PCI Registered Reports

Announcements

Please note that we will be CLOSED to ALL SUBMISSIONS from 1 December 2024 through 12 January 2025 to give our recommenders and reviewers a holiday break.

We are recruiting recommenders (editors) from all research fields!

Your feedback matters! If you have authored or reviewed a Registered Report at Peer Community in Registered Reports, then please take 5 minutes to leave anonymous feedback about your experience, and view community ratings.

Back

430

Title *

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

Authors *

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"

Year *

2023

Picture

Abstract *

<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> </p>

Indicate the full web address (DOI or URL) giving public access to these data (if you have any problems with the deposit of your data, please contact contact@rr.peercommunityin.org). *

You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Indicate the full web address (DOI or URL) giving public access to these scripts (if you have any problems with the deposit of your scripts, please contact contact@rr.peercommunityin.org). *

You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Indicate the full web address (DOI, SWHID or URL) giving public access to these codes (if you have any problems with the deposit of your codes, please contact contact@rr.peercommunityin.org). *

You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Keywords (optional)

dynamic norms, communication, meat, bayes, sustainability

Methods that require specific expertise (optional)

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

Thematic fields *

Social sciences

Suggested reviewers - Suggest up to 10 reviewers (provide names and Email addresses). (Optional)

e.g. John Doe john@doe.com

No need for them to be recommenders of PCI Registered Reports. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct

Opposed reviewers - Suggest up to 5 people not to invite as reviewers. (Optional)

e.g. John Doe john@doe.com

Submission date

2023-03-15 12:58:28

Recommender

Chris Chambers

Reviewers

Wendy Van Lippevelde, Gabriela Jiga-Boy

or Register
Submit a report