AI vs Human Touch in Nonprofit Marketing

The Quest for Connection in Nonprofit Campaigns

In the world of nonprofit fundraising and outreach, does the messenger matter as much as the message? Specifically, do people respond differently to digital animals compared to real ones, and can that distinction make or break a campaign? These are the questions driving research by University of Cincinnati Professor Victoria LaPoe in the Department of Journalism.

LaPoe's interest isn't just academic. Before joining UC, she volunteered with the Athens County Humane Society and saw firsthand the challenges nonprofits face in meeting fundraising and adoption goals. Inspired by Cincinnati Bengals quarterback Joe Burrow’s charitable message to “Do good,” LaPoe decided to apply her research skills to a community need, embracing the concept of journalism for the public good.

Pitting AI Against Authenticity The Study

To explore this, LaPoe and a team of researchers, including UC Assistant Professor Benjamin LaPoe, surveyed over 300 people nationwide. The study presented participants with a digital campaign featuring various messages about adoptions, donations, and emotional support animals.

One key experiment tested whether audiences reacted differently to an AI-generated illustration of children cuddling cats versus a traditional photograph depicting the same scene. The goal was to see what truly drives engagement: polished, AI-generated content or the raw authenticity of real-life photos?

UC Professor Victoria LaPoe, head of the Department of Journalism, examined the effectiveness of AI-created imagery in adoption appeals for the Humane Society. Photo/Provided

What Really Resonates With Audiences

The results were clear: what ultimately influenced responses was what LaPoe calls “perceived human emotion.” While participants could easily tell the cartoonish images were artificial, the emotional authenticity of the message and imagery was the deciding factor.

Surprisingly, a clever and humorous message like “Save a Bird, Adopt a Cat” connected more deeply with respondents than a visually cute but standard image of kids with cats. “That natural emotion of humor outweighed the AI generated images,” LaPoe noted. In another test, a polished, cartoonish AI bulldog stood out to people more than real photos from the Humane Society, but the study found that messaging produced by AI generally scored lower in emotional authenticity and empathetic tone. Traditional, human-centric content generated stronger emotional connections, which directly influenced interest in adoption and donations.

The Double-Edged Sword of AI in Fundraising

Co-author Adonis Durado, an associate professor at Ohio University, emphasized that AI tools can be both helpful and problematic for nonprofits. On one hand, AI can analyze tone, predict audience responses, and identify emotionally resonant messages that make a campaign successful. “It can study what kinds of stories or visuals connect with people and what makes someone stop scrolling, click donate or share a post,” he said.

However, there's a significant risk. If an audience associates AI with artifice or manipulation, it can damage trust—a nonprofit's most valuable asset. “If organizations rely too heavily on automation, messages can start to feel generic or manipulative,” Durado warned. The survey confirmed that authenticity matters deeply to audiences, and if a message feels “too perfect,” it can backfire.

The Verdict Human Creativity Still Reigns Supreme

The research, which LaPoe was invited to share with the ASPCA, concludes that nonprofits must be careful when using AI-generated messaging. The key is to maintain emotional authenticity and a genuine connection with the target audience. While AI can be a powerful tool for analysis and efficiency, the study highlights that human creativity, emotional honesty, and authentic storytelling are still what matter most when the goal is to “do good.”