When we write fundraising communications that seek to persuade donors to give, we can frame the information in several ways. We could talk about a sad story about a beneficiary or we could share an inspiring one. We could talk about what the community gets if the donor gives or what the community loses if the donor does not give. There are many combinations we can choose from.
The question for today’s discussion is do one of these pathways result in more donations? Are negative or positive appeals more effective in raising funds?
Here’s what you can expect to take away from this episode…
⦿ An understanding of how empathy drives giving behavior
⦿ When negative and positive appeals are effective
⦿ When mixed emotion appeals are effective
Sneak peek at the episode
⦿ [5:08] But it’s not just commercials that have this effect on us. Every time we send out a fundraising letter or even post on social media, we structure our ask either positively or negatively.
⦿ [7:25] The empathy-altruism hypothesis posed in 1987 by Batson and colleagues suggests that when we witness someone in distress, we will feel empathy, which motivates us to engage in prosocial behaviors such as donating or volunteering.
⦿ [10:47] And again, much like we’ve discussed thus far, this research team found support for both types of appeals- both positive and negative appeals are correlated with giving behavior.
⦿ [15:30] The results from study 1 indicated that although participants in all four trials liked the positive appeal better, when it came to actual giving behavior, more participants gave when they read the negative appeal.
⦿ [16:55] But, before you run off and change all of your appeals from positive to negative, let’s dig into this because the researchers interpret this data not to mean simply negative appeals raise more money and that’s that.
⦿ [20:58] Overall, my takeaway from the research is that both negative and positive appeals have their place.
⦿ [22:41] So, let’s go through our SIGNALS framework and talk about how we might use this information to guide our own investigations. Because remember- every organization and every community is different, and every study has its limitations so what works in an experimental setting may not translate into real life results.
Rate, Review, and Follow
Are you subscribed to our podcast? If you’re not, I invite you to do that today. I’m adding a bunch of new, information-packed episodes into the mix and I don’t want you to miss any of it! Click here to subscribe in Apple Podcasts!
And, if you got a lot of value out of this episode, I would be so grateful for a review on Apple Podcasts. Reviews help others find the Nonprofit Science Podcast and helps me support others just like you. Simply click here, open the show up in Apple Podcasts, select “Ratings and Reviews” and “Write a Review” to let me know what your favorite part of this podcast is. Thank you so much!
Links mentioned in this episode:
⦿ Article: Effect of different types of empathy on prosocial behavior: gratitude as a mediator
⦿ Article: The emerging study of positive empathy
⦿ Article: When sadness and hope work to motivate charitable giving
⦿ Article: Attitudes and donation behavior when reading positive and negative charity appeals
⦿ Nonprofit Science Podcast Episode 2: How to generate resources that tackle social, economic, and political inequalities with Dr. Abhishek Bhati
⦿ Download the “Think Like a Scientist” e-book
