Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37205662›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2023

Charitable donations and the theory of planned behaviour: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Katherine M White, Louise C Starfelt Sutton, Xiang Zhao

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Katherine M WhiteSchool of Psychology and Counselling, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0345-4724
Louise C Starfelt SuttonResearch and Evaluation Unit, Swedish Prison and Probation Service, Norrköping, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-9588-570X
Xiang ZhaoSchool of Behavioural, Social and Legal Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given the predominance of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) to represent the psychological determinants underlying people's charitable decisions, the present study synthesised the model's key relationships, using meta-analysis, and tested the predictive utility of the model for charitable giving encompassing donations of blood, organs, time, and money. Given its relevance to altruistic decisions, the impact of moral norm was assessed also. A systematic literature review identified 117 samples (from 104 studies) examining donation intentions and/or prospective behaviour using TPB measures. The sample-weighted average effects for all associations were moderate-to-strong with perceived behavioural control (PBC) most strongly associated with intention (r+ = 0.562), followed by moral norm (r+ = 0.537), attitude (r+ = 0.507), and subjective norm (r+ = 0.472). Intention (r+ = 0.424) showed stronger associations with prospective behaviour than PBC (r+ = 0.301). The standard TPB predictors explained 44% of variance in intention (52% including moral norm). Intention and PBC explained 19% of variance in behaviour. A number of TPB associations showed differences when analysed for moderator variables such as length of follow-up for prospective behaviour and type of target behaviour. Stronger associations were found for the (subjective and moral) norm-intention associations among some of the different types of giving behaviours, especially for donating organs and time. Overall, the large proportion of variance explained by the TPB predictors especially for intention highlights those cognitions associated with people's plans to give, informative for charities reliant on people's propensity to give.

Indexed as

AttitudeTheory of Planned BehaviorHumansIntentionMoralsProspective StudiesPsychological TheorySurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID37205662
PMCPMC10198540

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.