Do expressions of care crowd-out monetary donations?

Last registered on March 05, 2026
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Do expressions of care crowd-out monetary donations?
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0018029
Initial registration date
March 02, 2026

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
March 05, 2026, 8:56 AM EST

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Name
Alexander James
Affiliation
University of Wyoming
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Linda Thunstrom
PI Affiliation
University of Wyoming
PI Name
Klaas Van 't Veld
PI Affiliation
University of Wyoming
PI Name
Shiri Noy
PI Affiliation
Denison University

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2026-02-27
End date
2026-03-31
Keywords
Behavior
Additional Keywords
Charitable giving, expressions of care, virtue signaling, survey experiment
JEL code(s)
C9; D64
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Existing literature suggests people give in part because it makes them feel good, or receive "warm glow". But there is also evidence that people give due to social pressure and use donations as a public signal of their pro-social type. As such expressing one's level of care for a charitable cause reduces the signaling power of additional action and so reduces donations. We test this theory using an online survey experiment in which subjects were given the opportunity to donate to the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA). We hypothesize that giving people the opportunity to express their level of care for animals in need reduces their monetary donations to the ASPCA.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
James, Alexander et al. 2026. "Do expressions of care crowd-out monetary donations?." AEA RCT Registry. March 05. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.18029-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Existing literature suggests people give in part because it makes them feel good, or receive "warm glow". But there is also evidence that people give due to social pressure and use donations as a public signal of their pro-social type. According to this theory, expressing one's level of care for a charitable cause reduces the signaling power of additional action and so reduces donations. We test this theory using an online survey experiment in which subjects were given the opportunity to donate to the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA). All subjects are given a $5 bonus payment. Subjects assigned to the control group are simply given the opportunity to donate some amount of money (between $0 - $5) to the ASPCA. Subjects assigned to the "care only" treatment are simply asked to state their level of care for abused animals. Subjects assigned to the "decision" treatment first decide whether to i) donate only, ii) express their level of care only, or iii) donate & express their level of care. If their decision involves expressing their level of care or donating, these decisions are made on the following page.
Intervention Start Date
2026-03-27
Intervention End Date
2026-03-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Our primary outcomes of interest are i) the rate at which people donate to the ASPCA and ii) the amount that people donate to the ASPCA.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)

In one treatment described above, we give subjects the opportunity to express their level of care for abused animals without the option to also donate. We will compare levels of care across treatments. In this case, the outcome is the reported level of care.
We will explore a variety of sources of heterogeneity including subject i) reputational concerns, ii) gender, iii) age, and iv) religiosity.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
The survey experiment was designed and implemented using Qualtrics. Subjects first provide their consent to participate in the study and then answer a set of demographic questions. Subjects are then told they will receive a $5 bonus payment before being randomly assigned to one of three treatments:
i) donate
ii) express care
iii) donate and/or express care
Subjects assigned to the first treatment and simply asked if they would like to donate some of their $5 bonus payment to the ASPCA. Subjects in the second treatment are simply given the opportunity to state how much they care about abused animals. Subjects in the third treatment are given the option of i) donating, ii) expressing care, iii) both, or iv) nothing. For subjects in this third treatment, if their choice includes donating or expressing care, they do so on a following page. After donation decisions are made, additional demographic information is collected.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization is achieved using Qualtrics logic.
Randomization Unit
individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
1
Sample size: planned number of observations
800
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Roughly 266 subjects in each of the 2 treatments and control.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
University of Wyoming Institutional Review Board
IRB Approval Date
2026-02-20
IRB Approval Number
IRB-2026-73
Analysis Plan