This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
For many years, there has been a notable decline in the number of Americans making charitablecontributions. Even those who remain insulated from the harsh climatological effects will not be immune from the psychological effects of watching this catastrophe unfold. Trends in philanthropy make this a question worth asking.
In case you missed it, BusinessWeek just ran a terrific article, The New Abnormal , on the current state of consumer spending and psychology. In the broadest sense, I’d posit that marketers (of which fundraisers are a subset) should always be avid students of consumer psychology and behavior.
Rebate versus matching: does how we subsidize charitablecontributions matter? Subsidizing charitable giving with rebates or matching: Further laboratory evidence. Subsidizing charitablecontributions: a natural field experiment comparing matching and rebate subsidies. Psychology & Marketing, 38(2), 328-337.
Psychological Bulletin, 127 , 249-266. [4] Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98 (6), 946-955. [5] The pledging puzzle: How can revocable promises increase charitable giving? Rebate versus matching: Does how we subsidize charitablecontributions matter? Kilpatrick, S. Emmons, R. A., & Larson, D.
The SAGE handbook of evolutionary psychology. The SAGE handbook of evolutionary psychology. Psychological Science 27 (9), 1192-1206; Rand, D. In an ecologically rational mind, psychological mechanisms are triggered by the presence of cues associated with ancestral challenges and opportunities.” 12] Carter, G., Sznycer, D.,
A field experiment on the impact of a prior donor’s social status on subsequent charitable giving. Journal of Economic Psychology, 61 , 124-133. [18] Psychological Science, 23 (7), 704-709. [25] link] (among decedents in 2007 with estates of $5 million and above, 78% of charitable dollars went to private foundations). [26]
In contrast, empathy with a recipient of charitable aid, triggered by an identified victim narrative, increases charitablecontributions even when the donor knows little about the effectiveness of her donation” Metzger, L., & Günther, I. Simply psychology [Website]. Is it what you say or how you say it?
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 273- 280; Caporael, L. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35 , 1-11; Issac, R. Communication and free riding behavior: The voluntary contribution mechanism. European Journal of Social Psychology, 14 , 239-264; Messick, D. Utrecht University. 9] Caldwell, M.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 273- 280; Caporael, L. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35 , 1-11; Issac, R. Communication and free riding behavior: The voluntary contribution mechanism. European Journal of Social Psychology, 14 , 239-264; Messick, D. Utrecht University. 9] Caldwell, M.
It reveals the psychology of giving and wealth. Charitable foundations, funds, and trusts attract huge donations. One of the central psychological challenges for humans is personal mortality. The Journal of Social Psychology , 8(3), 347-353 and Knaplund, K. Psychological Review, 106 , 835-845. [14] 12] Helms, S.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 27,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content