THE IMPACT OF FRAMING ON DONATION BEHAVIOR: A RESEARCH AGENDA

Year 2020, Volume: 7 Issue: 2, 91 - 101, 30.06.2020

Sibel Demirel Sebnem Burnaz Elif Karaosmanoglu

https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2020.1227

Abstract

Purpose - Intense competition in today’s world has forced nonprofit organizations to dwell into marketing practices to get more share of the individuals’ donation budget in order to achieve their mission and objectives. The aim of this study is to understand how nonprofit organizations should frame their donation calls as part of their marketing strategy.
Methodology – This paper aims to provide the key literature on the donor and donation related factors which have an impact on donation behavior and sets a research agenda in order to explore the relationships between framing of the donation messages, religious orientation, mindset and donation behavior.
Findings- Subsequently, the paper posits several propositions for future empirical testing.
Conclusion- This paper intends to make theoretical and managerial contributions not only to donation literature but also to the message framing literature. This paper highlights the next step to examine the relationships proposed and provide empirical evidence for the relationships between the constructs of donation type, donation behavior, religious orientation and mindset.

Keywords

Donation, message framing, monetary donation, nonprofit organization, religious orientation

References

• Aderman, D. and Berkowitz, L. (1970). Observational set, empathy, and helping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14, pp. 141-148.
• Allport, G. W. and J. M. Ross. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 5, pp. 423-43.
• Andreoni, J. (1989). Giving with impure altruism: Applications to charity and Ricardian equivalence. The Journal of Political Economy, 97, pp. 1447–1458.
• Andreoni, J., Brown, E. and Rischall, I. (2003). Charitable Giving by Married Couples Who Decides and Why Does It Matter? Journal of Human Resources, 38(1), pp. 111-133.
• Andreoni, J.and Vesterlund, L. (2001). Which is the fair sex? Gender differences in altruism. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116, 1, pp. 293–312.
• Anik, L., Aknin, L. B., Norton, M. I. and Dunn, E. W. (2009). Feeling Good About Giving: The Benefits (and Costs) of Self-Interested Charitable Behavior. Harvard Business School Marketing Unit Working Paper No. 10-012.
• Annis, L. V. (1976). Emergency helping and religious behavior. Psychological Reports, 39, pp. 151–158.
• Arcury, T.A. and Christianson E. H. (1993) Rural-Urban Differences in Environmental Knowledge and Actions. The Journal of Environmental Education, Vol. 25, Issue 1, pp. 19-25.
• Batson. C. D. (1976). Religion as prosocial: Agent or double agent? Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 15(1), pp. 29-45.
• Batson, C. D. and Gray. R. A. (1981). Religious orientation and helping behavior: Responding to one’s own or to the victim’s needs’?
• Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 40(3), pp. 511-520.
• Batson, C. D. and Ventis. W. L. (1982). The religious experience: A social psychological perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Becker, Gary S. (1974). “Theory of Social Interaction.” Journal of Political Economy 82(6). pp. 1064–1093.
• Belfield, C. R. and A. P. Beney. (2000). “What Determines Alumni Generosity? Evidence for the UK” Journal Education Economics, Vol. 8 Issue 1, pp. 65-80.
• Bendapaudi, N., S.N. Singh and V. Bendapaudi. (1996). Enhancing helping behavior: An integrative framework for promotion planning. Journal of Marketing, 60(3): pp. 33-49.
• Bennett, R. (2003), Factors underlying the inclination to donate to particular types of charity, International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 8, pp. 12–29.
• Benson, P. L., Dehority, J., Garman, L., Hanson, E., Hochschwender, M., Leobold, C., Rohr, R., Sullivan, J. (1980), Intrapersonal correlates of nonspontaneous helping behavior. The Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 110, pp. 87-95.
• Bernt, F. M. (1989). Being religious and being altruistic: A study of college service volunteers. Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 10, Issue 6, pp. 663-669.
• Brendl, C. Miguel, Arthur B. Markman, and Claude Messner (2003). “The Devaluation Effect: Activating a Need Devalues Unrelated Choice Options,” Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (March), pp. 463-473.
• Brunel, Frederic F, Michelle R Nelson. (2000). Explaining gendered responses to “help-self” and “help-others” charity ad appeals: The mediating role of world-views. Journal of Advertising 29(3) pp. 15–28.
• Bryant, W. K., Jeon-Slaughter, H., Kang, H., and Tax, A. (2003). Participation in philanthropic activities: Donating money and time. Journal of Consumer Policy, 26(1), pp. 43-73.
• Bussell, H., and Forbes, D. (2002). Understanding the volunteer market: The what, where, who and why of volunteering. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 7(3), pp. 244-257.
• Carabain, C.L. and R. Bekkers, (2012). Explaining differences in philanthropic behavior between Christians, Muslims and Hindus in the Netherlands. Review of religious research., 53: pp. 419-440.
• Carroll, J., S. McCarthy and C. Newman, (2005). An econometric analysis of charitable donations in the republic of Ireland. Economic and Social Review 36(3): pp. 229-249.
• Chandran, S. and Menon, G. (2004). When a day means more than a year: effects of temporal framing on judgments of health risk. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, pp. 375–389.
• Chau, L. L., Johnson, R. C., Bowers, J. K., Darvill, T. J., and Danko, G. P. (1990). Intrinsic and Extrinsic religiosity as related to conscience, adjustment, and altruism. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, pp. 397-400.
• Chrenka, J., Gutter, M. S., and Jasper, C. (2003). Gender Differences in the Decision to Give Time or Money. Consumer Interests Annual, Vol. 40, pp. 1-4. 

• Clarke, P. and Mount, P. (2001). Nonprofit marketing: the key to marketing's ‘mid‐life crisis’? International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 78-91.
• Coke, Jay S., C Daniel Batson, Katherine McDavis. (1978). Empathic mediation of helping: A two-stage model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36(7) 752.
• Correa, K.A., Stone, B. T., Stikic, M., Johnson, R. R. and Berka, C. (2015). Characterizing donation behavior from psychophysiological indices of narrative experience, Frontiers in Neuroscience, 9:301.
• Danko, W. D. and Stanley, T. J. (1986). “Identifying and Reaching the Donation Prone Individual: A Nationwide Assessment”, Journal of Professional Services Marketing, 2(1/2) 117-122.
• DeVoe, S. E. and Pfeffer, J. (2007). “When Time Is Money: The Effect of Hourly Payment on the valuation of Time,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 104(1) pp. 1-13.
• Dovidio, John F. (1984). “Helping Behavior and Altruism: An Empirical and Conceptual Overview,” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 17, ed. Leonard Berkowitz, New York: Academic Press, 361–427.
• Dufwenberg, M., and Muren, A. (2006). Generosity, anonymity, gender. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 61(1), 42-49.
• Eckel, C. C., and Grossman, P. J. (1998). Are women less selfish than men?: Evidence from dictator experiments. The Economic Journal, 108(448), pp. 726-735.
• Eckel, C.C. and Grossman, P.J. (2000). Differences in the Economic Decisions of Men and Women: Experimental Evidence. Handbook of Results in Experimental Economics, Charles Plott and Vernon L. Smith (Eds). New York: North Holland. 

• Eckel, C.C. and P.J. Grossman, 2004. Giving to secular causes by the religious and nonreligious: An experimental test of the responsiveness of giving to subsidies. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33(2): 271-289.
• Eisenberg, N. and Miller, P.A. (1987) “The Relation of Empathy to Prosocial and Related Behaviours” Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 101(1) pp. 91-119.
• Flippen, Annette R., Harvey A. Hornstein, William E. Siegal, and Eben A. Weitzman (1996). A Comparison of Similarity and Interdependence as Trigger for In-Group Formation, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22 (September), 882–93.
• Frey, K. P., and Eagly, A. H. (1993). Vividness can undermine the persuasiveness of messages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(1), pp. 32–44.
• Gershon R. and Cryder, C. (2016). When Money Doesn’t Talk: Corporations Receive Less Credit For Monetary Donations, - Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 44, pp. 455-456.
• Glazer, Amihai, and Kai Konrad. (1996). “A Signaling Explanation for Charity.” American Economic Review 86:1019–1028.
• Gourville, J. T., (1998). Pennies-a-Day: The Effect of Temporal Reframing on Transaction Evaluation, Journal of Consumer Research, Volume 24, Issue 4, pp. 395-408.
• Grau, S. and Folse, J.G. (2007). Cause-related marketing (CRM): The influence of donation proximity and message-framing cues on the less-involved consumer. Journal of Advertising ,36 (4): 19–33.
• Gwin, C.F. (2000). American Marketing Association. Conference Proceedings, suppl. 2000 AMA Educators' Proceedings; Chicago Vol. 11, 348.
• Harris, M. B. and Huang, L. C. (1973). Helping and the attribution process. Journal of Social Psychology, 90, pp. 291-297.
• Hassay, D. N. and Peloza, J. (2007). A Typology of Charity Support Behaviors: Toward a Holistic View of Helping, Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, Vol. 17, 135-151.
• Herzog, A. R., Kahn, R. L., Morgan, J. N., Jackson, J. S., and Antonucci, T. C. (1989). Age differences in productive activities. Journal of Gerontology, 44(4), pp. 129-138.
• Hoge, D.R. and F. Yang, (1994). Determinants of religious giving in American denominations: Data from two nationwide surveys. Review of Religious Research 36(2).
• Hunsberger, B. and Platonow. E. (1986). Religion and helping charitable causes. The Journal of Psychology Vol. 120, Issue 6, pp. 517-528.
• Kitchen, H. and Dalton R. (1990). Determinants of Charitable Donation by Families in Canada: A Regional Analysis, Applied Economics, Vol. 22(3) pp. 285-299.
• Kogut, T. and I. Ritov. (2005). The “identified victim” effect: An identified group, or just a single individual? Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 18(3) pp. 157–167.

• Krebs, Dennis. (1975). Empathy and altruism. Journal of Personality and Social psychology, 32(6) 1134.
• Lee, Y.K. and C.T. Chang, (2007). Who gives what to charity? Characteristics affecting charitable donations. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 35(9): pp. 1173-1180.
• Leeds, Ruth, (1963). Altruism and the Norm of Giving, Merrill- Palmer Quarterly 9, pp. 229-239.
• List, J.A. and M.K. Price, (2009). The role of social connections in charitable fundraising: Evidence from a natural field experiment. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 69: pp. 160-169.
• Liu, W. and Aaker, J., (2008), Reflective versus transactional mindsets in donation requests: the “time-ask” effect, SCP 2008 Winter Conference.
• Macaulay, J.R. (1970). A Shill for Charity. Altruism and Helping Behavior. New York: Academic Press.
• McLeish, Barry, J. (1995). Successful Marketing Strategies for Nonprofit Organizations. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 

• McPherson, J. M., and Rotolo, T. (1996). Testing a dynamic model of social composition: Diversity and change in voluntary groups. American Sociological Review, pp. 179-202.
• Mehrabian, A. and Epstein, N. (1972). A measure of emotional empathy. Journal of Personality, 40, pp. 525-543.
• Mesch, D. J., Brown, M. S., Moore, Z. I. and Hayat, A. D. (2011). Gender differences in charitable giving. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 16(4), pp. 342-355.

• Nelson, M.R., Brunel, F.F., Supphellen, M. and Manchanda, R.V. (2006) Effects of culture, gender, and moral obligations on responses to charity advertising across masculine and feminine cultures. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(1), pp. 45–56.
• Newman, R. (1996). Know your donor: gender differences in giving. Fund Raising Management, 27(5), pp. 31-32. 

• Nisbett, R.E. and Ross, L. (1980). Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Nowell, C. and Tinkler, S. (1994). The influence of gender on the provision of a public good. Journal of Behavior and Organization, Vol. 25, pp.25-36. 

• Peltier, James, Schibrowsky, John, and Schultz, Don (2002). Leveraging Customer Information to Develop Sequential Communication Strategies: A Case Study of Charitable Giving Behavior. Journal of Advertising Research, July-August, pp. 23-33. 

• Pew Research Center. (2012). The Global Religious Landscape. Retrieved from: http://www. pewforum.org/2012/12/18/global‐religious‐landscape‐exec/, accessed 12–4‐16.
• Pope, J. A., Isely, E. S. and Tutu, F. A., (2009). Developing a Marketing Strategy for Nonprofit Organizations: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, Vol. 21, Issue 2, 184-201.
• Radley, A. and M. Kennedy (1995). Charitable giving by individuals: A study of attitudes and practices. Human Relations, Vol. 48, pp. 685-710. 

• Reitsma, J., P. Scheepers and M.T. Grotenhuis, (2006). Dimensions of individual religiosity and charity: Cross-national effect differences in European countries. Review of religious research, 47(4): pp. 347-362.
• Repoport, A. (1988). Provision of Step-level Public Goods; Effect of Inequality in Resources, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 54 pp. 432-440.
• Sablosky, R. (2014). Does religion foster generosity? The Social Science Journal, 51, pp. 545-555.
• Sargeant Adrian, John B. Ford, Douglas C. West. (2006). Perceptual determinants of nonprofit giving behaviour, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 59, Issue 2, pp. 155-165.
• Sargeant, A. (1999). Charitable giving: Towards a model of donor behaviour, Journal of Marketing Management, 15, pp. 215–238.
• Scheepers, P. and M.T. Grotenhuis, (2005). Who cares for the poor in Europe? European Sociological Review, 21(5): pp. 453-465.
• Schibrowsky, J.A. and Peltier, J.W. (1995). Decision frames and direct marketing offers: a field study in a fundraising context. Journal of Direct Marketing, 9(1), pp. 8–16.
• Schlegelmilch, B.B., A. Diamantopoulos and A. Love, (1997). Characteristics affecting charitable donations: empirical evidence from Britain, Journal of Marketing Practice: Applied Marketing Science 3(1): pp. 14-28.
• Sherman S. J., Beike D. R., Ryalls, K. R., (1999). Dual Process Theories in Social Psychology, Guiford Press.
• Sherry, John F. (1983). Gift-Giving in Anthropological Perspective, Journal of Consumer Research. 10, pp. 157-168.
• Simmons, W. O., and Emanuele, R. (2007). Male-female giving differentials: are women more altruistic? Journal of Economic Studies, 34(6), pp. 534-550.
• Small, D.A. and Loewenstein, G. (2003). Helping a victim or helping the victim: altruism and identifiability. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 26(1), pp. 5–16.
• Small, D. A. and Nicole M. Verrochi (2009). The Face of Need: Facial Emotion Expression on Charity Advertisements, Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (6), pp. 777–87.
• Smith, Scott M.,(1980). Giving to Charitable Organizations: A Behavioral Review and a Framework for Increasing Commitment, in Advances in Consumer Research, Jerry Olson (ed.). Ann Arbor: Association for Consumer Research, pp. 753-743.
• Sober, E. (1988). What is Evolutionary Altruism, Canadian Journal on Philosophy, Vol. 14, pp. 75- 99.
• Sundeen, R. A., and Raskoff, S. A. (1994). Volunteering among teenagers in the United States. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 23(4), pp. 383-403.
• Taylor, S.E. and Thompson, S. (1982). Stalking the Elusive “Vividness” Effect. Psychological Review, 89, pp.155-191.
• Tversky A., D. Kahneman, (1981). The framing of decisions and psychology of choice, Science, Vol. 211, Issue 4481, pp. 453-458.
• Watson, P. I., Hood, R. W., Morris, R. J. and Hall. J. R. (1984). Empathy. religious orientation and social desirability. The Journal of Psychology, Vol. 117, Issue 2, pp. 211-216.
• 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), pp. 13-24.

• Winterich, K. P., and Zhang, Y. (2014). Accepting Inequality Deters Responsibility: How Power Distance Decreases Charitable Behavior, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 41, Issue 2, pp. 274-293.
• Women's Philanthropy Institute, the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University. (2010). Women Give 2010. 

• Women's Philanthropy Institute, the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University. (2014). Women Give 2014.
• Yao, Kimberly, (2015). Who Gives? The Determinants of Charitable Giving, Volunteering, and Their Relationship. Wharton Research Scholars Journal. Paper 126.
• Yen, S. T. (2002). An Econometric Analysis of Household Donations in the USA. Applied Economic Letters, 9, pp. 837-41.
• Giving USA, https://givingusa.org/giving-usa-2019-americans-gave-427-71-billion-to-charity-in-2018-amid-complex-year-for-charitable-giving