Interesting—do you have any sources for the evidence suggesting “that donation matching may not actually lead to people who donations are matched to necessarily donate more out of their own pocket”?
Edit: is this what you were referring to?
source
(in the “offer a matching donation” row)
There is some evidence that the presence of a match does increase out-of-pocket donations (Karlan and List); however, it works in an unpredictable way and may act simply as a signal. It may even be counterproductive (Huck and Rasul, ’11), better to be simply a ‘lead gift’. However, we have evidence from only a few selected field experiments, not from a broad range of settings. Meier (’07) finds the positive (participation?) effect may be crowded-out in the longer run when the match is removed.
Essentially yes. I was giving my impression of the consensus of the academic literature, partly from memory. But I’m fairly confident in my memory of this, and you can see the citations in that resource.
Thanks everyone for the comments & resources!
Interesting—do you have any sources for the evidence suggesting “that donation matching may not actually lead to people who donations are matched to necessarily donate more out of their own pocket”?
Edit: is this what you were referring to? source (in the “offer a matching donation” row)
Essentially yes. I was giving my impression of the consensus of the academic literature, partly from memory. But I’m fairly confident in my memory of this, and you can see the citations in that resource.