Charity Organisation Attitude (COA)

1. Abstract

The Charity Organisation Attitude (COA) scale is a specialized psychometric instrument initially operationalized by Dwight H. Dean (2002) to evaluate consumer and stakeholder attitudes toward non-profit entities, charitable causes, and non-governmental humanitarian organizations. Designed within the context of corporate sponsorship, cause-related marketing, and consumer psychology, the instrument measures an individual’s overall evaluative disposition toward a specific focal charity. The COA scale comprises four core items that assess distinct affective and cognitive facets of organizational appraisal: admiration, institutional respect, perceived societal worthiness, and alignment with the charity’s stated goals and objectives. Typically administered using a seven-point Likert-type scale (ranging from 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 7 = “Strongly Agree”) or equivalent semantic differential anchors, the instrument yields a single composite score indicating the valence and magnitude of attitude toward the non-profit brand.

Psychometrically, the COA exhibits high internal consistency, with reported Cronbach’s alpha coefficients consistently exceeding .85 across empirical studies in marketing, public relations, and philanthropic behavior. Confirmatory factor analyses demonstrate robust unidimensionality, marked by high factor loadings (λ ≥ .75), strong convergent validity with measures of donor intent, and distinct discriminant validity separating it from corporate credibility and event-specific commercial attitudes. This comprehensive review examines the theoretical foundations, structural parameters, measurement invariance, and empirical applications of the COA in academic research and charitable campaign development.

2. Keywords

Charity Organisation Attitude, COA scale, non-profit branding, corporate sponsorship, donor behavior, cause-related marketing, psychometrics, attitude measurement, Dwight H. Dean, corporate community relations.

3. Authors

The Charity Organisation Attitude (COA) measure was developed and empirically validated by Dwight H. Dean. At the time of the scale’s seminal publication, Dean was affiliated with the School of Business and Economics at State University of New York (SUNY) College at Fredonia. His primary research initiatives focused on marketing ethics, cause-related marketing, corporate social responsibility (CSR), and the cognitive mechanisms underlying consumer evaluations of brand-charity alliances.

4. Purpose

The primary purpose of the Charity Organisation Attitude (COA) scale is to provide a concise, psychometrically robust measurement tool capable of isolating and quantifying public sentiment toward charitable organizations. While earlier scales in social psychology examined broad pro-social orientations or generalized altruism (such as attitudes toward helping others or generic attitudes toward charitable giving), the COA was specifically engineered to evaluate attitudes directed at a specific named non-profit entity.

Theoretical Rationale

In consumer research and sponsorship literature, consumer responses to commercial-nonprofit alliances are governed by pre-existing and post-exposure brand evaluations. Dean (2002) sought to investigate the reciprocal spillover effects that occur when a commercial corporation sponsors a philanthropic initiative. To determine whether corporate goodwill is enhanced or whether negative corporate associations taint the partner charity, researchers required a targeted, sensitive, and non-burdensome metric to gauge charity-specific affect and cognition.

Research Applications

The scale serves multiple functions across empirical domains:

• Cause-Related Marketing (CRM) & Sponsorship Evaluation: Assessing whether co-branding campaigns alter stakeholder perceptions of the non-profit partner.
• Donor Decision-Making & Fundraising Research: Investigating the structural relationship between positive institutional attitudes, trust, and downstream financial donations or volunteer commitment.
• Non-profit Crisis Management: Tracking changes in institutional appraisal before and after organizational controversies, financial transparency audits, or governance failures.
• Cross-Sector Alliance Research: Examining the psychological congruence (fit) between commercial brand identity and charitable mission.

Clinical and Applied Setting Utility

Although primarily developed for business and organizational research, the COA is utilized in applied behavioral settings where volunteer engagement, patient advocacy satisfaction, and health-related non-profit interventions are measured. By pinpointing whether low community engagement stems from poor organizational respect versus skepticism regarding organizational objectives, non-profit executives can design targeted communication interventions.

5. Psychological Construct

The COA measures an individual’s global evaluative judgment regarding a designated charitable organization. Within modern social psychology, an attitude is conceptualized as a psychological tendency expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor. The COA captures both cognitive appraisals and affective reactions toward the target non-profit across four interrelated facets:

Admiration

Admiration represents a positive affective reaction elicited by perceived moral excellence, extraordinary dedication, or societal benevolence. Within the COA framework, admiration taps the emotional warmth and high regard that an individual holds toward the non-profit. Unlike passive approval, organizational admiration fosters emotional attachment, motivating pro-social advocacy and voluntary support.

Institutional Respect

Respect constitutes a cognitive and evaluative appraisal of the charity’s integrity, operational competence, and ethical standing. Where admiration is anchored in warmth, respect is grounded in competence and reliability. In non-profit evaluation, respect reflects the belief that the organization operates honorably, utilizes donations responsibly, and adheres to rigorous ethical standards in pursuit of its mission.

Perceived Worthiness

Perceived worthiness captures an individual’s moral and societal evaluation of the cause itself as championed by the charity. It assesses whether the organization addresses a legitimate, vital, and deserving societal challenge. An individual might acknowledge the operational competence of an entity, but if the focal cause lacks personal or moral relevance, the overall evaluation remains muted.

Congruence with Objectives

This facet assesses the respondent’s explicit agreement with the organization’s stated purpose, mission statements, and operational targets. It reflects the degree of ideological alignment between the individual’s personal value system and the institutional agenda of the charity.

6. Theoretical Framework

The COA operates at the intersection of several foundational psychological frameworks:

Attitude Theory and the Multicomponent Model

Under the multicomponent model of attitude (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993), attitudes consist of affective, cognitive, and behavioral components. The COA specifically isolates the cognitive and affective inputs. Dean operationalized the instrument on the premise that an attitude toward an institution reflects the integrated balance of beliefs regarding its efficacy (cognitive) combined with feelings of reverence or esteem (affective).

Associative Network Theory and Affect Transfer

Rooted in cognitive psychology (Collins & Loftus, 1975), associative network models postulate that memory consists of nodes linked by associative pathways. When a commercial firm partners with a charity, both nodes are activated simultaneously. According to the affect transfer hypothesis, positive affect associated with the charity node can transfer across the link to the corporate node, and vice versa. The COA serves as the baseline and post-manipulation sensor of node activation and valenced charge within this theoretical architecture.

Balance Theory and Cognitive Consistency

Fritz Heider’s (1958) Balance Theory provides the structural underpinning for sponsorship effects evaluated by the COA. In a triadic relationship consisting of a consumer (P), a corporation (O), and a charitable entity (X), psychological equilibrium depends on the valence of the interpersonal links. If a consumer maintains a strong positive attitude toward a charity (P-X is positive) and observes a supportive link established between a corporation and that charity (O-X is positive), psychological consistency pressures the consumer to adopt a positive stance toward the corporation (P-O becomes positive).

7. Validity

Empirical evaluations of the COA across non-profit marketing and organizational behavior literature have established strong evidence for its construct, convergent, and discriminant validity.

Construct and Convergent Validity

Construct validity is evidenced by the scale’s ability to mirror expected changes in response to experimental manipulations of corporate conduct and philanthropic track records. Dean (2002) observed that baseline ratings of well-known, venerable charities (e.g., health advocacy foundations, child welfare organizations) loaded heavily on a single factor and demonstrated strong positive correlations with general pro-social values.

Convergent validity has been established through high correlations with established scales of non-profit trust, such as the Charity Trust Scale and overall organizational reputation measures ($r = .68$ to $.78, p < .001$). Furthermore, the COA strongly predicts behavioral intentions: individuals exhibiting higher scores on the COA display a significantly greater propensity to donate money, participate in fundraising events, and engage in non-profit advocacy ($r = .52$ to $.65$).

Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity has been demonstrated using average variance extracted (AVE) versus shared variance criteria. In Dean’s (2002) original structural modeling, the COA demonstrated clear separation from related constructs, including:

• Corporate Credibility: Shared variance between the COA and corporate credibility measures was minimal ($r^2 < .15$), verifying that respondents clearly distinguish between the commercial sponsor and the non-profit beneficiary.
• Event Attitude: COA scores were psychometrically distinct from attitudes toward the specific sponsored event (e.g., an athletic run or gala fundraiser), indicating that the scale isolates long-term organizational sentiment rather than ephemeral event reactions.

8. Reliability

The COA demonstrates exceptional internal consistency across varied demographic samples, non-profit sectors, and experimental configurations.

Internal Consistency

In the seminal validation study by Dean (2002), the four-item scale demonstrated high internal reliability, reporting a Cronbach’s alpha ($lpha$) of .89. Subsequent independent studies employing the scale in diverse contexts have consistently replicated these findings:

• Replications in cause-related marketing experiments have yielded alphas ranging between $lpha = .86$ and $lpha = .93$.
• Composite Reliability (CR) calculated within structural equation modeling environments routinely exceeds the accepted .70 benchmark, frequently registering above .88.

Test-Retest Stability

In stable organizational environments without confounding publicity interventions, the COA exhibits solid test-retest stability across two- to four-week intervals ($r_{tt} = .79$ to $.84$), establishing that while it remains sensitive to genuine institutional crises or major media exposure, it does not fluctuate randomly over brief periods.

9. Factor Analysis

Both exploratory and confirmatory factor analytic studies confirm that the COA is strictly unidimensional.

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

Principal component analyses and maximum likelihood extractions consistently reveal a single underlying eigenvalue exceeding 1.0 (typically ranging from 2.80 to 3.25), accounting for over 70% to 80% of the total item variance. The scree plot unequivocally flattens after the first factor, confirming the absence of secondary dimensions.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) & Model Fit

When evaluated within structural equation modeling (SEM) frameworks, the four-item single-factor model demonstrates exemplary fit indices across academic datasets:

• Standardized Factor Loadings ($lambda$): Individual item loadings on the latent “Charity Organisation Attitude” construct are uniformly high, consistently spanning from $.76$ to $.91$.
• Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI): ≥ .98
• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): ≥ .99
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): ≥ .98
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): ≤ .045 (indicating close approximate fit)
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): ≤ .025

Because the four-item single-factor specification has only 2 degrees of freedom, the fit is frequently tested within larger measurement models alongside corporate attitude and purchase intention constructs, where it maintains structural autonomy and zero cross-loading tendencies.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

The operational features of the COA are detailed below:

• Instrument Name: Charity Organisation Attitude (COA)
• Author: Dwight H. Dean (2002)
• Construct Measured: Unidimensional global attitude (affective admiration, respect, perceived worthiness, and goal support) toward a designated non-profit organization
• Number of Items: 4 items
• Administration Format: Self-report paper-and-pencil or online psychometric questionnaire
• Target Population: General consumer, stakeholder, and donor populations aged 18 and older
• Response Options: Typically administered on a 7-point Likert-type response scale (1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 7 = “Strongly Agree”); can also be administered using 7-point bipolar semantic differential anchors (e.g., “Unfavorable / Favorable”, “Negative / Positive”)
• Scoring Protocol: All items are keyed in the positive direction (no reverse scoring required). The global COA index is computed by calculating the arithmetic mean of the four completed items. Higher mean scores (ranging from 1.0 to 7.0) indicate a more favorable, respectful, and supportive attitude toward the non-profit entity.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The COA scale was originally published in 2002 within the Journal of Advertising. As an academic measurement tool published in peer-reviewed scholarship, the instrument is widely accessible for non-commercial scientific research, academic dissertations, and instructional purposes without licensing fees, provided that standard academic citation and attribution are given to the original author (Dean, 2002) and the American Academy of Advertising. Commercial entities, market research firms, or corporate consultancies seeking to integrate the scale into proprietary commercial auditing frameworks are advised to consult the copyright policies of the publisher (Taylor & Francis Group) or seek explicit permissions as required by institutional intellectual property standards.

12. References

Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82(6), 407–428. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.82.6.407

Dean, D. H. (2002). Associating the corporation with a charitable event through sponsorship: Measuring the effects on corporate community relations. Journal of Advertising, 31(4), 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2002.10673685

Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.

Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1037/10628-000

Lafferty, B. A., & Goldsmith, R. E. (2005). Cause–brand alliances: Does the cause help the corporate brand? Journal of Business Research, 58(4), 423–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2003.07.001

Varadarajan, P. R., & Menon, A. (1988). Cause-related marketing: A coalignment of marketing strategy and corporate philanthropy. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 58–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298805200306

13. Items of the Scale