Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Making energy visible: sociopsychological aspects associated with the use of smart meters

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Energy Efficiency Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aims to improve the understanding of the sociopsychological and technological aspects that influence the use of smart meters—innovative electricity meters that provide real-time data on consumption and are instrumental in increasing energy efficiency. Few studies have examined the sociopsychological factors that influence their use. We argue that the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), and other specific factors from the social psychology literature, such as perceived procedural justice and risk perception, can help understand what determines the use of smart meters. To empirically examine that, first a quantitative survey was conducted with 515 households with smart meters installed. Results indicate that smart meter use is influenced by subjective norms, perceived utility, health-related risk perception, procedural justice, and time of usage. In a second study, internet blogs discussing smart meters were analyzed. This study corroborated some of the results of the first study and suggested additional factors—such as perceived distributive injustice and loss of control and privacy-related risk perception—that may influence the use of smart meters.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Notes

  1. Currently called EDP Box.

  2. Most variables have a mean at the center of the scale (3) which, given the fact that none of the distributions is bimodal, may indicate that people do not yet have a clear position about the EB. These results are discussed in the following section.

  3. Normally, these are not real increases in the electricity bill, but instead can reflect the fact that the EB measures the actual consumption of users (and not an estimation) and moreover its deployment was mainly performed during the winter, when more electricity tends to be used; the fact that in the first bill after the EB’s are installed, users pay the non-paid consumption of the old meter plus whatever they have consumed with the EB; or also some actual technical problems that affected metering with some EB’s.

References

  • Abrahamse, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C., & Rothengatter, T. (2005). A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(3), 273–291. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.08.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, M. (1997). Resistance to new technology: nuclear power, information technology and biotechnology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertoldi, P., & Atanasiu, B. (2007). Electricity consumption and efficiency trends in the enlarged european union. DG Joint Research Center, Institute for Environment and Sustainability.

  • Billig, B. (1985). Prejudice, categorization and particularization: from a perceptual to rhetorical approach. European Journal of Social Psychology, 15, 79–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M. (1997). Rhetorical and discursive analysis: How families talk about the royal family. In N. Hayes (Ed.), Doing qualitative analysis in psychology (pp. 39–54). Hove: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonnes, M., & Bonaiuto, M. (2002). Environmental psychology: from spatial–physical environment to sustainable development. In R. G. Bechtel & A. Churchman (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology (pp. 28–54). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castro, P. (2012). Legal innovation for social change: exploring change and resistance to different types of sustainability laws. Political Psychology, 33(1), 105–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castro, P., & Batel, S. (2008). Social representation, change and resistance: on the difficulties of generalizing new norms. Culture & Psychology, 14, 477–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clayton, S. (2000). Models of justice in the environmental debate. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 459–474.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Clayton, S., & Opotow, S. (2003). Justice and identity: changing perspectives on what is fair. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7(4), 298–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronick, K. (2002). The discourse of President George W. Bush and Osama bin Laden: a rhetorical analysis and hermeneutic interpretation. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 3(3) p. 282.

  • Dahlbom, B., Greer, H., Egmond. C. Jonkers, R. (2009). Changing energy behaviour, guidelines for behavioural change programmes. IDAE - Instituto para la Diversificacióny Ahorro de la Energía, Inteligent Energy Europe.

  • Darby, S. (2006). The effectiveness of feedback on energy consumption: a review for Defra of the literature on metering, billing and direct displays. Oxford: Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K. (1970). The research act: a theoretical introduction to sociological methods. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devine-Wright, P., & Howes, Y. (2010). Disruption to place attachment and the protection of restorative environments: a wind energy case study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 271–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Directive 2009/28/EC of the European parliament and of the council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources.

  • Directive 2009/72/EC of the European parliament and of the council of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 2003/54/EC.

  • Directive 2009/73/EC of the European parliament and of the council of 13 July 2009 concerning the internal market in natural gas and repealing Directive 2003/55/EC.

  • Faruqui, A., Sergici, S., & Sharif, A. (2010). The impact of informational feedback on energy consumption—a survey of the experimental evidence. Energy, 35(4), 1598–1608. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2009.07.042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Federal Energy Regulator Commission. (2008). Assessment of demand, response and advanced metering. USA: Federal Energy Regulator Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg, R. (2009). Achieving customer acceptance of the smart grid. The Intelligent Project (Apr. 15): http://theintelligentproject.org/assets/does/061509_achieving-customeracceptance.pdf.

  • Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS for windows: advanced techniques for the beginner. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research (4th ed.). London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R. (1987). Distributive and procedural justice in the workplace. Journal of Social Justice, 1(2), 143–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gamberini, L., Spagnolli, A., et al. (2014). Combining implicit and explicit techniques to reveal social desirability bias in electricity conservation self-reports. Energy Efficiency, 7(6), 923–935.

  • Giordano, V., Meletiou, A., Covrig, C.F., Mengolini, A. Ardelean, M., Fulli, G., Jiménez, M.S., Filiou, C. (2012). Smart grid projects in Europe: lessons learned and current developments. Joint Research Centre, European Commission.

  • Gross, C. (2007). Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia. The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance. Energy Policy, 35, 2727–2736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hargreaves, T., Nye, M., & Burgess, J. (2010). Making energy visible: a qualitative field study of how householders interact with feedback from smart energy monitors. Energy Policy, 38, 6111–6119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heffner, G. (2011). Smart grid—smart customer, policy needs. IEA paper submitted to the energy efficiency working party. Paris: OECD\IEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Energy Agency. (2003). Cool appliances—policy strategies for energy efficient homes. Paris: OECD / IED.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, L., Mulvad, L., Katan, S. H., & Sundahl, N.V. (2012). Researching motivational factors towards a sustainable electricity consumption. Paper presented at SMART 2012: The First International Conference on Smart Systems, Devices and Technologies (pp. 44–47).

  • Jones, M., & Alony, I. (2008). Blogs—the new source of data analysis. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 5, 433–446.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karlin, B. (2012). Public acceptance of smart meters: integrating psychology and practice. Proceedings of ACEEE 2012.

  • Kerrigan, D., Gamberini, L., Spagnolli, A., & Jacucci, J. (2011). Smart meters: a users’ view. Psychnology, 9, 55–72.

  • Kleijnen, M., de Ruyter, K., & Wetzels, M. (2004). Consumer adoption of wireless services: discovering the rules, while playing the game. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(2), 51–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kranz, J., Gallenkamp, J., Picot, A. (2010). Power control to the people? Private consumers’ acceptance of smart meters. Proceedings of the 18th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), June, Pretoria, South Africa.

  • Krueger, J., & Clement, R. W. (1994). The truly false consensus effect: an ineradicable and egocentric bias in social perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 596–610.

  • Lauri, M. A., & Lauri, J. (2005). Social representations of organ donors and non-donors. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 15, 108–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leach, J. (2000). In M. Bauer & G. Gaskell (Eds.), Qualitative researching with text, image and sound (pp. 207–226). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lima, M. L. (2005). Percepção de Riscos Ambientais. In L. Soczka (Ed.), Contextos Humanos e Psicologia Ambiental (pp. 203–245). Lisboa: Edições Calouste Gulbenkian.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lima, M. L. (2006). Predictors of attitudes towards the construction of a waste incinerator: two case studies. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2(36), 441–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lima, M. L., Barnett, J., & Vala, J. (2004). Risk perception and technological development at a societal level. Risk Analysis, 25(5), 1229–1239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lima, M. L., Lopes, D., & Garrido, M. (2009). Relatório final do Estudo de Adesão das Comunidades Locais ao Aproveitamento Hidro-eléctrico do Fridão [final report of the survey to the attitudes of the local communities to the project of Fridão dam]. Lisboa: Centro de Investigação e de Intervenção Social, ISCTE.

  • Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. NY: Plenum Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, X., Li, H., Zhang, J., & Shim, J. P. (2010). Examining multi-dimensional trust and multi-faceted risk in initial acceptance of emerging technologies: an empirical study of mobile banking services. Decision Support Systems, 49, 222–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martiskainen, M., & Coburn, J. (2011). The role of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in household energy consumption—prospects for the UK. Energy Efficiency, 4(2), 209–221.

  • Moser, S., Bruppacher, S. E., & Mosler, H.-J. (2011). How people perceive and will cope with risks from the diffusion of ubiquitous information and communication technologies. Risk Analysis, 31(5), 832–846.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pyrko, J., & Darby, S. (2011). Conditions of energy efficient behaviour—a comparative study between Sweden and the UK. Energy Efficiency, 4, 393–408.

  • Renn, O. (1998). Three decades of risk research: accomplishments and new challenges. Journal of Risk Research, 1(1), 49–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1981). Irony and the use-mention distinction. Radical pragmatics, 49, 295–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starlicki, D. P., & Folger, R. (1997). Retaliation in the workplace: the roles of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(3), 434–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, S. M. (2011). Smart-grid: technology and the psychology of environmental behavior change. Chicago-Kent Law Review., 86, 139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stragier, J. (2010). Introducing smart grids in residential contexts: consumers’ perception of smart household appliances. 2010 I.E. Conference on Innovative Technologies for an Efficient and Reliable Electricity Supply (CITRES)

  • Syme, G., Nancarrow, B., & McCreddin, J. (1999). Defining the components of fairness in the allocation of water to environmental and human uses. Journal of Environmental Management, 57(1), 51–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1990). Intrinsic versus community-based justice models: when does group membership matter? Journal of Social Issues, 46, 83–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Smith, H. J. (1995). Social justice and social movements. Working paper series. UC Berkeley: Institute for research on Labor and Employment.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Bavel, R., & Gaskell, G. (2004). Narrative and systemic modes of economic thinking. Culture and Psychology, 10(4), 417–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control, intrinsic motivation and emotion into technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 342–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315.

  • Verbong, G. P. J., Beemsterboer, S., & Sengers, F. (2013). Smart grids or smart users? Involving users in developing a low carbon electricity economy. Energy Policy, 52, 117–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C.-C., Lo, S.-K., & Fang, W. (2008). Extending the technology acceptance model to mobile communication innovation: the existence of network externalities. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 7, 101–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, T., & Nuttall, W. J. (2012). An agent-based simulation of smart metering technology adoption. International Journal of Agent Technologies and Systems (IJATS), 4(1), 17–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Energias de Portugal (EDP) for allowing us to use the data analyzed in Study 1 for academic purposes.

Compliance with ethical standards

We hereby confirm that this manuscript complies with the ethical rules applicable to the journal Energy Efficiency. All the relevant funding bodies and conflicts of interest were identified and the research involved human participants, whose participation was always performed with informed consent.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), CIS-IUL, Av. das Forças Armadas, 1649-026, Lisbon, Portugal

    Susana Guerreiro, Susana Batel & Maria Luísa Lima

  2. University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

    Sérgio Moreira

Authors
  1. Susana Guerreiro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Susana Batel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maria Luísa Lima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sérgio Moreira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susana Guerreiro.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Guerreiro, S., Batel, S., Lima, M.L. et al. Making energy visible: sociopsychological aspects associated with the use of smart meters. Energy Efficiency 8, 1149–1167 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-015-9344-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-015-9344-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation