General feedback on the Philanthropy database project
EA behavioural science researcher 1:
[Suggests it best to focus on effective donation and maybe to devote time to research in that space instead] “I am slightly unsure about focusing on increasing donations in general (instead of shifting donations to effective charities). You are right that there’s not that much research yet on shifting donations to effective charities. But wouldn’t this then mean that we just need to do more empirical research about that? To the extent that you’d be interested in that, my hunch is that doing more empirical research (to fill these gaps in the literature) may be more impactful than synthesising existing research.”
EA behavioural science researcher 2:
[Does this overlap with other projects] “Have you come across this Revolutionizing Philanthropy project lead by Rene Bekkers and Pamala Wiepking? https://osf.io/46e8x/ I know part of that is building a huge corpus of studies on all aspects of philanthropy but I’m not sure where it’s at so far… I guess one possibility would be to identify the subsection of the research covered in that project that relates to increasing giving specifically.”
[Might be useful to synthesise the general philanthropy literature] “To the extent that we are not trying to get people to shift, but simply presenting it as “give to these very effective causes”, then the literature on “what causes people to give more” becomes relevant, particularly if these things can be used as particular superpowers by the more effective charities.
[Might be useful to synthesise the effective philanthropy literature] “[I agree with the value of more effective giving research but] I think it would definitely be worthwhile to do more to synthesize the existing research that is particularly relevant to donations to effective charities. There is not much research, but there is some, and there is more that in my opinion is buried in the file drawer and in appendices. And some of the published stuff should also be reconsidered more carefully and robustly.”
Feedback on the philanthropy database
Effective charity (1) director
I wouldn’t personally use this database but I might find it useful to share with an in-house researcher or team.
Feedback on the Philanthropy database social media updates
Feedback thread [updated 10⁄11]:
General feedback on the Philanthropy database project
EA behavioural science researcher 1:
[Suggests it best to focus on effective donation and maybe to devote time to research in that space instead] “I am slightly unsure about focusing on increasing donations in general (instead of shifting donations to effective charities).
You are right that there’s not that much research yet on shifting donations to effective charities. But wouldn’t this then mean that we just need to do more empirical research about that?
To the extent that you’d be interested in that, my hunch is that doing more empirical research (to fill these gaps in the literature) may be more impactful than synthesising existing research.”
EA behavioural science researcher 2:
[Does this overlap with other projects] “Have you come across this Revolutionizing Philanthropy project lead by Rene Bekkers and Pamala Wiepking? https://osf.io/46e8x/ I know part of that is building a huge corpus of studies on all aspects of philanthropy but I’m not sure where it’s at so far… I guess one possibility would be to identify the subsection of the research covered in that project that relates to increasing giving specifically.”
EA behavioural science researcher 3:
“Would be good to integrate this into the ‘Barriers to Effective Giving’ project.”
[Might be useful to synthesise the general philanthropy literature] “To the extent that we are not trying to get people to shift, but simply presenting it as “give to these very effective causes”, then the literature on “what causes people to give more” becomes relevant, particularly if these things can be used as particular superpowers by the more effective charities.
[Might be useful to synthesise the effective philanthropy literature] “[I agree with the value of more effective giving research but] I think it would definitely be worthwhile to do more to synthesize the existing research that is particularly relevant to donations to effective charities. There is not much research, but there is some, and there is more that in my opinion is buried in the file drawer and in appendices. And some of the published stuff should also be reconsidered more carefully and robustly.”
Feedback on the philanthropy database
Effective charity (1) director
I wouldn’t personally use this database but I might find it useful to share with an in-house researcher or team.
Feedback on the Philanthropy database social media updates
Do donors donate more often if they can choose between recipients?
Board member at The Life You Can Save (2 )
Thanks! Very helpful and would be useful to us at The Life You Can Save.
Are happy donors less susceptible to identifiable victim appeals?
Do donors care about a charity’s efficiency and effectiveness?
Director @ High Impact Athletes
Rated both social media posts and database as very useful
Do indirect appeals (e.g., ‘Help [name] do y...’) beat direct appeals (e.g., ‘Help me do y...’) in peer-to-peer fundraising?
Does feeling older make people more impartially generous?
Fwiw I’m EA behavioural science researcher 3, and I agree with your responses to EABSR’s 1 and 2.