Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The role of diffusion of responsibility, responsibility, and attitude in willingness to donate to a world hunger-related charity

International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing volume 11, pages 1–11 (2014)Cite this article

Abstract

The role of diffusion of responsibility, responsibility, and attitude in willingness to donate to a world hunger-related charity was examined. Attitude towards helping others and attitude towards charitable organizations were the two attitude measures considered. In accordance with earlier studies on diffusion of responsibility, participation in the study was either as a member of a group or alone. Group versus non-group was established using priming techniques in a virtual environment. The intervention consisted of the viewing of a video from the World Food Programme website. Findings determined that the video exerted a significant effect on participants whether in the virtual group or alone, and on all variables with the exception of attitude towards charitable organizations, suggesting that such a video is an effective tool for fundraisers. It was also determined that, although responsibility was not diffused, it significantly impacted willingness to donate, with personal responsibility producing a more robust effect over social responsibility. Attitude towards helping others significantly impacted willingness to donate and also exhibited a covariate relationship with personal responsibility. Both of these findings suggest that a more personal, attitudinal type of responsibility is what promotes helping behaviors, rather than social responsibility that arises from social norms. These findings are supportive of the theory on prosocial behaviors and confirm the contributory role of responsibility when engaging in prosocial behaviors.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

39,95 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)

References

  • Bargh, J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal Of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 230–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berkowitz, L., & Donnerstein, E. (1982). External validity is more than skin deep. American Psychologist, 37(3), 245–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blair, C. A., Thompson, L. F., & Wuensch, K. L. (2005). Electronic helping behavior: The virtual presence of others makes a difference. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 27, 171–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darley, J. M., & LatanĂ©, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8(4), 377–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darley, J. M., Teger, A. I., & Lewis, L. D. (1973). Do groups always inhibit individuals’ responses to potential emergencies? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26(3), 395–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdfelder, E., Faul, F., & Buchner, A. (1996). GPOWER: A general power analysis program. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eubanks, A. C. (2008). To what extent is it altruism? An examination of how dimensions of religiosity predict volunteer motivation amongst college students. [Abstract]. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 69(6-B), 3898.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, P., Krueger, J. I., Greitemeyer, T., Vogrincic, C., Kastenjuller, A., Frey, D., & Kanbacher, M. (2011). The bystander-effect: A meta-analytic review on bystander intervention in dangerous and non-dangerous emergencies. Psychological Bulletin, 137(4), 517–537. doi:10.1037/a0023304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, S. M., Weaver, K., Moskowitz, G. B., & Darley, J. M. (2002). Crowded minds: The implicit bystander effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(4), 843–853. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.83.4.843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, D., & Mallery, P. (2008). SPSS for Windows (8th ed.). New York: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, L. M., & Foshay, N. N. (1984). Diffusion of responsibility in a nonemergency situation: Response to a greeting from a stranger. The Journal of Social Psychology, 123, 155–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • LatanĂ©, B., & Darley, J. M. (1968). Group inhibition of bystander intervention in emergencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10(3), 215–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LatanĂ©, B., & Darley, J. M. (1970). The unresponsive bystander: Why doesn’t he help? New York: Appleton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, M., & Crowther, S. (2008). The responsive bystander: How social group membership and group size can encourage as well as inhibit bystander intervention. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(6), 1429–1439. doi:10.1037/a0012634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Micklewright, J., & Schnepf, S. V. (2009). Who gives charitable donations for overseas development? Journal of Social Policy, 38(2), 317–341. doi:10.1017/S00047279408002869.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mynatt, C., & Sherman, S. J. (1975). Responsibility attribution in groups and individuals: A direct test of the diffusion of responsibility hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(6), 1111–1118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranganathan, S., & Henley, W. H. (2007). Determinants of charitable donation intentions: A structural equation model. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 13, 1–11. doi:10.1002/nvsm.297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuyt, T., Smit, J., Bekkers, R. (2004). Constructing a philanthropy-scale: Social responsibility and philanthropy. Retrieved from: http://ics.uda.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/Articles/2004/BekkersR-philscale/BekkersR-philscale-2004.pdf.

  • Schuyt, T., Smit, J., & Bekkers, R. (2010). The philanthropy scale: A sociological perspective in measuring new forms of pro social behaviour. Social Work & Society, 8(1), 121–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. R., & McSweeney, A. (2007). Charitable giving: The effectiveness of a revised theory of planned behavior model in predicting donating intentions and behavior. Journal of Community and Applied Psychology, 17, 363–386. doi:10.1002/casp.906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, D. J., Green, C. L., & Brashear, T. G. (2000). Development and validation of scales to measure attitudes influencing monetary donations to charitable organizations. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 299–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisenthal, D. L., Austrom, D., & Silverman, I. (1983). Diffusion of responsibility in charitable donations. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 4(1), 17–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Food Programme. (2012). Retrieved from http://www.wfp.org/hunger/.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. LIU Brooklyn School of Nursing, 1 University Plaza, Brooklyn, NY, 11201, USA

    Jocelyn D’Antonio

Authors
  1. Jocelyn D’Antonio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jocelyn D’Antonio.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

D’Antonio, J. The role of diffusion of responsibility, responsibility, and attitude in willingness to donate to a world hunger-related charity. Int Rev Public Nonprofit Mark 11, 1–11 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-013-0104-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-013-0104-x

Keywords

  • Prosocial behaviors
  • Responsibility
  • Diffusion of responsibility
  • Charitable donations
  • Attitude towards helping others
  • Attitude towards charitable organizations

Search

Navigation