2023- Reprints: Marketing
Charitable maximizers: The impact of the maximizing mindset on donations to human recipients, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 40(2), 417-454, 2023
J. Ma, Y. (Anna) Lin, and D. Ein-Gar
(Reprint No. 404)
Research No.: 00423100
The majority of donations are dedicated to helping human recipients. Building on prior literature that demonstrates the role of downward social comparisons between donors and donation recipients in elevating willingness to help those in need, we propose that a maximizing mindset increases such downward social comparisons, which in turn promote donations to human recipients. A set of seven studies, including online and field experiments and a secondary dataset, provides convergent support for the effect of the maximizing mindset (whether measured as an inherent individual difference or activated as a temporary mindset) on donations and the mediating role of downward social comparisons. This research enriches the understanding of donations to human recipients by showing that donations can be enhanced by a maximizing mindset. Our findings offer important insights to donation-raising agencies. Specifically, activating the maximizing mindset among prospective donors—by embedding certain words in donation appeals or encouraging donors to think about their best choices in everyday life—could benefit charities and social-cause platforms in their efforts to raise donations to support the needy.
Neural and functional validation of fMRI-informed EEG model of right inferior frontal gyrus activity, NeuroImage, 266, 2023
A. Or-Borichev, G. Gurevitch, I. Klovatch, A. Greental, Y. Lerner, Dino J. Levy, and T. Hendler
(Reprint No. 406)
Research No.: 04670100
The right inferior frontal gyrus (rIFG) is a region involved in the neural underpinning of cognitive control across several domains such as inhibitory control and attentional allocation process. Therefore, it constitutes a desirable neural target for brain-guided interventions such as neurofeedback (NF). To date, rIFG-NF has shown beneficial ability to rehabilitate or enhance cognitive functions using functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI-NF). However, the utilization of fMRI-NF for clinical purposes is severely limited, due to its poor scalability. The present study aimed to overcome the limited applicability of fMRI-NF by developing and validating an EEG model of fMRI-defined rIFG activity (hereby termed "Electrical FingerPrint of rIFG"; rIFG-EFP). To validate the computational model, we employed two experiments in healthy individuals. The first study ( n = 14) aimed to test the target engagement of the model by employing rIFG-EFP-NF training while simultaneously acquiring fMRI. The second study ( n = 41) aimed to test the functional outcome of two sessions of rIFG-EFP-NF using a risk preference task (known to depict cognitive control processes), employed before and after the training. Results from the first study demonstrated neural target engagement as expected, showing associated rIFG-BOLD signal changing during simultaneous rIFG-EFP-NF training. Target anatomical specificity was verified by showing a more precise prediction of the rIFG-BOLD by the rIFG-EFP model compared to other EFP models. Results of the second study suggested that successful learning to up-regulate the rIFG-EFP signal through NF can reduce one’s tendency for risk taking, indicating improved cognitive control after two sessions of rIFG-EFP-NF. Overall, our results confirm the validity of a scalable NF method for targeting rIFG activity by using an EEG probe.
Sending mixed signals: How congruent versus incongruent signals of popularity affect product appeal, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 2023
S. Moldovan, M. Shoham and Y. Steinhart
(Reprint No. 409)
Research No.: 01521100
A high volume of sales or online reviews can make a product seem more popular and established and consequently enhance its appeal. But is it advisable to display both metrics? We focus on the interplay between volume of sales and number of reviews and explore what happens when these signals are perceived as congruent versus incongruent. Five experimental studies and an analysis of field data demonstrate that consumers find products with congruent (vs. incongruent) ratios of reviews to sales more appealing. We distinguish between two types of incongruities: when the volume of sales clearly exceeds that of the reviews (over-purchased products) versus many reviews compared to sales (over-reviewed products). We argue that both reduce consumer confidence in the product’s merit, but that the latter has a more pronounced impact. However, the effects are attenuated when contextual cues explain the incongruities.
Helping him or her? Gender biased help-giving in the US and China, Paper Presented at the Society of Consumer Psychology 2023 USA conference Special Session submission: Gender and Consumer Psychology for a better world
D. Ein-Gar, J. Ma, L. Levontin and T. Kogut
(Reprint No. 412)
Research No.: 00422100
What would most donors do if they were asked to choose between helping a boy or helping a girl recipient? We tested this question in two different cultures. We find that in western culture (US), participants preferred to help a girl over a boy. In an eastern culture (China), the effect was reversed. We further tested the role of hostile sexism in predicting donors’ choices in each culture. In eastern culture, hostile sexism predicted the preference for the boy, while in western culture, hostile sexism predicted the preference for the girl.
The influence of proportion dominance and global need perception on donations, Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 2022
D. Ein-Gar and A. Give’on
(Reprint No. 414)
Research No.: 00490100
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.800867
Many donation-raising platforms request that first-time donors choose the charitable causes they most care about so that future campaign recommendations can best match donors’ charitable preferences. While matching charitable campaigns to donors’ reported preferences has its benefits, little is known about other effects that choosing charitable causes may evoke. We focus on how choosing charitable causes influences charitable behavior. We find two effects of the number of charitable causes donors choose on their subsequent charitable behavior. In studies 1 and 2, we show that a reference number of the maximum charitable causes donors can choose has a negative effect on charitable behavior. A small (versus large) reference number yields a greater likelihood to donate and a higher donation amount. This effect is aligned with the proportion dominance rationalization. In studies 3 and 4, we show that the number of charitable causes donors voluntarily choose as important to them is positively associated with subsequent charitable behavior. This association is mediated by global need perception. As the number of causes donors choose increases, donors experience an escalation in their perception of global neediness, which in turn motivates their willingness to donate and the donation amount. In Study 5, we show how the two effects together shape charitable behavior. These effects are observed while controlling the donors’ inherent prosocial attitudes toward help giving. With more than 1.5 million registered non-profit organizations operating in the United States (National Center for Charitable Statistics, 2019), it has become almost impossible for donors to easily choose which charitable campaigns to support. Online charitable fundraising platforms (e.g., One Today by Google, Round Up, and Charity Miles), websites (e.g., AmazonSmile) and crowdfunding platforms (e.g., Fundly, JustGiving, and GoFundMe) try to ease donors’ search and decision processes by offering them personalized charitable options. First-time donors are asked to indicate the charitable causes they care most about, and then asked to donate to charitable campaigns that best match their preferences. Interestingly, little is known about how this initial stage of choosing charitable causes influences subsequent donation behavior. In this research, we ask how choosing the charitable causes one cares most about influences subsequent response to a charitable appeal. Obviously, the mere selection of preferred causes enables charities to offer personalized campaigns and create a better fit between non-profits and donors, which has a generally positive effect on charitable giving. However, in this research we focus on an overlooked aspect of these practices. We examine how the number of charitable causes donors indicate as important to them influences their donation giving. We test two opposite effects: the proportion dominance effect, an effect driven by prior research, and the global need perception effect, a new effect identified in this article. Both effects are driven by the number of causes donors choose.
