Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-07T19:07:50.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Time for helping

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Anastasia Danilov  and
Timo Vogelsang
Anastasia Danilov*
Affiliation:
Department of Corporate Development and Business Ethics, University of Cologne, Albertus-Magnus-Platz, 50923 Cologne, Germany
Timo Vogelsang*
Affiliation:
Department of Personnel Economics and Human Resource Management, University of Cologne, Albertus-Magnus-Platz, 50923 Cologne, Germany
*
danilov@wiso.uni-koeln.de
e-mail: vogelsang@wiso.uni-koeln.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigates whether individuals engage in prosocial behavior when it requires an investment of their time, but not money. In a laboratory experiment with rigorous anonymity arrangements, senders receive their payoff at the beginning. They may then engage in a tedious task to increase the earnings of exogenously disadvantaged recipients who otherwise receive no earnings. We find that senders are willing to sacrifice time to benefit recipients. Whether or not the recipient is present in the laboratory during the working time does not alter this decision. However, in a treatment variation some senders also display antisocial behavior.

Keywords

Laboratory experimentSocial preferencesTimeOpportunity costsDictator gameNon-monetary giving

JEL classification

D64: Altruism • Philanthropy • Intergenerational Transfers C91: Laboratory, Individual Behavior J22: Time Allocation and Labor Supply
Type
Original Paper
Information
Journal of the Economic Science Association , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , May 2016 , pp. 36 - 47
Copyright
Copyright © Economic Science Association 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40881-015-0020-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Time is life itself….

Michael Ende (Momo, 1973).

References

Becker, G. S. (1965). A theory on the allocation of time. The Economic Journal, 75(299), 493–517. 10.2307/2228949CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bénabou, R., Tirole, J. (2006). Incentives and prosocial behavior. American Economic Review, 96(5), 1652–1678. 10.1257/aer.96.5.1652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, R., Rauhut, H., Prade, S., Helbing, D. (2012). Bargaining over waiting time in ultimatum game experiments. Social Science Research, 41(2), 372–379. 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2011.09.009CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bruyneel, S., Dewitte, S., Diecidue, E., Festjens, A. (2015) Time-based versus money-based decision making under risk: an experimental investigation. Journal of Economic Psychology 50:52–72.Google Scholar
Camerer, C. F. (2003). Behavioral game theory: Experiments in strategic interaction, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Cappellari, L., Ghinetti, P., Turati, G. (2011). On time and money donations. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 40(6), 853–867. 10.1016/j.socec.2011.08.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, J., Myers, C. K. (2010). Why volunteer? Evidence on the role of altruism, image, and incentives. Journal of Public Economics, 94(11–12), 911–920. 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.07.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craig, A., Carbarino, E., Heger, S. A., & Slonim, R. (2014). Waiting to give. IZA discussion paper no.8491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellingsen, T., Johannesson, M. (2009). Time is not money. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 72(1), 96–102. 10.1016/j.jebo.2009.05.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engel, C. (2011). Dictator games: A meta study. Experimental Economics, 14(4), 583–610. 10.1007/s10683-011-9283-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falk, A., Ichino, A. (2006). Clean evidence on peer effects. Journal of Labor Economics, 24(1), 39–58. 10.1086/497818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischbacher, U. R. S. (2007). z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 10(2), 171–178. 10.1007/s10683-006-9159-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forsythe, R., Horowitz, J., Savin, N. E., Sefton, M. (1994). Fairness in simple bargaining experiments. Games and Economic Behavior, 6(3), 347–369. 10.1006/game.1994.1021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greiner, B. (2015). Subject pool recruitment procedures: Organizing experiments with ORSEE. Journal of the Economic Science Association, 1(1), 114–125. 10.1007/s40881-015-0004-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, E., McCabe, K., Smith, V. L. (1996). Social distance and other-regarding behavior in dictator games. American Economic Review, 86(3), 653–660.Google Scholar
Leclerc, F., Schmitt, B. H., Dubé, L. (1995). Waiting time and decision making: Is time like money? Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 110–119. 10.1086/209439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linardi, S., McConnell, M. A. (2011). No excuses for good behavior: Volunteering and the social environment. Journal of Public Economics, 95(5–6), 445–454. 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.06.020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noussair, C., Stoop, J. (2015). Time as a medium of reward in three social preference experiments. Experimental Economics, 18(3), 442–456. 10.1007/s10683-014-9415-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosaz, J., Slonim, R., & Villeval, M. C. (2014). Peer effects at work. IZA discussion paper no.6475.Google Scholar
Wilson, T. D., Reinhard, D. A., Westgate, E. C., Gilbert, D. T., Ellerbeck, N., Hahn, C., Brown, C. L., Shaked, A. (2014). Just think: The challenges of the disengaged mind. Science, 345(6192), 75–77. 10.1126/science.1250830CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Danilov and Vogelsang supplementary material

Danilov and Vogelsang supplementary material
Download Danilov and Vogelsang supplementary material(File)
File 90.5 KB