Marketing Letters

, Volume 30, Issue 1, pp 75–90 | Cite as

Social exclusion influences on the effectiveness of altruistic versus egoistic appeals in charitable advertising

  • Tae Hyun Baek
  • Sukki Yoon
  • Seeun Kim
  • Yeonshin KimEmail author


In three experiments, the authors study charitable behaviors and demonstrate that consumers who feel socially excluded react more positively to altruistic, other appeals rather than egoistic, self-benefit appeals. In Study 1, a child poverty relief campaign with a message persuasiveness variable, consumers who feel socially excluded are more persuaded by other-benefit appeals, but other appeals and self-benefit appeals have equal effects on consumers who feel socially included. Study 2 replicates the findings in a cancer research campaign with an amount-to-donate variable: consumers who feel socially excluded allocate more dollars to the charity in response to other-benefit rather than self-benefit ads, but the effects are not observed among consumers who feel socially included. Study 3, a campaign for providing drinking water, further validates the findings with a donation intentions variable: other-benefit ads rather than self-benefit ads drive consumers who feel socially excluded to be more willing and likely to donate, but the effects are not observed among consumers who feel socially included and those in the baseline control condition.


Charitable behavior Message persuasiveness Other-benefit appeals Self-benefit appeals Social exclusion 


Funding information

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (NRF-2017S1A2A2041723).


  1. Baek, T. H., & Yoon, S. (2017). Guilt and shame: environmental message framing effects. Journal of Advertising, 46(3), 440–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Batson, C. D. (1987). Prosocial motivation: is it ever truly altruistic? Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 20, 65–122.Google Scholar
  3. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brunel, F. F., & Nelson, M. R. (2000). Explaining gendered responses to “help-self” and “help-others” charity ad appeals: the mediating role of world-views. Journal of Advertising, 29(3), 15–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cacioppo, J. T., Chen, H. Y., & Cacioppo, S. (2017). Reciprocal influences between loneliness and self-centeredness: a cross-lagged panel analysis in a population-based sample of African American, Hispanic, and Caucasian adults. Personality and Social PsychologyBulletin, 43(8), 1125–1135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chang, C. (2014). Guilt regulation: the relative effects of altruistic versus egoistic appeals for charity advertising. Journal of Advertising, 43(3), 211–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dillard, J. P., & Ye, S. (2008). The perceived effectiveness of persuasive messages: questions of structure, referent, and bias. Journal of Health Communication, 13(2), 149–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Duclos, R., Wan, E. W., & Jiang, Y. (2013). Show me the honey! Effects of social exclusion on financial risk-taking. Journal of Consumer Research, 40, 122–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ekici, A., & Shiri, A. (2018). The message in the box: how exposure to money affects charitable giving. Marketing Letters, 29(2), 137–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fisher, R. J., Vandenbosch, M., & Antia, K. D. (2008). An empathy-helping perspective on consumers’ responses to fund-raising appeals. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 519–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gardner, W. L., Pickett, C. L., & Brewer, M. B. (2000). Social exclusion and selective memory: how the need to belong influences memory for social events. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(4), 486–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Giving USA Foundation (2017). Giving USA 2017: Total charitable donations rise to new high of $390.05 billion. Accessed 14 May 2018.
  13. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  14. Kemp, E., Moore, D. J., & Cowart, K. (2016). Me, myself, and I: examining the effect of loneliness and self-focus on message referents. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 37(1), 15–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Knowles, M. L. (2014). Social rejection increases perspective taking. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 55, 126–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kulow, K., & Kramer, T. (2016). In pursuit of good karma: when charitable appeals to do right go wrong. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(2), 334–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lee, J., & Shrum, L. J. (2012). Conspicuous consumption versus charitable behavior in response to social exclusion: a differential needs explanation. Journal of Consumer Research, 39, 530–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Maner, J. K., DeWall, C. N., Baumeister, R. F., & Schaller, M. (2007). Does social exclusion motivate interpersonal reconnection? Resolving the “porcupine problem”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 42–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mead, N. L., Baumeister, R. F., Stillman, T. F., Rawn, C. D., & Vohs, K. D. (2011). Social exclusion causes people to spend and consume strategically in the service of affiliation. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(5), 902–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nelson, M. R., Brunel, F. F., Supphellen, M., & 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), 45–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Primack, B. A., Shensa, A., Sidani, J. E., Whaite, E. O., Lin, L. Y., Rosen, D., Colditz, J. B., Radovic, A., & Miller, E. (2017). Social media use and perceived social isolation among young adults in the US. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 53(1), 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Scharf, T., Phillipson, C., & Smith, A. E. (2005). Social exclusion of older people in deprived urban communities of England. European Journal of Ageing, 2(2), 76–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Su, L., Jiang, Y., Chen, Z., & DeWall, C. N. (2017). Social exclusion and consumer switching behavior: a control restoration mechanism. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(1), 99–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Twenge, J. M., Baumeister, R. F., Tice, D. M., & Stucke, T. S. (2001). If you can’t join them, beat them: effects of social exclusion on aggressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(6), 1058–1069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Twenge, J. M., Catanese, K. R., & Baumeister, R. F. (2002). Social exclusion causes self- defeating behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(3), 606–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Twenge, J. M., Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Ciarocco, N. J., & Bartels, J. M. (2007). Social exclusion decreases prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 56–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wang, J., Zhu, R., & Shiv, B. (2012). The lonely consumer: loner or conformer? Journal of Consumer Research, 38(6), 1116–1128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Williams, K. D. (2007). Ostracism. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 425–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Williams, K. D., & Jarvis, B. (2006). Cyberball: a program for use in research on interpersonal ostracism and acceptance. Behavior Research Methods, 38(1), 174–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Winterich, K. P., & Zhang, Y. (2014). Accepting inequality deters responsibility: how power distance decreases charitable behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(2), 274–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tae Hyun Baek
    • 1
  • Sukki Yoon
    • 2
  • Seeun Kim
    • 3
  • Yeonshin Kim
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Integrated Strategic Communication College of Communication and InformationUniversity of KentuckyLexingtonUSA
  2. 2.Marketing Department College of BusinessBryant UniversitySmithfieldUSA
  3. 3.Department of Consumer and Design SciencesAuburn UniversityAuburnUSA
  4. 4.Department of Business Administration, College of BusinessMyongji UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations