Urban Economics, Social Sciences Group, Wageningen University, KN, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
PLoS One. 2019 Jan 17;14(1):e0209469. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0209469. eCollection 2019.
Many campaigns targeting pro-environmental behavior combine multiple approaches without properly understanding how these different approaches interact. Here we study the effect of such combinations. We apply construal level theory to classify different intervention approaches, which can either be at a high construal level (abstract and distant) or at a low construal level (concrete and proximal). In a field experiment we recruited 197 students living in one-person apartments in an all-inclusive student housing facility. We objectively measured their individual electricity and warm water use, and measured psychological variables through surveys. We expected that the (commonly considered superior) combination between a high and a low construal level approach would be least effective. Participants were randomly assigned to a 2(Construal Level: low vs. high) × 2(Social Distance: low vs. high) plus control condition mixed-model design targeting a reduction in warm water use. Our findings suggest that a congruent combination at a high construal level (i.e., the high construal level condition combined with the high social distance condition) has the largest effect on warm water use and that spillover to electricity use is most likely to occur when a high construal level is used (i.e., high social distance). Moreover, especially participants who valued nature and the environment less were most strongly influenced by the combination of two high construal level approaches. In sum, our study suggests that when designing interventions one should consider the construal level and when targeting pro-environmental behavior high construal levels appear most appropriate.
许多针对环保行为的宣传活动结合了多种方法，但并没有正确理解这些不同方法之间的相互作用。在这里，我们研究了这种组合的效果。我们应用构念水平理论对不同的干预方法进行分类，这些方法可以是高构念水平（抽象和遥远），也可以是低构念水平（具体和接近）。在一项现场实验中，我们招募了 197 名居住在全包式学生宿舍单人公寓的学生。我们通过调查客观地测量了他们的个人用电量和热水使用量，并测量了心理变量。我们预计，高构念水平和低构念水平方法之间的（通常被认为是优越的）组合效果最差。参与者被随机分配到一个 2（构念水平：低与高）×2（社会距离：低与高）加控制条件的混合模型设计中，旨在减少热水使用量。我们的研究结果表明，高构念水平上的一致组合（即高构念水平条件与高社会距离条件相结合）对热水使用量的影响最大，并且当使用高构念水平时（即高社会距离）最有可能出现向用电量的溢出效应。此外，特别是那些对自然和环境价值较低的参与者，最容易受到两种高构念水平方法组合的影响。总之，我们的研究表明，在设计干预措施时，应考虑构念水平，而针对环保行为，高构念水平似乎是最合适的。
