Now on ScienceBlogs: Charles Darwin, Geologist

ScienceBlogs Book Club: Inside the Outbreaks

Guilty Planet

Seeking reason amidst the irrational madness of destroying one's only home.

The Guilty Planet Blog

Jacquet_Berlin.jpgJennifer Jacquet is a postdoctoral research fellow working with Dr. Daniel Pauly and the Sea Around Us Project at the UBC Fisheries Centre. As a kid, she read 50 Simple Things Kids Can Do to Save the Earth and would come to discover that while those 50 things were indeed simple, saving the Earth was not.

Search

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Online Resources & Blogs

Projects & Publications

July 30-August 1, 2010: Attending Sci Foo Camp hosted by Nature, O'Reilly and Google at the Googleplex, Mountain View, CA.

June 19, 2010: Presenting at the Human Behavior and Evolution Society Annual Meeting at the University of Oregon in Eugene.

May 2010: Counting fish: A typology for fisheries catch data published in The Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences.

May 3-7, 2010: Workshop: Incorporating Appropriate Ecological Baselines into Management of Ocean Resources at the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C.

April 24, 2010: Q&A following a screening of The End of the Line at the Food Film Festival in Portland, Oregon.

March 12, 2010: Presenting at the World Affairs Conference of Northern California in San Francisco.

February 21, 2010: Co-organizing and presenting on the panel Preserving the Global Commons Through Conservation and Cooperation at the AAAS meeting in San Diego.

January-March 2010: Visiting lecturer at the Scripps Insitution of Oceanography, UCSD. Co-teaching Topics in Marine Conservation with Jeremy Jackson.

November 2009: Conserving Wild Fish in a Sea of Market-Based Efforts published online at Oryx

August 14, 2009: Dan Ax at Avukado Productions makes the following short video for Guilty Planet:

July 30, 2009: Successfully defended Ph.D. dissertation Fish as Food in an Age of Globalization at the University of British Columbia.

June 2009: Published at Conservation Biology: What Can Conservationists Learn from Investor Behavior?

May 27, 2009: Talk titled "Historical Renaming and Mislabeling of Fish" given the Oceans Past II conference in Vancouver, B.C.

May 24, 2009: Talk at the International Marine Conservation Congress in Washington, D.C.

March 24, 2009: Dave Beck and I showcase our jellyfish burger in Scientific American's photo gallery:

beck_jacquet_jellyburger.jpg


March 24, 2009: Talk at the Student Conference for Conservation Science at Cambridge University, UK.

March 14, 2009: Talk at the Kettle's Yard Problemathon for Cambridge's Science Festival.

March 3, 2009: Talk titled "Guilt v. Shame in Market Based Efforts to Save Our Fish" at the Max Planck Institute in Ploen, Germany.

February 27, 2009: Talk at Fauna & Flora International.

January-March 2009: Visiting researcher with Bill Sutherland's lab in the Conservation Science Group at the University of Cambridge.

November 2008: A new study In hot soup: sharks captured in Ecuador's waters published in Environmental Sciences.

November 2008:

« McDonald's Ad Reminds Customers Their Fish Sandwich Was Once Alive | Main | UK Neighborhood Captures Litterbugs on Film »

What Can an Emoticon Do for Energy Use?

Category: Evidence-based ConservationPsychology of Conservation
Posted on: June 30, 2009 10:22 AM, by Jennifer L. Jacquet

Social-norms campaigns are intended to mitigate problem behaviors by conveying the message that problem behavior occurs with far less frequency than people think (e.g. teenage drinking). But for individuals who already abstain from the undesirable behavior, this can actually produce a boomerang effect (similar to the effect we discussed for the Crying Indian PSA) where people see that others are behaving in a certain way and actually do more of the undesired behavior. In other words, there is a tendency toward normalization.

In social messaging, therefore, it is important to build in something to convey the perception of what is commonly approved or disapproved of within the culture (i.e. not simply what is normal but what society thinks should be normal). This is called the injunctive norm.

A team of psychologists tested the injunctive norm in a study on energy use in 290 households in San Marcos, California. They gave half of those households a series of messages containing information on their home's energy and how that energy use compared to their neighbors along with information on how to conserve energy. The other half they sent the same information plus an injunctive message: a smiley face if the household consumed less than average and a frown if it consumed more. Researchers hypothesized that the emoticon would prevent households who consumed less from consuming more when they saw they were below average (the undesirable boomerang effect) and lead to greater overall energy savings. They were right.

happy_sad.jpg

With just the descriptive message about energy use relative to their neighbors, short-term energy use (the 3-week period following the final message) fell by 1.22kWh/day (so it did have a positive effect on energy conservation). But the households who received the injunctive message (the emoticon that signaled how their energy use was perceived) reduced their energy consumption by 1.72kWh/day. An emoticon reduced energy use by an additional 40 percent and saved 0.50 additional kWh/day. Maybe it would be best if all behavior came with smiley or frown faces...

Schultz, P.W., J.M. Nolan, R.B. Cialdini, N.J. Goldstein, V. Griskevicius. 2007. The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychological Science 18(5): 429-434.

Share on Facebook
Share on StumbleUpon
Share on Facebook
Find more posts in: EnvironmentBrain & Behavior

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/113807

Comments

1

"...problem behavior occurs with far less frequency than people thing ..."

Do you mean "people think"?!

Thanks for the blog. Keep up the great work!

Posted by: Ian | June 30, 2009 11:35 AM

2

Thanks for the catch, Ian! Corrected it...

Posted by: Jennifer L. Jacquet | June 30, 2009 11:46 AM

3

Interesting... though I wonder how much of the effect can be explained by the uber-simple visual summary that the emoticon provided?

I can't think of an easy way to control well for that. Most very simple visual signals have a good/bad connotation. A partial control might be the emoticons vs something like an up or down arrow (for higher or lower)... though down=bad, though maybe less strongly than frown=bad.

Apologies if they actually did this sort of thing. I'm away from journal access at the moment.

Posted by: travc | July 1, 2009 6:27 AM

4

Nice job. This is one of the clearest overviews of that research that I have read. - Ryan

Posted by: Ryan Nagy | July 1, 2009 9:53 AM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Follow ScienceBlogs on Twitter

© 2006-2011 ScienceBlogs LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of ScienceBlogs LLC. All rights reserved.