Syftet med uppsatsen var att undersöka om människors intentioner att donera pengar påverkas av deskriptiva normer. Följande hypoteser användes: 1) Både sociala närhetsnormer (du agerar som personer du känner samhörighet med gör) och provinsiellas normer (du agerar efter de lokala normer som gäller för platsen du befinner dig på) ökar människors intentioner att donera till välgörande ändamål jämfört med ett standardförfarande där välgörenhetsorganisationen enbart signalerar altruistiska ideal och 2) Sociala närhetsnormer leder till starkare intentioner att donera jämfört med provinsiella normer. En kvantitativ metod har använts, instrumentet var ett självskattningsformulär. Etthundraåttio personer, deltog i studien och blev således tilldelade ett av experimentets tre villkor (social närhetsnorm, provinsiell norm, eller standard villkor). Den provinsiella normen bidrar till en högre frekvens av donationer än standardförfarandet och det sociala närhetsvillkoret. Slutsatsen är att välgörenhetsorganisationer kan ha nytta av att ta hänsyn till och använda sig av provinsiella normer vid insamlingar. / The aim of this study was to examine whether people´s intent to donate money is influenced by descriptive norms. Our hypotheses were as follows: 1) Both the social closeness norm (you behave as people close to you do) and the provincial norm (you behave as the local norms of the location where you are at prescribe) increase people´s self-reported intent to donate money to charity compared to the control group where the welfare organisation only try to activate your altruistic ideals and 2) Social closeness norms induce a stronger intent to donate money compared to provincial norms. A qualitative method has been used and the instrument was a self-report questionnaire. One hundred eighty people participated in the study and were thereby given one of the tree conditions (social closeness norm, provincial norm, or the standard condition). The use of provincial norms leads to a higher donation frequency than the standard condition and the social closeness condition.

Doctor of Philosophy / School of Family Studies and Human Services / Walter Schumm / Farrell J. Webb / There is considerable research on concepts of Blackness in America. Much of this research is conducted within a Eurocentric as opposed to an Afrocentric perspective. Social research has established that ideals, social norms, and values about Black minority groups may be shaped by dominant culture premises and that the dominant culture of any society can influence the attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors of minority group members coexisting within that culture. The White racial frame holds that over time a dominant cultural perspective in the U.S. has installed a positive orientation to “White” and whiteness and a strong negative orientation toward racial “others”, particularly toward Black Americans. The present research explores this phenomenon from an Afrocentric perspective, assessing propinquity preferences of non-native Immigrant and native-born American Blacks toward native-born Blacks. Utilizing data drawn from The National Survey on American Life 2001-2003 (Jackson, 2007) the study assessed the degree of Black propinquity (i.e., self-identified feelings of closeness and identity preferences with native-born Blacks) expressed within and between subsamples of native-born African American (n = 3,464) and non-native (chiefly Afro-Caribbean) Blacks (n = 1,118). More specifically, it hypothesized that native-born Blacks would display greater propinquity preferences than Immigrant Blacks for native-American Blacks depicted as more economically-challenged as well as socially affluent and elite; also, it expected they would report greater support for socially undesirable as well as socially desirable Blacks than would Immigrant Blacks. A series of hierarchical regression analyses modeled the unique and joint predictive variance of socio-demographic, socio-economic, and Black (derived) target characteristics within each Black subpopulation against the primary outcome variable (propinquity). Overall regression models for each Black group were highly similar in the proportion of explained variance (27% for native Blacks; 26% for Immigrant Blacks) and weighted contributions of three blocks of variables; derived variables for Black target characteristics contributed most of the total variance within each group. No statistically reliable differences for R score values were found between the two Black subpopulations on these derived variables. Findings are discussed in the context of the White racial frame perspective, secondary data methodology, and future research.