How to motivate „normal“ people to behave in a more proenvironmental way?

How to motivate „normal“ people to behave in a more proenvironmental way?

Sebastian BambergUniversity of Applied Science [email protected]

The Problem

CO2 emissions are the central cause of climate change.

Contribution of consumers’ behavior to CO2-emissions:

Transport – ca. 20% Home energy use (heating/cooling) – ca. 35% Nutrition (meat consumption) – ca. 20%

The Problem

With growing insight into the harmful impact on the earth‘s ecosystems of the lifestyles pursued in industrialized societies, behavioral change has become a central focus not only of climate protection policy but also of environmental psychology as an applied science.

The Problem

How can we persuade people…

to switch transport modes, appliance choices, and eating habits

… in a way that will reduce their damaging impact on the environment?

The Role of Psychology

It is trivial that problem awareness is a first precondition for behavioral change.

Does problem awareness (high environmental consciousness) directly motivates behavioral change?


In Germany about 75% of the population view climate change as one of the most serious threats humanity is confronted with.

However, only 9% are willing to personally adopt behaviors which would effectively contribute to the reduction of this threat.

Central Questions

Obviously, even if people are aware of a problem it is a long way to actually change own behavior.


What motivates a person to critically reevaluate her/his current behavior?

How does a behavioral change goal develop, how is it transformed into a concrete behavioral change strategy?

How do individuals overcome the problems they encounter when trying to implement this new behavioral strategy?

STAGE MODELS

In psychology stage models provide an interesting approach for answering these questions.

Stage models explicitly focus on the dynamic, temporal aspects of behavioral change.

STAGE MODELS

The central theoretical assumption underlying all stage models:

Behavioral change could be best modelled as a person‘s transition through a sequence of qualitatively different stages of behavioral change.

In health psychology the Transtheoretical Modell (Prochaska & Velicer, 1997) is a well known stage model.

Stage Model of Self-regulated behavioral Change (SSBC, Bamberg 2011)

Construes change as a process involving progress through a series of four stages:

Predecisional stage Preactional stage Actional stage Postactional stage

Stage Model of Self-regulated behavioral Change (SSBC)

These stages of behavioral change reflect …

four timely ordered, qualitatively different TASKS

people have to solve for turning desired goals into behavioral practices.

Stage Model of Self-regulated behavioral Change (SSBC, Bamberg 2011)

The formation of the three intention types

goal-intention behavioral intention implementation intention

indicates that a person has successfully solved the respective stage specific task and can move on to the next stage.

Stage Model of Self-regulated Behavioral Change

Mind set of people in the predecisional stage:

Perform the problem behavior on a regular, habitual basis.

Are not fully aware of the negative consequences associated with this behavior, and thus see no reasons for behavioral change.

Confronting people in this stage with a direct request to change their behavior runs the risk of triggering reactance.

Stage Model of Self-regulated behavioral Change (SSBC) -Task of the first PRE-

DECISIONAL stage

PreactionalStage

Actional Stage

Behavioral Intention

Transition point

PredecisionalStage

PostactionalStage

Implementation Intention

Transition point

Motivation task:Raising doubts

Motivational task:Selecting a

change strategy

Motivational task:Implemention of

the change strategyMotivational task:

Habitualising the new behavior

Goal Intention

Transition point


Mind set of people in the preactional stage:

People already have the general goal of changing their current behavior (high goal intention).

However, because several actions (e.g. cycling, walking, public transport) could normally be used as a means to achieve this goal (e.g. car reduction), the task confronting them is to select the personally most suitable behavioral strategy.

PreactionalStage

Actional Stage

Goal Intention

Transition point

PredecisionalStage

PostactionalStage


Transition point



change strategy





Transition point

Stage Model of Self-regulated behavioral Change (SSBC)- Task of the second PRE-

ACTIONAL stage


Mind set of people in the actional stage:

People not only possess a strong goal intention but also have formed a strong behavioral intention; that is, they have made a decision on which new behavioral strategy they want to test instead of the old one.

However, people often have difficulties to translate their “good” behavioral intentions into real action. That is, people often fail to do the things that they say they intent to do or fail to avoid doing things that they do not want to do (Orbell & Sheeran, 1998).

PreactionalStage

Actional Stage

Goal Intention

Transition point

PredecisionalStage

PostactionalStage



change strategy





Transition point


Transition point

Stage Model of Self-regulated behavioral Change (SSBC)- Task of the third ACTIONAL

stage


Mind set of people in the postactional stage:

Persons actually perform the selected new behavior for some time.

In this stage they reflect on the experiences they have made with the new behavior and compare it critically with the old behavior.

As a result, the main intervention task in this stage is twofold: to provide feedback on how successfully they have achieved their personal change goal and to help them to cope with the temptation to relapse to the old behavior.

PreactionalStage

Actional Stage

Goal Intention

Transition point

PredecisionalStage

PostactionalStage



change strategy





Transition point


Transition point

Stage Model of Self-regulated behavioral Change (SSBC)- Task of the forth POST-

ACTIONAL stage • Evaluating what has achieved and to decide whether further action is necessary.

• Struggling with temptation that is, preventing a relapse into the old behavior.

• How to explain the formation of the three critical transition points

• For intervention development precise information is needed concerning the determinants of the three critical intention types.

• These intention determinants are the direct intervention targets.

Stage Model of Self-regulated behavioral Change (SSBC)

SSBC - Processes contributing to the formation of a goal intention

Pre-decisional Stage Pre-actional Stage

Transition point

Negativeaffect

Felt obligation tofulfil personal

standards

reference value

Perceived goalfeasibility

Goal IntentionSocial Norms

Perceivedresonsibility

Awareness ofnegative

consequences

Pos. emotionsanticipated with

goal succes

SSBC - Processes contributing to the formation of a behavioral intention

Pre-actional stage Actional Stage

Goal intention

Behavioral intention

Attitudes toward alternative behavioral strategies

Perceived behaviroal control over alternative

behavioral strategies

Perceived goal feasibility

SSBC- Processes contributing to the formation of an implementation intention

Actional Stage

BehavioralIntention

Coping and action planning abilities

Postactional Stage

ImplementationIntention

New habit

Maintenance Self-efficacy

Perceived behaviroal control

SSBC- Processes contributing to the maintenance of the new behavior

ImplementationIntention

New habit

Recovery Self-efficacy

Maintenance Self-efficacy

Postactional Stage

The stage model of self-regulated behavioral change

Model specific focus: Developing and testing action hypotheses for the SSBC.

Interventions targeting people in the predecisional stage.

The SSBC provides clear guidelines on which strategies interventions targeting people in the predecisional stage should focus on:

(a)enhancing problem awareness; (b)increasing acceptance of personal responsibility; (c)making social norms salient; (d)strengthening perceived ability to change current

behavior; and(e)promoting the formation of a clear and challenging, but

not excessive personal change goal.

Interventions targeting people in the predecisional stage.

However, because of the aforementioned risk of eliciting reactance, the intervention should include not only arguments promoting behavioral change but also elements trying to reduce reactance.

Research (e.g., Knowles & Riner, 2007) has indicated that one of the most effective ways to reduce reactance is to merely acknowledge the fact that the person might feel some resistance.

Interventions targeting people in the preactional stage

The main task people are confronted with in this stage is to select the personally most suitable behavioral strategy.

Consequently, the main intervention goal in this stage is to provide more knowledge about the pros and cons as well as the personal feasibility of behavioral alternatives, and then help people to select their personally most suitable behavioral alternative

Interventions targeting people in the preactional stage

Besides promoting arguments, interventions for people in the preactional stage should also include arguments targeting potential sources of reactance/resistance:

According to Knowles and Riner (2007), one effective strategy to deal with concerns about an offer consists in giving guarantees.

In the mobility case for example, participants could be offered a possibility to test whether public transport services fit their purposes with a free one-week travel pass.

Interventions targeting people in the actional stage.

In this stage the main task people are confronted with is to translate their “good” behavioral intentions into real action.

Gollwitzer (1999; Gollwitzer & Sheeran, 2006) proposed that explicitly motivating people to plan the when, where, and how to enact the intended new behavior is a simple and effective strategy for dealing with this problem.

Interventions targeting people in the postactional stage

In this stage people are reflecting on the experiences they have made with the new behavior and are comparing it critically with the old behavior.

As a result, the main intervention task in this stage is twofold: to provide feedback on how successfully they have achieved their personal change goal and to help them to cope with the temptation to relapse to the old behavior.


As a consequence, besides repeating and strengthening the positive consequences associated with the new behavior and helping them to overcome barriers, the focus of interventions should be on providing social support.

This could be done by explicitly thanking and praising people for their good decision and offering them a small gift in recognition.


Besides asking them whether they need additional information, another intervention element for this stage group consists in motivating them to think about buying a permanent monthly or annual public transport pass.

The idea behind this intervention element is to increase participants’ commitment to their current behavior and to strengthen its habitual nature.

From the Model to a Real InterventionThe Berlin Intervention Study

General aim: To test the ability of a stage-based phone marketing campaign

to promote voluntary car use reduction for daily trips in Berlin.

General logic of the intervention approach: Using personal contact (a phone call) to motivate car users Tailoring the intervention to the person’s current behavioral

change stage. Combining personal contact with supporting print materials Repeating the intervention (2 times)

The Berlin Intervention StudyIntervention Elements

Invitation letter contains the stage diagnosis tool

Specific dialogue modules for the phone contact with participants in the pre-decisional stage pre-actional stage actional stage post-actional stage

Stage specific support print materials

Guidelines for Developing Stage-specific Intervention Modules Aiming to Trigger Stage Transition

Stage of change Intervention techniques

Predecisional

Make social norms salient Enhance problem awareness and self-focus Enhance goal setting und goal commitment

Preactional

Provide information about the pros and cons of

different behavioural alternatives and enhancing

perceived behavioural control

Actional Support behavioural planning

Postactional

Provide behavioral feedback Prevent the temptation to relapse

Intervention Effects

H1: The stage-based dialogue marketing intervention has a significant effect on post-intervention travel behavior.

H2: The effect of the stage-based dialog marketing intervention is significantly stronger than the effect of a standardized information intervention.

Effect of the Berlin Dialogue Marketing Campaignon Car Use for Daily Trips

ANOVA F (2, 243) = 5.31, p < .01

Experimental Condition

DialogueInfo-PackageControl Group

Mea

n C

ar U

se A

fter I

nter

vent

ion

8,0

7,0

6,0

5,0

4,0

3,0

2,0

1,0

0,0

5,8

6,77,0

p = .001

p = .01 p = .30

Effect of the Berlin Dialogue Marketing Campaignon PT Use for Daily Trips

ANOVA F (2, 243) = 3.31, p < .05

Experimental Condition

DialogueInfo-PackageKontrollgruppe

Mea

n PT

Use

Afte

r Int

erve

ntio

n7,0

6,0

5,0

4,0

3,0

2,0

1,0

0,0

6,5

5,65,5

p = .02

p = .03 p = .80

Identification of four Stage Groups

H3: With help of the information obtained by a newly developed stage measure in the total sample four homogeneous subgroups could be identified representing the four stage groups of behavioral change.

The Stage Measure1. part: Six statements representing the stage typical “mind-sets”

Question: Which of the following statements best describes how youfeel about your current level of car use for daily trips (in city X/ toyour workplace) and whether you have any plans to try to reducesome or all of these car trips?

Please choose which statement fits best to your current situationand tick only one box

Stageallocation

At the moment, I use the car for most of my trips. I am happy withmy current level of car use and see no reason why I should reduceit.

At the moment, I still use the car for most of my trips. I would like toreduce my current level of car use, but, at the moment, I feel it wouldbe impossible for me to do so.

Predecisional

At the moment, I do use the car for most of my trips. I am currentlythinking about changing some or all of these trips to noncar modes,but at the moment I am unsure how I can replace these car trips, orwhen I should do so.

Preactional

At the moment, I use the car for most of my trips, but it is my aim toreduce my current level of car use. I already know which trips I willreplace and which alternative transport mode I will use, but, as yet, Ihave not actually put this into practice.

Actional

Because I am aware of the many problems associated with car use,I already try to use non-car modes as much as possible. I willmaintain or even reduce my already low level of car use in the nextmonths.

Postactional

As I do not own/have access to a car, reducing my level of car use isnot currently an issue for me. ‚Captives‘

The Stage Measure2. part: Current behavior

Your current travel behaviour: In the last four weeks how frequently have you used the fol-lowing transport modes for everyday trips (e.g. to the workplace, for shopping- or leisure)? Car as driver Always ? Often ? Occasionally ? Seldom ? Never ? Car as passenger Always ? Often ? Occasionally ? Seldom ? Never ? Bicycle Always ? Often ? Occasionally ? Seldom ? Never ? Walking Always ? Often ? Occasionally ? Seldom ? Never ? Public transport (PT) Always ? Often ? Occasionally ? Seldom ? Never ?

Empirical Evidence for the Postulated four Stage GroupsResults of a Latent Class Cluster Analysis (LCCA)

Pre-intervention LCCA Results Post-intervention LCCA Results

LL BIC(LL) LL BIC(LL)

1-Cluster -1157,3418 2374,9247 -1191,2895 2443,3589

2-Cluster -967,9227 2045,3746 -978,8870 2068,2831

3-Cluster -908,5095 1975,8365 -919,1107 1998,4596

4-Cluster -871,7382 1951,5821 -881,6886 1973,3444

5-Cluster -866,8682 1991,1301 -876,8799 2013,4562

Half Year Test-Re-Test Reliability: gamma = .74; rank-correlation = .66

Post-intervention Behavioral Profils of the four Stage Groups

Planned contrasts indicate significant differences in Car und PT use between the two earlier and to later stages of behavioral change

Furthermore, there is a significant decrease in car use and increase inPT use from actional to postactional stage.

StagePredecisional Preactional Actional Postactional

Car use 8.8 8.6 7.5 4.7

PT use 3.8 3.8 5.7 7.0

Cycling 3.4 3.8 3.8 5.5

Walking 7,8 8.8 8.6 8.9

Testing the role of the three intention types as stage transition points

H4a: A strong goal intention is significantly associated with the probability of assignment to the preactional stage,

H4b: A strong behavioral intention significantly associated with the assignment probability to the actional stage,

H4c: A strong implementation intention significantly associated with the assignment probability to the postactional stage.

Results of a non-proportional ordinal logistic regression analysis: Odds Ratio (OR) Estimates

Varying Effect on Thresholds

Contemplation

OR1

Preparation

OR2

Maintenance

OR3

p- Value for

OR1 = OR2 = OR3

Low vs. High Goal intention 3.19*** 1.80*** > .001

Low vs. High Behav. Intention 1.46** > .001

Low vs. High Planning 1.63*** 1.77*** > .001

Stage Transition as mechanism mediating the intervention effect on behavior

H5: The intervention triggers a significantly stronger transition from earlier to later stages.

H6: The intervention effect on behavior is mediated by its effect on stage progression: after controlling for the intervention effect on stage transition, the direct intervention effect on behavior is no longer significant.

Mediates Stage Transition the Intervention Effect?

Predictive power of the stage-specific variable sets

H7: The proposed sets of socio-cognitive variables are strong predictors of the three transition points goal-intention, behavioral intention, and implementation intention.

Estimator: MLRModel Fit: Chi-squ. = 1.129,163; df = 505; CFI =0.94; TLI = 0.94; RMSEA = 0.034; Probability RMSEA <= .05 is 1.000

Empirical Model TestStructural Equation Model (N = 1.055)

Conclusion

The presented results provide some evidence that stage models may be an interesting framework for intervention development.

Central limitation:

Study provides no evidence that stage-based interventions are more effective than non-stage based interventions.

For this purpose other experimental designs are needed

What intervention techniques are effective in the pre-decisional stage (promoting the

formation of a goal intention)?

Remember:

Comparing current behavior with important personal standards is viewed as critical in the pre-decisional stage.

Self-Awareness as the critical psychological stage.

The Induced Hypocrisy Techniques

Theoretical basis: Cognitive Dissonance Theory and Self-Consistency Theory

Assumption:

Rendering salient inconsistencies between actual behavior and important self-standards raises negative feelings in a person which motivate her/him to re-adjust her/his behavior in line with her/his self-standards.


Procedure:

The IH paradigm relies on a two-stages procedure. In a first, public commitment, stage participants are asked to make public statements that are supportive of the attitudinal object under study (e.g., they have to make public statements about the importance of energy saveing).

In a second, mindfulness, stage they are rendered mindful of their own behavioral transgressions of their self-standards (e.g., they have to recall instances of

behaviors in which they did not perform in a energy saving way).


Procedure:

People facing such inconsistencies should realize that they do not behave in agreement with what they preach for others, that is they behave in a hypocritical way.


Practical implementation

A sample of 100 students were unsystematically approached on the university campus. Using a randomization procedure half of them were confronted to a IH procedure (experimental group). The other half completed only a questionnaire (control group).

Participants in the IH condition were asked for a contribution for a planned high school lesson aiming to promote energy saving behavior.

For this purpose participants were asked to allow to photograph them. Then they were asked to complete the phase ‚Energy saving is important for me, because...‘ with a own statement (public commitment stage).

After that they were asked to complete a scale measuring participants actual performance of 10 energy saving behaviors. Half of the items asked for behaviors which are not performed by the majority of the German population(e.g., not using the plane for vacation trips, always switching of the stand by function). The function of the scale was to render participants mindful of their own behavioral transgressions of their self-standards (mindfullness stage)

What intervention techniques are effective in the pre-actional/ actional stage (promoting the formation of a

behavioral/ implementation intention)?

Remember:

Reflecting about the pros and cons of alternative behaviors as well as planning the when, where, and how of action initiation are viewed as critical in these stages.

The MCII - Technique

In mental contrasting, people (1) name their most important feasible wish that is directed toward changing their behavior (e.g., regular physical activity), (2) name and imagine the most positive outcome of successfully changing their behavior (e.g., being in better shape), and (3) name and imagine the most critical obstacle that stands in the way of wish fulfillment (e.g., being tired after work).

If participants expect that they can realize their wish, mental contrasting leads to strong behavioral change intention.

The MCIITechnique

The thus strengthened behavioral intention is then supplemented by a procedure aiming to promote the precise planning when, where and how to implement this intention (e.g., If the weather is fine tomorrow morning, then I will bike to work!)

The combination of mental contrasting and behavioral planning should have a strong impact on behavior change because the two strategies complement each other.

The MCIITechnique

Procedure:

In the first step participants write down four items: (1) their most important current wish regarding physical activity (e.g., biking to work); (2) the most positive outcome of realizing their wish (e.g., getting into better shape) and events and experiences they associated with this positive outcome; (3) the most critical obstacle (e.g., getting up too late) together with events and experiences they associated with this obstacle.

The MCIITechnique

Procedure:

In the next step with the following questions participants are motivated to for three behavioral plans: (1) When and where does the obstacle occur, and what can I do to overcome or circumvent the obstacle?;

(2) When and where is an opportunity to prevent the obstacle from occurring, and what can I do to prevent it from occurring?; and

(3)When and where is a good opportunity for me to act on my wish, and what would this action be?

The MCIITechnique

Procedure:

For example, a participant could counter the obstacle of getting up too late with the plan “If I get up too late,

then I’ll skip the morning news!”

Effect of the Induced Hypocrisy Technique

Predecisional/Preactional Decisional/Actional

Control

Group

Experimental

Group

Control

Group

Experimental

Group

Variable M SD M SD M SD M SD

Social Norm 1.52 1.18 1.73 1.23 1.43 1.18 1.33 1.06

Personal moral norm 2.67 1.16 3.42 0.64*** 2.96 0.94 2.84 0.85

Goal Intention 2.87 0.92 3.66 0.46** 3.27 0.66 3.06 0.65

Behavioral attitude 3.14 0.66 3.55 0.62*** 3.27 0.67 3.30 0.48

Behavioral PBC 2.98 0.76 3.05 0.88 2.81 0.83 2.78 0.88

Behavioral Intention 2.54 1.03 3.11 0.98** 2.82 0.77 2.76 0.76

Implementation Intention 1.63 1.21 2.44 1.33** 1.72 1.20 1.80 1.09

Effekte der Hypercrisy-Intervention getrennt für beide Stage Gruppen

Effect of the MCII Technique

Effekte der Hypercrisy-Intervention getrennt für beide Stage Gruppen

Predecisional/Preactional Decisional/Actional

Control

Group

Experimental

Group

Control

Group

Experimental

Group

Variable M SD M SD M SD M SD

Social Norm 0.66 0.83 0.49 0.75 0.67 0.77 0.87 1.10

Personal moral norm 0.99 1.01 1.42* 1.13 1.99 1.19 2.75** 1.01

Goal Intention 1.12 0.98 1.56* 1.22 2.27 1.03 3.08*** 0.86

Behavioral attitude 2.42 0.88 2.46 1.07 3.06 0.69 3.41** 0.49

Behavioral PBC 1.57 0.94 1.84 1.15 2.39 1.10 2.94** 0.73

Behavioral Intention 1.34 0.90 1.66 1.18 2.34 0.92 3.08*** 0.63

Implementation Intention 0.79 0.76 1.24* 1.30 1.27 1.05 2.11*** 1.09

Meat Consumption 3.94 3.13 6.00* 3.69 3.44 2.69 1.74** 2.57

Effect of the MCII Technique

SocialNorm (Goal)

R2 = .05

Personal Norm (Goal)

R2 = .18

Goal IntentionR2 = .64

Attitude (Behavior)

R2 = .35

PBC(Behavior)

R2 = .51

BehavioralIntention R2 = .73


R2 = .44

Behavior (Meat Consumption)

R2 = .22

MCII Intervention

Hypocrisy Intervention

Goal Feasibility

R2 = .10

.19*

.01

.08*.06*

.52***

.31***

.68***

.28***

.23***.30***

.10**

.23*.23***

.20***.32**

.28***

.29***

.48***

.18***

-.46***

Documents

How to motivate „normal“ people to behave in a more proenvironmental way?