A person's expressed likelihood of donating time and effort to a charity is measured in this scale using three, seven-point items.
Four, seven-point items compose this scale and are intended to measure the belief that an appeal one has been exposed to is either focused on benefits for others or benefits for self. Although the items do not specifically reference a charity, that is the context for which they were developed and most naturally employed.
A four-item, five-point summated scale is used to measure the importance to a potential donor of the pressure tactics used by a charity in its fundraising activities. It was described by Harvey (1990) as the campaign intensity dimension of the fundraising ''product.''
An eight-item, five-point summated scale is used to measure the importance to a potential donor of a charity's support services that focus on preventing problems from developing. It was described by Harvey (1990) as the preventative/facilitative services dimension of the fundraising ''product.''
A five-item, five-point summated scale is used to measure the importance to a potential donor of a charity's support services that focus on repairing damage already done. It was described by Harvey (1990) as the curative services dimension of the fundraising ''product.''
A seven-item, five-point summated scale is used to measure the importance to potential donors of the service a charity provides to the community. It was described by Harvey (1990) as the cause dimension of the fundraising ''product.''
A nine-item, five-point scale is used to measure the importance of various business aspects of a charity to a potential donor. It was described by Harvey (1990) as the management activities dimension of the fundraising ''product.''
Six, seven-point items are used to measure the degree to which a person views an organization as engaging in an activity out of self interest rather than for the public's interests. As used by Simmons and Becker-Olsen (2006), the scale compared what people thought about a nonprofit cause vs. its corporate sponsor announcing the relationship between the two.
Four, seven-point items are used to measure the degree to which a person believes that one act is more moral than another. As structured by Reed, Aquino, and Levy (2007), two specific acts were identified for respondents and they had to compare them in terms of their morality.
Four Likert-type items with a seven point response format are used in this scale to measure the degree to which a person believes that a specific nonprofit organization has explicitly approved of a certain brand (or line of products) from a company.
