12/2/2020
I’m so excited to share a new publication that Pam, Kris, and I landed in American Sociological Review!
Does Use of Emotion Increase Donations and Volunteers for Nonprofits?
(Sort answer: Yes!)
Check back later as I plan on creating more content about this work in the future.
Also, fill out the contact form if you have trouble accessing the article and would like to request a copy.
Abstract:
Nonprofits offer services to disadvantaged populations, mobilize collective action, and advocate for civil rights. Conducting this work requires significant resources, raising the question: how do nonprofits succeed in increasing donations and volunteers amid widespread competition for these resources? Much research treats nonprofits as cold, rational entities, focusing on overhead, the “price” of donations, and efficiency in programming. We argue that nonprofits attract donors and volunteers by connecting to their emotions. We use newly available administrative IRS 990 e-filer data to analyze 90,000 nonprofit missions from 2012 to 2016. Computational text analysis measures the positive or negative affect of each nonprofit’s mission statement. We then link the positive and negative sentiment expressed by nonprofits to their donations and volunteers. We differentiate between the institutional fields of nonprofits—for example, arts, education, social welfare—distinguishing nonprofits focused on social bonding from those focused on social problems. We find that expressed positive emotion is often associated with higher donations and volunteers, especially in bonding fields. But for some types of nonprofits, combining positive sentiment with negative sentiment in a mission statement is most effective in producing volunteers. Auxiliary analyses using experimental and longitudinal designs provide converging evidence that emotional language enhances charitable behavior. Understanding the role of emotion can help nonprofit organizations attract and engage volunteers and donors.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0003122420960104
https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122420960104
9/27/2020
After a long move across the country, from Spokane to Boston to start my new job at Brandeis, I can’t stop thinking about food waste.
Maybe it’s the Season 6 of Alone I’m watching on Netflix that has me thinking about it, as the contestants there basically organize their whole day around finding food.
Either way I’m struck by how the discourse in the U.S. around food waste is such a great example of how our individualistic society is standing in the way of our ability to confront pressing social problems.
I’ll try to unpack this for you:
A lot of the “fixes” for social problems in the U.S., and widespread understandings of the origins of those problems, are often framed as the responsibility of individual people. Whether this looks like “lazy” people or “loose” women or “consumer power” or “self help” we often talk about systemic problems that are caused by macro-level actors such as laws, institutions, and cultural norms as if the actions of individual people are still the root of our ills.
Food waste is the same way. I’ve read two items today about food waste https://www.fda.gov/food/consumers/food-loss-and-waste and https://foodprint.org/issues/the-problem-of-food-waste/ and both stress the fact that U.S. households waste 30-40% of food we purchase with the two main causes basically being spoiling of food and not eating leftovers. The solutions presented are, seemingly logically, that we should purchase and cook less food.
But tell me how that’s possible when a bag of lettuce holds 11 servings, or when the price for a gallon of milk is $3.47 but if you were to buy that in quarts it would be twice as expensive at $7.12. How can we purchase less food when food is only sold in large quantities and when we’re so overworked that the cost in time and money to purchase the food means that we try to buy as much as possible all at once? How is this an individual problem when food is provided in a for profit system that incentivizes massive quantities of food distributed by few locations that often require vehicle access? Yes, we can try to only buy as many tomatoes as we’re sure we’ll need before they go bad, or buy a baking pan that allows us to make 1/2 size lasagnas, but when commercial food producers profit off of selling us the largest possible quantities and a lack of diversification in our food supply chains allows them to not give us other feasible options… when “consumer demand” is “white affluent consumer demand”…it’s just not possible for the individual households to make these changes. It’s like telling a prisoner they can go free if they are able to forge a key from raw materials from within their cell and then touting the “Keys for Prisoners” program as a hugely successful policy initiative.
Okay. It felt good to get that out.
What to do? If we really want to reduce food waste, we need to remember that systemic changes happen on the systems level. We need to focus our energies on making structural changes through cooperative action as a group, not as individuals trying to troubleshoot our own dietary habits.
6/5/2020
“The problem is that white people see racism as conscious hate, when racism is bigger than that. Racism is a complex system of social and political levers and pulleys set up generations ago to continue working on the behalf of whites at other people’s expense, whether whites know/like it or not. Racism is an insidious cultural disease. It is so insidious that it doesn’t care if you are a white person who likes black people; it’s still going to find a way to infect how you deal with people who don’t look like you. Yes, racism looks like hate, but hate is just one manifestation. Privilege is another. Access is another. Ignorance is another. Apathy is another. And so on. So while I agree with people who say no one is born racist, it remains a powerful system that we’re immediately born into. It’s like being born into air: you take it in as soon as you breathe. It’s not a cold that you can get over. There is no anti-racist certification class. It’s a set of socioeconomic traps and cultural values that are fired up every time we interact with the world. It is a thing you have to keep scooping out of the boat of your life to keep from drowning in it. I know it’s hard work, but it’s the price you pay for owning everything.”― scott woods
12/6/2019
I’d like to put this out there on the internet because I think it’s a really good concept / idea:
symbolic reality: a socially constructed space that, in isolation, exhibits counter-hegemonic norms, cultures, or interactions.
9/2/2019
I’m trying to figure out a way to communicate what it is I do to my grandmother…
8/20/2019
Diversity pledges:
I promise to consciously promote acceptance and demonstrate respect.
I will dedicate myself to actively listen to each person’s story.
I promise to learn from and embrace differences among identities.
I will recognize commonalities and shared experiences.
I will practice inclusive language and be open to learning.
I promise to educate others to foster an inclusive community that treats every person with dignity and respect.
A diverse student body enables all students to have the transformational experience of interacting with their peers who have varied perspectives and come from different backgrounds. These experiences, which are highly valued by employers because of their importance in the workplace, also prepare students with the skills they need to live in an interconnected world and to be more engaged citizens. Our economic future, democracy, and global standing will suffer if the next generation is not ready to engage and work with people whose backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives are different from their own. Our nation’s higher education institutions, whether they are community colleges or four-year institutions, public or private, nonprofit or for-profit, religiously affiliated or secular, professional, vocational, or liberal-arts focused, stand committed to furthering the goals of equal opportunity and diversity in education. We pledge to reinvigorate our work to ensure that all who enroll in higher education experience a rigorous, horizonexpanding, and intellectually challenging education. We remain dedicated to the mission of discovering and disseminating knowledge, including the knowledge gained through direct experiences with diverse colleagues—a resource for achieving a stronger democracy and nation. (https://www.aascu.org/DiversityAd/)
Do you think this Frobes’s article is racist?:
7/8/2019
Happy 4th of July.
I was able to head to downtown Spokane to watch the annual fireworks show. They exploded them right above a little clock tower by the river. There was quite the gathering of families of all kinds, which reminded me how every community event has deep sociological potential.
Soc 101 Assignment:
Attend 1 community event during the semester. Observe who is attending this event, think about who is not in attendance. Are there families and if so are they talking to each other, or keeping to themselves? Do there appear to be different ways of going about this event, are there different roles people are playing?
Try to talk to at least one person. What did that person sound like when they responded? How did you feel? Did that person appear to notice? If more than just a short interaction takes place, take good notes.
3/18/2019
I don’t have a Facebook, and the fact that it enables human trafficking is only one of my reasons why. I sometimes feel pressure to reactivate or sign up for more social media accounts (I currently have researchgate, linkedin, and snapchat). Many job market preparation how-to’s, for example, state that a strong media presence is important for success.
But.
I can’t, y’all. I couldn’t nearly a decade ago after college, when I realized that all Facebook was going to be was other people’s news. Perhaps I could have curated my Facebook better, managing who showed up in my feed and trying to make Facebook “more professional.” I reactivated and deactivated it once a few years ago, and I sometimes find myself thinking I’ll start again, maybe it will be good for me? Maybe it will help my career?
But now I can sigh a big sigh of relief because case closed. If people are being bought and sold into slavery on Facebook it’s okay not to use it, right?
2/23/2019
It’s taken a while for me to get around to this, but it’s been on my mind. Back in January The Wall Street Journal published a piece by Jackson Toby with the opinion that Sociology is somehow in “decline” because of sociologists with “left wing politics.” Now, I can’t respond to their argument in full because I don’t subscribe to the WSJ. The title and use of “descriptive sociologist” and “truthful depiction of social reality” in the first paragraph, however, is enough to raise my voice against, even if it just a whimper in a blog somewhere. After breathing through my initial anger at someone smearing a whole discipline I happen to be a part of, I realized I was angry both because the opinion felt misinformed, but also because it felt violent as well. I’ll leave it up to you to decide on the first one but I think sociology is still going strong, and is becoming more relevant than ever (e.g. it’s now a part of the MCATs).
The main issue I have is the fact that this “decline” is then somehow the fault “left wing” sociological activists. I’m sorry? Does the fact that I study racism bother you? If I cite study after study that shows gender discrimination exists and hurts women, and then say that it should be eliminated, does that make me radical? It’s like calling a doctor who studies cancer in order to try and stop it from killing people a social justice warrior. “No, sir! I’m purely interested in the cells!” Nobody becomes a fire fighter to let houses burn. I study inequality, not because I’m trying to document it’s minutiae for some future historian, but because I think by understanding our social world we can empower people to improve it. It’s the whole point.
If I had to guess I think Jackson Toby has that opinion about sociologists because he’s scared of us, what we study, and what we represent. He thinks improving the world for everyone will make it a worse world for him. Boo-hoo. I challenge this too-pervasive narrative that people like me; queer people, or fem people, or black people, or liberal people can’t study the things that are important to them because it’s somehow damaging a pure, objective, or scientific reality. Those things don’t exist, but I do, and my desire to make the world a better place through exploring it is not a weakness of my discipline, it’s a strength.
For the CNCS nonprofit project I’ve been learning python code and thought I’d share a little of it here. I have to thank Nicholas Reith for his guidance in learning this code. We’re currently processing mission statements from nonprofit organizations for specific characteristics.
4/16/2018
This is the e-mail response I received from my Senator regarding net neutrality.
See below for contact information should you feel the need to contact him as well.
Unlike academic language, you should pay attention to the calculating use of adjectives.
Dear Robert:
Thank you for contacting me regarding Internet regulation and commerce. I appreciate having the benefit of your comments on this matter.
Over the past two decades, Americans have increasingly relied on the Internet in their personal and professional lives, and new technologies play a central role in the Internet’s growing importance. Many of these technologies have been developed in Texas. As Texans and Americans, we all benefit from advancements that encourage economic growth and make day-to-day life easier.
I believe in an open and free internet and that we need policies to meet the evolving challenges of technological advancement. However, government regulations move slower than technology, and we must ensure the laws we pass do not stifle innovation. A top-down regulatory approach can unnecessarily constrain an industry’s ability to create and deliver new products and services to consumers. In the Senate, I have supported legislation that facilitates innovation and opposed policies that threaten it.
As you may know, on December 14, 2017, the FCC voted 3-2 to restore internet freedom, reversing the 1930s-era utility-style regulation ("Title II") contained in the 2015 Open Internet Order, commonly referred to as “the net neutrality rule.” This action reinstates the light-touch regulatory structure established under the Clinton Administration that protects consumers, closes the digital divide, and brings next generation networks and services to all Americans. A return to the pre-2015 regulatory framework restores the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) jurisdiction to protect consumers and companies should Internet Service Providers engage in anticompetitive, unfair, or deceptive acts, which is the FTC’sprincipal mission and purpose.
I support the FCC’s transparent approach to reduce burdensome regulation and improve internet access and services. I am also proud to cosponsor the Restoring Internet Freedom Act (S. 993). This legislation would nullify the former net neutrality rule, ensure Congress maintains its primary authority to reshape communications policy, and restore the competitive freedom that has characterized the Internet. S.993 has been referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Although I am not a member of this Committee, I will keep your views in mind should S. 993 be considered by the full Senate during the 115th Congress.
I appreciate the opportunity to represent Texas in the United States Senate. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.
Sincerely,
JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator
517 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Tel: (202) 224-2934
Fax: (202) 228-2856
1/4/2018
How do I get this made into a reality television show?
Also some of the 198 should be graduate students, recent faculty, and people of color.
12/15/2017
Christmas Travel
A great example of how the social influences the personal, I'd like to introduce you to something I've been personally struggling with lately: the expensive prices of flights over the Christmas holiday (and also chanukah, Kwansaa, Chinese New Year, Valentines day, etc). As a graduate student, the United States Government recently passed a tax bill that would count my not paying tuition as part of my income (as if we can rely on companies like BP to research how to help every American child have access to preschool: here's a link to BP's two-week leave family policy, btw.)
Because we value certain days out of the year over others, as a society and as a culture with historically growing but potentially dwindling influence over global economic events, large groups of people try to travel during the "holidays." Consider the fact that we wouldn't have rush hour traffic if we didn't agree that working 9 to 5 is the regular "business" day in America. This culturally agreed-upon date, in turn, influences other aspects of our lives; ranging from how we consider gift-giving to the locations that form the cornerstones of family reunions. Is it, therefore, consequential for inequality if only certain individuals within our society are able to realize their family traditions surrounding travel during Christmas?
Despite what some people might say, every U.S. president has celebrated Christmas, because Americans care about Christmas. So much so that it was $800 dollars less expensive to fly home from my family's "Christmas," on the 24th rather than the 26th.
I realize that I am a very fortunate person to be able to ride a flying machine to visit my family hundreds of miles away for something so trivial as a cultural event. But there must be other people that contemplate the socially constructed, consequential, and arbitrary nature of time during the holidays too, right?