Near, Far, Wherever You Are: Understanding Distance Effects in Prosocial Cause Appeals

Abstract

Recent federal cuts have intensified pressure on nonprofit organizations, particularly those supporting vulnerable communities. As government support declines, nonprofits are increasingly dependent on individual prosocial contributions not only in terms of donations, but also more generally in terms of helping, to sustain their programs. Yet, motivating individual support for psychologically distant causes—those perceived as unrelated to one's immediate context—remains a persistent challenge. Despite over 17 years of research on prosocial behavior, it is unclear how psychological distance shapes responses to cause-related appeals. This meta-analysis synthesizes 235 effect sizes from 132 empirical studies to examine how psychological distance influences prosocial responses to cause-related appeals. Overall, the authors find no significant difference in prosocial responses between psychologically distant and proximal appeals. The results reveal distinct effects across dimensions of psychological distance. While spatially proximal causes yield only a modest impact, socially proximal causes are notably more persuasive. Crucially, proximal causes interact with the nature of the prosocial outcome: Proximal appeals are more effective when they spotlight a single individual or request monetary donations. These findings provide insights for nonprofits seeking to optimize individual prosocial engagement amid widening economic and social disparities.