The Effects of Similarity on Charitable Giving in Donor–Donor Dyads: A Systematic Literature Review
- 66 Downloads
Giving circles and alumni campaigns are popular forms of nonprofit fund-raising practice that may lead to positive peer effects that promote charitable giving among similar individuals. However, do individuals always give more in the presence of similar others? Most research finds a positive social influence among similar individuals in donor–solicitor and donor–recipient dyads. However, in donor–donor dyads, the effects of social influence on charitable giving are mixed. Individuals’ giving can be positively or negatively affected by other donors’ giving. This systematic literature review (35 eligible studies) investigates how individuals’ charitable giving is affected by the giving of others. Its major contribution is to extend the previous literature by proposing a new mechanism of decision making in charitable giving through an important psychological construct (similarity). It also identifies five critical factors that could help to explain inconsistent findings of similarity effects on two measures of charitable giving (giving propensity and giving amount). It also contributes to identifying a literature gap, suggesting future research directions, and providing important implications to fund-raising practice.
KeywordsSocial influence Conformity Charitable donations Peer influence Similarity
Yuan Tian was supported by the doctoral dissertation grant from the Research Department of Lilly Family School of Philanthropy at Indiana University for this study, and Sara Konrath was supported by grants from the John Templeton Foundation (#47993 and 57942) and from the Corporation for National and Community Service (Grant # 17REHIN002) while writing this paper.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Aristotle, (2004). Rhetoric. Whitefish: Kessinger Publishing.Google Scholar
- Bekkers, R. (2010). George gives to geology Jane: The name letter effect and incidental similarity cues in fundraising. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 15(2), 172–180.Google Scholar
- Booth, A., Sutton, A., & Papaioannou, D. (2016). Systematic approaches to a successful literature review. London: Sage.Google Scholar
- Croson, R., Handy, F., & Shang, J. (2010). Gendered giving: The influence of social norms on the donation behavior of men and women. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 15(2), 199–213.Google Scholar
- Croson, R., & Shang, J. (2005). Field experiments in charitable contribution: The impact of social influence on the voluntary provision of public goods. Knowledge@ Wharton.Google Scholar
- Giving USA. (2019). The annual report on philanthropy for the year 2018.Google Scholar
- Havens, J. J., O’Herlihy, M. A., & Schervish, P. G. (2006). Charitable giving: How much, by whom, to what, and how. In W. Powell & R. Steinberg (Eds.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook (Vol. 2, pp. 542–567). Yale Press.Google Scholar
- Heldt, T. (2005). Conditional cooperation in the field: cross-country skiers’ behavior in Sweden. Borlänge: Department of Economics and Society, Dalarna University.Google Scholar
- Hysenbelli, D., Rubaltelli, E., & Rumiati, R. (2013). Others’ opinions count, but not all of them: Anchoring to ingroup versus outgroup members’ behavior in charitable giving. Judgment & Decision Making, 8(6), 678–690.Google Scholar
- Klinowski, D. (2015). Reluctant donors and their reactions to social information. Working paper.Google Scholar
- Shang, J., Croson, R., & Reed, A. (2007). “I” give, but “we” give more: The impact of identity and the mere social information effect on donation behavior. NA-Advances in Consumer Research, 34, 93–126.Google Scholar
- Tian, Y. (2018). Can too much similarity to the self backfire? The effects of different levels of similarity on charitable donations. ProQuest Dissertation.Google Scholar