Pass The Dopamine, Please
In an article titled “The Joy of Giving,” The Economist reports on brain research that seeks to explain the mental processes involved in making donations.
Researchers at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke used a standard technique called functional magnetic resonance imaging to map the brain activity that occurred when test subjects were asked to consider making contributions to controversial charities. The test causes included support for abortion, euthanasia and sex equality, and opposition to the death penalty, nuclear power and war.
In layperson terms …
When an individual donates, what is activated is the brain's reward center … the area responsible for doling out the dopamine-mediated euphoria associated with sex, money, food and drugs. Hence the “warm glow” of giving!
But there's more. Donating also engages the part of the brain that plays a role in the bonding behavior between mother and child, and in romantic love. The chemical agent here is oxytocin, a hormone that increases trust and cooperation. However, when test subjects oppose an issue, a different area is activated … an area thought responsible for punishment.
And yet a third area is activated when subjects must to make tradeoffs between self-interest and moral beliefs. A good friend and fellow student of brain research, Rob Smith, suggests that this last area, recently evolved and thought to be unique to humans, is the locus of what Abraham Lincoln called “the better angels of our nature.”
Lesson for fundraisers: include a dose of dopamine with your fundraising letters and proposals, with instructions: Take Before Reading!
For serious students, a reprint of the full study can be purchased for $10 from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Behavioral Science Q & A
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
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
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
Interesting question. I had a quick look at the testing done on this topic. On the positive side, in all cases, over half of donors decide to cover the fee. In some cases, it goes as high as 65%. Not a negligible percentage at all. Here’s another test from iRaiser showing consistent results (see point […]
Read Full Answer
There’s just one thing to consider when designing a supporter journey: the supporter. More specifically, you need to take into account: Who the supporter is i.e. their identity, which is the reason they support this cause, and their personality, which describes the way they “see” and process the world. These will determine the kind of […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not an expert in this but a quick search surfaced this article on the effect of tax reforms on 2019’s charitable giving. The researchers didn’t find a reduction. Actually, they observed an “increase in charitable contributions in 2019, even with the lower tax rates and the dramatically smaller number of taxpayers who itemize their […]
Read Full Answer