interventions of the real world

Question 1

what different real world interventions do we look at?

Answer 1

Financial Incentives
Rewards and Punishments (i.e. Fines)
Legal Interventions
Media Interventions

Question 2

financial interventions typical layout

Answer 2

A reward for doing something
A fine/punishment for doing something
Both tend to change behaviour

Question 3

which theory supports financial interventions working?

Answer 3

cognitive theory

Question 4

Which beliefs do financial interventions tend to change?

Answer 4

Changes beliefs about benefits of behaviour, or costs of inaction
Potentially changes beliefs about self-efficacy

Question 5

How are financial interventions used in lab experiments?

Answer 5

Dictator Game
Trust Game, with Punishment

Question 6

Design of financial intervention encourage people to quit smoking in the US

Answer 6

Participants randomly assigned to one of two groups:
Experimental group: participants provided with up to $750 for progress towards quitting:
$100 for completing a course
$250 for quitting for 6 months
$400 for quitting for 12 months
Control group: no financial incentive

Question 7

Findings of financial intervention smoking study - Which group quit smoking the most?

Answer 7

Participants were significantly more likely to successfully quit
If they received financial incentives for doing so
I.e., if they were in the Experimental Group

Question 8

Did people continue to quit smoking after the intervention?

Answer 8

Financial incentives continued to make a difference at 18 months
Six months after the last financial payment
even though they were not getting payed suggesting not just benefits was at play - self-efficacy

Question 9

Do financial rewards support people to quit smoking?

Answer 9

Yes, and the effect lasted at least 6 months after the end of the rewards

Question 10

what do we not know from the smoking study?

Answer 10

These were rather large incentives.
Do smaller incentives work too?
Do punishments (fines) work, as well?

Question 11

Late child pick up design of study

Answer 11

• there is a fine for late pick ups, small fines vs no fine
• 10 day cares
• took place over 20 weeks, going from no fines to fines to no fines

Question 12

what occurred in the first four weeks of the late pick up study = no fines?

Answer 12

no difference in lateness

Question 13

what occurred in the weeks 5-16 of the late pick up study = fines?

Answer 13

NO! The opposite: Late pickups soared at the Experimental Daycares
it increased massively when there was a fine

Question 14

Did Experimental and Control Daycares to return to similar rates of late pickups at the last weeks of the study?

Answer 14

NO! Late pickups continued to be higher at the Experimental Daycares, even weeks after the financial incentives were removed.

Question 15

Do small fines encourage people to pick up their children on time?

Answer 15

No, it’s the opposite.

Question 16

Why did the small fines mean that the number of late pick ups increase?

Answer 16

It implied that daycares don’t strongly approve of picking your child up on time.
Nor do they strongly disapprove of late pickups.
The fine may have, therefore, unintentionally changed Injunctive Norms

Question 17

what norms might the late pick up study have changed?

Answer 17

The fine may have, therefore, unintentionally changed Injunctive Norms.
Our beliefs about what others approve of.
This would explain why the effect persisted even after the fines ended.

Question 18

legal interventions

Answer 18

Enacting a law that prohibits a particular practice
Backed up by sanctions or punishments imposed on those who break the law

Question 19

Why would a new law help to change an existing behaviour?

Answer 19

may change descriptive, injunctive norms

Question 20

why might legal interventions change descriptive norms?

Answer 20

People will now believe that others will likely change their behaviour, to follow the new law.

Question 21

how might legal interventions change injunctive norms?

Answer 21

People will now believe that others will approve of them changing their behaviour, to follow the new law.

Question 22

does law changes influence personal norms?

Answer 22

Not necessarily –> new law shouldn’t immediately change what people personally approve of.

Question 23

Law change of same sex marriage in the US

Answer 23

In June 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage
This changed the legal system in the U.S.
How did this Legal Intervention affect the beliefs of individual Americans?

Question 24

How did they study whether legalising same sex marriage had changed injunctive norms about marriage equality?

Answer 24

• Used non LGBTQ+ Ps
• Data collected at 5 different time - before an after court ruling
• asked them questions and looked at their answers

Question 25

what question for same sex marriage study measured injunctive norms?

Answer 25

“To what extent do you think Americans oppose or support gay marriage?”

Question 26

Did the same sex marriage study find that there was a change in injunctive norms?

Answer 26

Participants were more likely to say that other Americans support marriage equality After the ruling legalising same-sex marriage

Question 27

were Ps more likely to say they agreed with same sex marriage when they said they thought more Americans supported same sex marriage?

Answer 27

Participants were NOT more likely to say that they personally supported marriage equality After the ruling legalising same-sex marriage

Question 28

Do legal judgements change injunctive norms?

Answer 28

They seem to, yes! But they may not change Personal Norms.

Question 29

Media interventions

Answer 29

Information / Education Campaigns Bali AIDS Project AIDS Community Demonstration Project Edu-tainment Theatre / Performance Media Programs (e.g. Soap Operas)

Question 30

what does mass media provide that can influence beliefs?

Answer 30

social modelling -By observing the experiences of others: People may come to believe there are benefits to changing behaviour.

Question 31

what beliefs may social modelling change ?

Answer 31

May change Beliefs about Benefits / Costs, Attitudes or Personal Norms May change people’s self-efficacy --> People may now believe that they, too, can change their behaviour

Question 32

what beliefs may the fact the mass media is viewed by lots of people change?

Answer 32

it may change Descriptive Norms People may now believe that others may change their behaviour after encountering the media. And may also change Injunctive Norms People may now believe that others will approve of them changing their behaviour, after encountering the media. I.e. it may change second-order beliefs (about others Personal Norms)

Question 33

Rwandan genocide

Answer 33

Between April and July 1994, about 600,000 people were murdered in Rwanda. Many of the killings occurred within communities, between neighbours from different ethnicities. This made trust between ethnic groups fall dramatically

Question 34

Describe the soap opera of two fictional Hutu and Tutsi communities, living through the genocide and its aftermath and how it trys to change reconciliation

Answer 34

There was several narratives in the opera between the ethnic groups: Attempting to communicate and reconcile with other groups Working to prevent further violence Young people pursuing love in the face of community disapproval

Question 35

What was the study design of the Rwanda soap opera study?

Answer 35

Random villages selected --> assigned to one of two conditions Experimental Group: Participants listened to the ‘New Dawn’ soap opera Control Group: Participants listened to an unrelated soap opera at the end of the year - Subjects’ beliefs were measured through interviews The group was allowed to keep the stereo the program was played on

Question 36

Did trust change ( in terms of personal and descriptive norms) when people listened to new dawn?

Answer 36

They asked is it good to trust (personal norms) -> found that People were more likely to say that it is good to trust others if they listened to new dawn. “There is mistrust in my community”-->People were NOT more likely to say that there is mistrust in the community: If they had listened to New Dawn. Personal norms changed but not descriptive norms

Question 37

Did they think “If I stand by while others commit evil actions, then I am also responsible.” more if they listened to new dawn?

Answer 37

No suggesting new dawn did not change beliefs about violence

Question 38

“If we disagree with something that someone is doing or saying, we should keep quiet” - did they think this more if they listened to new dawn? (injunctive norm)

Answer 38

People were more likely to say that they should dissent against wrong-doing: If they had listened to New Dawn.

Question 39

what beliefs did new dawn change?

Answer 39

Increased Personal Norms that trusting others is good. But, didn’t change Descriptive Norms about whether others trusted. Increased Injunctive Norms that people generally believed that dissenting against wrong-doing is good. But, didn’t change Personal Norms about whether individuals ought to dissent/intervene themselves

Question 40

Did New Dawn also change actual behaviour?

Answer 40

After the study was complete, the village groups were allowed to keep the radio. They then debated how cooperative ownership would be maintained. Everyone was suggested to give it to local authorities. People in the New Dawn groups were more likely to dissent against the initial suggestion and try to collective share it.

Question 41

Pluralistic Ignorance

Answer 41

A phenomenon in which people mistakenly believe that others hold an opinion different from their own.

Question 42

Does FGC prevalence mean there is more support?

Answer 42

In some societies, the prevalence of the behavior is largely matched by private support for the behavior but in some societies Even when the Behavior is very prevalent… Privately, it isn’t very well supported --> People mistakenly think that others support FGC, so they practice it.

Question 43

Where Personal Norms do not match prevalence what needs to be changed ( Pluralistic Ignorance) ?

Answer 43

You may only need to convince people that others DO NOT support FGC I.e. change Injunctive Norms This is the Easier case.

Question 44

where Personal Norms MATCH prevalence - what needs to be changed?

Answer 44

You need to change Personal Norms, as well as Injunctive Norms. I.e. people’s private beliefs about what they themselves approve of. This is the Harder case.