Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Increasing charitable donation intentions with preliminary importance ratings

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the question-behavior effect (QBE), making a prediction about one’s behavior moves the behavior in the direction of the prediction. The current experiments explore the use of preliminary questions to increase the pro-social nature of such behavior predictions in both charitable giving and charitable bequests. Initially requesting importance ratings of charitable causes – as compared with simply referencing the charitable causes – significantly increased subsequent donation and bequest intentions to related charities. Requesting additional importance ratings for specific projects of named charities significantly increased subsequent cause importance ratings and donation and bequest intentions for both named and similar unnamed charities. Preliminary importance rating questions were also more effective than otherwise similar preliminary donation intention questions, potentially because of the non-monetary nature and greater malleability of importance ratings. Rather than merely revealing a fixed, underlying donative intent, these results suggest that the elicitation process can alter underlying donation intentions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The Nature Conservancy (Environment A), The World Wildlife Fund (Environment B), The American Cancer Society (Cancer A), The National Breast Cancer Foundation (Cancer B), A local animal shelter (Animal A), The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Animal B), UNICEF (International A), CARE (International B), Boys and Girls Clubs of America (Youth A), The YMCA or YWCA (Youth B).

References

  • Armitage, C. J., Norman, P., Alganem, S., & Conner, M. (2015). Expectations are more predictive of behavior than behavioral intentions: Evidence from two prospective studies. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 49(2), 239–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2006). To give or not to give, that is the question: How methodology is destiny in Dutch giving data. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(3), 533–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodur, H. O., Duval, K. M., & Grohmann, B. (2015). Will you purchase environmentally friendly products? Using prediction requests to increase choice of sustainable products. Journal of Business Ethics, 129(1), 59–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brickman, P., Redfield, J., Harrison, A. A., & Crandall, R. (1972). Drive and predisposition as factors in the attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 8(3), 1–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Descheemaeker, M., Spruy, A., Faxio, R. H., & Hermans, D. (2017). On the generalization of attitude accessibility after repeated attitude expression. European Journal of Social Psychology, 47, 97–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickert, S., Kleber, J., Västfjäll, D., & Slovic, P. (2016). Mental imagery, impact, and affect: A mediation model for charitable giving. PLoS One, 11(2), e0148274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downing, J. W., Judd, C. M., & Brauer, M. (1992). Effects of repeated expressions on attitude extremity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(1), 17–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fazio, R. H., Chen, J. M., McDonel, E. C., & Sherman, S. J. (1982). Attitude accessibility, attitude-behavior consistency, and the strength of the object-evaluation association. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18(4), 339–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, J., & Lynch, J. G. (1988). Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(3), 421–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glasman, L. R., & Albarracín, D. (2006). Forming attitudes that predict future behavior: A meta-analysis of the attitude-behavior relation. Psychological Bulletin, 132(5), 778–822.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godin, G., Sheeran, P., Conner, M., & Germain, M. (2008). Asking questions changes behavior: Mere measurement effects on frequency of blood donation. Health Psychology, 27(2), 179–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godin, G., Germain, M., Conner, M., Delage, G., & Sheeran, P. (2014). Promoting the return of lapsed blood donors: A seven-arm randomized controlled trial of the question–behavior effect. Health Psychology, 33(7), 646–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, J. K., Cryder, C. E., & Cheema, A. (2013). Data collection in a flat world: The strengths and weaknesses of mechanical Turk samples. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26(3), 213–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald, A. G., Carnot, C. G., Beach, R., & Young, B. (1987). Increasing voting behavior by asking people if they expect to vote. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(2), 315–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodge, J. M. (2012). Philanthropy & relationships: If philanthropy is all about relationships then why do metrics only measure money? Retrieved from Indiana University Purdue University – Indianapolis, Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, https://philanthropy.iupui.edu/files/file/lake-lecture-2012.pdf

  • Holland, R. W., Verplanken, B., & van Knippenberg, A. (2003). From repetition to conviction: Attitude accessibility as a determinant of attitude certainty. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(6), 594–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacob, C., Guéguen, N., & Boulbry, G. (2018). How proof of previous donations influences compliance with a donation request: Three field experiments. International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 15(1), 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, R. N. (2016). Phrasing the charitable bequest inquiry. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 27(2), 998–1011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, W., & Aaker, J. (2008). The happiness of giving: The time-ask effect. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 543–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mittelman, R., & Rojas-Méndez, J. (2018). Why Canadians give to charity: An extended theory of planned behaviour model. International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 15(2), 189–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morwitz, V. G., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2004). The mere-measurement effect: Why does measuring intentions change actual behavior? Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1–2), 64–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nederhof, A. J. (1985). Methods of coping with social desirability bias: A review. European Journal of Social Psychology, 15(3), 263–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obermiller, C., & Spangenberg, E. (2000). Improving telephone fundraising by use of self-prophecy. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 5(4), 365–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, S. J. (1980). On the self-erasing nature of errors of prediction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(2), 211–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons, C. J., Bickart, B. A., & Lynch Jr., J. G. (1993). Capturing and creating public opinion in survey research. Journal of Consumer Research, (2, 1), 316–329.

  • Spangenberg, E. (1997). Increasing health club attendance through self-prophecy. Marketing Letters, 8(1), 23–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spangenberg, E. R., Sprott, D. E., Grohmann, B., & Smith, R. J. (2003). Mass-communicated prediction requests: Practical application and a cognitive dissonance explanation for self-prophecy. Journal of Marketing, 67(3), 47–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spangenberg, E. R., Sprott, D. E., Knuff, D. C., Smith, R. J., Obermiller, C., & Greenwald, A. G. (2012). Process evidence for the question–behavior effect: Influencing socially normative behaviors. Social Influence, 7(3), 211–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sprott, D. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Perkins, A. W. (1999). Two more self-prophecy experiments. In E. J. Arnould & L. M. Scott (Eds.), NA - Advances in Consumer Research: Vol. 26 (pp. 621–626). Provo: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprott, D. E., Smith, R. J., Spangenberg, E. R., & Freson, T. S. (2004). Specificity of prediction requests: Evidence for the differential effects of self-prophecy on commitment to a health assessment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(6), 1176–1190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sprott, D. E., Spangenberg, E. R., Block, L. G., Fitzsimons, G. J., Morwitz, V. G., & Williams, P. (2006). The question–behavior effect: What we know and where we go from here. Social Influence, 1(2), 128–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tesser, A., & Leone, C. (1977). Cognitive schemas and thought as determinants of attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 340–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Dongen, A., Abraham, C., Ruiter, R. A., & Veldhuizen, I. J. (2012). Does questionnaire distribution promote blood donation? An investigation of question–behavior effects. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 45(2), 163–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vohs, K. D., Mead, N. L., & Goode, M. R. (2008). Merely activating the concept of money changes personal and interpersonal behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(3), 208–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, C., Conner, M., Miles, E., Sandberg, T., Taylor, N., Godin, G., & Sheeran, P. (2016). The impact of asking intention or self-prediction questions on subsequent behavior: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 20(3), 245–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Personal Financial Planning, Texas Tech University, 1301 Akron Ave., Box 41210, Lubbock, TX, 79409-1210, USA

    Russell N. James III

Authors
  1. Russell N. James III
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Russell N. James III.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

James, R.N. Increasing charitable donation intentions with preliminary importance ratings. Int Rev Public Nonprofit Mark 15, 393–411 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-018-0206-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-018-0206-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation