IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v141y2022icp279-289.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effects of solicitation and target amounts on consumers’ charitable giving decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Park, Sohyeon
  • Yoon, Song Oh

Abstract

This research examines the effect of double reference values in the context of charitable giving decision-making. We investigate how the two types of information that commonly appear in charitable giving campaigns—solicitation amount (e.g., “Your $1 matters”) and target amount (e.g., “Help Us Raise $305,000”)—interact to determine consumers’ decisions on how much to donate. Through four studies, we demonstrate that solicitation amount, compared with target amount, exerts a stronger influence on consumers’ donation decisions. Target amount influences the donation decision only when it is presented alone in the message. Furthermore, the study results demonstrate that using a small solicitation amount to enhance compliance can backfire, reducing the average donation amount and the total donation revenue. This study offers important practical implications to marketers for designing an effective charitable giving campaign, especially for the selective use of potential reference values in the solicitation message.

Suggested Citation

  • Park, Sohyeon & Yoon, Song Oh, 2022. "The effects of solicitation and target amounts on consumers’ charitable giving decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 279-289.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:141:y:2022:i:c:p:279-289
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.091
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296321009061
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.091?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Indranil Goswami & Oleg Urminsky, 2016. "When should the ask be a nudge? The Effect of Default Amounts on Charitable Donations," Natural Field Experiments 00659, The Field Experiments Website.
    2. Lynch, John G, Jr & Marmorstein, Howard & Weigold, Michael F, 1988. "Choices from Sets Including Remembered Brands: Use of Recalled Attributes and Prior Overall Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(2), pages 169-184, September.
    3. Briers, Barbara & Pandelaere, Mario & Warlop, Luk, 2007. "Adding exchange to charity: A reference price explanation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 15-30, January.
    4. Jen Shang & Rachel Croson, 2006. "The Impact of Social Comparisons on Nonprofit Fund Raising," Research in Experimental Economics, in: Experiments Investigating Fundraising and Charitable Contributors, pages 143-156, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    5. Northcraft, Gregory B. & Neale, Margaret A., 1987. "Experts, amateurs, and real estate: An anchoring-and-adjustment perspective on property pricing decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 84-97, February.
    6. Urbany, Joel E & Bearden, William O & Weilbaker, Dan C, 1988. "The Effect of Plausible and Exaggerated Reference Prices on Consumer Perceptions and Price Search," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(1), pages 95-110, June.
    7. Mollick, Ethan, 2014. "The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-16.
    8. Fraser, Cynthia & Hite, Robert E & Sauer, Paul L, 1988. "Increasing Contributions in Solicitation Campaigns: The Use of Large and Small Anchorpoints," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(2), pages 284-287, September.
    9. Dan Ariely & George Loewenstein & Drazen Prelec, 2003. ""Coherent Arbitrariness": Stable Demand Curves Without Stable Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(1), pages 73-106.
    10. Bruno S. Frey & Stephan Meier, 2004. "Social Comparisons and Pro-social Behavior: Testing "Conditional Cooperation" in a Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1717-1722, December.
    11. repec:dau:papers:123456789/1281 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. repec:cup:judgdm:v:4:y:2009:i:1:p:41-50 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Burnkrant, Robert E & Unnava, H Rao, 1995. "Effects of Self-Referencing on Persuasion," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 22(1), pages 17-26, June.
    14. Chapman, Gretchen B. & Johnson, Eric J., 1999. "Anchoring, Activation, and the Construction of Values, , , , , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 115-153, August.
    15. Adaval, Rashmi & Monroe, Kent B, 2002. "Automatic Construction and Use of Contextual Information for Product and Price Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(4), pages 572-588, March.
    16. Barbara Briers & M. Pandelaere & L. Warlop, 2007. "Adding exchange to charity: a reference price explanation," Post-Print halshs-00126759, HAL.
    17. Desmet, Pierre & Feinberg, Fred M., 2003. "Ask and ye shall receive: The effect of the appeals scale on consumers' donation behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 349-376, June.
    18. Mauricio M. Palmeira & Joydeep Srivastava, 2013. "Free Offer ≠ Cheap Product: A Selective Accessibility Account on the Valuation of Free Offers," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 40(4), pages 644-656.
    19. Jen Shang & Rachel Croson, 2009. "A Field Experiment in Charitable Contribution: The Impact of Social Information on the Voluntary Provision of Public Goods," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(540), pages 1422-1439, October.
    20. Briers, B.M.E. & Pandelaere, M. & Warlop, L., 2007. "Adding exchange to charity : A reference price explanation," Other publications TiSEM 7b0069ad-8251-4e7d-82ba-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    21. Holbrook, Morris B & Batra, Rajeev, 1987. "Assessing the Role of Emotions as Mediators of Consumer Responses to Advertising," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 14(3), pages 404-420, December.
    22. Gourville, John T, 1998. "Pennies-a-Day: The Effect of Temporal Reframing on Transaction Evaluation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 24(4), pages 395-408, March.
    23. Kuppuswamy, Venkat & Bayus, Barry L., 2017. "Does my contribution to your crowdfunding project matter?," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 72-89.
    24. Bruno Frey & Stephan Meier, 2004. "In a field experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00243, The Field Experiments Website.
    25. De Bruyn, Arnaud & Prokopec, Sonja, 2017. "Assimilation-contrast theory in action: Operationalization and managerial impact in a fundraising context," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 367-381.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Adena, Maja & Huck, Steffen & Rasul, Imran, 2014. "Charitable Giving and Nonbinding Contribution-Level Suggestions - Evidence from a Field Experiment," Review of Behavioral Economics, now publishers, vol. 1(3), pages 275-293, May.
    2. Steffen Altmann & Armin Falk & Paul Heidhues & Rajshri Jayaraman & Marrit Teirlinck, 2019. "Defaults and Donations: Evidence from a Field Experiment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(5), pages 808-826, December.
    3. Li, Jing, 2023. "I’m feeling lucky: How randomly drawn suggested donations affect donation choice," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:6:p:678-690 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Christoph Feldhaus & Tassilo Sobotta & Peter Werner, 2019. "Norm Uncertainty and Voluntary Payments in the Field," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1855-1866, April.
    6. John List & Michael Price, 2012. "Charitable Giving Around the World: Thoughts on How to Expand the Pie," Natural Field Experiments 00470, The Field Experiments Website.
    7. Dorina Hysenbelli & Enrico Rubaltelli & Rino Rumiati, 2013. "Others' opinions count, but not all of them: anchoring to ingroup versus outgroup members' behavior in charitable giving," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 8(6), pages 678-690, November.
    8. John A. List & James J. Murphy & Michael K. Price & Alexander G. James, 2019. "Do Appeals to Donor Benefits Raise More Money than Appeals to Recipient Benefits? Evidence from a Natural Field Experiment with Pick.Click.Give," NBER Working Papers 26559, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette & Lavoie, Nathalie, 2016. "Cause-related marketing of products with a negative externality," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 4321-4330.
    10. Hannes Koppel & Günther G. Schulze, 2009. "On the Channels of Pro-Social Behavior Evidence from a natural field experiment," Jena Economics Research Papers 2009-102, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    11. Pedro Naso; Tania Theoduloz; Nicholas Tyack; Dambala Gelo; Mare Sarr; Timothy Swanson, 2021. "Using Information to Improve Global Cooperation: A Climate Change Experiment," CIES Research Paper series 72-2021, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.
    12. O'Garra, Tanya & Sisco, Matthew R., 2018. "Redistribution and Social Information (ReSoc)," SocArXiv 28xwv, Center for Open Science.
    13. Lin-Healy, Fern & Small, Deborah A., 2012. "Cheapened altruism: Discounting personally affected prosocial actors," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 269-274.
    14. Chang, Chia-Chi & Chen, Po-Yu, 2019. "Which maximizes donations: Charitable giving as an incentive or incentives for charitable giving?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 65-75.
    15. Chan, Nathan W. & Wolk, Leonard, 2020. "Cost-effective giving with multiple public goods," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 130-145.
    16. Santana, Shelle & Thomas, Manoj & Morwitz, Vicki G., 2020. "The Role of Numbers in the Customer Journey," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 138-154.
    17. Azar, Ofer H., 2013. "Competitive strategy when consumers are affected by reference prices," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 327-340.
    18. Verhaert, Griet Alice & Van den Poel, Dirk, 2011. "Improving Campaign Success Rate by Tailoring Donation Requests along the Donor Lifecycle," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 51-63.
    19. Engelmann, Dirk & Munro, Alistair & Valente, Marieta, 2017. "On the behavioural relevance of optional and mandatory impure public goods," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 134-144.
    20. Timo Goeschl & Sara Elisa Kettner & Johannes Lohse & Christiane Schwieren, 2018. "From Social Information to Social Norms: Evidence from Two Experiments on Donation Behaviour," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-25, November.
    21. Rachel Croson & Jen Shang, 2006. "Field experiments in charitable contribution: The impact of social influence on the voluntary provision of public goods," Natural Field Experiments 00323, The Field Experiments Website.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:141:y:2022:i:c:p:279-289. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.