Journal of Applied Psychology 1975, Vol. 60, No. 3, 409-410
Blood Donor and Nonclonor Motivation: A Transnational Replication D. J. Obome and S. Bradley University College of Swansea, Swansea, Wales A questionnaire survey of a random selection of students (N — 533) at a British university was carried out to investigate the motives of blood donors and nondonors. The results obtained are in close agreement with those published by Oswalt and Napoliello (1974). Thus, donation by volunteer donors appears to result largely from humanitarian motives, while nondonation is a result, primarily, of fear of the unknown or of apathy. Furthermore, it was shown that a significantly larger proportion of donors than nondonors first heard about the work of the National Blood Transfusion Service through personal contact. Implications of these findings for the recruitment of donors are discussed.
A recent article by Oswalt and Napoliello (1974) reported a survey carried out among students at two American colleges to investigate the motivations of blood donors and nondonors. The purpose of this note is to describe a similar study using students at a British university. Although the two surveys were carried out independently (and thus questions may have been asked in different ways), similarities in the information acquired and populations sampled (i.e., college students) permit interesting transnational parallels. A comparison of American and British donor and nondonor motives is of interest because of differences in donor recruitment between the two countries. In Britain, blood collection is carried out by a national organization, the National Blood Transfusion Service, and donation'is a voluntary act for which the donor is unpaid apart from a cup of fluid, biscuits and, in some regions, a weeks supply of iron tablets. In America, however, donors may be recruited on a voluntary basis by the American Red Cross or they may receive some reward for their blood such as cash, or the offset of charges for blood already used (replacement donor), or blood which might be used in the future (assurance donor) (Titrnuss, 1970). Comparing voluntary donors from the two societies, therefore, might allow insight into whether the possibility of reward for blood in America influences the motives of volunteer donors.
METHOD Self-report questionnaires were sent to all 805 students living in five halls of residence at the University College of Swansea, Among other questions, data were requested concerning the respondent's year at University, how he/she came to hear of the National Blood Transfusion Service, whether he/she had given blood before, and the reasons for his/her decision. Respondents who had given blood in the past were provided with a list of four possible motives for donating and were asked to rank them in order of importance to them. Six possible reasons for nondonation were ranked in order of importance by the nondonors in the sample. Both donors and nondonors were asked to omit those alternatives which they considered inapplicable to them. RESULTS
Requests for reprints should be sent to D. J. Oborne, Department of Psychology, University College of Swansea, Singleton Park, Swansea SA2 8PP, South Wales,
Of the 805 questionnaires originally distributed, 533 (66%) were returned completed, 335 (63%) from males and 198 (37%) from females. One hundred-nineteen (22%) respondents reported having given blood at least once before. The advantage of requiring the respondent to rank a series of alternatives lies in the fact that the average rank for each alternative may be computed and thus provide an indication of the relative importance of each alternative. The median ranks for each alternative, provided by donor and nondonor respondents, are given in Table 1. With regard to the source from which respondents first became aware of the work of the National Blood Transfusion Service, the majority considered personal contact (42%) or adver-
409
SHORT NOTES
410
TABLE 1 MEDIAN RANKS ASSIGNED TO ALTERNATIVE MOTIVATIONS BY BLOOD DONORS AND NONDONORS Motivation
Rank
N
1.83 2.57 3.02 3.39
111 8S 77 41
1,64 1.90 2.05 2.61 3.08 6.00
103 185 144 103 74 25
11
Donors General desire to help Response to an appeal Encouragement by friends Repayment Nondonors b Medical reasons Fear of pain Not enough time to spare Not like the sight of blood Put off by someone else It is immoral to give blood
Note. A7" idicatcs the n u m b e r of respondents considering the reaso T to be important enoughl to warrant position. " Possible angc of ranks for donors'. 1 (most important) to 4 (least important). b Possible ange of ranks for nondonois: 1 (most important) to 6 (least ii portant).
tisements (40%) most important. In analyzing these data in terms of donors and nondonors, however, it appears that a significantly larger proportion of donors to nondonors received their information through personal contact whereas significantly more nondonors heard of the National Blood Transfusion Service via advertisements ( x - = 11.3, p < .01). DISCUSSION Regarding the reasons for donating blood, Oswalt and Napoliello showed that humanitarian reasons were the primary motivating factor in influencing the donor in his decision. The same reason was placed first by the donors in the present survey. Similarly, Oswalt and Napoliello discovered that peer pressure was the second most important reason, and this is corroborated by the present study which placed the alternatives "in response to an appeal" and "encouragement by friends or colleagues" as second and third in order of importance. Considering the reasons for not donating blood, results from the present survey compare well with the American study. Oswalt and Napoliello concluded that the majority of nondonors (60%) reported that "medical reasons . . . prohibited them from donating blood." (1974, p. 123) This reason was also placed first in the present survey. This result was to be expected, however, since "medical reasons" is the only alternative which depends upon the physiological condition of the potential donor rather than on his subjective impressions. Thus, if one had a medical condition which would render one unfit to be a donor, then this would be the overriding reason for not giv-
ing blood. Other, more subjective reasons do not enter into the decision. Of the remaining reasons for not giving blood, again results compare well. Apart from "medical reasons," Oswalt and Napoliello discovered that "general nervousness and fear" and apathy were placed high on the list of reasons, and the results of the present study support these findings. The study described in this note, therefore, largely confirms the results of Oswalt and Napoliello (1974). Blood donating by volunteer donors appears to be largely a humanitarian act while nondonation arises largely through fear of the unknown or apathy. Since it appears to be the aim of most countries to increase the proportion of blood obtained from voluntary donors (League of Red Cross Societies, 1973) blood procurement agencies should take more note of these conclusions by emphasizing more positively the altruistic aspects of donating blood and providing more information on the donation procedure. Further indications of the ways in which a donor panel may be increased are suggested b}' the results which showed that a significantly higher number of actual donors first heard about blood transfusion through personal contact. This observation is clearly in agreement with the motivations of nondonors as obtained from this survey. Personal contact (which may be via the blood bank or result from discussion with friends) may be the best way of overcoming fears about the procedure of blood donation. Thus, unlike his contemporary who might have received his information via mass advertisements, if the potential donor is told about blood transfusion by a friend who is a donor himself, he/she should have less anxiety about becoming a donor for the first time. Finally, it is, of course, an obvious statement that students are an abnormal sample with respect to the total population, and both the present study and that of Oswalt and Napoliello (1974) may be criticized on this point. It is for this reason that further research is at present being carried out by the authors to sample both donors and nondonors from the general population. REFERENCES League of Red Cross Societies. Blood donor recruitment: Successful methods (Medico-social Documentation No. 32). Geneva: Author, 1973. Oswalt, R. M., & Napoliello, M. Motivations of blood donors and nondonors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1974, 59, 122-124. Titmuss, R. M. The gift relationship. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1970. (Received July IS, 1974)
Blood Donor and Nonclonor Motivation: A Transnational Replication D. J. Obome and S. Bradley University College of Swansea, Swansea, Wales A questionnaire survey of a random selection of students (N — 533) at a British university was carried out to investigate the motives of blood donors and nondonors. The results obtained are in close agreement with those published by Oswalt and Napoliello (1974). Thus, donation by volunteer donors appears to result largely from humanitarian motives, while nondonation is a result, primarily, of fear of the unknown or of apathy. Furthermore, it was shown that a significantly larger proportion of donors than nondonors first heard about the work of the National Blood Transfusion Service through personal contact. Implications of these findings for the recruitment of donors are discussed.
A recent article by Oswalt and Napoliello (1974) reported a survey carried out among students at two American colleges to investigate the motivations of blood donors and nondonors. The purpose of this note is to describe a similar study using students at a British university. Although the two surveys were carried out independently (and thus questions may have been asked in different ways), similarities in the information acquired and populations sampled (i.e., college students) permit interesting transnational parallels. A comparison of American and British donor and nondonor motives is of interest because of differences in donor recruitment between the two countries. In Britain, blood collection is carried out by a national organization, the National Blood Transfusion Service, and donation'is a voluntary act for which the donor is unpaid apart from a cup of fluid, biscuits and, in some regions, a weeks supply of iron tablets. In America, however, donors may be recruited on a voluntary basis by the American Red Cross or they may receive some reward for their blood such as cash, or the offset of charges for blood already used (replacement donor), or blood which might be used in the future (assurance donor) (Titrnuss, 1970). Comparing voluntary donors from the two societies, therefore, might allow insight into whether the possibility of reward for blood in America influences the motives of volunteer donors.
METHOD Self-report questionnaires were sent to all 805 students living in five halls of residence at the University College of Swansea, Among other questions, data were requested concerning the respondent's year at University, how he/she came to hear of the National Blood Transfusion Service, whether he/she had given blood before, and the reasons for his/her decision. Respondents who had given blood in the past were provided with a list of four possible motives for donating and were asked to rank them in order of importance to them. Six possible reasons for nondonation were ranked in order of importance by the nondonors in the sample. Both donors and nondonors were asked to omit those alternatives which they considered inapplicable to them. RESULTS
Requests for reprints should be sent to D. J. Oborne, Department of Psychology, University College of Swansea, Singleton Park, Swansea SA2 8PP, South Wales,
Of the 805 questionnaires originally distributed, 533 (66%) were returned completed, 335 (63%) from males and 198 (37%) from females. One hundred-nineteen (22%) respondents reported having given blood at least once before. The advantage of requiring the respondent to rank a series of alternatives lies in the fact that the average rank for each alternative may be computed and thus provide an indication of the relative importance of each alternative. The median ranks for each alternative, provided by donor and nondonor respondents, are given in Table 1. With regard to the source from which respondents first became aware of the work of the National Blood Transfusion Service, the majority considered personal contact (42%) or adver-
409
SHORT NOTES
410
TABLE 1 MEDIAN RANKS ASSIGNED TO ALTERNATIVE MOTIVATIONS BY BLOOD DONORS AND NONDONORS Motivation
Rank
N
1.83 2.57 3.02 3.39
111 8S 77 41
1,64 1.90 2.05 2.61 3.08 6.00
103 185 144 103 74 25
11
Donors General desire to help Response to an appeal Encouragement by friends Repayment Nondonors b Medical reasons Fear of pain Not enough time to spare Not like the sight of blood Put off by someone else It is immoral to give blood
Note. A7" idicatcs the n u m b e r of respondents considering the reaso T to be important enoughl to warrant position. " Possible angc of ranks for donors'. 1 (most important) to 4 (least important). b Possible ange of ranks for nondonois: 1 (most important) to 6 (least ii portant).
tisements (40%) most important. In analyzing these data in terms of donors and nondonors, however, it appears that a significantly larger proportion of donors to nondonors received their information through personal contact whereas significantly more nondonors heard of the National Blood Transfusion Service via advertisements ( x - = 11.3, p < .01). DISCUSSION Regarding the reasons for donating blood, Oswalt and Napoliello showed that humanitarian reasons were the primary motivating factor in influencing the donor in his decision. The same reason was placed first by the donors in the present survey. Similarly, Oswalt and Napoliello discovered that peer pressure was the second most important reason, and this is corroborated by the present study which placed the alternatives "in response to an appeal" and "encouragement by friends or colleagues" as second and third in order of importance. Considering the reasons for not donating blood, results from the present survey compare well with the American study. Oswalt and Napoliello concluded that the majority of nondonors (60%) reported that "medical reasons . . . prohibited them from donating blood." (1974, p. 123) This reason was also placed first in the present survey. This result was to be expected, however, since "medical reasons" is the only alternative which depends upon the physiological condition of the potential donor rather than on his subjective impressions. Thus, if one had a medical condition which would render one unfit to be a donor, then this would be the overriding reason for not giv-
ing blood. Other, more subjective reasons do not enter into the decision. Of the remaining reasons for not giving blood, again results compare well. Apart from "medical reasons," Oswalt and Napoliello discovered that "general nervousness and fear" and apathy were placed high on the list of reasons, and the results of the present study support these findings. The study described in this note, therefore, largely confirms the results of Oswalt and Napoliello (1974). Blood donating by volunteer donors appears to be largely a humanitarian act while nondonation arises largely through fear of the unknown or apathy. Since it appears to be the aim of most countries to increase the proportion of blood obtained from voluntary donors (League of Red Cross Societies, 1973) blood procurement agencies should take more note of these conclusions by emphasizing more positively the altruistic aspects of donating blood and providing more information on the donation procedure. Further indications of the ways in which a donor panel may be increased are suggested b}' the results which showed that a significantly higher number of actual donors first heard about blood transfusion through personal contact. This observation is clearly in agreement with the motivations of nondonors as obtained from this survey. Personal contact (which may be via the blood bank or result from discussion with friends) may be the best way of overcoming fears about the procedure of blood donation. Thus, unlike his contemporary who might have received his information via mass advertisements, if the potential donor is told about blood transfusion by a friend who is a donor himself, he/she should have less anxiety about becoming a donor for the first time. Finally, it is, of course, an obvious statement that students are an abnormal sample with respect to the total population, and both the present study and that of Oswalt and Napoliello (1974) may be criticized on this point. It is for this reason that further research is at present being carried out by the authors to sample both donors and nondonors from the general population. REFERENCES League of Red Cross Societies. Blood donor recruitment: Successful methods (Medico-social Documentation No. 32). Geneva: Author, 1973. Oswalt, R. M., & Napoliello, M. Motivations of blood donors and nondonors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1974, 59, 122-124. Titmuss, R. M. The gift relationship. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1970. (Received July IS, 1974)
