Search

Millions of nonprofits compete for a share of the billions of dollars donated to charity each year. Yet how donors select which charities to support remains relatively understudied. Social norms influence whether people give to charity at all, but no research has yet considered whether norms also communicate information about which causes group members typically support. To address this important question, we surveyed 1,735 people from 117 countries to understand whether they identified normative causes typically supported by their social groups. We found different normative giving profiles for men, women, older people, younger people, conservatives, progressives, religious, and nonreligious people, with varying degrees of consensus within each social group. Results demonstrate empirically—and for the first time—that social identities contain normative content about which charitable causes group members typically support. Some causes were relatively universally approved of or avoided. Results can inform nonprofit fundraising strategy around segmentation and targeting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sustained mass behaviour change is needed to tackle the COVID‐19 pandemic, but many of the required changes run contrary to existing social norms (e.g., physical closeness with in‐group members). This paper explains how social norms and social identities are critical to explaining and changing public behaviour. Recommendations are presented for how to harness these social processes to maximise adherence to COVID‐19 public health guidance. Specifically, we recommend that public health messages clearly define who the target group is, are framed as identity‐affirming rather than identity‐contradictory, include complementary injunctive and descriptive social norm information, are delivered by in‐group members and that support is provided to enable the public to perform the requested behaviours. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article introduces a model of the internalisation of normative social harmdoing: the MINSOH. This model seeks to explain how group members internalise harmful social norms such that they personally endorse their groups' normative actions. To this aim, the MINSOH integrates two divergent yet complementary theoretical perspectives: self‐determination theory and the social identity approach. These perspectives differ in their basic assumptions about the possibility for harm to become internalised, yet when integrated, they provide a powerful account of how harmdoing can become internalised. The MINSOH proposes specific conditions under which harmful normative actions become accepted by group members. This article outlines multiple self‐determined motivations for harmdoing and discrete group processes that enable harmdoing to be internalised and autonomously enacted, and reviews factors that facilitate (i.e., strong/unique/comparative social identification; endorsement of ideological justifications) and block the internalisation process (presence of multiple identities/diverging norms; inclusive superordinate identity). Directions for future research are then discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Normative influence on dietary decision making was assessed as a function of the referent informational influence model within an extended theory of planned behavior framework. In a longitudinal design, university students ( N = 141) completed measures of attitudes, perceived behavioral control, subjective norms, referent group norms, and intentions toward healthy eating, with healthy eating behavior reported 2 weeks later ( n = 82). A distinction was made between injunctive and descriptive norms, in line with norm focus theory. The extended theory of planned behavior and referent informational influence models were partially supported. An interaction between group injunctive and descriptive norms emerged such that misaligned group norms were associated with healthier eating behavior than aligned group norms (both supportive and unsupportive). Theoretical and applied implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The theory of planned behavior was used to predict participants' ( n = 219) sun protection intentions and (longitudinally) self-reported behavior from attitudes, perceptions of control, and subjective norms. Norm focus theory was incorporated by distinguishing injunctive and descriptive norms. In turn, subjective descriptive and injunctive norms were examined in relation to the norms of a salient referent group: university students. Referent group norms were found to be associated with subjective norms, and to influence intentions indirectly. A marginal interaction of referent group descriptive and injunctive norms was also observed on behavior. Results highlight the importance of examining indirect effects in order to capture the effect of group-level processes when multiple sources and levels of normative influence are examined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present research adopts an extended theory of the planned behavior model that included descriptive norms, risk, and trust to investigate online privacy protection in Facebook users. Facebook users (N = 119) completed a questionnaire assessing their attitude, subjective injunctive norm, subjective descriptive norm, perceived behavioral control, implicit perceived risk, trust of other Facebook users, and intentions toward protecting their privacy online. Behavior was measured indirectly 2 weeks after the study. The data show partial support for the theory of planned behavior and strong support for the independence of subjective injunctive and descriptive norms. Risk also uniquely predicted intentions over and above the theory of planned behavior, but there were no unique effects of trust on intentions, nor of risk or trust on behavior. Implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Though the success of conservation initiatives relies on changing behaviour, little social psychological research has examined factors such as attitudes and social norms in the context of actual conservation campaigns. In the context of reducing light pollution around sea turtle nesting habitats, researching technological solutions has clear merit. Problems such as light glow are, however, fundamentally about human behaviour, and so finding ways to effect behavioural change is critical. Social norms, or perceptions about what other people think and do, have been widely used in behaviour change campaigns across various domains, including campaigns to promote conservation behaviour. Here, we investigate how the norms of different groups may influence our behaviour in the context of a campaign to alter behavioural norms about light glow pollution in a community. We examine attitudes, social norms, and the degree of conflict (versus congruence) between the behaviours of different groups, and their relationship with intentions to engage in conservation behaviours relevant to sea turtle conservation. We show that attitudes and norms are related to behavioural intentions, and conflicts between social norms influence intentions, over and above the norms themselves. This highlights an important consideration for conservation campaigns utilising social norms-based behaviour change appeals. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Healthy eating intentions were assessed as a function of theory of planned behavior variables and manipulated group norm salience. Participants ( n = 119) were exposed (or not) to a positive injunctive norm that their fellow students approve of eating healthily, and (or not) to a negative descriptive norm that their fellow students do not eat healthily. A significant interaction emerged. When a negative descriptive norm was made salient, participants exposed to a positive injunctive norm reported significantly lower intentions to eat healthily. When no descriptive norm was given, exposure to a positive injunctive norm had no effect. The results suggest the weakness of manipulated injunctive norm salience in the health domain, and the importance of investigating the interactive effects of referent group norms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research has not addressed the possibility that people may face conflicting norms of pro-environmental behavior from their multiple in-groups. Across two studies, the authors test competing hypotheses: People may be demotivated by norm conflict, or conversely, norm conflict may motivate people to action. The results of both studies suggest a clearly motivating effect of conflict. Norm conflict was associated with decreased water usage (i.e., increased water conservation) in Study 1, and increased pro-environmental behavior intentions in Study 2. The effects of conflict were partially mediated by perceived effectiveness in Study 2. Although these initial findings indicate that conflict motivates rather than hinders behavioral engagement, future research should investigate whether the nature of the influence of norm conflict depends on factors such as issue importance. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This two-study paper examines the detrimental impact of workgroup mistreatment and the mediating role of perceived rejection. In Study 1, perceived rejection emerged as a mediator between workgroup mistreatment and depression, organization-based self-esteem, organizational deviance, and organizational citizenship behaviors. In Study 2, the role of organizational norms was examined. Employees who experienced supportive organizational norms reported lower levels of perceived rejection, depression and turnover intentions, and higher levels of organization-based self-esteem and job satisfaction. Employees in the supportive norms condition reported that they were more likely to seek reconciliation after experiencing mistreatment than those who experienced low support. Perceived rejection also emerged as a mediator. Results, practical implications, and future research directions are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Norms have a pervasive influence on behavior, yet previous research has not addressed that people often face conflicting norms from multiple ingroups. The current research addresses this gap in the context of proenvironmental behavior and demonstrates two effects predicted by the novel theoretical position we offer: People can be de-motivated by norm-conflict, or conversely, norm-conflict can encourage people to take action. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrated that norm-conflict is associated with increased perceived effectiveness for those with positive attitudes to the issue and reduced perceived effectiveness for those with moderate attitudes, and effectiveness perceptions mediated an indirect effect on behavioral intentions. Study 3 found that perceived effectiveness also moderates the effects of norm-conflict such that norm-conflict only influences intentions when perceived effectiveness is high. Norm-conflict is both positively and negatively related to behavioral decision making, suggesting additional considerations in the design of social norms-based interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Abstract: Two experiments examine the interplay of injunctive and descriptive norms on intentions to engage in pro-environmental behavior. In Experiment 1, Australian participants were exposed to supportive or unsupportive group descriptive and injunctive norms about energy conservation. Results revealed that a conflict between the group-level injunctive and descriptive norm was associated with weaker behavioral intentions: The beneficial effects of a supportive injunctive norm were undermined when presented with an unsupportive descriptive norm. Experiment 2 replicated this effect in both a Western (UK) and non-Western (China) context, and found that the extent to which norms were aligned or not determined intentions even after controlling for attitudes, perceptions of control, and interpersonal-level injunctive and descriptive norms. These experiments demonstrate that conflict between injunctive and descriptive norms leads to weaker intentions to engage in pro-environmental behavior, highlighting the need to consider the interplay between injunctive and descriptive norms to understand how norms influence behavioral intentions. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Two aspects of the social psychology of collective action are of particular interest to social movement organizers and activists: how to motivate people to engage in collective action, and how to use collective action to create social change. The second question remains almost untouched within social psychology. The present article delineates research from political science and sociology concerning variables that moderate the effectiveness of collective action and maps these variables against intergroup research. Within intergroup social psychology, there is a theoretical literature on what needs to be done to achieve change (e.g., changing identification, social norms, or perceptions of legitimacy, stability, permeability). The article considers possible testable hypotheses concerning the outcomes of collective action which can be derived from intergroup research and from the synthesis of the three disciplines. For theoreticians and practitioners alike, a program of research which addresses the social-psychological outcomes of collective action and links these to identities, norms, intentions, and support for social change in bystanders, protagonists, and opponents has a great deal of interest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Past research on the social identity approach to attitude-behaviour relations has operationalized group norms as a mixture of both descriptive information (i.e. what most people do themselves) and injunctive information (i.e. what most people approve of). Two experiments (Study 1 = 185 participants; Study 2 = 238 participants) were conducted to tease apart the relative effects of descriptive and injunctive group norms. In both studies, university students' attitudes towards current campus issues were obtained, the descriptive and injunctive group norms were manipulated, and participants' post-manipulation attitudes, behavioural willingness, and behaviour were assessed. Study 2 also examined the role of norm source (i.e. in-group vs. out-group injunctive and descriptive norms). In both studies, the injunctive and descriptive in-group norms interacted significantly to influence attitudes, behavioural willingness, and behaviour. Study 2 revealed that out-group norms were largely ineffective. The research illustrates that in-groups interactively influence decisions, not only by what they say, but also by what they do, and asserts the value of considering the interaction of descriptive and injunctive norms in accounts of normative influence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors used a revised planned behavior model in the consumer domain. The revised model incorporated separate measures of descriptive and injunctive/prescriptive norms, self-identity, and past behavior in an effort to improve the predictive power of the theory of planned behavior (TPB; I. Ajzen, 1985) in relation to a self-reported consumer behavior: purchasing one's preferred soft drink. At Time 1, respondents (N = 112) completed self-report measures of (a) attitudes, (b) perceived behavioral control, (c) descriptive and injunctive/prescriptive norms, (d) self-identity, (e) past behavior, and (f) intentions. The authors assessed self-reported behavior 1 week later (Time 2). Attitudes, injunctive/prescriptive norms, descriptive norms, past behavior, and self-identity were all positively related to purchase intentions, and intentions were predictive of self-reported behavior at Time 2. These findings highlight the utility of the TPB in the consumer domain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The compelling quality of the Global Change simulation study ( ), in which high RWA (right-wing authoritarianism)/high SDO (social dominance orientation) individuals produced poor outcomes for the planet, rests on the inference that the link between high RWA/SDO scores and disaster in the simulation can be generalized to real environmental and social situations. However, we argue that studies of the Person × Situation interaction are biased to overestimate the role of the individual variability. When variables are operationalized, strongly normative items are excluded because they are skewed and kurtotic. This occurs both in the measurement of predictor constructs, such as RWA, and in the outcome constructs, such as prejudice and war. Analyses of normal linear statistics highlight personality variables such as RWA, which produce variance, and overlook the role of norms, which produce invariance. Where both normative and personality forces are operating, as in intergroup contexts, the linear analysis generates statistics for the sample that disproportionately reflect the behavior of the deviant, antinormative minority and direct attention away from the baseline, normative position. The implications of these findings for the link between high RWA and disaster are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives The current experiment was conducted among ice hockey fans, and brings together theories of intergroup relations and self and identity literature. It investigated if perceiving strong norms in favor of derogating against fans of outgroup teams, and engaging in these behaviors oneself, leads to an increased compartmentalization of these behaviors (i.e., such that they are restricted to a particular compartment within the self). This association was expected to be especially strong when derogatory behaviors are portrayed as illegitimate. We also explored whether this compartmentalization then flows on to vitality as a well-being indicator. Method and design Ice hockey fans supporting a diversity of NHL teams were recruited ( N = 116). The legitimacy of the derogatory behaviors was manipulated by making salient either: that these behaviors have harmful consequences for outgroup members (illegitimate condition) vs. that such behaviors can benefit the ingroup (legitimate condition). Results The expected mediated model was supported among the entire sample. The association between engaging in the derogatory behaviors and their compartmentalization in the self was also moderated by the experimental manipulation: While participants in the illegitimate condition reported a positive link between engaging in these behaviors and their compartmentalization, participants in the legitimate condition did not show a significant association between these variables, suggesting no need for them to restrict these behaviors within themselves. Conclusions Results are discussed in light of normative approaches, intergroup theories, and the self. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]