IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/irpnmk/v21y2024i3d10.1007_s12208-024-00397-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is roundup donation request always preferred: a case for checkout charity

Author

Listed:
  • Neel Das

    (Appalachian State University)

  • Lubna Nafees

    (Appalachian State University)

  • Unal O. Boya

    (Appalachian State University)

  • Anindita Das

    (Appalachian State University)

Abstract

This research attempts to build a basic framework for understanding a fast-growing but little-investigated prosocial solicitation, checkout charity, by looking at round-up or a flat amount donate request, a priori liking of the charity, checkout mode (self-service or cashier), and presence of others (friends or strangers). Three scenario-based lab experiments were conducted. A clear preference for roundup donation request exists only when the scenario in the experiment mentioned that the charity was not particularly liked and checkout was done by the cashier (versus a self-checkout machine). Investigating the cashier condition further, the preference for a roundup request is only exhibited when the scenario mentioned that the charity was not particularly liked and strangers (versus friends) were present during the solicitation.

Suggested Citation

  • Neel Das & Lubna Nafees & Unal O. Boya & Anindita Das, 2024. "Is roundup donation request always preferred: a case for checkout charity," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 21(3), pages 645-658, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:irpnmk:v:21:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s12208-024-00397-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s12208-024-00397-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12208-024-00397-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12208-024-00397-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:irpnmk:v:21:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s12208-024-00397-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.