💡
EA market testing (public)
  • Introduction/overview
    • Introduction & explanation
    • 👋Meet the team
    • 📕Content overview
    • Progress/goals (early 2023)
      • EAMT progress & results
      • Goals, trajectory, FAQs
  • 🤝Partners, contexts, trials
    • Introduction
    • Giving What We Can
      • Pledge page (options trial)
      • Giving guides - Facebook
      • Message Test (Feb 2022)
      • YouTube Remarketing
    • One For the World (OftW)
      • Pre-giving-tues. email A/B
        • Preregistration: OftW pre-GT
    • The Life You Can Save (TLYCS)
      • Advisor signup (Portland)
    • Fundraisers & impact info.
      • ICRC - quick overview
      • CRS/DV: overview
      • 📖Posts and writings
    • University/city groups
    • Workplaces/orgs
    • Other partners
    • Related/relevant projects/orgs
  • 🪧Marketing & testing: opportunities, tools, tips
    • Testing Contexts: Overview
    • Implementing ads, messages, designs
      • Doing and funding ads
      • Video ads/Best-practice guidelines
      • Facebook
      • Targeted ad on FB, with variations: setup
    • Collecting outcome data
      • Facebook ads interface
        • Pivot tables
      • Google analytics interface
      • Google A/B, optimize interface
      • Reconciling FB/GA reports
      • Survey/marketing platforms
    • Trial reporting template
  • 🎨Research Design, methodology
    • Methods: Overview, resources
    • "Qualitative" design issues
    • Real-world assignment & inference
      • Geographic segmentation/blocked randomization
      • Difference in difference/'Time-based methods'
      • Facebook split-testing issues
    • Simple quant design issues
    • Adaptive design/sampling, reinforcement learning
    • 'Observational' studies: issues
    • Analysis: Statistical approaches
  • 🧮Profiling and segmentation project
    • Introduction, scoping work
    • Existing work/data
      • Surveys/Predicting EA interest
      • Awareness: RP, etc.
      • Kagan and Fitz survey
      • Longtermism attitudes/profiling
      • Animal welfare attitudes: profiling/surveying
      • Other data
    • Fehr/SOEP analysis... followup
      • Followup with Thomas Ptashnik
    • Further approaches in progress
      • Profiling 'existing traffic'
  • 📋(In)effective Altruistic choices: Review of theory and evidence
    • Introduction...
    • The challenge: drivers of effective/ineffective giving
      • How little we know...
    • Models, theories, psych. norms
    • Tools and trials: overview
      • Tools/interventions: principles
      • Outcomes: Effective gift/consider impact)
        • (Effectiveness information and its presentation)
        • (Outcome: Pledge, give substantially (& effectively))
          • (Moral duty (of well-off))
        • Give if you win/ conditional pledge
      • Academic Paper Ideas
  • Appendix
    • How this 'gitbook' works
      • Other tech
    • Literature: animal advocacy messaging
    • Charity ratings, rankings, messages
    • "A large-scale online experiment" (participants-aware)
  • Innovationsinfundraising.org
Powered by GitBook
On this page

Was this helpful?

Edit on GitHub
Export as PDF
  1. Appendix

Literature: animal advocacy messaging

PreviousOther techNextCharity ratings, rankings, messages

Last updated 2 years ago

Was this helpful?

DR: How people respond to animal advocacy ads and what appeals to them more? XXX redacted

Lots of things like this on Faunalytics

Meat consumption appeals etc (?)

There was no clear trend showing which tactics were most effective. Among the top ten, some used writing, pictures or virtual reality to show the suffering of animals on factory farms. Others added information about the health and environmental impacts of factory farming. Still others gave specific suggestions on how to eat less meat or discussed laws to improve how animals are treated on farms.

There was no clear trend showing which psychological strategies were most effective, although many different strategies were employed. Tactics often employed descriptions of how eating meat is becoming less normal, the emotions of farm animals, individual victims of factory farming, comparisons between farm animals and pets, and specific suggestions for how to eat less meat.The journal-published version:

This is a re-analysis of one of the earlier studies the community has done on messaging:

Some other older research (XXX redacted):

DR: Thanks. But I guess this stuff was mainly trying to appeal to the general public. XXX REDACTED I think the group that is being targeted is rather different.

Anytthing in the above seems specifically relevant to this, like stuff trying to get people who are already interested in animals to pursue it more seriously?

David Moss
Michael St. Jules
https://thehumaneleague.org/article/E014R01-reducing-meat-consumption-appealing-animal-welfare-meta-analysis-protocol
https://ww
w.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195666321001847?via%3Dihub
Michael St. Jules
https://thehumaneleague.org/article/animal-cruelty-abolitionist-messaging-reanalysis
https://animalcharityevaluators.org/blog/our-initial-thoughts-on-the-mfa-facebook-ads-study/
https://mercyforanimals.org/blog/impact-study/
https://mercyforanimals.org/blog/dominate-social-media/