M. Alblas, M. Meijers, Heleen E. de Groot, S. Mollen
{"title":"“肉”我在中间:肉类消费背景下社会规范反馈干预的潜力-概念复制","authors":"M. Alblas, M. Meijers, Heleen E. de Groot, S. Mollen","doi":"10.1080/17524032.2022.2149587","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Meat consumption has detrimental environmental effects. Research shows that social norms are important when it comes to meat consumption. However, social norm interventions have shown mixed effects regarding their effectiveness for decreasing meat consumption. Therefore, an experiment was conducted (n = 279) with a 2 (baseline meat consumption: above- vs. below-average) x 3 (social norm feedback: descriptive norm only, descriptive plus injunctive norm, no feedback) x 3 (time: T0 [baseline], T1 [+1 week from baseline], T2 [+2 weeks from baseline]) mixed-factorial design. Results showed that reported changes in meat consumption at T1 and T2 relative to T0 were not different after receiving social norm feedback (i.e. descriptive norm only or descriptive plus injunctive norm) compared to receiving no feedback. Irrespective of the social norm feedback condition, participants reporting above-average meat consumption at baseline reduced their consumption, whereas those reporting below-average meat consumption at baseline increased their consumption over time. A plausible explanation for these findings may be statistical regression to the mean. Further understanding is needed of how social norm interventions may be used to reduce meat consumption.","PeriodicalId":54205,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Communication-A Journal of Nature and Culture","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Meat” Me in the Middle: The Potential of a Social Norm Feedback Intervention in the Context of Meat Consumption – A Conceptual Replication\",\"authors\":\"M. Alblas, M. Meijers, Heleen E. de Groot, S. Mollen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17524032.2022.2149587\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Meat consumption has detrimental environmental effects. Research shows that social norms are important when it comes to meat consumption. However, social norm interventions have shown mixed effects regarding their effectiveness for decreasing meat consumption. Therefore, an experiment was conducted (n = 279) with a 2 (baseline meat consumption: above- vs. below-average) x 3 (social norm feedback: descriptive norm only, descriptive plus injunctive norm, no feedback) x 3 (time: T0 [baseline], T1 [+1 week from baseline], T2 [+2 weeks from baseline]) mixed-factorial design. Results showed that reported changes in meat consumption at T1 and T2 relative to T0 were not different after receiving social norm feedback (i.e. descriptive norm only or descriptive plus injunctive norm) compared to receiving no feedback. Irrespective of the social norm feedback condition, participants reporting above-average meat consumption at baseline reduced their consumption, whereas those reporting below-average meat consumption at baseline increased their consumption over time. A plausible explanation for these findings may be statistical regression to the mean. Further understanding is needed of how social norm interventions may be used to reduce meat consumption.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54205,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Communication-A Journal of Nature and Culture\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Communication-A Journal of Nature and Culture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2022.2149587\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Communication-A Journal of Nature and Culture","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2022.2149587","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
“Meat” Me in the Middle: The Potential of a Social Norm Feedback Intervention in the Context of Meat Consumption – A Conceptual Replication
ABSTRACT Meat consumption has detrimental environmental effects. Research shows that social norms are important when it comes to meat consumption. However, social norm interventions have shown mixed effects regarding their effectiveness for decreasing meat consumption. Therefore, an experiment was conducted (n = 279) with a 2 (baseline meat consumption: above- vs. below-average) x 3 (social norm feedback: descriptive norm only, descriptive plus injunctive norm, no feedback) x 3 (time: T0 [baseline], T1 [+1 week from baseline], T2 [+2 weeks from baseline]) mixed-factorial design. Results showed that reported changes in meat consumption at T1 and T2 relative to T0 were not different after receiving social norm feedback (i.e. descriptive norm only or descriptive plus injunctive norm) compared to receiving no feedback. Irrespective of the social norm feedback condition, participants reporting above-average meat consumption at baseline reduced their consumption, whereas those reporting below-average meat consumption at baseline increased their consumption over time. A plausible explanation for these findings may be statistical regression to the mean. Further understanding is needed of how social norm interventions may be used to reduce meat consumption.
期刊介绍:
Environmental Communication is an international, peer-reviewed forum for multidisciplinary research and analysis assessing the many intersections among communication, media, society, and environmental issues. These include but are not limited to debates over climate change, natural resources, sustainability, conservation, wildlife, ecosystems, water, environmental health, food and agriculture, energy, and emerging technologies. Submissions should contribute to our understanding of scientific controversies, political developments, policy solutions, institutional change, cultural trends, media portrayals, public opinion and participation, and/or professional decisions. Articles often seek to bridge gaps between theory and practice, and are written in a style that is broadly accessible and engaging.