Behavioral Science Posts

Agitator Cliff Notes: “The Why Axis”

Next up is The Why Axis, by Uri Gneezy and John List, two of the community of economists who work on charitable giving. Roger had already covered one item I had noted back in 2013: that 1:1 matches work just as well as 2:1 or 3:1 matches. And I talked about how people give more […]

Learn More May 23, 2018

Channel vs. Identity: Two Go In; One Comes Out

The words we use shape our thinking. A recent study, for example, showed you can change how people want to stop crime by how you describe it (by more than the divide between Democrats and Republicans). If crime is a “beast preying” on the city, you want more punitive crackdowns. If it’s a “virus infecting” […]

Learn More May 16, 2018

The Opposite of “More” Is Not “Less”; It’s “Better”

For generations direct response fundraisers have been steering the fundraising car with little more than two controls: the gas pedal and the brake pedal. Want more monthly donors? Invest more money. More prospecting. More F2F. More DRTV. More campaigns to reactivate lapsed sustainers. More. More. Want more net income to “meet the numbers”? Cut back […]

Learn More May 14, 2018

Agitator Cliff Notes: What’s Next?

I wanted to find another book to talk about today. But the problem wasn’t finding a book; it was narrowing it down to just one. So let’s hear your votes in the Comments on two things: Is this Agitator Cliff Notes approach worthwhile and worth doing again? What book(s) do you recommend? Roger has sent […]

Learn More May 5, 2018

Attacking the Dreaded Rebrand with Donor Focus

I’ve been through rebrands. I’ve been through prostate exams. And I know which I’d rather go through again. That’s why when the question “what does donor identity mean for a rebranding organization?” came up on last week’s webinar, I started to experience all of the side effects you’d see in the average pharmaceutical ad. (“Ask […]

Learn More April 19, 2018

The Terrifying Freedom of a Blank Sheet of Paper

It’s a yearly exercise – take what you did for your direct marketing program last year, replace some controls with the tests that beat them, and set up your tests and tweaks for the next year. Lather, rinse, repeat. This system has advantages. You know what each communication is capable of, and what it isn’t. […]

Learn More April 18, 2018

The Ripple Effect – A Large Donation Shows Two Trends at Work

FUNDRAISING BULLETIN! “An enterprise blockchain cryptocurrency company just funded every classroom project request on DonorsChoose.org.” Yes, I realize that half of that sentence wouldn’t have made a bit of sense five years ago. It may not even make full sense now. So let’s break it down. Ripple is the name of the enterprise blockchain solutions […]

Learn More April 11, 2018

(Lack of) Speed Kills

When Amazon started, people were nervous about providing a credit card number in hope that their books would arrive. (Don’t @ me, 25-and-unders, this was a real thing.) Will my book arrive? Will it be what I intended? Is this whole Internet thing a scam? So a large part of Amazon’s infrastructure works to convince […]

Learn More April 5, 2018

The Neuroscience of Donor Services

Why do we care about donor service? Let’s delve into our donors’ brains to find out. You! Put down that hacksaw! I was speaking metaphorically! Picture any decision you make as a debate between “pull towards” and “push away.” The pull comes from our nucleus accumbens. The nucleus accumbens – think of this as your […]

Learn More April 4, 2018

Are Your New Donors Hiding in Plain Sight?

We’ve talked about ways to bring people in from the outside like advocacy programs and content marketing efforts. But while both are good ways to get people on your file, they may not always convert to donors. So what if it turns out that, like the Scarecrow’s brains and the True Meaning of Christmas*, the […]

Learn More March 29, 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