Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials examining social comparison as a behaviour change technique across the behavioural sciences

IF 21.4 1区 心理学 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
Thole H. Hoppen, Rieke M. Cuno, Janna Nelson, Frederike Lemmel, Pascal Schlechter, Nexhmedin Morina
{"title":"Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials examining social comparison as a behaviour change technique across the behavioural sciences","authors":"Thole H. Hoppen, Rieke M. Cuno, Janna Nelson, Frederike Lemmel, Pascal Schlechter, Nexhmedin Morina","doi":"10.1038/s41562-025-02209-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Research on social comparison as a behaviour change technique (SC-BCT) has increased substantially. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials investigating SC-BCTs across the behavioural sciences (PROSPERO: CRD42022343154). We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science from inception to January 2024. Seventy-nine randomized controlled trials (<i>N</i> = 1,356,521) investigating effects on behaviours related to climate change mitigation, health, performance and service were included. In the short term (mean 3.7 months post-intervention), SC-BCTs produced small effects relative to both passive (Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.11–0.23; <i>k</i> = 37; <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001) and active control conditions (<i>g</i> = 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.15–0.31; <i>k</i> = 42; <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001). A greater number of SC-BCT sessions and emphasis on desired (versus undesired) behaviours were associated with larger effects. Moderation effects were observed in only a few analyses, highlighting the need for further testing. SC-BCTs also produced significant small effects in the long term (mean 6.2 months post-intervention). Small effects should be interpreted in the context of low cost and scalability (for example, sending one or two emails). Certainty of evidence, using GRADE criteria, ranged from low to moderate depending on the analysis. More high-quality research is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":19074,"journal":{"name":"Nature Human Behaviour","volume":"55 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":21.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Human Behaviour","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-025-02209-2","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research on social comparison as a behaviour change technique (SC-BCT) has increased substantially. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials investigating SC-BCTs across the behavioural sciences (PROSPERO: CRD42022343154). We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science from inception to January 2024. Seventy-nine randomized controlled trials (N = 1,356,521) investigating effects on behaviours related to climate change mitigation, health, performance and service were included. In the short term (mean 3.7 months post-intervention), SC-BCTs produced small effects relative to both passive (Hedges’ g = 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.11–0.23; k = 37; P < 0.001) and active control conditions (g = 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.15–0.31; k = 42; P < 0.001). A greater number of SC-BCT sessions and emphasis on desired (versus undesired) behaviours were associated with larger effects. Moderation effects were observed in only a few analyses, highlighting the need for further testing. SC-BCTs also produced significant small effects in the long term (mean 6.2 months post-intervention). Small effects should be interpreted in the context of low cost and scalability (for example, sending one or two emails). Certainty of evidence, using GRADE criteria, ranged from low to moderate depending on the analysis. More high-quality research is needed.

Abstract Image

随机对照试验的荟萃分析,检验社会比较作为行为科学中的行为改变技术
社会比较作为一种行为改变技术(SC-BCT)的研究已经大量增加。我们对行为科学领域的sc - bct随机对照试验进行了随机效应荟萃分析(PROSPERO: CRD42022343154)。我们检索了MEDLINE, PsycINFO和Web of Science从创立到2024年1月。纳入了79项随机对照试验(N = 1,356,521),调查对减缓气候变化、健康、绩效和服务相关行为的影响。在短期内(干预后平均3.7个月),sc - bct相对于两种被动治疗产生较小的影响(Hedges’g = 0.17;95%置信区间为0.11-0.23;k = 37;P < 0.001)和主动对照条件(g = 0.23;95%置信区间为0.15-0.31;k = 42;P < 0.001)。更多的SC-BCT会话和对期望(而非期望)行为的强调与更大的效果相关。仅在少数分析中观察到适度效应,强调需要进一步测试。sc - bct在长期(干预后平均6.2个月)也产生了显著的小影响。小的影响应该在低成本和可伸缩性的背景下解释(例如,发送一个或两个电子邮件)。证据的确定性,使用GRADE标准,根据分析从低到中等不等。需要更多高质量的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Nature Human Behaviour
Nature Human Behaviour Psychology-Social Psychology
CiteScore
36.80
自引率
1.00%
发文量
227
期刊介绍: Nature Human Behaviour is a journal that focuses on publishing research of outstanding significance into any aspect of human behavior.The research can cover various areas such as psychological, biological, and social bases of human behavior.It also includes the study of origins, development, and disorders related to human behavior.The primary aim of the journal is to increase the visibility of research in the field and enhance its societal reach and impact.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信