Charity Norms and Donations Research Proposal Example | Topics and Well Written Essays

Charity Norms and Donations

Marlan Rodriguez Perez

Florida International University

July 06, 2020

Study One

Social Media fame in the contemporary world makes it simple to think that individuals connecting and drawing online can change the procedure of data creation and dispersal and produce a steady stream of brand backers, supporters, and pundits for any association. In an optimistic sense, breaking down this at scale would permit the association to decide the current view of their administrations, which they could then use to empower further commitment and create an increasingly faithful supporter base who help to add to their own showcasing endeavors. For noble cause, it is basic that they know whether or on the other hand not this is extremely conceivable when they are settling on the choice on whether to apportion constrained assets to create and keeping up a social nearness on the web. An issue emerges, in any case, in that the degree of comprehension around how compelling these administrations really are for setting up these social connections is restricted. It is anything but difficult to expect, given the consistent media publicity around them, that these destinations breed client commitment and resident activism.

Notwithstanding, there are additionally settled rules' to propose that the level of any network online, which really draws in, is little. If so, for a cause's online nearness, at that point, this could have incredible ramifications on their impression of the 'worth' or 'value' of social media life to them as an association. Charitable donations are progressively subject to the inclusion of social media users. Three examinations researched their inspirations to help good cause connected occasions: the passionate distinguishing proof with a reason, charitable behavior (CB) guidelines, and setting related Facebook advancements.

This article delivers the ongoing call to grow CB explore from a straightforward examination of independent versus controlled inspiration, to contemplating the impacts of the considerable number of guidelines in the CB continuum, specifically, the incorporation of the tripartite components of characteristic inspiration and coordinated inspiration. Results exhibited that the more prominent the passionate ID with the reason, the more grounded was the inclination to help the cause connected occasion.

Likewise, the outcomes in these web-based life settings uncovered that particular inherent measurements (e.g., experience incitement) are sparks of on the web and disconnected help, similar to the individual worth nature of incorporated guidelines. While just self-sufficient inspirational guidelines anticipated help for the two occasions sorted out explicitly for admirable missions, both independent and controlled guidelines anticipated the help of a revenue-driven occasion composed with a worthy mission as an assistant (Agrawal, Catalini & Goldfarb, 2014). These discoveries can help experts in structuring increasingly viable internet-based life interchanges on the side of noble cause connected occasions.

The literature on character actuation impacts judgment gives some knowledge into the systems that moderate this impact. For instance, differential affectability to character consistent data ought to be most grounded when the pertinent personality is an initiated segment of the benefactor's social self-diagram It associates humanitarian examinations explore with hypothetical advancements in inspirations for giving in financial matters, philanthropic administration, not-for-profit showcasing, buyer conduct, and social brain science.

It uses individual perceptions as well as quantitative techniques remembering tests and studies for various examples counting givers, college understudies, and tests of the U.S. populace. It produces noteworthy and solid information to improve the act of altruism. It adds to the development and development of the youthful field called humanitarian investigations in principle, in the system, and practically speaking. This article takes advantage of the lucky break to apply the social brain science hypothesis in the area of web-based life. It does as such with regards to three observational examinations researching the mind-boggling inspirations of an extremely relevant voting demographic of Millennials to participate in supporting connected foundation occasions as advanced by means of Facebook pages of not-for-profit associations. In particular, the article delivers the ongoing call to grow CB inquire about from an investigation of self-governing versus controlled inspiration to examining the impacts of the unmistakable persuasive guidelines (Erceg, Burghart, Cottone, Lorimer, Manku, Putz, Vlasicek & Willems, 2018).

Specifically, the article shows that the consideration of the tripartite elements of inherent inspiration and of the coordinated guideline can give a more extravagant comprehension in chose settings than that of self-sufficient and controlled inspiration alone. This examination into the connections among the passionate reason recognizable proof and particular self-decided inspirations can help experts in structuring increasingly powerful web-based life interchanges on the side of good cause connected occasions.

The plan of each examination included the progressed Conditional Process Model, which is especially pertinent when the objective is to depict and comprehend the contingent idea of the instrument or components by which a variable transmits its impact on another. The model's presumptions are that (an) every single direct impact work through a component (intervention), (b) they are dependent upon something (balance), and (c) any examination which concentrates just on intercession or control yet not both will be inadequate here and there. In this manner, each examination analyzed (a) the immediate impact of the enthusiastic distinguishing proof with a reason on the web and disconnected expectations to help a foundation related occasion, (b) the intervention of this impact by the particular CB inspirational guidelines in the CB continuum and, (c) the mediator impacts of isolated Facebook page claims as sparks to help these three distinctive cause connected occasions. A critical bit of charitable behavior originates from drive contributors reacting rapidly to sentiments of liberality. These demonstrations of giving give quick and simple, enthusiastic fulfillment. Hasty benefactors are normally responding to an intrigue instead of considering long haul donation plans or cautiously assessing cause beneficiaries. The ascent of portable stages has added to the fame of drive giving, making it simpler than any time in recent memory for potential givers to promptly send cash. This isn't an inalienably negative approach to give; the liberality released to help casualties of catastrophic events is rousing. In any case, as imprudent creation buys, this sort of giving is particularly vulnerable to our mind's psychological alternate ways.

Furthermore, as hasty buys, these donations can be requested with showcasing procedures that put forth passionate interests trying to entice individuals to give. Conduct financial matters offer another option, helping individuals finish on their aims while as yet protecting their feeling of decision. In spite of the fact that we center on motivation giving with these strategies, they may likewise be useful to deliberative giving since they, at last, intend to evacuate the social hindrances blocking individuals from finishing on their giving goals.

Making the demonstration of donation simple, and causing it to feel great, are helpful in all instances of magnanimous giving. However, we should take note of that the foundations profiting the most from motivation giving are those that can pay for showcasing strategies, not really the causes that are the best at helping their motivation. Drive suppliers are not looking into and assessing the viability of the associations to which they are giving. Rather, these fast donations just prize great, showcasing with the expectation that dollars are utilized successfully. Furthermore, some advertising strategies, particularly as they are received by an ever-increasing number of associations, may begin to appear to be straightforward to crowds, devaluing the reason they should support (Yoruk, 2012).

The aftereffects of the three investigations will, in general, help the three general speculations. To start with, and as anyone might expect, the more noteworthy the enthusiastic distinguishing proof with the reason, the more grounded was the on the web and disconnected help of the particular occasion. Second, in the two reasons occasion considers, this immediate impact was seen as interceded by mixes of independent CB persuasive guidelines. Be that as it may, both a self-governing natural inspiration to encounter incitement and controlled interjected guidelines were go-betweens with the help of the design show cause-related occasion (Berman, Levine, Barasch & Small, 2015). The immediate impact of cause ID and occasion support was directed by the setting regarding Facebook requests; this was not the situation in the reason related design appears in here, the item versus the decent item/cause claims legitimately affected the occasion support without essentially impacting cause recognizable proof.

Talk about the manners by which inclinations and hostility can be all the more effectively prepared on the web and will attempt to show that the introduction style of Facebook life stages may prime watchers to predispositions with respect to the news before they even start understanding it. An overview was regulated, getting some information about their internet based life propensities, which permits me to introduce a progressively complete image of where significance is set in Facebook encompassing news.

The examination uncovers that subjects might be prepared to put more significance on the first banner, or sharer, rather than the wellspring of news. It likewise affirmed some past discoveries in regard to the pervasiveness of animosity in online conversations of news. At long last, this examination endeavors to draw a connection between the occasions somebody sees a news story presented via web-based networking media, and the manners by which that influences their impression of the piece's significance.

The charity is useful for the supplier, the beneficiary, and society. To this end, the discoveries on the connections among cause distinguishing proof, self-decided inspirations, and backing for magnanimous occasions can help professionals in structuring increasingly viable web-based social networking correspondence. Given the exploratory settings of the three investigations, the specialists deliberately ceased from representing a huge number of progressively explicit speculations in regard to the potential impacts of each unmistakable CB persuasive guidelines (Winterich, Mittal & Aquino 2013). Likewise, it was anything but a goal, to sum up, the current outcomes to other generational associates. Millennial business college subjects were deliberately researched in view of their all-inclusive and broad utilization of online networking just as being significant administrative constituents for the future achievement of corporate and philanthropic associations engaged with admirable missions. By looking at information scratched from noble cause's Facebook Cause pages to data acquired from those associations' expense entries, the creators showed that the size of noble cause's online life fan base was emphatically connected with the measure of cash they raised on their Facebook Cause pages, yet the associations' effectiveness appraisals were definitely not. They inferred that social media charity support achievement is resolved more by informal organization impacts than customary instruments like effectiveness.

They found that, in the wake of controlling for pertinent pledge drive socioeconomics and good cause occasion factors, the quantity of Facebook companions, a pledge drive had was related to the measure of cash they raised. In particular, pledge drives with bigger online interpersonal organizations got a more noteworthy number of donor yet littler normal endowments. The creators contended that outcomes mirrored a 'nearby' open great that must be given by the specific social gathering. These examples of reactions show that benefactors are propelled by what the creators call 'social benevolence': they give since they give it a second thought about the pledge drive, and they see that the pledge drive thinks about how much cash they raise.

Charitable drives can bear witness to the intensity of accepted practices. In the two stories and past research, we can see a reasonable connection between normal practices that are normal, esteemed, and acknowledged by others and beneficent giving. Set forth plainly: when you see somebody give, you're bound to give yourself. We've seen this become animated through the intensity of crowdfunding efforts. Aggregate giving stages make greater permeability forgivers' practices, which can prompt snowballing or fleeting trend impacts in giving. The two examinations sketched out above give proof that informal organization size impacts on the Facebook charity results and propose that distributed contributors might be spurred by social charitableness. These investigations, nonetheless, don't address the manner in which pledge drives may outfit that inspiration by flagging the amount they give it a second thought. We suggest that the activities which pledge drives choose to require in their push to fundraise may decide their results and that extraordinary raising support activities signal various needs or degrees of care. Thusly, the signs that these activities give summon various degrees of responsiveness in charity.

Methods

Participants

The research involved recruitment of 138 participants who were students from Florida International University. Out of these 138 participants, 44.93% (n = 62) were male and 55.07% (n = 76) were female. The sample population in the study comprised of 24.6% Caucasians (n = 34), 18.8% African Americans (n = 26), 42% Hispanics (n= 58), 8.7% Asian Americans (n = 12), and 5.9% others (n = 8). Ages of the participants ranged from 18 to 35 with an average of 24.56 years (SD = 4.20).

Material and Procedure

Consideration of informed consent was an important aspect of the study. They recruited study participants were notified of the importance of participating in the research and assured that there were no risks or negative impacts associated with the activity. Verbal means of communication were utilized in ensuring informed consent in the study to avoid unintended consequences.

The participants were verbally requested if they were willing to participate in the study or not. In case the students agreed to be recruited as a participant in the study, each of them was provided documents containing demographic questions. After obtaining the oral informed consent from the participants, they were asked requested to follow instructions provided at the top section of the questionnaire. The participants were told to read the instructions everything carefully on Michael’s Facebook page before providing responses to the questions.

The survey consisted of five different parts that were required to be completed by the study participants. In the first part, participants were requested to read the “About” page of a Facebook user called Michael Bezijian. In the reading, participants were asked to identify some important about Michael by going through his Birthday donation request towards a charity group called “Unlikely Heroes.” After reviewing the request made by Michael, the participants read comments given by eight of his friends about how much they donated to the charity.

Upon completing reviewing the Facebook page, the participants were requested to give opinions concerning the charity and possible amount of money they would donate to support the cause. Also, those willing to donate in the form of the time were also asked to give their views if they get a chance to do so. In the third part of the survey document, the subjects provided their opinions about Michael, the charity "Unlikely Heroes," reactions from Michael's friends, and their feelings about charitable they are based on the amount to be donated to the cause. In the fourth part, the study sample completed demographics questions by providing their personal information. In the fifth part, the participants provided important information about the overall nature of the charity donations made by Michael’s friends towards the cause.

In the survey, the study participants were asked if answering the questions in the five parts were frustrating and responded on a scale from 1 (very frustrating) to 9 (not at all frustrating). To determine how the participants rated Michael, several questions were asked; Michael seems like a generous person. Do you agree? And they responded on a scale ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 6 (Strongly Agree). Michael seems like a selfish person. Do you agree? And also responded on a scale ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 6 (Strongly Agree).

After the participants completed the survey questions, they were debriefed about the study. All participants were introduced to normative social influence concepts and study hypotheses employed in the survey. The purpose of the study was then read to them to understand why the survey was conducted. After the activity was done, all participants were thanked for participating in the study.

Results

Survey conditions utilized in the study were High, Middle, and Low. The conditions were based on the amount of money donated by Michael's friends and those in which the participants were willing to donate towards the charity "Unlikely Heroes." A manipulation check was undertaken, and a significant effect in the study was x2(2.5) = 94.35, p < .001. With the use of charity donation conditions as the independent variable (low, middle, or high) and recall on the amount of dollar donated by Michael's friends as a dependent variable, there was a significant effect the χ2(2) = 72.15, p < .001. According to the findings, many subjects in the "low" condition had a lower recall of $5 to $ 10 donations to the charity cause (95% and the majority of the study subjects in the "middle" condition contributed between $25 and $30. A large number of participants in the "high" condition donated high $45 to $50.

Chi-square was utilized in the analysis because the direct variables (DVs) were categorical. This first method did not consider data based on means but on the number of responses as compared to what was expected before the survey. The Chi-square focused on the three manipulation check based on what the participants recalled the amount of money or time donated by Michael's friends towards the "Unlikely Heroes" charity causes. The options for the nominal variable was determined by the manipulation check employed in the study.

When rating their impressions associated with Michael and his Facebook page, many research participants gave positive responses about the charity donations. One hundred twenty-six participants rated "Unlikely Heroes" as a worthy charity and congratulated Michael Bezjian for his generosity. The remaining 12 participants rated "Unlikely Heroes" as a scam charity intended to con people. In the survey, participants in the "high" never suspected the charity cause to be a scam and looked more comfortable with the donations.

The generosity of the participants in the "high" made them donate much as compared to those in the "middle" and "low" donor conditions. Participants occupying the "high" donor situations were also willing to donate more time and money to "Unlikely Heroes" charity as compared to those in the other two groups. Participants who were willing to donate a lower amount of money and time towards the charity had various negative experiences about online donations. The main dependent variables analyzed in the study are time donated, dollar amount donated, and ratings of generosity.

For our analysis, the first One-Way ANOVA test gave significant differences among the independent variables, dependent variables, and the scenario conditions (low, middle, or high). In the test, F(2, 138) = 4.2, p < .05. Tukey post hoc was conducted as a subsequent test that supported the study hypothesis because it demonstrated that the dollar amount donated by participants to the charity was determined by their past experience with online donations.

The results from Tukey post hoc depicted that participants donated highest in “high” condition (M = $42.25, SD = 0.86) than those participants in the middle (M = $27. 12, SD = 0.94) and low (M = 8.24, SD = 1.18) conditions. This is because some of the participants in the "low" condition had a negative experience with online charity donations. The participants in the "middle" were more likely to donate in the future as compared to those in the "low" condition.

According to the findings, there was no great difference in the likelihood to donate in the future among participants in "high" and "middle" conditions. Based on the analysis of these findings, it was clear that participants were likely to donate in the future if their past experience with online donations were appropriate. The analysis of findings from the Tukey post hoc test was clear that participants are likely to donate less when they see other people donating low.

When the ratings of “Michael’s friends seem stingy” was used as a dependent variable and donation condition (low v. middle v. high) as the independent variable, the condition effect was not significant F(2, 138) = 2.46, p > .05. Ratings for participants’ stinginess had no significant differences within the “low” (M = 3.36, SD = 1.32), “middle” (M = 4.56, SD = 0.96), and “high” (M = 4.52, SD = 0.84) donation conditions. The participants did jot judged Michael’s friends based on their stinginess.

The second ANOVA test was done on part III questions; that is, question 7 (Michael's friends seem like generous people) and question 8 (Michael's friends seem like "stingy" people). Most of the participants in the survey rated Michael's friends as generous people, but others viewed those who contributed less as "stingy." There was no significant difference between the rating of Michael's friends on the "low" and "high" donation conditions.

With the use of charity condition (low v. high) as our independent variable and ratings of “Your own hypothetical donation amount (from $0 to $100)” as our dependent variable, we failed to find a significant condition effect, t(140) = 1.34, p > .05. Participants in both the “low” condition (M = $22. 58, SD = $1.28) and participants in the high condition (M = $22.49, SD= $0.81) said they would donate similarly.

On the other hand, using ratings of “Michael’s friends seem stingy” as the dependent variable, and charity condition (low v. high) as the independent variable in the study, we obtained a significant condition effect, t(140) = 4.28, p < .05. In this analysis, the participants found Michael’s friends in the “low” condition (M = 5.34, SD = 0.18) to be more “stingy” than those in the “high” condition (M = 3.14, SD = 0.72).

Discussion

We predicted that the participants would rate Michael's friends based on the donation condition (low v. middle v. high). From the analysis of the survey findings, it was clear that most of the participants rated Michael's impression and his Facebook friends as generous people due to their donations towards the charity cause. The results supported the predictions because participants responded by rating the donors based on the amount of money they donated to the charity. The majority of the participants rated the impression of Michael's Facebook page based on their past experience on online charity, but some were not willing to donate to the charity because of their negative perceptions that the cause was a scam. The participants were more likely to donate less when many people donated low. The hypothetical donation amount differed based on how other participants donated to the charity. The use of Chi-square was important for determining the willingness of participants to contribute towards the

Study Two

Charity norm manipulation has significant interaction with the second independent variable (low v. high) dollar amounts donated to Michael's friends to the cause. Based on the donation conditions, people are willing to donate towards the charity cause provided that they have appropriate experience with charity donations conducted through various social media platforms. Charitable and non-profit organizations have enormous impacts on charity norm manipulations (Le, 2019). Social communication is also fundamental in charity norm manipulation.

In the United States, for example, charities collected more than $410 billion; therefore, suggesting that they are part of the big businesses in the country. The question is, what factors determine charity norm manipulation in society? According to Le (2019), charity donations connect donors with needy people; therefore, providing essential services that the government and other businesses cannot deliver to them. To attain these humanitarian causes, charities normally rely on private donations. For example, in 2017, private donors accounted for almost 70% of the total charity donations in the United States (Le, 2019).

With the increasing number of charitable groups in the United States, there is a fight between private donors and non-profit organizations (Le, 2019). Effectiveness of communication is considered to be one of the important factors that determine the dollar amount donated by individuals to the charity cause. Donation behavior is affected by the nature of communication and some charity norms in society. People are likely to donate high when they see others donate too (Le, 2019). This type of manipulation to donate high is determined by the nature of the charity norm.

Interestingly, some evidence has shown that communication activities not be effective in some cases and can lead to a negative attitude towards charity donation (Le, 2019). For example, when a persona with negative experiences on charity donations conducted through social media discourages other willing donors. Also, there is overhead aversion resulting from situations when donors tend to select charity causes with the minimum overhead cost; that is, charities that focus more on advertising may be less attractive to private donors (Gneezy, Keenan, & Gneezy, 2014).

Research has shown that donor-specific factors like age, personality, gender, economic status, cultural identity, and moral identity are important moderators that affect how charity norm manipulation interacts with the low vs. high independent variable during charity donation cause (Le, 2019). These factors may weaken or strengthen donors' responsiveness to charity donations. Effective social communication is needed to ensure that donors' responsiveness is strengthened; thus, resulting in high contributions to the charity cause.

Evidence from different research has also suggested that male donors normally prefer self-focused donation appeals, while female donors may prefer other ads from masculine culture and individualistic nature (Le, 2019). These research findings are true when the culture of the donors is feminine and individualistic in nature. Female donors are likely to donate high when other people are also donating the same because they are easily manipulated. Although this finding is true, the studies do not give a reason to support the claim. Duclos and Barasch (2014), assert that donation appeal in a charity cause intended to support the needy beneficiary groups is likely to be effective when a group of donors possesses an interdependent orientation. There is not significant variability for individual/independent donors.

In addition to the identified donor-specific characteristic, other factors may also affect how the low vs. high dollar donation as an independent variable interact with charity norm manipulation (Duclos & Barasch, 2014). The first factor is the relationship between individual donors with the charity cause. This factor is likely to affect charity manipulation if most participants are not familiar with charity donations. When the donors are new in the activity, they are more likely to donate low to the charity cause (GitLab, 2013). Another factor is charity-specific aspects. The factors specific to the charity include previous experiences of the donors on online contributions, the objectives of the cause, and how the needy will benefit from the donations (Agerström, Carlsson, Nicklasson, & Guntell, 2015). The third factor is determined by the response context. For example, the response of donors who have contributed to the charity cause may affect how other people will donate towards the activity.

There is limited knowledge of the differences between donors' behaviors, either with or without a progressive donation scheme. It is also suggested that some donors may develop a weak response to subsequent communication after accepting to donate regularly (Agerström et al., 2015). This interaction between charity norm manipulation and independent variable results when there is no effective and strong social communication between the donors and requesting individuals/groups. This poor response results in a low donation-based o hoc basis. According to Agerström et al. (2015), the type of responses to communication activities is normally affected by the nature of the association between the charity cause and the donor.

Some studies have also attempted to explore whether setting various matching rates during charity donation activities can motivate people to agree on recurring charity contributions. Developing a committed and strong social relationship with donors is important in ensuring recurring and high donations. Contractual vs. non-contractual relationship is another independent variable that normally arises during charity norms manipulation. According to Agerström et al. (2015), additional information relating how the charity donations will help the needy groups and contributions by other people is important in manipulating donors. Individual donors will be more likely to donate to the charity cause if they learn that other people from the same background or society have contributed to the activity (Agerström et al., 2015). For example, college students are likely to give some monetary donations after realizing that their fellow students have also contributed to the charity cause.

Social norms have significant influence on various behaviors that include environmental conversations, and donation habits. Different ways in which social norms can be used to influence peoples’ behaviors and increase donations to charitable activities. Two distinct types of social norms have been proven to be the leading factors with significant influence on people’s donation behaviors (Agerström et al., 2015). Injunctive social norms are the first factors that contribute to the nature of interaction between low vs. high independent variable and charity donation manipulation. Injunctive social norms results to increased charity donations because it manipulates people decisions based on the belief that they should be doing that a routine activity in life. Agerström et al. (2015, p. 3) asserts that “injunctive norms tend to be effective because noncompliance often elicits social disapproval.”

Injunctive social norms may have positive impacts in donor’s giving behaviors (Agerström et al., 2015). For example, when Dictator Game players are told that sharing monetary resources is what they should do, they are more likely to share more than when there is no any form of injunctive norm. Descriptive social norms also have significant impacts in people’s donation behaviors. This type of social norm determines how people behave in various situations. For example, is a donor acknowledges that a large number of people have participated in the charitable giving, he/she is likely to follow the trend since he or she automatically assumes that the charity is effective and important course of action (Agerström et al., 2015).

Extant studies have suggested that charity donations are influenced by various factors that include donor characteristics, final recipients’ characteristics, emotional reactions, characteristics of the charity groups, and perceived cognitions (Agerström et al., 2015). Potential donors are likely to donate more if they learn that other people have also contributed to the charity activity; therefore, increasing the amount of money donated to the group.

Charity Norms and Donations - Research Proposal Example

Extract of sample "Charity Norms and Donations"