The Effect of the Number and Identification of Recipients on Organ-Donation Decisions

Abstract

We examined how presentations of organ donation cases in the media may affect people’s decisions about organ donation issues. Specifically, we focused on the combined effect of the information about the number of recipients saved by the organs of one deceased person (one vs. four) and the identifiability of the donor and the recipient(s) in organ donation descriptions, on people’s willingness to donate the organs of a deceased relative. Results suggest that reading about more people who were saved by the organs of a deceased donor does not increase willingness to donate. Replicating earlier research, we found that reading about a case of organ donation involving an identified deceased donor, deceased willingness to donate. However, this effect was attenuated when participants read about more recipients who were saved by the donation. Importantly, the presentation that prompted the greatest willingness to donate a deceased relative’s organs was the one that featured an unidentified donor and only one identified recipient. Finally, an explorative investigation into participants’ subconscious thoughts of death following the organ donation story revealed that identifying a deceased organ donor prompts more thoughts of death in the perceiver (regardless of the number of recipients).

Effects of portraying an innocent versus non‐innocent identified victim on intentions to donate organs post‐mortem

“…Our study thus aimed to answer the question of whether the intention to register as an organ donor is affected by a presentation of an identified victim (compared to statistical information) and to examine whether this effect varies depending on whether the victim is presented as more or less innocent or responsible for their medical condition. This study extends previous work that found increases in willingness to donate a deceased relative's organs when people were presented with only one identified organ recipient (Harel & Kogut, 2021), and work that has examined effects of victim innocence in other contexts (Kogut, 2011). Unlike past studies, the current study had pre‐registered hypotheses, sample size, and methods.…”

“…Although Feeley and Moon (2009) called for studies to compare narratives with statistical content to increase the understanding of how to design effective organ donor recruitment campaigns, research on the effects of narrative content for willingness to donate organs remains scarce (Harel & Kogut, 2021). Some studies (Chien & Chang, 2015;Skumanich & Kintsfather, 1996) found effects of information containing stories about individuals compared to statistical information on the intention to register as an organ donor, and a few studies have investigated the effects of identified victims in this context (Harel & Kogut, 2021;Harel, Kogut, Pinchas & Slovic, 2017). Specifically, in Harel et al (2017), participants read a newspaper article about an accident in which a young man died, whereupon his kidney was transplanted, saving the life of another young man.…”

“…To summarize, previous studies (Chien & Chang, 2015;Harel & Kogut, 2021;Harel et al, 2017;Skumanich & Kintsfather, 1996) have compared identifying versus nonidentifying information describing a deceased or already transplanted identifiable victim, without examining the effect of victim innocence. This is (to the best of our knowledge) the first study to contrast effects of portraying an identified innocent victim, an identified non-innocent victim, and statistical information in the context of organ donation willingness.…”

“…Each organ donor can save up to eight people's lives (Harel & Kogut, 2021). However, the demand far exceeds the supply, and in Sweden, where the present study was conducted, 33 people died while on the transplant waiting list in 2021 (Scandiatransplant, 2022).…”

“…They found that participants who read about an identified recipient of the organ were more willing to donate their own or a relative's organs, compared to those who received identifiable information about the recipient of the organ, and to the control group receiving no identifying information. In a subsequent study, Harel and Kogut (2021) examined whether the willingness to donate the organs of a deceased relative was affected by a newspaper article describing a group of identified deceased donors or recipients of organs.…”