Advocacy is intended to change people's attitudes and behavior. Yet the psychological and behavioral consequences of advocacy have rarely been considered. Across 3 experiments (combined N = 934) in the contexts of debates around racial discrimination and abortion, we investigated if and how exposure to advocacy can influence collective giving responses: self-reported willingness to make donations congruent with one's beliefs on the issue and actual giving behavior. Reading tweets from one's own side of a contentious debate sometimes indirectly mobilized collective giving responses by enhancing perceptions of efficacy and ensuring people empathized and identified with highlighted victim groups. Simultaneously, however, supporting advocacy sometimes inadvertently suppressed action by reducing anger and perceived injustice. Results therefore show that advocacy can simultaneously mobilize and demobilize support. However, effects were not found consistently across contexts and donation measures. Overall, mobilization pathways were stronger, especially on donation behavior and in the context of the abortion debate. Results suggest advocacy can work broadly as intended: by influencing the attitudes and behaviors of audience members. Online advocacy exposure in social media echo chambers may therefore be contributing to political polarization. Finally, results also demonstrate that charitable giving can be a form of collective action.

中文翻译：

---

愤怒的捐赠和动员：了解倡导对集体捐赠反应的影响

倡导旨在改变人们的态度和行为。然而，很少有人考虑倡导的心理和行为后果。跨越 3 个实验（组合N = 934）在围绕种族歧视和堕胎的辩论的背景下，我们调查了接触倡导是否以及如何影响集体捐赠反应：自我报告的捐赠意愿与个人对该问题的信念和实际捐赠行为一致。在有争议的辩论中阅读自己一方的推文有时会通过增强对功效的认识并确保人们对突出的受害者群体产生同情和认同，间接地动员了集体给予回应。然而，与此同时，支持倡导有时会通过减少愤怒和感知的不公正来无意中压制行动。因此，结果表明，宣传可以同时动员和解除支持。然而，在不同的背景和捐赠措施中并未发现一致的影响。全面的，动员途径更强，特别是在捐赠行为和堕胎辩论的背景下。结果表明，宣传可以按预期广泛发挥作用：通过影响受众成员的态度和行为。因此，社交媒体回声室中的在线宣传曝光可能会导致政治两极分化。最后，结果还表明，慈善捐赠可以是一种集体行动。