Customers evaluated companies more favorably when equivalent charitable contributions were presented as regular donations instead of a single annual total in a series of marketing studies.
The research, published in the October issue of the Journal of Marketing Research, included two field studies and five online experiments. The authors examined reputation, customer engagement and stated likelihood of purchase.
The findings concern how people respond to a company’s giving and the way it is described. They do not show that regular donations always provide more help to a charity, or that a company can replace real contributions with better wording.
The same total, described over time
The researchers compared periodic contributions with equivalent aggregate amounts. For example, $20,000 a month for 12 months adds up to $240,000 in a year. The timing and description differ even though the total is the same.
In one field study, the team partnered with a Midwestern business that regularly contributes to its community. An Indiana University account of the research says separate newsletter messages described the business’s contribution as 25,000 meals each month or 300,000 meals over the year.
Across the seven preregistered studies, the authors reported more favorable responses to periodic giving. They attribute part of the pattern to people perceiving a consistent donor as more genuinely motivated to help others.
Perceived motivation is a judgment made by study participants, not independent proof of a company’s intentions. Co-author Alexander Park also notes that describing a small donation as a series of very small amounts can make a donor seem less generous. The experiments cannot establish that every audience will respond in the same way, or that a favorable response will persist indefinitely.
Communication cannot substitute for a donation
A company’s giving can take several forms, including cash contributions, donated products and employee volunteering. A reliable account should identify what was given, when it was provided and who received it. A pledge is not the same as a completed donation.
Companies should also avoid presenting an annual total as regular monthly support unless the underlying record supports that description. If contributions differ by month, an average may be accurate when clearly identified as an average, but it should not imply identical payments.
The needs of recipients matter too. A nonprofit may benefit from predictable recurring funding, while another may need a larger immediate contribution for an urgent project. The marketing study measured consumer responses; it did not compare those charitable outcomes.
What businesses can learn from the test
When assessing a message about corporate giving, a business can compare how well customers understand the contribution and whether they trust the claim. Sales, reputation and charitable impact are separate outcomes and require separate evidence.
Our earlier explanation of how to measure additional sales from marketing describes why an observed purchase is not automatically caused by the message a customer saw.
The paper was first published online in January 2026. Its combination of field and online studies offers evidence about communication, while the appropriate donation schedule still depends on the recipient’s needs, the donor’s resources and the commitments actually made.
