Examples of Behavioral Interventions

Wednesday, September 12, 2007

CSS 387

Problem 1: Shiloh National Military Park

• Three treatments– Awareness of consequences– AC + “heritage guardian”– AC + HG + incentive

• Control

Vander Stoep, G. & Gramann, J. 1987. The effect of verbal appeals and incentives on depreciative behavior among youthful park visitors. Journal of Leisure Research, 19, 69-83

Problem 1: Shiloh National Military Park

Effects of Messages on Depreciative Behaviors at Shiloh Military Park

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Total Sitting Touching Climbing

Behavior Type

Mea

n nu

mbe

r of

act

s/gr

oup

No message AC message AC +RP AC + RP + I

Vander Stoep, G. & Gramann, J. 1987. The effect of verbal appeals and incentives on depreciative behavior among youthful park visitors. Journal of Leisure Research, 19, 69-83

Problem 2: University Cafeteria Recycling

• Signs– Old– New

• Pre-test/post-test– Questionnaires– Examination of bins

Werner, C. M., Rhodes, M. U., & Partain, K. K. (1998). Designing effective instructional signs with schema theory: Case studies of polystyrene recycling. Environment & Behavior 30: 709-735.

Problem 2: University Cafeteria Recycling

Knowledge and attitudes about styrofoam recycling

0 20 40 60 80 100

Should U recycle polystyrene?

Know what polystyrene is?

DK what food service items arepolystyrene

Know polystyrene must be scraped

Know U recycles polystyrene

Percent

Old SignsNew Signs

No effect on general knowledge or attitude

Knowledge and attitudes about styrofoam recycling

0 20 40 60 80 100

Should U recycle polystyrene?

Know what polystyrene is?

Don't know what food service itemsare polystyrene

Know polystyrene must be scraped

Know U recycles polystyrene

Percent

Old SignsNew Signs

1 full bin/day

3.5 full bins/day

Large effect on specific knowledge & behavior

Problem 2: University Cafeteria Recycling

Problem 3: Recycling Cans in Academic Buildings

• Focus of study– Convenience vs. messages

• Methods– 5 buildings – 1 treatment in each– Posted signs– Counted cans

Werner, C. M., Stoll, R., Birch, P., & White, P. H. (2002). Clinical validation and cognitive elaboration: Signs that encourage sustained recycling. Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 24(3), 185-203

Problem 3: Recycling Cans in Academic Buildings

0 20 40 60 80 100

Low convenience

Moderateconvenience

High convenience

"30 seconds"

"inconvenient butimportant"

Percentage of Aluminum Cans Recycled

AfterBaseline

Problem 4: Deer at Shenandoah

Problem 4: Deer at Shenandoah

• Goal:– Compare moral and fear appeals– Effects on beliefs & elaboration

• Methods– Table-top signs

Hockett, K. & Hall, T. E. 2007. The effect of moral and fear appeals on park visitors’ beliefs about feeding wildlife. Journal of Interpretation Research. In press.

Although visitors mean well by offering you food, accepting even one apple could seriously hurt you. Human food may taste good, but it… may make you sick.

may make you fat and slow – an easy target for predators and cars. may make you trust all humans – making you easy prey for hunters. may make you dependent on humans and unable to find natural food.

Protect your health. Resist the temptation and never accept food from humans.

Attention All Deer - Danger!

Never accept food from humans.

Moral Appeal

Although deer may appear tame and gentle, they are wild. Deer are unpredictable creatures and could seriously injure you. If you feed a deer, it…

may suddenly bite you. may kick you with its powerful legs and sharp hooves. may gore you with its hard, pointed antlers.

may expose you to diseases that could make you very sick.

Protect yourself and your family. Never try to feed or approach deer or other wildlife in the park.

Attention All Campers - Danger!

Never feed deer.

Fear Appeal

Effect on Effect on beliefsbeliefs::Mean responses to items taken from the Mean responses to items taken from the

moralmoral appeal appeal

-2-1.5

-1-0.5

00.5

11.5

2

Lose ability tofind food

human food -sick deer

fed = hit bycars

fed = shot byhunters

feeding helpsavoid

predators

Control Moral Fear

Agree

Disagree

Elaboration: Moral messageElaboration: Moral message

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

Fed -> eat garbage Natural food OK One person not matter

Control Moral Fear

Agree

Disagree

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

Deer givediseases

Deer cangore

Deer can kick Deer can bite

Control Moral Fear

Effect on beliefs:Effect on beliefs:Mean responses to items taken from the Mean responses to items taken from the

fearfear appeal appeal

Agree

Disagree

Elaboration: Fear messageElaboration: Fear message

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

I'm scared Deer unlikelyto attack

Deer notaggressive

Der notDangerous

Deer endangerchildren

Control Moral Fear

Agree

Disagree

010

203040

50607080

90100

Ignore Watch Approach Follow Photograph

Camper Behavior

Per

cen

t

Control Moral Fear

Unintended consequences

Problem 5: Coral Damage by Divers

• Approach – verbal education

• Methods– Observed divers for 8 weeks – recorded number

of contacts with coral– During 5 weeks, gave briefing at end of dive #3– During 3 weeks, no briefings

Medio, D., Ormond, R. F. G., & Pearson, M. (1996). Effect of briefings on rates of damage to corals by scuba divers. Biological Conservation, 79, 91-95.

Problem 5: Coral Damage by Divers

Mean number of contacts per diver per 7 minutes

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Ctrl-1 Ctrl-2 Ctrl-3

Dark bars = dives 1-3

Light bars = dives 4-10 (post briefing for experimental groups)

Problem 5: Coral Damage by Divers

Mean number of contacts per diver per 7 minutes

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Expt-1 Expt-2 Expt-3 Expt-4 Expt-5 Ctrl-1 Ctrl-2 Ctrl-3

Dark bars = dives 1-3

Light bars = dives 4-10 (post briefing for experimental groups)