MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

In memoriam fundraising: An empirical exploration of donor motivations

2021· article· en· W3212106606 on OpenAlexaff
Sara Penner, Kelley Main

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Business · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDeath Anxiety and Social Exclusion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNonprobability samplingThematic analysisLoyaltyEmpirical researchOrder (exchange)Value (mathematics)Qualitative researchPsychologyPublic relationsMarketingSocial psychologySociologyBusinessPolitical scienceFinanceSocial scienceComputer scienceDemographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: This research explores in memoriam fundraising from the perspective of the donor, providing empirical support for what motivates people to make permanent in memoriam donations and how making such donations assists them in the grieving process. These insights then provide guidance to aid nonpro t organisations (herein referred to as nonpro ts) in building relationships with bereaved donors.<br/> Methodology: Study one collected data using a purposive criterion sampling, with 10 in-depth interviews that were analysed using thematic analysis. Study two used an experimental design that collected data using a convenience-based sampling, with 184 participants (53.6% male, mean age 38 years). T-tests and Process models were utilised for analysis.<br/> Findings: This research demonstrates that charitable donations can play a role in bereavement and that the value they provide is to both the nonpro t, with monetary outcomes and increased donor loyalty, and to the donor, with the creation of a continued bond with the deceased. This research provides the rst empirical evidence that people use in memoriam donations, which include a permanent memorial, to create a symbolic continuing bond with the deceased and that such symbolic donations increase the giver's desire to visit the memorial. Using the ndings of this research, we provide a set of recommendations that fundraisers can follow in order to best meet the needs of both their donors and their organisation. Recommendations include ways to provide the value that donors are looking for which will aid them in their bereavement along with best practices for the organisation to allow for the most e ective in memoriam fundraising program.<br/> Implications: Providing evidence that the creation of a continued bond is a motivator for charitable giving connects the literature on charitable giving, bereavement and consumer behaviour. This research deepens our understanding of consumer behaviour by examining why people spend money to help themselves through the grieving process, thus building on the mood, decision making, and consumer-choice literatures that can be used in both for pro t and nonpro t marketing domains. Providing empirical support for the industry best practice of providing permanent memorial opportunities is of signi cant importance, as doing so can provide relationship building opportunities. This research shows that there are societal bene ts to in memoriam giving, demonstrating that it can provide value to people in their grieving process.<br/> Contribution: This is the rst empirical study that looks at motivations for in memoriam fundraising, providing evidence of continued bonds as a motivator for in memoriam donations, and the role that charitable giving can play in bereavement.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score0.813

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.110
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial BusinessSame topicDeath Anxiety and Social ExclusionFrench-language works237,207