Shock charity campaigns: Building our understanding on their effectiveness: Comments on “Emotions and Prosocial Behaviors: A Study of the Effectiveness of Shocking Charity Campaigns” by Jeanne Albouy

Abstract

The recent article entitled “Emotions and Prosocial Behaviors: A Study of the Effectiveness of Shocking Charity Campaigns” authored by Jeanne Albouy published in Recherche et Applications en Marketing provides important evidence on the effectiveness of shocking advertisements in the context of charity appeals. Specifically, this research highlights how the negative emotions and empathy that are produced by shock campaigns lead to positive attitudes toward the ad, the cause, and the intentions to help the charity. This work is important because it helps to resolve a conflict in the literature – namely, divergent findings that have shown both positive and negative outcomes for ads in charity campaigns that are emotional and raw in nature. Furthermore, like any good research, this work also seeds new opportunities for future investigation into the role of shock advertising in the context of charity communication campaigns. This commentary will look to highlight where additional research opportunities exist. Specifically, the discussion will center on three directions of potential interest: (1) a broader investigation into the notion of shock advertising in the context of charity campaigns, (2) understanding potential differences in how an audience is exposed to shock advertising and the implications therein, and (3) contemplating other outcome measures that could provide meaningful insight into how shock advertising has an impact in the marketplace.

Impact of emotional appeal on non‐profit advertising: A neurophysiological analysis

“…Previous research on NPO advertising has discussed the effectiveness of advertising strategies in increasing donations (Dahl, 2018; Lindauer et al, 2020; Nguyen & Faulkner, 2020; Zemack‐Rugar & Klucarova‐Travani, 2018). These investigations have examined the effectiveness of different appeals, such as positive and negative emotional appeals (Albouy, 2017; Chang & Lee, 2009; Erlandsson et al, 2018; Septianto & Tjiptono, 2019; Wu et al, 2022), altruistic and egoistic (Chang, 2014; White & Peloza, 2009), and abstract and concrete appeals (Macdonnell & White, 2015).…”