to field experiments in economics with applications to the economics of charity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2025

John A. List
John A. List*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, The University of Chicago, 1126 East 59th Street, Chicago, IL 60636, USA
*
e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This special issue highlights an empirical approach that has increasingly grown in prominence in the last decade—field experiments. While field experiments can be used quite generally in economics—to test theories’ predictions, to measure key parameters, and to provide insights into the generalizability of empirical results— this special issue focuses on using field experiments to explore questions within the economics of charity. The issue contains six distinct field experimental studies that investigate various aspects associated with the economics of charitable giving. The issue also includes a fitting tribute to one of the earliest experimenters to depart from traditional lab methods, Peter Bohm, who curiously has not received deep credit or broad acclaim. Hopefully this issue will begin to rectify this oversight.

Keywords

Field experimentEconomics of charity

JEL classification

H: Public Economics C93: Field Experiments
Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Economics , Volume 11 , Issue 3: Field experiments in economics with applications to the economics of charity , September 2008 , pp. 203 - 212
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 Economic Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alpizar, F., Carlsson, F., & Johansson-Stenman, O. (2008, forthcoming). Does context matter more for hypothetical than for actual contributions? Evidence from a natural field experiment. Experimental Economics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreoni, J. (2006). Philanthropy. In Kolm, S.-C., & Ythier, J. M. (Eds.), Handbook of giving, reciprocity and altruism. North Holland: Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Andreoni, J. (2007). Charitable giving. In Durlauf, S. N., & Blume, L. E. (Eds.), The new palgrave dictionary of economics (2nd ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Andreoni, J., & Payne, A. (2007). Crowding out both sides of the philanthropy market: evidence from a panel of charities. Working Paper.Google Scholar
Benz, M., & Meier, S. (2008, forthoming). Do people behave in experiments as in real life? - evidence from donations. Experimental Economics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohm, P. (1972). Estimating the demand for public goods: an experiment. European Economic Review, 3(2), 111–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breman, A. (2007). Give more tomorrow - a field experiment on inter-temporal choice in charitable giving. Working Paper.Google Scholar
Carpenter, J., Harrison, G., & List, J. (2005). Field experiments in economics: an introduction. In Carpenter, J., Harrison, G., & List, J. (Eds.), Field experiments in economics. Greenwich, CT and London: JAI/Elsevier.Google Scholar
Carpenter, J., Connolly, C., & Myers, C. (2008, forthcoming). Altruistic behavior in a representative dictator experiment. Experimental Economics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croson, R., & Shang, J. (2005). Field experiments in charitable contribution: the impact of social influence on the voluntary provision of public goods. Working paper, Wharton.Google Scholar
Croson, R., & Shang, J. (2008, forthcoming). The impact of downward social information on contribution decisions. Experimental Economics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cummings, R., Elliott, S., Harrison, G., & Murphy, J. (1997). Are hypothetical referenda incentive compatible? Journal of Political Economy, 105(3), 609–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, D., Millner, E., & Reilly, R. (2005). Subsidy schemes and charitable contributions: a closer look. Experimental Economics, 8(2), 85–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckel, C., & Grossman, P. (1996). Altruism in anonymous dictator games. Games and Economic Behavior, 16(2), 181–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckel, C., & Grossman, P. (2003). Rebates and matching: does how we subsidize charitable contributions matter? Journal of Public Economics, 8(3), 681–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckel, C., & Grossman, P. (2008, forthcoming). Subsidizing charitable contributions: a field test comparing matching and rebate subsidies. Experimental Economics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falk, A. (2007). Gift-exchange in the field. Econometrica, 75(5), 1501–1511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frey, B., & Meier, S. (2004). Social comparisons and pro-social behavior: testing ‘conditional cooperation’ in a field experiment. American Economic Review, 94(5), 1717–1722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, G., & List, J. (2004). Field experiments. Journal of Economic Literature, 42(4), 1009–1055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, E., McCabe, K., & Smith, V. (1996). Social distance and other-regarding behavior in dictator games. American Economic Review, 86(3), 653–660.Google Scholar
Karlan, D., & List, J. (2007). Does price matter in charitable giving? Evidence from a large-scale natural field experiment. American Economic Review, 97(5), 1774–1793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landry, C., Lange, A., List, J., Price, M., & Rupp, N. (2006). Toward an understanding of the economics of charity: evidence from a field experiment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(2), 747–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levitt, S., & List, J. (2007). What do laboratory experiments measuring social preferences tell us about the real world? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(2), 153–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levitt, S., & List, J. (2008). Field experiments in economics: the past, the present, and the future. Working paper, University of Chicago.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
List, J. A. (2004). Young, selfish, and male: field evidence of social preferences. Economical Journal, 114(492), 121–149.Google Scholar
List, J., & Lucking-Reiley, D. (2002). Effects of seed money and refunds on charitable giving: experimental evidence from a university capital campaign. Journal of Political Economy, 110(1), 215–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
List, J., & Reiley, D. (2007). Field experiments in economics. In Durlauf, S. N., & Blume, L. E. (Eds.), The new palgrave dictionary of economics (2nd ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
List, J., Berrens, R., Bohara, A., & Kerkvliet, J. (2004). Examining the role of social isolation on stated preferences. American Economic Review, 94(3), 741–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rondeau, D., & List, J. (2008, forthcoming). Exploring the demand side of charitable fundraising: evidence from field and laboratory experiments. Experimental Economics.Google Scholar
Yates, F. (1975). The early history of experimental design. In Srivastava, J. N. (Ed.), A survey of statistical design and linear model (pp. 581–592). North-Holland: Amsterdam.Google Scholar