Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

papers:empathy_effectiveness_and_donations_to_charity_social_psychologytextquotesingles_contribution [2018/05/30 21:53] (current)
david created
Line 1: Line 1:
 +====Empathy,​ effectiveness and donations to charity: Social psychology{\textquotesingle}s contribution====
  
 +Warren, Peter E.; Walker, Iain, (1991). Empathy, effectiveness and donations to charity: Social psychology{\textquotesingle}s contribution. British Journal of Social Psychology, 325--337.
 +
 +**Keywords**: ​
 +
 +**Discipline**: ​
 +
 +**Type of evidence**: Field-exp-charity
 +
 +**Related tools**: [[tools:​Individualidentifiable victim|Individual/​identifiable victim]]
 +
 +**Related theories**: ​
 +
 +**Related critiques**: ​
 +
 +**Charity target**: International disasters
 +
 +**Donor population**: ​
 +\\
 +\\
 +===Paper summary===
 +
 +
 +\\
 +===Discussion===
 +
 +"​Higher donations from subjects in the low need persistence condition"​ (the "​immediate short-term needs of the sufferers"​ rather than "​sufferers'​ ongoing, continuous long term needs"​. ​ Similar result for returning "​support forms"​. Combining these two responses, both the "low need persistence"​ and the "low need extent"​ treatment increased the response rate. However, the "low need extent"​ condition appears confounded with an identifiable victims effect, presenting "the plight of one Sudanese family"​ instead of having "made explicit the widespread nature of the crisis"​.
 +\\
 +===Evaluation===
 +
 +Very relevant, environmentally valid field design. Possibly underpowered,​ given low response rate.
 +\\
 +This paper has been added by David Reinstein
  • papers/empathy_effectiveness_and_donations_to_charity_social_psychologytextquotesingles_contribution.txt
  • Last modified: 2018/05/30 21:53
  • by david