Environmental Psychology Group, Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Appl Psychol Health Well Being. 2023 Feb;15(1):337-353. doi: 10.1111/aphw.12382. Epub 2022 Jun 29.
Despite efforts to create dedicated smoking areas and no-smoking signs, many smokers continue to light their cigarettes in front of public building entrances-leading to concerns over health consequences for non-smokers passing by. To increase compliance with no-smoking requests, behavioral interventions that tap into habitual and automatic processes seem promising. A pseudo-randomized controlled trial was conducted to assess the differential impact of seven behavioral interventions based on Cialdini's principles of persuasion. Over a period of 9 weeks, the number of smokers was counted (total n = 17,930 observations) in front of a German University Medical Center. Relative to a baseline and a control condition, interventions based on the principles of reciprocity, scarcity, and authority were most effective in reducing the number of observed smokers in front of the building entrance (41.5%, 45.7%, and 52.1% reduction rates, respectively). Having observed smokers' behavior in vivo, this study provides substantial evidence for the impact of persuasive strategies on outdoor smoking. In the future, this knowledge should be used to protect non-smokers from second-hand smoke by increasing the use of designated smoking areas, leave to another place to smoke, or not smoke at all.
尽管已经努力创建专门的吸烟区和禁烟标志,但许多吸烟者仍继续在公共建筑入口处吸烟,这导致了非吸烟者路过时对健康后果的担忧。为了提高对禁烟请求的遵守程度,基于习惯和自动过程的行为干预似乎很有前景。一项基于希尔德布兰德的说服原则的伪随机对照试验评估了七种行为干预的不同影响。在 9 周的时间内,对德国大学医疗中心前的吸烟者人数进行了统计(总 n=17930 次观察)。与基线和对照条件相比,基于互惠、稀缺和权威原则的干预措施在减少建筑物入口处观察到的吸烟者人数方面最为有效(分别减少 41.5%、45.7%和 52.1%)。通过在现场观察吸烟者的行为,本研究为说服策略对户外吸烟的影响提供了充分的证据。在未来,应该通过增加指定吸烟区、去其他地方吸烟或完全不吸烟来利用这些知识来保护非吸烟者免受二手烟的侵害。