The Head v. Heart discussion broke out again recently at Whitewater: do you focus an appeal on the rationality of staggering numbers and mass need, or focus on the emotions inherent in helping one person?

In the book Made to Stick, Why some Ideas Survive and Others Die, Chip and Dan Heath share an interesting experiment at Carnegie Mellon University that explored the Head v. Heart question.

The following is a mashup of ideas from a research project, a book, and 2 web sites.

In Volunteer Power News - Number 58, The Power of Emotions, Thomas W. McKee summarizes the experiment:

The researchers offered five dollars to participants who had just completed a survey (the survey was insignificant). Upon completion of the survey each participant received along with their five dollars an envelope with a request for a charity-request letter giving them an opportunity to donate some of their five dollars to Save the Children.

The researchers tested two versions of the request letter. As you read these, ask, "Which one would you respond to?" and then ask, "Which one did the people in the test respond to?"

Version One:
• Food shortages in Malawi are affecting more than 3 million children.
• In Zambia, severe rainfall deficits have resulted in a 42 percent drop in maize production from 2000.
• As a result, an estimated 3 million Zambians face hunger.
• Four million Angolans-one third of the population-have been forced to flee their homes.
• More than 11 million people in Ethiopia need immediate food assistance.

Version Two:
• Any money you donate will go to Rokia, a seven-year-old girl from Mali, Africa.
• Rokia is desperately poor and faces the threat of severe hunger or even starvation.
• Her life will be changed for the better as a result of your financial gift.
• With your support, and the support of other caring sponsors, Save the Children will work with Rokia's family and other members of the community to help feed and educate her and provide basic medical care and hygiene education.

The researchers gave the participants the two different letters, then left them alone to make a decision how much money, if any, to put back into the envelope. On average those who read the statistics contributed $1.14. But those who read the story of Rokia, gave $2.38-more than twice as much.

Katya writes:

Now it gets really interesting: the researchers decided to give a third group of people BOTH sets of information. People who got both letters gave $1.43.

The lesson?

From Chip and Dan:

Statistics shift people into a more analytical frame of mind. When people think analytically, they are less likely to think emotionally.

Or as Thomas puts it:

Just because people believe there is a problem does not mean that people care enough to act.

Katya continues:

Researchers proved this argument by asking people analytical questions like math problems before getting the Rokia letter, while other people were asked to free-associate after hearing the word, “baby.” The people who did math before getting the letter gave $1.26 while the people who thought about babies gave $2.34.

Chip and Dan Heath say:

"It's not about pushing people's emotional buttons, like some kind of movie tearjerker. Rather, the goal of making messages emotional' is to make people care. Feelings inspire people to act." The message must move from the heart to the head.

I love this graph, from later in the series of experiments. Feelings correlate directly with amounts donated. And the detrimental impact of numbers begins at 2!

For further reading, I recommend "If I look at the mass I will never act" - Psychic numbing and genocide, by Paul Slovic. A PDF is also available.

If you want to know more about the Rokia study, try this Google search for "Rokia, a 7 year-old girl from Mali"

Brad Bell