Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
What Influences People’s Tradeoff Decisions Between CO2 Emissions and Travel Time? An Experiment With Anchors and Normative Messages
Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, University of Gävle, Gävle, Sweden.
Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, University of Gävle, Gävle, Sweden.
Department of Building Engineering, Energy Systems and Sustainability Science, University of Gävle, Gävle, Sweden.
Luleå University of Technology, Department of Health, Learning and Technology, Health, Medicine and Rehabilitation. School of Psychology and Computer Science, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-9494-1287
Show others and affiliations
2021 (English)In: Frontiers in Psychology, E-ISSN 1664-1078, Vol. 12, article id 702398Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

One of the today’s greatest challenges is to adjust our behavior so that we can avoid a major climate disaster. To do so, we must make sacrifices for the sake of the environment. The study reported here investigates how anchors (extrinsic motivational-free information) and normative messages (extrinsic motivational information) influence people’s tradeoffs between travel time and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in the context of car travel and whether any interactions with environmental concern (an intrinsic motivational factor) can be observed. In this study, people received either a CO2, health or no normative message together with either a high anchor, a low anchor, or no anchor. People that received both a high anchor and a CO2 emission normative message were willing to travel for a longer time than those that only received a high anchor. If a low anchor was presented, no differences in willingness to travel for a longer time were found between the three different conditions of normative message groups, i.e., CO2 normative message, health normative message, or no normative message. People with higher concern for the environment were found to be willing to travel for a longer time than those with lower concern for the environment. Further, this effect was strongest when a high anchor was presented. These results suggest that anchors and normative messages are among the many factors that can influence people’s tradeoffs between CO2 emission and travel time, and that various factors may have to be combined to increase their influence over pro-environmental behavior and decisions.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Frontiers Media S.A., 2021. Vol. 12, article id 702398
Keywords [en]
anchoring effect, normative message, travel time, tradeoff, environmental concern
National Category
Environmental Sciences
Research subject
Engineering Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-88742DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.702398ISI: 000738298400001PubMedID: 34955942Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85121642509OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ltu-88742DiVA, id: diva2:1630500
Note

Validerad;2022;Nivå 2;2022-01-20 (johcin)

Available from: 2022-01-20 Created: 2022-01-20 Last updated: 2022-02-10Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Marsh, John Everett

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Marsh, John Everett
By organisation
Health, Medicine and Rehabilitation
In the same journal
Frontiers in Psychology
Environmental Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 25 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf