ÜBERMAD

FocusPaper

A brief chat with a scholarship student may keep fundraisers on the phone longer

HelpedThe short version

Callers who briefly met the student spent more time on the phone a month later.

A young caller presses his headset to his ear and eases it away, staying on the line, as a student sits calmly beside him.
185
fundraising callers and university students
Randomised
groups picked at random
Recorded
behaviour was recorded
1 tool
tested

The study

  1. Who took part

    There were 39 paid fundraising callers at a university. Two lab studies had 146 university students.

  2. What they did

    Callers read a letter from a scholarship student for 5 minutes. Then some met him for about 5 minutes, and others discussed the letter with each other. A third group had no contact with him. In the lab, students edited cover letters for up to 35 to 45 minutes. Before editing, they chatted with the letter writer, had a brief silent encounter with him, or had no contact.

  3. What happened

    A month later, callers who met the student spent about 260 minutes a week on the phone, against about 150 and 180. They also raised about 500 dollars, against about 250 to 260. In the lab, chatting with the writer led to more editing, and silent contact alone made no difference.

What the study found

  1. HelpedFocus

    Callers who briefly met the student spent more time on the phone a month later.

    Randomised trial of 185 fundraising callers and university students · vs callers who read the letter or had no contact · behaviour was recorded · ⚠ numbers unreliable

  2. HelpedGoals

    Callers who briefly met the student raised more donations a month later.

    Randomised trial of 185 fundraising callers and university students · vs callers who read the letter or had no contact · behaviour was recorded · ⚠ numbers unreliable

  3. HelpedFocus

    Students who chatted briefly with the letter writer spent longer editing the letters.

    Randomised trial of 185 fundraising callers and university students · vs students who had no chat with the writer · behaviour was recorded · ⚠ numbers unreliable

How solid is this?

  • Groups picked at random
  • Behaviour was recorded
  • Numbers unreliable

Source

Impact and the art of motivation maintenance: The effects of contact with beneficiaries on persistence behavior (2007)

DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.05.004 (opens in a new tab)

More on focus

See all