The behavior of others in people's social environment (i.e., descriptive norms), as well as their opinions regarding appropriate actions (i.e., injunctive norms) strongly influence people's decisions and actions. The goal of this study was to extend prior laboratory research on the influence of social norms on food choices, by conducting a field-experiment in an on-campus food court. One of three different messages was posted on a given day: a healthy descriptive norm, healthy injunctive norm, or an unhealthy descriptive norm. Effects of these social norms messages on food choice were compared against each other and a no-message control condition. In total, 687 students reported their food choice through a questionnaire provided to them. Food choices were analyzed for participants who reported being exposed to one of the social norms signs and those in the control condition (N=220). Findings showed that the healthy descriptive norm resulted in more healthy food choices, compared to an unhealthy descriptive norm, as well as the control condition. The difference between the injunctive healthy norm and the control condition was not significant, though those in the injunctive norm condition did make more healthy decisions, than those in the unhealthy descriptive norm condition. Implications with regard to theory and practice are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract

In situations when people have been drinking, they often find it difficult to tell their friends to stop drinking, or not to drive home. Most people want to avoid being seen as a busybody, which may inhibit advice giving. In the current study, we investigated how positive and negative descriptive and injunctive norms (in alcohol consumption contexts) affect people's motivation to engage in intervening (e.g., ask a friend to stop drinking) and non-intervening (e.g., let friends make their own drinking decisions) behaviours. An online experiment with a four weeks post-test was conducted. Results showed that positive social norms resulted in a higher motivation to engage in intervening behaviour and a lower motivation to engage in non-intervening behaviour, compared to negative social norms. Injunctive, but not descriptive, norms had an effect on intervening behaviour four weeks after the manipulations. In line with prior findings, we also found that injunctive norms, in comparison to descriptive norms, are less amenable to change but that their influence is more enduring. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.