Communicating Dynamic Norms With Visual Cuesuse asterix (*) to get italics

Alaa Aldoh, Paul Sparks, Peter R. HarrisPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"

2023

<p>While decreasing their meat consumption is one of the most impactful behaviours an individual may carry out to reduce their carbon emissions, it is still a minority behaviour in many parts of the world. Research suggests that communicating information about changing ‘dynamic’ norms may be a useful tool for changing attitudes and behaviours in the direction of those currently held by the minority. This study utilizes a 2 x 2 mixed design (Norm Type [dynamic/static] x Visual Cue [present/absent], and a no-task control), and a follow-up assessment after one week to investigate the effect of making dynamic norms salient on various meat consumption outcomes: attitudes towards meat consumption, interest in reducing one’s own meat consumption, intentions to reduce one’s own meat consumption, and self-reported meat consumption. We used an online sample of British participants (N = 1294), ranging in ages 18–77 (Mage = 39.97, SDage = 13.71; 55.8% female). We hypothesized that: (a) dynamic norms will positively influence meat consumption outcomes, (b) visual cues will accentuate the difference between norm conditions, (c) using a visual cue will enhance the effect of dynamic norms, and (d) any effects of dynamic norms will endure over a period of one week. We found no positive effect of dynamic norms (vs. static norms) on any outcome at time 1, and no positive effect on changes in outcomes from time 1 to time 2. However, we found a positive interaction of norm type and visual cue at time 1 (although not from time 1 to time 2): the addition of a visual cue to dynamic norm messages enhanced the positive effect of the message at time 1 (but did not enhance the changes occurring from time 1 to time 2). Analyses for changes in self-reported meat consumption did not reach our evidential threshold. We discuss the practical and theoretical implications of these findings.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p>

dynamic norms, communication, meat, bayes, sustainability

NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).

Social sciences

2023-03-15 12:58:28

Chris Chambers

Gabriela Jiga-Boy, Wendy Van Lippevelde