IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/doi10.1086-666470.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

More for the Many: The Influence of Entitativity on Charitable Giving

Author

Listed:
  • Robert W. Smith
  • David Faro
  • Katherine A. Burson

Abstract

Donations to large numbers of victims are typically muted relative to donations to a single identified victim. This article shows that people can donate more to large numbers of victims if these victims are perceived as entitative--comprising a single, coherent unit. For example, donations to help children in need are higher when the children comprise a family than when they have no explicit group membership. The same effect is observed on donations for endangered animals that are depicted as moving in unison. Perceived entitativity results in more extreme judgments of victims. Victims with positive traits are therefore viewed more favorably when entitative, triggering greater feelings of concern and higher donations. Entitativity has the opposite effect for victims sharing negative traits.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert W. Smith & David Faro & Katherine A. Burson, 2013. "More for the Many: The Influence of Entitativity on Charitable Giving," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(5), pages 961-976.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:doi:10.1086/666470
    DOI: 10.1086/666470
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/666470
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/666470
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/666470?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Grinstein, Amir & Hagtvedt, Henrik & Kronrod, Ann, 2019. "Aesthetically (dis)pleasing visuals: A dual pathway to empathy and prosocial behavior," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 83-99.
    2. Pellegrin, Claire & Grolleau, Gilles & Mzoughi, Naoufel & Napoleone, Claude, 2018. "Does the Identifiable Victim Effect Matter for Plants? Results From a Quasi-experimental Survey of French Farmers," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 106-113.
    3. Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette & Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2020. "Moral judgment of environmental harm caused by a single versus multiple wrongdoers: A survey experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    4. Hasford, Jonathan & Farmer, Adam & Waites, Stacie F., 2015. "Thinking, feeling, and giving: The effects of scope and valuation on consumer donations," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 435-438.
    5. Arvid Erlandsson, 2021. "Seven (weak and strong) helping effects systematically tested in separate evaluation, joint evaluation and forced choice," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(5), pages 1113-1154, September.
    6. Sudeep Bhatia & Lukasz Walasek & Paul Slovic & Howard Kunreuther, 2021. "The More Who Die, the Less We Care: Evidence from Natural Language Analysis of Online News Articles and Social Media Posts," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(1), pages 179-203, January.
    7. Butts, Marcus M. & Lunt, Devin C. & Freling, Traci L. & Gabriel, Allison S., 2019. "Helping one or helping many? A theoretical integration and meta-analytic review of the compassion fade literature," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 16-33.
    8. Hagit Sabato & Tehila Kogut, 2021. "Happy to help—if it’s not too sad: The effect of mood on helping identifiable and unidentifiable victims," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-15, June.
    9. Zhijie Xie & Fangfang Wen & Xiao Tan & Jin Wei & Bin Zuo, 2020. "The preference for potential in competence, not in morality: Asymmetric biases regarding a group's potential for moral improvement and decline," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-19, August.
    10. Abhishek Bhati & Ruth K. Hansen, 2020. "A literature review of experimental studies in fundraising," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(1).
    11. Farrow, Katherine & Grolleau, Gilles & Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2018. "Less is more in energy conservation and efficiency messaging," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 1-6.
    12. Saerom Lee & Lisa E Bolton & Karen Page Winterich & Vicki MorwitzEditor & Lauren BlockAssociate Editor, 2017. "To Profit or Not to Profit? The Role of Greed Perceptions in Consumer Support for Social Ventures," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 44(4), pages 853-876.
    13. Smith, Robert W. & Keller, Kevin Lane, 2021. "If all their products seem the same, all the parts within a product seem the same too: How brand homogeneity polarizes product experiences," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 698-714.
    14. Mukherjee, Ashesh & Lee, Seung Yun & Burnham, Thomas, 2020. "The effect of others’ participation on charitable behavior: Moderating role of recipient resource scarcity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 213-228.
    15. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:5:p:1113-1154 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Katherine Burson & David Faro & Yuval Rottenstreich, 2013. "Multiple-Unit Holdings Yield Attenuated Endowment Effects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(3), pages 545-555, November.
    17. Chen Wang & JoAndrea Hoegg & Darren W. Dahl, 2018. "The impact of a sales team’s perceived entitativity on customer satisfaction," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 190-211, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:jconrs:doi:10.1086/666470. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcr .

    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.