The BWA behaviour change database: April 2020 update

BehaviourWorks Australia (BWA) researchers at the Monash Sustainable Development Institute (MSDI) have spent several years curating a database of over 5,000 behaviour change publications. This database is used to inform many of our research projects and is now available for others to use.

Here are some of the most interesting and useful papers added this month:

Global Behaviors and Perceptions in the COVID-19 Pandemic

We conducted a large-scale survey covering 58 countries and over 100,000 respondents between late March and early April 2020 to study beliefs and attitudes towards citizens’ and governments’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Most respondents reacted strongly to the crisis: they report engaging in social distancing and hygiene behaviors, and believe that strong policy measures, such as shop closures and curfews, are necessary. They also believe that their government and their country’s citizens are not doing enough and underestimate the degree to which others in their country support strong behavioral and policy responses to the pandemic. The perception of a weak government and public response is associated with higher levels of worries and depression. Using both cross-country panel data and an event-study, we additionally show that strong government reactions correct misperceptions, and reduce worries and depression. Our findings highlight that policy-makers not only need to consider how their decisions affect the spread of COVID-19, but also how such choices influence the mental health of their population.

For the fun of it: Harnessing immediate rewards to increase persistence in long-term goals

Pursuing personal goals for delayed rewards (e.g., exercising to improve health) often provides consumers with immediate rewards (e.g., a fun workout) in addition to the delayed rewards they receive. With regard to health and academic goals, we find that attending to the immediate rewards of health and academic activities increases persistence in these activities to a greater extent than attending to delayed rewards, even though these activities are selected for the delayed rewards they provide. Specifically, bringing immediate rewards into activity choice-for example, having participants choose the most enjoyable rather than the most useful exercise or the tastier rather than healthier bag of carrots-increases persistence and consumption. Similarly, adding external immediate rewards to activity pursuit-for example, playing music in a high school classroom-increases persistence. Across these studies, immediate rewards are stronger predictors of activity persistence than delayed rewards. This research suggests that marketers and consumers can harness immediate rewards to increase persistence in long-term goals

How actions create - not just reveal - preferences

The neo-classical economics view that behavior is driven by - and reflective of - hedonic utility is challenged by psychologists' demonstrations of cases in which actions do not merely reveal preferences but rather create them. In this view, preferences are frequently constructed in the moment and are susceptible to fleeting situational factors; problematically, individuals are insensitive to the impact of such factors on their behavior, misattributing utility caused by these irrelevant factors to stable underlying preferences. Consequently, subsequent behavior might reflect not hedonic utility but rather this erroneously imputed utility that lingers in memory. Here we review the roles of these streams of utility in shaping preferences, and discuss how neuroimaging offers unique possibilities for disentangling their independent contributions to behavior.

The many obstacles to effective giving

When people donate, they rarely give to the charities that do the most good per dollar. Why is this? One possibility is that they do not know how to give effectively. Another possibility is that they are not motivated to do so. Across six tasks (Studies 1a, 1b), we found support for both explanations. Among lay donors, we observed multiple misconceptions-regarding disaster relief, overhead costs, donation splitting, and the relative effectiveness of local and foreign charities-that reduced the effectiveness of their giving. Similarly, we found that they were unfamiliar with the most effective charities (Studies 2a, 2b). Debunking these misconceptions and informing people about effectiveness boosted effective donations; however, a portion of lay donors continued to give ineffectively to satisfy their personal preferences. By contrast, a sample of self-identified effective altruists gave effectively across all tasks. They exhibited none of the misconceptions that we observed among lay donors and overwhelmingly favored the most effective option in their choice set (Study 3). Taken together, our studies imply that donors need to be both informed and motivated to give effectively on a consistent basis.

The effectiveness of celebrity endorsements: a meta-analysis

Celebrities frequently endorse products, brands, political candidates, or health campaigns. We investigated the effectiveness of such endorsements by meta-analyzing 46 studies published until April 2016 involving 10,357 participants. Applying multilevel meta-analysis, we analyzed celebrity endorsements in the context of for-profit and non-profit marketing. Findings revealed strong positive and negative effects when theoretically relevant moderators were included in the analysis. The most positive attitudinal effect appeared for male actors who match well with an implicitly endorsed object (d = .90). The most negative effect was found for female models not matching well with an explicitly endorsed object (d = ?.96). Furthermore, celebrity endorsements performed worse compared to endorsements of quality seals, awards, or endorser brands. No publication bias was detected. The study has theoretical and practical implications, and provides an agenda for future research.

Does Maximizing Good Make People Look Bad?

People make inferences about others depending on the way they arrive at their moral decisions. Here, we examine evaluations of people who make moral decisions through deliberation compared to those who decide based on empathy. To do so, we turn to charitable donations. People often fail to prioritize the cost-effectiveness of charities when donating (Berman, Barasch, Levine, & Small, 2018). We argue that this pattern exists in part because donors who make charitable decisions by deliberating about the cost-effectiveness of charities are perceived as less moral and less desirable as social partners than those who decide based on empathizing with the recipients of the donation. Across six pre-registered studies using two different scenarios (N = 1,961), we presented participants with descriptions of people who thought about donation decisions by either deliberating about the cost-effectiveness of charities, or by deciding based on empathy. Reliably, participants judged “deliberators” to have less positive moral character and to be less desirable as social partners than “empathizers.” We found these results across different designs (between-subjects and within-subjects), when evaluating respondents of different genders (male and female), and for donations of different stakes (low and high). The negative reputational effects of deliberating were reduced if “deliberators” expressed empathy first. These results suggest that there may be disincentives for selecting charities based on their impact, since people are not socially rewarded for prioritizing charitable impact but are rewarded for signaling the right kinds of moral traits. We end by discussing implications and limitations of these findings.

The compendium of self-enactable techniques to change and self-manage motivation and behaviour v.1.0

Behaviour change techniques describe the content of behaviour change interventions, but do not adequately account for the actions that people must themselves undertake to successfully change or self-manage motivation or behaviour. This paper describes the development of a compendium of self-enactable techniques, combining behaviour- and motivation-regulation techniques across six existing classifications of behaviour change techniques and three scoping reviews. The compendium includes 123 techniques, each of which is labelled, defined and presented with instructive examples to facilitate self-enactment. Qualitative feedback was gathered from intervention developers and the general public to improve the utility, congruence and ease of self-enactability of the techniques. This integrative index of self-enactable techniques can assist intervention developers in selecting appropriate self-directed techniques to help people self-manage their motivation and behaviour. Future research with this compendium can expand on the number of behaviours covered by the instructive examples and link techniques with their potential impacts on factors that influence behaviours.

To access the database of over 5,000 behaviour change publications, please use this link.

For further information about BehaviourWorks please email: [email protected]