Skip to main content

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


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. 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 <service> 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 <service> 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:
Hide All
Allison, P. D. 2009. Fixed Effects Regression Models. Sage, Los Angeles.
Andreoni, J. 2001. The economics of philanthropy. In Smelser, N. J. and Baltes, P. B. (eds), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Science. Elsevier, London, 11369–76.
Andreoni, J., Brown, E. and Rischall, I. 2003. Charitable giving by married couples. Who decides and why does it matter? The Journal of Human Resources, 38, 1, 111–33.
Baltes, P. B. and Baltes, M. M. 1990. Psychological perspectives on successful ageing: the model of selective optimization and compensation. In Baltes, P. B. B. and Baltes, M. M. (eds), Successful Ageing: Perspectives from Behavioural Sciences. Cambridge University Press, New York, 134.
Barlow, J. and Hainsworth, J. 2001. Volunteerism among older people with arthritis. Ageing & Society, 21, 2, 203–17.
Batson, C. D. and Powell, A. A. 1998. Altruism and prosocial behavior. In Gilbert, D. T., Fiske, S. T. and Lindzey, G. (eds), The Handbook of Social Psychology. Oxford University Press, New York, 282316.
Bekkers, R. 2005 a. It's not all in the ask. Effects and effectiveness of recruitment strategies used by nonprofits in the Netherlands. Paper presented at the 34rd Annual ARNOVA Conference, Washington DC, November 17–19, 2005.
Bekkers, R. 2005 b. Traditional and health related philanthropy: the role of resources and personality. Social Psychology Quarterly, 69, 4, 349–66.
Bekkers, R. and Wiepking, P. 2007. Generosity and philanthropy: a literature review. SSRN Working Paper Series No. 1015507, Science of Generosity Resource Paper.
Bekkers, R. and Wiepking, P. 2011. A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40, 5, 924–73.
Broese Van Groenou, M. and Deeg, D. 2010. Formal and informal social participation of the ‘young-old’ in the Netherlands in 1992 and 2002. Ageing & Society, 30, 3, 445–65.
Bryant, W. K., Slaughter, H. J., Kang, H. and Tax, A. 2003. Participating in philanthropic activities: donating money and time. Journal of Consumer Policy, 26, 1, 4373.
Burgoyne, C. B., Young, B. and Walker, C. M. 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.
Choi, N. G. and Kim, J. 2010. The effect of time volunteering and charitable donations in later life on psychological wellbeing. Ageing & Society, 31, 4, 590610.
Cornwell, B., Laumann, E. O. and Schumm, L. P. 2008. The social connectedness of older adults: a national profile. American Sociological Review, 73, 2, 185203.
Daneshvary, N. and Luksetich, W. A. 1997. Income sources and declared charitable tax deductions. Applied Economics Letters, 4, 5, 271–4.
Danko, W. D. and Stanley, T. J. 1986. Identifying and reaching the donation prone individual: a nationwide assessment. Journal of Professional Services Marketing 2, Fall/Winter, 117–22.
Davis, M. H. 1994. Empathy: A Social Psychological Approach. Brown & Benchmark Publishers, Madison, Wisconsin.
De Vignemont, F. and Singer, T. 2006. The empathic brain: how, when and why? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 10, 435–41.
Decety, J. and Jackson, P. L. 2006. A social-neuroscience perspective on empathy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 2, 54–8.
Edmundson, B. 1986. Who gives to charity? American Demographics, 45–9.
Edwards, K. P. 1991. Planning for family asset transfers. Financial Counselling and Planning, 2, 1, 5578.
Einolf, C. J. 2009. Will the boomers volunteer during retirement? Comparing the baby boom, silent and long civic cohorts. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38, 2, 191–9.
Eurostat 2010. Europe in Figures. Eurostat Yearbook. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
Giving USA 2009. Giving USA 2009: The Annual Report on Philanthropy for the Year 2008. Giving USA Foundation in conjunction with the Centre on Philanthropy, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Halfpenny, P. 1991. The 1989/90 charity household survey. In McQuillan, J. (ed.), Charity Trends. Charities Aid Foundation, Tonbridge, UK.
Hatch, L. R. and Bulcroft, K. 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.
Havens, J. J. and Schervish, P. G. 2003. Why the $41 Trillion Wealth Transfer Estimate is Still Valid: A Review of Challenges and Questions. Social Welfare Research Institute, Boston College, Boston, Massachusetts.
He, W., Sengupta, M., Velkoff, V. A. and DeBarros, K. A. 2005. 65+ in the United States: 2005. In Current Population Reports: Special Studies. US Census Bureau, Washington DC.
Hein, G. and Singer, T. 2008. I feel how you feel but not always: the empathic brain and its modulation. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 18, 2, 153–8.
Hodgkinson, V. and Weitzman, M. S. 1996. Giving and Volunteering in the United States: Findings from a National Survey. Independent Sector, Washington DC.
Hurd, M. 2009. Inter-vivos giving by older people in the United States: who received financial gifts from the childless? Ageing & Society, 29, 8, 1207–25.
Institute for Social Research 2003. Codebook: HRS 1998 Core Final Release. Available online at [accessed 27 February 2012].
Internal Revenue Service 2007. Statistics of Income – 2006 Individual Income Tax Returns. Internal Revenue Service, Washington DC.
James, R. N. 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.
James, R. N. III 2011 a. Charitable giving and cognitive ability. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 16, 1, 7083.
James, R. N. III 2011 b. Cognitive skills in the charitable giving decisions of the elderly. Educational Gerontology, 37, 7, 559–73.
John, D. R. and Cole, C. A. 1986. Age differences in information processing: understanding deficits in young and elderly consumers. The Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 3, 297315.
Karlson, K. B., Holm, A. and Breen, R. 2010. Comparing Regression Coefficients Between Models Using Logit and Probit: A New Method. Available online at [Accessed 7 April 2011].
Knulst, W. and Eijck, K. V. 2006. Old soldiers never die: explaining the disproportionate aging of volunteers in the Netherlands between 1985 and 2000. Acta Sociologica, 49, 2, 185200.
Landry, C. E., Lange, A., List, J. A., Price, M. K. and Rupp, N. G. 2006. Toward an understanding of the economics of charity: evidence from a field experiment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121, 2, 747–82.
Lemon, B. W., Bengtson, V. L. and Peterson, J. A. 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.
Longino, C. F. and Karl, C. S. 1982. Explicating activity theory: a formal replication. Journal of Gerontology, 37, 6, 713–22.
Ma, Q. 2002. Defining Chinese nongovernmental organizations. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 13, 2, 113–30.
Marsden, P. V. 1987. Core discussion networks of Americans. American Sociological Review, 52, 1, 122–31.
Maxfield, M., Kluck, B., Greenberg, J., Pyszczynski, T., Cox, C. R., Solomon, S. and Weise, D. 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.
Means, R. and Langan, J. 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.
Midlarsky, E. and Hannah, M. E. 1989. The generous elderly: naturalistic studies of donations across the life span. Psychology and Ageing, 4, 3, 346–51.
Mood, C. 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.
Moye, J. and Marson, D. C. 2007. Assessment of decision-making capacity in older adults: an emerging area of practice and research. Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 62B, 1, 311.
Munnell, A. and Sundén, A. E. 2003. Death and Dollars: The Role of Gifts and Bequests in America. Brookings Institution Press, Washington DC.
Neuhaus, J. M. and Kalbfleisch, J. D. 1998. Between- and within-cluster covariate effects in the analyses of clustered data. Biometrics, 54, 2, 638–45.
NHIS 2006–08. Chronic Conditions. National Center for Health Statistics. Health Data Interactive. Available online at
Nieswiadomy, M. and Rubin, R. M. 1995. Change in expenditure patterns of retirees: 1972–1973 and 1986–1987. Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 50B, 5, S274–90.
Penner, L. A., Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A. and Schroeder, D. A. 2005. Prosocial behavior: multilevel perspectives. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 365–92.
Phillips, L. W. and Sternthal, B. 1977. Age differences in information processing: a perspective on the aged consumer. Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 4, 444–57.
Preston, S. D. and De Waal, F. B. M. 2002. Empathy: its ultimate and proximate bases. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25, 1, 172.
Sargeant, A. and Shang, Y. 2008. Identification, Death and Bequest Giving. A Report to AFP and Legacy Leaders. Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Sargeant, A. and Woodliffe, L. 2007. Individual giving behaviour: a multi-disciplinary review. In Sargeant, A. and Wymer, W. (eds), The Nonprofit Marketing Companion. Routledge, London, 111–44.
Schervish, P. G., Havens, J. J. and O'Herlihy, M. 2006. Charitable giving: how much, by whom, to what and why. In Powell, W. W. and Steinberg, R. (eds), The Nonprofit Sector: A Research Handbook. Yale University Press, Boston, Massachusetts, 542–67.
Schnittker, J. 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.
Shaw, B. A., Krause, N., Liang, J. and Bennett, J. 2007. Tracking changes in social relations throughout late life. Journals of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 62B, 2, S90–9.
Singer, T. 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.
Tang, F., Morrow-Howell, N. and Choi, E. 2010. Why do older adult volunteers stop volunteering? Ageing & Society, 30, 5, 859–78.
Tilse, C., Wilson, J., Rosenman, L., Morrison, D. and McCawley, A.-L. 2011. Managing older people's money: assisted and substitute decision making in residential aged-care. Ageing & Society, 31, 1, 93109.
Van Tilburg, T. and Broese van Groenou, M. 2002. Network and health changes among older Dutch adults. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 4, 697713.
Wheeler, J. A., Gorey, K. M. and Greenblatt, B. 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.
Wiepking, P. 2007. The philanthropic poor: in search of explanations for the relative generosity of lower income households. Voluntas, 18, 4, 339–58.
Wiepking, P. 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.
Wiepking, P. and Breeze, B. 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.
Wiepking, P. and Maas, I. 2009. Resources that make you generous: effects of social and human resources on charitable giving. Social Forces, 86, 4, 1973–96.
Wu, S.-Y., Huang, J.-T. and Kao, A.-P. 2004. An analysis of the peer effects in charitable giving: the case of Taiwan. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 25, 4, 483505.
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? *



Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 21
Total number of PDF views: 196 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 386 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 19th June 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.