Motivation in Italian whole blood donors and the role of commitment

The literature contains numerous reports on motivation in blood donors, although none of these are specific to blood donation in Italy and almost all of them focus on altruism and the desire to help others. Altruism is important, but a comprehensive analysis of donor motivation should examine all the factors affecting the decision to donate, including commitment to voluntary blood donor organizations. The aims of this paper are to verify if the motivational factors that influence the choice to donate blood in Italy are generally consistent with the findings from other countries reported in the literature and to focus on commitment to donor organizations as an additional factor. A sample of 895 whole blood donors completed a self-report questionnaire containing questions about: reasons for beginning to donate, people who influenced this choice, and level of commitment to voluntary blood donor organizations. The most frequently reported reasons for giving blood for the first time were "to help others" (56%), "influence of family/friends" (22%), and "social/moral obligation" (11.2%); commitment did not vary as a function of the leading motivation reported. Differences emerged between males, who more frequently reported having been influenced by parents and friends, and females, who referred more often to altruistic motives. The opportunity to check one's own state of health also played an important role (6.9%), especially for male donors. Overall, however, the decision to donate was primarily a personal choice (41.3%), although influence was also attributed to relatives (21.8%), friends (22.3%), and voluntary blood donor organizations (21.8%). The reported level of commitment to the donor organization was positively correlated with the number of total and annual donations made and number of new donors recruited.     

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.     

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。     

Effects of directiveness of instructions and surveillance on the production and persistence of children's donations

All subjects earned tokens for correct size judgments and observed a model who had previously earned tokens at the same task donate some of her earnings. Children were subsequently given an opportunity to donate some of their tokens to children at another school. The opportunity to give occurred in presence (surveillance) or absence of the experimenter and after being presented with either directive (you must give) or permissive (you can give if you want to) instructions. Directive instructions and surveillance both produced greater initial giving for all children. In a second session with no modeling, no surveillance, and no further instructions, earlier directive instructions also produced greater persistence of giving for all children. Permissive instructions produced greater reductions in giving over time for boys than for girls. The present findings suggest that directive instructions produce greater initial giving and that donating persists better under these more explicit conditions.     

Helping Unrelated Strangers: Physical and Psychological Reactions to the Bone Marrow Donation Process Among Anonymous Donors1

The development of models that predict outcomes of voluntary action is important for practitioners who manage large groups of volunteers. In accordance with this goal, a path model was generated linking predonation characteristics of volunteer marrow donors to postdonation physical and psychological reactions. Questionnaire data were collected from 343 individuals registered to donate marrow to unrelated strangers at 3 time points: shortly predonation, shortly postdonation, and 1-year post- donation. Although donors had generally positive reactions to donation, a substantial minority reported ambivalence about donating, physical difficulty with donation, and negative psychological reactions postdonation. In addition, our data suggest that predonation ambivalence is a central predictor of postdonation reactions, even after other donor characteristics are taken into account. These results have practical implications for the recruitment of volunteers, and suggest important variables to be considered in evaluating potential bone marrow donors.     

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.     

When the poor give more than the rich: The role of resource evaluability on relative giving

Five experiments examined the role of resource evaluability on giving. We systematically varied participants' resources they and another potential donor received and whether they could donate to a recipient either by themselves or with the other donor. Participants in the relative advantage condition received more resources than the other donor, and those in the relative disadvantage condition received fewer resources than the other donor. The presence of the other donor made participants' resources evaluable and shaped giving: Relatively disadvantaged participants were proportionally more generous than advantaged participants but only when they could evaluate their resources. Neither the mere presence of others nor reputational concerns could explain the results. Exploratory mediation and moderation analyses further showed that relatively disadvantaged participants give proportionally more the higher and the more equal they perceive their status to the advantaged donor. This shows that the generosity of those who have less does depend on how they evaluate their status compared to other donors. Our results provide insights into the question of why and when resource asymmetries between donors result in prosocial giving and can influence fundraising strategies of charitable organizations.     

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。     

Gender Differences in Family Communication About Organ Donation

In this study we investigated gender differences in willingness to donate organs and conversations with family members about organ donation. Results from a snowball sample of 353 men and 488 women (average age = 41–50) indicated that men are less willing to donate and less likely to have conversations about organ donation. When such conversations do occur, men are less likely to include within them topics of conversation that are associated with more positive responses from family members. Women are more likely to include a mention of their desire to donate organs, discussion of the need for organs, and an explanation of why they would/would not like to donate their organs. They are also more likely to mention moral/altruistic/religious reasons for donation or to tell/use a narrative in the discussion. Men, however, more commonly discussed whether signing a donation card would affect medical care. Women report higher agreed compliance from family members. Directions are provided for future research and campaign development by taking these differences into consideration.     

Ask and You Shall be Given: Request Size and Donations to a Good Cause1

In an attempt to replicate the findings reported in this Journal by Weyant and Smith (1987), members or recent donors to a Canadian civil liberties organization were asked to donate money under one of three conditions: (a) In the control condition, they were simply asked for a donation; (b) in the “smaller request” condition, they were asked to make a donation, but amounts of Canadian $30 to $100 were suggested; and (c) in the “larger request” condition, amounts of $50 to $250 were suggested. Unlike the Weyant and Smith studies, we found no difference in the proportion of respondents making a donation, but significant differences in the size of the donations made by those making donations. In our study, the most effective way of getting large donations was to ask for a large amount. It was suggested that the most likely explanations for the differences in the results of the two studies were the following: First, our target population were previous donors to the organization, whereas those in the Weyant and Smith studies were not likely to have been. Previous research suggests that those who had been donors previously are influenced, positively, by requests for a specific large donation, whereas those not previously approached are, if anything, negatively influenced. Second, our “larger request” appears to be within a plausible range for donations, whereas the larger request in the Weyant and Smith study may have been seen as being outside of the plausible range. In any case, however, we would recommend caution in drawing a conclusion about the most effective request size to encourage people to donate money to charity.     

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).     

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.     

Real Donors, Real Consent: Testing the Theory of Reasoned Action on Organ Donor Consent

In an attempt to apply the theory of reasoned action (TRA) to the process underlying organ donor consent, participants completed questionnaires concerning their affective responses to organ donation, as well as their intentions to donate. Participants were given the opportunity to sign an organ donor card. Those who chose to sign the card had more positive attitudes about donation, perceived donation as something that their reference group would encourage, and had stronger intentions to consent to signing a card. The current investigation extends the organ donor literature by using a true behavioral outcome measure indicating consent. Moreover, the pattern of results between attitudes, norms, intention, and behavior illustrates the usefulness of applying the TRA to yet another health-related behavior.     

Developing a Commitment to Blood Donation: The Impact of One's First Experience1

The increasing demand for voluntarily donated blood has generated research concerned with the development of commitment to regular blood donation. Taking a developmental perspective, this paper explores the longitudinal impact of background, situational, and dispositional factors measured at one's first donation. Questionnaire responses from a sample of first-time donors are analyzed and logistic regression analysis is employed to predict successive “continuation decisions” (the decisions to donate twice, three times, and four times). Results suggest that factors may change in their magnitude and direction of impact across the donor's career. Externally focused social pressures and rewards are dominant at the early stages and self-originating factors at the later stages. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.     

Donor payoffs and other-regarding preferences in cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus)

Helping others at no cost to oneself is a simple way to demonstrate other-regarding preferences. Yet, primates exhibit mixed results for other-regarding preferences: chimpanzees and tamarins do not show these effects, whereas capuchin monkeys and marmosets preferentially give food to others. One factor of relevance to this no-cost food donation is the payoff to the donor. Though donors always receive the same payoffs regardless of their choice, previous work varies in whether they receive either a food reward or no food reward. Here, I tested cotton-top tamarins in a preferential giving task. Subjects could choose from two tools, one of which delivered food to a partner in an adjacent cage and the other of which delivered food to an empty cage. Thus, subjects could preferentially give or withhold food from a partner. I varied whether subjects received food payoffs, whether a partner was present or absent, and whether the partner was a non-cagemate or the subject’s mate. Results showed that the subjects’ overall motivation to pull either tool declined when they did not receive any food. Additionally, they did not preferentially donate or withhold food, regardless of their own payoff or their relationship with the partner. Thus, cotton-top tamarins do not take advantage of cost-free food giving, either when they might gain in the future (mates) or when they have no opportunity for future interactions (non-cagemates).     

Normative explanations of helping behavior: A critique,proposal, and empirical test

Criticisms of normative explanations of helping behavior are examined, and an explanation responsive to these criticisms is proposed. This explanation specifies conditions which affect the activation of personal norms and hence their influence on behavior. One hypothesis based on the explanation was tested: the impact of norms on behavior is a function of the tendency to deny or to ascribe responsibility to the self (AR). AR and personal norms toward donating bone marrow to a stranger were measured in a mailed questionnaire. Three months later, 132 women received mailed appeals to join a pool of potential donors from an unrelated source. As predicted, volunteering was a function of the AR × personal norm interaction (p < .0001). Personal norms had no impact on volunteering among those low on AR (deniers), but a substantial impact among those high on AR. Neither intentions to donate, attitudes toward transplants, nor various sociodemographic variables added to the variance in volunteering accounted for by the AR × personal norm interaction.     

Blood donor development: Effects of personality, motivational and situational variables

The present study examined the relative importance of the aversiveness of the donation procedure, donor motives and donor personality characteristics in the blood donors' decision to donate. One hundred and eighty-six blood donors and 106 nondonors took part in this retrospective study. Participants were asked to complete a number of personality measures, and two questionnaires assessing their motives for donating and the aversiveness of their most recent donation experience. Results indicated that both the aversiveness of the donation procedure and the donor's motivation exert considerable influence upon the donors' decision to return and donate again. Additionally, the donors' experience of physical discomfort and fearfulness about the donation procedure made the major contributions to the donation's aversiveness. The results also revealed that significant differences exist among nondonor, ex-donor, irregular and regular donor groups on several personality characteristics, on their motives for donating, and on the components comprising the aversiveness of the donation procedure. A blood donor decision model is presented incorporating the influence of motivational, situational and dispositional factors in the individual's development into a regular donor.     

Risks and Benefits of Pediatric Bone Marrow Donation: A Critical Need for Research

Healthcare providers assume that there are minimal risks and potential psychosocial benefits for children who undergo a bone marrow harvest for the benefit of their critically ill siblings. Ethical justifications for the use of children as donors rely on there being minimal risks since donors receive no direct medical benefits from the intervention. There is little empirical research regarding psychosocial consequences. This article reviews relevant research in three contexts: a) psychosocial outcomes for adults and children who donate tissue and organs; b) psychosocial impacts on a sibling of a pediatric cancer patient; and c) children's decision-making regarding medical decisions. The relevant research literature supports the belief that the psychosocial impact on a child bone marrow donor will be influenced by the survival of the recipient, the age of the donor, and the donor's participation in the decision to donate. In order to empirically validate the actual psychosocial risks (and benefits) for donors, it is argued that direct research is needed so that a donor's well-being can be protected.