Crafting messages to fight dishonesty: A field investigation of the effects of social norms and watching eye cues on fare evasion

Ayal, Shahar; Celse, Jérémy; Hochman, Guy

doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.10.003

Cited by 37 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 86 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, integrating work in economic sociology across the Morality and Markets, as well as Moral Economy (Almeling 2007;Altomonte 2020;Frye and Wo zny 2021;Koos and Sachweh 2019;Livne 2014;Mau 2003;Sachweh 2012;Taylor-Gooby et al 2019;Vila-Henninger 2017, 2019a, 2019b, 2020a with work in Behavioral Economics (Ayal et al 2019;Bhanot 2021), we see that social norms influence behavior rather than, or in tandem with, self-interest. However, in my model-and drawing on the Embeddedness literature (Dequech 2003;Zukin and DiMaggio 1990) and work in the sociology of culture (Vaisey and Valentino 2018)not only do norms affect self-interested action, but they also serve as the basis of beliefs, expectations, and preferences.…”

Section: "Response": Synthesis Of Specific Critiques Of the Neoclassical Modelmentioning

confidence: 87%

A Dual‐Process Model of Economic Behavior: Using Culture and Cognition, Economic Sociology, Behavioral Economics, and Neuroscience to Reconcile Moral and Self‐Interested Economic Action*

Vila‐Henninger

2021

Sociological Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Synthesizing theory and findings from across neoclassical economics, behavioral economics, economic sociology, culture and cognition, and neuroscience, I create a dual-process model of economic behavior that explains both self-interested and moral decision-making. The core of this model is from neuroscience (Crockett 2013;Cushman 2013;Greene 2017;Lockwood et al. 2020). In my model, Type I and Type II processes exist relative to socially learned outcomes and causal models for achieving these outcomes. For Type I cognition, nondeclarative strategies for how to achieve an outcome are learned through life experience and automatically generate "gut feelings" about how to accomplish a given outcome. Type II cognition is deliberation based on declarative memory of the process through which one must act to obtain an outcome. Type II cognition also deliberates between Type I and Type II inputs for how to reach an outcome. This model allows for goals, and strategies to achieve goals, to be learned socially-therefore allowing for actors to learn moral and/or selfinterested economic goals and strategies through social interaction. This model can be used across economic sociology, cultural sociology, and the sociology of morality because it advances current models of selfinterested decision-making and moral judgment. Furthermore, this article is a bridge between behavioral economics and sociology, as well as between cultural sociology and economic sociology that can help foster collaboration by providing a common model of behavior.

show abstract

Section: "Response": Synthesis Of Specific Critiques Of the Neoclassical Modelmentioning

confidence: 87%

A Dual‐Process Model of Economic Behavior: Using Culture and Cognition, Economic Sociology, Behavioral Economics, and Neuroscience to Reconcile Moral and Self‐Interested Economic Action*

Vila‐Henninger

2021

Sociological Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Occitanie, France, Ayal, Celse, and Hochman (2019) have examined the impact that ad campaigns featuring watching eye cues and social norm messages can have on fare evasion. These types of ad campaigns are meant to encourage 'internal enforcement,' where social norms cause individuals to police their own behaviours (Ayal et al, 2019). Ayal et al (2019) have identified two ways of encouraging this: informing people of the desired social norms and what others are doing (Bicchieri, 2005in Ayal et al, 2019, and making people feel as though they are being observed by others (Ernest-Jones, Nettle, & Bateson, 2011;Nettle, Nott, & Bateson, 2012in Ayal et al, 2019.…”

Section: Positively Framed Ad Campaignmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These types of ad campaigns are meant to encourage 'internal enforcement,' where social norms cause individuals to police their own behaviours (Ayal et al, 2019). Ayal et al (2019) have identified two ways of encouraging this: informing people of the desired social norms and what others are doing (Bicchieri, 2005in Ayal et al, 2019, and making people feel as though they are being observed by others (Ernest-Jones, Nettle, & Bateson, 2011;Nettle, Nott, & Bateson, 2012in Ayal et al, 2019. In this context, a poster with a picture of watching eyes, and another poster with a picture of watching eyes and a positive descriptive social norm were put up at two comparable railway stations (Ayal et al, 2019).…”

Section: Positively Framed Ad Campaignmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ayal et al (2019) have identified two ways of encouraging this: informing people of the desired social norms and what others are doing (Bicchieri, 2005in Ayal et al, 2019, and making people feel as though they are being observed by others (Ernest-Jones, Nettle, & Bateson, 2011;Nettle, Nott, & Bateson, 2012in Ayal et al, 2019. In this context, a poster with a picture of watching eyes, and another poster with a picture of watching eyes and a positive descriptive social norm were put up at two comparable railway stations (Ayal et al, 2019). The social norm message was "In this station, 90 percent of all individuals purchase and validate their ticket" because it was found that these messages tend to be more effective when they are attached to a geographical location, and that people respond better to social norm messages that are framed positively as opposed to those that are framed negatively (i.e.…”

Section: Positively Framed Ad Campaignmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Towards a equitable approach to tackling the fare evasion problem: a scoping literature review and case study analysis

Cho¹

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<div>The widespread adoption of “proof-of-payment” ticketing systems by public transit corporations (PTCs) has renewed interest in the topic of fare evasion. Although this system has</div><div>many benefits, it has also been associated with higher rates of actual or perceived fare evasion. As such, many PTCs including the TTC in Toronto have also simultaneously invested in heightened measures to curb fare evasion. These measures, however, have usually taken the form of increased fines and policing, which have the potential to further disadvantage marginalized populations. A scoping literature review and case study analysis have been</div><div>employed to determine whether there is existing evidence that can make a case for the need for a more equitable solution to this problem, and to determine what alternative measures have been effective. Although there is much evidence to support the need for a more equitable approach, research into alternative measures is emerging and therefore somewhat inconclusive.</div>

show abstract

“…This finding has been supported by another research (Daumiller & Janke, 2019) that found an increase in cheating when the social norm made explicit by a cheating confederate suggested that cheating behavior was an acceptable way to increase performance. Besides, exposing passengers to watching eye cues along with a FOLLOWING THE CROWD 6 descriptive social norm messaging campaign has been found to be an effective intervention to hinder fare evasion (Ayal et al, 2019).…”

Section: Social Norms and Group Identitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Following the crowd: The effects of descriptive norms and self-esteem on dishonest behavior

Jem¹,

Pilati²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research’s major objective consisted of assessing the effect of a manipulation of peer descriptive norms on dishonest behavior. Specifically, we aimed at analyzing to what extent an interaction with an ingroup member would influence participants towards cheating in a task to obtain more money. A laboratory experiment with 198 participants in which a confederate interacted with the experimental group participants, telling them how to act to achieve the maximum reward in a task was performed. We found that the tip provided by the confederate led individuals toward being more dishonest in comparison with the control group. Besides, descriptive norms of daily dishonesty were significant predictors of the results obtained in the task, providing further evidence to the influence of other’s dishonesty on participants’ behavior. Also, a significant negative relationship between descriptive norms and self-esteem has been found, which indicates that individuals with low self-esteem are particularly more impressionable by such norms. These results suggest that making descriptive norms of honesty salient as well as working toward promoting enhancement of individuals’ self-esteem may reduce engagement in dishonest behavior.

show abstract

Crafting messages to fight dishonesty: A field investigation of the effects of social norms and watching eye cues on fare evasion

Cited by 37 publications

References 86 publications

A Dual‐Process Model of Economic Behavior: Using Culture and Cognition, Economic Sociology, Behavioral Economics, and Neuroscience to Reconcile Moral and Self‐Interested Economic Action*

A Dual‐Process Model of Economic Behavior: Using Culture and Cognition, Economic Sociology, Behavioral Economics, and Neuroscience to Reconcile Moral and Self‐Interested Economic Action*

Towards a equitable approach to tackling the fare evasion problem: a scoping literature review and case study analysis

Following the crowd: The effects of descriptive norms and self-esteem on dishonest behavior

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About