Emotional mechanisms and format effects of motivational questions for blood donation

What would it take to convince you to donate? A survey study of the relationship between motivators, barriers, and payment for whole blood, plasma, and platelet donation

Background

With growing discussion about blood donor remuneration, the present study examined the level of payment that may be required to convince individuals to engage in whole blood, plasma, and platelet donations.

Study Design and Methods

Anonymous online surveys were completed by a college sample [n = 490; 76.9% female; Mean Age = 20.3 (SD = 4.9) years; 32.9% whole blood donors] and a ResearchMatch sample [n = 323; 70.6% female; Mean Age = 50.7 (SD = 16.6) years; 82.7% whole blood donors]. Level of payment needed to motivate whole blood, plasma, and platelet donation was examined as a function of donation history, sample, and gender. In addition, path analyses examined associations between donation motivators, barriers, and payment level.

Results

Across all types of donation, history of whole blood donation was related to a greater willingness to donate without payment. At the same time, however, sizeable portions of prior donors indicated that monetary payment would convince them to donate whole blood (24%), plasma (51%), or platelets (57%). Across all types of donation, donation‐related barriers (i.e., anxiety, fear) were indirectly related to higher payment levels via lower self‐efficacy and more negative donation attitudes. Donation‐related motivators (i.e., warm glow, regret, and altruism) were indirectly related to lower payment levels via higher self‐efficacy and more positive donation attitudes.

Conclusion

Despite reporting a strong commitment to nonremunerated blood donation, many respondents with and without a history of blood donation indicated that money would convince them to engage in whole blood, plasma, and platelet donation.

Assessing motivations for non-living and living organ donation among individuals with and without a history of blood donation

OBJECTIVES

The current study investigated relationships between a history of blood donation, registration as a non-living and living organ donor, and differential motivations.

BACKGROUND

Motivational commonalities exist between blood and organ donors, but there is no prior data on the relationships between blood donation history and both living and non-living organ donor registration and motivation.

METHODS/MATERIALS

Participants completed online surveys assessing blood donation history, organ donor registration and interest, and motivations related to donation behaviour.

RESULTS

Blood donation history was not significantly related to registration as either a non-living organ donor (blood donors = 81.4%; non-blood donors = 76.4%) or as a living organ donor (blood donors = 14.0%; non-blood donors = 10.9%). Further, blood donation history was not related to interest in learning more about being an organ donor. Compared to those not registered as an organ donor, those who were registered reported more positive organ donation motivations, but these relationships were unrelated to prior blood donation history.

CONCLUSION

The present findings are consistent with existing research on attitudes, warm glow, and identity as organ donation motivators, and provide novel information regarding the importance of independent assessment of motivations for non-living and living organ donation.

Assessing the impact of an automated Web-based motivational interview on the intention and return behavior of Australian O-negative donors

BACKGROUND

O-negative donors are a critical resource for blood collection agencies, and their recruitment and retention provides an ongoing challenge. Motivational interviewing shows promise as a tool to promote donor retention, although concerns about scalability remain. The current study examined the effect of an automated Web-based interview drawing on motivational interviewing and self-determination theory on O-negative donors' motivation, intention, and behavior.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Within 13 days of donating, 2820 O-negative donors completed baseline measures of motivation and intention before being randomly assigned to complete either a motivational interview (MI) or active control interview (ACI). Motivation and intention were assessed at 2 days and at 7 weeks after participation in the MI or ACI, with return behavior tracked for 6 months following trial completion.

RESULTS

Changes in donor motivation and intention, rate, and time to return did not vary by participation in the MI or ACI. When compared with O-negative donors who experienced business-as-usual practices, donors completing the MI or ACI returned to donate more, and they returned more quickly. However, subsequent exploratory analyses considering the behavior of those who did not accept the invitation to participate and those who completed only baseline measures showed that the improved return behavior of donors in the MI or ACI conditions was likely not due to any specific properties of the MI or ACI activities.

CONCLUSIONS

Australian O-negative donors were highly internally motivated and committed to donating. An automated Web-based motivational interview appears to be of limited effectiveness in promoting the return of such donors.