Emotional Engagement and Donor Influence Tactics: Camp For All Study by Emmanuel Epau

ExecutiveSummary

ThisresearchpaperexplorestherelationshipbetweensocialmediapostsofCamp ForAllandtheemotionalandpsychologicalreactionselicitedfromusers,andthe relationshipbetweenpromisesandingratiationandwithself-orientation.Itis recommendedCampForAllshouldfocusoncreatingmoreemotionallyimpactful contenttoengagewithpotentialdonors.Sinceingratiation/promisesisnotrelatedto self-orientation,CampForAllshouldconsiderdevelopingadonorstewardshipprogram tofosterlong-termrelationshipswithitsdonors.

ThedatawascollectedthroughasurveyadministeredusingiSurveyonaniPadon March10th,11th,19th,and20th,with57respondentsprovidingusableresponses.The resultsforsocialmediapost3indicatethatthereismorelikeabilityandemotionand likelytobeshared.Thiswasbecausethesocialmediapostsweregenerallylikableand effectiveinelicitingpositiveemotionalresponsesfromtherespondentsasthepost containedkidshugging.

However,thecorrelationbetweeningratiation/promisesandself-orientationwas notsignificant.Onepossibleexplanationforthisresultcouldbethatdonorsareless interestediningratiationtacticsandmorefocusedontheimpactoftheirdonations. Donorsmayfeelthatingratiationtacticsareinsincereormanipulative,whichcan decreasetheirtrustandwillingnesstodonatetotheorganization.

Therefore,CampForAllcouldconsideralternativestrategiestoengagedonors effectively.Insteadofrelyingonthesetactics,CampForAllmaywanttofocuson buildingrelationshipswithdonorsbasedonsharedvaluesandtrust.Itcandothisby beingtransparentaboutitsoperationsandfinances,sharingsuccessstoriesandimpact data,andprovidingopportunitiesfordonorstogetinvolvedandseetheimpactofits donationsfirsthand.ThesefindingssuggestthatCampForAllmayneedtoreviseits

fundraisingstrategybyfocusingmoreonemotionalappealsandlessonpromisesand ingratiatingtacticstoattractdonors.

Introduction

ThepurposeofthisresearchpaperistoexploretherelationshipbetweenCamp ForAllsocialmediapostsandtheemotionsandreactionsitelicitsfromusers.Thestudy aimstounderstandhowusersengagewithmediacontentbymeasuringthelevelof emotionalresponseandengagementwiththeseposts.Inaddition,theprojectwill investigatetheinfluenceoftheindependentvariables’promisesandingratiationonthe dependentvariableself-orientationofdonors.Theultimategoalistobetterunderstand howthesefactorsimpactdonors'decision-makingandinformfuturefundraising strategies.

ThefirstpartofthisresearchpaperfocusesonCampForAll'ssocialmediaposts andtheemotionsandreactionsitelicitsfromusers.Socialmediahasbecomeapowerful toolfororganizationstoengagewithitsaudiencesandpromoteitscauses.Therefore,itis importanttounderstandtheemotionsandreactionsthatCampForAll'ssocialmedia poststriggerinusers.Theobjectiveofthispartofthestudyistoidentifytheemotions andreactionsthataremostcommonlyassociatedwithCampForAll'ssocialmediaposts.

Thesecondpartofthisresearchpaperfocusesontheinfluencetacticsofpromises andingratiationandtheimpactondonors'self-orientation.Donorsareanimportantpart offundraisingefforts,andunderstandingthemotivationsisessentialforCampForAll. Thestudyaimstoinvestigatehowpromisesandingratiationinfluencedonors' self-orientationandtheextenttowhichitprioritizesitsowninterestsoverCampForAll. Thispartofthestudyaimstounderstandtherelationshipbetweentheseinfluencetactics anddonors'self-orientation.Byexaminingthesefactors,thestudyaimstoan understandingonhowconsumersengagewithmediacontentandhowCampForAllcan betterunderstandandinfluenceitsaudiences.Thispaperisorganizedasfollows:thefirst sectionincludesExecutiveSummary,Introduction,ModelandHypothesis,Survey

Developmentand,Datacollectionmethod.ThesecondsectioncontainsResults, Recommendations.TheThirdsectionincludesReferences,Figures,andTables.

ModelandHypotheses

Thisprojectwilladdresstwoproblemstatements:Whatemotionsandreactions aretriggeredbyCampForAllsocialmediaposts,andhowimportantarepromisesand ingratiationininfluencingself-orientation?Thestudyaimstounderstandbothemotional andpsychologicalresponsestoCampForAllpostsbymeasuringthelevelofengagement andemotionalresponsetotheseposts.Inaddition,theprojectwillinvestigatehowthe keyconstructs,promises,andingratiationasindependentvariables,influenceorare relatedtoadonor'sself-orientationasthedependentvariable.AsshowninFigure1,this istobetterunderstandhowthesefactorsimpactthedonors’decision-making,informing futurefundraisingstrategies.

Peoplelikesocialmediapostsbecauseitevokespositiveemotions.Theywantto maintainrelationshipsbyaddingvaluetothesepoststoencouragecloseness.Theyalso feelobligedtodothesametopeoplewholiketheirposts,explainedasthereciprocity effect. (Seiter,2022).Additionally,poststhatevokefeelingsofsociallife,connectedness, andbelongingalsotendtoreceivemorelikes(Hampton,Goulet,Rainie,&Purcell, 2011).Itdependsonmanyfactorsconcerningwhatmakespeopleexperienceemotions fromasocialmediapost.Theseincludebutarelimitedtothetypeofcontentbeing shared,thetoneofthepost,andthepersonalrelationshipbetweentheconsumerandthe personwhosharedthepost.Forexample,apostaboutapersonalaccomplishmentevokes feelingsofprideorjoy,whileapostaboutatragedymayevokefeelingsofsadnessand empathy.

Whenitcomestosharingapost,peopletendtoshareinterestingthingsthatthey careaboutandareimportanttothemandresonatewiththeirpersonalbeliefsandvalues

inhopesthattheywillbenefittheirfriendsor,rather,followers.Peoplesharecontentto develop,nurture,andboostonlinerelationships.(Wutzke,2022).Followingapoll,78% oftheusersshareinformationonlinebecauseitkeepsthemconnectedandintouchwith friends,family,andbusinessesawayfromthem(Wutzke,2022).Thethreesocialposts thatwillbeusedinthisresearchareshowninFigures2,3,and4.

Promises

Promisesisdefinedasthefundraiser's“pledgestoprovidethetargetwitha specificreward,contingentonthetarget’scompliancewiththesource’s”request.

Promisesarepledgesoffuturerewardstothedonor(McFarlandetal.,2006). Promises areoftenusedtogaintrustandfavorfromothers,thusleadingtopersonalbenefitssuch asincreasedsocialstatusandaccesstoresources.AsH1predicted,“Promisesare positivelyrelatedtoself-orientation,”promisesarepositivelyrelatedtomanifest influenceforbuyerswithahighself-orientationbutareunrelatedtoitforbuyerswitha lowself-orientation.Inaddition,promisescanalsobeareflectionofone'spersonalvalues andbeliefs.Forexample,individualsprioritizinghonestyandintegritymaybemore likelytokeeptheirpromises,asfailingtodosowouldcontradicttheirvalues.Onthe otherhand,thosewhoprioritizepersonalgainandsuccessmaymakepromisestoachieve theirgoalswithoutconsideringtheimpactonothers.Furthermore,therelationship betweenpromisesandself-orientationcanalsobeinfluencedbyculturalandsocial norms.Forexample,insomecultures,makingpromisesisseenasasignof trustworthinessandcommitment,whileinothers,itmaybeconsideredunnecessaryor insincere.Additionally,socialpressureorexpectationsfromone'speersorsuperiorsmay influencethefrequencyandnatureofpromisesmade.Promisescanbeapowerfultoolfor gaininginfluenceandachievingpersonalgoals.However,themotivationandintent

behindthosepromisescanvarysignificantlybasedonone'sorientation,values,and culturalcontext.

Ingratiation

Ingratiationinvolvestheuseof“behaviorsthataredesignedtoenhanceone’s interpersonalattractiveness”andimproverapportwiththetargetofinfluence(McFarland etal.,2006).AsH2predicted,“Ingratiationispositivelyrelatedtoself-orientation, ingratiationispositivelyrelatedtomanifestinfluenceforbuyerswithahigh self-orientationbutareunrelatedtoitforbuyerswithalowself-orientation.”This remainsthesameastheconceptofself-orientation. Ingratiatingbehaviors,suchas obedienceandcompliments,canaswellbeusedtogainfavorandbuildbeneficial relationshipsinthelongrun.Bothpromisesandingratiationasindependentvariablesare positivelyrelatedtoself-orientationbecausemostindividualswhomakepromisesand engageiningratiatingbehaviorsoftenaimtogainpersonalbenefits.

Self-orientation,asadependentvariable,isdefinedasdonorswitha self-orientationareconcernedalmostentirelywiththeirownwelfare(McFarlandetal., 2006).Therefore,self-orientedpeoplearemostlikelytoengagemoreiningratiating behaviorsandmakepromisestheycannotkeeporgainpersonalbenefitsprimarily.In summary,self-orientedpeopleprioritizetheirownneedsanddesiresabovethoseof others.Alwaysself-focusedandprimarilyconcernedwithpersonaldevelopmentand growth.

Hypotheses

H1:Promisesarepositivelyrelatedtoself-orientation.

H2:Ingratiationispositivelyrelatedtoself-orientation.

SurveyDevelopment

Thesurveyquestionswerecreatedaboutthreedifferentpostsandlaterasked questionsabouthowitmadetherespondentfeelinthreespecificaspects.Attitude, emotion,andbehavior.Allquestionswereaskedtobeansweredusingaseven-point scale.Thefirstquestionstated,“Howmuchdoyoulikethispost?”theseven-pointLikert scalesrangingfromunliketolike.Thesecondquestionasked,“Howstrongofanemotion wasexperiencedbythepost?”itsseven-pointLikertscalerangedfrom“Noemotion”to “anextremeemotion”.Thefinalquestionproceededtoask,“Howlikelyareyoutoshare thispost?”astheseven-pointLikertrangedfrom“extremelyunlikelytoextremelylikely” aswell.

Thesecondportionofthesurveywasfilledwithquestionsthatweremodifiedto specificallyaskaboutfundraising.(McFarlandetal.,2006.)Inordertodothisthetwo independentvariablesthatwereusedwerepromisesandingratiation,utilizinga seven-pointLikertscalerangingfromextremelyunlikelytoextremelylikely.Thenextset ofquestionswereaskedtofindoutmoreaboutthepersonthatwastakingthesurvey The followingsetofquestionsweremodifiedtoaskaboutthedonator Theseven-pointLikert scalerangedfrom“extremelydisagree”to“extremelyagree”.Thelastsetofquestions weredemographicquestionsthatincluded:income,ethnicity,gender,education,etc.The scalesusedforthesewerenominalandchangeddependingonthequestion.

DataCollectionMethod

ThesurveywasadministeredusingiSurveyonaniPad.Thedaysitwas administeredwereMarch10th,11th,19th,and20th Duringthesedaysthelocationswhere thesurveywasconductedwereatPeaseParkandButlerMetroPark.Outofthe59people whowereaskedtoparticipate,57ofthemelected,meaning97%tookthesurvey, regardlessoftheirresponse.Outofthe57respondents,41providedusableresponses,so theusableresponsesratewastherefore71.9%.Thiswasverygoodsinceitmeantthat morethanhalfoftherespondentswereusabledata.

AsshowninTable1,all41usableresponseswerefromfemalerespondents,with agesrangingequally Morethanhalfoftherespondents58.5%hadnotdonatedtoa non-profit,but51.2%knewofanon-profitinAustin.Instagramwasthemostused platform,with18respondentsusingit,andFacebookbeingthesecondmostused platform,with13respondents.Goingmoreintodepthwhenlookingateducation,20of therespondentshadabachelor'sdegree.Theaveragesalaryrangewasbetween $50,001-$75,000,andthemajorityofrespondentsweremarried.Almosthalfofthe respondents48.8%knewsomeonewithspecialneeds,andthemajorityhadeithernokids orjustonekid.Whenlookingatpatternsandsimilarities,thedemographicvariables collectedprovideageneraloverviewofthesamplepopulation,andthepatternsand similaritiesfoundinthedata.Morethanhalfoftherespondentshadnotdonatedtoa non-profit,butoverhalfknewofanon-profitinAustin.Instagramwasthemostused platform,followedbyFacebook.Themajorityofrespondentsweremarried,andthe averagesalaryrangewasbetween$50,001-$75,000.Almosthalfoftherespondentsknew someonewithspecialneeds,andthemajorityhadeithernokidsorjustonekid.

Results

ThesurveydatawasprocessedusingSPSStoperformtestsandanalysis,withthe specificaimofcomprehendingthefactorsthatdriveaperson'sinterestinsupporting CampForAll.Outofthetotalnumberofresponsescollected,whichwas59,just41of themweredeemedusablefortheresearchstudy Variousdataanalysiswaspreformedto extractmeaningfulinsightsfromthedataandprovideacomprehensiveanswertothe researchquestion. ThesetestsincludedFactorAnalysis,ANOVA,IndependentMeans, Correlation,andMultipleRegression.Thesetestshelpedtoeffectivelyexplorethe collecteddataandgainadeeperunderstandingofthefactorsdrivingindividuals’interest insupportingCampForAll.

Social Media Postings

Inordertoeffectivelyinvestigatethefactorsthattriggercustomerengagement withCampForAll,aselectionofthreepostswaschosenforthisstudy,asdepictedin Figure2,Figure3,andFigure4.Asthestudyaimedtocomprehendbothemotionaland psychologicalresponsestoCampForAll'ssocialmediaposts,thesepostswereusedto gaugethelevelofengagementandtheemotionalresponseelicitedbyeachpost. Specifically,thestudyaimedtoexaminetherespondents'likenesstowardstheposts, whethertheyexperiencedanemotionalreaction,andwhethertheywouldsharethepost withothers.TheresultsofthisinvestigationarepresentedinFigure5,whichdepictsthe highmeanvalueforeachcategory.Theseresultsindicatethatthemajorityofrespondents foundthepostsinallthreecategoriesagreeable.Similarly,Figure6andFigure7revealed highmeanvalues,whichfollowedthesametrendastheresponseratetoCampForAll's socialmediapostswaspositive.TheclusteredbargraphsdepictedinFigure8,Figure9, andFigure10provideavisualrepresentationofthecomparisonofrespondents'behavior towardssocialmediapostingsforthevariablesof"like,""share,"and"emotion".Figure8 illustratesthatthemajorityofrespondentsdemonstratedapositiveresponsetowards

socialmediapostings,with"like"and"extremelylike"responses.Thissuggeststhatthe respondentsweregenerallyreceptivetothepostings,astheyfoundthemlikable.The samecanbesaidaboutFigure9.Finally,thetabledepictstherespondents'emotional responsestosocialmediapostings.Themajorityofrespondentsexperiencedstrong emotionsacrossallcategories.Thissuggeststhatthesocialmediapostingswereeffective inelicitingpositiveemotionalresponsesfromtherespondents.Figure10displaysa similartrend,withthemajorityofrespondentsindicatingawillingnesstosharesocial mediapostings.Thehighestfrequencyofresponseswasfor"somewhatlikely,"indicating thatmostrespondentswerelikelytosharetheposts.

Factor Analysis

ComingtotheFactorAnalysiswhich,isseenbelow(Table2),twoconstructs wereused;Ingratiation/PromisesandSelfOrientation.ConductingaFactorAnalysis helpedtoexploretheessentialscopesthatexplaintherelationshipbetween ingratiation/promisesandself-orientation.Whileanalyzingthedata,itwasnecessaryto mergetheconstructs.Whenlookingatself-orientationone,itemwasremoved,“Iusually dominatetheconversationmore,”nowresultinginacumulativevarianceof82.097%.As aresult,twoindependentvariablesweremerged,asshowninFigure11.

NewHypothesis:

H1:Promises/IngratiationispositivelyrelatedtoSelf-Orientation

Two-Group Independent Means Test

Table3showstheresultsofanindependentmeanstestonthevariable"Haveyou donatedtonon-profitsinthelastsixmonths?"Thetestcomparesthemeansofthegroups whoresponded"Yes"and"No"tothisquestion.Theresultsshowthatthereisno significantdifferenceinthemeansoftheIngratiation/PromisesandSelf-Orientation constructsbetweenthetwogroups.Table4presentstheresultsofanindependentmeans

testonthevariable"Doyouknowanynon-profitorganizationsintheAustinarea?"The resultsshowthatthereisnosignificantdifferenceinthemeansofthe Ingratiation/Promisesconstructbetweenthetwogroups.However,theSelf-Orientation constructissignificantlygreaterforthe"Yes"groupcomparedtothe"No"group.Table5 showstheresultsofanindependentmeanstestonthevariable"Haveyoueverbeentoa summercamp?"Itisseenthatthereisnosignificantdifferenceinthemeansofthe

Ingratiation/PromisesandSelf-Orientationconstructsbetweenthetwogroups.Table6 displaystheresultsfor"Doyouknowanyoneclosethatcanbeconsideredaspecialneeds person?"Asthetestcomparesthemeansofthegroupswhoresponded"Yes"and"No"to thisquestion,Table6showsthatthereisnosignificantdifferenceinthemeansofthe Ingratiation/Promisesconstructbetweenthetwogroups,yetSelf-Orientationis significantlygreaterforthe"Yes"groupcomparedtothe"No"group.

ANOVA

TheANOVAtestresultsarepresentedinTables7to12.Table8indicatesthat peoplewithadoctoratedegreewouldrespondmorepositivelytoingratiationand promisescomparedtopeoplewithabachelor’sdegree,whilethereisnodifferencein responsetoself-orientationbetweendifferenteducationlevels.Table9suggestsno significantdifferenceinresponsetoeitheringratiation/promisesorself-orientationbased onincomelevel.Table10showsthatpeoplewhopreferrednottosayorweredivorced weremoreself-orientedcomparedtoothermaritalstatusgroups,whiletherewasno significantdifferenceinresponsetoingratiation/promises.Table11indicatesthatAsian ethnicityismorelikelytorespondpositivelytoingratiation/promisesthantheWhite ethnicity.Lastly,Table12showsnosignificantdifferenceinresponseto ingratiation/promisesorself-orientationbasedonthenumberofkids.

Multiple Regression & Correlation

Thecorrelationbetweenthetwoconstructswasanalyzed.Thecorrelationbetween ingratiation/promisesandself-orientationwas.258andisnotsignificant.InTable13,the resultsofmultipleregressionanalysisarepresented,H1proposesthat ingratiation/promisesispositivelyrelatedtoself-orientation.However,theindependent variableofingratiation/promisesisnotsignificantlyrelatedtoself-orientation,asnot supportedbyH1.Henceingratiation/promisesisnotrelatedtoself-orientation,which doesnotsupportthehypothesis.Thismeansself-orientedpeopledonotrespondwellto promises/ingratiation.

Recommendations

ThesurveyresultsprovidefactualdatatounderstandthelocalAustinpopulation aboutnon-profitorganizations,astheanalysiswasbetween25-40-year-oldwomen.The intentionofunderstandingbothemotionalandpsychologicalresponsestoCampForAll postsbymeasuringthelevelofengagementandemotionalresponsetotheseposts.The originaltwohypothesesweretestedwiththefindingsfromthesurvey,andtwo independentvariableswerecombinedtogether,resultinginachangeinthehypotheses,as seenin(Figure11). Basedonthetestingresults,therewillbediscussionsonthenew hypothesesofhowingratiation/promisesisnotrelatedtoself-orientationinrelationtoan interestinCampForAll.Basedonthestudyresults,severalrecommendationsdiscussed belowcanbemadetoCampForAlltoimproveitsdonorcommunicationstrategies.

First,forInstagram,CampForAllshouldfocusoncreatingvisuallyappealing contentandengagingcaptionsshowcasingcampgrounds,activities,andevents.Itshould alsoaimtocreateemotionalconnectionswithitsaudiencetoimproveengagementand shareability Secondly,CampForAllshouldfocusonshowcasingtheimpactofits programsandservicestoattractandretaindonorsratherthanrelyingonmaking

promises.Lastlyitshouldreconsidertheuseofingratiationtacticsandinsteadfocuson buildingrelationshipswithdonorsbasedonsharedvaluesandtrust.

Social Platform:

BasedonFigure5,Figure6,andFigure7thecomparisonofsocialmediapostsis represented.Itillustratesthatrespondentshaveahighlikabilityandemotionfortheposts, butshareabilityremainslow Therefore,CampForAllmaywanttocontinueusing Instagramtoreachitstargetaudience.Itmayalsowanttoconsiderexperimentingwith differenttypesofcontentandpostingstrategiestoseewhichonesgeneratethemost engagementandconversions.

ThefirstrecommendationtobediscussedforCampForAll’sInstagrampostsis utilizingvisualcontent.Theorganizationwouldcreatevisuallyappealingcontent,as Instagramisavisualplatform,andusinghigh-qualityphotosandvideosthatarevisually appealingisessential.CampForAllcanshowcaseitscampgrounds,activities,andevents througheye-catchingvisuals.Secondly,inaddition,tovisuallyappealingcontent, creatingengagingcaptionsforCampForAllthatareinformativeandrelevanttoitspost isanotherstrategyforimprovingengagement.Itcanusestorytellingtechniquesto connectwiththeaudienceemotionallyandmakethepostmoreshareable.Lookingatthe responses,peoplereactwelltopoststhatshowhowanythingispossible.CampForAll shouldshowalltheaccessibilitiesithasaroundthecampthatmakeitpossibleforanyone togo.Itiscriticalthatpostscreatesometypeofemotiontowardviewerssincethiswill getthemostengagement.

Ingratiation/Promise

Thenewhypothesisthatsuggeststhatingratiation/promisesarepositivelyrelated toself-orientation.However,afterconductingamultipleregressionanalysis,the independentvariableofingratiation/promisesisnotsignificantlyrelatedtothedependent

variableself-orientation.Theunstandardizedbetacoefficientisonly0.20,whichsuggests arelativelyweakpositiverelationship.Lookingatthep-valueof0.141thissuggeststhat itisnonsignificant,asseenin(Table13). However,theseresultssuggestthatindividuals withhigherlevelsofself-orientationmayrespondtoingratiatingorpromisingtacticsthan thosewithlowerlevelsofself-orientation. Onepossibleexplanationforthisresultcould bethatdonorsarelessinterestediningratiationtacticsandmorefocusedontheimpactof theirdonations.Donorsmayfeelthatingratiationtacticsareinsincereormanipulative, whichcandecreasetheirtrustandwillingnesstodonatetotheorganization.Alternatively, donorsmaybemoreinterestedinorganizationsthataretransparentandauthenticintheir communicationsratherthanthosethatrelyoningratiationtactics.

Asaresult,CampForAllmaywanttofocusonshowcasingtheimpactofits programsandservicestoattractandretaindonors.Itcandothisbysharingsuccess stories,providingdataonthenumberofindividualshelped,andhighlightinghow donationsareusedtosupporttheirmission.CampForAllmayalsoconsider implementingtargetedfundraisingcampaignsthatemphasizetheimportanceof supportingitsmissionandthepositiveimpactithasonthecommunity Bydoingso,it mayattractdonorswhoaremorealignedwithitsvaluesandgoals,whichcouldresultin moresustainableandmeaningfulsupportovertime.

Basedontheseresults,CampForAllmaywanttofocuslessonmakingpromises andmoreonbuildingtrustanddemonstratingitsimpact.Itmaywanttoconsider re-evaluatingitsmessagingandcommunicationstrategiestoensureeffective communicationofitsworkimpacttodonors.Thiscanbedonebysharingthesuccess storiesofdifferentvolunteersandthechildrenatitscamp. Furthermore,CampForAll couldconsiderimplementingdonorrecognitionprograms,suchasnamingopportunities orexclusiveevents,toshowappreciationfortheirsupporters'contributions.This,inthe

longrun,strengthensdonorrelationshipsandboostscontinuedsupportovertime.By highlightingtheimpactoftheorganization'sprograms,donorsmaybemorelikelytofeel asenseofconnectionandpurposeintheircontributions,increasingengagementand support.

CampForAllmaywanttoreconsideritsuseofingratiationtacticsinitsdonor communications.Insteadofrelyingonthesetactics,theymaywanttofocusonbuilding relationshipswithdonorsbasedonsharedvaluesandtrust.Itcandothisbybeing transparentaboutitsoperationsandfinances,sharingsuccessstoriesandimpactdata,and providingopportunitiesfordonorstogetinvolvedandseetheimpactofitsdonations firsthand.Additionally,CampForAllmaywanttoconsiderdevelopingadonor stewardshipprogramtofosterlong-termrelationshipswithitsdonors.Thisprogramcould includepersonalizedcommunications,exclusiveevents,programs,andopportunitiesfor donorstoprovidefeedbackandsuggestionstotheorganization.Byprioritizingdonor relationshipsandfocusingonsharedvaluesandtrust,CampForAllcanbuildastrong foundationofsupporterscommittedtoitsmissionandmotivatedtodonatetoitscause.It couldalsouseInstagramtoengagewithpotentialdonorsandshareupdatesonitsimpact andsuccesses.Byleveragingthisplatformwithusingtoolssuchasstoriesandreels, CampForAllcanreachabroaderaudienceandconnectwithindividualswhomaynot havebeenawareofitsmissionandwork.

References

Hampton,K.,Goulet,L.S.,&Purcell,K.(2020). Social networking sites and our lives. PewResearchCenter:Internet,Science&Tech.RetrievedJanuary29,2023,from https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2011/06/16/social-networking-sites-and-our-lives/

McFarland,R.G.,Challagalla,G.N.,&Shervani,T.A.(2006). Influence tactics for effective adaptive selling. JournalofMarketing, 70(4),103–117.

Seiter,C.(2022). The psychology of social media: Why we like, comment, and share online. BufferResources.RetrievedJanuary29,2023,from https://buffer.com/resources/psychology-of-social-media/

Wutzke,M.K.(2022).Thepsychologyofsocialmediasharing: How you can use it to boost your content. CoscheduleBlog.RetrievedJanuary29,2023,from https://coschedule.com/blog/why-people-share.

Figure1

Hypothesesmodel(original)

ComparisonofRespondentsforSocialMediaPostingsforLike

Figure8

Figure9

ComparisonofRespondentsforSocialMediaPostingsforEmotion

ComparisonofRespondentsforSocialMediaPostingsforShare

Figure10

Figure11 Hypothesesmodel(new)

Ingratiation/Promises

Offeredtogivespecialattentiontoyouifyouwouldgive fundraiseranewdonation

Madepromisestogivesomethingbackforcomplyingwiththe fundraiser'srequest 0.91

Offeredadditionalbenefitsforyourdonationafteryouhadbeen initiallyreluctanttoagreetoterms

Offeredtoprovideincentivesforadonationforagreeingtothe fundraiser'srequest(s) 0.93

Offeredaspecificdealforyourdonationtochangeyourposition oncertainissues

Discussedsharedinterestand/orhobbiespriortodiscussing donationissues 0.90

Complimentedandpraisedyourachievement 0.94

Madeyoufeelgoodaboutyourselfbeforemakingdonating pitch 0.90

Sympathizedwithyouabouttheaddedproblemsthattherequest caused

Actedinafriendlymannerpriortoaskingforwhatthe fundraiserwanted

Self-Orientation

Table3

IndependentMeansTestsResults: Haveyoudonatedtonon-profitsinthelastsixmonths?

Conclusion:Ingratiation/Promiseisnotdifferent betweentheYesandNogroups

Conclusion:SelfOrientationisnotdifferentbetweenthe YesandNogroups

Table4

IndependentMeansTestsResults: Doyouknowanynon-profitorganizationintheAustinarea? Independen

Conclusion:Ingratiation/Promiseisnotdifferent betweentheYesandNogroups

Conclusion:SelfOrientationisgreaterforthe YesgroupsthantheNogroups

Table5

IndependentMeansTestsResults: Haveyoueverbeentoasummercamp?

Conclusion:Ingratiation/Promiseisnotdifferentbetween theYesandNogroups

Conclusion: SelfOrientationisnotdifferentbetweenthe YesandNogroups

Table6

IndependentMeansTestsResults: Doyouknowanyoneclosethatcanbeconsideredaspecialneedsperson?

Independen

Conclusion: Ingratiation/Promiseisnotdifferentbetweenthe YesandNogroups

Conclusion:SelfOrientationisgreaterfortheYesgroupsthan theNogroups

Table7

ANOVATestResults:SocialMedia