Noncompliance with Persuasive Appeals for a Prosocial, Altruistic Act: Blood Donating¹

Effects of persuasive messages, responsibility denial (RD), and attitude‐accessing on blood‐giving attitudes, intentions, moral obligations, and behavior were examined. In Study 1, participants ( n = 84) who heard a message emphasizing moral reasons for donating indicated a more favorable postmessage attitude and stronger moral obligation to donate than participants exposed to a message aimed at reducing fear, a combined moral and fear‐ reduction message, or no message. Combined message participants showed greatest intent to donate, yet only 14% of all participants attended a campus drive. In Study 2, low ( n = 52) and high ( n = 60) RD individuals heard the message arguments and were asked to access their attitudes. Low compared to high RD individuals stated a stronger sense of moral obligation, particularly when they accessed their thoughts relevant to blood donating, and behavioral intention, especially in the combined message condition. Few participants attended a blood drive (12.5%), yet most were low RD individuals from the nonaccessed attitude condition (83%). Results suggest that few individuals will engage in the altruistic act of blood donating, despite the experimental use of persuasive messages and accessing issue‐relevant attitudes.