In the crowded and emotionally charged world of charity, one enduring question looms large: which emotions truly move people to donate? And at what cost? In their recent article in the Italian Journal of Marketing, Sofia Pansoni and Giacomo Gistri examine emotional appeals in charity advertising through a rigorous, systematic literature review. Drawing on 79 peer-reviewed studies published between 2005 and 2023, the authors map the complex, sometimes contradictory landscape of emotional appeals in charity advertising.

According to prior studies, the authors distinguish between single, comparative, and mixed emotions, uncovering how different emotional configurations (from guilt and empathy to pride and hope) interact with message framing, donor psychology, and campaign context.

The central finding is that there is no one-size-fits-all formula. Emotions such as sadness and guilt can indeed prompt donations, especially when they evoke moral discomfort or a sense of personal responsibility. However, these emotional appeals in charity advertising can also lead to donor fatigue, emotional distancing, or even an ethical backlash when not handled properly. By contrast, positive emotions such as hope, pride, or gratitude often foster favorable attitudes toward the charity. They are especially effective at building long-term engagement when donors perceive their contributions as meaningful. Interestingly, the most persuasive campaigns often combine opposing emotions (e.g., sadness and hope) to create a richer, more compelling narrative that balances urgency with impact.

The review also highlights the importance of aligning emotional tone with the charity’s moral mission, also considering the role of the audience: donor traits such as self-construal (independent vs. interdependent), regulatory focus (promotion vs. prevention), and social proximity to beneficiaries significantly influence how emotional appeals in charity advertising are received and acted upon.

In this interview, the authors reflect on their key findings and provide practical recommendations for incorporating emotional appeals in charity advertising. From message tailoring to ethical storytelling, the conversation sheds light on how marketers can engage donors without overwhelming or alienating them..

---

---

Your review maps the emotional appeals in charity advertising. Based on your findings, which emotions are most effective in prompting donations, and under what conditions, according to the literature?

Emotions such as guilt, empathy, and sadness are especially effective in triggering donations when they create a sense of moral obligation or emotional discomfort that people seek to alleviate by making a donation. Anger can also drive action, particularly when it is linked to the pursuit of justice.

Hope and pride, on the other hand, foster positive attitudes toward the organization and are most effective when donors believe their contribution will lead to meaningful change. Interestingly, mixed emotional appeals—such as combining sadness with hope or dignity—are often the most powerful. They stimulate deeper cognitive and emotional engagement by portraying both the urgency of the need and the potential impact of giving.

The effectiveness of emotional appeals in charity advertising varies based on message framing, donor traits (e.g., empathy, identity), and alignment with the charity’s moral mission. Emotional appeals in charity advertising are most persuasive when these factors are carefully considered.

---

You highlight that the context and recipient characteristics shape the effectiveness of emotional appeals in charity advertising. In your opinion, although your study is a literature review, what should marketers consider when targeting different donor segments?

Marketers should carefully tailor emotional appeals in charity advertising to the psychological profiles, social values, and levels of involvement of different donor segments. For example, individuals with an interdependent self-construal (who value connection and social responsibility) are more responsive to sadness and empathy-based appeals. In contrast, those with a more independent self-construal respond better to positive emotions, such as pride or happiness.

Regulatory focus also matters: prevention-focused donors tend to react more to appeals that highlight needs or risks, while promotion-focused donors prefer hopeful, impact-oriented messages.

Additionally, perceived social closeness to beneficiaries increases the effectiveness of empathy and reduces the risk of emotional avoidance (e.g., disgust). Significantly, the moral alignment between the emotional tone and the charity’s mission (such as using compassion for humanitarian causes or gratitude for justice-oriented campaigns) can significantly improve persuasion. Segment-specific strategies should therefore combine emotional fit, message framing, and moral congruency to maximize engagement and donations.

---

What are the potential ethical risks of using negative emotions like guilt, fear, or sadness in charity campaigns? And how can organizations manage them responsibly, according to the literature?

Using negative emotions such as guilt, fear, or sadness can be influential in driving donations, but they carry ethical risks if not handled with care.

These emotional appeals in charity advertising may generate emotional fatigue, rejection, or feelings of helplessness in donors. Additionally, overexposing suffering may reinforce harmful stereotypes, reduce empathy due to social stigma, or lead to “poverty porn” (the use of shocking, undignified images that strip beneficiaries of agency and dignity).

To manage these risks, organizations should adopt ethical storytelling principles:

• Respect the dignity of beneficiaries
• Avoid portraying them only as passive victims
• Show resilience, progress, and local success stories
• Involve people directly in telling their stories, with informed consent

Emotional appeals in charity advertising are a powerful storytelling tool. Still, they must be used with responsibility, balance, and respect, to both move audiences and honor the humanity of those portrayed.

---

Based on your review, what practical recommendations would you give to organizations planning a multi-platform fundraising campaign that aims to engage without overwhelming or alienating potential donors emotionally?

Start by matching emotional appeals in charity advertising to your campaign’s goal: leverage guilt or compassion for urgent appeals, and hope or pride when showcasing positive outcomes. For older audiences or those with a strong group identity, nostalgic messages can be effective, provided they are culturally relevant.

To avoid emotional fatigue, consider using mixed emotional appeals in charity advertising (e.g., sadness + hope) that balance urgency with a sense of impact. On social media, happy facial expressions with eye contact can foster connection, while sad faces may be more effective for highlighting need, especially for distant or unfamiliar causes.

Adapt the content to each platform: use short videos, testimonials, or interactive formats to drive engagement. Most importantly, reduce social distance by sharing authentic, relatable stories and visuals, and build long-term loyalty by consistently showing donors the impact of their support and expressing gratitude.

---

Copertina: Image by ladybug1093 from Pixabay