John List, one of the heroes of SuperFreakonomics, is a master of clever field experiments concerning fairness and altruism. He is particularly adept at imbuing experiments, whether in the field or the lab, with real-world wrinkles that make the results more believable.
He has already done some noteworthy work on door-to-door charitable solicitations. Now he’s written a new working paper (pdf here; abstract here) along with Stefano DellaVigna and Ulrike Malmendier (we’ve featured their work before as well), whose real-world wrinkle is as clever as it gets: distributing a flyer that tells a potential donor the date and time that a solicitor will be visiting, thereby giving donors the opportunity to be out of the house or simply to not answer the door. This enables the researchers to measure the degree to which altruism is affected by social pressure (to say nothing of tax breaks).
So what happens?
As List, DellaVigna, and Malmendier write:
We find that the flyer reduces the share of households opening the door by 10 to 25 percent and, if the flyer allows checking a “Do Not Disturb” box, reduces giving by 30 percent. The latter decrease is concentrated among donations smaller than $10. These findings suggest that social pressure is an important determinant of door-to-door giving. Combining data from this and a complementary field experiment, we structurally estimate the model. The estimated social pressure cost of saying no to a solicitor is $3.5 for an in-state charity and $1.4 for an out-of-state charity. Our welfare calculations suggest that our door-to-door fund-raising campaigns on average lower utility of the potential donors.
John List had better be careful. His research is very valuable to the philanthropic community; but if this latest paper engenders a public outcry for a “do-not-knock” registry, he might quickly become a pariah.
and 
. You can also watch it on 
This isn’t about altruism. This is about how little it takes to annoy your average American bear.
I don’t consider this form of altruism to be nearly as reflective (although it would be a quick test) as anonymous polling to see who would give something up to make things better for a community. Examples: lessening the sound of church bells if they were too loud for the closest neighbors; driving slower through residential streets; taking a dog out on a leash in the evening/morning so that it didn’t bark long enough to wake the neighbors, etc.
I used to work for a public interest group on environmental campaigns. Through constant door-to-door canvassing, I found that the homeowner was much more likely to give a donation if I gave them no option to give any other way (such as through the mail). When I did give that option, even excited and interested people hardly ever sent anything in.
It was odd doing this kind of work however, because I knew that if somone came to my door I would be incredibly sceptical as well. I felt incredibly awkward almost demanding that I at least say my piece before they close the door on me. But the social pressure worked. Once they heard what I was about, combined with the fact that I was standing face to face with them, as opposed to an impersonal, electronic manifestation of a human being (aka: the phone), they listened; some of them even donated. This was a successful tactic, and I raised over $10k for our campaign in the span of just one summer.
I didn’t like the work that I did. But do I think I helped to bring about positive change? Absolutely. Would I give to someone at my door doing the same thing I did? I don’t know. It was an incredibly conflicting experience, but one I don’t regret.
There already is such a thing. It’s called the “no solicitors” sign.
“The door-to-door issue can be confronted in a way that cold-calling cannot: a sign reading “Trespassers will be shot”.”
And those who survive will be buried alive.
I don’t open my door to strangers. If the person is not expected (or a friend, neighbor or a workman with an appointment for instance), I ignore them. I can see who is there. If they persist I simply shout through the door “Please go away.” My time is valuable to me and just because you can knock on my door does not mean I have to open it (same for phone calls). I have NO GUILT about this. My charitable habits are NOYB by the way.
I used to get mad about knockers and unsolicited phone calls. Now I ask callers for their home phone number and what time they will be watching their favorite TV show or eating dinner so I can call them back then. Now they get mad and I laugh.
My take is a tad different. I live in a smaller community so that the solicitors are for the Boy Scouts or the local schools. Therefore we know these people or they actually could be our kids. I therefore have an envelope of cash (not a wad) that I can use to buy their overpriced items. I don’t have to search for the dough and consider it a part of being a good neighbor. Granted if I lived in NYCity where apparently everyone is anonymous I would feel much different.
The research presumes that giving at the door is “altruistic” – I believe that this is a very narrow metaphor for altruism, which the author has not validated.