大学生网络捐助的影响因素:求助者特征的视角

以往关于捐助的心理学研究主要聚焦于现实环境中的捐助行为,以及捐助者自身特点对捐助的影响,网络环境、求助者特征对捐助影响的研究较少。本研究以大学生为被试,比较不同信息发布者情境中,网络与现实中捐助的意愿,并确定求助者的身份特征和求助信息特征对网络捐助的影响。结果发现,在捐助意愿和捐助金额方面,网络渠道高于现实渠道、熟人发布高于陌生人发布;当求助者与捐助者同为大学生时,捐助者对求助者的理性求助信息比情绪性求助信息有更强的捐助意愿和更多捐助金额。以上结果与大学生网络社会支持水平较高、处理网络信息能力较强有关。     

大学生网络捐助的影响因素:求助者特征的视角

以往关于捐助的心理学研究主要聚焦于现实环境中的捐助行为,以及捐助者自身特点对捐助的影响,网络环境、求助者特征对捐助影响的研究较少。本研究以大学生为被试,比较不同信息发布者情境中,网络与现实中捐助的意愿,并确定求助者的身份特征和求助信息特征对网络捐助的影响。结果发现,在捐助意愿和捐助金额方面,网络渠道高于现实渠道、熟人发布高于陌生人发布;当求助者与捐助者同为大学生时,捐助者对求助者的理性求助信息比情绪性求助信息有更强的捐助意愿和更多捐助金额。以上结果与大学生网络社会支持水平较高、处理网络信息能力较强有关。     

Giving from a distance: Putting the charitable organization at the center of the donation appeal

Past research has shown repeatedly that people prefer donating to a single identified human victim rather than to unidentified or abstract donation targets. In the current research we show results countering the identifiable victim effect, wherein people prefer to donate to charitable organizations rather than to an identifiable victim. In a series of five studies, we manipulate temporal and social distance, examine a variety of donation targets, and measure intention to donate time or money as well as actual donations of money. We show that people are more willing to donate to a charitable organization when they are temporally or socially distant from the population in need. Willingness to donate to a specific person in need is higher when donors are temporally or socially close to the donation target. Furthermore, we demonstrate that (a) empathy mediates donations to a single victim, yet does not mediate donations to charitable organizations; (b) that donation giving to charitable organizations is unique and is not similar to donations to a group of victims. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

Positive fantasies dampen charitable giving when many resources are demanded

Previous research found that positive fantasies about an idealized future yield low energy to pursue the fantasized future. We examined how positive fantasies about the resolution of a crisis (i.e., a lack of pain medication in Sierra Leone, the risk of flooding after Hurricane Irene) influence people's agreement to donate to charitable efforts directed at crisis resolution. In three studies, positive fantasies dampened the likelihood of agreeing to donate a relatively large amount of money, effort, or time, but did not affect the likelihood of agreeing to donate a relatively small amount of these resources. The effect of positive fantasies was mediated by perceiving the donation of larger (but not smaller) amounts of resources as overly demanding. These findings suggest that charitable solicitations requesting small donations might benefit from stimulating positive fantasies in potential donors, but those requesting large donations could be hurt.     

To Ask or Not to Ask: Enhancing Donations to Nonprofits by Soliciting Opinions Upfront,Rather than Donations

The success of non-profit organizations depends mainly on the strategies they use to recruit new donors. One common strategy is to solicit donations upfront (mostly online)—but is this indeed an effective approach? We conducted three experiments (N_total?=?1287), in which we compared an upfront appeal of that sort with one that offered prospective donors the opportunity to express their opinion about a given fundraising campaign—and then asked if they cared to donate to it. Drawing on foot-in-the-door and escalation of commitment theories, we found that soliciting an opinion (as opposed to a donation) led to greater engagement with the charity among prospective donors, as reflected by their greater willingness to read about the cause. This, in turn, encouraged them to donate. In experiment 1, we showed that the direct effect of request type on donations was mediated by the donors’ willingness to learn about the charity. In experiment 2, we showed that pairing an appeal for an opinion with a donation request was more effective than merely appealing for a donation. Finally, in experiment 3, we found that the more donors learn about a given cause, the stronger their emotional response to it, and the greater their donations to it. Further, we showed that soliciting an opinion (as opposed to a donation) made donors feel a greater connection with the organization. In sum, we propose a simple and cost-effective intervention that may help non-profit businesses become more effective.

     

The emotional consequences of donation opportunities

Charities often circulate widespread donation appeals, but who is most likely to donate and how do appeals impact the well-being of individual donors and non-donors, as well as the entire group exposed to the campaign? Here, we investigate three factors that may influence donations (recent winnings, the presence of another person, and matched earnings) in addition to the changes in affect reported by individuals who donate in response to a charitable opportunity and those who do not. Critically, we also investigate the change in affect reported by the entire sample to measure the net impact of the donation opportunity. Results reveal that people winning more money donate a smaller percentage to charity, and the presence of another person does not influence giving. In addition, large donors experience hedonic boosts from giving, and the substantial fraction of large donors translates to a net positive influence on well-being for the entire sample.     

Donate More,Be Happier! Evidence from the Netherlands

It is hypothesized that charitable donation provides psychological benefits collectively referred to as the “warm glow”. This study aimed to determine the magnitude of the “warm glow” of charitable donors based on subjective wellbeing data and real-world donation totals obtained from two surveys: the Longitudinal Internet Studies for the Social Sciences (LISS) and the Giving in the Netherlands Panel (GINP). Fixed effect estimates showed that when controlling for such major shocks to happiness as changes in marital status, income, and employment, charitable donors had higher happiness scores. To account for the endogeneity of donating, variation in the types of solicitation by charities was exploited. Some specifications from instrumental variable estimation showed that donating higher amounts of money increases life satisfaction significantly. The results show the local average treatment effect (LATE) for individuals who donate an extra Euro because they are solicited and these individuals would not donate this extra Euro if they were not solicited.     

Would You Like to Round Up and Donate the Difference? Roundup Requests Reduce the Perceived Pain of Donating

Recently, some companies have begun to ask their customers to “round up” transactions to the next highest dollar and donate the difference to charity. However, little is known about how consumers respond to such an appeal. Across a series of lab experiments and one large field study, we find that consumers respond more favorably to a roundup than to a flat donation request, even when the requested amount is identical. We find evidence that the effect arises because a roundup request reduces consumers’ perceived pain of donating. Three alternative explanations are examined (i.e., objective financial cost, inattention to donation cost, and perceived novelty of the request) but not supported. This research has important implications for both companies and nonprofits seeking to increase charitable donations from consumers.     

“This is my only request” – using the ‘Omega’ strategy to boost the success of charity drives

IntroductionThe Omega strategy described by Knowles is comprised of techniques applied with the goal of breaking down an individual's resistance to taking decisions (involving the purchase of a product, donations to charity, support for an idea, etc.).ObjectiveThe article describes two experiments designed to test a hypothesis on the usefulness of applying the Omega strategy in seeking donations for charitable organizations. The studies examines how adding the phrase “this is my only request” after announcing the primary request impacts the tendency to fulfil it. We tested both the willingness to help (experiment 1 and 2) as well as its declared size (experiment 2).MethodIn first experiment, 106 participants were asked in control and experimental conditions to make a donation to a children's hospice. In a second experiment, randomly assigned pedestrians (n = 80) were asked to help in writing and sending Christmas postcards to prisoners.ResultsThe results of both experiments demonstrate that the formula “this is my only request” is effective in increasing the chances that people will give donations.ConclusionWe may suspect that adding this phrase softens resistance among those who fear a more difficult request will come after the first one is fulfilled (and thus are wary of the mechanism applied in the foot-in-the-door technique).     

社会拥挤对金钱捐赠意愿的影响：自我表达需要的中介作用

通过四个实验（474名被试）,采用三种不同的刺激物操纵拥挤感,在三种不同情境下测量两类金钱捐赠行为,来探索拥挤感对金钱捐赠的影响。结果发现：拥挤感强（vs. 弱）的被试有更高的金钱捐赠意愿、更高的月度和年度捐赠金额;其中个体的自我表达需要发挥中介作用,即体验到强拥挤感的个体的自我表达需要更强,为了满足这一需要,更积极响应金钱捐赠的呼吁。     

Getting More by Asking for Less: The Effects of Request Size on Donations of Charity1

In the context of an annual fundraising drive for the American Society, two field experiments were conducted to test the relative effectiveness of suggesting either small or large contributions. In experiment 1, as part of a door-to-door campaign 300 people were randomly assigned to: (a) a standard request for contributions (control); (b) the standard request plus the words, “even a penny will help”; or (c) the standard request plus the words, “a generous contribution would really help.” As hypothesized, asking for a generous contribution significantly decreased the percentage of people who donated and failed to increase the average size of contribution by those who gave. Inconsistent with previous findings, the even-a-penny condition did not increase donating. In the second experiment conceptually similar requests were made in a mail-out campaign: 6,000 requests were made—2,000 suggested relatively small amounts (options beginning at $5); 2,000 suggested large amounts (options beginning at $5); and 2,000 were unspecified with regard to recommended amount (control). As expected, compared to the control condition, asking for small amounts increased the proportion of donors to nondonors without decreasing the average size of contributions, while asking for large amounts decreased the proportion of donors to nondonors without increasing the size of contributions. It is suggested that the findings have important implications for charitable fundraising.     

Memory for the Experience of Donating Blood: Just How Bad Was It?

A field experiment investigated the accuracy of blood donor's memory for the emotions they experienced during blood donation. Compared to what they reported at the time of donation, the donors remembered a greater contrast between predonation and postdonation emotions. The donors also remembered experiencing more anxiety than they actually did. The bias in memory was especially pronounced among relatively inexperienced donors who had not been asked to report on their emotion prior to their actual donations. The memory boas was also related to donors' attitudes at the time of recall. Donors' intentions to donate blood again were reliably predicted by a combination of attitude and emotion measures. Discussion considers a potential intervention for improving donor return rates.     

Affective motivations to help others: A two‐stage model of donation decisions

Emotional reactions are an important element in the motivation to help others. Our research examined the role of affective vs. deliberative information processing in the genesis and use of emotional reactions in decisions to provide financial aid to people in distress. In two studies, we investigated whether information processing mode influenced participants' donations, affective reactions, and the relationship between the two. Information processing was manipulated by a priming procedure and a cognitive load paradigm. Participants' empathic emotions were assessed by self‐reported sympathy, compassion, and distress. Additionally, we measured how much better a donation would make participants feel and their anticipated regret for not donating, which were taken as indicators of their motivation to donate as a form of mood management. Results suggest that different mechanisms govern the initial decision to donate money (Stage 1) compared to later decisions on how much money to donate (Stage 2). Motivations for mood management were primarily predictive of donation decisions, whereas empathic feelings were predictive of the donation amount. The potentially disruptive effects of deliberative processing on prosocial behavior are discussed in light of a two‐stage processing model of donations. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The polite wiggle‐room effect in charity donation decisions

We extend research on charity donations by exploring an everyday tactic for increasing compliance: asking politely. We consider three possible effects of politeness on charity donations: a positive effect, a negative effect, and a wiggle‐room effect where the perception of the request is adjusted to decline donating without feeling selfish. Results from six experiments systematically supported the polite wiggle‐room effect. In hypothetical donations contexts, indirect requests were judged more polite. In real donation contexts, though, indirect requests were not judged as more polite and had no consistent effect on donation decision. Rather, the decision to donate predicted the perceived politeness of the request, independently of its phrasing. Experiment 4 provided causal evidence that participants justified their donation decisions by adjusting their perception of the request. The polite wiggle‐room effect has important implications for organizations that seek to increase compliance while maintaining a positive image.     

Blood donation is an act of benevolence rather than altruism.

OBJECTIVES: Blood donation is described as an archetypal altruistic behavior, and recruitment/retention campaigns emphasize altruism. Here, a benevolence hypothesis for blood donation (both the donor and recipient benefit) rather than the altruism hypothesis (only the recipient gains) is proposed. DESIGN: Three United Kingdom-based studies contrasted benevolence and altruism: (a) a 6-month prospective study of blood donor behavior (Study 1: N = 957), (b) a cross-sectional study of blood donors' intentions (Study 2: N = 333), and (c) an experimental study examining the effect of benevolent and altruistic messages on willingness to help across high- and low-cost helping behaviors for committed and noncommitted blood donors (Study 3: N = 200). MAIN OUTCOME: Donor behavior and intentions-willingness. MEASURES: Beliefs in personal and societal benefit (Time 1) and actual donations (Time 2) were assessed in Study 1; beliefs in benevolence, altruism, hedonism, and kinship along with donation intentions were assessed in Study 2; and empathy, donor commitment, and willingness to donate blood, money, fund-raise, and staff a telephone helpline were assessed in Study 3. RESULTS: Beliefs in personal rather than societal benefit predicted actual future donation. A path model showed that only beliefs in benevolence were associated with intentions to donate. Committed blood donors were more willing to donate blood when exposed to a benevolent message rather than an altruistic one. This effect was not observed for other forms of helping. CONCLUSIONS: The benevolence hypothesis is supported, suggesting that blood donor motivation is partly selfish. Blood donation campaigns should focus on benevolent rather than purely altruistic messages.     

Factors affecting withdrawal from an escalating conflict: Quitting before it's too late

In an experimental study of “entrapping” conflicts —situations in which a decisionmaker may continue to expend resources in part to justify previous expenditures—subjects were given an initial stake of $4.00 and had the opportunity to win an additional $2.00 jackpot. Two independent variables (Process of Resource Allocation and Prior Limit-Setting) were combined in a 2 × 3 design. Once the subjects had started to invest, half of them had to make an “active” decision to continue. Unless they actively decided to continue, their investments automatically ceased and they were no longer eligible for the jackpot (Selfterminating condition). The other half only had to make a “passive” decision to continue. Unless they actively decided to dis continue, their investments for the jackpot automatically increased (Self-sustaining condition). In addition, before investments began, some subjects were asked to inform the experimenter of the nonbinding limit they had set on the amount they planned to invest (Public condition), some were asked to set a limit which they kept to themselves (Private condition), while a third group was not asked to set a limit (Control condition). Subjects invested significantly more money in the Self-sustaining condition. Also, investments were somewhat greater in the Control than the Public condition. Although the mean investments in the Public and Private conditions did not differ, those in the Public condition deviated significantly less from their earlier set limits, suggesting greater commitment to these limits. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

The effect of mood and incentives on helping: Are there some things money can't buy?

Happy, guilty, and neutral mood states were induced in participants who were then provided with an opportunity to donate blood for free, to donate in exchange for $5, or to choose between donating for free or for $5. As expected, there was a significantly higher incidence of helping when subjects felt happy and guilty as opposed to emotively neutral. Contrary to predictions, helping was unaffected by the type of incentive (donate for $5, donate for free, choose $5/free) subjects were offered in interaction with their mood state. However, the type of incentive did seem to influence the postdonation emotions of subjects: Guilty subjects who donated for money felt significantly less guilty following donation than prior to it and happy subjects felt more self-altruistic (kind and generous) following donation when they helped for free. The results are discussed in terms of Cialdini's negative state relief model (for negative moods) and the intrinsic qualities of helping (for positive moods).     

The role of identity in how whole‐blood donors reflect on and construct their future as a plasma donor

In the context of decreased demand for whole blood and increased demand for plasma‐derived products, donors in Australia are increasingly being asked to convert from whole‐blood to plasmapheresis donations. Plasmapheresis is a different type of donation to whole blood as the process takes longer and can be engaged in more frequently. What is unknown is whether whole‐blood donors view donating plasma as consistent with their donor identity and how they respond to the possibility of donating more frequently. To explore this, we undertook semistructured telephone interviews with 26 whole‐blood donors who had recently made their first plasma donation. Findings indicated that whereas donating plasma was viewed as a bigger ask than donating whole blood, the former was viewed as consistent with their identity as a donor because both behaviours were seen to benefit others and self and were located within the same institutional context. Donating plasma was an opportunity for donors to enhance their self‐concept as an altruistic giver. When contemplating their future donation behaviour, donors considered how their donor identity would fit alongside other salient roles. These findings have implications for how institutions can position their request of existing donors to give a different gift.     

Moral realism as moral motivation: The impact of meta-ethics on everyday decision-making

People disagree about whether “moral facts” are objective facts like mathematical truths (moral realism) or simply products of the human mind (moral antirealism). What is the impact of different meta-ethical views on actual behavior? In Experiment 1, a street canvasser, soliciting donations for a charitable organization dedicated to helping impoverished children, primed passersby with realism or antirealism. Participants primed with realism were twice as likely to be donors, compared to control participants and participants primed with antirealism. In Experiment 2, online participants primed with realism as opposed to antirealism reported being willing to donate more money to a charity of their choice. Considering the existence of non-negotiable moral facts may have raised the stakes and motivated participants to behave better. These results therefore reveal the impact of meta-ethics on everyday decision-making: priming a belief in moral realism improved moral behavior.     

Conversion to non-remunerated plasmapheresis donation: Effects of labeling and donation environment

IntroductionPlasmapheresis donors’ recruitment strategies should focus on asking whole-blood donors (WBDs) to convert to plasmapheresis.ObjectiveThis study measured the effect of labeling on the conversion of WBDs to plasmapheresis donation and examined the relationship between the type of blood drive and conversion to plasmapheresis.MethodsTwo blood drives destined towards students were held either on a university campus (mobile blood drive), or in a blood center. At the end of each whole-blood donation, the nurse performed a labeling, reactivated a few minutes later by a second individual asking the donor if he would agree to donate plasma. If so, an appointment for plasma donation was made or a promise was collected. The number of commitments to plasmapheresis (promise/appointment) and the number of achievements of these commitments measured the effect of labeling.ResultsFew significant differences between social or functional labeling were found compared to a “no labeling” condition in terms of commitments and concretizations. The in-center blood drive achieved three times more engagements than the mobile blood drive (p < .001). Appointments had better chances to turn into a plasma donation than promises (p < .001).ConclusionLabeling as it was tested seemed ineffective in conversion from whole blood donation to plasmapheresis, but further studies should be carried out to replicate these results. When only collected during in-center blood drives, blood collection agencies should try to develop in-center whole blood donations and promotional approaches towards plasma donation. When approaching potential plasmapheresis donors, appointments should be preferred to promises. Further research is needed to examine the causes of these results.