carr discussion

Which of these two ads does the most good?

In Poverty and Research, Carr and Atkins argue that the pity-arousing image on the left may attract more short-term donations, yet simultaneously harden the prejudices of non-donors – with social effects that remain unexplored over the long haul. Five psych and IDS students made it to Stewart Bio’s 8th floor lobby to discuss this appeal for research, and share their experiences as North American and West African aid advertising consumers. An hour and a half of free-wheeling conversation produced the following questions, to which Carr has graciously replied from Massey University in Auckland, New Zealand. As always, don’t hesitate to comment if you’d like to join the discussion!

In addition to the neurological approach you suggest, have you considered the effect of a cognitive prejudice-reduction model, such as dramatizing Allport’s contact hypothesis?

Mm, have not thought about that kind of approach, was thinking more along the lines of perspective-taking skills and the equivalent of fostering mirror neurons! I think the key issue is a denuding of situational perspective from the ads, coupled with constantly negative (or mostly constantly negative) information and outlook (implied). These effectively promote mental distancing (Lott) so the idea of using an e-equivalent of contact is a logical antidote, perhaps…

What follow-up research has been done on the issues you raise?

I do know however of some research in the pipeline, by one of my ex Honours students, Ishbel McWha. The research focuses on educational background and differential attributions about poverty, following exposure to classically cropped (e.g., sad-face-only) imagery of poverty versus the more contextually rich kinds of image suggested as an alternative by the likes of Oxfam and UNICEF (e.g., kids working hard to overcome basic school conditions). I'll also let Ishbel know about sending a copy of her work once it is peer-reviwed somewhat more down the track.