Behavioral Science Posts

The Reality Distortion Field: Imagination

Pollster Frank Luntz calls “imagine” the most powerful word in the English language. He says “imagine allows you to communicate in the eyes and the vision of the listener rather than yours.” Good verbs like “imagine,” “remember,” and “picture in your mind” give a person the trigger to help them put themselves in the place […]

Learn More July 24, 2018

May the Fundraising Force Be With You

Among the many skills attributed to Steve Jobs was his ability to create a “reality distortion field”—a mental force he created to persuade himself and others to believe almost anything. Colleagues from early days note it was this skill that enabled Jobs and his team to develop the original Macintosh computer and deliver the software […]

Learn More July 23, 2018

How Donor Opinion Can Steer You Right

Yesterday’s post ccataloged a multitude of reasons surveys and donor listening could steer you wrong. That said, there are many things we must ask donors that are both easy to answer accurately and vital for us to know: How easy was the online donation process? How committed are you to the organization? Are you a […]

Learn More July 20, 2018

Why Donor Opinions Could Steer You Wrong

It’s not their fault; it could be yours. On Monday, Roger talked about the multitude of sins committed in the Charity Commission report. Among them was the flawed approach of asking people why they thought what they thought. Today, I wanted to explain why it’s so difficult to get people’s opinions of their opinions. Tomorrow, […]

Learn More July 19, 2018

Your Gift of 16 Minutes

Adrian Sargeant and his crew at the Philanthropy Centre need 16 minutes of your help. Here’s why. They’re undertaking a major study on how best to measure an organiztion’s “philanthropic orientation.” The end product will be a simple questionnaire that you and other organizations can put to work to determine what steps they need to take […]

Learn More July 18, 2018

See Ya Later, Regulator

We know that trust in nonprofits is waning. You can see it in the Edelman Trust Barometer that we talked about in February, along with the reasons why trust is important to fundraising. And last week, the Charity Commission in the UK came out with similar results, showing a drop in trust for UK […]

Learn More July 15, 2018

Why I Hate Sugarcoating Issues

I was looking for studies that had been done on what type of images are effective in nonprofit direct marketing. So I headed over to Google Scholar and searched for “use pictures fundraising appeals.” You would have thought I was searching for snuff films. Here are some of the titles of journal articles that faced […]

Learn More June 26, 2018

What About People Who Don’t Answer Donor Surveys?

When you are in the business of asking donors about themselves and customizing their donor journeys based on that, you almost always get the question: “But what about those folks who don’t answer the survey?” There are couple of answers to this. The first is: keep asking. If there’s a datum that you need to […]

Learn More June 21, 2018

Consent Dies in Your Inbox. But There’s Hope.

Let me guess. This month, your inbox looks more or less like mine below. Your turn to guess. How many of these did I give my consent to? How many did I read or even open? My work relates closely to GDPR. Yet I didn’t bother with any of these. As a sector we’ve been […]

Learn More May 25, 2018

Agitator Cliff Notes: “Hacking Marketing”

This time, I’m going with a non-fundraising book: Hacking Marketing by Scott Brinker of Chief Marketing Technologist fame. The idea is how to take the lessons from the agile software development movement and apply them to more traditional marketing. In the book, Scott espouses agile marketing values of: Individuals and interactions over processes and tools Responding to […]

Learn More May 24, 2018

Ask A Behavioral Scientist

Behavioral Science Q & A

Q: As a designer who works with non-profits on fundraising strategy, I see the language like the following: “Our supporters help empower every girl, ensuring she has the resources she needs.” I do not think the word “help” is useful–I think “Our supporters empower every girl, ensuring she has the resources she needs. ” is much more engaging. Thoughts?

Whether “help” is more engaging or not really depends on the framing and context. The word help can sometimes weaken the perceived agency of the supporter, making their role feel secondary rather than central (your point). On the other hand, help can also signal collaboration rather than implying full ownership of the outcome, which might […]

Read Full Answer

Q: We started offering a donor cover option last april 1. The data to date suggests this may be dampening giving.eg. those who say yes to donor cover have a lower average gift (based on analysis of 6000+ gifts). I’m wondering if those who give lower gifts feel more guilt and therefore say yes to donor cover or if the presence of donor cover is making people adjust (lower) their gift size to accommodate the extra 3%. Would love any insights you have.

Great question! Here’s how behavioral science can help unpack what might be happening: Pain of Paying: Even a small extra charge can make giving feel more transactional than emotional, potentially reducing generosity. Fairness Concerns: Some donors might perceive donor cover as a surcharge rather than a contribution to the cause. If they feel the charity […]

Read Full Answer

Q: When writing an appeal, I waffle back and forth between writing “Your gift CAN…” or “Your gift WILL…” Any studies of which of these two words is best for an appeal?

The choice between “Your gift CAN…” and “Your gift WILL…” taps into the psychological framing of certainty vs. possibility. Currently, there is no academic research directly comparing these two framings in charitable appeals. However, I suspect no framing is universally better—the outcome likely depends on your target audience and the campaign’s goal. Here are some thoughts: Certainty Framing – […]

Read Full Answer

Q: Do you have any insight on whether integrating an individual giving appeal with other comms from the charity in both appearance and messaging can uplift results? Or does the actual appeal become ‘lost’ for lack of stand-out?

Integrating an individual giving appeal with other communications from a charity can have both positive and negative effects, and the outcome largely depends on how it’s executed. Advantages of Integration Brand Consistency: Maintaining a consistent appearance and messaging across all communications can reinforce the org’s brand identity and strengthen brand recognition and trust among your […]

Read Full Answer

Q: Is there any research on response rate impact in direct mail when referring to a sustainer gift as ongoing or recurring (catching all frequencies) v. monthly or annual?

I’m not aware of any in-market tests specifically comparing recurring vs. gift frequency language. I suspect the answer might not be the same with all gift frequencies, nor with all people. It sounds like a great opportunity for you to test and find out what works for your audience. Based on the literature, here’s a couple […]

Read Full Answer

Q: A major conservation nonprofit sends me lots of mail, many of which have on the envelope “time to renew” or “2nd notice.” I find this practice deceptive, especially as I haven’t given to said organization since 1997. It must be effective or they wouldn’t do it. But is it ethical?

Based on what we know from existing data, those renewal notices can actually be pretty effective in getting people to donate. They tap into our psychology – creating a sense of urgency, reminding us of past support, and using personalization to make the message hit home. They’re playing on our natural tendencies to feel obligated […]

Read Full Answer