Guilt Appeals and Prosocial Behavior: An Experimental Analysis of the Effects of Anticipatory Versus Reactive Guilt Appeals on the Effectiveness of Blood Donor Appeals

Asking for something different from our donors: factors influencing persuasion success

“…In terms of approaches to donors, future research would do well to consider both donor and staff perceptions of the same conversion conversation, to understand what is and is not considered pressure and supportive factors. Further, addressing gaps in WB donors' knowledge regarding the plasmapheresis procedure and how it is used may also facilitate conversion, allowing both perceived positive and perceived negative aspects of plasmapheresis to be addressed in conversations …”

“…The source of the persuasion communication contributes to its effectiveness, with agents perceived as credible being more persuasive than noncredible agents. [18][19][20] From the donors' perspective, in-center staff may be perceived to have greater credibility in relation to plasmapheresis donation than call center staff due to their perceived medical expertise 20,21 and trustworthiness, 19,22 which is enhanced by symbolic cues such as uniforms, logos, and emblems. Indeed, as a professional group, nurses are typically stereotyped as honest.…”

“…Further, addressing gaps in WB donors' knowledge 8 regarding the plasmapheresis procedure and how it is used may also facilitate conversion, allowing both perceived positive and perceived negative aspects of plasmapheresis to be addressed in conversations. 20 In conclusion, in a voluntary, nonremunerated environment, suitable WB donors are best encouraged to ask for details about plasmapheresis donation in collection centers, facilitated through targeted marketing campaigns. Further, a plasmapheresis conversation must be perceived as donor oriented, that is, focused on identifying and meeting the donor's needs.…”

Attitudes and Donation Behavior When Reading Positive and Negative Charity Appeals

“…To illustrate, Renner, Lindenmeier, Tscheulin, and Drevs (2013) compared charity appeals inducing either reactive guilt or anticipatory guilt and made statements about appeal efficiency and prosocial action tendencies. Their dependent variables were, however, appeal credibility, inference of manipulative intent, and attitude toward the appeal.…”

Social Loafing in the Refugee Crisis: Information about Existing Initiatives Decreases Willingness to Help

“…For example, if willingness to help was increased to a high level through the above mentioned picture, a higher number of initiatives is probably needed to induce social loafing. On the other hand, assuming that this high level of willingness to help is driven by feelings of guilt [24], one might expect that already a low number of initiatives might offer people a way to reduce those feelings and further willingness to help. Based on this reasoning, future research should focus on the underlying processes and the conditions under which this kind of loafing versus normative social influence occur.…”