Comment on "Psychological research and energy policy."

Winett, Richard A.; Geller, E. Scott

doi:10.1037/0003-066x.36.4.425

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the efficiency-curtailment distinction is not always clear-cut (Stern & Gardner, 1981b; Winett & Geller, 1981), it is important for understanding the ways consumers respond to changing energy conditions. Because efficiency and curtailment involve different sorts of behavior, they may be influenced by different variables—this is one likely explanation for the confusion in the research literature.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Personal and contextual influences on househould energy adaptations.

Black

Stern²,

Elworth³

1985

Journal of Applied Psychology

584

414

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Survey data on 478 residential electricity consumers in Massachusetts are used to examine the interactive effects of economic, demographic, structural, and psychological variables on four behaviorally distinct types of reported conservation response involving energy efficiency improvements or curtailment of the services energy provides. The causal model assumes that contextual variables (i.e., demographic, economic, and structural) may affect behavior indirectly through personal variables (e.g., attitudes, beliefs, norms) and that between personal variables, causality moves from the general through the specific to reported behavior. A path analysis incorporating these assumptions suggested that although behaviors that are relatively unconstrained for most households (such as temperature settings) are strongly influenced by norms, personal variables have much less influence on more constrained actions (such as major insulation activity). The effect of high and rising fuel price was stronger in producing economic sacrifice than in producing energy savings. Limits to generalizability are discussed.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Personal and contextual influences on househould energy adaptations.

Black

Stern²,

Elworth³

1985

Journal of Applied Psychology

584

414

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, higher SES groups tend to respond to the needs for energy conservation by investment strategy, buying more efficient equipment and retrofitting. Lower SES groups tend to respond by behavioral changes, such as turning off unused lights, closing doors, and wearing heavier clothing in the winter (Becker et al, 1981;Winett and Geller, 1981). We also found significant SES differences between the MCS and Control groups: the MCS group is more likely than their counterparts to come from higher income groups (based on our survey) and from higher occupa-.…”

Section: • Location Of Key Appliancesmentioning

confidence: 52%

The residential standards demonstration program: Occupant survey analysis

Vine¹,

Barnes²

1986

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

EXECUTfVES~YWe present the findings of a mail questionnaire sent to all participants III the Residential Standards Demonstration Program (RSDP) during the Summer of 1986. The primary objective of this investigation is to compare occupants of MCS ("super" energyefficient) houses with occupants of "Control" ("current practice") houses to see whether the two groups are similar or different with respect to energy-related behavior, house characteristics, attitudes, and demographics.The results indicate that the MCS and Control groups are different from one another, but the effect of these variables on space conditioning energy use is not uniform .Chapter 1.

show abstract

“…One of the main problems in promoting energy-efficient investments to low-income households is that they are more likely to consider energy conservation in terms of comfort deprivation (a lowering of thermal comfort) than in terms of the efficient use of energy (Winett and Geller, 1981;Becker et.al., 1981). Comfort deprivation is more likely to induce a negative perspective on conservation and apathy (no action) than to encourage energy efficiency.…”

Section: Chapter 11 Hers and Low-income Householdsmentioning

confidence: 99%