Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Changing attitudes, changing behaviour – how do they connect? | Psychology of communications | Conference | 29 June 2017

1,669 views

Published on

Will Tucker, director, Will Tucker Consulting

Visit the CharityComms website to view slides from past events, see what events we have coming up and to check out what else we do: www.charitycomms.org.uk

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Be the first to comment

Changing attitudes, changing behaviour – how do they connect? | Psychology of communications | Conference | 29 June 2017

  1. 1. Psychology of communications conference: Changing attitudes, changing behaviour Will Tucker, Will Tucker Consulting
  2. 2. The Aid Attitudes Tracker • Five year study of attitudes and engagement with global poverty • Four countries – UK, USA, France, and Germany • Ten wave tracking survey, 8,000 people per wave in the UK and USA, 6,500 in France and Germany • ~125 questions, including many tracking questions • Qualitative research to deepen and build upon quantitative findings • Quantitative experiments to look at specific issues
  3. 3. The UK partners
  4. 4. Engagement with global poverty is declining. Which of the following have you done, if any, to become involved with international poverty and development as an issue? (Showing responses for ‘Have done in the last year’) 66% 57% 61% 58% 59% 54% 57% 36% 30% 29% 28% 23% 22% 23% 8% 6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 4% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15 May-15 Jul-15 Sep-15 Nov-15 Jan-16 Mar-16 May-16 Jul-16 Sep-16 Nov-16 Read, watched or listened to a news article about it, including offline and online Used your voice to impact the issue (e.g. via social media, signing a petition, etc.) Donated money to an organization focused on the issue Fundraised by asking for donations from others for a cause I am involved in (such as a charity, or trip) Contacted a Member of Parliament or other elected official in person or by phone call or letter about the issue In the last 3 years we have: • Lost ~1/3rd of donors • Lost ~1/2th of fundraisers • Lost ~1/5th of those writing to MPs • Lost ~1/5th of those using their voice to impact on the issue People who are right wing are least likely to be engaging with global poverty issues.
  5. 5. Our audiences 33.7 35.7 15.8 8.4 6.4 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Totally Disengaged Marginally Engaged Informationally Engaged Behaviourally Engaged Fully Engaged Tracking 18 behaviours relating to global poverty we can identify 5 segments: • Totally Disengaged likely to do nothing • Marginally Engaged likely to read and discuss, nothing else • Informationally Engaged likely to consume media more likely to discuss, use their voices, donate • Behaviourally Engaged likely to consume media, more likely to donate, fundraise, volunteer • Fully Engaged more likely to do a lot of the activities
  6. 6. Drivers of engagement Analysis which shows that on average a change in audiences’ underlying perceptions (identified through responses to a cluster of questions) creates a change in the level of engagement ‘up’ and ‘down’. By changing perceptions we can increase and decrease propensity to engage. Perceptions Engagement
  7. 7. The original driver hypothesis • Personal effectiveness – extent to which you can make a difference • Aid/ Charity ineffectiveness – waste, corruption, aid dependency, laziness of ‘recipient’ communities • National Interest – influence, trade, preventing terror & security • Moral cause – moral reasons to engage/ support; duty, empathy… • Politics – Interest in and belief you can influence politics • Social Norms – belief others like you are engaging and are supportive off engagement • Ideology – ‘left’ or ‘right’ • Partisan – moving party allegiance • EU Attitudes- pro/ anti EU • Racial Attitudes – prejudices • Immigration attitudes – numbers, positive/ negative influence • Economic outlook – optimism/ pessimism about UK and personal economy
  8. 8. Marginal Effects Totally Disengaged Marginally Engaged Informationally Engaged Behaviourally Engaged Fully Engaged Marginal Effects
  9. 9. 0.17 -0.41 -0.16 0.59 0.62 0.2 0.53 -0.12 0.02 0.05 0.1 0.08 0.12 -0.23 -0.45 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Personal efficacy Aid & Charity Ineffectiveness National Interest Moral cause Political interest Political efficacy Social norms Ideology Conservative Labour UKIP Pro EU Racial Attitudes Immigration Economic outlook The driver’s effects Not significant Significant
  10. 10. Our experience suggests…
  11. 11. Study engagement from three angles… Increasing Propensity Triggering Engagement Audience Targeting
  12. 12. Test comm’s impact on driver perceptions Moral Driver Social Norms Driver
  13. 13. Work in partnership Work together
  14. 14. Thanks Email: will@willtuckerconsulting.com Call: 07482241163 Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/willdtucker DevCommsLab: https://devcommslab.org Will Tucker Consulting: http://www.willtuckerconsulting.com
  15. 15. Visit the CharityComms website to view slides from past events, see what events we have coming up and to check out what else we do: www.charitycomms.org.uk
  16. 16. 29 June 2017 London #CCPsychComms Psychology of communications – what can communicators learn from the behavioural sciences?

×