GiverBlikk
Logg inn

GiverBlikk

Veiledning for bedre giverbrev

Her står teorien bak vurderingen. Hvordan en giver leser et brev, hva brevet må få sagt, og hvordan du skriver det slik at det blir lest.

Se hva en skumleser trolig får med seg

Last opp giverbrevet, så viser GiverBlikk hvor blikket trolig stopper, hva som mangler og det viktigste grepet for å løfte brevet. Første vurdering er gratis.

Last opp brevet

Forskning og fagstoff

Forskningen, bøkene og fagsidene bak veiledningen, samlet på ett sted. Hver artikkel viser sine egne.

Forskning

  • Duggan, G. B., & Payne, S. J. (2009). Text skimming: The process and effectiveness of foraging through text under time pressure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15(3), 228–242. doi.org/10.1037/a0016995
  • Pieters, R., & Wedel, M. (2004). Attention capture and transfer in advertising: Brand, pictorial, and text-size effects. Journal of Marketing, 68(2), 36–50. doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.68.2.36.27794
  • Cryder, C. E., Loewenstein, G., & Scheines, R. (2013). The donor is in the details. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 120(1), 15–23. doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.08.002
  • Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2011). A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(5), 924–973. doi.org/10.1177/0899764010380927
  • Small, D. A., Loewenstein, G., & Slovic, P. (2007). Sympathy and callousness: The impact of deliberative thought on donations to identifiable and statistical victims. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102(2), 143–153. doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.01.005
  • Kogut, T., & Ritov, I. (2005). The “identified victim” effect: An identified group, or just a single individual? Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 18(3), 157–167. doi.org/10.1002/bdm.492
  • Lee, S., & Feeley, T. H. (2016). The identifiable victim effect: A meta-analytic review. Social Influence, 11(3), 199–215. doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2016.1216891
  • Merchant, A., Ford, J. B., & Sargeant, A. (2010). Charitable organizations' storytelling influence on donors' emotions and intentions. Journal of Business Research, 63(7), 754–762. doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.05.013
  • Small, D. A., & Verrochi, N. M. (2009). The face of need: Facial emotion expression on charity advertisements. Journal of Marketing Research, 46(6), 777–787. doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.46.6.777
  • Genevsky, A., Västfjäll, D., Slovic, P., & Knutson, B. (2013). Neural underpinnings of the identifiable victim effect: Affect shifts preferences for giving. The Journal of Neuroscience, 33(43), 17188–17196. doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2348-13.2013
  • Hutton, S. B., & Nolte, S. (2011). The effect of gaze cues on attention to print advertisements. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(6), 887–892. doi.org/10.1002/acp.1763
  • Arango, L., Singaraju, S. P., & Niininen, O. (2023). Consumer responses to AI-generated charitable giving ads. Journal of Advertising, 52(4), 486–503. doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2023.2183285
  • Andreoni, J. (1990). Impure altruism and donations to public goods: A theory of warm-glow giving. The Economic Journal, 100(401), 464–477. doi.org/10.2307/2234133
  • Dunn, E. W., Aknin, L. B., & Norton, M. I. (2008). Spending money on others promotes happiness. Science, 319(5870), 1687–1688. doi.org/10.1126/science.1150952
  • Aaker, J. L., & Akutsu, S. (2009). Why do people give? The role of identity in giving. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(3), 267–270. doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2009.05.010
  • Doshi, A. R., & Hauser, O. P. (2024). Generative AI enhances individual creativity but reduces the collective diversity of novel content. Science Advances, 10(28), Article eadn5290. doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adn5290
  • Ji, Z., Lee, N., Frieske, R., Yu, T., Su, D., Xu, Y., Ishii, E., Bang, Y. J., Madotto, A., & Fung, P. (2023). Survey of hallucination in natural language generation. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(12), 1–38. doi.org/10.1145/3571730
  • De Bruyn, A., & Prokopec, S. (2013). Opening a donor's wallet: The influence of appeal scales on likelihood and magnitude of donation. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(4), 496–502. doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2013.03.004
  • Weyant, J. M., & Smith, S. L. (1987). Getting more by asking for less: The effects of request size on donations of charity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17(4), 392–400. doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1987.tb00320.x
  • Oppenheimer, D. M. (2006). Consequences of erudite vernacular utilized irrespective of necessity: Problems with using long words needlessly. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20(2), 139–156. doi.org/10.1002/acp.1178
  • Tausczik, Y. R., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29(1), 24–54. doi.org/10.1177/0261927X09351676
  • Anderson, J. (1983). Lix and Rix: Variations on a little-known readability index. Journal of Reading, 26(6), 490–496. eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ276209

Bøker

Fagsider og eksempler