Sustaining Business: A Psychological Perspective of Donation Behavior

Abstract

The modern-day corporate sector implements various forms of socially responsible programs, perhaps with different motives. Nevertheless, harnessing potential support towards such initiatives from stakeholders is vital. In this regard, researchers previously uncovered that the processes of psychological reaction to the request of time and money donations are different, yet the influence of psychological distance on time and money donation behavior has not been explicitly explored. Hence, this research investigates how temporal distance and value accessibility lead to different types and sizes of donation. The findings reveal that when individuals jointly evaluate donation options, temporal distance evokes dissimilar mental processes, subsequently leading them to provide time donations (near future) or money donations (distance future). With respect to the size of the donation, temporal distance has an impact on donating money, but not on time. Notably, the self-construal level interacted with temporal distance more so than that of personality traits to bring about strong donation behavior. This interaction is more pronounced and visible in relation to money donation than to time donation. In addition, implications of this research are also considered and discussed.

1. Introduction

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and fair trade have become prominent practices of the modern-day dynamic business world, and, hence, practitioners and researchers have paid increasing attention towards these notions. A broader spectrum of environmental and social activities and interactions with stakeholders on a voluntary basis are considered to be two properties of CSR [1]. The contribution of corporate bodies to charitable initiatives takes various forms and is provided to varying degrees.

One aspect of company involvement in charitable initiatives is, in addition to being a donor that it acts as a facilitating body by forming an alliance with a charity organization (e.g., Asiana Airline collects donation from its travelers to donate to the United Nations Children’s fund). Chang and Liu [2] reported that charitable cause (i.e., consistent-fit or complementary-fit) and the level of donation by the company are a matter of involving the consumer in making donations. Furthermore, people perceive CSR in foundations, charitable activities, and in sponsorship and donations as important [3].

Another aspect of company involvement with charitable causes is corporate volunteering (CV), whereby for-profit organizations support and provide opportunities for their employees to volunteer their time and skills in serving the community at large. This includes a range of activities, such as organizing team-volunteering projects, providing matching funds for employees, devoting time to voluntarily serve in various projects, releasing employees from work to perform volunteer activities, and acknowledging and rewarding employee participation in volunteer programs [4]. In addition to the above, some companies encourage employees to donate money for charitable causes. For instance, American Airlines itself volunteered nearly 38,000 h and donated USD 733,000, including employees’ contributions, in 2012 to charity work.

A substantial body of empirical research has demonstrated that the involvement of a company with the aforementioned charitable initiatives (or CSR initiatives) is positively associated with the performance [5] and image of the given company [4]. This thus brings an array of corporate benefits, such as more favorable corporate evaluation behavior and increased purchasing behavior [6], and market value of the firm through customer satisfaction, innovativeness and product quality [7]. Among others, as byproducts, CV results in increased customer loyalty (affective and cognitive) and positive word-of-mouth communication, as well as strategic opportunities for the non-profit organizations [4,8].

All of these facts emphasize the need for having carefully created, innovative, and tactical cause-related marketing (CRM) tools in place in order to increase the amount of donations and stakeholders’ benefits. In this regard, Liu and Aaker [9] reported that provoking intention to donate, with respect to time, leads to a significant increase in the actual amount of contribution in terms of both time and money. Furthermore, they revealed that time and money are a similar kind of resource, but humans tend to perceive them in two different manners. While trying to achieve emotional well-being allows individuals to donate more, the aim of economic utility restrains them from donating more. Hence, the time donation aspect paves the way for forming charity cause initiatives in a more provocative manner.

Company involvement with charitable initiatives has been put into practice with the help of consumers (i.e., external customers) and employees (i.e., internal customers). CRM programs particularly focus on external customers expecting money donations, while CV programs focus on internal customers encouraging volunteering (time donations). It is apparent that for-profit organizations have not been able to involve external customers in volunteering in both CRM and CV programs, despite the fact that individuals prefer time donations to money donations. Hence, it is worth ascertaining the psychological process of corporate volunteering of consumers in order to achieve greater participation of customers in charitable initiatives.

1.1. Theoretical Background and the Gap

Irrespective of the nature of donation, donation behavior is regarded as a moral act in every society. However, the response to a request for donation may not be the same—it may differ from person to person depending on the nature of donation (i.e., time and money) [9]. At the individual level, this diversity of perception towards moral acts, at large, can be explained through the lens of psychological distance. This is defined in different ways in which an object, event or a task is removed from the self, along with dimensions such as time, space, the social and the hypothetical [10]. Mental representations of moral acts are different when such acts are structured in line with proximity, whether it is near future or distant future. Nevertheless, findings of research in this area are not convergent. For instance, Eyal et al. [11] concluded that people judge moral acts as more virtuous when the acts are more psychologically distant rather than nearer, whereas Gong and Medin [12] reported that an individual’s judgment of moral acts becomes more extreme when the acts are psychologically nearer rather than distant.

However, it is worth noting that the relationships between psychological distance—temporal and social distance—and donation behavior have never been investigated explicitly, particularly with respect to money donation. In light of this, from a theoretical stand point, this study investigates the influence of psychological distance on time and money donation behavior. Moreover, as highlighted above, the relationship between psychological distance and time donation is not consistent. Previously, researchers have noted that this divergent result may have emerged due to the difference in accessibility of values (i.e., central values and secondary values) and culture (i.e., mitigating and emotional factors) [12,13]. Taking these facts into account, it can be argued that there might be intervening constructs, perhaps value differences that cause these differences. However, these antecedences of such conflicting results have also not been empirically tested.

The scope of this research is limited in investigating the influence of temporal distance on donation behavior (i.e., time and money donation) and how value accessibility, in terms of personal traits (motivation) and cultural traits (self-construal level), moderate the influence of the psychological representation of a moral act/event on donation behavior. The finding of this research would help for-profit organizations to plan and design CSR initiatives in a favorable manner and non-profit organizations to boost donations for their charity works.

1.2. Literature Review

1.2.1. Cause-Related Marketing and Corporate Volunteering

Involvement of a charitable company has been carried out in forms of CRM and CV. CRM is referred to as a process of formulating and implementing marketing activities that are characterized by an offer from a firm to contribute a specified amount to a designated cause—when customers engage in revenue-providing exchange that satisfies organizational and individual objectives [14]. This has been a popular tool that ties a brand or a company with a social cause [15]. Going beyond the initial concept of financial contribution, introduced by American Express Card to renovate the Statue of Liberty, TOMS initiated the donation of pairs of shoes to children in need, through their “one for one” program that donates every time a consumer makes a purchase.

On the other hand, corporate volunteering (CV), where commercial organizations support and provide opportunities for employees to volunteer their time and skills in service to the community, is increasingly getting popular as a means of enhancing the company image in public [4]. Among others, corporate volunteering includes a range of activities such as organizing team volunteering projects, providing matching funds for employee devoting time to projects, releasing employees from work to perform volunteer activities as well as acknowledging and rewarding employee participation in volunteer programs [4].

Prior studies have unveiled that involvement of a company with charitable initiatives (or CSR initiatives) is positively associated with company image [4]; more favorable corporate evaluation behavior and increased purchasing behavior [6]; market value of the firm through customer satisfaction, innovativeness and product quality [7]. Despite the favorable outcomes of CRM tactics, Kim and Lee [15] noted that even though CRM initiatives are prevalent, many consumers are skeptical about these initiatives and this might result in an unfavorable evaluation of the organization. In a related vein, according to Amoroso and Roman [16], young consumers tend to build trust by analyzing the authenticity of CSR whereas older-aged consumers build trust based on proper awareness of CSR, gained through communication channels and in effect continue to make repeat purchases. Such divergent behavioral intentions may be due to the different schematic presentation of CRM that acts in the mind of consumers and this can be explained from the theory of psychological distance.

1.2.2. Psychological Distance and Evaluation

Psychological distance refers to different ways in which an object, event or a task is removed from direct experience (the self) along the dimensions such as time, space, social and hypothetical [10]. According to them, temporal (time) distance occurs when an event takes place in the distant future rather than in the near future removing direct experience. Hence, events that take place in the distant future are represented in an abreacted and structured manner, while events that take place in the near future are represented in a concrete and contextualized manner. The relationship between psychological distance and people’s representation of events, situations or decisions, whether concreate or abstract, is explained through construal level theory; when low psychological distance exists people tend to hold a low level construal and concrete mindset; when stimuli has high psychological distance, people tend to hold a more high level construal and abstract mindset. Further, the mental representation of knowledge structures pertaining to the near future is concerned with the practicality and feasibility aspect while knowledge structures pertaining to the near future is concerned with the ideal and desirability aspect.

With regard to morality and psychological distance, people judge moral acts as more virtuous when acts are psychologically distant rather than nearer [11] and the message is framed as both a gain and desirable [17]. Contrary to this, it is reported that individual’s judgment of moral acts become more extreme when acts are psychologically nearer than distant [12]. Gong and Medin [12] noted that in addition to other reasons, the cultural difference (i.e., mitigating and emotional factors) is a potentially critical factor that leads to divergent results. Further, Eyal and Liberman [13] noted that representing an object abstractly involves retaining central features and omitting secondary features and this means central features are placed in a higher order than secondary features. Thus, most probably, individuals could conceptualize central value as having higher-level constructs when compared with secondary value. However, as one gets closer to an event/object (i.e., near future situation) there is an increasing tendency for the person to evaluate features based on secondary values.

1.2.3. Value and Motivational Goals

Values are a focal part of human life in defining self and identity of an individual, thereby determining patterns of thinking and behavior. Values can be defined as beliefs about “desirable, trans-situational goals, having varying degrees of importance, that serve as guiding principles in people’s lives” [18] (p. 269). Schwartz [19] identified some formal features of values. Accordingly, values are concepts or beliefs, values pertain to desirable end states or behaviors, values transcend specific situations, values guide selection or evaluation of behavior and events, and values are ordered according to relative importance. Therefore, due to the fact that basic human motivational values are structured within oneself in a compatible manner (e.g., benevolence and universalism) and also in a conflicting manner (e.g., benevolence and power), some values become central and important, whereas other values become secondary or even insignificant depending on situations. This relative importance of values guides individuals to evaluate events and in effect direct them to behave in a desirable manner.

According to Schwartz [19] though the achievement values have been reported in many other sources, the contextual meaning of motivational value of achievement mentioned by the researcher is different from McClellan’s definition of achievement motivation which emphasizes internal standards of excellence over social standards. Therefore, McClellan’s need for achievement is considerably similar to self-direction values. On the other hand, McClellan’s need for affiliation shares some commonalities of benevolence value (and perhaps universalism). In addition, county-level differences in value properties are reflected on cultural differences. Individuals construct themselves either as interdependent or as independent in relation to others in cultures that are widely recognized as individualistic and collectivistic, consecutively. In relation to basic motivational values, interdependent-self view appears to be driven by conformity value (and perhaps benevolence value), whereas independent-self view seems to be guided by self-direction value (and perhaps universalism value). Although a considerable number of studies on value properties focus on national-level value (country as a unit of analysis), Dobewall and Rudnev [20] argued that because national level value properties are derived from individual pools of data, the structure of value properties is not different from the individual level.

1.2.4. Need for Achievement and Affiliation

The need for achievement refers to an individual’s desire to excel and to improve performance [21]. When an individual pursues higher achievements, the person generally aspires to accomplish difficult tasks and to maintain high standards of performance. Individuals with strong motivation for achievement seek out situations in which they could get satisfaction by setting achievement standards for themselves [22]. Such internal standards are barely driven by extrinsic incentives provided by the situations and once these are set up, they try harder to reach these standards. In addition, they demand greater task-related feedback than individuals with a low level of need for achievement do [23].

In contrast, the need for affiliation is referred to as, enjoying being with friends and people in general; readily accepting people; making efforts to win friendships and maintaining associations with people. In addition, such behavior can either be verbal or nonverbal as well as explicit or implicit [24]. According to Johnson and Johnson [25], some individuals are more predisposed towards acting cooperatively; such people prefer cooperative settings over individual settings. The need for affiliation is represented by a desire to participate in cooperative, noncompetitive activities and also by a desire for close, friendly relationships with others. Individuals with a higher need for affiliation are more friendly, sociable, and cooperative than those with a lower need for affiliation [26].

Given the fact that a simple act performed by a person can be variously motivated [22], behaviors of achievement-oriented and affiliation-oriented individuals are motivated by different motives as well as divergent sets of values. According to McClelland, [27] motives are more important for predicting what individuals will spontaneously do, whereas values are more important for determining what they cognitively decide should be done.

1.2.5. Self-Construal Levels

Social cognition research depicts that an individual’s mental representation of self is mostly determined by the social aspect of self: independent-self view and interdependent-self view.

Independent self claims that they are differentiated from social contexts, interpersonal relationships, and group memberships in terms of one’s unique values, traits, abilities, preferences, interests, goals, experiences [28] and unilateral decisions are made on behalf of the self and multiple others [29]. According to Markus and Kitayama [30], behavior of this view of self is organized by referring to their own internal and inner repertoire of thoughts, feelings and actions rather than by referring to thoughts, feelings and actions of others. In contrast, Markus and Kitayama [30] noted that although, interdependent selfpossesses a set of internal attributes such as abilities, opinions, judgments and personal characteristics, these internal attributes are sometimes illusive and unreliable. Thus, they are unlikely to assume a powerful role in regulating behavior, particularly if this behavior closely and significantly connects to others. Therefore, interdependent self claims that they represent important relationships and roles which share self-space with abstract traits, abilities and preferences [28]. Thinking and behavior of such a connected self to others is largely determined by what the actor perceives to be the thoughts, feelings and actions of others in the relationship.

These divergent views of the self have a systematic influence on various aspects of self-related processes such as cognition (information processing), emotion, motivation, relationship and pursuing goal. In their work, Markus and Kitayama [30], noted several consequences of divergent self-systems for emotion, cognition and motivation. Emotions are distinguished as ego-focused emotions versus other-focused emotions. Ego-focused emotions consist of anger, frustration and pride which are driven by his or her internal attributes like needs, goals, desires or abilities. In contrast, some emotions such as sympathy, feeling of interpersonal communion and shame that have other persons as a primary reference, are encapsulated into other-focused emotions. Those with an independent self tend to experience ego-focused emotions rather than other-focused emotions. Because cultural value systems train the interdependent self to control ego-focused emotions especially towards relevant others, compared to independent self, interdependent self appears to more frequently experience other focused emotions.

With regard to cognition, those with interdependent self are likely to organize knowledge in a more situational specific and concrete manner. That is, what was done, where it was dome, and to whom or with whom it was done. However, independent self organizes knowledge in context-free and abstract manner [30].

1.2.6. Psychological Distance, Self-Construal Levels and Moral Behavior

Qian [31] illustrated how individual factors such as psychological distance and self-construal levels influence moral decision making in entrepreneurship. Here the researcher mainly argued that temporal construal level and self-construal interactively influence moral decision making of entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurs with an interdependent-self view value relationships, belongingness and, thus are likely to care for others and society rather than for short-term costs or profits and financial gains. Further, abstract mental representation draws their attention to social values while attenuating attractiveness of symbolic rewards such as money, profits and spare time [32]. As such, interaction of independent self and abstract mindset induces entrepreneurs to make more moral decisions. Qian [31] concluded that entrepreneurs who are more disposed to an abstract mindset and interdependent-self view are likely to make more moral decisions in relation to customers and entrepreneurial values than those who are more disposed to an independent-self perspective. Nevertheless, with regard to external accountability (social and environment), although chronic temporal construal level is consistent with the hypothetical direction, priming of psychological distance reversed the results. Entrepreneurs who focus on the distant future and possess an independent-self view show a greater likelihood of making moral decisions concerning society and environment. These divergent results indicate that independent self may also show a higher moral behavior depending on the context where there is a high probability of activating universal value [33].

1.2.7. Helping/Donation Behavior

People with affiliation motives try to establish and maintain friendships. Therefore, in order to maintain a healthy and harmonious interpersonal relationship, helping behavior should be essential and integral. High affiliation-oriented individuals would exhibit higher levels of helping behavior for the purpose of strengthening interpersonal relationships. For instance, Cho et al. [34] reported that affiliation motives of university students are positively associated not only with intention to donate but also recommendation to donate. In contrast, such interpersonal helping behavior cannot be expected from achievement-oriented individuals whose objective is to maximize their performance. However, vicarious achievements were reported to be positively associated with intention to donate [34]. Importantly, such individuals search for ways and means to overcome performance barriers and thereby enhance helping behavior [35].

Helping behavior widely encompasses both extending financial assistance to people closer to them and extending monetary donations to needy people, and devoting time to assist people requiring various kinds of help (excluding monetary donation) which is called as time donation. Some economic theories like the private consumption model, the impure altruism model and the investment model explain giving behaviors as solving the puzzle associated with the observation that individuals both donate and volunteer [36]. They further stated that if the purpose of a giving individual is to maximize the effect of his/her donation, then it is surely the best to donate as effectively as possible by engaging in productive options. However, individuals do not volunteer in the sectors in which they work, suggesting that they may be suffering from a high disability of engaging in more of work that they do for a living. Put differently, to maximize the utility individuals donate money and enjoy volunteering outside of their profession.

1.2.8. Psychological Distance, Vale and Donation Behavior

Because of abstract nature, values have a greater impact on predicting how individuals plan distant future events than events that will occur in the near future [33]. In this regard, Agerström and Björklund [32] reported that altruistic behavior of individuals is closely associated with an activated abstract mindset. Particularly, in the second experiment, they demonstrated that participants were more willing to contribute towards altruistic causes in the distant future. In this case, the term “contribution” was broadly defined as financial or other means of contribution. In a similar fashion, Eyal et al. [33] illustrated that altruistic behavior in the distant future was driven by the laden benevolence values (i.e., helpful, honest, forgiving, loyal, responsible etc.). In that study, participants read a scenario in which a graduate student following a degree in psychology named Yael made a request to participate in an experiment as a help, with a view to completing his/her dissertation. Participants who were high in benevolence value generally show willingness to contribute more time in the distance future than in the near future. However, when the experiment was expected to take place in the near future and at a convenient/feasible time, they were willing to contribute more time to the experiment.

The aforementioned measurement of contribution utilized by Agerström and Björklund [32] is vague. Therefore, it is not clear whether the question of willingness to contribute led to evoke mainly financial donation or other kinds of donations such as time, blood and in-kind donations in the mind of the participant. Moreover, the time contribution to an experiment as a help to complete a dissertation has been well pronounced among the individuals who are high in benevolence value. Then, it is not clear whether the different personality traits (interdependent/independent and affiliation/achievement) that are driven by different value properties respond to willingness to donate in the same manner. Moreover, it remains unclear whether their willingness to donate time is different from their willingness to donate money. More importantly, aforementioned donation behaviors have been subjected to investigation in temporal distance situations, but not in social distance or hypothetical distance situations, which have more implications for the marketing field. Thus, these existing gaps in donation literature have to be filled empirically.

1.2.9. Psychology of Time and Money Donation

Donation behavior is strongly driven by moral identity—the extent to which moral traits (e.g., fair, just, kind, compassionate) are experienced as a central part of one’s overall self-concept. However, higher moral identity does not increase charitable giving unconditionally when the recipients are perceived as responsible for their plight. Moral identity increases donations to recipients who are less responsible for their plight due to empathetic feeling, whereas the same identity decreases donations to recipients who are highly responsible for their plight due to lack of justice [37]. Nevertheless, Wendy Liu and Jennifer Aaker [9] concluded that provoking intention of donation with respect to time leads to a significant increase in the actual amount of contribution (both time and money). Consideration of money activates the value (utility) maximization mind-set leading to dissatisfaction, which in turn reduces the donation. Nonetheless, drawing attention to time appears to activate goals of emotional well-being and beliefs involving personal happiness. Such a mind-set or mechanism leads to greater willingness to make an actual donation. Findings further emphasize that time is not merely an accounting unit, but it also has rich emotional associations that make the behavior of people bolder.

1.3. Conceptual Framework and Hypothesis

In essence, psychological distance provides a theoretical base to predict how individuals plan their future events. However, because of the inconsistent results and the fact that the psychological representation of time is different from money, it is quite unclear, at this point, to predict whether distant future leads to the donation of more time or more money; or whether the near future leads to the donation of more time or more money. To provide a clear understanding of the complex picture of psychological distance and donation behavior, the following research question is posed: which temporal distance (near or distal) has a greater impact on time donation and money donation? In addition, it was evident that in distant future situations central value tends to become abstract and laden, whereas in near future (and similar others) situations secondary value becomes concrete and laden. The activated laden values connected to affiliation motive or achievement motive and to independent self or interdependent self, play a decisive role by interacting with construal levels in shaping human behavior.

Affiliation-oriented people, having more accessibility to interdependent traits, are likely to be driven by benevolence and universal values, respectively. They are likely to demonstrate a higher level of willingness to contribute in the distant future and the request to donate is made by a different person. In contrast, achievement-oriented people, having more accessibility to independent traits, are likely to be primarily driven by self-directed values and they are likely to demonstrate higher levels of willingness to contribute in the near future when a request to donate is made by someone similar to oneself. In addition, as a substantial number of organizational studies have used achievement/affiliation constructs to ascertain employee behavior while consumer research utilizes independent/interdependent constructs to investigate consumer behavior, achievement/affiliation and independent/interdependent constructs embody employee and consumer aspects, respectively. It further enhances the significance of proposed moderating variables as the corporate sector anticipates a substantial involvement in charity courses from consumers as well as employees. Figure 1 portrays the relationships between proposed constructs and willingness to donate.

1.4. Hypothesis

Value as concepts or beliefs has some formal features such as values pertaining to desirable end states or behaviors, values transcend specific actions and situations, values guide selection or evaluation of behavior and events, and values are ordered in line with their relative importance [19]. As such, basic human motivational values are structured within oneself in a compatible manner (e.g., benevolence and universalism) as well as in a conflicting manner (e.g., benevolence and power), some values become central and important whereas other values become secondary or even insignificant depending on situations. This relative importance of the value guides individuals to evaluate (or select) events and in effect direct them to behave in a desirable manner. Thus, it can be argued that evaluation of moral acts of individuals who are more disposed to a need for achievement (i.e., self-direction value) may differ from the evaluation of moral acts of individuals who are more disposed to a need for affiliation (i.e., benevolence and universalism). On the other hand, an independent self mainly driven by self-direction may evaluate moral acts in a way that is different from the evaluation carried out by the dependent self (i.e., conformity value and benevolence value).

People with affiliation motives try to establish and maintain friendships. Therefore, in order to maintain a healthy and harmonious interpersonal relationship, helping behavior should become an integral component. Affiliation-oriented individuals would exhibit higher levels of helping behavior in terms of time and money, whereas the same cannot be expected from individuals having interpersonal helping behavior, and also from achievement-oriented individuals whose objective is to maximize their personal goals. Drawing greater attention to social issues (perhaps environmental), the feeling of empathy and sense of belonging may evoke affiliation-oriented individuals to contribute more money or time when compared with achievement-oriented people.

From the temporal distant standpoint, achievement value becomes central while benevolence is secondary for individuals having a greater need for achievement, whereas benevolence value becomes central while achievement is secondary for individuals having a higher need for affiliation. Because of the accessibility of the secondary value of donation/benevolence seems to be high in the near future than in the distant future, it is hypothesized that individuals with a higher need for achievement tend to donate more money and time in the near future than in the distant future. In contrast, individuals with higher needs for affiliation tend to donate more time and money in the distant future than in the near future. As the accessibility of central value of donation/benevolence seems to be higher, the donation behavior is likely to be higher in the distant future than in the near future. Owing to the fact that time and money are mentally represented in two different manners [9,38], hypotheses have been formulated separately for time donation and money donation. Thus, the followings have been hypothesized:

Hypothesis 1 (H1).

(a) Achievement-oriented individuals tend to donate more time in the near future, compared to affiliation-oriented individuals, (b) whereas affiliation-oriented individuals tend to donate more time in the distant future, compared to achievement-oriented individuals.

Hypothesis 2 (H2).

(a) Achievement-oriented individuals tend to donate more money in the near future, compared to affiliation-oriented individuals, (b) whereas affiliation-oriented individuals tend to donate more money in the distant future, compared to achievement-oriented individuals.

With regard to self-construal level, because individuals with an independent self focus on the personal self and think of themselves only in terms of unique personal traits, attributes, and achievements (individually oriented), the likelihood of showing concern for others and social issues is somewhat weak. In contrast, individuals with an interdependent self focus on social roles, relationships with others, harmony-fostering activities, and socially oriented achievements. Therefore, such individuals are highly concerned about others and seriously take issues pertaining to society into consideration. Moreover, entrepreneurs with an interdependent-self view place relationships and belongingness in a higher order and, thus are likely to care about others and society more than short-term costs or profits and financial gains [31]. Hence, abstract construal and interdependent self interactively influence entrepreneurs to make more moral decisions in relation to customers and entrepreneurial values than those who are more prone to the view of independent self.

In abstract level processing, self-direction value becomes central while benevolence secondary for individuals with independent self, whereas benevolence value becomes central, while self-direction is secondary for individuals with interdependent self. Thus, it is suggested that abstract-level processing (distant future) by individuals with the interdependent-self view results in higher donation (time and money), whereas concrete-level processing (near future) by the independent-self view results in higher donation (time and money). Therefore, the following hypotheses are developed:

Hypothesis 3 (H3).

(a) Individuals with independent self are likely to donate more time in the near future compared to individuals with interdependent self, (b) whereas individuals with interdependent self are likely to donate more time in the distant future compared to individuals with independent self.

Hypothesis 4 (H4).

(a) Individuals with independent self are likely to donate more money in the near future compared to individuals with interdependent self, (b) whereas individuals with interdependent self are likely to donate more money in the distant future compared to individuals with independent self.

2. Materials and Methods

Experimental design has been used as the research strategy in order to answer the research question and to test the proposed hypotheses.

2.1. Independent Variables

Psychological distance is the independent variable and participants of the studies were primed by using temporal distance–near future and distance future. Manipulation of temporal distance was operationalized using time distance [39].

2.2. Moderate Variables

Two constructs proposed as moderate variables were operationalized as chronic individual differences rather than manipulation. In order to assess these constructs, multi-item scales were adapted from previous studies. In assessing self-construal levels, a thirty-item scale which comprises two major factors–independent construal (15 items), and interdependent construal (15 items) was utilized [40]. All those items were measured using a five-scale anchoring, ranging from 1 = “strongly disagree” to 5 = “strongly agree”.

The individual difference of need for achievement/affiliation was captured using an 8-item scale which was adapted from [41]. It covers both need for achievement (4 items) and need for affiliation (4 items). Those 8 items were also measured in a five-scales anchoring, ranging from 1 = “strongly disagree” to 5 = “strongly agree”.

2.3. Dependent Variables

Dependent variable of this study is donation behavior, which comprises time donation and money donation. In operationalizing this construct, expected donation was chosen instead of real donation [9] due to the difficulty in getting real donation information from individuals. In the first study, the willingness to donate both time and money were measured in a ratio-scale, ranging from 0 to 100.

2.4. Study and the Procedure

The main purpose of the experiment was to ascertain which temporal distance (near or distal) have a greater impact on donation of time and money and to find supportive evidence to the main propositions of this paper (Hypotheses 1–4). The scenario covers the general phenomenon of donation in the context of temporal distance.

Procedure: One hundred and fifty-one students pursuing a course in economics voluntarily registered to participate in the experiment, which had been scheduled to be conducted for 20 mins. Then, by considering the registration numbers of these students they were randomly categorized into either near future group or distant future group: accordingly 76 and 75 students were chosen for each category, respectively. Three days prior to the experiment, students were informed about which group they belonged to and also about the details of their respective experiment venues. On the day of the experiment, two groups of students were accommodated in separate lecture theaters and it was reported that only 135 students participated (near future; 71; distal future: 64) in the exercise. The questionnaire with scenarios designed for each group was kept on desks in the lecture theater, prior to their arrival. After their arrival clear instructions were given to fill the questionnaire constructively. At the end of the exercise participants were appreciated and thanked.

The initial questionnaire was developed in English and then translated into Sinhalese using bilingual translators. The method of double translation and pre-testing were used to ensure consistency and practical usage [42]. The questionnaire consisted of three parts (A, B and C). Part A was designed to gather demographic information about participants. Part B captured respondents’ chronic need for achievement/affiliation and self-construal levels. The willingness to donate was captured in part C with a series of scenario-based questions. The questions were designed to test whether willingness to donate differed according to the kind of donation (time and money) and temporal distance. For this purpose, different questions were asked from the same scenario and questionnaires were administered separately for both near future sample and distant future sample.

The scenario was presented as an advertisement which explained about the under privileged children suffering from chronic health issues and why they need financial and time donation from the participants. Except the title and name of the NGO, the content of the advertisement was identical in both conditions (i.e., near and distal future). Detailed information is provided in the Appendix A. The scenario was followed by four questions under the main narration. The purpose of the narration was to ask participants to gear their attention towards the near future or distant future. Therefore, in between-subject design, participants were asked “If the earliest event is going to take place in this week [near future sample]” or “If the earliest event is going to take place four months later [distant future sample]”, what would be your responses to the following questions. In the within-subject design, the first question sought to find kinds of preferable donation (time or money the second and third questions sought to measure the willingness to donate time and money, respectively.

2.5. Statistical Procedure

In order to test the direct effect between temporal distance and donation type and size, chi-square test of independence, analysis of variance (ANOVA) and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) were performed.

Prior to testing the proposed hypotheses, the internal consistency and reliability of latent variables (i.e., need for achievement/affiliation and self-construal level) were measured (See Table 2). An independent sample t-test was carried out to check the strength of the manipulation of need for achievement/affiliation and self-construal level separately. Next, participants were categorized into two groups, namely achievement and affiliation, this was done in line with the mean scores reported on achievement and affiliation measurement items used to test H1 and H2.In addition, later they were regrouped into independent and interdependent based on mean scores reported on independent and interdependent measurement items used to test H3 and H4. The ANOVA was employed as the main technique of testing the hypotheses.

3. Results

One hundred and thirty-five undergraduate students from a leading university of Sri Lanka voluntarily participated in the study and 128 (mean age = 23; 37% male) were found to be valid. To answer the question “which temporal distance (near or distal) have a greater impact on the types of donation and size of time and money?” 2 (types of donation: time donation and money donation) × 2 (temporal distance: near future and distal future) chi-square test of independence was performed by examining the relationship between temporal distance and types of contribution. A significant difference between the temporal (near or distal) distance and types of contribution (time donation and money donation) (χ² (1, n = 121) = 3.47, p = 0.06, Cramer’s v = 0.17) was identified. An appeal to contribute in the near future event was highly associated with time donation (76%). However, the response to situations about contributing in the distant future was not substantially associated with time donation (60%) or money donation (40%) (See Figure 2). Thus, it can be concluded that although individuals are willing to contribute for charity causes in terms of time rather than money, it is more pronounced in a near future situation.

Next, a between-within subject ANOVA was performed to get a broader picture about which temporal distance (near or distal) had a greater impact on the donation size of time and money. It assesses the impact of temporal distance (near vs. distant future) on size of contribution, across two types of donation (time and money). Size of contribution was measured in terms of the willingness to donate time and money. Because there was a significant main effect on types of donation, Pillai’s Trace = 0.058, F (1, 111) = 6.85, p = 0.01, partial eta squared = 0.058, and a substantial interaction between temporal distance and types of donation on willingness to donate (size of donation), Pillai’s Trace = 0. 038, F (1, 111) = 4.40, p = 0.03, a closer look at the data is paramount for precise interpretation (See Figure 3).

Pairwise comparison reveals that mean value difference between time contribution and money contribution were significant in the near future situation (Mtime = 3.43, Mmoney = 2.35, p = 0.001), whereas time contribution was not significantly different from money contribution in the distal future (Mtime = 3.95, Mmoney = 3.83 p = 0.71). In addition, a one-way between-group multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA was performed to investigate the difference of temporal distance (near future and distant future) in size of donation. Willingness to donate the amount of time and money was considered as a dependent variable, whereas temporal distance (near and distant future) was treated as an independent variable. There was a statistically significant difference between near future and distant future temporal distance on the combined dependent variables: F(2, 110) = 7.91, <0.001; Pillai’s Trace = 0.13; partial eta squared = 0.13. When results for dependent variables were considered separately, only the amount of money willingness to donate was found to be statistically significant (F(1, 111) = 15.12, <0.0005) (See

Table 1. Univariate Effect for Temporal Distance and Descriptive Statistics.

Dependent Variables	df	df Error	F	p	Temporal Distance	N	M	SD
Time contribution	1	111	2.55	0.113	Near future	54	3.43	1.354
					Distal future	59	3.95	1.029
Money contribution	1	111	15.12	0.0005	Near future	54	2.35	1.418
					Distal future	59	3.83	1.469

). The mean value of money contribution was significantly higher in the distant future, than that of near future (Mdistal = 3.83, Mnear = 2.35, p < 0.0005).

Thus, it can be concluded that temporal distance has no significant impact on types of donation as means of contribution (donation options/types). Nevertheless, individuals were eager to go for a time donation option rather than money option in the near future. With respect to size of donation, temporal distance has a significant impact on amount of money donation (measured as a percentage), whereas it has no impact on amount of time donation (measured as a percentage).

What follows next is the presentation of data analysis and results to illustrate how temporal distance interacts with achievement/affiliation (H1 and H2) and independent/interdependent (H3 and H4) construct to determine size of donation in terms of time and money.

3.1. Interaction Effect of Temporal Distance and Achievement/Affiliation Orientation on Donation Size of Time and Money

Before testing the hypothesis 1 and 2, though a large number of prior researches have restricted to test only the reliability when subjects are assigned to different groups [43], factor analysis was conducted to reconfirm the latent variables (i.e., achievement and affiliation). Four items were discarded from the initial 8-item scale owing to weak loading and loading under the different classifications. The remaining 4 items were used to calculate the mean scores and to build two indices. As shown in

Table 2. Results of Factor Analysis.

Factors and Items	Affiliation	Achievement
I am afraid of being rejected by others	0.886	−0.026
I am afraid of making others bored	0.877	−0.094
I usually feel confident in succeeding in a given task	−0.066	0.866
I usually feel good about one’s competence about a given task	−0.051	0.868
Eigenvalues	1.745	1.329
Cumulative variance explained (%)	43.623	76.855
AVE	0.777	0.749
Cronbach’s Alpha	0.718	0.675

, the factor loading values ranged from 0.866 to 0.886. The reliability of the constructs was tested computing Cronbach’s Alpha and values are 0.718 and 0.675 for affiliation and achievement constructs, respectively, demonstrating a satisfactory level of factor reliability.

Next, participants were grouped into two groups—achievement and affiliation—based on mean scores reported on achievement and affiliation measurement items [44]. The subjects that reported the highest mean score for achievement items relative to affiliation items were assigned to the achievement group, while the subjects that reported the highest mean score for affiliation items relative to achievement items were assigned to the affiliation group. Next, independent sample t-test was run to check whether the manipulation of achievement and affiliation is statistically significant [44]. The reported scores on achievement scale items were significantly higher in the achievement group (M = 4.05) compared to the affiliation group, M = 3.22; t (122) = −6.29, p < 0.0005, whereas the reported scores on affiliation scale items were significantly higher in the affiliation group (M = 3.82) compared to the achievement group, M = 2.57; t (122) = 7.29, p = 0.0005.

A two-way between-group—2 (temporal distance: near future and distant future) × 2 (personality traits: achievement and affiliation)—analysis of variance (ANOVA was conducted to explore the impact of temporal distance and personality traits on time donation (H1). The Levene’s Test of Equality of Error Variance was significant (p = 0.011) indicating the violation of equality of variance assumption across groups. To fix this issue, it is recommended to set a more stringent significant level like 0.01 [45]. The interaction effect between temporal distance and personality traits was not significant, F(1, 121) = 2.61, 0.10.The main effect for personality traits was not significant, F(1, 121) = 0.05, 0.83, while the main effect for temporal distance was marginally significant F(1, 121) = 5.54, 0.02. However, because the interaction effect was in the predicted direction (See Figure 4), pairwise comparison is presented. It is noteworthy that pairwise comparison reveals that the mean difference was significantly higher for affiliation in the near future condition than that of the distal future condition (Mnear = 2.91, Mdistal = 4.25, p = 0.01). Further, the mean value for affiliation was lower than the mean value for achievement in the near future (Maffiliation = 2.91, Machievement =3.56, p = 0.21), whereas the mean value for affiliation was higher than the mean value for achievement in the distal future (Maffiliation = 4.25, Machievement =3.75, p = 0.31). The results of the analysis do not provide supportive evidence to verify H1.

Next, a two-way between subject groups 2 (temporal distance: near future and distant future) × 2 (personality traits: achievement and affiliation analysis of variance (ANOVA was conducted to explore the impact of temporal distance and personality traits on money donation (H2). The interaction effect between temporal distance and personality traits was not significant, F(1, 111) = 0.001, 0.97, while the main effect for temporal distance was significant F(1, 111) =13.77, 0.001. However, the main effect for personality traits was not significant, F(1, 111) = 0.17, 0.68 The interaction effect was not in the predicted direction. The results of the analysis do not provide supportive evidence to verify H2.

Though H1 is not statistically significant, it is in the predicted direction. Thus, H1 and H2 that predict achievement-oriented individuals tend to donate more in the near future compared to affiliation-oriented individuals, whereas affiliation-oriented individuals tend to donate more in the distant future compared to achievement-oriented individuals in terms of both time and money, were not confirmed.

3.2. Interaction Effect of Temporal Distance and Independent/Interdependent Orientation on Donation Size of Time and Money

The procedures of testing hypothesis three and four and results are presented in this section. Factor analysis was not conducted for independent and interdependent constructs, because the total number of subjects (128) was not adequate compared to the number of measurement items (32). It is recommended that the ratio of subject to measurement items should at least be 10: 1(or more than 150 subjects), to obtain a satisfactory factor loading [45]. Further, a large number of prior studies have been restricted to test only the reliability [43]. Total ten items (five independent items and five interdependent items) were discarded from the initial 30-item scale, due to poor reliability scores. The remaining 20 items (see the Appendix B) were used to test the reliability of the two constructs (i.e., independent and interdependent). Cronbach’s Alpha values were 0.613 and 0.690 for independent and interdependent constructs, respectively, and it demonstrates a satisfactory level of factor reliability. Next, participants were grouped into two groups—namely independent and interdependent—based on mean scores reported on independent and interdependent measurement items. The subjects that reported the highest mean score for independent items relative to interdependent items were assigned to the independent group, while the subjects that reported the highest mean score for interdependent items relative to independent items were assigned to the interdependent group. Next, independent sample t-test was run to check whether the manipulation of independent and interdependent is statistically significant [44]. The reported scores on independent scale items were significantly higher in the independent group (M = 3.73) compared to the interdependent group, M =3.42; t (125) = 3.05, p = 0.003, whereas the reported scores on interdependent scale items were significantly higher in the interdependent group (M = 4.04) compared to the independent group, M =3.63; t (125) = 7.29, p = 0.0005.

A two-way between-group—2 (temporal distance: near future and distant future) × 2 (self-construal levels: independent and interdependent)—analysis of variance (ANOVA was conducted to explore the impact of temporal distance and self-construal levels on time donation (H3). The interaction effect between temporal distance and self-construal levels was significant, F(1, 121) = 2.61, 0.007, while the main effect for temporal distance was also significant F(1, 121) = 8.21, 0.005. However, the main effect for self-construal level was not significant, F(1, 121) = 0.97, 0.33. (See Figure 5). Pairwise comparison revealed that mean value difference between independent and interdependent was significant for the distal future (Mindependet = 3.54, Minterdependent = 4.81, p = 0.008), while it was not significant for near future (Mindependet = 3.50, Minterdependent = 2.90, p = 0.22) (See

Table 3. Descriptive statistics for time donation.

Temporal Distance	Self-Construal Levels	M	SD	N
Near future	Independent	3.50	1.502	19
	Interdependent	2.90	0.994	42
Distal future	Independent	3.53	1.804	21
	Interdependent	4.81	2.581	43

). In other words, although the mean value difference for the near future condition was not statistically significant it follows the predicted direction. The mean value for the interdependent group was lower than the mean value for the independent group in the near future condition, whereas the mean value for interdependent was higher than the mean value for dependent in the distal future. The results of the analysis provide supportive evidence to partially verify H3.

Next, a two-way between-group—2 (temporal distance: near future and distant future) × 2 (self-construal levels: independent and interdependent)—analysis of variance (ANOVA was conducted to explore the impact of temporal distance and self-construal levels on money donation (H4)). The Levene’s Test of Equality of Error Variance was significant (p = 0.008) indicating the violation of equality of variance assumption across groups. To fix this issue, it is recommended to set a more stringent significance level like 0.01 [46]. The interaction effect between temporal distance and self-construal levels was marginally significant, F(1, 111) = 4.48, 0.037, while the main effect for temporal distance was significant F(1, 111) =9.67, 0.002. However, the main effect for self-construal level was not significant, F(1, 111) = 1.12, 0.28 (See Figure 6). Pairwise comparison reveals that mean value difference between independent and interdependent was marginally significant for the distal future (Mindependet = 3.00, Minterdependent =4.26, p = 0.02), while it is not significant for near future (Mindependet = 2.61, Minterdependent =2.21, p = 0.48. In order to have a close look into data an independent sample t-test was run, after splitting the file into near future and distal future conditions. It compares the size of donation for independent and interdependent conditions. The Levene’s Test of Equality of Error Variance was insignificant for both near future (p = 0.14) and distal future (p = 0.29) conditions. There was a significant difference in size of donating money for independent (M = 3.00) and interdependent, M = 4.26; t (57) = −2.01, p = 0.04 in the distant future condition, whereas there was no significant difference in size of donating money for independent (M = 2.61) and interdependent, M = 2.21; t (54) = 0.84, p = 0.39 in the near future condition (See

Table 4. Descriptive Statistics for Money Donation.

Temporal Distance	Self-Construal Levels	M	SD	N
Near future	Independent	2.61	1.944	18
	Interdependent	2.21	1.417	38
Distal future	Independent	3.00	2.052	20
	Interdependent	4.26	2.370	39

). This provides more robust results than the above pairwise comparison. Therefore, although the mean value difference for the near future condition was not statistically significant it follows the predicted direction. The mean value for interdependent was lower than the mean value for independent in the near future condition, whereas the mean value for interdependent was higher than the mean value for dependent in the distal future. The results of the analysis provide supportive evidence to partially verify H4.

Thus, H3 that predicts individuals with interdependent self are likely to donate more time in the distant future, compared to individuals with independent self, whereas individuals with independent self are likely to donate more time in the near future, compared to individuals with interdependent self, is partially supported. Similarly, H4 that predicts individuals with interdependent self are likely to donate more time in the distant future, compared to individuals with independent self, whereas individuals with independent self are likely to donate more time in the near future, compared to individuals with interdependent self, is partially supported.

3.3. Additional Analysis

Finally, the study investigates whether there is an impact of gender on willingness to donate. A two-way between-group—2 (temporal distance: near future and distant future) × 2 (gender: female and male)—analysis of variance (ANOVA was conducted separately for time contribution and money contribution. Neither the main effect nor the interaction effect was significant not only for time contribution (gender: F(1, 121) = 0.65, 0.42; interaction effect: F(1, 121) = 0.06, 0.81) but also for money contribution (gender: F(1, 111) = 0.68, 0.41; interaction effect: F(1, 111) = 0.40, 0.52).

3.4. Findigs

Findings reveals that temporal distance has a direct impact on joint evaluation of time and money donations. That is temporal distance evokes dissimilar mental processes which lead them to go for time donation (near future) or money donation (distance future). With respect to the size of donation, temporal distance has an impact on donating money, but not for time. Importantly, as far as the interaction effects are concerned, people who are more orientated to independent self are willing to donate more time and money in the near future, whereas people with a more interdependent-self perspective are willing to donate more time and money in the distant future. Findings suggest that moderation effect is much more apparent in relation to money donation than to time donation.

4. Discussion

Results found that individuals were more willing to donate by means of volunteering rather than by contributing money under both near future and distant future conditions. This may be due to consideration of time as a less scarce resources than money [46], and valuing time is more ambiguous than money [47]. However, volunteering time was well pronounced when the event was going to take place within the coming week rather than after four months. Thus, it can be concluded that temporal distance has no significant impact on types of donation as means of contribution (donation options).To put it differently, when individuals evaluate time and money donation options jointly, they may prefer time donation to money donation. Nevertheless, individuals were eager to go for a time donation option rather than a money option in the near future.

As far as the size of the donation is concerned, individuals are willing to contribute more time, as a percentage of available spare time, when the event is taking place after four months. Nevertheless, it was not significantly different from events that took place in the near future. This finding is not fully consistent with the notion that people rich in benevolence value are willing to donate more time in the distant future than in the near future [30], because this analysis did not focus on value difference under two conditions. With regard to money contribution, as a percentage of monthly expenses provided by parents or earned by them, they were willing to contribute more money when the event was taking place after four months and it was significantly different from the event that takes place in the near future. Agerström and Björklund [32] also noted that people were willing to contribute for altruistic causes more in the distant future than near future. Nevertheless, there was no significant difference between time contribution and money contribution in the distal future. Thus, temporal distance has a significant impact on size of money donation, whereas temporal distance has no impact on the size of time donation.

Hypothesis one and two that predict achievement-oriented individuals tend to donate more in the near future compared to affiliation-oriented individuals, whereas affiliation-oriented individuals tend to donate more in the distant future compared to achievement-oriented individuals in terms of both time and money, was not confirmed. The potential reason for rejecting the hypothesis is value overlapping. In accordance with universal value theory, human motivational values are structured within oneself in a compatible manner [19], in which self-direction is structured in a compatible manner with universalism. A scenario that appeals to people to help children with chronic health problems may evoke protection for the welfare of all people. Consequently, activated universalism value may result in more contribution in the distant future similar to the behavior of affiliation-oriented individuals. The other potentiality is the weak manipulation of temporal distance [32]. According to this, manipulation of temporal distance like next week vs. ten years later was a weak manipulation. Therefore, though the time contribution was in the predicted direction, it was not substantial enough, which may be due to fact that the difference in temporal distance in this study was four months.

The third and fourth hypotheses are partially confirmed. That is, individuals with interdependent self are likely to donate more time in the distant future, compared to individuals with independent self, whereas individuals with independent self are likely to donate more time in the near future, compared to individuals with interdependent self (H3). Similarly, individuals with interdependent self are likely to donate more time in the distant future, compared to individuals with independent self, whereas individuals with independent self are likely to donate more time in the near future, compared to individuals with interdependent self (H4). Mean differences in the near future condition were not statistically significant, though it was in the predicted direction, maybe due to weak manipulation of temporal distance [32].

Prior research concluded that female individuals demonstrate higher willingness to donate relative to male individuals [48]. However, such differences could not be found in relation to contribution of time and money in either near future condition or in distant future condition, and even in interaction effect.

5. Concluding Remarks

5.1. Theoretical Contribution

This study contributes to the existing body of knowledge of psychological distance and self-construal level theory.

First, much less research has intensively investigated the relationship between psychological distance and donation behavior. Notably, Ein-Gar and Levontin [38] investigated the influence of social distance and temporal distance on money donation or time donation in separate studies, whereas this study has separated temporal distance from social distance and investigated the influence on time and money donation within subject design. Moreover, instead of measuring only the size of donation, this study has introduced donation options as joint evaluation. Importantly, the study has investigated the influence of temporal distance on time and money donation through the lens of value-driven individual differences. Therefore, the findings advance our knowledge, especially, in relation to how value-driven individual differences moderate the relationship between temporal distance and donating time (money).

Second, the study contributes to the knowledge of self-construal level in such a way that introduces self-construal level, which is driven by personal values as a strong construct that highly responds to psychological distance (construal level). However, further investigation is needed to test the robustness of this relationship and establish a direct relationship between two construal levels and respective value properties. Moreover, this study found that demographic factors like gender have no significant impact on donation behavior of individuals.

5.2. Managerial Implications

At present, charity organizations and non-profit organizations (NPOs) are struggling to raise funds in order to help needy communities. This situation may become more serious when the non-profit sector faces difficulty in applying complex marketing tools [49]. In an effort to tackle this issue, charity organizations collaborate with profit making organizations. In this milieu, the study helps nonprofit and for-profit organizations to design charitable initiatives with greater participation of members and customers.

Further, because people are willing to contribute more money when an event is going to take place in the distant future, the information about the event and request for donation (collecting contribution) can be communicated to the expected audience. The greater the difference between the period of money collection (communicating the message of request) and the date of event taking place, the higher the effectiveness of the tactic. If charity organizations have regular members, the organization can make the request and agree with contributors about the amount of contribution in advance.

5.3. Limitation and Future Direction

The results presented in this paper are subjected to few inherited limitations. Eliciting decision-making methodology from participants based on hypothetical scenarios is a widely accepted methodology in consumer behavior. However, someone can argue that employing university students as subjects may attenuate the value of pragmatic use of the finding in a real business context. As university students also become consumers in another time, it can be believed that the validity of the findings has not been hampered.

Further, even though the literature has shown some relationships between value properties and personality traits (achievement/affiliation orientation and construal levels), the present study has not explored it explicitly. Value properties have been measured through the measurement of individual differences. Therefore, the study has been limited in illustrating the extent to which central values and secondary values have been activated in response to psychological distance directly. Future research is required to investigate this phenomenon in order to clearly establish the moderation role of value properties between psychological distance and donation behavior.

Moreover, this study has been limited to investigate only temporal dimensions of psychological distance. Therefore, future research can focus on investigating how self-construal level moderates the relationship between social distance and physical distance and donation behavior, and how it differs from results of this study.

Most of the prior studies have highlighted that consumers have become skeptical about CRM usage. However, the current study has not touched on this aspect and the donation familiarity of individuals in different cultures. Thus, it is worth exploring this phenomenon with respect to temporal and social psychological distance in future studies as big data can be utilized with the insights derived from these findings.

5.4. Conclusions

Psychological distance shows different ways in which an object, event or a task is removed from the self. When individuals evaluate donation options jointly, temporal distance evokes a similar mental process through which they tend to choose time donation if the event is taking place near (close) future. In a similar vein, there is a tendency to choose money donation options by participants, if the event takes place in the distant future. With regard to size of donation, temporal distance has an impact on donating money, but not for time. Notably, self-construal level interacted with a temporal construal level rather than that of a personality trait (achievement/affiliation) to bring about strong donation behavior. Findings suggest that the moderation effect is much more apparent in relation to money donation than to time donation.