Princeton University: Behavioral Science and the Environment: Results from Campus as Lab

1. Behavioral Science and the Environment:
Results from Campus as Lab
Shana S. Weber, Ph.D.
Director, Office of Sustainability
Sander van der Linden, Ph.D.
Director, Social and Environmental Decision-Making (SED) Lab

2. Outline of Talk
PA RT 1 – B E H AV I O R A L S C I E N C E A N D T H E E N V I R O N M E N T
PA RT 2 – P R O - S O C I A L B E H AV I O R , E M PAT H Y, A N D I N T R I N S I C M O T I VAT I O N
PA RT 3 – T H E P O W E R O F S O C I A L A N D I N S T I T U T I O N A L N O R M S
PA RT 4 – H O W B E H AV I O R A L S C I E N C E C A N I N F O R M S U S TA I N A B I L I T Y O N C A M P U S
PA RT 5 – C O N C L U S I O N

3. Behavioral Science and the Environment
• Behavioral science is an interdisciplinary field of study which aims to
systematically analyze and investigate (human) behavior and decision-
making through naturalistic observation and controlled experimentation.
• Until recently, behavioral science has played a very limited role in
informing public policy and institutional decision-making (Shafir, 2012).
• Especially when it comes to climate, energy, and environmental
policies (Dietz, Stern, & Weber, 2013; van der Linden, Maibach, & Leiserowitz, 2015).
• National implementation of changes in individual lifestyles and
behaviors could reduce direct emissions from households by 20% or
7.5% of US national emissions (Dietz et al., 2009).
Dietz et al. 2009. Household actions can provide a behavioral wedge to rapidly reduce US carbon emissions.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 106(44), 18452-18456.

4. Behavioral Science and the Environment
“Energy policies and programs need to replace outmoded assumptions
about what drives human behavior; they must integrate insights from the
social and behavioral sciences with those from engineering
and economics” (Dietz, Stern, & Weber, 2013).
Homo Economicus vs. Homo Sapiens

5. Human Motivation
Extrinsic
External
pressure
Short-term
Intrinsic
Internal
processes,
beliefs and
emotions
Long-term

6. “Do-it-in-the-Dark” Energy Conservation Competition

7. Wattvision
Livestream
http://www.wattvision.com/competition/princeton/

8. Wattvision
Livestream
http://www.wattvision.com/competition/princeton/

9. van der Linden, S. (2015). Intrinsic motivation and pro-environmental behaviour. Nature Climate Change, 5(7), 612-613.

10. van der Linden, S. (2015). Intrinsic motivation and pro-environmental behaviour. Nature Climate Change, 5(7), 612-613.

11. van der Linden, S. (2015). Intrinsic motivation and pro-environmental behaviour. Nature Climate Change, 5(7), 612-613.

16. Insights from psychological science

17. Empathy as an Evolved Capacity

18. Empathy as an Evolved Capacity

19. From feeling “good” to acting “good”
• Longitudinal Survey Study
• National Sample (N = 808 in Wave 1) and (N = 501 in Wave 2)
• Anticipated positive (feel-good) “affect” from acting pro-
environmentally vs. negative affect (e.g., guilt) from not acting.
• Do our current dispositions predict our energy-conservation
behavior 4 weeks later?
van der Linden, S. (2015). The Social-Psychological Determinants of Climate Change Risk Perceptions, Attitudes, and
Behaviors: A National Study. Environmental Education Research.

20. From feeling “good” to acting “good”
• Longitudinal Survey Study
• National Sample (N = 808 in Wave 1) and (N = 501 in Wave 2)
• Anticipated positive (feel-good) “affect” from acting pro-
environmentally vs. negative affect (e.g., guilt) from not acting.
• Do our current dispositions predict our energy-conservation
behavior 4 weeks later?
van der Linden, S. (2015). The Social-Psychological Determinants of Climate Change Risk Perceptions, Attitudes, and
Behaviors: A National Study. Environmental Education Research.

21. Experimental Treatments

22. The Power of Social and Institutional Norms

23. The Power of Social Norms
• It is through social comparison with referent others that people
validate the correctness of their opinions and decisions (Festinger, 1954).
• Norms either describe how others are behaving (descriptive norms)
or how one ought to behave (prescriptive norm).

24. The Power of Social Norms
• It is through social comparison with referent others that people
validate the correctness of their opinions and decisions (Festinger, 1954).
• Norms either describe how others are behaving (descriptive norms)
or how one ought to behave (prescriptive norm).

25. Institutional Norm-Signaling
• An institution’s decisions and innovations signal what behaviors are
common or desired within a group (Tankard & Paluck, 2015).
• Institutional norm-signaling can influence behavior by setting the
“anchor” or “default” behavior for the group.
• Setting a “sustainable” alternative as the default may lead people to
think that it is a prototypical behavioral choice for the group.
Santos, J., & van der Linden, S. (2015). Changing Behavior by Changing Minds: The Princeton Drink Local Program.

26. The Princeton Drink Local Program
Santos, J., & van der Linden, S. (in press, 2016). Changing Behavior by Changing Minds: The Princeton Drink Local Program.
Environmental Practice. Cambridge University Press.
University wide survey (N = 1,302)

27. The Princeton Drink Local Program
University wide survey (N = 1,302)
Santos, J., & van der Linden, S. (in press, 2016). Changing Behavior by Changing Minds: The Princeton Drink Local Program.
Environmental Practice. Cambridge University Press.

28. The Princeton Drink Local Program
University wide survey (N = 1,302)
Santos, J., & van der Linden, S. (in press, 2016). Changing Behavior by Changing Minds: The Princeton Drink Local Program.
Environmental Practice. Cambridge University Press.

29. The Princeton Drink Local Program
University wide survey (N = 1,302)
Santos, J., & van der Linden, S. (in press, 2016). Changing Behavior by Changing Minds: The Princeton Drink Local Program.
Environmental Practice. Cambridge University Press.

30. Behavioral science can inform (energy) policy
van der Linden, S., Maibach, E., & Leiserowitz, A. (2015). How to Improve Public Engagement with Climate Change:
Five “Best Practice” Insights from Psychological Science. Perspectives on Psychological Science.

31. Campus as Lab: Health and Environment
• Decisions, Decisions

32. Conclusion
• Behavioral science has an important role to play:
• Directly reducing (carbon) emissions on campus and beyond.
• Building bottom-up support among students, faculty, and staff for climate, energy, and
sustainable policies and practices.
• Humans are not hopelessly irrational and not (primarily) motivated by
money and external incentives.
• Behavioral science offers low-cost, scalable strategies to change human
behavior in the long-term.
• Behavioral responses to (new) technology and policies can be modeled
and should be integrated in environmental and economic models.

33. Thank you
Karen Gallagher-Teske, Angela Zhou, and Jess Santos, Lab Coordinators
Shana Weber, Director, Office of Sustainability

34. The Psychology of
Environmental Decision-Making
ENE 561 / WWS 586C
SANDER VAN DER LINDEN

35. Designing and Planning Sustainable Systems,
Buildings, and University Campus!

36. • How do people process and perceive environmental risks?
• Where do environmental values, attitudes and norms come from?
• How we define ourselves relative to the natural world?
• How can we design sustainable systems, buildings and places that
also promote human happiness and well-being?
• How can we effectively design and evaluate interventions that
encourage pro-environmental behavior and decision-making?
Behavioral Dimensions of Sustainability