This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
Recent years have seen a growth in energy research that integrates social and behavioural sciences. A core component of this work involves collecting human data, commonly via surveys and field experiments. But there are often barriers to recruiting large and representative samples of participants, with sampling bias and non-response error posing threats to validity. Identifying cost-effective ways to increase participation in energy research is therefore important for strengthening the rigor, utility and generalisability of studies in this area. To this end, the current study harnesses an experimental design to test pathways for making energy surveys more impactful – specifically by improving response rates and times, lowering sampling bias, and enhancing overall cost-effectiveness. As part of a postal survey on household energy use in Australia, a set of randomised controlled trials were conducted to test the impact of four strategies: incentives, an envelope message, a handwritten sticky note, and a reminder postcard. A 3 x 2 x 2 x 2 factorial design was applied to assess both individual and interactive effects. While material incentives in the form of an upfront token gift and prize draw were ineffective in improving response relative to the control survey, results revealed that a handwritten sticky note expressing upfront thanks for participating – designed to serve as an intrinsically motivating attentional cue – improved both the rate and timeliness of response. Three combinations of strategies yielded significantly higher response rates than the control, but they were more expensive on a ‘dollar cost per response’ basis. Implications for research and practice are discussed.
Elisha R. Frederiks; Lygia M. Romanach; Adam Berry; Peter Toscas. Making energy surveys more impactful: Testing material and non-monetary response strategies. Energy Research & Social Science 2020, 63, 101409 .
AMA StyleElisha R. Frederiks, Lygia M. Romanach, Adam Berry, Peter Toscas. Making energy surveys more impactful: Testing material and non-monetary response strategies. Energy Research & Social Science. 2020; 63 ():101409.
Chicago/Turabian StyleElisha R. Frederiks; Lygia M. Romanach; Adam Berry; Peter Toscas. 2020. "Making energy surveys more impactful: Testing material and non-monetary response strategies." Energy Research & Social Science 63, no. : 101409.
In recent years, energy conservation research has identified a number of household actions that have the potential to drive significant reductions in carbon emissions in the near-term, without requiring substantial changes to householders’ lifestyles or imposing significant financial costs. In this qualitative study, we investigate the potential of some of these actions for behavioral modification by asking householders to reveal the reasons why they perform (or fail to perform) such actions. As part of a telephone survey, a sample of customers (n = 1541) from an Australian energy retailer were asked about their reasons for engaging in specific energy usage practices in one of five household domains: laundry, kitchen, bathroom, space heating/cooling or general appliance usage. Qualitative analyses of participants’ open-ended responses revealed that practices in the laundry and kitchen appear to hold the greatest promise for behavioral change, whereas practices in the shower may be more challenging to modify. Integrating our findings with current psychological and sociological knowledge, we present a range of possibilities for future behavior change interventions at the practice-level.
Elizabeth V. Hobman; Karen Stenner; Elisha R. Frederiks. Exploring Everyday Energy Usage Practices in Australian Households: A Qualitative Analysis. Energies 2017, 10, 1332 .
AMA StyleElizabeth V. Hobman, Karen Stenner, Elisha R. Frederiks. Exploring Everyday Energy Usage Practices in Australian Households: A Qualitative Analysis. Energies. 2017; 10 (9):1332.
Chicago/Turabian StyleElizabeth V. Hobman; Karen Stenner; Elisha R. Frederiks. 2017. "Exploring Everyday Energy Usage Practices in Australian Households: A Qualitative Analysis." Energies 10, no. 9: 1332.
This article provides a comprehensive review of theory and research on the individual-level predictors of household energy usage. Drawing on literature from across the social sciences, we examine two broad categories of variables that have been identified as potentially important for explaining variability in energy consumption and conservation: socio-demographic factors (e.g., income, employment status, dwelling type/size, home ownership, household size, stage of family life cycle) and psychological factors (e.g., beliefs and attitudes, motives and intentions, perceived behavioral control, cost-benefit appraisals, personal and social norms). Despite an expanding literature, we find that empirical evidence of the impact of these variables has been far from consistent and conclusive to date. Such inconsistency poses challenges for drawing generalizable conclusions, and underscores the complexity of consumer behavior in this domain. In this article, we propose that a multitude of factors—whether directly, indirectly, or in interaction—influence how householders consume and conserve energy. Theory, research and practice can be greatly advanced by understanding what these factors are, and how, when, where, why and for whom they operate. We conclude by outlining some important practical implications for policymakers and directions for future research.
Elisha R. Frederiks; Karen Stenner; Elizabeth V. Hobman. The Socio-Demographic and Psychological Predictors of Residential Energy Consumption: A Comprehensive Review. Energies 2015, 8, 573 -609.
AMA StyleElisha R. Frederiks, Karen Stenner, Elizabeth V. Hobman. The Socio-Demographic and Psychological Predictors of Residential Energy Consumption: A Comprehensive Review. Energies. 2015; 8 (1):573-609.
Chicago/Turabian StyleElisha R. Frederiks; Karen Stenner; Elizabeth V. Hobman. 2015. "The Socio-Demographic and Psychological Predictors of Residential Energy Consumption: A Comprehensive Review." Energies 8, no. 1: 573-609.