Persuasion in fundraising letters: An interdisciplinary study

Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 228-246

  Goering, Elizabeth ^a   Connor, Ulla M ^a   Nagelhout, Ed ^b   Steinberg, Richard ^b  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

Author keywords

direct mail; donations; factorial experiments; fundraising; persuasion

Indexed keywords

EID: 79952974360     PISSN: 08997640     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0899764009339216     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Abelen, E., Redeker, G., & Thompson, S.A. (1993). The rhetorical structure of U.S.-American and Dutch fund-raising letters. Text, 13, 323-350.
2. Bazerman, C. (1997). Some informal comments on texts mediating fund-raising relationships: Cultural sites of affiliation. In U. Connor (Ed.), Written discourse in philanthropic fund raising: Issues of language and rhetoric (Working Paper 98-13, pp. 17-26). Indianapolis: Indiana University Center on Philanthropy.
3. Bekkers, R., & Crutzen, O. (2007). Just keep it simple: A field experiment on fundraising letters. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 12, 1-8.
4. Berger, P.D., & Smith, G.E. (1997). The effect of direct mail framing strategies and segmentation variables on university fundraising performance. Journal of Direct Marketing, 11, 30-43.
5. Bhatia, V.K. (1998). Generic patterns in fundraising discourse. New Directions for Philanthropic Fundraising, 22, 95-110.
6. Connor, U. (Ed.). (1997). Written discourse in philanthropic fund raising. Issues of language and rhetoric (Working Paper 98-13). Indianapolis: Indiana University Center on Philanthropy.
7. Connor, U., & Gladkov, K. (2004). Rhetorical appeals in fundraising direct mail letters. In U. Connor & T. A. Upton (Eds.). Discourse in the professions: Perspectives from corpus linguistics (pp. 257-286). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
8. Connor, U., & Lauer, J. (1985). Understanding persuasive essay writing: Linguistic/rhetorical approach. Text, 5, 309-326.
9. Connor, U., & Wagner, L. (1998). Language use in grant proposals by nonprofits: Spanish and English. New Directions for Philanthropic Fundraising: Understanding and Improving the Language of Fundraising, 22, 59-73.
10. Crismore, A. (1997). Visual rhetoric in an Indiana University Foundation Annual Report. In U. Connor (Ed.), Written discourse in philanthropic fund raising: Issues of language and rhetoric (Working Paper 98-13, pp. 64-100). Indianapolis: Indiana University Center on Philanthropy.
11. Desmet, P., & Feinberg, F.M. (2003). Ask and ye shall receive: The effect of the appeals scale on consumers' donation behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 24, 349-376.
12. Diamond, W.D., & Gooding-Williams, S. (2002). Using advertising constructs and methods to understand direct mail fundraising appeals. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 12, 225-242.
13. Eckel, C.C., & Grossman, P.J. (2008). Subsidizing charitable contributions: A natural field experiment comparing matching and rebate subsidies. Experimental Economics, 11, 234-252.
14. Falk, A. (2004). Charitable giving as a gift exchange: Evidence from a field experiment (CESifoWorking Paper 1218). Bonn, Germany: Institute for the Study of Labor.
15. Fraser, C., Hite, R.E., & Sauer, P.L. (1988). Increasing contributions in solicitation campaigns: The use of large and small anchor points. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 284-287.
16. Graves, R. (1997). Dear friend (?): Culture and genre in American direct marketing letters. Journal of Business Communications, 34, 235-252.
17. Handy, F. (2000). How we beg: The analysis of direct mail appeals. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29, 439-454.
18. Hoeken, H., & Hustinx, L. (2007). The impact of exemplars on responsibility stereotypes in fund-raising letters. Communication Research, 34, 596-617.
19. Katzev, R.D. (1995). Applying social psychology to charitable donations: Three experiments on nonprofit fundraising (Final Report). Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute Nonprofit Sector Research Fund.
20. LaTour, S.A., & Manrai, A.K. (1989). Interactive impact of informational and normative influence on donations. Journal of Marketing Research, 26, 327-335.
21. Lauer, J. (1997). Fundraising letters. In U. Connor (Ed.), Written discourse in philanthropic fund raising: Issues of language and rhetoric (Working Paper 98-13, pp. 101-108). Indianapolis: Indiana University Center on Philanthropy.
22. List, J.A., & Lucking-Reiley, D. (2002). The effects of seed money and refunds on charitable giving: Experimental evidence from a university capital campaign. Journal of Political Economy, 110, 215-233.
23. Myers, G. (1997). Wednesday morning and the millennium: Notes on time in fund-raising texts. In U. Connor (Ed.), Written discourse in philanthropic fund raising: Issues of language and rhetoric (Working Paper 98-13, pp. 121-134). Indianapolis: Indiana University Center on Philanthropy.
24. Parsons, L. (2001). The impact of financial information and voluntary disclosures on contributions to not-for-profit organizations: A field-based experiment (Working Paper). Available from SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=406760orDOI:10.2139/ssrn.406760.
25. Perrine, R.M., & Heather, S. (2000). Effects of picture and even-a-penny-will-help appeals on anonymous donations to charity. Psychological Reports, 86, 551-559.
26. Reingen, P. (1982). Test of a list procedure for inducing compliance with a request to donate money. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 110-118.
27. Smith, G. (1996). Asking properly: The art of creative fundraising. London: The White Lion Press.
28. Smith, G.E., & Berger, P.D. (1996). The impact of direct marketing appeals on charitable marketing effectiveness. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 24, 219-231.
29. Stone, R.A. (1992). The mass plaintiff: Public interest law, direct mail fundraising and the donor/client. Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems, 25, 197-241.
30. Turner, T., & Yeakel, A.R. (1994). The University of Texas Law School Foundation: Small shop, big results. Fund Raising Management, 25, 24-28.
31. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.
32. Upton, T.A. (2002). Understanding direct mail letters as a genre. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 7(1), 65-85.
33. Vasilopolous, T., Goering, E.M., & Nagelhout, E. (2004, November). Development and implications of a taxonomy for fundraising letters. Paper presented at the Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Action (ARNOVA), Los Angeles, CA.
34. Vriens, M., van der Scheer, H.R., Hoekstra, J.C., & Bult, J.R. (1998). Conjoint experiments for direct mail response optimization. European Journal of Marketing, 32, 323-339.
35. Warren, P.E., & Walker, I. (1991). Empathy, effectiveness and donations to charity: Social psychology's contribution. British Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 325-337.
36. Warwick, M. (2000). The five strategies for fundraising success: A mission-based guide to achieving your goals. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
37. Weyant, J.M., & Smith, S.L. (1987). Getting more by asking for less: The effects of request size on donations of charity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17, 392-400.
38. Wheildon C. (2005). Type and layout: Are you communicating or just making pretty shapes. Gainesville, FL: Worsley Press, FAP Books.