A priest, a minister, and a rabbi walk into an economics lab. Which one is most likely to increase contributions to the public good? A new study found that Protestants were more likely than Jews or Catholics to contribute money to a public pool. The Protestants also worked hardest for wages in a labor market game. Consider it evidence for the Protestant work ethic. (HT: Chris Blattman) [%comments]
Of God and Money
TAGS:
and 
. You can also watch it on 
Is the minister prime?
JoelP,
That’s what a public goods donation game IS. The authors don’t mention charities–that’s a different animal altogether.
These games are meant to have the same sort of properties of any public good. You can donate, but you’d rather benefit from other people’s provisions. The socially optimal outcome is to have everyone donate, but each person has an incentive to free ride. The question is which types of people are the free-riders. Think parks, not charities.
Well at least JoelP looked at the study itself, which is conveniently (thank you Freakonomics) linked, which apparently isn’t true for commenters 1 thru 7.
That said, this isn’t a real world study of the actual actions of real people in their normal lives, but a Psych Lab study using university students (not, and I apologize in advance for this even though it is screamingly pertinent, real adults) paid to participate.
All of your who participated in Psych Lab studies while at uni to make a couple extra bucks raise your hands. Thank you. Those of you who took these tasks as seriously as the researchers keep your hands up, everyone else put your hands down. Alright, the one guy with his hand still up, are you kidding me?
This study has a key failure and it is that it ignores the “minority” status of both Catholics and Jewish. Of course someone who is part of a minority will rather contribute to his or her own community goods. Before making such statement, the test should be carried in countries where the Catholics or Jewish are the predominant religion. No evidence for the Protestant work ethic, you should be more careful with this kind of post and the statements you make in them.
From the look of things, this study has not, as of yet, been published in a peer-reviewed journal and therefore should not be the basis of an article–or even a blog post– in The NY Times.
Got it right thanks to my families tireless emphasis on the correlation between hard work and god. lol
Let me just say that atheists are the best of all.
Dharmendra Goel 3.30pm,Nov. 21, 2009.
Yes to me an Indian the question is whether religiosity becomes sectarian Charity when it slecifically helps its own brand of Faithfuls. What about indigentshirtless tribals and animists and dire poor who do not know of any sacrament and rituals than thedaily grind of feeding the empty Belly. such also are there in our World in millions.
Must they come as Catholics ,Jews , Musalmans or Hindus before a humaniast is moved to do somethingt o alleviate their dire indigence?
A true humanist should do charity unmindful of evangelism of any kind and only rescue the Shirtless humans of any race, creed or nationality.This is what philosophy which i have nourished my soul with ,over decades of contemplation of greatest Thinkers of the World have left on me as the crystalline Truth. D. Goel