1. Did the Ice Bucket Challenge Drain the Philanthropic Reservoir?
Adam Zindler, Marc Rauckhorst, and Daniel Meneses
Department of Economics Texas A&M University
1. Background and Motivation
The ALS Ice Bucket Challenge
2. Objective and Questions
• Will total charitable giving remain the same before
and after a campaign?
• Is there a rise in giving towards the targeted charity?
• Is there a crowding out effect in the charitable giving
market?
3. Experimental Design
• We find a significant increase in giving to the targeted charity after an
implementation of a campaign.
• Total philanthropic reservoir (charity budget) remained the same
before and after treatment.
• Non-targeted charities suffered in contributions compared to their
baseline treatment, indicating a crowding out effect.
4. Results
5. Conclusion
6. References
Anderoni, (1990). “Impure Altruism and Donation to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving,” The
Economic Journal, Volume 100, Issue 401, 464-477.
Eckel, C. C., and Grossman, P. J. (1996). “Altruism in Anonymous Dictator Games, Games and Economic
Behavior 16, 181-191.
Eckel, Grossman, and Johnston (2004). “An Experimental test of the Crowding Out Hypothesis. Journal of
Public Economics 89 1553-1560
Ice Bucket Challenge. (n.d.). Retrieved January 20, 2015, from http://www.alsa.org/fight-als/ice-bucket-
challenge.html
ERL
• The ALS Ice Bucket Challenge was a viral
phenomenon that peaked in the summer of 2014.
• We investigate the crowding out effect on donations
to charities when a campaign for a single charity is
run.
• We test whether individuals increase their charitable
expenditures, or take money they would have given
to other charities to donate to the targeted cause.
2.1
2.70
0
1
2
3
4
Basline Treatment
Mean Contributions to
Targeted Charity Increase
After Campaign
Charities
Feeding Texas: Its mission is to lead a unified effort
for a hunger-free Texas.
Texas Campaign for the Environment: Its mission is
to empower Texans to fight pollution through
sustained grassroots organizing campaigns that shift
corporate and governmental environmental policy.
Operation Kindness: Its mission is to care for
homeless cats and dogs in a no-kill environment until
each is adopted into responsible homes and to
advocate humane values and behavior.
P=.0113
Mean Contributions by Session and Charity
Session 1 Session 2 Session 3
FT
(n=24)
TCE
(n=22)
OK
(n=21)
Baseline Treatment Baseline Treatment Baseline Treatment
FT 2.92+ 3.58+ 2.27 1.77 3.05 2.19
TCE 1.21 1.04 1.18 1.36 1.14 1.81
OK 1.75* 0.96* 2.05 1.86 2.14+ 3.10+
Total 5.88 5.58 5.50 5.00 6.33* 7.10*
P values for t-test of means between control and treatment.*p<0.05,+p<0.10
Why The Lab?
• Impossible to study in the field.
• Difficult to determine the effectiveness of a campaign
without a control.
• Cannot determine if the gifts to charity are from a
new budget or reallocated donations.
• The lab offers a controlled environment where we can
determine where the donations are generated and
how they effect non treated charities.
P=0.9016
Total Expenditure for
Giving is Unchanged
2nd Treatment
Again, each player allocates their $15 budget between
three Texas regional charities and themselves.
Payment
A die is rolled to decide which treatment is paid to
each subject, with the subject earning the exact
amount contributed to themselves. The amounts
allocated to the charities is donated online.
1st Treatment
Each player allocates their $15 budget between three
Texas regional charities and themselves.
Video Campaign
One of three campaign videos highlighting additional
attributes and statistics of a Texas regional charity is
played.
Baseline Treatment Baseline Treatment