Publicly announcing how much individuals donate on behalf of themselves is a common fundraising strategy. For tribute gifts made on behalf of others, however, many charities only reveal donor identities to the honoree with few revealing the size of their contributions. This paper examines the fundraising consequences of recognizing donors with and without information about donation amounts when notifying honorees of gifts made on their behalf. I find that revealing contribution amounts in addition to recognizing donors benefits fundraisers. I find that both the likelihood of giving and size of contributions made on behalf of others increase when honorees learn how much donors give. Results from a survey with fundraising professionals show that practitioners believe revealing the size of these gifts may be repugnant, and overestimate the share of donors who prefer to keep gift amounts private. Holding these inaccurate beliefs may lead fundraisers to leave tribute donations on the table.

To what extent have immigrants contributed to the growth of the United States arts sector? In this paper, we explore the impact of immigration during the Age of Mass Migration on the development of the arts in the U.S. over the past century. In the short run, our results suggest that immigration helped produce greater numbers of native artists. Over a century later, the benefits to the arts persist. Counties with greater historical immigration house more arts businesses and nonprofit organizations that generate more revenue, employ a larger proportion of the community, and earn more federal arts grants. When considering potential mechanisms, our analysis suggests that greater interaction between the aggregate immigrant population and natives led to increased exposure to new arts experiences and ideas, creating arts markets that persisted in the long run. This channel is further supported by positive links between the presence of immigrants from certain countries of origin and the growth of art forms popular in those countries, and evidence of long-run benefits to the arts that cannot be attributed to higher income in a causal mediation analysis. Altogether, our results highlight the important role that immigrants played in the development of the arts in America.

How does pay-for-performance (P4P) impact productivity and the composition of workers in mission-oriented jobs when output has multiple dimensions? This is a central issue in the public sector, particularly in areas such as education and healthcare. We conduct an experiment, manipulating compensation and mission, to answer these questions. We find that P4P has significantly smaller positive effects on productivity on the incentivized (quantity) dimension in the mission-oriented setting relative to the non-mission-oriented setting. On the other hand, P4P generates no loss in performance on the non-incentivized (quality) dimension of effort in the mission-oriented setting, whereas it does so in the non-mission-oriented setting. In both mission and non-mission settings, P4P attracts higher ability workers, but it does so at the expense of attracting more motivated workers in the mission setting.

Conflict and communication difficulties are commonly cited as reasons for why assembling diverse teams does not generate its expected benefits. This paper studies a possible mechanism underlying this result: the voices of women and minoritized racial/ethnic groups are disproportionately discounted. In an online experiment, we study differential listening in diverse teams in a hiring context, where committee leaders aggregate input from committee members when selecting a wage to offer a job applicant and no differences in quality of input exist. We find clear evidence of differential listening by race. Committee leaders are less influenced by input from Black committee members than they are by white committee members. The impact of gender is mixed: white men are the most influential and Black men the least; yet the input of all women and Black men is discounted relative to that of white men. We also find that only some leaders engage in differential listening; specifically, white leaders, both women and men. When examining mechanisms, we find that gender differences in confidence explain the lower influence of women, while beliefs about the quality of committee member input in part drive the differential listening of Black men.

To assess the threat of experimenter demand, we ask whether a hypothetical 'ill-intentioned' researcher can manipulate inference. Four classic behavioral comparative statics are evaluated, and the potential for false inference is gauged by differentially applying strong positive and negative experimenter demand across the relevant decision pair. Evaluating three different subject pools (laboratory, Prolific, and MTurk) we find no evidence of experimenter demand eliminating or reversing directional effects. The response to experimenter demand is very limited for all three subject pools and is not large enough to generate false negatives, though we do find evidence of false positives when testing precise nulls  in larger online-subject pools.

Online Appendix

Formerly circulated as, "Simon Doesn't Say: Minimal Qualitative Distortions from Experimenter Demand"

Does exposure to climate-related natural disasters affect individuals' willingness to engage in climate activism? Prior studies show that exposure to climate change affects pro-climate preferences, but there is little evidence on whether it changes individuals' participation in costly, public actions to influence climate policy. We assemble a novel panel dataset of nearly 150,000 reported attendances at more than 5,000 pro-climate events in the United States. Using a stacked event study approach, we show exposure to climate change-related natural disasters causes an increase in attendance at pro-climate events. We also show that attendance increases in distant areas that are socially connected to disaster areas. Furthermore, public exposure to large pro-climate events itself transfers through the social network. These effects rely on the presence of an existing advocacy infrastructure. Our results suggest that increasingly salient climate risks may not only spur advocacy locally, but also generate wider demand for pro-climate policy action.

Excuse-seeking behavior that facilitates replacing altruistic choices with self- interested ones has been documented in several domains. In a laboratory study, we replicate three leading papers on this topic: Dana et al. (2007), and the use of information avoidance; Exley (2015), and the use of differential risk preferences; and Di Tella et al. (2015), and the use of motivated beliefs. The replications were conducted as part of a graduate course, attempting to embed one answer to the growing call for experimental replications within the pedagogic process. We fully replicate the simpler Dana et al. paper, and broadly replicate the core findings for the other two projects, though with reduced effect sizes and a failure to replicate on some secondary measures. Finally, we attempt to connect behaviors to facilitate the understanding of how each fit within the broader literature. However, we find no connections across domains.