Qualitative versus quantitative impact communications in humanitarian appeals: Findings from a field experiment
We report a field experiment comparing the efficacy of two impact-based appeals conducted by Oxfam Australia. Both appeal types demonstrated Oxfam Australia’s previous humanitarian impact, one in a qualitative (narrative) and the other in a quantitative (statistical) manner. We find that the quantitative appeal caused both a greater number and size of donations. We also find heterogeneity in the treatment effects across donor characteristics. • We examine the effect of impact communications on donations to a humanitarian appeal. • We compare communications of a quantitative and qualitative nature with a neutral control. • Our field experiment utilises an appeal conducted by the charity Oxfam. • Quantitative but not qualitative communications raise donations compared to the control. • Treatment effects are sensitive to donor gender and giving history.
Authors
- Simon Feeny (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5955-0045)
- Swee‐Hoon Chuah (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4562-1340)
- Ananta Neelim (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6352-2859)
- Robert Hoffmann (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7763-4392)
- Timothy Hannan
Institutions
- Oxfam (GB)
- University of Tasmania (AU)
- RMIT University (AU)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Economics Letters
- Published
- 2024-08-19
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2024.111923
- Primary Topic
- Disaster Management and Resilience
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00