Search

This is a study investigating the effect of a dynamic norm intervention on pro-environmental behaviour.

This study investigates the influence of dynamic vs. static norm messaging on pro-environmental behaviour and the role of group identity in this relationship.

This study examines how social identification with pro-environmentalism influences the effect of dynamic vs. static norm messages on pro-environmental behaviour.

Social norms are typically defined as rules and behaviours that guide or restrict unwritten or unenacted social behaviour in a group or society (Cialdini & Trost, 1998). Also, social norms are generally related to a perceived social pressure to engage in or not engage in certain behaviours (Ajzen, 1991). It is common for social norms to work in an implicit way, relying on people's perceptions of appropriate behaviours to drive behavioural patterns and intents, but they may also be based on direct and explicit communication among group members (Hogg and Reid, 2006). Social norms have been classified as descriptive or injunctive. The descriptive norms are what most people do (Cialdini et al., 1990). In other words, it is social norms that direct behaviour with the perception of how others will behave (Cialdini et al., 1991). The injunctive norms also called the prescriptive norms (Cialdini et al., 1991, p. 203), are norms approved or disapproved by the majority of others. The imperative meaning of norms is a set of rules or beliefs that constitute morally acceptable or unacceptable behaviour. On the other hand, Sparkman and Walton (2017, 2019) examined social norms as dynamic versus static norms. Static descriptive norms are social norms that inform about the prevalence or frequency of a behaviour at a given time, while dynamic descriptive norms are social norms that describe how people's behaviour changes over time. In other words, dynamic norms draw attention to the change in attitudes, opinions or beliefs over time. This project aims to explore the relationship between dynamic versus static norms and target behaviour. We will investigate how and to what extent majority members would participate in activism to benefit refugees and the perceptions of majority members about the related norms.

Social norms are a determining factor in individual behaviour. They direct individual behaviour assuming a regulatory role for the individual's goals (Cialdini & Trost, 1998; Ajzen, 1991). Witnessing (seeing, hearing and feeling) what others do affects individual behaviour and thoughts. As such, people adapt more easily to normative knowledge about the attitudes and behaviours of others at present. On the other hand, Sparkman and Walton (2017) differentetiate between dynamic and static social norms. While static norms are information about the prevalence or frequency of a behaviour (descriptive norms) or the attitudes of others toward a behaviour (injunctive norms) at a given point in time (Cialdini et al., 1991), dynamic norms are information about the collective change in behaviour (Sparkman & Walton, 2017). In other words, dynamic norms draw attention to the change in attitudes, opinions or beliefs over time. This project aims to explore the relationship between the norms of human behaviour that change over time (dynamic norms) and the current norms (static norms). This project will focus on how and to what extent refugee activism (e.g., organizing marches, demonstrations, or petitions) is supported by the majority group to improve refugees' group rights, and majority group members' perception of the possible norm.

An emerging body of research demonstrates that dynamic norms, information about how norms are changing over time, may have positive effects above and beyond static norms, information about the prevalence of behaviors and attitudes at the current time (Sparkman & Walton, 2017). Dynamic norms promote self-efficacy, communicate that the change is important to others, and show that change can be compatible with one’s identity (Sparkman & Walton, 2019). Thus far, Sparkman and Walton (2017; 2019) have provided evidence that dynamic norms strengthen the social norms approach in several domains, such as sustainable behaviors, health behaviors, and men’s identification as feminists. The present research aims to extend this dynamic norm research to sexual assault prevention. One avenue through which sexual assault prevalence can be reduced is by increasing bystander action in sexual risk contexts. A sample of all genders from Amazons Mechanical Turk will be assigned to one of three norm conditions (dynamic v. static v. control) in which the norms apply to bystander intervention in sexual risk scenarios. Intent to intervene and possible mechanisms will be assessed.

An emerging body of research demonstrates that dynamic norms, information about how norms are changing over time, may have positive effects above and beyond static norms, information about the prevalence of behaviors and attitudes at the current time (Sparkman & Walton, 2017). Dynamic norms promote self-efficacy, communicate that the change is important to others, and show that change can be compatible with one’s identity (Sparkman & Walton, 2019). Thus far, Sparkman and Walton (2017; 2019) have provided evidence that dynamic norms strengthen the social norms approach in several domains, such as sustainable behaviors, health behaviors, and men’s identification as feminists. The present research aims to extend this dynamic norm research to sexual assault prevention by correcting misperceptions about consensual sexual behavior among perpetrators. A sample of college-aged men from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln will be assigned to one of three norm conditions (dynamic v. static v. control) about the prevalence of respecting your partner’s wishes when they hesitate during sexual activity. Intent to stop sexual activity and possible mechanisms will be assessed.

Stage 1 IPA at PCI RR

This study examines how the commonness of different climate-related behaviors, such as diet style, consumption, mobility choices, and public engagement, influences participants’ moral judgments of these behaviors. This study is based on previous research investigating the so-called “Common is Moral” heuristic (Lindström et al., 2018) that we willl extend to climate-relevant behavior. Furthermore, we extend it by not only considering static norms, but also incorporating dynamic norms which might help reduce the psychological distance of climate change and the threat posed by sustainable behavior (Sparkman & Walton, 2017; Sparkman et al., 2021). We also want to explore how individual factors, like one’s personality or climate change attitude, influence these judgments. This study applies the research of Lindström et al. (2018) on the “Common is Moral” heuristic to the topic of climate-related behavior. This research could offer important insights about the role of descriptive norms for individual climate action and practical implications for norm-based interventions regarding these behaviors. It might also extend the literature on the role of dynamic norms compared to static norms in climate change communication.

Although communicating so-called ‘dynamic norms’ may promote sustainable consumption behavior, the present study challenges the assumption that their impact is inevitably positive. On the contrary, it seeks to expand current research by establishing when and why sources with vested motives may result in a backfiring effect of dynamic norms. Our experiment (N=352) investigates consumers' intentions to reduce their meat consumption after reading norm messages from different sources (i.e., a researcher, vegan activist, company representative). In line with the predictions, dynamic norm messages from a researcher led to more sustainable consumption choices than identical messages communicated by a vegan activist or company representative while controlling for gender. Concerning the underlying theoretical mechanisms, a perceived moral superiority and ensuing psychological reactance sequentially explained the backfiring effect for the vegan activist. The backfiring effect for the company representative was mediated by a perceived pro-self-motivation that again resulted in elevated consumer reactance. Overall, the present findings establish the crucial importance of a nudge's source that either fosters or undermines the effectiveness of a dynamic norm message in eliciting sustainable behavior. The results not only contribute to the academic debate on nudging, but can also inform practitioners to choose the most powerful sender (e.g. academics) when designing sustainable norm interventions.

Social norm interventions are a cheap and convenient strategy to promote proenvironmental behavior change. However, the effectiveness of using them has been debated. The present study argues that the effectiveness depends on one's own internal moral compass, as presented by personal norms. We examined this main assumption across 3 studies focusing on pro-environmental behavior in a food and diets context. Study 1 shows in a cross-sectional design that people with stronger personal norms are more likely to reduce their meat consumption regardless of their perceptions of the static or dynamic social norms towards meat consumption. Furthermore, quasi-experimental findings show that dynamic (Study 2) and static (Study 3) social normative messages are more effective the weaker one's personal norms towards the pro-environmental behavior. Therefore, when evaluating the effectiveness of social norm interventions people's personal norms should be taken into consideration.

Perceptions of social norms around eating behavior can influence food choices. Communicating information about how others are changing their eating behavior over time (dynamic descriptive social norms) may motivate individuals to change their own food selection and consumption. Following a four-week baseline period, 22 in-store restaurants of a major retail chain across the UK were randomized to display a dynamic descriptive social norm message intended to motivate a shift from meat-to plant-based meals either during the first two, or last two weeks of the four-week study period. A linear regression model showed there was no evidence of an effect of the intervention (β = -0.022, p = .978, 95% CIs: −1.63, 1.58) on the percentage sales of meat-vs plant-based dishes. Fidelity checks indicated that adherence to the intervention procedure was often low, with inconsistencies in the placement and display of the intervention message. In four stores with high fidelity the estimated impact of the intervention was not materially different. The lack of apparent effectiveness of the intervention may reflect poor efficacy of the intervention or limitations in its implementation in a complex food purchasing environment. These challenges highlighted by this study should be considered in future design and evaluation of field trials in real-world environments.

A convincing array of evidence suggests that excessive meat consumption contributes significantly to alarming environmental impacts and lifestyle illnesses. The transition to lower meat consumption levels and increased consumption of plant-based foods is key to addressing today and tomorrow's health and environmental challenges. One of the options for a more sustainable diet is to replace meat with alternative proteins, such as seaweed or beans. In this research, we will examine the attitude and behaviour changes of participants who are exposed to dynamic and static norm situations. We expect that exposure to changing human behaviour (dynamic norm) will affect the participants' attitudes towards eating habits more. Basically, it can be an effective way to show how human behaviour is changing, to change their behaviour in the desired way. If it can be shown in what direction and to what extent the behaviour of people and community members has changed, the tendency towards desirable behaviours will increase. We think when there is a recent trend (dynamic) behaviour about a collective change in behaviour, people are more compatible with the new trend behaviour than existing (static) behaviour.