Massrecycle 2017 disposal biases
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•157 views
2017 R3 Conference - Main Track, Session 3
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Massrecycle 2017 disposal biases
Similar to Massrecycle 2017 disposal biases (20)
More from MassRecycle .
More from MassRecycle . (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Massrecycle 2017 disposal biases
- 1. Consumer Disposal Decisions Remi Trudel MASSRECYCLE 2017
- 3. Sustainability Decisions Disposal Consumption Consumer Characteristics Promotions & Firm Interventions Product Features Consumer Goals & Motivation
- 4. What about the products themselves? Are there product attributes that influence disposal decisions? • Products vary in terms of the tangible attributes that they possess. • Attributes are important in the categorization process (Barsalou 1985; Loken and Ward 1990; Rosch and Mervis 1975) • Attributes • Determine consumption choices (Alpert 1971; Nowlis and Simonson 1996; Ratchford 1975) Sustainability Decisions Disposal decisions Consumption decisions Product Features
- 5. Tangible product attributes Products are “distorted” during consumption • Degree of distortion = amount of physical dissimilarity
- 6. Tangible product attributes Products are “distorted” during consumption • Degree of distortion = amount of physical dissimilarity
- 7. Tangible product attributes Products are “distorted” during consumption • Degree of distortion = amount of physical dissimilarity
- 8. Tangible product attributes Products are “distorted” during consumption • Degree of distortion = amount of physical dissimilarity
- 9. Distorted paper 22 Faculty assistant offices Each office had recycling and trash bins • Bins are emptied daily Product: Coded paper relative to a standard sized sheet of paper (8 ½ x 11) • Less than half sheet • Greater than or equal to half sheet DV: Disposal Trudel, Remi and Jennifer Argo (2013), “The Effect of Product Size and Form Distortion on Consumer Recycling Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 40(4), 632-643.
- 10. Disposal behavior as a function of paper size Paper Size Recycled Trashed Ratio Greater than ½ Mean (SD) Minimum Maximum 5.27(4.88) 0 17 1.27 (1.75) 0 7 .52 (.64) -1.0 1.0 Less than ½ Mean (SD) Minimum Maximum 1.18(2.52) 0 8 1.95 (2.28) 0 8 -.58 (.66) -1.0 .78 Trudel, Remi and Jennifer Argo (2013), “The Effect of Product Size and Form Distortion on Consumer Recycling Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 40(4), 632-643.
- 11. Disposal behavior as a function of paper size Paper Size Recycled Trashed Ratio Greater than ½ Mean (SD) Minimum Maximum 5.27(4.88) 0 17 1.27 (1.75) 0 7 .52 (.64) -1.0 1.0 Less than ½ Mean (SD) Minimum Maximum 1.18(2.52) 0 8 1.95 (2.28) 0 8 -.58 (.66) -1.0 .78 Trudel, Remi and Jennifer Argo (2013), “The Effect of Product Size and Form Distortion on Consumer Recycling Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 40(4), 632-643.
- 12. Disposal behavior as a function of paper size Paper Size Recycled Trashed Ratio Greater than ½ Mean (SD) Minimum Maximum 5.27(4.88) 0 17 1.27 (1.75) 0 7 .52 (.64) -1.0 1.0 Less than ½ Mean (SD) Minimum Maximum 1.18(2.52) 0 8 1.95 (2.28) 0 8 -.58 (.66) -1.0 .78 Trudel, Remi and Jennifer Argo (2013), “The Effect of Product Size and Form Distortion on Consumer Recycling Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 40(4), 632-643.
- 13. Distorted cans 130 undergraduate students Design: 2(can size: regular vs. small) x 2(distortion: dented vs. maintained) Product: Coke can DV: Disposal Trudel, Remi and Jennifer Argo (2013), “The Effect of Product Size and Form Distortion on Consumer Recycling Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 40(4), 632-643.
- 14. Study 5A Participants wrote about an empty 12 fl oz can • First 5 things that come to mind • 150-250 word creative writing task
- 15. Percentage of cans recycled as a function of size and product distortion 47% 83% 23% 16% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Small Can Regular Can PercentRecycled SIZE Not Distorted Distorted(dented) Trudel, Remi and Jennifer Argo (2013), “The Effect of Product Size and Form Distortion on Consumer Recycling Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 40(4), 632-643.
- 16. Are there other products attributes that bias disposal decisions? Social Identity Theory (Tajfel and Turner 1979, 1986) • Personal-Identity • collection of beliefs, traits, and characteristics that belong to/identify the individual • Related to one’s sense of self • Group Identity • that which is shared among members of a larger collective.
- 17. rtrudel@bu.edu
- 19. Individual Identity 164 undergraduate participants Design: Three between subjects conditions: 1. Individual identity – linked 2. Individual Identity – Not linked 3. Control Product: Paper cup (3 fl oz.) DV: Disposal Trudel, Remi and Jennifer Argo (2013), “The Effect of Product Size and Form Distortion on Consumer Recycling Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 40(4), 632-643.
- 20. rtrudel@bu.edu
- 21. 48% 24% 26% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Spelled Correctly Spelled Incorrectly Control PercentRecycled Disposal behavior as a function of identity link Trudel, Remi, Jennifer Argo, and Matthew Meng (2016), “The Recycled Self: Consumers’ Disposal Decision of Identity–Linked Products,” Journal of Consumer Research, 43(2), 246-264.
- 22. Incidental Mood and Disposal Daily campus-wide recycling amounts (in tons) from 2012-2016 were collected from 4 American universities Design We matched campus-wide recycling amounts to game results from the same period resulting in 529 collection day observations immediately following basketball games. DV: Recycling amounts in tons
- 23. Recycling as a function of team wins β = 1,101.14, SE = 524.06, t = 2.10, p = .036 Controlling for: Weather Record/season winning percentage Rivalry games Holdiays
- 24. Incidental Mood and Disposal Data: Daily waste and recycling collection amounts from the Kensington and Chelsea, West Central London • 14 Boroughs • April 1st 2015 - March 31 2016 • Collections 2x/week – Monday/Thursday or Tuesday/Friday • 2,842 collection day observations over 203 collection days Mood Proxy: Weather – daily precipitation and cloud coverage DV: Recycle weight
- 25. Variable β t Precipitation -.003 -3.005* Cloud coverage -.002 -.36 Average Waste Collected .223 37.005** Holiday -.094 -10.783** Pickup Schedule (Mon/Thurs) .074 10.458** Parameter estimates for recycling behavior * p < .01, **p< .001
- 26. Could the redesign of a product change littering behavior? Weston Baxter Imperial College of London rtrudel@bu.edu
- 27. rtrudel@bu.edu
- 28. rtrudel@bu.edu
- 29. Redesign of a Cigarette 40 smokers outside Imperial College of London courtyard Single factorial: regular vs. redesigned product Product: Cigarette DV: disposal behavior – litter vs. proper disposal
- 30. rtrudel@bu.edu
- 31. Results rtrudel@bu.edu 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Regular Redesigned Count Product Condition Litter Proper Disposal
- 32. Thank You Remi Trudel Assistant Professor of Marketing School of Management, Boston University 595 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston MA 02215 rtrudel@bu.edu 617.358.3316
Editor's Notes
- There is great public concern about our environment (Gallup 2014, Hoornweg and Bhada-Tat 2012) and in particular, how consumption affects large-scale environmental issues such as greenhouse gas emissions and its subsequent impact on climate change (Bostrom, Morgan, Fischhoff, and Read 1994; Reynolds, Bostrom, Read, and Morgan 2010). Fortunately, research has shown that individual consumers can positively drive large scale environmental changes by engaging in socially responsible behaviors such as recycling (EPA 2012). We all know we should recycle, but even committed recyclers can be erratic, cleaning and sorting bottles one day, and tossing glass in the trash the next. Why? It turns out that an array of biases sway our decisions about what to place in the green bin and what to throw away.
- And while we know a lot about how and why consumers obtain products, we know very little about how and why they dispose of products like they do. Disposal has a huge environmental impact as well – in the US, Two billion tons of trash is thrown away each year, more trash than any other country (Wilcox 2008). EPA estimates that nearly 60% of what ends up in our landfills could have been recycled. What ends up in our landfills impacts large-scale environmental issues such as greenhouse gas emissions and its subsequent impact on climate change (Bostrom et al. 1994; Reynolds et al. 2010). One possibility is that consumers dispose of products in the same way regardless of whether or not there is an identity-link. Indeed, even prior to disposal, consumers have decided that the product is no longer useful as they no longer want or need it for functional or identity purposes. Another possibility, and the one we demonstrate in the current research, is that the presence (vs. absence) of an identity-link between the self and a product will influence consumers’ disposal decisions even when they have decided that they no longer want the product. Another possibility, and the one we demonstrate in the current research, is that the presence (vs. absence) of an identity-link between the self and a product increases the likelihood that the product will be recycled as compared to trashed.
- 1. Consumer Characteristics - Attitudes, Personality, and Individual Variables Individualism, collectivism, and locus of control on environmental beliefs and recycling (McCarty and Shrum 2001) Attitudes and specific behavioral variables that pertain specifically to recycling predicted curbside recycling (Oskamp et al. 1991) 2. Consumer Goals and Motivation - Effort is a moderator of the attitude-behavior relationship on recycling (Schultz and Oskamp 1996) 3. Promotion & Firm Interventions Negatively framed messages from an acquaintance increase recycling behaviors (Lord 1994) Match between a loss (gain) message frame and a concrete (abstract) mind-set increases recycling intentions (White at al. 2011) Appeals using descriptive social norms proved to be superior to traditional messages focusing on environmental protection (Goldstein et al. 2008) A Room with a Viewpoint: Using Social Norms to Motivate Environmental Conservation in Hotels NOAH J. GOLDSTEIN ROBERT B. CIALDINI VLADAS GRISKEVICIUS* Appeals employing descriptive norms (e.g., “the majority of guests reuse their towels”) proved superior to a traditional appeal widely used by hotels that focused solely on environmental protection. Moreover, normative appeals were most effective when describing group behavior that occurred in the setting that most closely matched individuals’ immediate situational circumstances (e.g., “the majority of guests in this room reuse their towels”), which we refer to as provincial norms. 4. Product Features
- To make sense of the numerous products that exist in the marketplace consumers assign products to different classes or categories (Loken and Ward 1990). To categorize a product means to evaluate it, not only in terms of its similarity to other products in the same category, but also in terms of its perceived dissimilarity to products not in the category. A central theme in the early categorization research is that categories are assumed to have a graded structure (Barsalou 1983, 1985) such that consumers categorize a product based on how representative or typical it is of a category. Graded structure is thus a continuum of category representativeness with most typical category members at one end and least typical category members at the other.. Products vary in terms of the attributes that they possess. Research has shown that these attributes are used by consumers in the categorization of a product (Barsalou 1985; Cohen and Basu 1987; Loken and Ward 1990; Rosch and Mervis 1975) and determine consumption choices (for e.g. Alpert 1971; Nowlis and Simonson 1996; Ratchford 1975). During the consumption process, products often go through a number of physical changes that alter (i.e., distort) its characteristics. For instance, paper gets torn and aluminum cans get dented which distorts their size and form. In the present research we seek to provide initial insight into how and why distorting a product’s size and form has implications for the likelihood that the product will be recycled. How do attributes determine disposal choices? More specifically how do changes in attributes influence disposal choices.
- In the product design literature, the placement of a product along a category’s graded structure is often an intentional and strategic outcome of the design process (Veryzer and Hutchinson 1998). Indeed, the product design and aesthetics literature uses the term “prototypical distortion” to describe a strategic design principle whereby designs that currently exist in the marketplace are systematically altered to create distance between existing prototypical products and the newly designed product (for example, Cruesen and Schoorman 2005, Hutchinson and Alba 1991; Wagner 1999;Veryzer 2005; Veryzer and Hutchinson 1998). Normally this is achieved by making physical changes to an existing product prototype with the objective of making the newly designed product appear more novel and aesthetically pleasing (Cruesen and Schoormans 2005; Meyers-Levy and Tybout 1989). Thus, the degree of distortion is a function of the amount of physical dissimilarity between the original product or prototype and the “new” product During the consumption process, products often go through a number of physical changes that alter (i.e., distort) its characteristics. For instance, paper gets torn and aluminum cans get dented which distorts their size and form. In the present research we seek to provide initial insight into how and why distorting a product’s size and form has implications for the likelihood that the product will be recycled.
- In the product design literature, the placement of a product along a category’s graded structure is often an intentional and strategic outcome of the design process (Veryzer and Hutchinson 1998). Indeed, the product design and aesthetics literature uses the term “prototypical distortion” to describe a strategic design principle whereby designs that currently exist in the marketplace are systematically altered to create distance between existing prototypical products and the newly designed product (for example, Cruesen and Schoorman 2005, Hutchinson and Alba 1991; Wagner 1999;Veryzer 2005; Veryzer and Hutchinson 1998). Normally this is achieved by making physical changes to an existing product prototype with the objective of making the newly designed product appear more novel and aesthetically pleasing (Cruesen and Schoormans 2005; Meyers-Levy and Tybout 1989). Thus, the degree of distortion is a function of the amount of physical dissimilarity between the original product or prototype and the “new” product During the consumption process, products often go through a number of physical changes that alter (i.e., distort) its characteristics. For instance, paper gets torn and aluminum cans get dented which distorts their size and form. In the present research we seek to provide initial insight into how and why distorting a product’s size and form has implications for the likelihood that the product will be recycled.
- In the product design literature, the placement of a product along a category’s graded structure is often an intentional and strategic outcome of the design process (Veryzer and Hutchinson 1998). Indeed, the product design and aesthetics literature uses the term “prototypical distortion” to describe a strategic design principle whereby designs that currently exist in the marketplace are systematically altered to create distance between existing prototypical products and the newly designed product (for example, Cruesen and Schoorman 2005, Hutchinson and Alba 1991; Wagner 1999;Veryzer 2005; Veryzer and Hutchinson 1998). Normally this is achieved by making physical changes to an existing product prototype with the objective of making the newly designed product appear more novel and aesthetically pleasing (Cruesen and Schoormans 2005; Meyers-Levy and Tybout 1989). Thus, the degree of distortion is a function of the amount of physical dissimilarity between the original product or prototype and the “new” product During the consumption process, products often go through a number of physical changes that alter (i.e., distort) its characteristics. For instance, paper gets torn and aluminum cans get dented which distorts their size and form. In the present research we seek to provide initial insight into how and why distorting a product’s size and form has implications for the likelihood that the product will be recycled.
- In the product design literature, the placement of a product along a category’s graded structure is often an intentional and strategic outcome of the design process (Veryzer and Hutchinson 1998). Indeed, the product design and aesthetics literature uses the term “prototypical distortion” to describe a strategic design principle whereby designs that currently exist in the marketplace are systematically altered to create distance between existing prototypical products and the newly designed product (for example, Cruesen and Schoorman 2005, Hutchinson and Alba 1991; Wagner 1999;Veryzer 2005; Veryzer and Hutchinson 1998). Normally this is achieved by making physical changes to an existing product prototype with the objective of making the newly designed product appear more novel and aesthetically pleasing (Cruesen and Schoormans 2005; Meyers-Levy and Tybout 1989). Thus, the degree of distortion is a function of the amount of physical dissimilarity between the original product or prototype and the “new” product During the consumption process, products often go through a number of physical changes that alter (i.e., distort) its characteristics. For instance, paper gets torn and aluminum cans get dented which distorts their size and form. In the present research we seek to provide initial insight into how and why distorting a product’s size and form has implications for the likelihood that the product will be recycled.
- Twenty-two faculty assistant offices from a large northeastern university were selected, each of which had both individual recycling and garbage bins. The sample consisted of all of the faculty assistant offices in the building. To the best of our knowledge, the office environment did not provide guidelines on what is and is not recyclable. After hours, one of the authors and a research assistant searched through the recycling and garbage bins in each of the offices and coded the number and sizes of discarded paper in each bin. Since each bin is emptied daily by the custodial staff, the quantities represent a single day’s recycling behavior. We did not code the paper according to their original size but rather relative to a standard sized sheet of paper (i.e., 8 ½ x 11 inches). Paper configuration was coded as either less than ½ standard sized sheet (small) or greater than or equal to ½ sheet (large). All types of paper were included but the vast majority of the paper included in this study was standard sized printer type paper. Multiple papers stapled together were coded as a single sheet of paper.
- Of those faculty assistants offices with both sizes of paper (N = 13), a paired samples t-test revealed that paper was more likely to be recycled when it was large (M = .56) as compared to small (M = -.51; t(12) = 5.37, p < .001). We also conducted one sample t-tests on the recycle ratio measure for paper that was small in size, and for paper that was large. The t-tests revealed that small paper was significantly more likely to be thrown in the garbage (M = -.58; t(14) = -3.39, p < .01) whereas large paper was significantly more likely to be recycled (M = .52; t(19) = 3.64, p < .01). Based on the findings of the field study it appears that consumers’ recycling decisions are related to product distortion and in particular changes in product size. In particular, consumers appear more willing to recycle (garbage) paper when it is large (small), providing preliminary evidence that attributes of the product may affect the decision to recycling. While providing initial support for our theory, this study was largely exploratory and has limitations. First, it is unclear in the present study whether the paper was broken down in to smaller pieces during consumption, or whether the consumer broke down (e.g., tore up) the paper as part of the recycling (or garbaging) act. Second, while we were conservative in our coding of large sheets of paper (sheets stapled together were coded as 1 sheet), it is possible that we may have double counted some smaller sheets. For instance, if someone tore a piece of paper prior to trashing (or recycling) it, we counted each individual piece of paper even though the decision to trash/recycle the paper was made only once. This is a limitation given that this measurement error may have been more frequent in the trash condition (15 offices had small paper in trash bins in comparison to 8 offices that had small paper in recycling bins). In the studies that follow we address these limitations and provide further support for the role of size distortion in disposal behaviors. To explicate this from the process, the remaining studies are conducted in a controlled laboratory environment to shed more light on the impact of product distortion on recycling decisions.
- Of those faculty assistants offices with both sizes of paper (N = 13), a paired samples t-test revealed that paper was more likely to be recycled when it was large (M = .56) as compared to small (M = -.51; t(12) = 5.37, p < .001). We also conducted one sample t-tests on the recycle ratio measure for paper that was small in size, and for paper that was large. The t-tests revealed that small paper was significantly more likely to be thrown in the garbage (M = -.58; t(14) = -3.39, p < .01) whereas large paper was significantly more likely to be recycled (M = .52; t(19) = 3.64, p < .01). Based on the findings of the field study it appears that consumers’ recycling decisions are related to product distortion and in particular changes in product size. In particular, consumers appear more willing to recycle (garbage) paper when it is large (small), providing preliminary evidence that attributes of the product may affect the decision to recycling. While providing initial support for our theory, this study was largely exploratory and has limitations. First, it is unclear in the present study whether the paper was broken down in to smaller pieces during consumption, or whether the consumer broke down (e.g., tore up) the paper as part of the recycling (or garbaging) act. Second, while we were conservative in our coding of large sheets of paper (sheets stapled together were coded as 1 sheet), it is possible that we may have double counted some smaller sheets. For instance, if someone tore a piece of paper prior to trashing (or recycling) it, we counted each individual piece of paper even though the decision to trash/recycle the paper was made only once. This is a limitation given that this measurement error may have been more frequent in the trash condition (15 offices had small paper in trash bins in comparison to 8 offices that had small paper in recycling bins). In the studies that follow we address these limitations and provide further support for the role of size distortion in disposal behaviors. To explicate this from the process, the remaining studies are conducted in a controlled laboratory environment to shed more light on the impact of product distortion on recycling decisions.
- Of those faculty assistants offices with both sizes of paper (N = 13), a paired samples t-test revealed that paper was more likely to be recycled when it was large (M = .56) as compared to small (M = -.51; t(12) = 5.37, p < .001). We also conducted one sample t-tests on the recycle ratio measure for paper that was small in size, and for paper that was large. The t-tests revealed that small paper was significantly more likely to be thrown in the garbage (M = -.58; t(14) = -3.39, p < .01) whereas large paper was significantly more likely to be recycled (M = .52; t(19) = 3.64, p < .01). Based on the findings of the field study it appears that consumers’ recycling decisions are related to product distortion and in particular changes in product size. In particular, consumers appear more willing to recycle (garbage) paper when it is large (small), providing preliminary evidence that attributes of the product may affect the decision to recycling. While providing initial support for our theory, this study was largely exploratory and has limitations. First, it is unclear in the present study whether the paper was broken down in to smaller pieces during consumption, or whether the consumer broke down (e.g., tore up) the paper as part of the recycling (or garbaging) act. Second, while we were conservative in our coding of large sheets of paper (sheets stapled together were coded as 1 sheet), it is possible that we may have double counted some smaller sheets. For instance, if someone tore a piece of paper prior to trashing (or recycling) it, we counted each individual piece of paper even though the decision to trash/recycle the paper was made only once. This is a limitation given that this measurement error may have been more frequent in the trash condition (15 offices had small paper in trash bins in comparison to 8 offices that had small paper in recycling bins). In the studies that follow we address these limitations and provide further support for the role of size distortion in disposal behaviors. To explicate this from the process, the remaining studies are conducted in a controlled laboratory environment to shed more light on the impact of product distortion on recycling decisions.
- Participants entered the lab to find a soft drink can at their computer terminal. Participants in the regular can size condition received an empty 12 fl oz/355 ml. can while participants in the small can size condition received an empty 7.5 fl.oz/222ml. can. To manipulate form distortion in the distorted condition the can was dented while in the maintained condition the can was left undented (see appendix A for a photo of a can used in the distorted condition). Thus, while the product remains uncut in the form distorted condition, the product’s form has been distorted and the new product form is distanced from the original form. Participants were then informed that they would be completing a series of unrelated studies. The first study consisted of a novel approach to measuring participants’ categorization of the product as garbage to provide additional support for our conceptualization. In the previous studies we intentionally measured perceptions of garbage after participants’ recycling behavior to keep the measurement from contaminating the behavior. However, respondents’ recycle/trash behavior may have influenced the categorization measure.
- They were asked to write down the first five things that came to mind regarding the can. They subsequently completed a 150 - 250 word creative writing assignment about the empty soft drink can in front of them. The thought listings and creative writing task were subsequently coded as either recycle thoughts or garbage thoughts using a list of terms that was generated from a separate sample of 40 students who were asked to list the first seven things that came to mind when they thought about garbage (recycling). Examples of garbage-related words included trash, trash cans, dirty, disgusting, filth, rubbish, and landfills, whereas recycling-related words included recycling bins, clean, green, reuse, blue box, environment, and earth. We then created a categorization measure using a ratio of thoughts related to recycling versus garbage (Fazio 1990). The categorization measure was calculated as: (number of recycle thoughts – number of garbage thoughts)/garbage + recycle thoughts. The resulting ratio is such that a positive (negative) number indicates a greater proportion of recycling (garbage) thoughts. The ratio was used as our evidence of categorization. After the creative writing task, participants were told that after completing another task (a filler) they were allowed to leave the session and that on their way out they should dispose of their can. Next to the exit were the same bins described earlier. Soft drink cans were numbered so that we could match specific cans, whether they were recycled or thrown in the garbage, with participants and their creative writing tasks. As per the previous experiments, the focal dependent variable was the percentage of participants who recycled.
- Recycle data. The recycle data were analyzed using a logistic regression model with recycling behavior as the dependent variable (coded 1 = recycled, 0 = thrown away), and a categorical variable for can size (coded 1 = regular size 12 fl. oz., 0 = small size 7.5 fl. oz.), a categorical variable for form distortion (coded 1 = distorted; 0 = maintained), and their interaction. Logistic regression revealed a significant main effect of can size (β = 1.74, X2 = 9.24, p < .01) indicating that large cans were recycled more than small cans. The data also revealed a significant main effect of form distortion (β = -1.11, X2 = 3.95, p < .05) showing that cans whose form is maintained are recycled more than form distorted cans (i.e., the can is dented). The interaction between can size and form distortion on recycling behavior also proved to be significant (β = -2.15, X2 = 6.18, p < .05). Consistent with our earlier findings for paper, a planned comparison of the form maintained conditions revealed that participants recycled the regular sized 12 fl. oz. can (83.33%) more than the smaller 7.5 fl. oz. can (46.88 %; β = .840, X2 = 9.91, p < .01). Planned comparisons also revealed that participants recycled the regular size can more when its form was maintained (83.33%) as compared to distorted (16.13%; β = 1.71, X2 = 25.24, p < .001), and recycled the small can marginally more when its form was maintained (46.88%) versus distorted (22.58%; β = .50, X2 = 3.61, p = .057).
- Identity – distinctive characteristic that belongs to the individual or that which is shared among members of a larger collective. According to social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner 1979, 1986), and its extension social categorization theory (Turner 1985), identity is comprised of personal identity, which is related to one’s sense of self, and social identity, which is related to the groups to which one belongs. Further, situational demands can make salient a specific aspect of identity that will in turn influence an individual to respond in a way that is congruent with that identity (e.g., Brewer 1991; Deaux 1996; Deshpandé and Stayman 1994; Forehand and Deshpandé 2001).
- But what happens when these products are no longer needed or wanted? Do consumers dispose of identity-linked products differently than products not linked to their identities? These unanswered questions are the impetus behind this research project.
- Method Participants and Design. One hundred and sixty four undergraduates (91 females, MAge = 19.65) at a large northeastern US university participated in the laboratory study. The experiment used a single factorial, between-subjects design, resulting in three conditions (self-identity: linked vs. not linked vs. control). Procedure. Upon arrival, participants were asked their names so they could be ostensibly checked in for their session. Next, the research assistant provided them with a small paper cup (3 fl. oz.) under the guise of participating in a sampling study. Participants were told that in the sampling study we were interested in whether consumers could differentiate between tap water and bottled spring water. Depending on the condition to which they were assigned, participants were either given a blank cup (control condition), a cup with their name on it written by the research assistant and spelled correctly (identity-linked), or a cup with their name on it written by the research assistant and purposely spelled incorrectly (identity not linked). In the latter condition, the research assistant was instructed to change the name enough so that it could still be interpreted but was obviously incorrect (e.g., Ashley might become Ashli). After being seated at individual computer stations and having the first water sample poured into their cups from an unmarked bottle, participants were told to taste the water sample and complete some online questions related to the water. The research assistant then poured the second water sample into their cup from a second identical unmarked bottle and participants repeated the same process. After tasting both of the water samples, answering the online evaluation questions comparing the two different water samples, and completing three other unrelated studies, participants were instructed to “dispose of your cup on the way out.” The same trash can and recycle bin used in our previous study were placed outside the closed door of the laboratory. Participants exited one at a time. The dependent variable was whether the cup was disposed of in the trash or the recycle bin. Results and Discussion Five participants left with their cup in hand, leaving us with 159 data points. We assume that these participants either did not see the bins or opted to keep the cups. A logistic regression analysis tested whether there were different recycling rates across the cup conditions. Two dummy codes were created for the identity-linked condition (correctly spelled = 2, incorrectly spelled = -1, control = -1) and the identity not linked condition (correctly spelled = -1, incorrectly spelled = 2, control = -1) to allow comparison with the control condition. The dependent variable was coded as trash = 0 and recycle = 1. The analysis revealed a significant main effect of identity-link, where those who were given a cup with their name spelled correctly on it were significantly more likely to recycle the cup (48%) compared to the control condition (26%, ; β = .33, χ2 = 5.34, p < .05, Odds Ratio = 1.39). Participants given a cup with their name spelled incorrectly, that is, those in the identity not linked condition, were just as likely to recycle their cup (24%) as those in the control condition (26%; β = -.05, χ2 = .09, p > .75).
- Depending on the condition to which they were randomly assigned, participants were either given a blank cup (control condition), a cup with their name on it written by the research assistant and spelled correctly (identity-linked), or a cup with their name on it written by the research assistant and spelled incorrectly (identity not linked).
- Upon arrival, participants were led to the behavioral lab where they were asked to sit at a station. Each station was sectioned off in cubicles and consisted of one computer and a 3 x 1½ in piece of paper with a 3-digit passcode used to log on to the survey. The experiment employed a single factorial between –subjects design with two mood conditions: positive vs. negative. Participants were told that they would be participating in a series of studies. The first tasked induced either a positive or a negative mood. Depending on their randomly assigned condition, participants were asked to read positive or negative online news articles and rate these articles in terms of quality of writing, use of emotion, topic and sensitivity to the person(s) involved. Participants were then asked to reflect on their own experiences and then write a short news article detailing one of the saddest (negative condition) or happiest (positive condition) days of their life. This procedure has been used successfully to induce moods in previous research (e.g. Fishbach and Labroo 2007). Participants then completed other studies to stagger finishing times so that they would leave one at a time. When finished, participants were asked to “dispose of their paper on the way out”. The data was collected at the end of the day, counting the number of pieces of paper in the trash versus recycling. Upon getting the number in each, the passcodes were matched to the subject and their condition effectively getting a link between each participant, their condition and chosen disposal method.
- Upon arrival, participants were led to the behavioral lab where they were asked to sit at a station. Each station was sectioned off in cubicles and consisted of one computer and a 3 x 1½ in piece of paper with a 3-digit passcode used to log on to the survey. The experiment employed a single factorial between –subjects design with two mood conditions: positive vs. negative. Participants were told that they would be participating in a series of studies. The first tasked induced either a positive or a negative mood. Depending on their randomly assigned condition, participants were asked to read positive or negative online news articles and rate these articles in terms of quality of writing, use of emotion, topic and sensitivity to the person(s) involved. Participants were then asked to reflect on their own experiences and then write a short news article detailing one of the saddest (negative condition) or happiest (positive condition) days of their life. This procedure has been used successfully to induce moods in previous research (e.g. Fishbach and Labroo 2007). Participants then completed other studies to stagger finishing times so that they would leave one at a time. When finished, participants were asked to “dispose of their paper on the way out”. The data was collected at the end of the day, counting the number of pieces of paper in the trash versus recycling. Upon getting the number in each, the passcodes were matched to the subject and their condition effectively getting a link between each participant, their condition and chosen disposal method.
- Participants and Design. . The location was close to several places where users can properly dispose of their cigarette. In total, 40 cigarettes were handed out in order to observe behaviours with the altered cigarette and those with no change. Once the cigarette was given to the participant the researcher explained that they were looking into user experience issues with a cigarette and asked a series of questions unrelated to littering or disposal. In all cases, the researcher asked if their experience was changed by the sheath or if they thought it would be in the instances where a normal cigarette was provided.
- In the next phase of the project we created a metallic casing around the cigarette as shown below in order to maintain the size of the cigarette whilst not disrupting the normal smoking experience.