MDSC 409 Final Assignment

Strategic Fundraisingthe brain, altruism and media

Brittany Staddon

What do we know about advertising?

Sex sells

Beauty sells

Neither of these methods are ideal for charity advertisements however.

The question remains, with our current

understanding of the brain and its responseto images, how can one create the most

beneficial response?

Social Understanding

Humans are seemingly selfish beings, yet, there still exists a degree of what has widely been termed ‘humanity’. By further understanding how people

interact and why giving is still practiced (beyond tax benefits and Mary Poppin’s ‘Feed the Birds’ song) one must understand social behaviour.

Motivation

Helping behaviour is an action that provides benefit to others whether it beemotional, personal, casual or during an emergency. The most prominent

motivation behind helping behaviours is that of egotistic motivation. Egotisticmotivation is undertaken in order to benefit ourselves, largely supporting Darwin’s

theory of evolution. However there are instances in which no self-reward isavailable as a result of giving behaviour. If ensuring ones own survival is the primary

goal for organisms, why do people help others at a cost to their own wellbeing? This is the primary question that must be addressed.

Altruism is a prosocial behaviour defined as the selfless act to reduce the suffering of another individual (Mathur et al, 2010). The primary driver for altruism is that of

empathy , the ability to share the emotional states of others through cognitiveperspective taking and cognitive appraisal. When a beneficial deed to the sufferer is undertaken with only loss experienced by the giver, who may easily escape from

the situation by choice, an altruistic behaviour has been undertaken.

Despite individuals experiencing different degrees of empathy, science indicates that increasing empathy to others is possible through careful planning.

At the end of the day our ancestors wanted one thing. Offspring – carriers of their genes. Congratulations, they appear to have been successful in this venture.

Although our own genes are at the top of the priority list for passing on tosubsequent generations, the closer the kin the more supportive behaviour one is willing to make. It is unlikely one will be marketing to the family members of the

cause you are supporting however, kin selection has been shown to be a close knit form of ingroup selection.

Social Variation

The greater the degree of ingroup belonging, whether it be through socialgroupings of race, political affiliation or allegiance, the great the willingness toexpend resources such as money and time in altruistic behaviours. Minority

groups tend to show greater ingroup favouritism than those in the majority. Incertain instances, the majority may actually show outgroup favouritism if the

intergroup status is wide enough (Mathur et al., 2010).

So what does all this jargon mean for someone trying to tap into the human brain for a charity’s benefit? If marketing to those who closely share resources with the

beneficiaries, highlight the ingroup similarities in order to light up theempathetic regions of the brain like a Christmas tree in Times Square. If the

beneficiaries do not closely share resources with the givers, for instanceinternational aid, highlighting the outgroup differences in addition to the

commonalties for basic needs may be the best method of taping their hearts – and wallets.

It is commonly believed that women value interpersonal relationships and social goals to be of greatest importance in contrast to men who place greatest

importance on advancement and earnings. This therefore suggests that women may be a more successful audience to target. Research largely supports this notion

that women in masculine cultures are more likely to positively respond to charity appeals – however, the same is true for men in feminine cultures such as in

Scandinavia (Nelson et al, 2006). This indicates that it is not simply a gender appeal but that audience must be taken into consideration. Likewise, women in feminine

cultures and men in masculine cultures feel less obligated to show altruisticbehaviours.

Gender Differences

The BrainEmpathy has been found to be connected to a distinct neural matrix, incl uding the

bilateral anterior insula and anterior cingulate cortex on account of theirapparent role in perceiving others’ distress, judging the degree of pain

experienced, and emotion formation (Decety and Jackson, 2004). By firstperceiving the cause of distress, in order to experience empathy one must be able

to take another’s perspective for oneself. The medial prefrontal cortext isresponsible for personalizing the distress experienced externally (Lamm et al.,

2007).

Increased brain activity is not the only evidence that the brain is directlyconnected to altruistic behaviour. Another study found that the mesolimbic

dopaminergic and dorsal raphe serotonergic pathways are also stimulated by the feelings of moral obligation (Moll et al., 2006). Largely regulating the reward

reinforcement and stimulated by the things humans are known to enjoy, such as food, sex, drugs and money, these pathways are a keen area of interest. If one

could determine a method of making behaviours of charity and benevolence as rewarding as a large bowl of poutine, charity events would become a thing of the

past.

These regions of the brain are important for the release of oxytocin andvasopressin – neuromodulators that are primarily associated with good. It has been found that oxytocin administration leads to increase feelings of trust and cooperation in giving. How can one best access these physiological feelings

through targeted marketing?

If you the reader and person of charity are conscious of advertising (or have watched enough Superbowl ads) it is quite apparent that babies are flooding our media. With this knowledge of resource dispersion in response to oxytocin levels

one must wonder if E-Trade was truly targeting the neuronal pathways thatwomen in particular may be sensitive to? Baby graces the television screen

during the computer screen, viewer experiences an oxytocin surge, andimmediately invests in E-Trade.

Let’s try this theory...

If you have not reached for your wallet do not fret. This theory may need to be more thoroughly researched. Although not quite that simple, the ability to feel

attachment to a societal cause goes beyond simple ingroup association and moral obligations but are directly tied to brain function.

Media

Society has moved from print based media advertising to that of visual basedadvertising. Whether it be magazines, television, billboards, or through the

internet, we are bombarded with images. The intent and reaction of thepopulation behind verbal messages have been widely studied however visualmessages have not been thoroughly investigated. In fact, the best method tocreate persuasive messages through visual imagery may be key in promoting

charities.

How can one best put forward a need that can be fulfilled by altruistic behaviour without numbing society to the message yet by encouraging

immediate action?

Charity advertising must assess sensitivity and the cultural constructs more than what is needed for advertisement design. Charities may be dealing withindividuals in a vulnerable population or issues that are associated with

stigmatization. It is important that charity advertisements are perceived in a light that will most importantly be beneficial to the cause itself and secondly achieve the

desired outcome – altruistic behaviour.

The most common method of charity advertising has been through eliciting guilt and sympathy (Barnett and Hammond, 1999), yet this negative method has been deemed incompatible with an individual’s response to be altruistic. Despite the

public responding that they are more likely to donate when exposed to a‘negative’ ad, the monetary donations do not support this assertion. Instead,

images that represent a positive outcome as a direct result of the cause are the most likely to encourage further altruistic behaviour in the forms of monetary or

volunteered time.

Some of the most memorable images published, such as Steve McCurry’s Afghan Girl and Dorothea Lange’s Migrant Mother, were quite simplistic in their approach yet above all

else they featured the human story.

Humans are naturally drawn to human faces. Perception and facial recognition is formed within the fusiform face area (FFA) and there is evidence directly after

birth that a newborn infant prefers viewing faces over other objects as evidence by increased tracking. The preference for human impact within an image may be

beneficial when creating fundraising advertisements.

Likewise, the images must be memorable in order to invoke a sense of a call toaction. On account of the bombardment of visual images our attention to such

advertisements is low – the novelty factor is not present. Novelty encourages the brain to explore and to gain a deeper understanding of the stimulus as indicated by greater activity within the substantia nigra/ventral tegmental area (Cell Press,

2006). By challenging the target population with a new perspective, a novel aspect of the issue at hand, it is hypothesized that greater altruistic behaviour may be

experienced.

What does this mean for those responsible for creating charity advertisements?

The typical methods of advertising using beauty and sex are not applicable on account of the more sensitive and

specialized nature of fundraising.

One

It is essential to know the target audience. Methods ofadvertising will vary depending on whether the audience is

male or female, their cultural norms, what moralobligations society may place on giving, and whether

ingroup or outgroup representation will elicit a greaterempathetic response.

Two

When viewing charity advertisements there is a complex number of processes occurring in the brain. Recognition,

memory, novelty and empathy all play a role in elicitingaltruistic behaviour.

Three

Barnett, J and Hammond, S. 1999. Representing disability in charity promotions. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology. 9:309-314

Cell Press. 2006. Pure novelty spurs the brain. ScienceDaily. Web. 13 April 2011

Decety, J., and Jackson, P.I. 2004. The functional architecture of human empathy. Behavioral and Cognitive Neurosci-ence. Revision 3 (2). 71-100

Lamm, C., Batson, C.D., Decety, J. 2007. The neural substrate of human empathy: effects of perspective-taking and cog-nitive appraisal. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 19(10. 42-58

Mathur, V.A., Harada, T., Lipke, T. and Chiao, J.Y. 2010. Neural basis of extraordinary empathy and altruistic motivation. NeuroImage. 51. 1468-1475

Moll, J., Kreuger, F., Zahn, R., Pardini, M., Oliveira-Souza, R., and Grafman, J. 2006. Human fronto-mesolimbic networks guide decisions about charitable donation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. 103:42. 15623-15628.

Nelson, M.R., Brunel, F.F., Supphellen, M., and Manchanda, R.V. 2006. Effects of culture, gender, and moral obligations on responses to charity advertising across masculine and feminine cultures. Journal of Consumer Psychology. 16(1). 45-56

Works Cited

MDSC 409

University of Calgary 2011