From the University of Chicago:
In studying how people respond to matching gifts, the scholars
(John List of the U. of Chicago and Dean Karlan of Yale) discovered that whether the donation match was three dollars to one,
two dollars to one, or one dollar to one, the rate and amount of giving
was the same. The expectation that their donation would increase the
total support to the organization was apparently enough to motivate
donors, they found.
“Simply announcing the match money is available considerably
increases the revenue per solicitation — by 19 percent,” List said. “In
addition, the match offer significantly increases the probability that
an individual donates — by 22 percent.”
...List and Karlan were able to test that assumption (that increasing matching amounts increases giving) with a field
experiment conducted with the cooperation of a liberal non-profit
organization that works on social and policy areas related to civil
liberties. The group regularly sends out mailings requesting donations,
and the two scholars were able to perform a field experiment with one
of their mailings.
In their experiment, the organization sent a mailing to more than
50,000 people who had given to them in the past. A control group,
making up about a third of the group, received a mailing with no offer
of a match. The remainder was divided evenly into groups that received
different matching offers, including one to one, two to one and three
to one.
Here is the paper. The italicized entries are mine. I found this interesting:
Because the group is politically oriented, the scholars also wanted
to see if the political environment of the donors’ communities had an
impact on giving. The people who lived in states where George Bush had
won the 2004 presidential election apparently felt a greater threat to
civil liberty causes because they gave more in response to the match,
the scholars found.
Regardless of their age, education, or income, donors in red states
were much more sensitive to the match than those in blue states, the
study showed. List noted that “much more work is necessary before we
understand the exact mechanism at work in red and blue states, but the
results of our study are consistent with other research in sociology,
psychology, and economics that also shows people have a tendency to
rally to support causes when they feel they are under some threat.”
The obvious question is if conservatives, libertarians, or other political (or non-political) groups behave differently.