Browsing by Author "Yang, Yongzheng"
Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Computational Social Science for Nonprofit Studies: Developing a Toolbox and Knowledge Base for the Field(Springer, 2023-02) Ma, Ji; Ebeid, Islam Akef; de Wit, Arjen; Xu, Meiying; Yang, Yongzheng; Bekkers, René; Wiepking, Pamala; Lilly Family School of PhilanthropyHow can computational social science (CSS) methods be applied in nonprofit and philanthropic studies? This paper summarizes and explains a range of relevant CSS methods from a research design perspective and highlights key applications in our field. We define CSS as a set of computationally intensive empirical methods for data management, concept representation, data analysis, and visualization. What makes the computational methods “social” is that the purpose of using these methods is to serve quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods social science research, such that theorization can have a solid ground. We illustrate the promise of CSS in our field by using it to construct the largest and most comprehensive database of scholarly references in our field, the Knowledge Infrastructure of Nonprofit and Philanthropic Studies (KINPS). Furthermore, we show that through the application of CSS in constructing and analyzing KINPS, we can better understand and facilitate the intellectual growth of our field. We conclude the article with cautions for using CSS and suggestions for future studies implementing CSS and KINPS.Item Economic Inequality and Prosocial Behavior: A Multidimensional Analysis(2022-06) Yang, Yongzheng; Wiepking, Pamala; Badertscher, Katherine; Konrath, Sara; Ottoni-Wilhelm, Mark; Rooney, PatrickRising economic inequality has become a widespread trend and concern in recent decades. Economic inequality is often associated with pernicious consequences such as a decrease in individual health and social cohesion and an increase in political conflicts. Does economic inequality have a negative association with prosocial behavior, like many other aspects of inequality? To answer this question, this dissertation investigates the relationship between economic inequality and prosocial behavior, particularly charitable giving, by conducting three empirical studies. The first study is a meta-analysis on the overall relationship between economic inequality and prosocial behavior. Results from 192 effect sizes in 100 studies show that there is a general small, negative relationship between economic inequality and different forms of prosocial behavior. Moderator tests demonstrate that social context, the operationalization of prosocial behavior, the operationalization of economic inequality, and average age of participants significantly moderate the relationship between economic inequality and prosocial behavior. The second study differentiates between redistributive and non-redistributive charitable causes and examines how income inequality is associated with charitable giving to these two causes in China. Using synthesized data from the China Labor-force Dynamics Survey (CLDS) and official data, this study shows that income inequality has no significant relationship with charitable giving to redistributive causes, but it has a negative association with charitable giving to non-redistributive causes. Of the four moderators, only education significantly moderates the relationship between income inequality and redistributive giving. The third study tests whether and how government social spending mediates the relationship between income inequality and charitable giving. Using the US county level panel data, this study finds there is no significant relationship between income inequality and government social spending as well as between government social spending and charitable giving. Thus, government social spending does not significantly mediate the relationship between income inequality and charitable giving. However, income inequality has a robustly and significantly negative relationship with charitable giving. In sum, this dissertation furthers our understanding of the relationship between economic inequality and prosocial behavior, especially charitable giving. Given the higher economic inequality facing many countries, it is a timely dissertation and has important practical implications.Item The Gendered Pathways Into Giving and Volunteering: Similar or Different Across Countries?(Sage, 2023-02) Wiepking, Pamala; Einolf, Christopher J.; Yang, Yongzheng; Lilly Family School of PhilanthropyThere has been a steady increase in research studying the role of gender in prosocial behavior, such as charitable giving and volunteering. We provide an extensive review of the interdisciplinary literature and derive hypotheses about three different pathways that lead men and women to differ in their display of giving and volunteering: pathways through social capital, motivations, and resources. We test these hypotheses across 19 countries by analyzing 28,410 individuals, using generalized structural equation models. Our results support previous research, conducted in single countries, that there are distinct different pathways that lead men and women to engage in giving and volunteering: Women report stronger motivations to help others, but men report more of the financial resources that make giving and volunteering possible. The gendered pathways to giving and volunteering that lead through social capital, educational achievement, and financial security vary by country.Item Global generosity during the COVID-19 crisis. Recommendations for philanthropic organizations and governments in times of crisis from 11 countries(IU Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, 2023-09-21) Hampton, DeeAndria; Wiepking, Pamala; Chapman, Cassandra; McHugh, Lucy H.; Kim, Sung-Ju; Neumayr, Michaela; Vamstad, Johan; Arnesen, Daniel; Carrigan, Cathie M.; Feit, Galia; Grönlund, Henrietta; Hrafnsdóttir, Steinunn; Ivanova, Natalia; Katz, Hagai; Kristmundsson, Ómar H.; Litofcenko, Julia; Mersianova, Irina; Pessi, Anne Birgitta; Scaife, Wendy; Sivesind, Karl Henrik; Yang, YongzhengThe COVID-19 pandemic presented a unique opportunity to undertake a cross-national study of how people living in different countries manifested generosity behaviors during the crisis. Cross-national data allow us to consider how generosity presented in countries with various welfare and health systems, as well as varying public and private responses to manage the effects of the pandemic. The present study also provides valuable insights about which actions philanthropic organizations and governments can take to promote a strong, viable social sector and to support societal wellbeing during times of crisis. To this end, philanthropy researchers across 11 countries studied the generosity responses emerging in their own country during the early COVID-19 crisis in 2020. The 11 countries included in this project are Australia, Austria, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Israel, Norway, Sweden, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation and the United States of America. In 11 individual country reports, the researchers compared generosity behavior data for their country with data from the other participating countries.2 Second, they expounded what both philanthropic organizations and governments could learn from the findings, with the goal of facilitating people’s future generosity responses more effectively, especially during crises. Individual generosity behavior across 11 countries during times of crisis Our findings, which resulted from surveying over 44,000 people from 11 countries, revealed a clearly predominant philanthropic activity: the donation of money to philanthropic organizations. There was significant variation in the beneficiaries of donor funds—for example, with some countries reporting as many as 53% of donors giving to philanthropic organizations in health and social services, while in other countries, only 22% of donors gave to the same types of organizations. Overall, giving to philanthropic organizations appeared relatively stable compared to pre-pandemic times. However, upon closer look, we found that this was due to those not engaging in giving prior to the pandemic largely did not engage once the pandemic started. By contrast, those giving pre-pandemic were almost equally as likely to increase as decrease the size of their donations to philanthropic organizations during the pandemic. While in some cases people reported their decline in engagement was due to the uncertainty of the pandemic or worsening of their own financial conditions, perhaps counterintuitively, others, even in the face of similar challenges, reported increasing their engagement in generosity behaviors. Actions for philanthropic organizations in times of crisis: To best support community needs, we recommend that philanthropic organizations focus on the following key actions during crises: 1. Innovate and keep fundraising. Use (technological) innovations such as shifting to online platforms and promoting in-kind giving to maintain engagement with existing donors and volunteers, and to attract new ones. 2. Communicate. Philanthropic organizations are uniquely positioned to identify local needs and share with service providers. They can also serve as community hubs to disseminate verified information during a crisis and leverage the social networks of those who they currently serve to reach the wider community. 3. Focus on equity. Philanthropic organizations can ensure that vulnerable or underserved populations are provided access to the information, services, and support they need. Government actions to support philanthropic organizations during times of crisis To promote the vitality of the social sector and public trust in government, we recommend the following government actions during crises: 1. Engage in cross-sector collaboration. Governments should incentivize, facilitate, and engage in cross-sector collaborations in order to maximize resources and meet broad needs within communities. 2. Communicate effectively. Clear, consistent, and effective communication is essential. Accurate and consistent communication can help build trust in public authorities and the government. 3. Bolster the capacity of the nonprofit sector. Governments need to ensure that legal policies are in place that facilitate and promote smooth functioning of nonprofit operations (volunteering, donating, receiving services), as well as promote corporate and individual generosity and provide direct government funding to philanthropic organizations. 4. Be mindful of those who are vulnerable. Ensure that those on the margins of society or who are disproportionately affected by the crisis are resourced and served and take action to provide support for mental health and social needs that may be exacerbated during times of crisis.Item Global Philanthropy: Does Institutional Context Matter for Charitable Giving?(Sage, 2021-02-04) Wiepking, Pamala; Handy, Femida; Park, Sohyun; Neumayr, Michaela; Bekkers, René; Breeze, Beth; De Wit, Arjen; Einolf, Chris; Gricevic, Zbignev; Scaife, Wendy; Bethmann, Steffen; Breen, Oonagh B.; Kang, Chulhee; Katz, Hagai; Krasnopolskaya, Irina; Layton, Michael D.; Mersianova, Irina; Lo, Kunag-Ta; Osili, Una; Pessi, Anne Birgitta; Sivesind, Karl Henrik; Yamauchi, Naoto; Yang, YongzhengIn this article, we examine whether and how the institutional context matters when understanding individuals’ giving to philanthropic organizations. We posit that both the individuals’ propensity to give and the amounts given are higher in countries with a stronger institutional context for philanthropy. We examine key factors of formal and informal institutional contexts for philanthropy at both the organizational and societal levels, including regulatory and legislative frameworks, professional standards, and social practices. Our results show that while aggregate levels of giving are higher in countries with stronger institutionalization, multilevel analyses of 118,788 individuals in 19 countries show limited support for the hypothesized relationships between institutional context and philanthropy. The findings suggest the need for better comparative data to understand the complex and dynamic influences of institutional contexts on charitable giving. This, in turn, would support the development of evidence-based practices and policies in the field of global philanthropy.Item Party membership and charitable giving in China: The mediating role of resources, networks, prosocial values, and making compulsory donations(Policy Press, 2020) Yang, Yongzheng; Wiepking, PamalaPrevious studies suggest Communist Party members in China are more likely to give and give more to charity, but why remains unclear. Using the Chinese General Social Survey (CGSS, 2012), this study develops and tests hypotheses about the potential mechanisms that influence the relationship between Party membership and charitable giving. Uniquely, total charitable giving in China includes both voluntary and compulsory donations. Generalized structural equation model results indicate that Party members donate more overall, because they have higher levels of human resources, larger formal networks, higher prosocial values and are more likely to make compulsory donations than non-Party members. Interestingly, our results show that making compulsory donations crowds out voluntary giving. Therefore, Party members donate only marginally more than non-Party members in terms of voluntary giving.