A slice of hygiene: justification and consequence in the persuasiveness of prescriptive and proscriptive signs

Leoniak, Krzysztof J.; Maj, Konrad

doi:10.1080/15534510.2016.1267663

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, a message containing both an explanation of why it is important not to litter in a park and the penalty for littering is perceived to be better than a message that only states the penalty. In their study, the justification message alone was just as effective as the combination of justification and penalties (Leoniak & Maj, 2016). This parallels previous findings (e.g., Langer, Blank, & Chanowitz, 1978;Wogalter, Sojourner, & Brelsford, 1997) of the benefits presented by a justification message.…”

Section: Justificationsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…When researchers gave out brochures with information regarding the benefits of recycling, they increased curbside recycling participation rate by 200-400% (Jacobs, Bailey, & Crews, 1984) The justification method implies informing consumers about the reasons for performing a certain behaviour (Osbaldiston & Schott, 2012). While justification has been found to be more effective than a simple message (Ham, 1992;Gramann, Bonifield, & Kim, 1995;Widner & Roggenbruck, 2000;Duncan & Martin, 2002), prompts that contain both a justification and information about consequences have been shown to lead to the highest levels of compliance (Leoniak and Maj, 2016). Besides, justification helps balance out negative reactions that might be associated with imposed sanctions and penalties (Leoniak & Maj, 2016).…”

Section: Justificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While justification has been found to be more effective than a simple message (Ham, 1992;Gramann, Bonifield, & Kim, 1995;Widner & Roggenbruck, 2000;Duncan & Martin, 2002), prompts that contain both a justification and information about consequences have been shown to lead to the highest levels of compliance (Leoniak and Maj, 2016). Besides, justification helps balance out negative reactions that might be associated with imposed sanctions and penalties (Leoniak & Maj, 2016). For example, a message containing both an explanation of why it is important not to litter in a park and the penalty for littering is perceived to be better than a message that only states the penalty.…”

Section: Justificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Communicating Returnable Packaging Through Product Labelling

Ratnichkina¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research seeks to find effective ways to communicate returnable packaging campaigns to consumers through product labelling. This is an important line of inquiry as more and more countries are rolling out regulations that penalize companies for their wasteful practices. Knowing how to encourage people to engage with returnable packaging campaigns will be of great interest to future marketers and sustainability practitioners. This research uses experimental approach with the use of online questionnaires showcasing different label messages. Results show that the conventional method of tapping into the altruistic side of human nature with guilt-inducing messages is ineffective for the population at large. Embracing the self-enhancing, gain-seeking, pain-eliminating side of human nature results in a bigger pro-environmental behaviour change. Making the process of “doing the right thing” easier resulted in the higher willingness to return an empty milk bottle among participants when compared to financial rewards, social modelling, and justification.

show abstract

Section: Justificationsupporting

confidence: 85%

Section: Justificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Justificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Communicating Returnable Packaging Through Product Labelling

Ratnichkina¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Geller Source: Taken from https://polmas.wordpress.com/category/safety-driving/ Intervention methods used to improve the secure behavior of riders are basically categorized into three intervention types [5], they are: 1) communication/education strategies, 2) activator-based strategies using antecedent and prompting, and 3) consequence-based strategies using feedback, rewards and penalties. Out of these three, the second strategy which uses appeal and warning signs, is the most commonly used due to the low-cost of the application [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…'Stopping when the red light is on shows that we respect others' rights to drive') and the element of consequence (e.g. 'breaking through red light means shaming yourself before others') [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Justification and Consequence in Increasing the Effectiveness of Road Signs to Reduce the Number of Traffic Violations by Motorcyclists in Semarang

Fauziah¹,

Indrawati²,

Dinardinata³

2020

Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Education and Social Science Research (ICESRE 2019)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of road signs is commonly used to reduce traffic violation. However, the number of traffic violation is still high. Literature shows that the number of traffic violation depends on the type of message used in the road sign. This research aimed to know what message is the most effective to reduce the number of traffic violation. Five messages used within this research were 1) neutral message, 2) prescriptive message, 3) proscriptive message, 4) justification message, and 4) consequence message. This research was conducted by observing the compliance of motorcyclists in natural experiment condition (N = 2752). Road signs which used justification message resulted in the highest compliance rate. Road signs which used consequence message showed unexpected result, which decreased the number of motorcyclists' compliance and increased the number of violation instead.

show abstract

Dissecting the dimension of protection: Caligae and Scutum in the evaluative model of normative appeals

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A normative appeal indicates that one should (or should not) do a certain action in a concrete situation. According to the Evaluative Model of Normative Appeals (EMNA), willingness to comply with these messages depends on an appraisal formed by two dimensions: formality and protection. In this work we center on the dimension of protection, proposing that it can be divided into two components: avoiding physical or psychological damage (scutum) and affording the performance of the main intended action (caligae). We conducted two studies to test this twofold meaning of protection. In Study 1 (N = 525), we manipulated the coherence of regulatory focus (promotion vs. control vs. prevention) with salience of the components of protection (caligae vs. control vs. scutum). In Study 2 (N = 513), we separately measured the perception of each component referred to an actual normative appeal (i.e., “To get into a class punctually”). The results showed that the manipulated salience and the measured perception of caligae and scutum elicits (Study 1) and predicts (Study 2) higher willingness to comply with normative appeals. Theoretical and applied implications of the results are discussed.

show abstract

A slice of hygiene: justification and consequence in the persuasiveness of prescriptive and proscriptive signs

Cited by 7 publications

References 33 publications

Communicating Returnable Packaging Through Product Labelling

Communicating Returnable Packaging Through Product Labelling

The Effect of Justification and Consequence in Increasing the Effectiveness of Road Signs to Reduce the Number of Traffic Violations by Motorcyclists in Semarang

Dissecting the dimension of protection: Caligae and Scutum in the evaluative model of normative appeals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About