Cueing Common Ecological Behaviors to Increase Environmental Attitudes

  • Gert Cornelissen
  • Mario Pandelaere
  • Luk Warlop
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3962)


A major obstacle for promoting sustainable (e.g. ecological) consumer behaviors is people’s negative attitude towards these.  We tested the potential of a persuasion technique for improving these attitudes. We propose that cueing ecological behaviors people usually engage in, increases the accessibility of previously performed ecological behavior in the memory.  As several theories suggest attitudes are inferred from previous behavior, we expected the increased ease of retrieval of ecological actions to result in more favorable attitudes towards these.  Two studies confirmed this hypothesis, and further research will verify the success of the technique in promoting actual environmental behavior.  Implications for setting up effective social marketing campaigns are discussed.


Social Marketing Environmental Behavior Environmental Attitude Experimental Social Psychology External Motivation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Meadows, D.H., Meadows, D.L., Randers, J., Behrens, W.W.: The limits to growth - A report for the Club of Rome project on the predicament of mankind. Universe Books, New York (1972)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fuchs, D.A., Lorek, S.: Sustainable Consumption governance: A history of promises and failures. Journal of Consumer Policy 28, 261–288 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Greening, L.A., Green, D.L., Difiglio, C.: Energy efficiency and consumption - The rebound effect - A survey. Energy Policy 28, 389–401 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ajzen, I.: The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50, 179–211 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McCarthy, J.A., Shrum, L.J.: The recycling of solid wastes: Personal values, value orientations, and attitudes about recycling as antecedents of recycling behavior. Journal of Business Research 20, 53–62 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bem, D.J.: Beliefs, attitudes, and human affairs. Brooks/Cole, Belmont, CA (1970)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bem, D.J.: Self-perception theory. In: Berkowitz, L. (ed.) Advances in experimental social psychology, Academic Press, New York (1972)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Buss, D.M., Craik, K.H.: The act frequency approach to personality. Psychological Review 90, 105–126 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Holland, R.W., Verplanken, B., Van Knippenberg, A.: On the nature of attitude-behavior relations: the strong guide, the weak follow. European Journal of Social Psychology 32, 869–876 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology 5, 207–232 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schwarz, N., Strack, F., Bless, H., Klumpp, G., Rittenauer-Schatka, H., Simons, A.: Ease of retrieval as information: another look at the availability heuristic. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 61, 195–202 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Menon, G., Raghubir, P.: Ease-of-Retrieval as an Automatic Input in Judgments: A Mere-Accessibility Framework? Journal of Consumer Research 30, 230–243 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Feldman, J.M., Lynch, J.G.: Self-Generated Validity and Other Effects of Measurement on Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology 73, 421–435 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Grice, H.P.: Logic and conversation. In: Cole, P., Morgan, J.L. (eds.) Syntax and semantics: Speech acts, Academic Press, New York (1975)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schwarz, N.: Judgment in a social context: Biases, shortcomings, and the logic of conversation. In: Zana, M.P. (ed.) Advances in experimental social psychology, Academic Press, San Diego (1994)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kaiser, F.G., Wölfing, S., Fuhrer, U.: Environmental attitude and ecological behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology 19, 1–19 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Minton, A.P., Rose, R.L.: The Effects of Environmental Concern on Environmentally Friendly Consumer Behavior: An Exploratory Study - Dimensions of Environmental Concern. Journal of Business Research 40, 37–48 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gill, J.D., Crosby, L.A., Taylor, J.R.: Ecological concern, attitudes, and social norms in voting behavior. Public Opinion Quarterly 50, 537–554 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Deci, E.L., Ryan, R.M.: A motivational approach to self: Integration in personality. In: Dienstbier, R. (ed.) Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln (1991)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cialdini, R.B.: Influence: science and practice. Allyn and Bacon, Boston (2001)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Freedman, J.L., Fraser, S.C.: Compliance without pressure: the foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 4, 195–202 (1966)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Spangenberg, E.R., Greenwald, A.G.: Social influence by requesting self-prophecy. Journal of Consumer Psychology 8, 61–89 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Burger, J.M., Caldwell, D.F.: The Effects of Monetary Incentives and Labeling on the Foot-in-the-Door Effect: Evidence for a Self-Perception Process. Basic and applied social psychology 25, 235–241 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kraut, R.E.: Effects of social labeling on giving to charity. Journal of experimental social psychology 9, 551–562 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Miller, R.L., Brickman, P., Bolen, D.: Attribution versus persuasion as a means for modifying behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 31, 430–441 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Aronson, E., Fried, C., Stone, J.: Overcoming denial and increasing the intention to use condoms through the induction of hypocrisy. American Journal of Public Health 81, 1636–1638 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gert Cornelissen
    • 1
  • Mario Pandelaere
    • 2
  • Luk Warlop
    • 1
  1. 1.Marketing Research GroupCatholic University LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  2. 2.School of Research on Mass CommunicationCatholic University LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations