Research proposal · Neuroeconomics, University of Bath · 2025
“Mind Over Matter:
Are charitable donations best increased through transparency-based or emotion-based framing?”
Summary
With government funding falling, charities rely more and more on public donations, so how an appeal is framed matters. For a Neuroeconomics unit at Bath, I chose to design an experiment testing which works better: showing donors exactly what their money achieves, or telling one person's story. The proposal sets out the theory behind each approach, a controlled online experiment with around 500 adults, and what charities should do with each possible result.
Two theories
Transparency-based framing
- Cognitive ease: clear, simple information makes deciding easier, so more people follow through
- Credibility: stating exactly how funds are used reduces scepticism and builds trust
- Mental accounting: tying money to a specific outcome makes giving feel like a gain, not a loss
Prediction: if clarity and trust drive giving, transparency should raise donations
Emotion-based framing
- Warm glow: giving brings its own emotional reward
- Identifiable victim effect: people respond more to one named person than to statistics
- Compassion fade: empathy doesn't grow with the number of people affected
Prediction: if empathy drives giving, emotion should raise donations
Why not do both?
Small, Loewenstein and Slovic (2007) found that adding statistics to a story about one identifiable child lowered donations: the numbers push people into analytical thinking, which dampens the feelings the story creates.
Experimental design
A controlled online experiment, holding everything constant except the framing.
| Sample | Around 500 adults, recruited online and through community outreach |
|---|---|
| Conditions | Random assignment to one of two appeals from a fictional charity, the FutureLight Foundation, identical in structure |
| Transparency | Specific impact metrics, e.g. Just £10 provides a week's supply of books for one classroom |
| Emotion | A short story about one child, her circumstances and her hopes |
| Task | Each participant has a hypothetical £50 and can donate any amount |
| Primary measure | Donation amount, £0 to £50 |
| Mechanisms | Perceived trust, emotional response and perceived impact, plus written reflections on why |
Hypothesis
Evidence comparing the two directly is limited. One earlier study found that a photo and description of a little girl raised about twice as much as factual information about food scarcity. That study tested facts rather than donation impact, but it points the same way, so I predicted that emotion-based framing would produce higher average donations.
What it would mean for charities
On ethics
Every appeal is framed one way or another, so the question isn't whether to frame but how. I treated framing as choice architecture: it should be transparent, evidence-based and used to clarify information, never to limit people's freedom to choose.