Publisher: Routledge
Download 0.9 Mb. View original pdf
|
| Hypotheses What appeal Altruistic vs egoistic Charitable appeals can be divided into two categories egoistic and altruistic (Brunel & Nelson 2000; Peloza & White 2007; Chang & Lee 2011; Chang 2012). Altruistic appeals, usually referred to as ‘help-others’ or ‘other-benefit’ appeals, emphasise that the benefits go to other individuals (White & Peloza 2009). Thus, this type of appeal positions itself as an Downloaded by [McGill University Library at 01:34 07 February 2015 709 ADVERTISING STRATEGIES FOR CHARITIES opportunity to help others, and proposes that people should help others without anticipation of return or reward, sometimes at the expense of the donor’s own welfare (Brunel & Nelson 2000). In contrast, egoistic appeals, usually referred to as ‘help-self’ or ‘self-benefit’ appeals, position themselves to give donors an opportunity to receive something in return (Peloza & White 2007). In this case, advertising asserts that the main beneficiaries of helping behaviour are the helpers themselves (White & Peloza 2009), and that donors can avoid punishments or gain rewards by helping others (Brunel & Nelson 2000). Some advertising even claims that donors can receive something in return, such as tax credits or acknowledgements from others. Overall, egoistic appeals insist that donors should help others to increase their own personal welfare (Kottasz The effects of these two appeals on time and money donations can be inferred from two different streams of research. First, studies on donors motivation to help explain the effect of egoistic appeals Batson et al. (1987) found that donors with different motivation to help show different helping behaviours according to the ease of escape from helping. Donors with altruistic motivation help others in both easy escape (when one can leave the situation with minimal or no self-imposed or other-imposed consequences, Carlo et al. 1991, p. 450) and difficult escape situations (when one cannot avoid the emotion-eliciting situation, Carlo et al. 1991, p. 450); however, donors with egoistic motivation only help others in difficult escape situations. In other words, these donors help only when they have to. Donors exposed to egoistic appeals have egoistic motivation because the appeals emphasise egoistic motives (Chang & Lee 2011). Therefore, these donors are likely to choose money when faced with situations in which they should choose what to donate because money requires less effort and psychological behavioural investment than time (Mogilner & Aaker 2009), resulting in an easy method to escape the situations. On the other hand, researchers pointed out that altruistic appeals have a value- expressive quality (Brunel & Nelson 2000) because they invite individuals to express values related to altruistic and humanitarian concerns for others by helping others (Basil & Weber 2006, p. 63). Therefore, this quality of the appeal will trigger donors moral identity to be more salient (Reed et al. 2007). When moral identity is temporarily salient, it regulates donors judgements on donation behaviour, and they attempt to behave in a manner consistent with this identity (Reed et al. 2007). If donors focus their attention on the moral identity of their image, they are more willing to give time than to give money, because giving time more directly involves the self and is perceived to be a more moral act than giving money (Reed et al. 2007). Giving time is an experience, and individuals can be more self-expressive by doing the good. Therefore, the following hypotheses are formulated: Download 0.9 Mb. Share with your friends:
|