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.     

助推爱心：利用默认选项促进捐赠行为

本研究采用实验室和现场实验的方法检验了默认选项的助推策略是否能够促进慈善捐赠行为。结果发现：（1）相较于把被试费的“保留选项”设置为默认,把“捐献选项”设置为默认时,被试捐献的概率和金额更高;（2）在多个捐款选项情景中,默认选项的设置总体上提高了默认选项被选择的概率;将最大金额选项设置为默认选项有助于提高被试平均捐赠额。这些发现表明,应用默认选项的助推策略能够有效促进人们的捐赠行为。本研究结果对减少募捐成本、提高募捐效率有所启示。     

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.     

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.     

The self-protective altruist: terror management and the ambivalent nature of prosocial behavior

Three studies examined the hypothesis that mortality salience (MS) will increase prosocial behaviors when the prosocial cause promotes terror management processes. However, when the prosocial cause interferes with these processes, MS will reduce prosocial behavior. In Study 1, following a MS procedure, participants indicated their willingness to donate money to charity or to donate to an organ donation organization. In Study 2, a research assistant randomly distributed fliers with reminders of death or back pain, and another research assistant solicited participants' assistance from either a charitable fund booth or an organ donation booth. Study 3 examined the impact of MS on helping a wheelchair-bound confederate or a walking confederate. The results indicated that MS increased charitable donations and increased help to a walking confederate. However, MS significantly decreased organ donation card signings and decreased help to a wheelchair-bound confederate. The discussion examines the tension between personal fear and worldview validation.     

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.     

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.     

Memorial Distortions in Donation Data

Abstract

In this study, participants' memory for charitable acts, including the amounts they donated to charity and the frequency of such donations, and also the processes associated with the recall of charitable acts was explored. Participants were Australian students who earned money for responding correctly to a decision-making task and then were given the opportunity to make a donation to a charity. Five weeks later they attempted to recall how much they had donated. Recall of the amount donated produced significant overestimations. A 2nd study examined estimates of donating frequency, and results suggested that the frequency of donating was overestimated. The discussion focuses on the validity of survey data on donation size and frequency and the processes associated with the recall of charitable acts.     

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.     

情绪和框架效应对个体捐赠决策影响的实验研究

本研究采用双因素被试间实验具体考察了特定即时情绪和框架效应对于捐赠决策的影响,结果发现存在显著的主效应和交互作用。悲伤情绪能够增加捐赠者的捐赠意愿,快乐情绪会降低捐赠者的捐赠意愿;损失框架能够增加捐赠者的捐赠意愿,幸存框架会降低捐赠者的捐赠意愿;快乐情绪的捐赠者的捐赠决策受框架效应的影响要弱于中性情绪和悲伤情绪的捐赠者,捐赠者在幸存框架下的捐赠决策受情绪的影响比在损失框架下受情绪的影响更小。     

An “Opting In” Paradigm for Kidney Transplantation

Almost 60,000 people in the United States with end stage renal disease are waiting for a kidney transplant. Because of the scarcity of organs from deceased donors live kidney donors have become a critical source of organs; in 2001, for the first time in recent decades, the number of live kidney donors exceeded the number of deceased donors. The paradigm used to justify putting live kidney donors at risk includes the low risk to the donor, the favorable risk-benefit ratio, the psychological benefits to the donor, altruism, and autonomy coupled with informed consent; because each of these arguments is flawed we need to lessen our dependence on live kidney donors and increase the number of organs retrieved from deceased donors.

An “opting in” paradigm would reward people who agree to donate their kidneys after they die with allocation preference should they need a kidney while they are alive. An “opting in” program should increase the number of kidneys available for transplantation and eliminate the morally troubling problem of “organ takers” who would accept a kidney if they needed one but have made no provision to be an organ donor themselves. People who “opt in” would preferentially get an organ should they need one at the minimal cost of donating their kidneys when they have no use for them; it is a form of organ insurance a rational person should find extremely attractive.

An “opting in” paradigm would simulate the reciprocal altruism observed in nature that sociobiologists believe enhances group survival. Although the allocation of organs based on factors other than need might be morally troubling, an “opting in” paradigm compares favorably with other methods of obtaining more organs and accepting the status quo of extreme organ scarcity. Although an “opting in” policy would be based on enlightened self-interest, by demonstrating the utilitarian value of mutual assistance, it would promote the attitude that self-interest sometimes requires the perception that we are all part of a common humanity.     

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).     

Cheapened altruism: Discounting personally affected prosocial actors

Are charitable donors always perceived as charitable? Three studies suggest that although having a personal connection to a cause motivates much charitable giving, donors who have been personally affected by the target cause are given less “credit” for their donations, i.e., are perceived as less intrinsically charitable. These donors are perceived as having selfish motivations even when they have nothing economic or social to gain from the donation. More specifically, personally-affected donors are perceived as driven by emotional selfishness, or a desire to improve their own hedonic state rather a desire to improve the welfare of others, which lessens the charitable credit that they receive. In addition, although donors who have been personally affected by the target cause are seen as less charitable, they are perceived more favorably in other ways (e.g., more loyal).     

Inspired to donate: How donors' social class impacts charitable donations

Previous research has found that donors' social class affects their own charitable giving. This research explores the effect of donors' social class on others' donation behavior. Specifically, we propose that individuals feel more inspired to engage in prosocial behavior after learning about low-social-class donors (vs. high-social-class donors) perform the giving behavior. A series of five studies, combining online and experimental data, provide converging support for this proposition and its underlying mechanism of inspiration. Furthermore, we show that the effect of donors' social class on individuals' donation behavior is attenuated when the donation currency is goods (instead of money). The article concludes with implications for the marketing of charities and prosocial behaviors.     

The role of psychosocial factors in predicting the formalized human milk donation to nonprofit milk banks

Human milk donation is important for improving the development of preterm infants. However, despite the importance of donating the human milk, relatively little research has tested which factors predict this form of donation. This study assessed the association between the psychosocial factors and formalized milk donation to a nonprofit milk bank. This study used a cross-sectional design. Breastfeeding mothers (N = 556) completed measures assessing altruism, pride, instrumental and affective attitudes, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, anxiety, and intention to donate human milk to a nonprofit milk bank. We also assessed whether participants requested additional information about donating the human milk. Instrumental and affective attitude, subjective norm, and self-efficacy were positively associated with intention to donate milk. Self-efficacy and intention were also uniquely associated with requesting the additional information. The intention to engage in the formalized milk donation to a nonprofit milk bank appears to be more likely if women view this action as beneficial, believe significant others support the action and think they have the ability to undertake this action. Women who think they have the ability to undertake this action and are willing to donate are more likely to request additional information. These findings might inform future experimental research and campaigns on the human milk donation.     

The Martyrdom Effect: When Pain and Effort Increase Prosocial Contributions

Most theories of motivation and behavior (and lay intuitions alike) consider pain and effort to be deterrents. In contrast to this widely held view, we provide evidence that the prospect of enduring pain and exerting effort for a prosocial cause can promote contributions to the cause. Specifically, we show that willingness to contribute to a charitable or collective cause increases when the contribution process is expected to be painful and effortful rather than easy and enjoyable. Across five experiments, we document this “martyrdom effect,” show that the observed patterns defy standard economic and psychological accounts, and identify a mediator and moderator of the effect. Experiment 1 showed that people are willing to donate more to charity when they anticipate having to suffer to raise money. Experiment 2 extended these findings to a non‐charity laboratory context that involved real money and actual pain. Experiment 3 demonstrated that the martyrdom effect is not the result of an attribute substitution strategy (whereby people use the amount of pain and effort involved in fundraising to determine donation worthiness). Experiment 4 showed that perceptions of meaningfulness partially mediate the martyrdom effect. Finally, Experiment 5 demonstrated that the nature of the prosocial cause moderates the martyrdom effect: the effect is strongest for causes associated with human suffering. We propose that anticipated pain and effort lead people to ascribe greater meaning to their contributions and to the experience of contributing, thereby motivating higher prosocial contributions. We conclude by considering some implications of this puzzling phenomenon. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

真实急病情境下共情对大学生慈善捐助的影响:有调节的中介效应

基于真实急病情境,采用道德强度、道德认同、共情和慈善捐助问卷对462名大学生进行调查,探讨了共情影响大学生慈善捐助的内在机制。结果显示:(1)女生在真实急病情境下比男生更容易对主人公的不幸事件产生共情反应;大学生真实急病情境下的共情反应随年级关系的疏远而逐渐降低;(2)共情在道德强度与慈善捐助的关系中具有部分中介作用,即道德强度通过共情对慈善捐助产生间接影响;(3)道德认同对共情的中介作用具有调节效应,具体而言,相对于低道德认同的个体,高道德认同的个体表现出更多的慈善捐助,并且共情对道德强度和慈善捐助的中介效应也显著增强。研究结论对于理解慈善捐助的内在机制具有理论价值,对于慈善捐助的教育和干预具有现实启示意义。     

Can an organization's philanthropic donations encourage consumers to give? The roles of gratitude and boundary conditions

This study examines whether an organization's charitable donation will prompt consumers who closely identify with the organization to give to the charity as well. We posit that identifying with a benefactor will enhance the perception that consumers are involved in the donation process, which evokes grateful feelings. We also predict that the amount of the organization's donation will positively moderate the influence of organization identification on charity‐evoked feelings of gratitude, while attitude toward the organization's charity will positively moderate the gratitude–donation relationship. In Study 1, we show how gratitude arises in the context of corporate social responsibility by demonstrating the mediating role of perceived donation contribution in the relationship between organization identification and gratitude. In Study 2, we demonstrate that organization identification has a significant indirect effect on donation intention through gratitude. Multigroup analyses show that the identification–gratitude link is more salient when the organization commits to donating a larger amount of money to a charity. Furthermore, the impact of gratitude on donation intent is significantly stronger for individuals who hold a favorable attitude toward the organization's corporate social responsibility activity. Our findings indicate that an organization's charitable giving also encourages consumers to give to the community via vicariously felt gratitude. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.