Pamala Wiepking | Rotterdam school of Management, Erasmus University (original) (raw)

Papers by Pamala Wiepking

International Journal of Educational Advancement, 2008

Using data from 1,373 households participating in the 2005 Giving in the Netherlands Panel Survey... more Using data from 1,373 households participating in the 2005 Giving in the Netherlands Panel Survey, this paper examines the characteristics of educational donors in comparison with other types of charitable donors and with non-donors. Charitable giving is quite common in the Netherlands, but there is no established higher education advancement profession. Similar to U.S. findings, Dutch educational donors were among the most generous, giving more than other donors did to religion and other noneducational charities. However, educational gifts were much smaller in the Netherlands.

Australasian Marketing Journal (amj), 2010

This article considers what drives donors to leave charitable bequests. Building on theories of c... more This article considers what drives donors to leave charitable bequests. Building on theories of charitable bequest giving, we consider two types of motivations for leaving a bequest:

This article considers what drives donors to leave charitable bequests. Building on theories of c... more This article considers what drives donors to leave charitable bequests. Building on theories of charitable bequest giving, we consider two types of motivations for leaving a bequest:

In the last decades, however, in several western welfare states private responsibility for the pu... more In the last decades, however, in several western welfare states private responsibility for the public good has increased. Governments have cut back public funding for the Third Sector and new modes of funding (e.g. public-private- partnerships, corporate social responsibility, social entrepreneurship) have emerged. Hence, corporate, but as well private philanthropy turned up as intensively discussed topics and started to gain

In philanthropic research, much attention has been given to the impact of the actual costs of giv... more In philanthropic research, much attention has been given to the impact of the actual costs of giving. In this paper we argue that, in addition to actual costs, the perceived costs of giving should be taken into consideration when seeking to understand the incidence and scale of charitable giving. We know from the economic and sociological literature that people differ in their attitudes towards money (Furnham and Argyle 1998; Zelizer 1989) but these findings have largely been overlooked within philanthropic studies. Whilst 'money perceptions' have been mentioned in passing in a number of academic studies (for example , and in some non-academic fundraising literature (notably Rosenberg 1994), attitudes towards money are rarely considered as a key explanatory factor behind the propensity to give and decisions regarding size of gifts. This paper seeks to rectify that situation by focusing on hypotheses that explore the effects of money perceptions on charitable giving. The hypotheses are developed from qualitative data found in existing UK datasets in which the wealthy account for their decision to give or withhold donations. We find that, regardless of the actual financial resources held by the individual, the decision to give and the size of gift are negatively affected by feelings of retention (a careful approach to money) and inadequacy (people who worry about their financial situation). Feeling financial secure positively affects the act of making donations. We conclude that money perceptions are an additional significant variable in explaining incidence and level of charitable donations.

Quality & Quantity, 2011

In this paper we assess overall accuracy in survey self-reports on giving to charitable organizat... more In this paper we assess overall accuracy in survey self-reports on giving to charitable organizations, direction of bias in self-reports, and the influence of this bias on relationships. We compare donations to one specific health charity reported in the Giving in the Netherlands Panel Study 2003 with donations recorded in the database (n = 191). We find that (a) reported donations are significantly higher than recorded donations; (b) reported amounts contributed are correlated very strongly with recorded contributions; (c) differences between amounts reported and amounts recorded are positively related to education, religious affiliation, and the tendency to social desirability, and negatively to household income. This suggests that effects of education are overestimated and effects of income and religious affiliation are underestimated using self-reports on donations rather than archival records.

The authors present an overview of the academic literature on charitable giving based on a litera... more 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. We 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.

We present an overview of the academic literature on philanthropy, divided in two parts: 1. Who g... more We present an overview of the academic literature on philanthropy, divided in two parts: 1. Who gives how much; 2. Why people give. In part 1 we survey the literature on characteristics of individuals and households that are related to giving. In part 2, we identify eight mechanisms as the most important forces that drive giving: (1) awareness of need; (2) solicitation; (3) costs and benefits; (4) altruism; (5) reputation; (6) psychological benefits; values; (8) efficacy. We evaluate the progress in the almost 500 studies we reviewed and suggest directions for future research on philanthropy. (2006b) found that empathy and verbal proficiency affects giving partly through church attendance.

... accurate respondents. Acknowledgements This paper was presented at the 39th Annual Arnova Con... more ... accurate respondents. Acknowledgements This paper was presented at the 39th Annual Arnova Conference November 18-20, Alexandria, VA. ... Accuracy of Self-Reported Donations European Research Network on Philanthropy Working Paper Series 3 1. Why surveys? ...

Voluntas, 2010

We study causes and consequences of financial management in households in the specific case of ch... more We study causes and consequences of financial management in households in the specific case of charitable giving. We test hypotheses using couples in the Giving in the Netherlands Panel Study (n = 1,101). We find that more relationship specific investments lead to deciding on charitable giving as one economic actor. Furthermore, we find that the partner with the highest relative educational resources has most decision making power over charitable donations. Separately deciding couples are smallest charitable donors. Households in which the male partner decides are largest charitable donors when only larger and more structural donations are considered. This can be explained by their more conservative religious denomination. Notre étude porte sur les causes et les conséquences de la gestion financière des ménages pour le cas spécifique des dons caritatifs. Nous testons des hypothèses à travers un panel de quelques couples des Pays-Bas (GINPS) en matière de dons (n = 1,101). Nous trouvons que davantage d’investissements spécifiques relationnels conduisent à prendre en compte le don caritatif en tant qu’acteur économique. En outre, nous trouvons que le conjoint au revenu le plus élevé détient le plus de pouvoir décisionnel quand il s’agit de faire des dons de charité. Les couples qui prennent les décisions séparément sont les donateurs les plus modestes. Lorsque des dons structurels importants sont envisagés, les ménages dans lesquels l’homme prend les décisions sont les donateurs les plus généreux. Une confession religieuse conservatrice peut venir expliquer cette conduite. Wir untersuchen Gründe und Folgen der Verwaltung der Haushaltsfinanzen speziell bezogen auf das Spenden für wohltätige Zwecke. Wir testen Hypothesen an Paaren im Projekt Giving in the Netherlands Panel Study (n = 1,101). Wir finden, dass Paare bei beziehungsspezifischeren Investitionen eine Spendenentscheidung als eine ökonomische Einheit treffen. Außerdem entdecken wir, dass der Partner mit dem höchsten relativen Bildungsniveau die größere Entscheidungsbefugnis über wohltätiges Spenden hat. Paare, wo Partner separat entscheiden, spenden am wenigsten. Haushalte, in denen der männliche Partner entscheidet, sind die größten Spender bei größeren und strukturelleren Spenden. Dies kann mit deren Zugehörigkeit zu konservativeren Glaubensgemeinschaften erklärt werden. Hemos estudiado las causas y las consecuencias de la administración económica de los hogares en el caso específico de las donaciones caritativas. Probamos diversas hipótesis con parejas dentro del Estudio del Panel de las Donaciones en los Países Bajos (n = 1,101). El resultado es que las inversiones específicas de relación llevan a decidir sobre las donaciones caritativas como un actor económico. Asimismo, hemos descubierto que el cónyuge con más recursos educativos tiene más poder de decisión sobre las donaciones caritativas. Las parejas que deciden por separado son donantes de menor envergadura, mientras que los hogares en los que decide el cónyuge masculino son donantes de más envergadura, solo cuando se tienen en cuenta más y mayores donativos estructurales. Esto puede explicarse por su carácter religioso más conservador. 我们就慈善捐助这一具体情况中财务管理方法的原因与后果进行了研究。我们使用 了“荷兰捐助情况的专家小组研究” (n = 1,101) 中的多对配偶进行假设测试。我们发 现在较多的情况中,与(双方)关系相关的投资会导致慈善捐助决定是一个经济行 为。我们还进一步发现,配偶中拥有相对较高教育资源的一位在慈善捐赠中具有最 大的决定权。 双方作出分别决定的那些配偶对,是捐赠量较少的慈善捐赠者。仅 仅在涉及较大型和有组织的慈善捐赠中,那些由男性配偶作出决定的家庭则是捐赠 量较大的慈善捐赠者。这可以用他们较为保守的宗教信仰进行解释。 特定の慈善提供におけるケースでの家計の財務管理の原因と結果について研究す る。 オランダのパネル・スタディ(n = 1,101) では、カップルを使用することによ って仮説を検討する。結果から、特定の投資に関連を持つことによって、経済的 主体として慈善提供が決定づけられることがわかった。相対的に高学歴を持つパ ートナーが慈善貢献について、ほとんどの場合、意志決定を持つことがわかった。 離婚したカップルについては、慈善提供が最も少ないこともわかった。男性のパ ートナーが家計を握っている場合は、多額の構造的な貢献を行い、偽善提供が最 大であった。これは、保守的な宗教団体を見れば明らかになる。 نحن نقوم بدراسة أسباب وعواقب الإدارة المالية في الأسر في حالة محددة من العطاء الخيري. نقوم بإختبار الفرضيات بإستخدام الأزواج في العطاء في فريق دراسة هولندا (ن = (1,101. نجد أن علاقة أكثر الإستثمارات المحددة تؤدي إلى إتخاذ قرار بشأن العطاء الخيري كفاعل إقتصادي واحد. وعلاوة على ذلك نجد أن الشريك الذي لديه أعلى الموارد التعليمية النسبي له معظم السلطة في إتخاذ القرارات خلال جمع التبرعات الخيرية. الأزواج المنفصلون الذين يأخذون القرار هم أصغر المانحين الخيريين. الأسر التي بها الرجل يأخذ القرار هي أكبر المانحين للتبرعات الخيرية عندما يؤخذ في الإعتبار فقط أكبر وأكثر التبرعات الخيريه هيكلية. ويمكن تفسير ذلك من قبل أكثر طائفتهم الدينية المحافظة .

This is the first of two articles in which we present a comprehensive review of the multi-discipl... more This is the first of two articles in which we present a comprehensive review of the multi-disciplinary academic literature on philanthropy, identifying the predictors of charitable giving. For each predictor, we discuss the evidence for the mechanisms that may explain why the predictor is correlated with giving. We conclude with a brief agenda for future research. In this first article we present the evidence on the relationship of giving with religion, education, age, and socialization.

This is the first of two articles in which we present a comprehensive review of the multi-discipl... more This is the first of two articles in which we present a comprehensive review of the multi-disciplinary academic literature on philanthropy, identifying the predictors of charitable giving. For each predictor, we discuss the evidence for the mechanisms that may explain why the predictor is correlated with giving. We conclude with a brief agenda for future research. In this first article we present the evidence on the relationship of giving with religion, education, age, and socialization.

This is the first of two articles in which we present a comprehensive review of the multi-discipl... more This is the first of two articles in which we present a comprehensive review of the multi-disciplinary academic literature on philanthropy, identifying the predictors of charitable giving. For each predictor, we discuss the evidence for the mechanisms that may explain why the predictor is correlated with giving. We conclude with a brief agenda for future research. In this first article we present the evidence on the relationship of giving with religion, education, age, and socialization.

We study causes and consequences of financial management in households in the specific case of ch... more We study causes and consequences of financial management in households in the specific case of charitable giving. We test hypotheses using couples in the Giving in the Netherlands Panel Study (n = 1,101). We find that more relationship specific investments lead to deciding on charitable giving as one economic actor. Furthermore, we find that the partner with the highest relative educational resources has most decision making power over charitable donations. Separately deciding couples are smallest charitable donors. Households in which the male partner decides are largest charitable donors when only larger and more structural donations are considered. This can be explained by their more conservative religious denomination.

Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 2006

In research on giving, methodology is destiny. The volume of donations estimated from sample surv... more In research on giving, methodology is destiny. The volume of donations estimated from sample surveys strongly depends on the length of the questionnaire used to measure giving. By comparing two giving surveys from the Netherlands, the authors show that a short questionnaire on giving not only underestimates the volume of giving but also biases the effects of predictors of giving. Specifically, they find that a very short module leads to an underestimation of the effects of predictors of giving on the amount donated but an overestimation of their effects on the probability of charitable giving. Short survey modules may lead researchers to falsely reject or accept hypotheses on determinants of giving due to underreporting of donations.

Quality & Quantity, 2011

In this paper we assess overall accuracy in survey self-reports on giving to charitable organizat... more In this paper we assess overall accuracy in survey self-reports on giving to charitable organizations, direction of bias in self-reports, and the influence of this bias on relationships. We compare donations to one specific health charity reported in the Giving in the Netherlands Panel Study 2003 with donations recorded in the database (n = 191). We find that (a) reported donations are significantly higher than recorded donations; (b) reported amounts contributed are correlated very strongly with recorded contributions; (c) differences between amounts reported and amounts recorded are positively related to education, religious affiliation, and the tendency to social desirability, and negatively to household income. This suggests that effects of education are overestimated and effects of income and religious affiliation are underestimated using self-reports on donations rather than archival records.

International Journal of Educational Advancement, 2008

Using data from 1,373 households participating in the 2005 Giving in the Netherlands Panel Survey... more Using data from 1,373 households participating in the 2005 Giving in the Netherlands Panel Survey, this paper examines the characteristics of educational donors in comparison with other types of charitable donors and with non-donors. Charitable giving is quite common in the Netherlands, but there is no established higher education advancement profession. Similar to U.S. findings, Dutch educational donors were among the most generous, giving more than other donors did to religion and other noneducational charities. However, educational gifts were much smaller in the Netherlands.

Australasian Marketing Journal (amj), 2010

This article considers what drives donors to leave charitable bequests. Building on theories of c... more This article considers what drives donors to leave charitable bequests. Building on theories of charitable bequest giving, we consider two types of motivations for leaving a bequest:

This article considers what drives donors to leave charitable bequests. Building on theories of c... more This article considers what drives donors to leave charitable bequests. Building on theories of charitable bequest giving, we consider two types of motivations for leaving a bequest:

In the last decades, however, in several western welfare states private responsibility for the pu... more In the last decades, however, in several western welfare states private responsibility for the public good has increased. Governments have cut back public funding for the Third Sector and new modes of funding (e.g. public-private- partnerships, corporate social responsibility, social entrepreneurship) have emerged. Hence, corporate, but as well private philanthropy turned up as intensively discussed topics and started to gain

In philanthropic research, much attention has been given to the impact of the actual costs of giv... more In philanthropic research, much attention has been given to the impact of the actual costs of giving. In this paper we argue that, in addition to actual costs, the perceived costs of giving should be taken into consideration when seeking to understand the incidence and scale of charitable giving. We know from the economic and sociological literature that people differ in their attitudes towards money (Furnham and Argyle 1998; Zelizer 1989) but these findings have largely been overlooked within philanthropic studies. Whilst 'money perceptions' have been mentioned in passing in a number of academic studies (for example , and in some non-academic fundraising literature (notably Rosenberg 1994), attitudes towards money are rarely considered as a key explanatory factor behind the propensity to give and decisions regarding size of gifts. This paper seeks to rectify that situation by focusing on hypotheses that explore the effects of money perceptions on charitable giving. The hypotheses are developed from qualitative data found in existing UK datasets in which the wealthy account for their decision to give or withhold donations. We find that, regardless of the actual financial resources held by the individual, the decision to give and the size of gift are negatively affected by feelings of retention (a careful approach to money) and inadequacy (people who worry about their financial situation). Feeling financial secure positively affects the act of making donations. We conclude that money perceptions are an additional significant variable in explaining incidence and level of charitable donations.

Quality & Quantity, 2011

In this paper we assess overall accuracy in survey self-reports on giving to charitable organizat... more In this paper we assess overall accuracy in survey self-reports on giving to charitable organizations, direction of bias in self-reports, and the influence of this bias on relationships. We compare donations to one specific health charity reported in the Giving in the Netherlands Panel Study 2003 with donations recorded in the database (n = 191). We find that (a) reported donations are significantly higher than recorded donations; (b) reported amounts contributed are correlated very strongly with recorded contributions; (c) differences between amounts reported and amounts recorded are positively related to education, religious affiliation, and the tendency to social desirability, and negatively to household income. This suggests that effects of education are overestimated and effects of income and religious affiliation are underestimated using self-reports on donations rather than archival records.

The authors present an overview of the academic literature on charitable giving based on a litera... more 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. We 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.

We present an overview of the academic literature on philanthropy, divided in two parts: 1. Who g... more We present an overview of the academic literature on philanthropy, divided in two parts: 1. Who gives how much; 2. Why people give. In part 1 we survey the literature on characteristics of individuals and households that are related to giving. In part 2, we identify eight mechanisms as the most important forces that drive giving: (1) awareness of need; (2) solicitation; (3) costs and benefits; (4) altruism; (5) reputation; (6) psychological benefits; values; (8) efficacy. We evaluate the progress in the almost 500 studies we reviewed and suggest directions for future research on philanthropy. (2006b) found that empathy and verbal proficiency affects giving partly through church attendance.

... accurate respondents. Acknowledgements This paper was presented at the 39th Annual Arnova Con... more ... accurate respondents. Acknowledgements This paper was presented at the 39th Annual Arnova Conference November 18-20, Alexandria, VA. ... Accuracy of Self-Reported Donations European Research Network on Philanthropy Working Paper Series 3 1. Why surveys? ...

Voluntas, 2010

We study causes and consequences of financial management in households in the specific case of ch... more We study causes and consequences of financial management in households in the specific case of charitable giving. We test hypotheses using couples in the Giving in the Netherlands Panel Study (n = 1,101). We find that more relationship specific investments lead to deciding on charitable giving as one economic actor. Furthermore, we find that the partner with the highest relative educational resources has most decision making power over charitable donations. Separately deciding couples are smallest charitable donors. Households in which the male partner decides are largest charitable donors when only larger and more structural donations are considered. This can be explained by their more conservative religious denomination. Notre étude porte sur les causes et les conséquences de la gestion financière des ménages pour le cas spécifique des dons caritatifs. Nous testons des hypothèses à travers un panel de quelques couples des Pays-Bas (GINPS) en matière de dons (n = 1,101). Nous trouvons que davantage d’investissements spécifiques relationnels conduisent à prendre en compte le don caritatif en tant qu’acteur économique. En outre, nous trouvons que le conjoint au revenu le plus élevé détient le plus de pouvoir décisionnel quand il s’agit de faire des dons de charité. Les couples qui prennent les décisions séparément sont les donateurs les plus modestes. Lorsque des dons structurels importants sont envisagés, les ménages dans lesquels l’homme prend les décisions sont les donateurs les plus généreux. Une confession religieuse conservatrice peut venir expliquer cette conduite. Wir untersuchen Gründe und Folgen der Verwaltung der Haushaltsfinanzen speziell bezogen auf das Spenden für wohltätige Zwecke. Wir testen Hypothesen an Paaren im Projekt Giving in the Netherlands Panel Study (n = 1,101). Wir finden, dass Paare bei beziehungsspezifischeren Investitionen eine Spendenentscheidung als eine ökonomische Einheit treffen. Außerdem entdecken wir, dass der Partner mit dem höchsten relativen Bildungsniveau die größere Entscheidungsbefugnis über wohltätiges Spenden hat. Paare, wo Partner separat entscheiden, spenden am wenigsten. Haushalte, in denen der männliche Partner entscheidet, sind die größten Spender bei größeren und strukturelleren Spenden. Dies kann mit deren Zugehörigkeit zu konservativeren Glaubensgemeinschaften erklärt werden. Hemos estudiado las causas y las consecuencias de la administración económica de los hogares en el caso específico de las donaciones caritativas. Probamos diversas hipótesis con parejas dentro del Estudio del Panel de las Donaciones en los Países Bajos (n = 1,101). El resultado es que las inversiones específicas de relación llevan a decidir sobre las donaciones caritativas como un actor económico. Asimismo, hemos descubierto que el cónyuge con más recursos educativos tiene más poder de decisión sobre las donaciones caritativas. Las parejas que deciden por separado son donantes de menor envergadura, mientras que los hogares en los que decide el cónyuge masculino son donantes de más envergadura, solo cuando se tienen en cuenta más y mayores donativos estructurales. Esto puede explicarse por su carácter religioso más conservador. 我们就慈善捐助这一具体情况中财务管理方法的原因与后果进行了研究。我们使用 了“荷兰捐助情况的专家小组研究” (n = 1,101) 中的多对配偶进行假设测试。我们发 现在较多的情况中,与(双方)关系相关的投资会导致慈善捐助决定是一个经济行 为。我们还进一步发现,配偶中拥有相对较高教育资源的一位在慈善捐赠中具有最 大的决定权。 双方作出分别决定的那些配偶对,是捐赠量较少的慈善捐赠者。仅 仅在涉及较大型和有组织的慈善捐赠中,那些由男性配偶作出决定的家庭则是捐赠 量较大的慈善捐赠者。这可以用他们较为保守的宗教信仰进行解释。 特定の慈善提供におけるケースでの家計の財務管理の原因と結果について研究す る。 オランダのパネル・スタディ(n = 1,101) では、カップルを使用することによ って仮説を検討する。結果から、特定の投資に関連を持つことによって、経済的 主体として慈善提供が決定づけられることがわかった。相対的に高学歴を持つパ ートナーが慈善貢献について、ほとんどの場合、意志決定を持つことがわかった。 離婚したカップルについては、慈善提供が最も少ないこともわかった。男性のパ ートナーが家計を握っている場合は、多額の構造的な貢献を行い、偽善提供が最 大であった。これは、保守的な宗教団体を見れば明らかになる。 نحن نقوم بدراسة أسباب وعواقب الإدارة المالية في الأسر في حالة محددة من العطاء الخيري. نقوم بإختبار الفرضيات بإستخدام الأزواج في العطاء في فريق دراسة هولندا (ن = (1,101. نجد أن علاقة أكثر الإستثمارات المحددة تؤدي إلى إتخاذ قرار بشأن العطاء الخيري كفاعل إقتصادي واحد. وعلاوة على ذلك نجد أن الشريك الذي لديه أعلى الموارد التعليمية النسبي له معظم السلطة في إتخاذ القرارات خلال جمع التبرعات الخيرية. الأزواج المنفصلون الذين يأخذون القرار هم أصغر المانحين الخيريين. الأسر التي بها الرجل يأخذ القرار هي أكبر المانحين للتبرعات الخيرية عندما يؤخذ في الإعتبار فقط أكبر وأكثر التبرعات الخيريه هيكلية. ويمكن تفسير ذلك من قبل أكثر طائفتهم الدينية المحافظة .

This is the first of two articles in which we present a comprehensive review of the multi-discipl... more This is the first of two articles in which we present a comprehensive review of the multi-disciplinary academic literature on philanthropy, identifying the predictors of charitable giving. For each predictor, we discuss the evidence for the mechanisms that may explain why the predictor is correlated with giving. We conclude with a brief agenda for future research. In this first article we present the evidence on the relationship of giving with religion, education, age, and socialization.

This is the first of two articles in which we present a comprehensive review of the multi-discipl... more This is the first of two articles in which we present a comprehensive review of the multi-disciplinary academic literature on philanthropy, identifying the predictors of charitable giving. For each predictor, we discuss the evidence for the mechanisms that may explain why the predictor is correlated with giving. We conclude with a brief agenda for future research. In this first article we present the evidence on the relationship of giving with religion, education, age, and socialization.

This is the first of two articles in which we present a comprehensive review of the multi-discipl... more This is the first of two articles in which we present a comprehensive review of the multi-disciplinary academic literature on philanthropy, identifying the predictors of charitable giving. For each predictor, we discuss the evidence for the mechanisms that may explain why the predictor is correlated with giving. We conclude with a brief agenda for future research. In this first article we present the evidence on the relationship of giving with religion, education, age, and socialization.

We study causes and consequences of financial management in households in the specific case of ch... more We study causes and consequences of financial management in households in the specific case of charitable giving. We test hypotheses using couples in the Giving in the Netherlands Panel Study (n = 1,101). We find that more relationship specific investments lead to deciding on charitable giving as one economic actor. Furthermore, we find that the partner with the highest relative educational resources has most decision making power over charitable donations. Separately deciding couples are smallest charitable donors. Households in which the male partner decides are largest charitable donors when only larger and more structural donations are considered. This can be explained by their more conservative religious denomination.

Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 2006

In research on giving, methodology is destiny. The volume of donations estimated from sample surv... more In research on giving, methodology is destiny. The volume of donations estimated from sample surveys strongly depends on the length of the questionnaire used to measure giving. By comparing two giving surveys from the Netherlands, the authors show that a short questionnaire on giving not only underestimates the volume of giving but also biases the effects of predictors of giving. Specifically, they find that a very short module leads to an underestimation of the effects of predictors of giving on the amount donated but an overestimation of their effects on the probability of charitable giving. Short survey modules may lead researchers to falsely reject or accept hypotheses on determinants of giving due to underreporting of donations.

Quality & Quantity, 2011

In this paper we assess overall accuracy in survey self-reports on giving to charitable organizat... more In this paper we assess overall accuracy in survey self-reports on giving to charitable organizations, direction of bias in self-reports, and the influence of this bias on relationships. We compare donations to one specific health charity reported in the Giving in the Netherlands Panel Study 2003 with donations recorded in the database (n = 191). We find that (a) reported donations are significantly higher than recorded donations; (b) reported amounts contributed are correlated very strongly with recorded contributions; (c) differences between amounts reported and amounts recorded are positively related to education, religious affiliation, and the tendency to social desirability, and negatively to household income. This suggests that effects of education are overestimated and effects of income and religious affiliation are underestimated using self-reports on donations rather than archival records.