Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Access
  • Open access
  • Cited by 2
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Wiepking, Pamala and Handy, Femida 2015. The Palgrave Handbook of Global Philanthropy.

    Meer, Jonathan and Rosen, Harvey S. 2013. Donative behavior at the end of life. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Vol. 92, p. 192.


Why are the oldest old less generous? Explanations for the unexpected age-related drop in charitable giving

  • DOI:
  • Published online: 23 March 2012

Previous research has demonstrated that the generally positive relationship between age and the presence of charitable giving becomes negative at the oldest ages. We investigate potential causes of this drop in charitable giving among the oldest old including changes in health, cognition, egocentric networks, religious attendance, and substitution of charitable bequest planning. A longitudinal analysis of data from the United States Health and Retirement Survey indicates that the drop in charitable giving is mediated largely by changes in the frequency of church attendance, with only modest influences from changes in health and cognition.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Why are the oldest old less generous? Explanations for the unexpected age-related drop in charitable giving
      Available formats
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Why are the oldest old less generous? Explanations for the unexpected age-related drop in charitable giving
      Available formats
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Why are the oldest old less generous? Explanations for the unexpected age-related drop in charitable giving
      Available formats
The online version of this article is published within an Open Access environment subject to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence <>. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use.
Corresponding author
Address for correspondence: Pamala Wiepking, Department of Sociology & Erasmus Centre for Strategic Philanthropy (ECSP), Faculty of Social Sciences, Erasmus University Rotterdam, M-building (M6-44), P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands. E-mail:
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

P. D. Allison 2009. Fixed Effects Regression Models. Sage, Los Angeles.

J. Andreoni 2001. The economics of philanthropy. In N. J. Smelser and P. B. Baltes (eds), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Science. Elsevier, London, 11369–76.

J. Andreoni , E. Brown and I. Rischall 2003. Charitable giving by married couples. Who decides and why does it matter? The Journal of Human Resources, 38, 1, 111–33.

P. B. Baltes and M. M. Baltes 1990. Psychological perspectives on successful ageing: the model of selective optimization and compensation. In P. B. B. Baltes and M. M. Baltes (eds), Successful Ageing: Perspectives from Behavioural Sciences. Cambridge University Press, New York, 134.

J. Barlow and J. Hainsworth 2001. Volunteerism among older people with arthritis. Ageing & Society, 21, 2, 203–17.

R. Bekkers 2005 b. Traditional and health related philanthropy: the role of resources and personality. Social Psychology Quarterly, 69, 4, 349–66.

R. Bekkers and P. Wiepking 2011. A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40, 5, 924–73.

W. K. Bryant , H. J. Slaughter , H. Kang and A. Tax 2003. Participating in philanthropic activities: donating money and time. Journal of Consumer Policy, 26, 1, 4373.

C. B. Burgoyne , B. Young and C. M. Walker 2005. Deciding to give to charity: a focus group study in the context of the household economy. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 15, 5, 383405.

N. G. Choi and J. Kim 2010. The effect of time volunteering and charitable donations in later life on psychological wellbeing. Ageing & Society, 31, 4, 590610.

B. Cornwell , E. O. Laumann and L. P. Schumm 2008. The social connectedness of older adults: a national profile. American Sociological Review, 73, 2, 185203.

N. Daneshvary and W. A. Luksetich 1997. Income sources and declared charitable tax deductions. Applied Economics Letters, 4, 5, 271–4.

W. D. Danko and T. J. Stanley 1986. Identifying and reaching the donation prone individual: a nationwide assessment. Journal of Professional Services Marketing 2, Fall/Winter, 117–22.

F. De Vignemont and T. Singer 2006. The empathic brain: how, when and why? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 10, 435–41.

J. Decety and P. L. Jackson 2006. A social-neuroscience perspective on empathy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 2, 54–8.

L. R. Hatch and K. Bulcroft 1992. Contact with friends in later life: disentangling the effects of gender and marital status. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 1, 222–32.

G. Hein and T. Singer 2008. I feel how you feel but not always: the empathic brain and its modulation. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 18, 2, 153–8.

R. N. James III 2009. Health, wealth, and charitable estate planning: a longitudinal examination of testamentary charitable giving plans. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38, 6, 1026–43.

R. N. James III 2011 a. Charitable giving and cognitive ability. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 16, 1, 7083.

R. N. James III 2011 b. Cognitive skills in the charitable giving decisions of the elderly. Educational Gerontology, 37, 7, 559–73.

D. R. John and C. A. Cole 1986. Age differences in information processing: understanding deficits in young and elderly consumers. The Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 3, 297315.

W. Knulst and K. V. Eijck 2006. Old soldiers never die: explaining the disproportionate aging of volunteers in the Netherlands between 1985 and 2000. Acta Sociologica, 49, 2, 185200.

C. E. Landry , A. Lange , J. A. List , M. K. Price and N. G. Rupp 2006. Toward an understanding of the economics of charity: evidence from a field experiment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121, 2, 747–82.

B. W. Lemon , V. L. Bengtson and J. A. Peterson 1972. An exploration of the activity theory of aging: activity types and life satisfaction among in-movers to a retirement community. Journal of Gerontology, 27, 4, 511–23.

C. F. Longino and C. S. Karl 1982. Explicating activity theory: a formal replication. Journal of Gerontology, 37, 6, 713–22.

Q. Ma 2002. Defining Chinese nongovernmental organizations. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 13, 2, 113–30.

P. V. Marsden 1987. Core discussion networks of Americans. American Sociological Review, 52, 1, 122–31.

M. Maxfield , B. Kluck , J. Greenberg , T. Pyszczynski , C. R. Cox , S. Solomon and D. Weise 2007. Age-related differences in responses to thoughts of one's own death: mortality salience and judgments of moral transgressions. Psychology and Ageing, 22, 2, 341–53.

R. Means and J. Langan 1996. Money ‘handling’, financial abuse and elderly people with dementia: implications for welfare professionals. Health and Social Care in the Community, 4, 6, 353–58.

E. Midlarsky and M. E. Hannah 1989. The generous elderly: naturalistic studies of donations across the life span. Psychology and Ageing, 4, 3, 346–51.

C. Mood 2010. Logistic regression: why we cannot do what we think we can do, and what we can do about it. European Sociological Review, 26, 1, 6782.

J. M. Neuhaus and J. D. Kalbfleisch 1998. Between- and within-cluster covariate effects in the analyses of clustered data. Biometrics, 54, 2, 638–45.

M. Nieswiadomy and R. M. Rubin 1995. Change in expenditure patterns of retirees: 1972–1973 and 1986–1987. Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 50B, 5, S274–90.

L. A. Penner , J. F. Dovidio , J. A. Piliavin and D. A. Schroeder 2005. Prosocial behavior: multilevel perspectives. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 365–92.

L. W. Phillips and B. Sternthal 1977. Age differences in information processing: a perspective on the aged consumer. Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 4, 444–57.

J. Schnittker 2007. Look (closely) at all the lonely people: age and the social psychology of social support. Journal of Aging and Health, 19, 4, 659–82.

T. Singer 2006. The neuronal basis and ontogeny of empathy and mind reading: review of literature and implications for future research. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 30, 6, 855–63.

T. Van Tilburg and M. Broese van Groenou 2002. Network and health changes among older Dutch adults. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 4, 697713.

J. A. Wheeler , K. M. Gorey and B. Greenblatt 1998. The beneficial effects of volunteering for older volunteers and the people they serve: a meta-analysis. The International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 47, 1, 6979.

P. Wiepking 2007. The philanthropic poor: in search of explanations for the relative generosity of lower income households. Voluntas, 18, 4, 339–58.

P. Wiepking 2010. Giving to particular charitable organizations: do materialists support local organizations and do democrats donate to animal protection? Social Science Research, 39, 6, 1073–87.

P. Wiepking and B. Breeze 2012. Feeling poor, acting stingy: the effect of money perceptions on charitable giving. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 17, 1, 13–24.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Ageing & Society
  • ISSN: 0144-686X
  • EISSN: 1469-1779
  • URL: /core/journals/ageing-and-society
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *