Research essay paper Apa charity
Therealdeal00
CharityEmotionsandFacebookSchattke.pdf
Motivations to Support Charity-Linked Events After Exposure to Facebook Appeals: Emotional Cause Identification and Distinct
Self-Determined Regulations
Kaspar Schattke Université du Québec à Montréal
Ronald Ferguson and Michèle Paulin Concordia University
Nonprofit organizations are increasingly dependent on the involvement of Millennial constituencies. Three studies investigated their motivations to support charity-linked events: emotional identification with a cause, self-determination theory (SDT) regula- tions, and context-related Facebook promotions. This article addresses the recent call to expand SDT research from a simple analysis of autonomous versus controlled moti- vation, to studying the effects of all the regulations in the SDT continuum, in particular, the inclusion of the tripartite dimensions of intrinsic motivation and integrated moti- vation. Results demonstrated that the greater the emotional identification with the cause, the stronger was the tendency to support the charity-linked event. Also, the results in these social media contexts revealed that specific intrinsic dimensions (e.g., experience stimulation) are motivators of online and offline support, as is the personal value nature of integrated regulation. Whereas only autonomous motivational regula- tions predicted support for the two events organized specifically a for charitable causes, both autonomous and controlled regulations predicted support of a for-profit event organized with a charitable cause as an adjunct. These findings can assist practitioners in designing more effective social media communications in support of charity-linked events.
Keywords: social media, self-determination theory, integrated regulation, tripartite model of intrinsic motivation, charitable causes
Supplemental materials: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/mot0000085.supp
Social media is a new domain offering excit- ing opportunities to investigate research ques- tions in social psychology (Greitemeyer, 2011; Kende, Ujhelyi, Joinson, & Greitemeyer, 2015).
Our research examined motivation to support charity-linked events of nonprofit organizations that are currently faced with increased compe- tition for resources and declining government support (Paulin, Ferguson, Jost, & Fallu, 2014; Reed, Aquino, & Levy, 2007; White & Peloza, 2009). Presently, they depend on an ageing set of traditional supporters (Urbain, Gonzalez, & Le Gall-Ely, 2013). However, their future suc- cess lies in ensuring the sustainable involve- ment of the Millennial generation (Fine, 2009), distinguished from other generations by their intense exposure at an early age to interactive technology and social media (Bolton et al., 2013).
Facebook, the most detailed social media, is used primarily to maintain or solidify existing offline relationships allowing people to develop a public or semipublic profile and to emotion- ally participate with those whom they can share
This article was published Online First December 21, 2017. Kaspar Schattke, Department of Psychology, Université
du Québec à Montréal; Ronald Ferguson, Management De- partment, John Molson School of Business, Concordia Uni- versity; Michèle Paulin, Marketing Department, John Mol- son School of Business, Concordia University.
This research is a pertinent activity within Michèle Pau- lin’s Royal Bank of Canada Professorship in Strategic Re- lationship Marketing. The authors also wish to thank Marylène Gagné for her encouragement during the initial stages of this research.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Kaspar Schattke, Département de psychologie, Université du Québec à Montréal, CP 8888, Succ. Centre-Ville, Montréal, Québec H3C 3P8, Canada. E-mail: schattke.kaspar_ [email protected]
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
Motivation Science © 2017 American Psychological Association 2018, Vol. 4, No. 4, 315–332 2333-8113/18/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/mot0000085
315
connections (Boyd & Ellison, 2007; Ho & Dempsey, 2010; Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007). Here, actors may be less concerned with spontaneous, single-encounter helping than with longer term sustained behavior. For example, vol- unteering to work for a nonprofit organization may be less influenced by obligation to a partic- ular person’s situation than by a decision to do good for an extended period in an organizational context (Penner, 2002; Penner, Dovidio, Piliavin, & Schroeder, 2005). Facebook can be used by organizations to empower decentralized net- works to organize and promote events and campaigns to raise money and create aware- ness (Kanter & Fine, 2010). The benefits to providers and recipients of helping remain even when the behavior occurs in a computer- related anonymous context (Martela & Ryan, 2016). Studies of nonprofit organizations have addressed the increasing importance of social media but not the practical details of how to go about it effectively (Guo & Saxton, 2014).
The purpose of our article is to address this practical gap from the theoretical perspective of motivation to support charity-linked events in a social media context. First, with respect to emo- tional identification with a charitable cause, we expand on the vast research literature regarding the motivation for engaging in prosocial behav- iors based on, among others, social identifica- tion (Tajfel, 1972; Tajfel & Turner, 1986), al- truism/egoism (Batson & Shaw, 1991), moral identity (Reed et al., 2007), gender (Eagly, 2009), and personality (Penner, 2002). Second, we address the more recent call to expand SDT research from just an analysis of autonomous versus controlled motivation, to studying the effects of the continuum of distinct motivational regulations in various charity-linked situations (Pelletier, Rocchi, Vallerand, Deci, & Ryan, 2013). We also assess the tripartite dimensions of intrinsic motivation and of integrated moti- vation, two important regulations often missing in previous SDT research (Amiot & Sansfaçon, 2011; Carbonneau, Vallerand, & Lafrenière, 2012; Chemolli & Gagné, 2014; Ferguson, Gut- berg, Schattke, Paulin, & Jost, 2015; Miquelon & Castonguay, 2017).
This article presents three empirical studies of Millennial’s motivation to support charity- linked events promoted on social media. Two
were organized specifically for a charitable cause and the other was to promote a for- profit event with a charitable cause as an adjunct. Study 1 involved the promotion of an annual charity event for the cause of homeless youth. Study 2 involved a proposed charity event for the cause of breast cancer, of which the annual promotions were predominantly feminine in nature (Sulik & Zierkiewicz, 2014). Study 3 involved a charity-related for- profit fashion show for women. The partici- pants in these studies were Millennial first- year undergraduate business school students. Traditionally these students can gain an addi- tional two percent of a core-course grade by participating in research projects. No mone- tary or other incentive for participation was given. Historically, more than 65% of stu- dents take part in available research projects. This target group is particularly pertinent given that they are digitally savvy and highly engaged in social media and, as future man- agers of for-profit and nonprofit organiza- tions, they will be involved in charitable causes. In each study, participants examined Facebook event page appeals and answered questions online. They were requested to carefully examine the Facebook event cover photo, description section, photos, and a vid- eo.
The design of each study involved the ad- vanced Conditional Process Model, which is particularly applicable when, the “. . . goal is to describe and understand the conditional nature of the mechanism or mechanisms by which a variable transmits its effect on another” (Hayes, 2013, p. 325). The model’s assumptions are that (a) all direct effects function through some kind of mechanism (mediation), (b) they are contin- gent on something (moderation), and (c) any analysis which focuses only on mediation or moderation but not both is going to be incom- plete in some ways. Therefore, each study ex- amined (a) the direct effect of the emotional identification with a cause on online and offline intentions to support a charity related event, (b) the mediation of this effect by the distinct SDT motivational regulations in the SDT continuum and, (c) the moderator effects of separate Face- book page appeals as motivators to support these three different charity-linked events.
316 SCHATTKE, FERGUSON, AND PAULIN
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
Theoretical Framework
Direct Motivational Effect of Emotional Cause Identification and Support for Charity-Linked Events
Social identity theory can be an important perspective to explain motivation for prosocial behaviors (Levine, Prosser, Evans, & Reicher, 2005; Thomas, McGarty, & Mavor, 2009). So- cial identity is that part of one’s self-concept, which derives from knowledge of belonging to a certain social group together with an emo- tional and value significance of this group mem- bership (Tajfel, 1972). Social identification is found to be one of the prime motivations for participation in social movements (Stets & Burke, 2000). Central and salient social identi- ties are more likely to influence thought, feel- ing, and action because they are contextually relevant and subjectively important (Ashforth, Harrison, & Corley, 2008). Identification with a salient social group may engender a sense of “we-ness” where self-benefit and others-benefit merge leading to helping behaviors (Penner et al., 2005).
More specifically, social identity theory im- plies that a sense of community should increase social engagement, volunteering, and helping because it increases one’s sense of belonging (Omoto & Snyder, 2002). Indeed, identifying with a social group has been shown to increase helping and volunteering (Simon, Stürmer, & Steffens, 2000), to enhance group cohesion and motivation (Ellemers, de Gilder, & Haslam, 2004), and to improve citizenship behaviors (Tyler & Blader, 2001). Although much pro- social behavior is about helping individuals in need, it can also be directed at supporting groups or organizations coordinating the provi- sion of that need (Eagly, 2009; Ferguson et al., 2015). Whereas one can develop social identi- fication with facets of an organization, family or other grouping, an emotional identification can also exist with respect to a charitable cause (Thomas et al., 2009). Vanhamme, Lindgreen, Reast, and van Popering (2012) define cause identification as the degree of overlap in an individual’s self-concept and the perception of the cause. They report that the stronger the identification with the cause, the more positive are the evaluations of campaigns for that cause. However, it is imperative to investigate further
this motivational link between cause identifica- tion and event support as promoted in various situations via social media.
Mediation of Direct Effect of Cause Identification on Event Support via Distinct SDT Motivational Regulations
Self-Determination Theory is a “macrotheory” of human motivation influenced by and dependent upon social and environmental factors (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Moller, Ryan, & Deci, 2006). SDT expands on the concepts of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation by positing a continuum of behavioral regulations ranging from controlled to autono- mous motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Gagné & Deci, 2005; Pelletier, Rocchi, Vallerand, Deci, & Ryan, 2013; Vallerand, Pelletier, & Koestner, 2008). In each of these two broad categories is a set of motivational regulations with distinct char- acteristics. Controlled motivation includes exter- nal and introjected regulations, whereas autono- mous motivation is comprised of identified and integrated regulations as well as intrinsic motiva- tion.
Intrinsic motivation involves three dimen- sions: to experience stimulation, acquire knowl- edge, and accomplish (Vallerand, Blais, Brière, & Pelletier, 1989; Vallerand et al., 1993). Car- bonneau et al. (2012) described this as the Tri- partite Model, in which the intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation is seeking for sensa- tions, excitement, or aesthetic enjoyment; the intrinsic motivation to know is doing an activity for the pleasure and satisfaction of learning and exploring or understanding something new and; the intrinsic motivation toward accomplishment is deriving pleasure and satisfaction from at- tempting to surpass oneself or engaging in the process of accomplishing or creating some- thing. They report that exploratory and confir- matory factor analyses in several contexts (edu- cation, work, leisure, and sport contexts) demonstrate that the three dimensions of intrinsic motivation, although related, are nevertheless dis- tinct constructs.
Thus, SDT provides a richer set of distinct regulations than simply analyzing the effects of autonomous versus controlled motivation (Fer- guson et al., 2015; Taylor, Jungert, Mageau, Schattke, Dedic, Rosenfield, & Koestner, 2014). The SDT continuum has been viewed as se- quentially moving from low to high levels of
317MOTIVATIONS TO SUPPORT CHARITY-LINKED EVENTS
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
self-determination (Vallerand, 1997). However, this has been questioned (Ferguson et al., 2015; Koestner & Losier, 2002). Chemolli and Gagné (2014) argued that the multidimensional treat- ment of motivation is a unique strength of SDT. However, until recently, autonomous integrated regulation has not been included in the assessment of SDT motivations and conspicuously absent in the above critique of the sequential predictive power of the SDT continuum (Amiot & Sansfa- çon, 2011; Ferguson et al., 2015). Given that in- tegrated regulation is determined by one’s closely held values, it is expected to be an important motivational factor for supporting a charitable cause with which one identifies. In addition, the majority of studies have employed an overall measure of intrinsic motivation rather than assessing the individual effects of the tripartite dimensions.
Moderation of Direct Effects of Cause Identification on Event Support via Facebook Appeals
According to Hayes (2013), moderation anal- ysis is pertinent when an investigator seeks to determine whether a given variable is thought to influence the size of the direct effect of an independent variable on the dependent variable. In the present research, we chose three contexts, in which the motivation for supporting a chari- table-linked event was thought to be directly determined by the participants’ emotional iden- tification with the cause. Sequentially, we as-
sessed a single moderating effect relevant to each context: self-versus -others benefit appeals in Study 1, gender in Study 2, and appeals for a commercial product alone versus a combined cause/product in Study 3.
The Empirical Studies
In general, for each of the three studies we hypothesized that (a) in the context of events linked to a cause, the strength of emotional cause identification would have a positive direct effect on Millennials’ online and offline support of the event, (b) this direct effect would be mediated (indirect effect) by different SDT mo- tivational regulations depending on the event studied, and (c) the direct effect would be mod- erated (conditional direct effect) by the type of promotional Facebook page appeal. Figure 1 illustrates the expected relationships.
Study 1: Homeless Youth Event
Study 1 examined motivations for support of the “Five Days for the Homeless” event (Five Days for the Homeless, https://5days.ca/about). This annual event began at one university busi- ness school in 2005 and now involves 26 with total donations of nearly two million dollars. For five days, students, professors, and celebri- ties live and sleep overnight on the street sur- rounding the university. Volunteers solicit funds from the student population and the pub-
SDT REGULATIONS Intrinsic/to experience Intrinsic/to know Intrinsic/to accomplish Integrated regulation Identified regulation Introjected regulation External regulation
EVENT SUPPORT Online Offline
IDENTIFICATION WITH CHARITABLE
CAUSE
Study 1 FACEBOOK APPEAL
Self-Benefit Others-Benefit
Study 2 GENDER
Male Female
Study 3 FACEBOOK APPEAL
Product/Cause Product
c’
bi ai
Figure 1. Conditional Process Model and study overview.
318 SCHATTKE, FERGUSON, AND PAULIN
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
lic. Besides examining participants’ online and offline intentions to support the event, we also examined their online and offline self-reported behaviors two weeks following the event.
Method
Participants and procedures. Study 1 used a between-subjects design involving N � 339 first-year undergraduate business school students. The “Five days for the Homeless” Facebook event page was manipulated to pro- vide two appeals, which were randomly as- signed to two groups. One appeal mainly pro- moted benefits to others (n � 165) and the other appeal benefits to the self (n � 174). The self- benefit appeal emphasized “where will you be sleeping tonight”, “sleepers are heroes”, “great for their CVs”, “free tickets to a rock concert”, and “tax breaks”. The others-benefit appeal em- phasized that “we take to the streets to raise funds”, “it makes ‘cents’ to participate”, “by working together we can help the homeless”, and “there is strength in numbers”.
Measures. Descriptive statistics, scale reli- abilities, and intercorrelations for all Study 1 variables are presented in Table 1. All measures were 5-point Likert scales. The dependent vari- ables included two 4-item scales of intentions to support the event. The online support scale was prefaced with the statement: “The Facebook event page makes me want to. . . .” The items were: “. . . respond that I like some of the postings”, “. . . post my comments to it”, “. . . share it with my friends and others in my net- work”, and “. . . share some of the videos, pictures and links”.
The offline support scale was prefaced with the statement “Other things considered, I would . . .”. The items were “. . . attend”, “. . . make a donation”, “. . . volunteer to help out”, and “. . . willingly be on the organizing committee”.
The independent variable of emotional iden- tification with the cause of homeless youth was assessed with a 4-item scale prefaced by the statement “The cause is important to me be- cause . . .” followed by “it is personally close to my heart”, “I know someone who has suffered”, “it can touch my family or those close to me”, and “it is one of the most important concerns for people my age”. The proposed mediation vari- ables were the seven motivational regulations in the SDT continuum measured using a 28-item T
ab le
1 M
ea n s,
S ta
n d a rd
D ev
ia ti
o n s,
S ca
le R
el ia
b il
it ie
s, a n d
In te
r- C
o rr
el a ti
o n s
S tu
dy 1:
H om
el es
s yo
ut h
ev en
t
N �
3 3 9
M (S
D )
M se
lf (S
D )
M o th
e r
(S D
) 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10
1. In
tr in
si c
m ot
iv at
io n
fo r
st im
ul at
io n
3. 45
(. 84
) 3.
37 (.
84 )
3. 52
(. 83
) .8
3 2.
In tr
in si
c m
ot iv
at io
n to
kn ow
3. 49
(. 84
) 3.
46 (.
83 )
3. 52
(. 82
) .5
6� �
.8 4
3. In
tr in
si c
m ot
iv at
io n
to ac
co m
pl is
h 3.
06 (.
84 )
3. 05
(. 84
) 3.
07 (.
85 )
.6 0�
� .6
5� �
.8 7
4. In
te gr
at ed
re gu
la ti
on 3.
26 (.
86 )
3. 17
(. 87
) 3.
34 (.
85 )
.5 0�
� .4
3� �
.4 4�
� .8
0 5.
Id en
ti fi
ed re
gu la
ti on
3. 22
(. 75
) 3.
17 (.
74 )
3. 27
(. 75
) .5
1� �
.5 2�
� .6
6� �
.6 5�
� .8
4 6.
In tr
oj ec
te d
re gu
la ti
on 2.
09 (.
83 )
2. 08
(. 82
) 2.
10 (.
84 )
.2 3�
� .1
5� �
.3 0�
� .2
4� �
.2 4�
� .7
0 7.
E xt
er na
l re
gu la
ti on
2. 37
(. 82
) 2.
30 (.
80 )
2. 44
(. 83
) .2
6� �
.2 1�
� .3
9� �
.1 3�
.4 4�
� .5
2� �
.7 9
8. C
au se
Id en
ti fi
ca ti
on 2.
94 (.
75 )
2. 98
(. 76
) 2.
90 (.
74 )
.3 4�
� .2
8� �
.2 5�
� .5
0� �
.2 8�
� .2
7� �
.0 9
.7 0
9. O
nl in
e S
up po
rt 3.
15 (.
96 )
2. 90
(. 93
) 3.
38 (.
93 )
.3 8�
� .2
5� �
.2 3�
� .3
1� �
.2 3�
� .3
1� �
.1 7�
� .4
4� �
.8 8
10 .
O ffl
in e
S up
po rt
3. 04
(. 86
) 2.
98 (.
83 )
3. 09
(. 88
) .4
2� �
.3 2�
� .2
5� �
.4 7�
� .2
8� �
.2 0�
� .0
4 .5
7� �
.6 0�
� .8
3
N o te
. C
ro nb
ac h
al ph
as ar
e sh
ow n
on th
e di
ag on
al s
in it
a li
cs .
T he
sc al
es ar
e 5-
po in
t L
ik er
t sc
al es
. C
or re
la ti
on si
gn ifi
ca nc
e �
p �
.0 5.
� �
p �
.0 1.
319MOTIVATIONS TO SUPPORT CHARITY-LINKED EVENTS
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
scale (see Appendix) adapted from Guay, Ma- geau, and Vallerand (2003) as well as Amiot and Sansfaçon (2011). The scales included four items for each of the measures: the three dimen- sions of intrinsic motivation; to experience stimulation, to know, and to accomplish as well as integrated, identified, introjected, and exter- nal regulations. The motivational regulations scales were introduced with the statement, “I would become engaged in the “Five Days for the Homeless” event because. . . .” The self- versus others- benefit Facebook appeals were analyzed as the dichotomous moderator vari- able (self � 0, other � 1) of the direct effect of cause identification on the online and offline support of the “Five days for the Homeless” event.
The participants were also contacted by e- mail in the two weeks following the “Five Days for the Homeless” event. They were asked to respond by indicating which, if any, actions they took with regard to the event. The reported actions were grouped into two categories, on- line and event behaviors. For example, online actions could be donating online, following the event, commenting or sharing information on- line. Event related actions included being a sleeper, visiting the site, being a volunteer, dis- cussing with sleepers and volunteers, donating via a volunteer or attending opening and closing ceremonies. No monetary or other incentives were offered in return for this information. A total of N � 149 participants (44%) responded to the e-mail request.
Results
The descriptive results in Table 1 show that online and offline intentions to support the homeless event were strongly correlated, r � .60, p � .001 but not strongly enough to be redundant, which justifies conducting separate analyses for online and offline intentions. More- over, identification with the cause was posi- tively correlated with online, r � .44, p � .001 and offline intentions, r � .57, p � .001 to support the event. Furthermore, participants tended to have higher mean values for autono- mous forms of motivation than for controlled ones and, overall, the correlations of cause iden- tification and support intentions seem to be higher with autonomous than with controlled forms of motivation.
Analyses of the conditional process models (see Table 2) showed significant direct effects of identification with the cause on both online (b � .29, SE � .10, p � .002) and offline (b � .34, SE � .08, p � .001) support for the “Five days for the Homeless” event, as indicated by unstandardized coefficients. The direct effect of cause identification was found to be mediated (indirect effect) through intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation for both online and of- fline support (see Table 2). Also, integrated regulation mediated the direct effect of cause identification on offline but not online support.
Moderation analyses showed a significant in- teraction term between the Facebook appeal type (self � 0, other � 1) and identification with the cause for online (b � .34, SE � .12, p � .004) as well as offline intentions (b � .24, SE � .10, p � .016). Online support for the “Five Days for the Homeless” event was stron- ger for the others-benefit (b � .63, SE � .09, p � .001) compared to the self-benefit appeal (b � .29, SE � .09, p � .002). Similar results were found for offline event support for the appeals to others-benefit (b � .58, SE � .07, p � .001) and self-benefit (b � .34, SE � .08, p � .001).
In the follow-up study, there were no signif- icant differences in the previous online and of- fline support for the Five Days for the Homeless event between those participants who did or did not respond to the follow-up email request for event behavior information (Online: M � 3.33, SD � 0.90 vs. M � 3.52, SD � 0.93, t(337) � �1.80, p � .07, r � .10, and actual offline actions: M � 3.13, SD � 0.81 vs. M � 3.26, SD � 0.93; t (337) � �1.29, p � .20, r � .07). Those respondents who reported that they actu- ally engaged in supporting the event online and offline had also previously indicated signifi- cantly higher intentions to do so than those who did not (Online: M � 3.65, SD � 0.70 vs. M � 3.08, SD � 0.96, t(122) � 3.73, p � .001, r � .32, and offline actions: M � 3.24, SD � 0.74 vs. M � 2.85, SD � 0.93, t(122) � 2.39, p � .018, r � .21).
Discussion
First, the findings of Study 1 are consistent with the literature demonstrating the positive motivational relationship between the degree of emotional feelings of cause identification and
320 SCHATTKE, FERGUSON, AND PAULIN
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
the engagement in prosocial helping behaviors. They fully support the hypothesis that the strength of the identification with the cause of homeless youth directly predicts Millennials’ online and offline intentions to support the “Five Days for the Homeless” event.
Second, these results validate previous re- search showing that identification with a cause engenders autonomous rather than controlled motivation in support of prosocial behaviors (Pavey, Greitemeyer, & Sparks, 2012; Ferguson et al., 2015). More importantly, they are con- sistent with the hypothesis that the significant role of distinct SDT regulations provides more practical information in that this mediation was seen to be due to the participants’ intrinsic mo- tivation to experience stimulation and to feel that the behavior would involve motivation in- tegrated with their basic values.
Third, the moderation of this direct motiva- tional effect of cause identification on event
support demonstrated that an altruistic others- benefit Facebook appeal created greater inten- tions of event support than one appealing to self-interests, thus demonstrating the influence of context as proposed by Hypothesis 3. Al- though the dominant theories of pro-social be- havior are based on self-benefit and universal egoism (Batson & Shaw, 1991), it can also be altruistic and driven by caring about principles of justice and others-benefit (Holmes, Miller, & Lerner, 2002). White and Peloza (2009) re- ported that, in a nonsocial media environment, where people were publicly accountable for their actions, an others-benefit appeal garnered more volunteer intentions and monetary dona- tions to a charitable cause than did a self-benefit appeal. Also, Fisher, Vandenbosch, and Antia (2008) studied the effects of public TV pledge drive appeals emphasizing either self- or others- benefit. Greater support occurred when viewers felt they were helping society at large, other
Table 2 The Direct Effect of Cause Identification on Event Support (c=), Relationship of Cause Identification to SDT Regulations (ai) and SDT Regulations to Event Support (bi), and the Indirect Effect of Mediation by SDT Regulations (aibi)
Study 1: Homeless youth event
Direct effect of cause identification on event support (c=)
Online unstandardized effect (SE) Offline unstandardized effect (SE) .290 (.095) p � .002 344 (.078) p � .001
Cause identification to SDT regulations (ai)
SDT regulations to event support (bi)
Bootstrap indirect effect (aibi) (mediation by SDT regulations)Online Offline
R2 � .34, p � .001
R2 � .42, p � .001 Online Offline
SDT regulations b (SE) b (SE) b (SE) Effect (SE) (LL, UL) Effect (SE) (LL, UL)
Intrinsic .385 (.057) .277 (.071) .224 (.059) .107 (.032) (.054, .180) .086 (.030) (.037, .157) stimulation R2 � .12, p � .001 p � .001 p � .001
Intrinsic .313 (059) .021 (072) .072 (060) .007 (026) (�.041, .061) .023 (022) (�.017, .070) knowledge R2 � .08, p � .001 p � .771 p � .231
Intrinsic .284 (.059) �.043 (.084) �.090 (.069) �.012 (.025) (�.068, .034) �.026 (.022) (�.078, .011) accomplish R2 � .06, p � .001 p � .610) p � .195
Integrated .579 (.054) .029 (.080) .169 (.066) .017 (.047) (�.082, .110) .098 (.041) (.022, .183) regulation R2 � .25, p � .001 p � .717 p � .011
Identified .283 (.052) �.057 (.100) �.002 (.083) �.016 (.031) (�.085, .041) �.001 (.026) (�.054, .051) regulation R2 � .08, p � .001 p � .567 p � .981
Introjected .303 (.058) .023 (.067) .077 (.054) .007 (.022) (�.035, .053) .023 (.018) (�.008, .064) regulation R2 � .07, p � .001 p � .726 p � .151
External .101 (.059) .077 (.071) �.110 (.059) .009 (.010) (�.005, .038) �.011 (.011) (�.044, .001) regulation R2 � .01, p � .089 p � .284 p � .065
Note. b � unstandardized coefficient, SE � standard error; R2 � effect size; df � degrees of freedom. The indirect effect is significant if Bootstrap 95% confidence interval (LL: Lower level, UL: Upper level) does not include zero. Significant indirect effects are marked in bold. Paths ai: df 1 � 1, df 2 � 337; Paths bi and c=: df 1 � 10; df 2 � 328.
321MOTIVATIONS TO SUPPORT CHARITY-LINKED EVENTS
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
viewers, and the station itself. Moreover, ap- peals that focused on what viewers would per- sonally gain from helping were actually coun- terproductive.
However, it must be recognized that an oth- ers-benefit altruistic appeal may also simultane- ously engender emotional feelings of individual benefits such as increased self-esteem or mak- ing a good impression on others. Such “impure altruism” experienced in supporting charitable causes may also provide the individual with benefits such as access to exclusive events, or the opportunity to be part of prestigious social networks (Meier, 2006). Even in their most altruistic actions, people seem to find benefits for themselves (Batson & Shaw, 1991).
Fourth, the results of the post event follow-up study of self-reported behaviors suggests that the participants’ online and offline intentions to support the event would result in actual behav- iors. It is also important to note that there were no significant differences in supportive inten- tions between those who did or did not respond with self-reported behaviors.
Study 2: Breast Cancer Event
Study 2 examined the direct effect of emo- tional identification with the cause of breast cancer on the support for the “Denim Night Party” event, the indirect effect of distinct SDT motivations and, the conditional direct effect of moderation by gender. The “Denim Night Party” was a realistic proposed event for the benefit of the nonprofit “Cure Foundation” for the cause of breast cancer. Similar events are regularly organized with participants dressing according to a denim theme. Traditionally, this foundation sponsors and collaborates with breast cancer events that are scheduled annually in universities and the workplace.
Method
Participants and procedures. Undergraduate business school students (N � 188: 96 women; 92 men) were instructed to examine online a “Denim Night Party” Facebook event page pro- moting the cause of breast cancer. The Face- book page was designed to gain online and offline support for the event. It included the profile picture, more information, likes, com- ments, and videos.
Measures. Descriptive statistics, scale reli- abilities, and intercorrelations for all Study 2 variables are presented in Table 3. The depen- dent variables of online and offline event sup- port, as well as the independent variable of emotional identification with the cause of breast cancer and the seven SDT regulation mediation variables were assessed as in Study 1. Gender was analyzed as a dichotomous (female � 1, male � 0) moderation variable of the direct effect of cause identification on the online and offline support of the “Denim Night Party.”
Results
Again, we found a strong correlation between online and offline support intentions, r � .65, p � .001. As in Study 1, there were significant positive correlations between the identification with the cause and online, r � .34, p � .001 as well as offline, r � .45, p � .001 support for the “Denim Night Party” event. Table 3 shows that these correlations were stronger for men than for women. At the same time, the mean values seem to be higher for women than for men on autonomous forms of motivation, on cause identification, and on offline intentions.
In the conditional process models (see Table 4), the direct effect of identification with the cause was less strong, compared to Study 1, for online (b � .16, SE � .09, p � .095) and offline intentions (b � .26, SE � .08, p � .002) to support the “Denim Night Party”. However, we found several indirect effects to mediate the link between identification with the cause and sup- port intentions (see Table 4). Again, only au- tonomous but not controlled distinct regulations were significant mediators of the direct effect. In this study, integrated motivation was the type of autonomous motivation that mediated the direct effects of both online and offline event support. Also, unlike Study 1, where intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation was the mediator of online support, here it were all three types of intrinsic motivations that significantly mediated the direct effect on online but not offline event support. Note however, that intrin- sic motivation to accomplish was negatively related to online support in this model.
Moderation analyses showed slightly different direct effects of identification with the cause and online and offline support for the “Denim Night Party” depending on gender. Even though the
322 SCHATTKE, FERGUSON, AND PAULIN
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
interactions between gender (female � 1, male � 0) and identification with the cause did not reach significance for online (b � �.21, SE � .14, p � .124) or offline support (b � �.16, SE � .12, p � .182), we found the tendency that these relation- ships were stronger for males compared to fe- males (Online: male b � .16, SE � .09, p � .095, female b � �.05, SE � .11, p � .635; Offline male: b � .26, SE � .08, p � .002, female b � .10, SE � .09, p � .297). Although they appear less clear in the model, gender differences are well reflected in the zero-order correlations between cause identification and supportive intentions.
Discussion
These findings replicate those of Study 1 for the direct and indirect effects. They demonstrate the positive motivational relationship between the de- gree of emotional feelings of cause identification and the engagement in prosocial helping behav- iors. Again, this direct effect was found to be mediated only by autonomous and not controlled SDT regulations. In this breast cancer event, inte- grated autonomous motivation mediated the direct effects of emotional cause identification on both online and offline event support. This suggests that supporting a cause such as breast cancer in- volves motivation close to participants’ basic val- ues. Also, the mediation of the direct effect by intrinsic motivation to gain knowledge indicates that this is an important aspect of the online reac- tion to Facebook promotion for a cause such as breast cancer. On the other hand, the fact that intrinsic motivation to accomplish had a negative mediation effect, suggests that: participants who are more goal-oriented, motivated to personally accomplish something, or seeking more self- interest and improved competence, are less likely to support the event online (Carbonneau et al., 2012). However, it needs to be mentioned that this negative effect might be due to a suppression effect, since it tends to appear only in combination with the other autonomous motivational regula- tions.
The fact that women had higher mean values on these scales agrees with the literature suggesting that women are more selfless, empathetic, and generous than men (Eagly, 2009; Einolf, 2011). Women tend to score higher than men on general empathy scales and are more likely to give to charities than men (Mesch, Brown, Moore, & Hayat, 2011). More Millennial women than menT
ab le
3 M
ea n s,
S ta
n d a rd
D ev
ia ti
o n s,
S ca
le R
el ia
b il
it ie
s, a n d
In te
r- C
o rr
el a ti
o n s
S tu
dy 2:
B re
as t
ca nc
er ev
en t
N �
1 8 8
M (S
D )
M w
o m
e n
(S D
) M
m e n
(S D
) 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10
1. In
tr in
si c
m ot
iv at
io n
fo r
st im
ul at
io n
3. 39
(. 80
) 3.
62 (.
68 )
3. 15
(. 85
) .8
0 .5
1� �
.6 4�
� .5
4� �
.5 7�
� .4
2� �
.3 0�
� .3
0� �
.4 1�
� .3
8� �
2. In
tr in
si c
m ot
iv at
io n
to kn
ow 3.
33 (.
88 )
3. 56
(. 76
) 3.
09 (.
94 )
.4 6�
� .8
8 .7
1� �
.4 8�
� .6
7� �
.1 7
.2 1�
.4 7�
� .3
7� �
.4 3�
�
3. In
tr in
si c
m ot
iv at
io n
to ac
co m
pl is
h 3.
10 (.
83 )
3. 29
(. 67
) 2.
90 (.
93 )
.3 4�
� .4
3� �
.8 3
.4 3�
� .7
2� �
.2 2�
.3 4�
� .2
7� �
.1 6
.3 3�
�
4. In
te gr
at ed
re gu
la ti
on 3.
22 (.
85 )
3. 44
(. 77
) 3.
00 (.
87 )
.4 7�
� .2
4� �
.2 4�
.8 0
.5 8�
� .2
3� �
.0 7
.5 0�
� .5
2� �
.5 6�
�
5. Id
en ti
fi ed
re gu
la ti
on 3.
08 (.
75 )
3. 21
(. 65
) 2.
04 (.
82 )
.5 4�
� .4
5� �
.5 1�
� .5
9� �
.7 1
.1 7
.3 1�
� .3
7� �
.3 4�
� .3
1� �
6. In
tr oj
ec te
d re
gu la
ti on
2. 12
(. 80
) 2.
19 (.
79 )
2. 05
(. 81
) .0
4 .2
3� .3
6� �
.0 6
.2 5�
.7 6
.4 8�
� .0
9 .2
8� �
.3 0�
�
7. E
xt er
na l
re gu
la ti
on 2.
42 (.
79 )
2. 43
(. 75
) 2.
41 (.
83 )
.1 8
.3 1�
� .4
3� �
.0 8
.3 5�
� .5
3� �
.7 4
� .0
8 .0
3 �
.0 3
8. C
au se
Id en
ti fi
ca ti
on 3.
31 (.
95 )
3. 48
(. 85
) 3.
13 (1
.0 3)
.4 1�
� .0
9 .1
4 .4
6� �
.3 3�
� .1
0 .1
1 .7
2 .4
2� �
.5 5�
�
9. O
nl in
e S
up po
rt 2.
78 (1
.0 0)
2. 85
(. 92
) 2.
71 (1
.0 8)
.4 1�
� .3
3� �
.1 8
.5 2�
� .3
6� �
.1 4
.2 0
.2 1�
.8 8
.7 5�
�
10 .
O ffl
in e
S up
po rt
2. 94
(. 90
) 3.
17 (.
84 )
2. 70
(. 91
) .2
6� .3
0� �
.2 6�
.4 6�
� .3
6� �
.1 0
.1 4
.2 7�
� .5
4� �
.8 3
N o te
. C
ro nb
ac h
al ph
as ar
e sh
ow n
on th
e di
ag on
al s
in it
a li
cs .
C or
re la
ti on
s fo
r w
om en
ar e
sh ow
n be
lo w
an d
fo r
m en
ab ov
e th
e di
ag on
al .
T he
sc al
es ar
e 5-
po in
t L
ik er
t sc
al es
. C
or re
la ti
on si
gn ifi
ca nc
e �
p �
.0 5.
� �
p �
.0 1.
323MOTIVATIONS TO SUPPORT CHARITY-LINKED EVENTS
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
highly support ethical consumerism (Bucic, Har- ris, & Arli, 2012). Also, although both genders engage in prosocial behaviors, men and women do so in different classes of activities (Eagly, 2009). The correlations between cause identifica- tion and event support were greater for men than women. Given that women are already more pre- disposed to helping behaviors, men must be emo- tionally prodded by altruism, closeness toward the cause, and social-oriented morality (Einolf, 2011; Paulin, Ferguson, Schattke, & Jost, 2014).
This moderation result is not surprising given that the breast cancer event is an example of mainly a female concern as is the typical promo- tional use of the Pink Ribbon logo which “. . . easily conjures the imagery and discourse of tra- ditional femininity—innocence, morality, nurtur- ance, emotional sensitivity, selflessness, and the feminine half of heterosexuality” (Sulik & Zierk- iewicz, 2014, p. 117).
Study 3: Cause-Related Fashion Show Event
Studies 1 and 2 were events promoting a given charitable cause. Study 3 involved an actual “Fu- turistic Fashion Show” for women organized by “Heels & HeART”, a boutique agency specializ- ing in event production. This event can be classed as cause-related, which means that the main pur- pose of the event was to promote fashion products with the charitable cause being an adjunct. Some of the profits were to be given to the “Leukemia & Lymphoma Society”. This study examined the direct effect of identification with the cause of cancer on the support for the “Futuristic Fashion” show, and the moderation by the type of Fa- cebook appeal. Again, the mediation of this direct effect by distinct SDT motivations was examined. Moderation analysis assessed the conditional direct effect of two Facebook
Table 4 The Direct Effect of Cause Identification on Event Support (c=), Relationship of Cause Identification to SDT Regulations (ai) (and SDT Regulations to Event Support, bi), and the Indirect Effect of Mediation by SDT Regulations (aibi)
Study 2: Breast cancer event
Direct effect of cause identification on event support (c=)
Online unstandardized effect (SE) Offline unstandardized effect (SE) .159 (.094) p � .095 .258 (.083) p � .002
Cause identification to SDT regulations (ai)
SDT regulations to event support (bi)
Bootstrap indirect effect (aibi) (mediation by SDT regulations)Online Offline
R2 � .37, p � .001
R2 � .40, p � .001 Online Offline
SDT regulations b (SE) b (SE) b (SE) Effect (SE) (LL, UL) Effect (SE) (LL, UL)
Intrinsic .317 (.057) .250 (.105) �.009 (.092) .079 (.043) (.009, .184) �.003 (.032) (�.074, .055) stimulation R2 � .14, p � .001 p � .018 p � .925
Intrinsic .318 (064) .222 (.108) .158 (.086) .071 (.041) (.005, .167) .050 (.038) (�.012, .137) knowledge R2 � .12, p � .001 p � .025 p � .068
Intrinsic .220 (.062) �.325 (.110) .081 (.096) �.072 (.037) (�.165, �.018) .018 (.023) (�.021, .076) accomplish R2 � .06, p � .001 p � .003 p � .397
Integrated .449 (.056) .472 (.103) .406 (.091) .212 (.050) (.125, .321) .182 (.040) (.113, .274) regulation R2 � .25, p � .001 p � .001 p � .001
Identified .290 (.053) .012 (.131) �.131 (.115) .003 (.040) (�.075, .084) �.038 (.035) (�.118, .023) regulation R2 � .14, p � .001 p � .930 p � .258
Introjected .092 (.061) .136 (.090) .126 (.079) .013 (.014) (�.003, .058) .012 (.013) (�.003, .050) regulation R2 � .01, p � .132 p � .131 p � .114
External .003 (.061) .078 (.098) �.034 (.086) .000 (.007) (�.014, .018) �.000 (.006) (�014, .011) regulation R2 � .00, p � .959 p � .428 p � .693
Note. b � unstandardized coefficient, SE � standard error; R2 � effect size; df � degrees of freedom. The indirect effect is significant if Bootstrap 95% confidence interval (LL: Lower level, UL: Upper level) does not include zero. Significant indirect effects are marked in bold. Paths ai: df 1 � 1, df 2 � 186; Paths bi and c=: df1 � 10; df 2 � 177.
324 SCHATTKE, FERGUSON, AND PAULIN
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
event page appeals for the “Futuristic Fashion Show”, one mainly promoting mainly the fashion products and the other a more bal- anced appeal of both the product and the emotional nature of the charitable cause.
Method
Participants and procedures. The sub- jects (N � 185) were female first-year business school students. In a between-subjects single- factor design, participants were randomly as- signed to examining one of two Facebook event pages promoting the local “Futuristic Fashion Show”. A group of n � 98 students was ex- posed online to the balanced cause/product and the other group of n � 87 to the product Face- book appeal. Both pages subtly stated that the event was in support of the “Leukemia & Lym- phoma Society”. The pages included the event cover photo and event photos, event descrip- tion, “Likes”, “comments”, “shares”, and a vid- eo. However, to one Facebook page (balanced cause/product appeal) a 1-min emotional video was added describing the Leukemia & Lym- phoma Society’s “Someday s Today” campaign emphasizing how people’s donations will ad- vance the treatment of blood cancer. The video presented a sequence of men and women stop- ping and looking astonished, as the narrator said “You’ll remember this day forever. You’ll re- member where you were. This day has never been closer”. To the other Facebook page (prod- uct appeal) a 1-min video was added consisting of female models on the runway in futuristic fashion trends (clothing, footwear, handbags, etc.) by luxury brands such as Dolce & Gab- bana, Burberry, and Gucci. Participants were requested to carefully examine the Facebook event cover photo, description section, photos, and the video.
Measures. Descriptive statistics, scale reli- abilities, and intercorrelations for the Study 3 variables are presented in Table 5. In contrast to the two previous studies, construct items were assessed using 7-point Likert scales. The depen- dent variables of online and offline event sup- port, as well as the independent variable of emotional identification with the cause of leu- kemia and lymphoma, and the seven SDT reg- ulation mediation variables were assessed as in Studies 1 and 2. Facebook appeals of product and product plus cause were analyzed as a di- T
ab le
5 M
ea n s,
S ta
n d a rd
D ev
ia ti
o n s,
S ca
le R
el ia
b il
it ie
s. a n d
In te
r- C
o rr
el a ti
o n s
S tu
dy 3:
F as
hi on
sh ow
ev en
t
N �
1 8 5
M (S
D )
M c a u se
(S D
) M
p ro
d u c t (S
D )
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
1. In
tr in
si c
m ot
iv at
io n
fo r
st im
ul at
io n
5. 20
(1 .1
1) 5.
36 (.
97 )
5. 02
(1 .2
2) .8
5 2.
In tr
in si
c m
ot iv
at io
n to
kn ow
5. 19
(1 .1
3) 5.
09 (1
.2 1)
5. 30
(1 .0
2) .5
5� �
.9 0
3. In
tr in
si c
m ot
iv at
io n
to ac
co m
pl is
h 4.
70 (1
.2 1)
4. 70
(1 .2
2) 4.
70 (1
.2 0)
.6 7�
� .7
1� �
.8 4
4. In
te gr
at ed
re gu
la ti
on 4.
61 (1
.3 3)
4. 88
(1 .1
5) 4.
31 (1
.4 7)
.6 9�
� .4
0� �
.5 3�
� .8
9 5.
Id en
ti fi
ed re
gu la
ti on
4. 60
(1 .1
3) 4.
68 (1
.0 3)
4. 55
(1 .2
4) .6
2� �
.6 1�
� .7
3� �
.7 1�
� .7
6 6.
In tr
oj ec
te d
re gu
la ti
on 2.
77 (1
.0 6)
2. 97
(1 .1
1) 2.
55 (.
97 )
.1 2
.0 6
.2 1�
� .1
8� .2
9� �
.7 7
7. E
xt er
na l
re gu
la ti
on 3.
61 (1
.2 0)
3. 60
(1 .2
2) 3.
64 (1
.2 0)
.2 3�
� .2
0� �
.3 7�
� .1
3 .4
0� �
.4 6�
� .7
5 8.
C au
se Id
en ti
fi ca
ti on
4. 94
(1 .1
0) 5.
06 (1
.0 7)
4. 81
(1 .1
4) .2
3� �
.1 2
.2 2�
� .3
4� �
.2 6�
� .2
2� �
.0 7
.7 0
9. O
nl in
e S
up po
rt 4.
02 (1
.3 4)
4. 23
(1 .2
9) 3.
80 (1
.3 6)
.4 3�
� .2
7� �
.3 2�
� .4
0� �
.3 3�
� .3
3� �
.1 1
.4 3�
� .8
7 10
. O
ffl in
e S
up po
rt 4.
37 (1
.4 6)
4. 67
(1 .2
7) 4.
04 (1
.6 0)
.4 8�
� .3
5� �
.3 8�
� .4
7� �
.4 2�
� .3
2� �
.1 3
.3 3�
� .7
2� �
.9 1
N o te
. C
ro nb
ac h
al ph
as ar
e sh
ow n
on th
e di
ag on
al s
in it
a li
cs .
T he
sc al
es ar
e 7-
po in
t L
ik er
t sc
al es
. C
or re
la ti
on si
gn ifi
ca nc
e �
p �
.0 5.
� �
p �
.0 1.
325MOTIVATIONS TO SUPPORT CHARITY-LINKED EVENTS
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
chotomous (product � 1, cause � 0) moderator variable of the direct effect of cause identifica- tion on the online and offline support of the “Futuristic Fashion Show.”
Results
Table 5 shows the descriptive results of Study 3, which show again the strong association be- tween online and offline supportive intentions of the Fashion Show Event, r � .73, p � .001. As in the previous studies, identification with the cause was positively correlated with online, r � .43, p � .001 and offline intentions, r � .33, p � .001 to support the event. Again, partici- pants seemed to have higher mean values for autonomous than for controlled forms of moti- vation, with introjected regulation being partic- ularly low. However, only external regulation was not correlated with cause identification or supportive intentions. The correlations of intrin-
sic motivation for stimulation with online and offline support appear to be particularly high compared to the other correlations. Finally, par- ticipants in the cause/product appeal condition had higher online, t (183) � �2.25, p � .026, r � .16 and offline, t(183) � �3.00, p � .003, r � .22 supportive intentions than people in the product only appeal condition.
Despite the zero-order correlations of cause identification with online and offline supportive intentions for the “Futuristic Fashion Show” event, we only found a significant direct effect for online (b � .40, SE � .11, p � .001) but not for offline intentions (b � .05, SE � .12, p � .655) in the process models (see Table 6). How- ever, we found indirect effects for online and offline supportive intentions that were due to a combination of autonomous and controlled mo- tivation. As in Study 1, intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation was the significant au-
Table 6 The Direct Effect of Cause Identification on Event Support (c=), Relationship of Cause Identification to SDT Regulations (ai) and SDT Regulations to Event Support (bi), and the Indirect Effect of Mediation by SDT Regulations (aibi)
Study 3: Fashion show event
Direct effect of cause identification on event support (c=)
Online unstandardized effect (SE) Offline unstandardized effect (SE) .399 (.111) p � .001 .054 (.120) p � .655
Cause identification to SDT regulations (ai)
SDT regulations to event support (bi)
Bootstrap indirect effect (aibi) (mediation by SDT regulations)Online Offline
R2 � .37, p � .001
R2 � .38, p � .001 Online Offline
SDT regulations b (SE) b (SE) b (SE) Effect (SE) (LL, UL) Effect (SE) (LL, UL)
Intrinsic .234 (.072) .387 (.119) .358 (.129) .090 (.045) (.023, .208) .084 (.044) (.018, .193) stimulation R2 � .05, p � .001 p � .001 p � .006
Intrinsic .119 (075) .146 (109) .230 (117) .017 (022) (�.007, .086) .027 (027) (�.005, .110) knowledge R2 � .01, p � .114 p � .181 p � .052
Intrinsic .240 (.079) �.053. (.121) �068. (.131) �.013 (.027) (�.074, .038) �.016 (.035) (�.092, .048) accomplish R2 � .05, p � .003 p � .661 p � .062
Integrated .416 (.084) .056 (.105) .138 (.113) .023 (.047) (�.071, .116) .057 (.053) (�.036, .165) regulation R2 � .12, p � .001 p � .591 p � .225
Identified .267 (.073) �.093 (.135) .025 (.146) �.025 (.040) (�.106, .057) �.007 (.045) (�.078, .103) regulation R2 � .07, p � .001 p � .490 p � .866
Introjected .213 (.069) .350 (.091) .337 (.098) .075 (.034)† (.018, .161) .072 (.035) (.017, .160) regulation R2 � .05, p � .002 p � .001 p � .001
External .101 (.059) �.106 (.085) �.087 (.092) �.008 (.014) (�.059, .009) �.007 (.014) (�.059, .009) regulation R2 � .00, p � .345 p � .212 p � .335
Note. b � unstandardized coefficient, SE � standard error; R2 � effect size; df � degrees of freedom. The indirect effect is significant if Bootstrap 95% confidence interval (LL: Lower level, UL: Upper level) does not include zero. Significant indirect effects are marked in bold. Paths ai: df 1 � 1, df 2 � 183; Paths bi and c=: df 1 � 10; df 2 � 174.
326 SCHATTKE, FERGUSON, AND PAULIN
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
tonomous mediator for both online and offline event support. However, controlled introjected but not autonomous integrated regulation was a significant mediator for both online and offline event support.
Moderation analyses only showed slightly different direct effects of identification with the cause and online and offline support for the “Futuristic Fashion Show” depending on the Facebook appeal. In fact, the interactions be- tween the appeal type (product � 1, cause � 0) and identification with the cause did not reach significance for either online support (b � �.08, SE � .15, p � .61) or for offline support (b � .30, SE � .16, p � .066).
Discussion
In this study of a cause-related fashion event, the hypothesis of a direct effect of an emotional identification with the cause on online and of- fline support for an event was again upheld, at least for online support. At the same time, we found indirect mediational effects for the asso- ciation between cause identification and online as well as offline support.
However, the hypothesis that mediation of the direct effect of emotional cause identifica- tion on event support by only autonomous SDT motivations was not supported. Both autono- mous intrinsic to experience stimulation and controlled introjected motivations mediated the direct effect. Neither identified (being person- ally important and worthwhile) nor integrated (perceived as valued and meaningful) had a unique and significant effect in this cause- related for-profit event. Controlled introjected motivation implies that the event support was considered to be partially viewed as an obliga- tion or the result of feelings of guilt or lowered self-esteem about not participating. This may be attributed to the fact that the prosocial behaviors regarding fashion products would take place in a highly visible public space where they may be driven also by a desire to avoid feelings of guilt (Peloza, White, & Shang, 2013). Moreover, Kasser and Ahuvia (2002) argued that people strive for materialistic goals for more controlled reasons, which are less likely to satisfy basic psychological needs and thus reduce well-being (Kasser et al., 2014). A fashion event can be seen as a rather materialistic event and support
would tend to be also influenced by this form of controlled motivation.
We did not expect that the appeal type would not significantly moderate the relationship be- tween cause identification and supportive inten- tions. On the other hand, participants in the balanced cause/product appeal condition had significantly higher online and offline support- ive intentions than those in the for-profit prod- uct condition. Vanhamme et al. (2012)1 advo- cate that cause-related marketing partnerships should be beneficial to both the profit-based and the cause-based organizations. With the recent emphasis on corporate social responsibility, many businesses link with a nonprofit organi- zation in order to differentiate their company and its brands from the competition (Kotler & Lee, 2005) and to define their roles in society by applying social and ethical standards to their operations (Robinson, Irmak, & Jayachandran, 2012). This study of the Futuristic Fashion Show indicates that the design of balanced pro- motional messages can be beneficial for both, the for-profit and the charitable cause (Mattila & Hanks, 2011).
General Discussion
The results of the three studies tend to sup- port the three general hypotheses. First, and not surprisingly, the greater the emotional identifi- cation with the cause, the stronger was the on- line and offline support of the respective event. Second, in the two cause event studies, this direct effect was found to be mediated by com- binations of autonomous SDT motivational reg- ulations. However, both autonomous intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation and con- trolled introjected regulation were mediators in the support for the fashion show cause-related event. Whereas in Study 1, the direct effect of cause identification and event support was mod- erated by the context in terms of Facebook appeals, this was not the case in the cause- related fashion show in Study 3. Here, the prod- uct versus the balanced product/cause appeals directly influenced the event support without significantly influencing cause identification.
Our research clearly points out the theoretical and practical richness of going beyond the fre- quent simple use of autonomous versus con- trolled motivation assessments by examining mediation using all the motivational regulations
327MOTIVATIONS TO SUPPORT CHARITY-LINKED EVENTS
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
in the SDT continuum. Our article adds to the findings of Carbonneau and colleagues (2012), justifying the use of assessments of the tripartite dimensions of intrinsic motivation. They dem- onstrated that the three dimensions of intrinsic motivation, although related, are nevertheless distinct constructs; each dimension being linked to specific outcomes such as affective states and behavioral activities. Their participants were found to be intrinsically motivated to experi- ence stimulation, to gain knowledge and to ac- complish in the respective contexts of gam- bling, studying, and working. These authors only contrasted the tripartite intrinsic motiva- tions to external regulation but recommended that this should be done with other SDT regu- lations, although integrated regulation was not included.
Miquelon and Castonguay (2017) have re- cently reviewed research on the importance of the utilization of integrated motivational regu- lation, which brings together behaviors that are both meaningful and valued. Integrated regula- tion was the only SDT motivation related to the maintenance of participants’ physical activity habits. Amiot and Sansfaçon (2011), studying SDT regulations as predictors of group identi- fication, reported that a variety of dependent variables were predicted separately by inte- grated and identified regulations. Interestingly, in their studies, integrated but not identified regulation was the predictor of those variables implicating personal values such as patriotism and satisfaction at being a community member. In our studies, which included integrated regu- lation in charity-linked contexts, identified reg- ulation was not found to be a significant medi- ator. Integrated regulation was however found to be a significant motivational mediator of the effect of cause identification on support for both cause events for homeless youth and breast can- cer charities. Such mediation was not found for integrated motivation in the cause-related “Fu- turistic Fashion Show” event. One could spec- ulate that, in this product-oriented fashion event, the participants were not as motivated by such deeply held values as they were for the cause events. Instead, along with autonomous intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation, controlled introjected regulation was a signifi- cant mediator of the cause identification/event offline support for the “Futuristic Fashion Show.” It is possible that, in the hedonistic
context of a fashion show, women were also more motivated by materialistic pleasure seek- ing and making a good impression than by being motivated by deeply held values linked to a specific cause.
The design of the present studies involved several limitations, the first of which was the assessment of participants’ intentions to sup- port these events online and offline. Research in this field often includes measures of inten- tions alone or with self-reported behaviors (e.g., Carbonneau et al., 2012; Miquelon & Castonguay, 2017; Reed et al., 2007; Shang, Reed, & Croson, 2008; Weinstein & Ryan, 2010). When possible, it is fruitful to validate intentions with actual observed or self- reported behaviors in field studies or recorded observations in the laboratory. This limitation was partially addressed in the “Five Days for the Homeless” study where the postevent data collection indicated that the previous online and offline intentions to support the event could indeed be valid precursors of self- reported behaviors. However, a more com- plete understanding of the behavioral out- comes involved in this type of research can certainly be achieved in future research where prosocial online or offline support is assessed with observable evidence.
Helping behaviors are beneficial for the provider, the recipient, and society. To this end, our findings on the relationships among cause identification, self-determined motiva- tions, and support for charitable events can assist practitioners in designing more effec- tive social media communication. Given the exploratory contexts of the three studies, we consciously refrained from posing a multitude of more specific hypotheses regarding the possible effects of each distinct SDT motiva- tional regulations. Also, it was not our inten- tion to generalize the present results to other generational cohorts. Millennial business school subjects were purposely investigated because of their extended and extensive use of social media as well as being important managerial constituents for the future success of corporate and nonprofit organizations in- volved in charitable causes (Fine, 2009). However, the increasing use of social media by other subgroups of constituencies would warrant similar studies.
328 SCHATTKE, FERGUSON, AND PAULIN
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
Conclusion
This article seizes on the opportunity to apply social psychology theory in the domain of social media (Greitemeyer, 2011; Kende et al., 2015). It does so in the context of three empirical studies investigating the complex motivations of a very pertinent constituency of Millennials to engage in supporting chari- ty-linked events as promoted via Facebook pages of nonprofit organizations. Most impor- tantly, the article addresses the recent call to expand SDT research from an analysis of autonomous versus controlled motivation, to studying the effects of the distinct motiva- tional regulations (Carbonneau et al., 2012; Miquelon & Castonguay, 2017; Pelletier et al., 2013; Taylor et al., 2014). In particular, the article shows that the inclusion of the tripartite dimensions of intrinsic motivation and of integrated regulation can provide a richer understanding in selected contexts than that of autonomous and controlled motivation alone. This research into the relationships among the emotional cause identification and distinct self-determined motivations can as- sist practitioners in designing more effective social media communications in support of charity-linked events.
References
Amiot, C. E., & Sansfaçon, S. (2011). Motivations to identify with social groups: A look at their positive and negative consequences. Group Dynamics, 15, 105–127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0023158
Ashforth, B. E., Harrison, S. H., & Corley, K. G. (2008). Identification in organizations: An exami- nation of four fundamental questions. Journal of Management, 34, 325–374. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1177/0149206308316059
Batson, C. D., & Shaw, L. L. (1991). Evidence for altruism: Toward a pluralism of prosocial motives. Psychological Inquiry, 2, 107–122. http://dx.doi .org/10.1207/s15327965pli0202_1
Bolton, R. N., Parasuraman, A., Hoefnagels, A., Migchels, N., Kabadayi, S., Gruber, T., . . . Solnet, D. (2013). Understanding generation Y and their use of social media: A review and research agenda. Journal of Service Management, 24, 245–267. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09564231311326987
Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 210–
230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007 .00393.x
Bucic, T., Harris, J., & Arli, D. (2012). Ethical con- sumers among the millennials: A cross-national study. Journal of Business Ethics, 110, 113–131. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1151-z
Carbonneau, N., Vallerand, R. J., & Lafrenière, M.- A. K. (2012). Toward a tripartite model of intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality, 80, 1147– 1178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011 .00757.x
Chemolli, E., & Gagné, M. (2014). Evidence against the continuum structure underlying motivation measures derived from self-determination theory. Psychological Assessment, 26, 575–585. http://dx .doi.org/10.1037/a0036212
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motiva- tion and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. New York, NY: Plenum Press. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1007/978-1-4899-2271-7
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological In- quiry, 11, 227–268. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/ S15327965PLI1104_01
Eagly, A. H. (2009). The his and hers of prosocial behavior: An examination of the social psychology of gender. American Psychologist, 64, 644– 658. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.64.8.644
Einolf, C. J. (2011). Gender differences in the corre- lates of volunteering and charitable giving. Non- profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40, 1092– 1112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/08997640103 85949
Ellemers, N., de Gilder, D., & Haslam, S. A. (2004). Motivating individuals and groups at work: A so- cial identity perspective on leadership and group performance. The Academy of Management Re- view, 29, 459– 478.
Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends”: Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communica- tion, 12, 1143–1168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j .1083-6101.2007.00367.x
Ferguson, R. J., Gutberg, J., Schattke, K., Paulin, M., & Jost, N. (2015). Self-determination theory, so- cial media and charitable causes: An in-depth anal- ysis of autonomous motivation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 298–307. http://dx.doi .org/10.1002/ejsp.2038
Fine, A. (2009). Using web 2.0 technologies to con- nect with new supporters. Nonprofit World, 27, 20–23.
Fisher, R. J., Vandenbosch, M., & Antia, K. D. (2008). An empathy-helping perspective on con- sumers’ responses to fund-raising appeals. Journal
329MOTIVATIONS TO SUPPORT CHARITY-LINKED EVENTS
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
of Consumer Research, 35, 519–531. http://dx.doi .org/10.1086/586909
Five Days for the Homeless: Students Supporting Youth at Risk. Retrieved from https://5days.ca/ about/
Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organiza- tional Behavior, 26, 331–362. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1002/job.322
Greitemeyer, T. (2011). Effects of prosocial media on social behavior. Current Directions in Psycholog- ical Science, 20, 251–255. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1177/0963721411415229
Guay, F., Mageau, G. A., & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). On the hierarchical structure of self-determined motivation: A test of top-down, bottom-up, recip- rocal, and horizontal effects. Personality and So- cial Psychology Bulletin, 29, 992–1004. http://dx .doi.org/10.1177/0146167203253297
Guo, C., & Saxton, G. D. (2014). Tweeting social change. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43, 57–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/08997640 12471585
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to Mediation, Mod- eration, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Re- gression-Based Approach. Methodology in the So- cial Sciences. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Ho, J. Y. C., & Dempsey, M. (2010). Viral market- ing: Motivations to forward online content. Jour- nal of Business Research, 63, 1000–1006. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.08.010
Holmes, J. G., Miller, D. T., & Lerner, M. J. (2002). Committing altruism under the cloak of self- interest: The exchange fiction. Journal of Experi- mental Social Psychology, 38, 144–151. http://dx .doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2001.1494
Kanter, B., & Fine, A. H. (2010). The Networked Non-Profit. San Francisco, CA: Wiley.
Kasser, T., & Ahuvia, A. (2002). Materialistic values and well-being in business students. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 137–146. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.85
Kasser, T., Rosenblum, K. L., Sameroff, A. J., Deci, E. L., Niemiec, C. P., Ryan, R. M., . . . Hawks, S. (2014). Changes in materialism, changes in psy- chological well-being: Evidence from three longi- tudinal studies and an intervention experiment. Motivation and Emotion, 38, 1–22. http://dx.doi .org/10.1007/s11031-013-9371-4
Kende, A., Ujhelyi, A., Joinson, A., & Greitemeyer, T. (2015). Putting the social (psychology) into social media. European Journal of Social Psychol- ogy, 45, 277–278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp .2097
Koestner, R., & Losier, G. F. (2002). Distinguishing three ways of being internally motivated: A closer look at introjection, identification, and intrinsic
motivation. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Determination Research (pp. 101–121). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2005). Corporate Social Re- sponsibility: Doing the Most Good for your Com- pany and your Cause. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley and Sons.
Levine, M., Prosser, A., Evans, D., & Reicher, S. (2005). Identity and emergency intervention: How social group membership and inclusiveness of group boundaries shape helping behavior. Person- ality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 443– 453. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167204271651
Martela, F., & Ryan, R. M. (2016). Prosocial behav- ior increases well-being and vitality even without contact with the beneficiary: Causal and behavioral evidence. Motivation and Emotion, 40, 351–357. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11031-016-9552-z
Mattila, A. S., & Hanks, L. (2012). Antecedents to participation in corporate social responsibility pro- grams. Journal of Service Management, 23, 664– 676. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/0956423121126 9829
Meier, S. (2006). A Survey of Economic Theories and Field Evidence on Pro-Social Behavior. Work- ing paper series//Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, No. 06 – 6. Retrieved from https://www.econstor .eu/bitstream/10419/55650/1/514905107.pdf http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.917187
Mesch, D. J., Brown, M. S., Moore, Z. I., & Hayat, A. D. (2011). Gender differences in charitable giving. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 16, 342–355. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1002/nvsm.432
Miquelon, P., & Castonguay, A. (2017). Integrated regulation, behavior consistency, and physical ac- tivity maintenance. Motivation Science, 3, 76–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/mot0000049
Moller, A. C., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Self-Determination theory and public policy: Im- proving the quality of consumer decisions without using coercion. Journal of Public Policy & Mar- keting, 25, 104–116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/ jppm.25.1.104
Omoto, A. M., & Snyder, M. (2002). Considerations of community. American Behavioral Scientist, 45, 846– 867. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000276420 2045005007
Paulin, M., Ferguson, R. J., Jost, N., & Fallu, J.-M. (2014). Motivating millennials to engage in char- itable causes through social media. Journal of Ser- vice Management, 25, 334–348. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1108/JOSM-05-2013-0122
Paulin, M., Ferguson, R. J., Schattke, K., & Jost, N. (2014). Millennials, social media, prosocial emo- tions, and charitable causes: The paradox of gender differences. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector
330 SCHATTKE, FERGUSON, AND PAULIN
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
Marketing, 26, 335–353. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1080/10495142.2014.965069
Pavey, L., Greitemeyer, T., & Sparks, P. (2012). “I help because I want to, not because you tell me to”: Empathy increases autonomously motivated help- ing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 681– 689. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014616 7211435940
Pelletier, L. G., Rocchi, M. A., Vallerand, R. J., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2013). Validation of the revised sport motivation scale (SMS-II). Psychol- ogy of Sport and Exercise, 14, 329–341. http://dx .doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2012.12.002
Peloza, J., White, K., & Shang, J. (2013). Good and guilt-free: The role of self-accountability in influ- encing preferences for products with ethical attri- butes. Journal of Marketing, 77, 104–119. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1509/jm.11.0454
Penner, L. A. (2002). Dispositional and organizational influences on sustained volunteerism: An interactionist perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 447– 467. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00270
Penner, L. A., Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A., & Schroeder, D. A. (2005). Prosocial behavior: Mul- tilevel perspectives. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 365–392. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev .psych.56.091103.070141
Reed, A., II, Aquino, K., & Levy, E. (2007). Moral identity and judgments of charitable behaviors. Journal of Marketing, 71, 178–193. http://dx.doi .org/10.1509/jmkg.71.1.178
Robinson, S. R., Irmak, C., & Jayachandran, S. (2012). Choice of cause in cause-related market- ing. Journal of Marketing, 76, 126–139. http://dx .doi.org/10.1509/jm.09.0589
Shang, J., Reed, A., II, & Croson, R. (2008). Identity congruency effects on donations. Journal of Mar- keting Research, 45, 351–361. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1509/jmkr.45.3.351
Simon, B., Stürmer, S., & Steffens, K. (2000). Help- ing individuals or group members? The role of individual and collective identification in aids vol- unteerism. Personality and Social Psychology Bul- letin, 26, 497–506. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0146167200266008
Stets, J. E., & Burke, P. J. (2000). Identity theory and social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63, 224– 237. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2695870
Sulik, G., & Zierkiewicz, E. (2014). Gender, power, and feminisms in breast cancer advocacy: Lessons from the United States and Poland. Journal of Gender and Power, 1, 111–145. Retrieved from https://repozytorium.amu.edu.pl/bitstream/10593/ 11295/1/sulik.pdf
Tajfel, H. (1972). Social categorization. English manuscript of “La catégorisation sociale.” In S. Moscovici (Ed.), Introduction à la psychologie
sociale (Vol. 1, pp. 272–302). Paris, France: La- rousse.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, Il: Nelson-Hall.
Taylor, G., Jungert, T., Mageau, G. A., Schattke, K., Dedic, H., Rosenfield, S., & Koestner, R. (2014). A self-determination theory approach to predicting school achievement over time: The unique role of intrinsic motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39, 342–358. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1016/j.cedpsych.2014.08.002
Thomas, E. F., McGarty, C., & Mavor, K. I. (2009). Aligning identities, emotions, and beliefs to create commitment to sustainable social and political ac- tion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 194–218. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/108886 8309341563
Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2001). Identity and cooperative behavior in groups. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 4, 207–226. http://dx.doi .org/10.1177/1368430201004003003
Urbain, C., Gonzalez, C., & Le Gall-Ely, M. (2013). What does the future hold for giving? An approach using the social representations of generation Y. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 18, 159–171. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1002/nvsm.1448
Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 271–360. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60019-2
Vallerand, R. J., Blais, M. R., Brière, N. M., & Pelletier, L. G. (1989). Construction et validation de l’échelle de motivation en éducation (EME) [Development and validation of the motivation in education scale]. Canadian Journal of Behav- ioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 21, 323–349. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1037/h0079855
Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., Blais, M. R., Briere, N. M., Senecal, C., & Vallieres, E. F. (1993). On the assessment of intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivation in education: Evidence on the concurrent and construct validity of the academic motivation scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 159–172. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013164493053001018
Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Koestner, R. (2008). Reflections on self-determination theory. Canadian Psychology, 49, 257–262. http://dx.doi .org/10.1037/a0012804
Vanhamme, J., Lindgreen, A., Reast, J., & van Popering, N. (2012). To do well by doing good: Improving corporate image through cause- related marketing. Journal of Business Ethics, 1 0 9 , 2 5 9 – 2 7 4 . h t t p : / / d x . d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 7 / s10551-011-1134-0
331MOTIVATIONS TO SUPPORT CHARITY-LINKED EVENTS
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
Weinstein, N., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). When helping helps: Autonomous motivation for prosocial behavior and its influence on well-being for the helper and recipient. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 222– 244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0016984
White, K., & Peloza, J. (2009). Self-benefit versus other-benefit marketing appeals: Their effective- ness in generating charitable support. Journal of Marketing, 73, 109–124. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1509/jmkg.73.4.109
Appendix
Questionnaire Items
Situational/Contextual SDT Motivation Scale
I would become engaged in events for social causes like the Denim Night Party/5 Days for the Homeless . . . (Scale from 1 Strongly Dis- agree to 5 Strongly Agree).
External
. . . because I do not want to disappoint certain people
. . . because I want to be viewed more posi- tively by certain people
. . . in order to show others what I am capable of
. . . in order to attain prestige
Introjected
. . . because I would beat myself up for not doing it
. . . because otherwise I would feel guilty for not doing them
. . . because I force myself to do them
. . . because I would feel bad if I do not do them
Identified
. . . in order to help myself become the person I aim to be
. . . because I chose them as means to attain my objectives
. . . because I chose them in order to attain what I desire
. . . because I choose to invest myself in what is important to me
Integrated
. . . because it is really a part of who I am.
. . . because it is very meaningful for me
. . . because it is something I value deeply
. . . because it is in line with my personal goals
Intrinsic to Experience Stimulation
. . . in order to feel pleasant emotions
. . . because of the sense of well-being I feel while I am doing them
. . . for the pleasant sensations I feel while I am Doing Them
. . . for the enjoyable feelings I experience
Intrinsic to Know
. . . Because I like making interesting discov- eries . . . for the pleasure of acquiring new knowledge . . . for the pleasure of learning new, interesting things . . . for the pleasure of learn- ing different interesting facts
Intrinsic Toward Accomplishment
. . . because of the pleasure I feel as I become more and more skilled
. . . for the pleasure I feel mastering what I am doing
. . . because of the satisfaction I feel in trying to excel in what I do
. . . because of the pleasure I feel outdoing myself
Received February 23, 2017 Revision received October 14, 2017
Accepted October 19, 2017 �
332 SCHATTKE, FERGUSON, AND PAULIN
T hi
s do
cu m
en t
is co
py ri
gh te
d by
th e
A m
er ic
an P
sy ch
ol og
ic al
A ss
oc ia
ti on
or on
e of
it s
al li
ed pu
bl is
he rs
. T
hi s
ar ti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r
th e
pe rs
on al
us e
of th
e in
di vi
du al
us er
an d
is no
t to
be di
ss em
in at
ed br
oa dl
y.
- Motivations to Support Charity-Linked Events After Exposure to Facebook Appeals: Emotional Cause ...
- Theoretical Framework
- Direct Motivational Effect of Emotional Cause Identification and Support for Charity-Linked Events
- Mediation of Direct Effect of Cause Identification on Event Support via Distinct SDT Motivationa ...
- Moderation of Direct Effects of Cause Identification on Event Support via Facebook Appeals
- The Empirical Studies
- Study 1: Homeless Youth Event
- Method
- Participants and procedures
- Measures
- Results
- Discussion
- Study 2: Breast Cancer Event
- Method
- Participants and procedures
- Measures
- Results
- Discussion
- Study 3: Cause-Related Fashion Show Event
- Method
- Participants and procedures
- Measures
- Results
- Discussion
- General Discussion
- Conclusion
- References
- AppendixQuestionnaire Items
- Situational/Contextual SDT Motivation Scale
