Lingnan University
Digital Commons @ Lingnan University
Bachelor of Social Sciences – Senior Theses
Undergraduate Open Access Dissertations
2016
Types of persuasive message promoting blood
donation in Hong Kong
Pui Chuen TAM
Follow this and additional works at: http://commons.ln.edu.hk/socsci_fyp
Part of the Applied Behavior Analysis Commons, and the Public Health Education and
Promotion Commons
Recommended Citation
Tam, P. C. (2016). Types of persuasive message promoting blood donation in Hong Kong (UG dissertation, Lingnan University,
Hong Kong). Retrieved from http://commons.ln.edu.hk/socsci_fyp/11
This UG Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Undergraduate Open Access Dissertations at Digital Commons @ Lingnan
University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Bachelor of Social Sciences – Senior Theses by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @
Lingnan University.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Types of Persuasive Message Promoting Blood Donation in Hong Kong
by
Pui Chuen TAM
A thesis
submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the Bachelor of
Social Sciences (Honours)
Supervisor: Dr. YEUNG Wai Lan, Victoria
Lingnan University
2015
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Abstract
Based on Ferguson, Farrell, & Lawrence (2008)’s study on persuasive messages
promoting blood donation, this study has identified a characteristic of persuasive message
that could influence Chinese participants’ behavioral intention to donate blood.
Participants (N = 66) were randomly assigned to read one of the four messages with
different focuses and framings. They then indicated their behavioral intention to donate
blood after reading the messages. Two-way ANCOVA, with self-efficacy as covariate
indicated that respondents after reading altruistic messages reported a higher intention to
donate blood than those who read egoistic messages. Moreover, it is also revealed that
within people with high interdependent self, those who read altruistic messages indicated
a higher level of intention to donate blood than those who read egoistic messages. While
findings may have implication in persuasive communication, it enriched the
understanding of persuasive messages within a Chinese context.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION------------------------------------------------------------------1
1.1 Definitions of Keywords---------------------------------------------------------------1
1.2 Blood donation in Hong Kong--------------------------------------------------------1
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW----------------------------------------------------------3
2.1 Motivations and Predictors of Blood Donation-------------------------------------3
2.2 Self-efficacy in Blood Donation------------------------------------------------------6
2.3 Self-construal and Prosocial behavior-----------------------------------------------7
2.4 Self-construals and Message Framing-----------------------------------------------8
2.5 Other Factors related to Prosocial Behavior----------------------------------------9
2.5.1 Prosocial Personality Orientation-----------------------------------------9
2.5.2 Mood and Prosocial Behavior---------------------------------------------9
2.5.3 Fatigue and Prosocial Behavior------------------------------------------10
2.6 Objective and Significance of Present Study--------------------------------------10
CHAPTER 3: HYPOTHESES--------------------------------------------------------------------12
CHAPTER 4: METHOD--------------------------------------------------------------------------16
4.1 Participants-----------------------------------------------------------------------------16
4.2 Materials--------------------------------------------------------------------------------18
4.2.1 Posters and Messages------------------------------------------------------18
4.2.2 Measures--------------------------------------------------------------------18
4.3 Procedure----------------------------------------------------------------------22
4.4 Data Analysis-----------------------------------------------------------------24
CHAPTER 5: RESULTS--------------------------------------------------------------------------26
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
5.1 Effect of framings and motives------------------------------------------------------26
5.2 Effect of motives within high and low self-efficacy group----------------------27
5.3 Effect of motives and framings within high interdependent-self group (HI)--27
5.4 Relationship between behavioral intention and TPB constructs----------------29
5.5 Relationship between behavioral intention and other factors-------------------31
CHAPTER 6: GENERAL DISCUSSION-------------------------------------------------------32
6.1 Discussion on major findings--------------------------------------------------------32
6.2 Implications----------------------------------------------------------------------------34
6.3 Limitations-----------------------------------------------------------------------------35
6.4 Future research suggestions----------------------------------------------------------36
6.5 Concluding Remarks------------------------------------------------------------------36
References-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------38
Appendix A -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------45
Appendix B------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------53
Appendix C------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------61
Appendix D------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------65
Appendix D----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Types of Persuasive Message Promoting Blood Donation in Hong Kong
1.1 Definitions of Keywords
Prosocial behavior (or helping behavior) is a general term used to cover a wide
range of actions that aims to enhance or secure the welfare of others (Batson, 1998;
Schwartz & Bilsky, 1990). Behaviors such as comforting, sharing, cooperation, helping,
volunteering, money donation and blood donation are typical types of prosocial behaviors
(Batson, 1998; Ferguson, Farrell & Lawrence, 2008; Piliavin & Callero, 1991; Weinstein
& Ryan, 2010). The motives behind these actions vary as they could be positive,
negative, or both (Eisenberg & Miller, 1987).
Altruism, on the other hand, is the subset of the prosocial behavior performed voluntarily
aiming to benefit others that is without expectation of receiving external rewards or
avoiding potential aversive stimuli or punishments (Eisenberg & Miller, 1987). It can
also be referred as a motivational concept in which one is motivated to enhance others’
welfare (MacIntyre, 1967 as cited in Batson, 1998).
Egoism, in contrast, is the motivation to benefit others based on the goal of self-benefit or
self-reward and these benefits or rewards are not obtained from others or kin through
reinforcement (Batson, Ahmad & Stocks, 2011).
1.2 Blood donation in Hong Kong
Blood donation programme in Hong Kong is voluntary and non-remunerated
(Devine, et al., 2010), which means that blood donors in Hong Kong act out of their
personal will to help the ill. It is administered solely by the public organization of Hong
Kong Red Cross Blood Transfusion Service (HKRCBTS). The HKRCBTS is responsible
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
2
for blood collection, screening, processing, distributing blood to all local hospitals, as
well as conducting donor recruitment and retention programme (Devine, et al., 2010).
From 2008 to 2012, the supply of whole blood and red blood cell products had
increased by 17.2% (Hong Kong Red Cross, 2013). This implies that the number of
donors also needs to keep increasing or else there would be no correspondent rise in
blood collection. Moreover, with aging population, between 2000 and 2010, the demand
for blood had risen by 4% (Devine, et al., 2010). It was also forecasted that the demand
for blood will increase by 25% in the coming 25 years by the time when one-fourth of
Hong Kong population is over 65 years old (Lee, Hong & Hung, 2008).
Given the need for blood will greatly increase in foreseeable future, it is important
to put more effort on recruiting young donors as it was found that young blood donors
showed significantly greater intention to donate than young non-blood donors (Hong &
Loke, 2011). Moreover, about 70% of all first-time blood donors recruited each year are
college and secondary schools students (Hong Kong Red Cross, 2013). If recruitment
programme effectively persuades those young non-blood donors to help, it would be very
beneficial to the growth of blood donor pool in the future.
In a recruitment campaign, slogans or messages related to the benefits of blood
donation are often present in promotion materials like leaflets and posters. Although
contents often emphasize the altruistic (prosocial) nature of blood donation (i.e. saving
patients), there are some slogans stress the egoistic (proself) nature of blood donation
(e.g. “Be cool Be a blood donor” used by HKBTS in university recruitment campaign)
(Hong Kong Red Cross, 2013).
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
3
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Motivations and Predictors of Blood Donation
Ferguson et al., (2008) described that while various previous studies supported the
hypothesis that blood donation is a kind of pure altruism, there are also a number of
studies showing blood donation is self-rewarding in a sense that the helping behavior
itself is personally reinforcing, related to brain areas responsible for neural reward and
sustained by egoistic motives.
In an attempt to compare the relative power of altruistic and egoistic (or
benevolent) beliefs concerning donor intentions and actual behavior, Ferguson et al.
(2008) conducted a prospective study, a cross-sectional study and an experimental study.
Results of the prospective study firstly revealed that personal benefit instead of societal
one is strongly associated with donation and predicted actual future donations; secondly,
results of the cross-sectional study also echoed with the prospective study that among
four aspects of altruism and egoism (i.e. hedonism, benevolence, kinship and altruism)
proposed by Sober and Wilson (1998), benevolence beliefs (e.g. “I’d feel good about
myself if I give blood” or “When I give blood, I find it a personally rewarding
experience”) are the only beliefs that predict donor’s intentions in the sample; finally,
results of the experimental study found that the influence of benevolence message is only
specific to blood donation and cannot generalize to other comparatively low-costs
helping behaviors like money donation, fundraising and volunteering for a telephone
helpline (Ferguson et al., 2008). These suggest that for high-cost helping behaviors like
blood donation, appealing to egoistic motives may be more important, while for the lowcost one, appealing to empathy may be more effective (Ferguson et al., 2008).
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
4
However, as all the participants in the study are Westerners and young adults (19
to 21 years old), there are chances that the influence of benevolence message may differ
in other age group and the effect of appeals to egoistic motives being more “persuasive”
than altruistic one may only be limited to single ethnicity and not observable or even
reverse in other ethnic groups.
Another study (Sojka & Sojka, 2007) examining the blood donors’ experiences
revealed that, generally Swedish blood donors’ self-reported motives are mainly
“Altruism”, partly “Social Responsibility/obligation” and partly “Influence from friends”.
For donors who donate their blood the first time, their main reasons and motives are
“Told by/accompanied a friend” and “Media report/appeal or advertisement” (Sojka &
Sojka, 2007). For regular donors, however, the main motives swift back to “Altruism”
and “Social responsibility/obligation” while egoistic motives (e.g. “Feeling better”,
“Good for health”, “Nice staff, good sandwiches”) were also reported but in a relatively
very small degree (Sojka & Sojka, 2007).
A systematic review on selected studies regarding the motivators and deterrents
for blood donation found that among the eight studies (1 in Sweden, 1 in China, 1 in
Senegal, 2 in Iran and 3 in USA), six of them reported that among regular blood donors,
altruism is the strongest motives for donation; awareness of blood shortage and positive
effects on health are the second and third most mentioned motives respectively (Luo,
2012). For first-time blood donors, the most common reason mentioned was the direct
influence from friends, relatives or peers while the second one was the news about the
need for blood in newspapers and magazines (Luo, 2012). Among the eight studies,
medical and health concerns were the most commonly mentioned deterrent among the
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
5
non-blood donors (Luo, 2012). In Senegal, Africa, for example, the high prevalence of
malaria prevents people from donating blood while the pain, fear and anxiety regarding
blood donation are also one of the main reasons for people to remain as non-blood donors
(Luo, 2012).
In the selected Chinese study (Xia, Su, Zhang, Wang & Liu, 2009) in which
participants were university students, it was found that apart from altruistic motives,
people engaged in blood donation were also motivated by humanitarian concerns while
non-blood donors in China refuse to donate is mainly due to the belief that giving out
blood is not good for their health and the fear that they would suffer from a disease
transmitted through blood donation. It was confirmed that even Chinese people were
motivated to donate, a portion of the donors still held the traditional Chinese beliefs that
by giving out blood, the life energy “Qi” would be adversely affected (Tison, Liu, Ren,
Nelson & Shuan, 2007).
Taking together, with evidence showing the most commonly reported
motives/reasons for blood donation are altruism and awareness of blood shortage, on the
face of it, it seems it contradicts with the findings by Ferguson et al. (2008) which show
that beliefs in personal benefit (egoistic motives) better predict actual future donation
than that in societal benefit (altruistic motives). However, one needs to be aware that the
motives identified were self-reported, meaning the real motives or reasons guiding people
to donate may be something else (e.g. self-image concerns in anonymous settings or
reputational concerns (Bénabou & Tirole, 2005)). Moreover, the main objectives of the
review as well as the studies on motivations of blood donation were to investigate the
motivators and deterrents but not comparing the relative power of altruistic and
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
6
benevolent beliefs in predicting actual donation. Therefore, as Ferguson et al. (2008)
cited that no previous studies have compared the two variables before, provided that
participants gave honest response, the self-rewarding property of blood donation may not
be so obvious to the donors. Finally, Batson et al. (2011) proposed that other than egoism
and altruism, there are also two more forms of prosocial motivation namely collectivism
(i.e. benefit another to benefit a group) and principlism (i.e. benefit another to uphold a
moral principle like justice). Individuals may have more than one of the four motives
conflicting or cooperating with each other to elicit prosocial behaviors (Batson et al.,
2011). So, the ultimate goal of blood donation for someone could be upholding a
principle of offering the needy blood whenever is possible.
As Ferguson et al. (2008) cited Mook’s article of In Defense of External Invalidity
(1983), since theory and results of experiments should be generalized to a larger
population, the hypothesis on benevolent beliefs predicting blood donation should apply
to other demographic groups. Further studies are needed to examine the effects of appeals
to egoistic benefits on blood donation in other groups or even society with different
cultures (i.e. individualistic or collectivistic).
2.2 Self-efficacy in Blood Donation
Applying an extended version of Ajzen’s (1991) theory of planned behavior
model (TPB), some past studies aimed to identify the major determinant of behavioral
intention of blood donation (Giles, McClenahan, Cairn, & Mallet, 2004; Masser, White,
Hyde, Terry, & Robinson, 2009; Lu, 2010; Holdershaw, Gendall, & Wright, 2011;
Veldhuizen, Ferguson, de Kort, Donders, & Atsma, 2011). In the TPB, it is assumed that
by measuring behavioral intention, which was found out to be predicted by attitude
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
7
towards the behavior, perceived behavioral control of the behavior, and subjective norm,
actual behavior could then be predicted (Ajzen, 1985). Self-efficacy measures how an
individual is confident or capable of performing a behavior (Giles et al., 2004). Although
self-efficacy was not one of the constructs in TPB, in studies applying TPB to study the
predictors of behavioral intention in blood donation, self-efficacy was included in the
model based on the suggestion that self-efficacy and perceived behavioral control are
different in a sense that individual’s evaluations of how difficult a behavior to be
performed might not necessarily be followed by individual’s perception of how the
behavior could be influenced by other external factors (Terry & O’Leary, 1995; as cited
in Giles et al., 2004).
Self-efficacy was found to be a strong predictor of behavioral intention of blood
donation in a number of studies (Giles et al., 2004; Lu, 2010; Veldhuizen et al., 2011;
Masser et al., 2008).
2.3 Self-construal and Prosocial behavior
Markus and Kitayama (1991) proposed two concepts of self-construal namely
independent and interdependent self-construals. For Western culture (e.g. USA),
individuals tend to have an independent self-construal that is separated from their social
context and therefore emphasize on independence, autonomy and individual as the unit of
analysis while for Asian culture (e.g. Japan), individuals tend to have an interdependent
self-construal that the self is contextualized as part of the society and that the others are
the integral part of the context in which self is connected (Markus & Kitayama, 1991).
For Chinese, as under the influence of Confucian idea which focuses on interrelatedness
and kindness, people are more inclined to consider the expectations of others and social
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
8
norms rather than personal wishes or attributes to act accordingly (Yang, 1981 as cited in
Markus & Kitayama, 1991).
Interdependent individuals were found to be more likely to emphasize
relationships and obligations (Oyserman, Sakamoto & Lauffer, 1998), motivated to meet
other people’s needs so as to fit in the social environment (Hashimoto & Yamagishi,
2013) but were also found to be showing a greater benevolence toward in-group members
over out-group members than independent individuals (who demonstrated an equal
dispositions toward helping in-group and out-group members) (Duclos & Barasch, 2014).
For independent individuals, it was suggested that they may participate in prosocial
behaviors more actively when they perceive themselves would benefit from the behaviors
(Bendapudi, Singh & Bendapudi, 1996).
2.4 Self-construals and Message Framing
Individual responses differently when being presented with messages of the same
content but are framed differently (Tversky & Kahneman, 1981). It was also found that
for individuals with dominant independent self, they are more sensitive to positive
information (gain framed) while individuals holding a more interdependent one are more
sensitive to negative information (loss framed) (Heine, Lehman, Markus & Kitayama,
1999). Possible reasons are that independent individuals wish to be outstanding in a
group so they would have a higher tendency to demonstrate their strengths when they
could and therefore more sensitive to positive information regarding themselves
(Holmberg, Markus, Herzog, & Franks, 1997; as cited in Ching, 2005). While the reason
for interdependent individuals being more attend to negative information can be that they
could avoid making mistakes or conflicts in the group by focusing on the negative
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
9
information (Kitayama & Karasawa, 1995; as cited in Ching, 2005). It was confirmed
that in health related communication (e.g. dental health care), with different selfconstruals, independent individuals found benefits-focused messages more persuasive in
convincing them to do oral health behavior while interdependent individuals found costsfocused messages more persuasive (Ching, 2005).
2.5 Other Factors related to Prosocial Behavior
2.5.1Prosocial Personality Orientation
It was proposed that there is a prosocial personality orientation that includes two
aspects namely, other-oriented empathy (tendency to feel empathy and responsibility for
others), and helpfulness (tendency to involve in actual prosocial behaviors) (Penner,
Fritzsche, Craiger, & Freifeld, 1995). These two aspects were found to correlate with
volunteering (Penner, 2002; Penner & Finkelstein, 1998), and organizational citizenship
behavior (Midili & Penner, 1995; as cited in Finkelstein, Penner, & Brannick, 2005).
Despite these, it was revealed that trait empathy did not correlate with willingness to
perform high-cost behaviors like blood donation (Ferguson et al., 2008). So, it is
expected that other-oriented empathy and helpfulness do not correlate with intention to
donate blood.
2.5.2 Mood and Prosocial Behavior
The relation between mood and helping behaviors was examined extensively in
the past three decades. While there were studies found that positive mood states were
positively associated with prosocial behaviors (Isen & Levin, 1972; Carlson, Charlin, &
Miller, 1988; George, 1991), negative moods were also found to be related to helping
(Carlson & Miller, 1987). In present study, it is not aimed to further examine the relation
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
10
between these two, so mood serves only as a variable that might relate to behavioral
intention to donate.
2.5.3 Fatigue and Prosocial Behavior
The relationship between fatigue and prosocial behavior is often examined
indirectly through mechanism of ego depletion and guilt (Xu, Bègue, & Bushman, 2012),
through depletion of self-regulatory energy (DeWall, Baumeister, Gailliot, & Maner,
2008), or through the relationship between glucose level and self-control (Gailliot et al.,
2007). These studies often base on the assumption that helping is an effortful behavior
that demand self-regulatory energy to resolve problems between self-interest and
prosocial motivation, and that if the energy is depleted, helping is reduced, vice versa
(DeWall et al., 2008). Various of studies (DeWall et al., 2008; Gailliot et al., 2007; Xu et
al., 2012; Joosten, Dijke, Hiel, & De Cremer, 2015) confirmed that with lower level of
self-regulatory energy (measured by glucose level or manipulation checks after Stroop
tasks), intention to help or actual money donation is lower. Although the role of fatigue in
prosocial behaviors might not be that clear, it is suggested that perceived level of fatigue
plays a role in working memory, a cognitive function that demands self-regulatory
resources (Clarkson, Hirt, Chapman, & Jia, 2011). As prosocial behavior and working
memory also demand self-regulatory energy, one could suspect that perceived fatigue
might be associated with prosocial intentions and behaviors.
2.6 Objective and Significance of Present Study
Based on the literatures above, given that Westerners and Asians hold a dominant
independent and interdependent self-construal respectively and these construals would
lead to differential helping dispositions toward others (Duclos & Barasch, 2014), it is
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
11
worth examining whether there is a difference between message that appeals to societal
interest and the one that appeals to personal interest in influencing the behavioral
intention of blood donation in the context of Hong Kong. Thus, the main objective of this
study is to answer the question of “Is appealing to altruistic motives (emphasizing
societal interest) for blood donation more persuasive than egoistic one (emphasizing
personal interest) for young people in Hong Kong?” Although based on the studies using
TPB to study blood donation, self-efficacy was found to be a strong predictor, the aim of
present study is to examine how messages with different appeals influence students’
behavioral intention to donate blood, regardless of their confidence to do so.
By looking into the effectiveness of different types of posters that appeal to
different motives, a more suitable type of message can then be tailor made to recruit new
donors in the context of Hong Kong. Meanwhile, although non-remunerated blood
donation is an atypical prosocial behavior that the costs to help are quite high (in terms of
time, pain endured during and after the process, and loss of fluid), identifying an effective
persuasive message in this area may also help evaluating and enhancing persuasion in
promotion campaigns of prosocial behaviors like money donation, volunteering, and
organ donation.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
12
CHAPTER 3: HYPOTHESES
In the present study, it is aimed to compare the relative effectiveness of messages
in influencing students’ behavioral intention to donate blood. While there could be many
types of persuasive messages being used by HKRCBTS, the contents of message used in
this study (four in total) are based on those designed by Ferguson et al., (2008), which
emphasize either the social interests (helping patients) or self-interests (feel proud of
yourself). A message could also be then framed positively or negatively (Tversky &
Kahneman, 1981). In order to compare the effect of framings as well, the content of
messages remains the same, except that one is framed to convey the benefits attained by
donation, and the other is framed to convey the benefits not attained by not donating.
Participants are randomly assigned into one of the four groups, which are based on the
type of posters they would read. Therefore, present study uses a 2 (Social Interest versus
Self-Interest) x 2 (Positive Framing versus Negative Framing) between subject design.
With this objective and research design, the following hypotheses are made.
It is hypothesized that within collectivistic societies like Hong Kong where in
general people hold a dominant interdependent self-construal, appealing to social interest
better increase the behavioral intention to donate blood.
Hypothesis 1: Chinese participants reading posters that emphasize social interest
will report higher behavioral intention to donate blood than those who read
posters that emphasize self-interest.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
13
It is also hypothesized that appealing to social interest with a loss framed message
could better increase the intention to donate than a gain framed message that appeals to
social interest.
Hypothesis 2: Participants reading poster that emphasizes social interest with
negative framing will report higher behavioral intention to donate blood than
those who read poster that emphasizes social interest with positive framing.
Given interdependent self is motivated to seek social harmony with others and avoids
being rejected in a group, within people with high interdependent self-construal score,
those who read altruistic messages will report higher behavioral intention than those who
read egoistic messages.
Hypothesis 3: For high interdependent self-construal individuals, those who read
altruistic messages will report higher behavioral intention than those who read
egoistic messages.
Behavioral intention, as a construct of theory of planned behavior, is expected to
be positively related to all constructs of TPB, except that it is expected to be negatively
related to donation anxiety.
Hypothesis 4: Behavioral intention will be positively related to these factors
(Hypothesis 4a: attitude
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
14
Hypothesis 4b: subjective norm
Hypothesis 4c: self-efficacy
Hypothesis 4d: moral norm
Hypothesis 4e: anticipated regret
Hypothesis 4f: self-identity)
Hypothesis 4g: Behavioral intention will be negatively related to donation
anxiety.
Based on the research findings on prosocial personality orientation and helping
behaviors as described in Literature Review, it is expected that two factors in the
orientation, namely Other-oriented empathy and Helpfulness do not significantly
associated with behavioral intention to donate blood.
Hypothesis 5a: Other-oriented empathy will not significantly correlate with
behavioral intention to donate blood.
Hypothesis 5b: Helpfulness will not significantly correlate with behavioral
intention to donate blood.
While other factors like positive mood and perceived level of fatigue might have
possible association with prosocial intentions and behaviors, it is expected that with
lower perceived level of fatigue, the behavioral intention to donate will be higher. Mood
is also expected to associate with intention to donate.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
15
Hypothesis 6a: Perceived level of fatigue will be negatively correlated with
intention to donate blood.
Hypothesis 6b: Mood will be associated with the intention to donate blood.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
16
CHAPTER 4: METHOD
In order to compare the relative effectiveness of types of messages in increasing
the behavioral intention of donating blood among university students in Hong Kong as
stated in the hypotheses, a cross-sectional and quasi-experimental study was conducted.
According to the number of possible types of messages (i.e. 4), participants were
randomly assigned into 4 groups and they were under the treatment of reading only one
of the four messages in their group (i.e. gain framed and egoistic/gain framed and
altruistic/ loss framed and egoistic/ loss framed and altruistic message). By comparing the
mean scores of behavioral intention between groups after they read the messages, the
hypotheses were tested.
4.1 Participants
One hundred-and-four responses were collected in the data collection process. But
since thirty-six participants failed in manipulation checks in forms of either multiple
choice questions or summarizing contents presented on the posters, two received primary
and secondary education in Malaysia (where Malays and Indians are also major ethnic
groups, and thus might be influenced by Malaysian or Indian culture that could be
different from Chinese culture) only sixty-six responses (24 males, 42 females, M age =
19.9, SD=1.3) were used in data analysis. They were all recruited using convenience
sampling. Some participated in the study for fulfilling course requirement, while some
were recruited from researcher’s and participants’ personal network. Table 1 summarizes
the demographic characteristics of participants in all four conditions.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Table 1
Demographic characteristics of participants
(N = 66) by poster groups
Positively framed
Altruistic Message (n = 18)
Variables
Gender
Age
Male
Female
n
4
14
%
22.2
77.8
Mean
19.6
Negatively framed Altruistic
Message (n = 18)
n
10
8
%
55.6
44.4
Mean
20.0
Positvely framed Egoistic
Message (n = 15)
n
6
9
%
40.0
60.0
Mean
19.9
Negatively framed Egoistic
Message (n = 15)
n
4
11
%
26.7
73.3
Mean
20.3
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
18
4.2 Materials
4.2.1 Posters and Messages. An original copy of a poster designed by the HKRCBTS
was provided by the organization, and its framework was used as a basis. There were two
messages presented in the original poster. In the upper part, as translated into English, it
says “If blood could be obtained from rocks, there is no need to ask from you.” This
message emphasizes neither social interest nor self-interest, with neural framing (i.e. it
does not state the benefits attained by blood donation, and the benefits not attained if this
behavior is not performed). It also matches with a picture below showing a man holding a
drill on a rock. Therefore, this message and the picture below are present in all four
conditions/posters.
In the lower part, there was another message saying “Show your sympathy, save people
through blood donation”. This message emphasizes social interest (saving others). So, it
was deleted in order to manipulate conditions. Based on Ferguson et al. (2008)’s message
designs, four messages were produced, including 1) By donating blood, you could save
patients in critical condition. Act now (emphasizing social interest with positive framing),
2) If you don’t want to miss the chance to save patients in critical condition, act now
(emphasizing social interest with negative framing), 3) By donating blood, you could feel
proud of yourself. Act now (emphasizing self-interest with positive framing), and 4) If
you don’t want to miss the chance to feel proud of yourself, act now (emphasizing selfinterest with negative framing).
4.2.2 Measures.
Self-construals. To assess participants’ dominant self, a Chinese version of SelfConstrual Scale (Singelis, 1994), which was translated by Kwan, Bond, & Signelis
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
19
(1997). The Chinese version has been used to access self-construal of Hong Kong people
(Kwan, Bond, & Signelis, 1997). It is a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly
disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) with 30 items. It consists of two subscales measuring
independent self-construal (α=.61), and interdependent self-construal (α=.72).
Independent subscale shows marginally acceptable reliability, while interdependent
subscale shows good reliability.
To further explore the dimensions of interdependent self, rejection avoidance
scale, and harmony seeking scale developed by Hashimoto & Yamagishi (2013) were
also included in the questionnaire. In rejection avoidance scale, three items measuring the
fear of being rejected and disliked ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly
disagree). The scale shows good reliability (α=.70). In harmony seeking scale, seven
items measuring one’s tendency to capture others’ feelings and needs, and respond to
them ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly disagree). The scale shows
acceptable reliability (α=.68).
TPB measures. To assess participants’ behavioral intention, the constructs of
extended theory of planned behavior (TPB) (attitude, subjective norm, self-efficacy,
intention, moral norm, self-identity, anticipated regret, and donation anxiety) were
assessed using the scale developed by Masser, White, Hyde, Terry & Robinson (2009).
With these 8 dimensions, it is a 7-point Likert scale with 22 items. Past several studies
investigating blood donation behavior have used the TPB model and the constructs have
accounted for between 31 and 72 percent of the variance in blood donation intentions and
from 54 to 56 percent in actual donation (Lemmens et al., 2005; Armitage & Conner,
2001; Giles & Cairns, 1995; Ampnsah-Afuwape, Myers & Newman, 2002; Giles,
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
20
McClenahan, Cairns & Mallet, 2004; all as cited in Masser et al., 2009). So, using TPB
model to assess participants’ intention and attitude towards donation would be
reasonable. The scale was firstly back-translated into Chinese, and bilingual check was
conducted. The Cronbach’s alphas are α=.84 for attitude, α=.89 for subjective norm,
α=.85 for self-efficacy, α=.92 for moral norm, α=.87 for self-identity, α=.88 for
anticipated regret, α=.95 for donation anxiety, showing good reliability.
Prosocial personality orientation. The prosocial personality orientation was
measured by Prosocial Personality Battery (PSB) (Penner et al., 1995). It is a 5-point
Likert scale ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree), with 22 items
measuring other-oriented empathy, and 8 items measuring helpfulness of participants.
Last five items that measure self-reported altruism, which is a factor of helpfulness, use
5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Very Often). The scale was firstly backtranslated into Chinese, and bilingual check was conducted. The internal consistency of
other-oriented empathy subscale (α=.63), and helpfulness subscale (α=.65) are
acceptable.
Perceived fatigue level. To access the perceived fatigue level, a Chinese version
of The Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) (Mendoza et al., 1999), translated and validated in
Chinese population by Lin et al (2006), was used in present study. It is a self-reported 9item scale with 10 scale points measuring the severity of fatigue, and the extent to which
fatigue interferes daily activities. The scale shows good reliability (α=.86).
Mood. Participants’ mood states at the time when they took the survey were
measured by a Chinese version of Brief Mood Introspection Scale (BMIS) (Mayer &
Gaschke, 1988), which was translated by Xiao (2004). The scale consists of 16 mood
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
21
adjectives which measures the overall pleasant-unpleasant mood. The scale points for
each adjective are 4 ranging from 1 (Definitely do not feel) to 4 (Definitely feel). In the
Chinese version, four more mood-adjectives were added (excited, scared, desperate, and
suffering). But in the reliability tests and data analysis, only 16 mood-adjectives, as
proposed by (Mayer & Gaschke, 1988) were used for validity concerns. The internal
consistency of pleasant mood subscale (α=.81), and unpleasant mood subscale (α=.81)
are good.
Past donation. The past donation experience of donors was examined by three
items. Ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (10 Times or More), the questions ask the overall
frequency, and the frequency in the past year of participants engaging in blood donation.
Moreover, the frequency of participants being deferred by the staff at blood collection
site was also asked.
Eligibility. Based on the basic requirements set by HKRCBTS (2013), one
question asks whether participants are eligible to donate blood. They first read the basic
requirements as provided in the questionnaire, and then select either eligible or ineligible
to donate.
Commitment. One question with 5 scale points, 1 (Not at all) to 5 (Very
Interested), provides some basic information to participants that each year there are blood
donation days held at local universities, and asks whether they are interested in them. It is
different from behavioral intention in a sense that external factors like time, and location
constraints are also involved.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
22
4.3 Procedure
The study is divided into two parts: Part 1 and Part 2. Participants were asked to
finish one online survey in each part of the study. While in Ferguson et al (2008)’s study,
participants in Study 3 only completed scale measuring empathy, previous donations,
future commitment, and willingness to donate blood, to donate money, to fund raise, and
to be helpline volunteer, the design of present study is similar to Study 3 in a sense that
participants read the messages and rate their intention to donate blood in the same survey.
The reasons it was divided into two parts are that firstly, participants might be influenced
by the items concerning mutual moral reasoning and other oriented reasoning in prosocial
personality battery (PSB), in which questions like “My decisions are usually based on
concern for the welfare of others.”, and “I choose a course of action that maximizes the
help other people receive.”, and thus be primed by words of altruistic motives, affecting
the poster manipulations. Even if the order of scales presentation is reversed, so that the
poster and TPB measures came before PSB, there might still be problems that their
agreements toward the statements concerning moral reasoning could be influenced by
their responses in moral norm subscale (e.g. “I believe I have a moral obligation to
donate blood”), and self-efficacy subscale (e.g. “I am confident that I will be able to
donate blood in the next 3 months.” of TPB.
Another reason there were two parts is that the number of items would be too
many (i.e. around 120 items). With a long questionnaire, respondent might already feel
fatigue, which would in turn affects the responses in BFI and BMIS. They might also lose
their interests, and complete the survey as soon as possible, yielding some inaccurate
responses.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
23
On the front page of two surveys, eligibility for the survey, which is receiving
primary and secondary education in Chinese-speaking regions, is stated in the study
descriptions. A research consent form is also present on the front page of the surveys.
After reading the consent form, participants were noticed that by clicking the button
“Next Page”, it would indicate their agreement and voluntary participation.
Then, in Part 1, they were first asked to fill in some demographic information
(e.g. gender, age, where they received primary and secondary education, and e-mail
address). After that, they were asked to complete the self-construal scale, followed by the
prosocial personality battery (PSB). At the end of the survey, a participation ID was
randomly generated, and was sent to participants’ e-mail mailbox. The ID was used to
match participants, and for the authentication process at the beginning of Part 2.
After seven days, participants were notified and the web link to Part 2 was sent to
the e-mail mailboxes. At the beginning of Part 2, an authentication was set up to allow
only those who completed Part 1 to have access to Part 2. Respondents were asked to
enter their participation ID in the authentication.
Afterwards, one of the four posters was randomly presented to the respondents.
The poster is followed by a translation check, in which respondents were required to
translate the manipulated messages into English. Then, they either answered three yes/no
questions concerning the message contents or they summarized the message contents in
Chinese to check whether the message has encoded. Three yes/no questions are “In the
poster, is the phrase "If you don't want to miss the chance" present?”, “In the poster, does
it mention the benefits of blood donation to the patients?”, and “In the poster, does it
mention the benefits of blood donation to yourself?” If respondents failed to translate the
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
24
corresponding message, or they chose the wrong answers in the three questions, or they
could not summarize the contents of the corresponding message, their responses were
considered as invalid.
Respondents then complete the TPB questionnaire to examine their behavioral
intention after reading the poster. TPB questionnaire was followed by scales looking at
past donation experience, eligibility, commitment, BFI, and BMIS. At the end of part 2,
respondents were asked to enter the e-mail address for sending confirmation e-mail.
4.4 Data Analysis
As aforementioned, self-efficacy is a strong predictor of behavioral intention in
blood donation. Blood donation is a costly behavior in terms of the time consumed in the
process, the tiredness felt after donation, and zero remuneration. Moreover, it is a
difficult behavior to perform as participants’ perceived ability could be influenced by
situational factors like body conditions, time constraints, reaching the collection site, and
possible deferral after on-site hemoglobin level test. Since the contents of messages in
present study only emphasize either the social benefit or self-benefit, and do not focus on
empowering the perceived confidence in performing this behavior, self-efficacy was
considered as a confounding variable and controlled in hypothesis tests.
To test the hypotheses, the mean score of the behavioral intention after reading
posters will be compared between groups using two-way analysis of covariance
(ANCOVA), with self-efficacy as a covariate. Before conducting ANCOVA, the
assumption of homogeneity of regression was tested. With 95% of confidence level, if p
value is less than .05, then Bonferroni test was conducted to determine which group’s
mean has significant difference with another group.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
25
Pearson correlation tests were conducted between behavioral intention, rejection
avoidance, harmony seeking, interdependent self-construal, independent self-construal,
other-oriented empathy, helpfulness, perceived level of fatigue, and self-reported mood
state.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
26
CHAPTER 5: RESULTS
5.1 Effect of framings and motives
A two-way ANCOVA was conducted to examine the main hypothesis of present
study. The independent variables were message framings and motives. Each variable had
two levels. For message framings, levels were gain framed, and loss framed. For motives,
levels were social interest, and self-interest. The dependent variable was behavioral
intention to donate blood. Analysis examining the assumption of homogeneity of
regression showed that the relationship between self-efficacy (covariate) and behavioral
intention (dependent variable) did not differ significantly as a function of independent
variables (framings and motives), F(3, 59)=.62, p=.608.
Effect size of the following effects is reported in regular omega squared. There
was significant main effect of motives on behavioral intention, F (1, 61) = 8.02, p < .01,
ω = .06 (See Table 2). However, there was no significant main effect of framings on
2
behavioral intention, F (1, 61) = 3.59, p = ns. There was no significant interaction effect
between framings and motives, on the behavioral intention to donate blood, F (1, 61)
= .80, p = ns.
Table 2
Analysis of Co-Variance for Behavioral Intention by Framings and Motives
Source
SS
df
MS
F
Self-Efficacy
60.44
1
60.44
42.63
Framings
5.09
1
5.09
3.59
Motives
11.37
1
11.37
8.02
Motives * Framings
1.131
1
1.131
.80
Error
86.50
61
1.42
Total
159.17
65
Note. R = .46, adj. R = .42.
2
2
p
.000
.063
.006
.375
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
27
Post hoc analyses using Bonferroni correction indicated that after reading
messages that appeal to social interest, respondents reported a significantly higher
behavioral intention (M = 4.21) than those who read messages that appeal to self-interest
(M = 3.38).
5.2 Effect of motives within high and low self-efficacy group
Since no significant main effect of framings was not found, their effect was not
further explored. According to median split, participants were divided into two groups:
people with high self-efficacy (M = 5.60, SD = .61), and people with low self-efficacy (M
= 3.24, SD = 1.04). Data were first split based on the self-efficacy grouping. Then, two
independent samples t-tests were then conducted to further explore the effect of two types
of messages within low and high self-efficacy group.
Within low self-efficacy group, there was no significant difference between
messages appealing to social interest (M = 3.29, SD = 1.38) and messages appealing to
self-interest (M = 2.86, SD = 1.41) in affecting respondents’ behavioral intention, t (33)
= .89, p = ns. However, within high self-efficacy group respondents who read messages
appealing to social interest reported a significantly higher behavioral intention (M = 5.33,
SD = 1.05) than those who read messages appealing to self-interest (M = 4.00, SD =
1.32), t (29) = 3.11, p < .01.
5.3 Effect of motives and framings within high interdependent-self group (HI)
To examine whether effects of motives and framings exist among people with
high interdependent self-construal, framings were also treated as an independent variable.
According to median split, participants were divided into two groups: people with high
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
28
interdependent self-construal (HI) (M = 3.92, SD = .25), and people with low
interdependent self-construal (LI) (M = 3.36, SD = .24).
After splitting the data based on interdependent self-construal grouping, a twoway ANCOVA was conducted to examine the effects in HI group.
Analysis examining the assumption of homogeneity of regression showed that the
relationship between self-efficacy (covariate) and behavioral intention (dependent
variable) did not differ significantly as a function of independent variables (framings and
motives), F(3, 21) = 1.78, p=.182.
Effect size of the following effects is reported in regular omega squared. There
was significant main effect of motives on behavioral intention, F (1, 23) = 17.36, p < .01,
ω = .19 (See Table 3). However, there was no significant main effect of framings on
2
behavioral intention, F (1, 23) = 2.81, p = ns. There was no significant interaction effect
between framings and motives, on the behavioral intention to donate blood, F (1, 23) =
3.73, p = ns.
Table 3
Analysis of Co-Variance for Behavioral Intention by Framings and Motives in HI
group
Source
SS
df
MS
F
p
Self-Efficacy
26.25
1
26.25
32.38
.000
Framings
2.28
1
2.28
2.81
.107
Motives
14.07
1
14.07
17.36
.000
Motives * Framings
3.02
1
3.02
3.73
.066
Error
18.64
23
.81
Total
68.12
27
Note. R2 = .73, adj. R2 = .68.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
29
Post hoc analyses using Bonferroni correction indicated that after reading
messages that appeal to social interest, respondents reported a significantly higher
behavioral intention (M = 4.47) than those who read messages that appeal to self-interest
(M = 2.91).
5.4 Relationship between behavioral intention and TPB constructs
As shown in Table 4, behavioral intention was found to positively related to
attitude (r = .30, p < .05), subjective norm (r = .34, p < .01), self-efficacy (r = .59, p
< .01), moral norm (r = .39, p < .01), anticipated regret (r = .46, p < .01), and self-identity
(r = .63, p < .01). Yet, it did not correlate with donation anxiety (r = .14, p = ns.).
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Table 4
Correlation matrix of Behavioral intention and TPB constructs (N=66)
Variables
1
2
3
4
1.
Behavioral Intention
—
2.
Attitude
.30*
—
3.
Subjective Norm
.34**
.44**
—
4.
Self-efficacy
.59**
.36**
.48**
—
5.
Moral Norm
.39**
.71**
.39**
.30**
6.
Anticipated Regret
.46**
.32**
.19
.13
7.
Self-identity
.63**
.51**
.41**
.47**
8.
Donation Anxiety
.14
-.08
.10
-.02
Note. *p < .05. **p < .01
30
5
6
7
8
—
.46**
.53**
.08
—
.53**
.61**
—
.17
—
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
31
5.5 Relationship between behavioral intention and other factors
To explore the relationship between behavioral intention and dispositional traits, Pearson correlations between intention, otheroriented empathy, helpfulness, harmony seeking, rejection avoidance, interdependent self-construal, and independent self-construal
were conducted (See Table 5). Behavioral intention to donate blood did not correlate with any of these factors. Other-oriented
empathy (r = .30, p = ns.), and helpfulness (r = .06, p = ns.) were not found to be significantly correlated with intention to donate
blood as well. However, other-oriented empathy was found to be positively related to tendency to seek harmony (r = .38, p < .01), and
interdependent self-construal (r = .39, p <.01). Perceived fatigue level was negatively related to mood state (r = -.45, p < .01).
Table 5
Correlation matrix of Behavioral intention and Other factors
(N=66)
Variables
1
2
1.
Behavioral Intention
—
2.
Other-Oriented Empathy
.30
—
3.
Helpfulness
.06
.12
4.
Rejection Avoidance
-.11
.09
5.
Harmony Seeking
.02
.38**
6.
Interdependent Self-construal
.09
.39**
7.
Independent Self-construal
.09
-.01
8.
Mood State
.18
.12
9.
Perceived Fatigue Level
.06
-.19
Note. *p < .05. **p < .01
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
—
-.06
-.01
-.13
.09
.04
-.04
—
.49**
.35**
.15
-.05
-.16
—
.68**
.17
.17
-.13
—
.27*
.31*
-.19
—
.15
.12
—
- .45**
—
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
32
CHAPTER 6: GENERAL DISCUSSION
6.1 Discussion on major findings
The main objective of present study is to compare the effectiveness of four types
of messages that appeal either to social interest or to self-interest, with positive framing
or negative framing, in influencing participants’ behavioral intention to donate blood,
based on Ferguson et al (2008)’s study design.
The results of this study indicated that (1) Chinese students who read messages
that appeal to social interest reported a higher behavioral intention, than those who read
messages that appeal to self-interest, when the level of self-efficacy is controlled.; (2)
Message framings do not have a significant effect on participants’ reported level of
behavioral intention when the level of self-efficacy is controlled.; (3) For students with
high level of self-efficacy, those who read messages that emphasize on social interest
reported a higher level of behavioral intention than those who read messages that focus
on personal interest.; (4) For students with low level of self-efficacy, the reported levels
of behavioral intention do not differ significantly between those who read messages that
focus on social interest, and those who read messages emphasizing self-interest.; (5) For
high HI individuals, people who read altruistic messages reported higher behavioral
intention than those who read egoistic messages, when self-efficacy is controlled.
Hypothesis 1 compares the effect of message contents on behavioral intention in a
Chinese context. Result confirms this hypothesis that after reading altruistic messages,
the reported behavioral intention is higher than those who read egoistic messages. This
result apparently disagrees with the studies by Ferguson et al (2008), which found that
appealing to self-interest better increase the willingness to donate blood. However, the
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
33
effect of egoistic message being more effective than altruistic message in terms of
willingness to donate blood was only observed among committed donors, but not among
non-committed donors (Commitment as indicated by the number of times participants
would be willing to donate blood in the subsequent year stated by participants before
reading the messages) (Ferguson et al., 2008). Yet, in present study, commitment to
donate blood was measured after the presentation of messages. Thus, direct comparison
between Ferguson et al (2008)’s study and present study could not be conducted. Despite
this, the result of present study still demonstrates that Chinese students who read altruistic
messages reported higher intention than those who read egoistic messages.
While hypothesis 2 states that those who read negatively framed altruistic
message would report higher intention than those who read positively framed altruistic
message, result showed that there was no significant difference between these two groups
of participants, and between participants in HI group. This finding matches with the
result in Ferguson et al (2008)’s study that no significant main effect of framings was
also observed. A limitation in methodology will be discussed.
Hypothesis 3 is confirmed by the result that HI respondents who read altruistic
messages reported higher behavioral intention than those who read egoistic messages.
Hypothesis 4a, 4b, 4c, 4d, 4e, and 4f are confirmed by the results showing
significant positive correlations between behavioral intention, attitude, subjective norm,
self-efficacy, moral norm, self-identity, and anticipated regret. Yet, hypothesis 4g is not
supported. Possible reason is that severe body reactions like nausea, and dizziness are not
captured by the donation anxiety subscale, and these reactions are important in assessing
donation anxiety as suggested by Meade, France, & Peterson (1996).
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
34
Hypothesis 5 relates two factors of prosocial personality orientation to behavioral
intention to donate blood. As expected, it is confirmed that other-oriented empathy and
helpfulness do not correlate with intention significantly.
Hypothesis 6 relates perceived fatigue level and self-reported mood state to
intention. While mood state was found to be negatively associated with perceived fatigue
level, these two factors did not significantly correlate with intention to donate. Possible
reason is that some other strong predictors of behavioral intention (e.g. self-efficacy, and
self-identity) are more important in the context of blood donation, which is a costly and
risky behavior.
6.2 Implications
Using similar message designs by Ferguson et al (2008), the findings of present
study demonstrated that within a Chinese context, messages appealing to altruistic
motives to donate blood, comparing with those appealing to egoistic motives, better
influences participants’ behavioral intention to donate blood. It could be suggested that
other persuasive communication that involves prosocial behaviors or altruistic behaviors
(for the benefits of others without the expectation of rewards) could apply this strategy
within the Chinese context.
Apart from prosocial behavior, the strategy could also be extended to healthrelated communication that involves persuasion like promoting exercises or smoking
intervention or marketing strategy within Chinese context.
Moreover, while some researches have been done to examine the effect of
reference point (by referring to self-benefits or benefits to self and to others in
persuasion), the focuses were on pro-environmental behaviors (Loroz, 2007), interaction
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
35
with motivation (Meyers-Levy, & Peracchio, 1996), and interaction with message
argument (Burnkrant, & Unnava, 1995). Few examine the role of self-referencing (i.e.
appealing to self-interest), and other-referencing (i.e. appealing to social interest), in the
context of altruistic behaviors and Chinese culture. The findings of present study could
provide more evidence on the effect of reference point in persuasive communication.
Last but not least, blood donation recruitment campaign focusing on young donor
recruitment could present altruistic messages to students with high interdependent selfconstrual, which could be measured in a survey, to enhance the recruitment effectiveness.
Meanwhile, as self-efficacy is consistently shown as a strong predictor (Giles et al., 2004;
Lu, 2010; Veldhuizen et al., 2011; Masser et al., 2008), messages that could empower
audiences’ confidence to donate could combine with altruistic messages to further
enhance the persuasiveness.
6.3 Limitations
First of all, due to small sample size, the findings might have limited
representativeness. Secondly, since the participants are college students, the results might
not be generalizable. Third, the gender ratio is rather unbalanced, male might be
underrepresented. Fourth, the reason that no effect of framings was found in present
study could be that in the manipulation check requiring participants to summarize
message presented on the posters, no instruction was given to require participants to
include message valence as well in their responses. This might lead to unsuccessful
encoding of message valence, resulting in insignificant difference in behavioral intention.
Finally, although the dependent variable of present study, the behavioral intention
to make future donation is measured by a single-item, the item is based on Ferguson et al
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
36
(2008)’s practice in study 2 in which only the item “I intend to give blood in the near
future” was used to measure intention.
6.4 Future research suggestions
It is suggested that future study which examines the effect of persuasive messages
could employ a longitudinal study to compare whether there is a difference in behavioral
intention before reading messages, and after reading the messages. This could further
minimize the effect of confounding variables. Future research may also recruit adults in
middle age to examine whether there is age difference in behavioral intention after
reading persuasive messages promoting blood donation or other prosocial behaviors like
volunteering. Moreover, a follow-up study could be conducted to investigate whether
behavioral intention predicts actual behavior.
With self-efficacy being a strong predictor, future study could also use a design of
2 (message empowering self-efficacy versus message not mentioning self-efficacy) x 2
(egoistic message versus altruistic message) to examine message that could increase selfefficacy to donate blood.
Cross-cultural studies may also be carried out to see if the effect of persuasive
message in promoting blood donation or prosocial behaviors in general are universal
across cultures.
6.5 Concluding Remarks
The present study has demonstrated some findings concerning identifying a type
of persuasive message based on Ferguson et al. (2008)’s study, although it has several
limitations. Within the domains of prosocial behavior and Chinese culture, the findings of
present study might help understanding the motives of helping others in collectivistic
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
37
culture. Future study is suggested to explore the influence of message empowering selfefficacy.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
38
References
Ajzen, I. (1985) From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behaviour. In Kuhl, J.
and Beckman, J. (eds), Action Control: From Cognition to Behaviour. Springer,
Heidelberg.
Ajzen, I. (1991) The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human
Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.
Batson, C. Daniel. (1998). Altruism and prosocial behavior. In The handbook of social
psychology. 2 vols. 4th ed. Edited by Daniel T. Gilbert, Susan T. Fiske, and
Gardner Lindzey, 282–316. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Batson, C. Daniel, Nadia Ahmad, and E. L. Stocks. (2011). Four forms of prosocial
motivation: Egoism, altruism, collectivism, and principlism. In Social motivation.
Edited by David Dunning, 103–126. Frontiers of Social Psychology. New York:
Psychology Press.
Bénabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2006). Incentives and prosocial behavior. The American
Economic Review, 96(5), 1652-1678.
Bendapudi, N., Singh, S. N., & Bendapudi, V. (1996). Enhancing helping behavior: An
integrative framework for promotion planning. Journal of Marketing, 60(3), 33.
Burnkrant, R. E., & Unnava, H. R. (1995). Effects of Self-Referencing on Persuasion.
Journal Of Consumer Research, 22(1), 17-26.
Carlson, M., Charlin, V., & Miller, N. (1988). Positive mood and helping behavior: A test
of six hypotheses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(2), 211-229
Carlson, M., & Miller, N. (1987). Explanation of the relation between negative mood and
helping. Psychological Bulletin, 102(1), 91.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
39
Ching, H.H. (2005). One Size Doesn’t Fit All: Getting the Message Across by Tailoring
its Framing to Individuals’ Self-Construal in Oral Health Care Communications
(Master’s Thesis, The Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shatin, Hong Kong)).
Clarkson, J., Hirt, E., Chapman, D., & Jia, L. (2011). The impact of illusory fatigue on
executive control: Do perceptions of depletion impair working memory capacity?
Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2(3), 231-238.
Devine D. V., Sher G. D., Reesink H. W., Panzer S., Hetzel P. A., Wong J. K., Horvath
M., Leitner G. C., Schennach H., Nussbaumer W., Genoe K., Cioffi J. M.,
Givisiez F. N., Rogerson M., Howe D., Delage G., Sarappa C. (2010 Apr).
Inventory management. Vox Sanguinis, 98(3 Pt 1), 295-363.
DeWall, C. N., Baumeister, R. F., Gailliot, M. T., & Maner, J. K. (2008). Depletion
makes the heart grow less helpful: Helping as a function of self-regulatory energy
and genetic relatedness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(12),
1653-1662.
Duclos, R., & Barasch, A. (2014). Prosocial Behavior in Intergroup Relations: How
Donor Self-Construal and Recipient Group-Membership Shape
Generosity. Journal Of Consumer Research, 41(1), 93-108.
Eisenberg, N., & Miller, P.A. (1987). The relation of empathy to prosocial and related
behaviors. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 91–119.
Ferguson, E., Farrell, K., & Lawrence, C. (2008). Blood donation is an act of
benevolence rather than altruism. Health Psychology, 27(3), 327-336.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
40
Finkelstein, M. A.; Penner, L. A.; Brannick, M. T. (2005). Motive, role identity, and
prosocial personality as predictors of volunteer activity. Social Behavior &
Personality: An International Journal, 33(4), 403-418.
Gailliot, M. T., Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Maner, J. K., Plant, E. A., Tice, D. M.
Schmeichel, B. J. (2007). Self-control relies on glucose as a limited energy
source: Willpower is more than a metaphor. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 92(2), 325-336.
George, J. M. (1991). State or trait: Effects of positive mood on prosocial behaviors at
work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(2), 299.
Giles, M., McClenahan, C., Cairns, E., & Mallet, J. (2004). An application of the theory
of planned behaviour to blood donation: The importance of self-efficacy. Health
Education Research, 19(4), 380-391.
Graziano W. G., Eisenberg N. (1997). Agreeableness: a dimension of personality. In
Handbook of Personality Psychology, ed. R Hogan, R Johnson, S Briggs, pp.
795–824. San Diego, CA: Academic
Hashimoto, H., & Yamagishi, T. (2013). Two faces of interdependence: Harmony
seeking and rejection avoidance. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 16(2), 142151.
Heine, S. J., Lehman, D. R., Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1999). Is there a universal
need for positive self-regard? Psychological Review, 106(4), 766-794.
Holdershaw, J., Gendall, P., & Wright, M. (2011). Predicting blood donation behaviour:
Further application of the theory of planned behaviour. Journal of Social
Marketing, 1(2), 120-132.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
41
Hong, J., & Loke, A. (2011). Hong Kong young people's blood donation behavior. Asian
Journal of Transfusion Science, 5(1), 49-52.
Hong Kong Red Cross. (2013, Spring Issue 68). Start Saving Lives - Review of Blood
Demand. Retrieved March 22, 2015, from
http://www.redcross.org.hk/sec_comm_files/Red Cross News/Issue 68/P8.pdf
Isen, A. M., & Levin, P. F. (1972). Effect of feeling good on helping: Cookies and
kindness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 21(3), 384-388.
Joosten, A., Dijke, M. v., Hiel, A. V., & Cremer, D. D. (2015). Out of control!? how loss
of self-control influences prosocial behavior: The role of power and moral values:
E0126377. PLoS One, 10(5)
Kwan, V. S. Y., Bond, M. H., & Singelis, T. M. (1997). Pancultural explanations for life
satisfaction: Adding relationship harmony to self-esteem. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 73, 1038-1051.
Lee, C. K., Hong, J., & Hung, A. T. F. (2008). An update of blood donor recruitment and
retention in Hong Kong. Asian Journal of Transfusion Science, 2(2), 47–50
Lin, C., Chang, A., Chen, M., Cleeland, C., Mendoza, T., & Wang, X. (2006). Validation
of the taiwanese version of the brief fatigue inventory. Journal of Pain and
Symptom Management, 32(1), 52-59.
Loroz, P. S. (2007). The interaction of message frames and reference points in prosocial
persuasive appeals. Psychology and Marketing, 24(11), 1001-1023.
Lu, J., (2010). "Predicting Blood Donations Among College Students As A Strategy To
Design Voluntary Blood Donation Campaigns In China" (Doctoral dissertation).
Retrieved from http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/etd/1018
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
42
Luo, R., (2012). Motivators and deterrents for blood donation: a systematic
review (Master's Thesis, The University of Hong Kong (Pokfulam, Hong Kong)).
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition,
emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.
Masser, B. M., White, K. M., Hyde, M. K., Terry, D. J., & Robinson, N. G. (2009).
Predicting blood donation intentions and behavior among Australian blood
donors: testing an extended theory of planned behavior model. Transfusion, 49(2),
320-329.
Mayer, J. D., & Gaschke, Y. N. (1988). The experience and meta-experience of mood.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 102-111.
Meade, M., France, C., & Peterson, L. (1996). Predicting vasovagal reactions in
volunteer blood donors. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 40(5), 495-501.
Mendoza, T., Wang, X., Cleeland, C., Morrissey, H., Johnson, B., Wendt, J., & Huber, S.
(1999). The rapid assessment of fatigue severity in cancer patients - use of the
brief fatigue inventory. Cancer, 85(5), 1186-1196.
Meyers-Levy, J., & Peracchio, L. A. (1996). Moderators of the Impact of Self-Reference
on Persuasion. Journal Of Consumer Research, 22(4), 408-423.
Oyserman, D., Sakamoto, I., & Lauffer, A. (1998). Cultural accommodation: Hybridity
and the framing of social obligation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 74(6), 1606-1618.
Penner, L. A. (2002). Dispositional and organizational influences on sustained
volunteerism: An interactionist perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 447-467.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
43
Penner, L. A., & Finkelstein, M. A. (1998). Dispositional and structural determinants of
volunteerism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 525-537.
Piliavin, J. A., & Callero, P. L. (1991). Giving blood: The development of an altruistic
identity. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W. (1990). Toward a theory of the universal content and
structure of values: Extensions and cross-cultural replications. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 58(5), 878.
Singelis, T. M. (1994). The Measurement of Independent and Interdependent SelfConstruals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(5), 580–591.
Sojka, B. N., & Sojka, P. (2008). The blood donation experience: self-reported motives
and obstacles for donating blood. Vox Sanguinis, 94(1), 56-63.
Tison, G. H., Liu, C., Ren, F., Nelson, K., & Shan, H. (2007). Influences of general and
traditional Chinese beliefs on the decision to donate blood among employerorganized and volunteer donors in Beijing, China. Transfusion, 47(10), 18711879.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The Framing of decisions and the psychology of
choice. Science, 211(4481), 453–458.
Veldhuizen, I., Ferguson, E., de Kort, W., Donders, R., & Atsma, F. (2011). Exploring
the dynamics of the theory of planned behavior in the context of blood donation:
does donation experience make a difference?. Transfusion, 51(11), 2425-2437.
Weinstein, N., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). When helping helps: Autonomous motivation for
prosocial behavior and its influence on well-being for the helper and
recipient. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(2), 222-244.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
44
Xia, M. Y., Su, Y. P., Zhang, T., Wang, T. & Liu, W. (2009). An Investigation and
Analysis of Non-remunerated Blood Donation Awareness and behavior among
University Students. Journal of DaLi University, 10, 50-53
Xiao, H. F. (2004). The influence of tragic news on viewer’s mood. (Unpublished
master’s thesis). National Chengchi University, Taiwan
(Chinese: 蕭慧芬. (2004). 悲劇性新聞畫面對觀眾心理衝擊程度之初探. 國立
政治大學傳播學院碩士學位論文)
Xu, H., Begue, L., & Bushman, B. (2012). Too fatigued to care: Ego depletion, guilt, and
prosocial behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(5), 11831186.
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Appendix A
Part 1 Questionnaire in English
Instructions and Research Participation Form
45
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Demographic Information
46
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Singelis self-construal scale
47
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
48
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Rejection Avoidance and Harmony Seeking Scales
49
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Prosocial Personality Battery
50
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
51
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
52
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Appendix B
Part 1 Questionnaire in Chinese
Instructions and Research Participation Form
53
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Demographic Information
54
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Singelis self-construal scale
55
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
56
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Rejection Avoidance and Harmony Seeking Scales
57
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Prosocial personality Battery
58
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
59
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Participation ID
60
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Appendix C
Posters used in present study
Gain framed, altruistic messages
61
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Loss framed, altruistic messages
62
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Gain framed, egoistic messages
63
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Loss framed, egoistic messages
64
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Appendix D
A Copy of Part 2 Questionnaire in English
Instructions and Research Participation Consent Form
65
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Authentication
66
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
One of the four Posters
67
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
68
Translation check
Manipulation Checks (Participants either answer 3 MCQ or summarize the message
presented)
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
69
Manipulation Checks (Participants either answer 3 MCQ or summarize the message
presented)
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Theory of planned behavior questionnaire
70
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
71
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Past donation, eligibility, and commitment
72
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Brief Mood Introspection Scale
73
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Brief Fatigue Inventory
Copyright 1999
The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center All rights reserved.
74
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
E-mail
75
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Appendix E
A Copy of Part 2 Questionnaire in Chinese
Instructions and Research Participation Form
76
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Authentication
77
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
One of the four posters
78
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Translation Check
Manipulation Checks (Participants either answer 3 MCQ or summarize the
message presented)
79
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
80
Manipulation Checks (Participants either answer 3 MCQ or summarize the message
presented
Theory of planned behavior measures
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
81
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Past donation, eligibility, and commitment
82
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Brief Mood Introspection Scale
83
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
Brief Fatigue Inventory
Copyright 1999
The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center All rights reserved.
84
Running head: PERSUASIVE MESSAGES AND BLOOD DONATION
E-mail
85