1. bookVolume 41 (2021): Issue 3 (September 2021)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2353-8414
First Published
30 Mar 2015
Publication timeframe
4 times per year
Languages
English
access type Open Access

Comparing Money and Time Donation: What Do Experiments Tell Us?

Published Online: 22 Oct 2021
Volume & Issue: Volume 41 (2021) - Issue 3 (September 2021)
Page range: 65 - 94
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2353-8414
First Published
30 Mar 2015
Publication timeframe
4 times per year
Languages
English
Abstract

Money donation and time donation, as charitable donations from individuals to organizations, are two forms of prosocial behavior that have been increasingly studied in recent years. Despite the vast amount of research about money and/or time donation, however, only limited work has been done on reviewing the research on these two forms of charitable donations as comparable or parallel entities. In this paper, we seek to help fill this gap by reviewing the existing research. We applied the backwards and forwards snowballing technique to arrive at a review sample of 39 experimental papers published in 2000–2020 that have compared money and time donation, or at least analyzed them as two parallel entities. We examine the issues that are predominantly considered in these experimental papers and summarize the general directions of their findings. We also point out certain gaps in the existing literature and posit some potentially fruitful directions for future experimental research regarding money and time donation.

Keywords

JEL Classification

1. Apinunmahakul, A., & Devlin, R. A. (2008). Social networks and private philanthropy. Journal of Public Economics, 92(1–2): 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2007.07.005.10.1016/j.jpubeco.2007.07.005 Search in Google Scholar

2. Bauer, T. K., Bredtmann, J., & Schmidt, C. M. (2013). Time vs. money — The supply of voluntary labor and charitable donations across Europe. European Journal of Political Economy, 32: 80–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2013.06.006.10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2013.06.006 Search in Google Scholar

3. Bekkers, R. (2010). Who gives what and when? A scenario study of intentions to give time and money. Social Science Research, 39(3): 369–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2009.08.008.10.1016/j.ssresearch.2009.08.008 Search in Google Scholar

4. Bekkers, R, van Ingen, E, de Wit, A, & van Groenou, M. B. (2016). Why do people volunteer? A review of the literature. Retrieved from https://osf.io/pftt3/download on 7/11/2020. Search in Google Scholar

5. Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P (2011). Who gives? A literature review of predictors of charitable giving. Part One: Religion, education, age and socialization. Voluntary Sector Review, 2(3): 337–365. Search in Google Scholar

6. Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P (2010). A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 20(10): 1–50. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0899764010380927. Search in Google Scholar

7. Benz, T. A., Piskulich, J. P., Kim, S., Barry, M., & Havstad, J. C. (2020). Student philanthropy and community engagement: A program evaluation. Innovative Higher Education, 45(4): 17–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-019-09484-8.10.1007/s10755-019-09484-8 Search in Google Scholar

8. Berger, I. E. (2006). The influence of religion on philanthropy in Canada. Voluntas, 17(2): 110–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-006-9007-3.10.1007/s11266-006-9007-3 Search in Google Scholar

9. Biernacki, P. & Waldorf, D. (1981). Snowball sampling: Problems and techniques of chain referral sampling. Sociological Methods and Research, 10(2): 141–163. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F004912418101000205. Search in Google Scholar

10. Bischoff, C., & Hansen, J. (2016). Influencing support of charitable objectives in the near and distant future: Delay discounting and the moderating influence of construal level. Social Influence, 11(4): 217–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2016.1232204.10.1080/15534510.2016.1232204 Search in Google Scholar

11. Borgonovi, F. (2008). Divided we stand, united we fall: Religious pluralism, giving, and volunteering. American Sociological Review, 73(1): 105–128. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F000312240807300106. Search in Google Scholar

12. Brown, A. L., Meer, J., & Williams, J. F. (2019). Why do people volunteer? An experimental analysis of preferences for time donations. Management Science, 65(4): 1455–1468. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2017.2951.10.1287/mnsc.2017.2951 Search in Google Scholar

13. Browne, K. (2005). Snowball sampling: Using social networks to research non-heterosexual women. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1): 47–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000081663.10.1080/1364557032000081663 Search in Google Scholar

14. Choi, N. G. and Chou, R. Jing-Ann (2010). Time and money volunteering among older adults: The relationship between past and current volunteering and correlates of change and stability. Ageing & Society, 30(4): 559–581. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1017/S0144686X0999064X. Search in Google Scholar

15. Choi, N, & Kim, J. (2011). The effect of time volunteering and charitable donations in later life on psychological wellbeing. Ageing & Society, 31(4): 590–610. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1017/S0144686X10001224. Search in Google Scholar

16. Choi, N.G., & DiNitto, D. M. (2012). Predictors of time volunteering, religious giving, and secular giving: Implications for nonprofit organizations. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 39(2): 93–120. Search in Google Scholar

17. Converse, B. A., Risen, J. L., & Carter, T.J. (2012). Investing in karma: When wanting promotes helping. Psychological Science, 23(8): 923–930. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0956797612437248. Search in Google Scholar

18. Courneya, K. S. (1994). Predicting repeated behavior from intention: The issue of scale correspondence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24(7): 580–594. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb00601.x. Search in Google Scholar

19. Devlin, R. A., & Zhao, W. Z. (2017). Are Quebeckers really stingier than other Canadians? An empirical analysis of philanthropy in Canada and how Quebec compares to other provinces. Canadian Journal of Nonprofit and Social Economy Research, 8(1): 20–39. Search in Google Scholar

20. Diop, A, Johnston, T, Le, K. T., & Li, Y. J. (2018). Donating time or money? The effects of religiosity and social capital on civic engagement in Qatar. Social Indicators Research, 138(1): 297–315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1646-9.10.1007/s11205-017-1646-9 Search in Google Scholar

21. Ein-Gar, D., & Levontin, L. (2013). Giving from a distance: Putting the charitable organization at the center of the donation appeal. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(2): 197–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2012.09.002.10.1016/j.jcps.2012.09.002 Search in Google Scholar

22. Faulkner, M., & Romaniuk, J. (2019). Supporters’ perceptions of benefits delivered by different charity activities. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 32(1): 20–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142.2018.1452829.10.1080/10495142.2018.1452829 Search in Google Scholar

23. Feeley, T. H., Anker, A. E., & Aloe, A. M. (2012). The door-in-the-face persuasive message strategy: A meta-analysis of the first 35 years. Communication Monographs, 79(3): 316–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2012.697631.10.1080/03637751.2012.697631 Search in Google Scholar

24. Feldman, N. E. (2010). Time is money: Choosing between charitable activities. American Economic Journal-Economic Policy, 2(1): 103–130. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25760053. Search in Google Scholar

25. Forbes, K. F., & Zampelli, E. M. (2011). An assessment of alternative structural models of philanthropic behavior. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(6): 1148–1167. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0899764010379054. Search in Google Scholar

26. Gertler, A. (2015). Charitable fundraising and smart giving: How can charities use behavioral science to drive donations? Retrieved from https://aarongertler.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Aaron-Gertler-Senior-Thesis-full-bibliography-1.pdf on 7/8/2020. Search in Google Scholar

27. Goktas, V., Erol, E., Altunisik, R., & Ardic, K. (2019). Social marketing in charitable giving intentions: A serial mediation model. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 2019(2): 21–32. http://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2019.2-02.10.21272/mmi.2019.2-02 Search in Google Scholar

28. Grant, A., & Dutton, J. (2012). Beneficiary or benefactor: Are people more prosocial when they reflect on receiving or giving? Psychological Science, 23(9): 1033–1039. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0956797612439424. Search in Google Scholar

29. Green, L., & Walkuski, C. B.(2020). Paying it forward: Does teaching philanthropy change behavior after graduation? Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership, 19(2): 179–200. https://doi.org/10.18666/JNEL-2020-V10-I2-10086.10.18666/JNEL-2020-V10-I2-10086 Search in Google Scholar

30. Handy, F., & Katz, E. (2008). Donating behavior: If time is money, which to give? A preliminary analysis. Journal of Economic Studies, 35(4): 323 — 332. Search in Google Scholar

31. Hill, M. (2012). The relationship between volunteering and charitable giving: Review of evidence. Retrieved from https://www.cass.city.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file0008/366983/wp-volunteering-and-charitable-giving-mh.pdf on 7/11/2020. Search in Google Scholar

32. Jones, K. S. (2006). Giving and volunteering as distinct forms of civic engagement: The role of community integration and personal resources in formal helping. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(2): 249–266. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0899764006287464. Search in Google Scholar

33. Kandaurova, M., & Lee, S. H. (2019). The effects of Virtual Reality (VR) on charitable giving: The role of empathy, guilt, responsibility, and social exclusion. Journal of Business Research, 100: 571–580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.027.10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.027 Search in Google Scholar

34. Karatas, M., & Gurhan-Canli, Z. (2020). A construal level account of the impact of religion and God on prosociality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(7): 1107–1120. Advanced Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0146167219895145. Search in Google Scholar

35. Kim, N. (2014). Advertising strategies for charities promoting consumers’ donation of time versus money. International Journal of Advertising, 33(4); 707–724. https://doi.org/10.2501/IJA-33-4-707-724.10.2501/IJA-33-4-707-724 Search in Google Scholar

36. Klein, N. (2017). Prosocial behavior increases perceptions of meaning in life. Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(4): 354–361. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1080/17439760.2016.1209541. Search in Google Scholar

37. Konrath, S., Ho, M. H., & Zarins, S. (2016). The strategic helper: Narcissism and prosocial motives and behaviors. Current Psychology, 35: 182–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-016-9417-3.10.1007/s12144-016-9417-3 Search in Google Scholar

38. Kou, X., Konrath, S., & Goldstein, T. R. (2019). The relationship among different types of arts engagement, empathy, and prosocial behavior. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 14(4): 481–492. Advance Online Publication. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/aca0000269. Search in Google Scholar

39. Kulow, K., & Kramer, T. (2016). In pursuit of good karma: When charitable appeals to do right go wrong. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(2): 334–353. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucw018.10.1093/jcr/ucw018 Search in Google Scholar

40. Li, H, Xu, C., & McDougle, L. M. (2019). Philanthropy can be learned: A qualitative study of student experiences in experiential philanthropy courses. Philanthropy & Education, 2(2): 29–52. https://doi.org/10.2979/phileduc.2.2.02.10.2979/phileduc.2.2.02 Search in Google Scholar

41. Lilley, A., & Slonim, R. (2014). The price of warm glow. Journal of Public Economics, 114: 58–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2013.12.004.10.1016/j.jpubeco.2013.12.004 Search in Google Scholar

42. Lin, S. C., & Reich, T. (2018). To give or not to give? Choosing chance under moral conflict. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(2): 211–233. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1002/jcpy.1008. Search in Google Scholar

43. Liu, W., & Aaker, J. (2008). The happiness of giving: The time-ask effect. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3): 543–557. https://doi.org/10.1086/588699.10.1086/588699 Search in Google Scholar

44. Li, S., Fu, G., Yuan, J., & Wu, J. (2020). Silver lining of haze: The mixed effect of haze on donation. Frontiers in Psychology, 11: 2042. https://dx.doi.org/10.3389%2Ffpsyg.2020.02042. Search in Google Scholar

45. Lyons, M., McGregor-Lowndes, M., & O’Donoghue, P. (2006). Researching, giving and volunteering in Australia. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 41(4): 385–397. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1839-4655.2006.tb00995.x.10.1002/j.1839-4655.2006.tb00995.x Search in Google Scholar

46. MacDonnell, R., & White, K. (2015). How construals of money versus time impact consumer charitable giving. Journal of Consumer Research, 42(4): 551–563. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucv042.10.1093/jcr/ucv042 Search in Google Scholar

47. Madurapperuma, MAYD, & Kim, K. M. (2020). Sustaining business: A psychological perspective of donation behavior. Sustainability, 12(22): 9355. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229355.10.3390/su12229355 Search in Google Scholar

48. Mantovani, D., de Andrade, L. M., & Negrao, A. (2017). How motivations for CSR and consumer-brand social distance influence consumers to adopt pro-social behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 36: 156–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.01.009.10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.01.009 Search in Google Scholar

49. Marsh, A. A., Kozak, M. N., & Ambady, N. (2007). Accurate identification of fear facial expressions predicts prosocial behavior. Emotion, 7(2): 239–251. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037%2F1528-3542.7.2.239. Search in Google Scholar

50. Marti-Vilar, M., Serano-Pastor, L., & Sala, F. G. (2019). Emotional, cultural and cognitive variables of prosocial behavior. Current Psychology, 38: 912–919. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-0168-9.10.1007/s12144-019-0168-9 Search in Google Scholar

51. Mason, D. P. (2013). Putting charity to the test: A case for field experiments on giving time and money in the nonprofit sector. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42(1): 193–202. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0899764012449518. Search in Google Scholar

52. McDougle, L., McDonald, D., Li, H., McIntyre Miller, W., & Xu, C. (2017). Can philanthropy be taught? Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 46(2): 330–351. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0899764016662355. Search in Google Scholar

53. Michel, G., & Rieunier, S. (2012). Nonprofit brand image and typicality influences on charitable giving. Journal of Business Research, 65(5): 701–707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.04.002.10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.04.002 Search in Google Scholar

54. Monga, A., & Zor, O. (2019). Time versus money. Current Opinion in Psychology, 26: 28–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.04.011.10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.04.011 Search in Google Scholar

55. Mantovani, D., & de Andrade, L. M. (2018). Brand’s CSR influence on consumers’ prosocial behavior in unrelated domains. Brazilian Journal of Marketing, 17(1): 139–149. https://doi.org/10.5585/remark.v17i1.3707.10.5585/remark.v17i1.3707 Search in Google Scholar

56. Nelson, K. M., Schluter, A., & Vance, C. (2018). Distributional preferences and donation behavior among marine resource users in Wakatobi, Indonesia. Ocean & Coastal Management, 162: 34–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2017.09.003.10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2017.09.003 Search in Google Scholar

57. Newman, G. E., & Cain, D. M. (2014). Tainted altruism: When doing some good is evaluated as.worse than doing no good at all. Psychological Science, 25(3): 648–655. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613504785.10.1177/0956797613504785 Search in Google Scholar

58. Olberding, J. C. (2012). Does student philanthropy work? A study of long-term effects of the ‘learning by giving’ approach. Innovative Higher Education, 37(2): 71–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-011-9189-5.10.1007/s10755-011-9189-5 Search in Google Scholar

59. Ottoni-Wilhelm, M., Estell, D. B., & Perdue, N. H. (2014). Role-modeling and conversations about giving in the socialization of adolescent charitable giving and volunteering. Journal of Adolescence, 37(1): 53–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2013.10.010.10.1016/j.adolescence.2013.10.010 Search in Google Scholar

60. Pavey, L., Greitemeyer, T., & Sparks, P. (2011). Highlighting relatedness promotes prosocial motives and behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(7): 905–917. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0146167211405994. Search in Google Scholar

61. Qu, H., Konrath, S., an& Poulin, M. (2020). Which types of giving are associated with reduced mortality risk among older adults? Personality and Individual Differences, 154: 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.109668.10.1016/j.paid.2019.109668 Search in Google Scholar

62. Reed, A., Kay, A., Finnel, S., Aquino, K., & Levy, E. (2016). I don’t want the money, I just want your time: How moral identity overcomes the aversion to giving time to prosocial causes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(3): 435–457. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/pspp0000058. Search in Google Scholar

63. Reed, A., Aquino, K., & Levy, E. (2007). Moral identity and judgments of charitable behaviors. Journal of Marketing, 71(1): 178–193. https://doi.org/10.1509%2Fjmkg.71.1.178. Search in Google Scholar

64. Reinke, S. J. (2003). Making a difference: Does service-learning promote civic engagement in MPA students? Journal of Public Affairs Education, 9, 129–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/15236803.2003.12023582.10.1080/15236803.2003.12023582 Search in Google Scholar

65. Roetzel, P. G. (2019). Information overload in the information age: A review of the literature from business administration, business psychology, and related disciplines with a bibliometric approach and framework development. Business Research, 12: 479–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-018-0069-z.10.1007/s40685-018-0069-z Search in Google Scholar

66. Romani, S., & Grappi, S. (2014). How companies’ good deeds encourage consumers to adopt pro-social behavior. European Journal of Marketing, 48(5–6): 943–963. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1108/EJM-06-2012-0364. Search in Google Scholar

67. Schaltegger, S., Gibassier, D., & Zvezdov, D. (2013). Is environmental management accounting a discipline? A bibliometric literature review. Meditari Accountancy Research, 21(1): 4–31. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-12-2012-0039.10.1108/MEDAR-12-2012-0039 Search in Google Scholar

68. Simmons, W. O., & Emanuele, R. (2004). Does government spending crowd out donations of time and money? Public Finance Review, 32(5): 498–511. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1091142104264364. Search in Google Scholar

69. Slattery, P., Vidgen, R., & Finnegan, P. (2020). Winning heads and hearts? How websites encourage prosocial behavior. Behaviour & Information Technology, 40(9): 933–961. Advance Online Publication. DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2020.1736156.10.1080/0144929X.2020.1736156 Search in Google Scholar

70. Smith, W., & Chang, C. (2002). Shipping the good apples out: A note on contributions of time and money. Economics Bulletin, 10(1): 1–14. Search in Google Scholar

71. Song, D., & Kim, D. H. (2019). I’ll donate money today and time tomorrow: The moderating role of attitude toward nonprofit organizations on donation intention. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing. Advanced Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/nvsm.1659.10.1002/nvsm.1659 Search in Google Scholar

72. Studte, S., Clement, M., Soliman, M., & Boenigk, S. (2019). Blood donors and their changing engagement in other prosocial behaviors. Transfusion, 59(3): 1002–1015. Search in Google Scholar

73. Sun, X., Tang, W., Ye, T., Zhang, Y., Wen, B., & Zhang, L. (2014). Integrated care: A comprehensive bibliometric analysis and literature review. International Journal of Integrated Care, 14: e017. Search in Google Scholar

74. Tiltay, M. A., & Torlak, O. (2020). Similarities and differences of motivations of giving time and money: Giving to individuals versus humanitarian organizations in an emerging market. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 25(1): e1649. https://doi.org/10.1002/nvsm.1649.10.1002/nvsm.1649 Search in Google Scholar

75. Wheeler, R. T. (2009). Nonprofit advertising: Impact of celebrity connection, involvement, and gender on source credibility and intention to volunteer time or donate money. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 21: 80–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/10495140802111984.10.1080/10495140802111984 Search in Google Scholar

76. Wiepking, P., & Bekkers, R. (2012). Who gives? Who gives? A literature review of predictors of charitable giving. Part Two: Gender, family composition and income. Voluntary Sector Review, 3(2): 217–245. https://doi.org/10.1332/204080512X649379.10.1332/204080512X649379 Search in Google Scholar

77. Winterich, K. P., Mittal, V., & Aquino, K. (2013). When does recognition increase charitable behavior? Toward a moral identity-based model. Journal of Marketing, 77(3): 121–134. https://doi.org/10.1509%2Fjm.11.0477. Search in Google Scholar

78. Wohlin, C. (2014). Guidelines for snowballing in systematic literature studies and a replication in software engineering. EASE’14: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, Article No. 38: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/2601248.2601268.10.1145/2601248.2601268 Search in Google Scholar

79. Wong, K., Ong, P., & Zheng, W. (2017). American philanthropy literature review. Retrieved from https://faculty.sites.uci.edu/karnawong/files/2017/10/American-Philanthropy-Literature-Review.pdf on 7/11/2020. Search in Google Scholar

80. Yeomans, M., & Al-Ubaydli, O. (2018). How does fundraising affect volunteering? Evidence from a natural field experiment. Journal of Economic Psychology, 64: 57–72. DOI: 10.1016/j.joep.2017.11.004.10.1016/j.joep.2017.11.004 Search in Google Scholar

81. Zhang, Y., Lin, C. L. and Yang, J. L. (2019). Time or money? The influence of warm and competent appeals on donation intentions. Sustainability, 11(22): 6228. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11226228.10.3390/su11226228 Search in Google Scholar

82. Zupic, I., & Cater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3): 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1094428114562629. Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo