This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
Public acceptance is a precondition for implementing climate change mitigation policies. What, then, determines acceptance of these policies? Based on 76 datasets from 34 countries, generating a total sample of 146,817 participants, we report a series of meta-analyses assessing the importance of 15 determinants for accepting climate change mitigation policies. Results show the following: (a) Among policy-specific beliefs, perceived fairness is the most important factor. (b) Among climate change beliefs, knowledge about climate change is weakly related to acceptance. Climate change beliefs, environmental concern, and perceived risk of and problems associated with climate change are all related to acceptance. (c) Among psychological factors, trust is most important. (d) Finally, demographic variables show weak or no relationship with acceptance. These results inform climate policy researchers as to which determinants of acceptance to include in future analyses and provide advice to policymakers about which sentiments they should consider when introducing and communicating intended climate policies.
Magnus Bergquist; Andreas Nilsson; Niklas Harring; Sverker Jagers. Determinants for Accepting Climate Change Mitigation Policies: A Meta-Analysis. 2021, 1 .
AMA StyleMagnus Bergquist, Andreas Nilsson, Niklas Harring, Sverker Jagers. Determinants for Accepting Climate Change Mitigation Policies: A Meta-Analysis. . 2021; ():1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMagnus Bergquist; Andreas Nilsson; Niklas Harring; Sverker Jagers. 2021. "Determinants for Accepting Climate Change Mitigation Policies: A Meta-Analysis." , no. : 1.
In developing the focus theory of normative conduct (FTNC), Cialdini et al. (1990), proposed and demonstrated that social anti-littering norms reduced littering in 1) clean environments (signaling that others did not litter) and 2) by adding a single piece of litter to an otherwise clean environment. The assumption was that the single piece of litter would focus people's attention on the descriptive anti-littering norm, signaling that others did not litter. Despite the profound influence of Cialdini et al.‘s (1990) paper, no attempt to replicate this “single piece of litter” effect has been reported. In two high powered and pre-registered field-experiments and one online experiment (ntotal = 1798), we attempted to replicate and then examine the processes behind both descriptive anti-littering norms and the single piece of litter effect. Results first supported FTNC by replicating less littering in clean compared to littered environments. Second, replications of the single piece of litter effect ran contrary to the original finding, showing as much littering in environments including a single piece of litter as in fully littered environments. Hence, littering increased rather than decreased by adding a single piece of litter in an otherwise clean environment. Supporting some theoretical assumptions of the FTNC, a follow-up experiment showed increased salience of an anti-littering norm and a perceived descriptive norm against littering in a single-piece-of-litter compared to a clean environment. However, in line with findings from our replications, the injunctive anti-littering norm appears to weaken as litter accumulates.
M. Bergquist; Paula Blumenschein; P. Karinti; J. Köhler; É. Martins Silva Ramos; J. Rödström; E. Ejelöv. Replicating the focus theory of normative conduct as tested by Cialdini et al. (1990). Journal of Environmental Psychology 2021, 74, 101573 .
AMA StyleM. Bergquist, Paula Blumenschein, P. Karinti, J. Köhler, É. Martins Silva Ramos, J. Rödström, E. Ejelöv. Replicating the focus theory of normative conduct as tested by Cialdini et al. (1990). Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2021; 74 ():101573.
Chicago/Turabian StyleM. Bergquist; Paula Blumenschein; P. Karinti; J. Köhler; É. Martins Silva Ramos; J. Rödström; E. Ejelöv. 2021. "Replicating the focus theory of normative conduct as tested by Cialdini et al. (1990)." Journal of Environmental Psychology 74, no. : 101573.
In this study, we design and explore interventions encouraging pro‐environmental donations by testing social norms and anticipated positive emotions. The social norms‐based intervention included descriptive and injunctive social normative information while the emotions‐based intervention included information about anticipated positive emotions. The two intervention techniques were tested in a field‐experiment; applying social norms‐based or emotions‐based messages to a real choice situation between retaining versus donating one's own money (i.e., using recycling machines giving people the choice to either retain money obtained from their recycled bottles, or to donate their money to a pro‐environmental organization). Results showed that more people donated their money after being exposed to the emotions‐based message, than the social norms‐based message or no message.
Magnus Bergquist; Lina Nyström; Andreas Nilsson. Feeling or following? A field‐experiment comparing social norms‐based and emotions‐based motives encouraging pro‐environmental donations. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 2020, 19, 351 -358.
AMA StyleMagnus Bergquist, Lina Nyström, Andreas Nilsson. Feeling or following? A field‐experiment comparing social norms‐based and emotions‐based motives encouraging pro‐environmental donations. Journal of Consumer Behaviour. 2020; 19 (4):351-358.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMagnus Bergquist; Lina Nyström; Andreas Nilsson. 2020. "Feeling or following? A field‐experiment comparing social norms‐based and emotions‐based motives encouraging pro‐environmental donations." Journal of Consumer Behaviour 19, no. 4: 351-358.
We conducted a meta-analysis on field-experiments using social norms to encourage pro-environmental behaviors. Results of 91 field-experiments (N = 227′730) revealed a positive main effect of social norms on pro-environmental behaviors compared to no-treatment control conditions. Moderation analysis found that social norms induced implicitly were more influential than social norms induced explicitly and that social norms tended to be more influential in individualistic countries than in collectivistic countries.
Magnus Bergquist; Andreas Nilsson; Wesley P. Schultz. A meta-analysis of field-experiments using social norms to promote pro-environmental behaviors. Global Environmental Change 2019, 59, 101941 .
AMA StyleMagnus Bergquist, Andreas Nilsson, Wesley P. Schultz. A meta-analysis of field-experiments using social norms to promote pro-environmental behaviors. Global Environmental Change. 2019; 59 ():101941.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMagnus Bergquist; Andreas Nilsson; Wesley P. Schultz. 2019. "A meta-analysis of field-experiments using social norms to promote pro-environmental behaviors." Global Environmental Change 59, no. : 101941.
Climate change is primarily driven by human-caused greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and may therefore be mitigated by changes to human behavior (Clayton et al., 2015; IPCC, 2018). Despite efforts to raise awareness and concern about climate change, GHG emissions continue to rise (IPCC, 2018). Climate change seems to be at odds with the immediate, present threats to which humans are adapted to cope (Gifford et al., 2009; Schultz, 2014; van Vugt et al., 2014). In contrast to immediate dangers, climate change is typically abstract, large scale, slow and often unrelated to the welfare of our daily lives (e.g., Ornstein and Ehrlich, 1989; Gifford, 2011). But there are moments when the consequences of climate change are readily apparent, such as extreme weather events. In the current paper, we examine the impact of personal experience with an extreme weather event, and the impact of this experience on beliefs about climate change, and intentions to take actions that can help prepare for and mitigate the consequences of climate change.
Magnus Bergquist; Andreas Nilsson; P. Wesley Schultz. Experiencing a Severe Weather Event Increases Concern About Climate Change. Frontiers in Psychology 2019, 10, 220 .
AMA StyleMagnus Bergquist, Andreas Nilsson, P. Wesley Schultz. Experiencing a Severe Weather Event Increases Concern About Climate Change. Frontiers in Psychology. 2019; 10 ():220.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMagnus Bergquist; Andreas Nilsson; P. Wesley Schultz. 2019. "Experiencing a Severe Weather Event Increases Concern About Climate Change." Frontiers in Psychology 10, no. : 220.
Descriptive norms guide social behavior by informing what other people do. In a conceptual proposition, we suggest that descriptive norms also could signal what other people don’t do. Building on the evolutionary predisposition to more urgently attend to negative than positive information, we hypothesize that people are more strongly influenced by choices that other people avoid, than by choices that other people choose. Descriptive data in three experiments consistently demonstrated that more participants conformed to information about what other people don’t do (i.e., the don’t‐norm) than information about what other people do (i.e., the do‐norm). We found that don’t‐norms more strongly influenced pro‐environmental choices related to both energy efficiency (Experiment 1) and sustainable food consumption (Experiments 2 and 3). The increased influence of the don’t‐norm were supported in two cultures (Sweden and USA), in two decision contexts (accepting and rejecting), and when using two wordings (want vs. avoid and preferred vs. unpreferred). These results suggest that descriptive do‐ and don’t‐norms are conceptually distinct and that don’t‐norms exert stronger influential power.
Magnus Bergquist; Andreas Nilsson. The DOs and DON’Ts in social norms: A descriptive don’t-norm increases conformity. Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology 2019, 3, 158 -166.
AMA StyleMagnus Bergquist, Andreas Nilsson. The DOs and DON’Ts in social norms: A descriptive don’t-norm increases conformity. Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology. 2019; 3 (3):158-166.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMagnus Bergquist; Andreas Nilsson. 2019. "The DOs and DON’Ts in social norms: A descriptive don’t-norm increases conformity." Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology 3, no. 3: 158-166.
Setting up a contest is a popular means to promote pro-environmental behaviors. Yet, research on contest-based interventions is scarce while norm-based interventions have gained much attention. In two field experiments, we randomly assigned 79 apartments to either a contest-based or a norm-based electricity conservation intervention and measured kWh usage for 2 and 4 weeks, respectively. Results from both studies showed that contest-based interventions promote intensive but short-lived electricity saving. In Study 1 apartments assigned to a norm-based intervention showed more stable electricity saving (low intensity and long-lasting). Study 2 did not replicate this finding, but supported that participants in the norm-based intervention also engaged in non-targeted behaviors. These results emphasize the importance of identifying how different intervention techniques may activate different goals, framing both how people think about and act upon targeted pro-environmental behaviors.
Magnus Bergquist; Andreas Nilsson; Emma Ejelöv. Contest-Based and Norm-Based Interventions: (How) Do They Differ in Attitudes, Norms, and Behaviors? Sustainability 2019, 11, 425 .
AMA StyleMagnus Bergquist, Andreas Nilsson, Emma Ejelöv. Contest-Based and Norm-Based Interventions: (How) Do They Differ in Attitudes, Norms, and Behaviors? Sustainability. 2019; 11 (2):425.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMagnus Bergquist; Andreas Nilsson; Emma Ejelöv. 2019. "Contest-Based and Norm-Based Interventions: (How) Do They Differ in Attitudes, Norms, and Behaviors?" Sustainability 11, no. 2: 425.
Normative feedback has shown to promote energy conservation, indicating that people are motivated to adjust their energy usage to others. Yet, the effect of social norms is conditional. Adding to past research, we proposed a norm distance effect, hypothesizing that the influential power of social norms increases as others’ behavior comes closer to peoples’ own behavior. In two experiments, we provided participants with normative information on energy usage through fictive smart phone applications. Results first conceptually replicated the norm alignment effect, showing that participants adjusted their energy usage intentions more when other peoples engaged in the approved rather than the disapproved behavior. In line with our norm distance hypothesis, both experiments found that people are more likely to adjust their behavior intentions to others as others’ behaviors come closer to their own behavior. These experiments contribute to past research on normative influence through smart meters, suggesting that norm distance can refine normative feedback promoting energy conservation.
Magnus Bergquist; Andreas Nilsson. Using social norms in smart meters: the norm distance effect. Energy Efficiency 2018, 11, 2101 -2109.
AMA StyleMagnus Bergquist, Andreas Nilsson. Using social norms in smart meters: the norm distance effect. Energy Efficiency. 2018; 11 (8):2101-2109.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMagnus Bergquist; Andreas Nilsson. 2018. "Using social norms in smart meters: the norm distance effect." Energy Efficiency 11, no. 8: 2101-2109.
Interventions using either contests or norms can promote environmental behavioral change. Yet research on the implications of contest-based and norm-based interventions is lacking. Based on Goal-framing theory, we suggest that a contest-based intervention frames a gain goal promoting intensive but instrumental behavioral engagement. In contrast, the norm-based intervention was expected to frame a normative goal activating normative obligations for targeted and non-targeted behavior and motivation to engage in pro-environmental behaviors in the future. In two studies participants (n = 347) were randomly assigned to either a contest- or a norm-based intervention technique. Participants in the contest showed more intensive engagement in both studies. Participants in the norm-based intervention tended to report higher intentions for future energy conservation (Study 1) and higher personal norms for non-targeted pro-environmental behaviors (Study 2). These findings suggest that contest-based intervention technique frames a gain goal, while norm-based intervention frames a normative goal.
Magnus Bergquist; Andreas Nilsson; André Hansla. Contests versus Norms: Implications of Contest-Based and Norm-Based Intervention Techniques. Frontiers in Psychology 2017, 8, 2046 -2046.
AMA StyleMagnus Bergquist, Andreas Nilsson, André Hansla. Contests versus Norms: Implications of Contest-Based and Norm-Based Intervention Techniques. Frontiers in Psychology. 2017; 8 ():2046-2046.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMagnus Bergquist; Andreas Nilsson; André Hansla. 2017. "Contests versus Norms: Implications of Contest-Based and Norm-Based Intervention Techniques." Frontiers in Psychology 8, no. : 2046-2046.
When implementing environmental education and interventions to promote one pro-environmental behavior, it is seldom asked if and how non-target pro-environmental behaviors are affected. The spillover effect proposes that engaging in one behavior affects the probability of engagement or disengaging in a second behavior. Therefore, the positive spillover effect predicts that interventions targeting one specific behavioral have the capacity to promote non-targeted and/or future pro-environmental behaviors. However, the negative spillover effect predicts that engaging in a first pro-environmental behavior will prevent or decrease a second pro-environmental behavior. Since the theoretical and empirical basis for positive and negative spillover effects are not sufficiently understood, the present paper (1) suggests a distinction between behavioral, temporal, and contextual spillovers (2) reviews the existing spillover research literature across a variety of environmental domains, (3) presents potential moderators governing the direction of spillover effects, and finally (4) discuss techniques to promote pro-environmental spillovers.
Andreas Nilsson; Magnus Bergquist; Wesley P. Schultz. Spillover effects in environmental behaviors, across time and context: a review and research agenda. Environmental Education Research 2016, 23, 573 -589.
AMA StyleAndreas Nilsson, Magnus Bergquist, Wesley P. Schultz. Spillover effects in environmental behaviors, across time and context: a review and research agenda. Environmental Education Research. 2016; 23 (4):573-589.
Chicago/Turabian StyleAndreas Nilsson; Magnus Bergquist; Wesley P. Schultz. 2016. "Spillover effects in environmental behaviors, across time and context: a review and research agenda." Environmental Education Research 23, no. 4: 573-589.
The focus theory of normative conduct proposes that normative influence can be enhanced by focusing people's attention to social norms. In a quasi-experimental field study, four normative prompts were compared on their ability to promote energy conservation behavior in public bathrooms. In line with an attention-reactance proposition, prompts that included both prescriptive and proscriptive content (i.e. dualinjunctive) elicited higher compliance compared prompts including either prescriptive or proscriptive content (i.e. single-injunctive). Study 2 assessed participants' experience of the prompts, indicating support for attention and reactance processes. Moreover, a clear incongruence between results of study 1 and respondents' assessment of the most influential prompt was found. Taken together, these findings add to the focus theory of normative conduct, suggesting one technique to increase compliance. On the applied level, these findings propose that the content used in prompts can have large effects on energy conservation behavior.
Magnus Bergquist; Andreas Nilsson. I saw the sign: Promoting energy conservation via normative prompts. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2016, 46, 23 -31.
AMA StyleMagnus Bergquist, Andreas Nilsson. I saw the sign: Promoting energy conservation via normative prompts. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2016; 46 ():23-31.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMagnus Bergquist; Andreas Nilsson. 2016. "I saw the sign: Promoting energy conservation via normative prompts." Journal of Environmental Psychology 46, no. : 23-31.