A social norms approach to increasing vegetable consumption

A Social Norms and Identity Approach to Increasing Fruit and Vegetable Intake of Undergraduate Students in the United Kingdom

This study investigated the influence of descriptive norm messages that either communicated that university students eat a sufficient amount of fruit and vegetable (F&V) or that they do not, on F&V consumption, and whether or not any effects are moderated by student identification. An online 2 (Norm: "Sufficient"/"Insufficient") × 2 (Identification: "Low"/"High") experimental design was employed. Infographics containing "sufficient"/"insufficient" F&V intake descriptive norms were presented. An identification manipulation was employed to create "high"/"low" student identifiers. F&V intake intentions were assessed after the manipulations; self-reported F&V intake was reported at 2 days post-intervention. Undergraduate students in the United Kingdom (N = 180) reported their intake intentions, of which 112 (62%) completed the behavioral follow-up. Participants were predominantly white female students from Scottish universities, mean age 20.4 (±1.6) years. Baseline mean F&V consumption was high (4.5 ± 2.8). There were no significant main effects of Norm or Identification manipulations on F&V intentions and intake. Significant norm × identification interactions were revealed for fruit intake intentions and vegetable intake at follow-up, indicating half-portion differences (~40 g) between groups. Ironic effects were observed for "high" identifiers, who neither intended to, nor acted in accordance with group norms; "low" student identifiers intended to and followed group norms, whereby the "sufficient"/"low" group intended to consume significantly more fruit portions and consumed more vegetables than the "insufficient"/"low" group. Given the half-portion differences between groups resulting from the norm × identification interactions, future research on a larger sample of young adults with low F&V intake is warranted to further explore the conditions under which moderating effects of identification are observed and the underlying mechanisms.

Reducing the Consumer Attitude⁻Behaviour Gap in Animal Welfare: The Potential Role of 'Nudges'

Simple Summary

Many members of the public express a desire for farm animals to have a good quality of life. Yet, when it comes to purchasing higher welfare products which would support this, many consumers do not ‘walk their talk’. This paper introduces the concept of ‘nudging’ as a means to help consumers align their actions with their intentions and support their desire to engage in pro-animal welfare behaviours. ‘Nudging’ is a collection of behaviour change tools designed to hint to, or suggest, a choice most closely aligned with an individual’s self-interests or intentions. Their purpose is to simplify the decision-making environment by working in concert with the behavioural flaws known to influence human decision-making. Four specific behavioural ‘nudges’ are outlined: self-nudges, choice architecture, social norms and pre-commitments, along with examples of how they can be applied to animal welfare. Inspired by effective applications of ‘nudging’ to close the consumer attitude–behaviour gap in other relevant domains, this paper seeks to highlight how similar initiatives might be applied to better support higher welfare choices amongst consumers and in turn, enhance the lives of farm animals.

Abstract

Citizen concern for the welfare of farm animals is well documented. However, there is a notable gap between people saying they want improved farm animal welfare and how they actually behave as a consumer. This is known as the citizen–consumer attitude–behaviour gap. As improvements in farm animal welfare can be affected by market demand, the choices consumers make become important. This paper introduces the concept of ‘nudging’ and discusses how it could be applied to reduce the attitude–behaviour gap amongst consumers. By designing the choice environment to better reflect the behavioural biases known to impact human decision-making, ‘nudge’ tools function to prompt individuals to make choices that are aligned with their stated intentions. Four ‘nudge’ tools: self-nudges, choice architecture, social norms and pre-commitments are discussed. The behavioural rationales for their use are reviewed and examples of how they might be applied to animal welfare provided. Improved farm animal welfare arguably requires improved pro-welfare consumer behaviour. This paper highlights how this might be encouraged by: self-nudging the salience of an ethical self-image; altering the choice architecture to influence decision-making; articulating social norms to impact behaviour; and using pre-commitment devices to overcome self-control issues.