Analyzing the Role of Mystic Appeals on Donation Intention

Abstract

Today, together with the increasing population, the social, economic, and environmental problems our World is experiencing are increasing and becoming prevalent. Donation by consumers is one of the essential income items of non-profit organizations that fight against these problems. Furthermore, the increase of these problems creates pressure on businesses, and businesses react to these pressures by organizing donation campaigns within social marketing. Several different methods are being used for delivering these campaigns to consumers, which are analyzed empirically in consumer behavior literature. This study analyzed the effect of mystically designed appeals on donation intention, which can be accepted as one of these methods. It is already known that mystic visuals create positive effects in landscape preference studies. Inspired by this fact, a pilot study was carried out in which the effect of mystical-themed appeals on donation intention was analyzed experimentally. Analysis of the study revealed the negative effect of mystical appeals on donation intention. Findings discussed together with implications and theoretical contributions.

Keywords

• mystic appeals
• donation appeals
• mysticism
• social marketing
• donation intention
• ads

Bağış Reklamlarında Mistik Tema (Gizem) Kullanımının Bağış Niyeti Üzerindeki Etkisinin Analiz Edilmesi

Öz

Günümüzde artan nüfusla beraber dünyamızın deneyimlediği sosyal, ekonomik ve çevresel sorunlar giderek artmakta ve yaygınlaşmaktadır. Bu sorunlarla mücadele eden kar amacı gütmeyen kuruluşların en temel gelir kalemlerinden birisi tüketiciler tarafından yapılan bağışlardır. Ayrıca, bu sorunların artması işletmeler üzerinde de baskı oluşturmakta ve işletmeler de bu baskıya karşı koyabilmek için sosyal pazarlama anlayışı çerçevesinde çeşitli bağış kampanyaları düzenlemektedirler. Bu kampanyaların tüketicilere ulaştırılmasında çeşitli yöntemler kullanılmakta ve bu yöntemlerin önemli bir bölümü bilimsel olarak incelenmektedir. Bu çalışmada bu kampanyaların iletişiminde kullanılan bir alternatif olarak değerlendirilebilecek olan mistik (gizemli) olarak tasarlanmış reklamların bağış niyeti üzerindeki etkisi analiz edilecektir. Mistik görsellerin manzara tercihi araştırmalarında olumlu bir etki yarattığı bilinmektedir. Buradan ilham alınarak çalışma kapsamında yürütülen pilot çalışmada, mistik temalı görsellerin bağış niyeti üzerindeki etkisi deneysel olarak analiz edilmiştir. Yapılan araştırma sonucunda kullanılan görselin gizemli olarak tasarlanmasının bağış niyeti üzerinde olumsuz bir etki yaptığı görülmüştür. Sonuç kısmında elde edilen bulgular tavsiyeler ve teorik yorumlamalarla birlikte tartışılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Mistik mesaj
• bağış reklamları
• gizem
• sosyal pazarlama
• bağış niyeti
• reklam

Kaynakça

1. Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5(4), 432-443.
2. Antonetti, P., & Maklan, S. (2014). Feelings that make a difference: How guilt and pride convince consumers of the effectiveness of sustainable consumption choices. Journal of Business Ethics, 124(1), 117–134.
3. Bagozzi, R. P., & Moore, D. J. (1994). Public service advertisements: Emotions and empathy guide prosocial behavior. Journal of Marketing, 58(1), 56-70.
4. Brennan, L., & Binney, W. (2010). Fear, guilt, and shame appeals in social marketing. Journal of Business Research, 63(2), 140–146.
5. Brough, A. R., Wilkie, J. E., Ma, J., Isaac, M. S., & Gal, D. (2016). Is eco-friendly unmanly? The green-feminine stereotype and its effect on sustainable consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(4), 567–582.
6. Butler, R. A. (2020, July 12). 10 Rainforest Facts for 2020. Mongabay: https://rainforests.mongabay.com/facts/rainforest-facts.html
7. Cialdini, R. B. (2003). Crafting normative messages to protect the environment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(4), 105-109.
8. Çarkoğlu, A., & Aytaç, S. E. (2019). Individual giving and philanthropy in Turkey. İstanbul: Türkiye Üçüncü Sektör Vakfı (TÜSEV).

9. Dann, S. (2010). Redefining social marketing with contemporary commercial marketing definitions. Journal of Business Research, 63(2), 147–153.
10. Everyone.org. (2012). A life free from hunger tackling child malnutrition.
11. Gallopel-Morvan, K., Gabriel, P., Gall-Ely, M. L., Rieunier, S., & Urien, B. (2011). The use of visual warnings in social marketing: The case of tobacco. Journal of Business Research, 64(1), 7–11.
12. Goldstein, N. J., Cialdini, R. B., & Griskevicius, V. (2008). A room with a viewpoint: Using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 472-482.
13. Grewal, L., Hmurovic, J., Lamberton, C., & Reczek, R. W. (2019). The self-perception connection: why consumers devalue unattractive produce. Journal of Marketing, 83(1), 89-107.
14. Hagerhall, C. M. (2000). Clustering predictors of landscape preference in the traditional swedish cultural landscape: Prospect-refuge, mystery, age and management. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 20(1), 83-90.
15. Hart, P. S., & Nisbet, E. C. (2012). Boomerang effects in science communication: How motivated reasoning and identity cues amplify opinion polarization about climate mitigation policies. Communication Research, 39(6), 701–723.
16. Henley, N., Donovan, R. J., & Moorhead, H. (1998). Appealing to positive motivations and emotions in social marketing: Example of a positive parenting campaign. Social Marketing Quarterly, 4(4), 48-53.
17. Herzog, T. R., & Bryce, A. G. (2007). Mystery and preference in within-forest settings. Environment and Behavior, 39(6), 779-796.
18. Herzog, T. R., & Smith, G. A. (1988). Danger, mystery, and environmental preference. Environment and Behavior, 20(3), 320-344.
19. Hoog, N. d., Stroebe, W., & Wit, J. B. (2007). The impact of vulnerability to and severity of a health risk on processing and acceptance of fear-arousing communications: A meta-analysis. Review of General Psychology, 11(3), 258 –285.
20. Huhmann, B. A., & Brotherton, T. P. (1997). A content analysis of guilt appeals in popular magazine advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 26(2), 35-45.
21. Hurriyet Daily News. (2020, March 30). Erdoğan launches national campaign against COVID-19. www.hurriyetdailynews.com: https://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/erdogan-launches-national-campaign-against-covid-19-153428
22. Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press.
23. Koo, M., Oh, H., & Patrıck, V. M. (2019). From oldie to goldie: humanizing old produce enhances its appeal. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 4(4), 337-351.
24. Kotler, P., & Zaltman, G. (1971). Social marketing: An approach to planned social change. Journal of Marketing, 35(3), 3-12.
25. Lehman, P. K., & Geller, E. S. (2004). Behavior analysis and environmental protection: accomplishments and potential for more. Behavior and Social Issues, 13(1), 13-32.
26. Kohn, P. M., Goodstadt, M.S., Cook, G.M., Sheppard, M., & Chan, G. (1982). Ineffectiveness of threat appeals about drinking and driving. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 14(6), 457-464.
27. Nasar, J. L., & Cubukcu, E. (2011). Evaluative appraisals of environmental mystery and surprise. Environment and Behavior, 43(3), 387–414.
28. National Geographic. (2019, July 5). Great Pacific Garbage Patch. nationalgeographic.org: https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/great-pacific-garbage-patch/
29. Noble, G., Pomering, A., & Johnson, L. W. (2014). Gender and message appeal: their influence in a pro-environmental social advertising context. Journal of Social Marketing, 4(1), 4-21.
30. O’Neill, S., & Nicholson-Cole, S. (2009). “Fear won’t do it” Promoting positive engagement with climate change through visual and iconic representations. Science Communication, 30(3), 355-379.
31. Ok, Ü. (2011). Dini tutum ölçeği: ölçek geliştirme ve geçerlik çalışması. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 8(2), 528-549.
32. Osbaldiston, R., & Schott, J. P. (2012). Environmental sustainability and behavioral science: meta-analysis of proenvironmental behavior experiments. Environment and Behavior, 44(2), 257–299.
33. Oxford Reference. (n.d). guilt appeals. In Oxford Reference Dictionary. Retrieved August 15, 2021, from https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095911849
34. Pepelko, K. (2014). One Green Planet. 12 Alarming Facts About Pet Homelessness: https://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/12-alarming-facts-about-pet-homelessness/
35. Peter, P. C., & Honea, H. (2012). Targeting social messages with emotions of change: The call for optimism. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 31(2), 269–283.
36. Prooijen, A.-M. v., & Sparks, P. (2014). Attenuating initial beliefs: increasing the acceptance of anthropogenic climate change information by reflecting on values. Risk Analysis, 34(5), 929-936.
37. Prothero, A., Dobscha, S., Freund, J., Kilbourne, W. E., Luchs, M. G., Ozanne, L. K., et al. (2011). Sustainable consumption: Opportunities for consumer research and public policy. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 30(1), 31-38.
38. Reno, R. R., Cialdini, R. B., & Kallgren, C. A. (1993). The transsituational influence of social norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(1), 104-112.
39. Ruiter, R. A., Abraham, C., & Kok, G. (2001). Scary warnings and rational precautions: A review of the psychology of fear appeals. Psychology and Health, 16(6), 613-630.
40. Sharma, N. (2021). The impact of using negative versus positive Karma framing in donation appeals at grocery checkouts on the facilitating store's outcomes. Journal Consumer Behaviour, 20(2), 474–486.
41. SheltonGrp. (2018). Brands & Stands Social Purpose is the New Black. Shelton Communications Group. Snyder, L. B., & Blood, D. J. (1992). Caution: Alcohol advertising and the surgeon general's alcohol warnings may have adverse effects on young adults. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 20(1), 37-53.
42. Thompson, S. C., & Stoutemyer, K. (1991). Water use as a commons dilemma: The effects of education that focuses on long-term consequences and individual action. Environment and Behavior, 23(3), 314-333.
43. United Nations. (2020, March 21). UN World Water Development Report 2020 ‘Water and Climate Change’. https://www.unwater.org/: https://www.unwater.org/world-water-development-report-2020-water-and-climate-change/
44. Vermeir, I., Weijters, B., Houwer, J. D., Geuens, M., Slabbinck, H., Spruyt, A., et al. (2020). Environmentally sustainable food consumption: A review and research agenda from a goal-directed perspective. Frontiers in Psycholgy, 11(1603).
45. Wang, T., Mukhopadhyay, A., & Patrick, V. M. (2017). Getting consumers to recycle NOW! When and why cuteness appeals influence prosocial and sustainable behavior. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 35(2), 269–283.
46. White, K., & Peloza, J. (2009). Self-benefit versus other-benefit marketing appeals: Their effectiveness in generating charitable support. Journal of Marketing, 73(4), 109-124.
47. White, K., Argo, J. J., & Sengupta, J. (2012). Dissociative versus associative responses to social identity threat: The role of consumer self-construal. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(4), 704–19.
48. White, K., Habib, R., & Dahl, D. W. (2020). A review and framework for thinking about the drivers of prosocial consumer behavior. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 5(1), 2-18.
49. White, K., Habib, R., & Hardisty, D. J. (2019). How to SHIFT consumer behaviors to be more sustainable: A literature review and guiding framework. Journal of Marketing, 83(3), 22-49.
50. Winterich, K. P., G. Y., & Gonzales, G. E. (2019). Knowing what it makes: How product transformation salience increases recycling. Journal of Marketing, 83(4), 21-37.