MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991271312 · doi:10.1002/nml.232

Keeping up with the Joneses: The relationship of perceived descriptive social norms, social information, and charitable giving

2009· article· en· W1991271312 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNonprofit Management and Leadership · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNonprofit Sector and Volunteering
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDescriptive researchSocial psychologyDescriptive statisticsNorm (philosophy)Keeping up with the JonesesProsocial behaviorPsychologyPerceptionDonationSociologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceSocial scienceEconomicsMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We study the influence of perceived descriptive social norms on subsequent giving behavior to nonprofits, explore how social information can influence these norms, and provide insight for fundraising practice. A survey conducted in a nonprofit organization first shows that donors use their beliefs about the descriptive social norm to inform their own donation behavior. Donors who believe that others make high contributions tend to make high contributions themselves. Next, a laboratory experiment demonstrates the influence of social information on the descriptive social norm and consequently on giving. These results suggest strategies for fundraising practice. Informing donors of contributions made by another person influences their perceptions about the descriptive social norm, which in turn influences their giving behavior. We conclude with a discussion of theoretical and practical implications.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.174 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it