Restricted access
Research articles
Research articles
The expressive function of public policy: renewable energy mandates signal social norms
Published:22 January 2024https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2023.0038
Abstract
Addressing collective action problems requires individuals to engage in coordinated and cooperative behaviours. Existing research suggests that individuals' propensity to work together depends in part on their belief that others support the cause in question. People form their expectations about prevalent beliefs and behaviours from many sources. To date, most of the literature has focussed on how social norm perceptions are inferred from peers or summary statistics. We explore an understudied source of norm information: the passage of policies by democratically elected institutions. Institutional signals, such as the setting of defaults, national laws or policies, can act as coordination devices, signalling or prescribing social norms to large audiences. However, their expressive function is likely to depend on whether the institution is seen as accountable to the public. In two highly powered, pre-registered experiments (N = 11 636), we examine the role of policy signals as a source of social norm information. In Study 1, Americans randomly assigned to learn that their state passed a 100% renewable energy mandate believe that a greater percentage of their state's residents support such a mandate. In Study 2, we replicate this effect for national policy and show that the influence is moderated by information about whether the government represents the will of the people.
This article is part of the theme issue ‘Social norm change: drivers and consequences’.
Footnotes
References
- 1.
Tankard ME, Paluck EL . 2016 Norm perception as a vehicle for social change. Soc. Issues Policy Rev. 10, 181-211. (doi:10.1111/sipr.12022) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 2.
Constantino SM, Sparkman G, Kraft-Todd GT, Bicchieri C, Centola D, Shell-Duncan B, Vogt S, Weber EU . 2022 Scaling up change: a critical review and practical guide to harnessing social norms for climate action. Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 23, 50-97. (doi:10.1177/15291006221105279) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 3.
Leviston Z, Walker I, Morwinski S . 2013 Your opinion on climate change might not be as common as you think. Nat. Clim. Change 3, 334-337. (doi:10.1038/nclimate1743) Crossref, Google Scholar - 4.
Mildenberger M, Tingley D . 2019 Beliefs about climate beliefs: the importance of second-order opinions for climate politics. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 49, 1279-1307. (doi:10.1017/S0007123417000321) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 5.
Sparkman G, Geiger N, Weber EU . 2022 Americans experience a false social reality by underestimating popular climate policy support by nearly half. Nat. Commun. 13, 4779. (doi:10.1038/s41467-022-32412-y) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 6.
Geiger N, Swim JK . 2016 Climate of silence: pluralistic ignorance as a barrier to climate change discussion. J. Environ. Psychol. 47, 79-90. (doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.05.002) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 7.
Tankard ME, Paluck EL . 2017 The effect of a Supreme Court decision regarding gay marriage on social norms and personal attitudes. Psychol. Sci. 28, 1334-1344. (doi:10.1177/0956797617709594) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 8.
Ajzen I . 1991 The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50, 179-211. (doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 9.
Wicker AW . 1969 Attitudes versus actions: the relationship of verbal and overt behavioral responses to attitude objects. J. Soc. Issues 25, 41-78. (doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1969.tb00619.x) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 10.
Bolsen T, Leeper TJ, Shapiro MA . 2014 Doing what others do: norms, science, and collective action on global warming. Am. Politics Res. 42, 65-89. (doi:10.1177/1532673X13484173) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 11.
Cialdini RB, Reno RR, Kallgren CA . 1990 A focus theory of normative conduct: recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 58, 1015-1026. (doi:10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1015) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 12.
De Dominicis S, Sokoloski R, Jaeger CM, Schultz PW . 2019 Making the smart meter social promotes long-term energy conservation. Palgrave Commun. 5, 51. (doi:10.1057/s41599-019-0254-5) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 13.
Kormos C, Gifford R, Brown E . 2015 The influence of descriptive social norm information on sustainable transportation behavior: a field experiment. Environ. Behav. 47, 479-501. (doi:10.1177/0013916513520416) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 14.
Cialdini RB, Trost MR . 1998 Social influence: Social norms, conformity and compliance. In The handbook of social psychology (edsGilbert DT, Fiske ST, Lindzey G ), pp. 151-192. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar - 15.
Bicchieri C . 2016 Norms in the wild: how to diagnose, measure, and change social norms. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar - 16.
- 17.
Asch SE . 1952 Group forces in the modification and distortion of judgments. In Social psychology (ed.Asch SE ), pp. 450-501: Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Crossref, Google Scholar - 18.
Newcomb TM . 1943 Personality and social change; attitude formation in a student community. Dryden Press. Google Scholar - 19.
- 20.
Chartrand TL, van Baaren R . 2009 Chapter 5 Human mimicry. In Advances in experimental social psychology (ed.Zanna MP ), pp. 219-274. New York, NY: Academic Press. Crossref, Google Scholar - 21.
Deutsch M, Gerard HB . 1955 A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. J. Abnormal Soc. Psychol. 51, 629-636. (doi:10.1037/h0046408) Crossref, PubMed, Google Scholar - 22.
Behavioural Insights Team. 2012 Applying behavioural insights to reduce fraud, error, and debt. See https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fraud-error-and-debt-behaviouralinsights-team-paper. Google Scholar
- 23.
Coleman S . 1996 The Minnesota income tax compliance experiment: State tax results. Minnesota Department of Revenue. See http://www.revenue.state.mn.us/research_stats/research_reports/19xx/research_reports_content_complnce.pdf. Google Scholar - 24.
Behavioural Insights Team. 2013 Applying behavioural insights to organ donation: Preliminary results from a randomised controlled trial. See https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/organ-donor-registrations-trialling-different-approaches. Google Scholar
- 25.
Gerber A, Green D, Larimer C . 2008 Social pressure and voter turnout: evidence from a large-scale field experiment. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 102, 33-48. (doi:10.1017/S000305540808009X) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 26.
Paluck EL, Shepherd H . 2012 The salience of social referents: a field experiment on collective norms and harassment behavior in a school social network. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 103, 899-915. (doi:10.1037/a0030015) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 27.
Paluck EL . 2009 What's in a norm? Sources and processes of norm change. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 96, 594-600. (doi:10.1037/a0014688) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 28.
Paluck EL . 2010 Is it better not to talk? Group polarization, extended contact, and perspective taking in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 36, 1170-1185. (doi:10.1177/0146167210379868) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 29.
Bursztyn L, González AL, Yanagizawa-Drott D . 2020 Misperceived social norms: women working outside the home in Saudi Arabia. Am. Econ. Rev. 110, 2997-3029. (doi:10.1257/aer.20180975) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 30.
Bursztyn L, Egorov G, Fiorin S . 2020 From extreme to mainstream: the erosion of social norms. Am. Econ. Rev. 110, 3522-3548. (doi:10.1257/aer.20171175) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 31.
Perkins HW, Craig DW . 2006 A successful social norms campaign to reduce alcohol misuse among college student-athletes. J. Stud. Alcohol 67, 880-889. (doi:10.15288/jsa.2006.67.880) Crossref, PubMed, Google Scholar - 32.
Turner J, Perkins HW, Bauerle J . 2008 Declining negative consequences related to alcohol misuse among students exposed to a social norms marketing intervention on a college campus. J. Am. Coll. Health 57, 85-93. (doi:10.3200/JACH.57.1.85-94) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 33.
Young HP . 2015 The evolution of social norms. Economics 7, 359-387. (doi:10.1146/annurev-economics-080614-115322) Google Scholar - 34.
Bhargava S, Manoli D . 2015 Psychological frictions and the incomplete take-up of social benefits: evidence from an IRS field experiment. Am. Econ. Rev. 105, 3489-3529. (doi:10.1257/aer.20121493) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 35.
Fellner G, Sausgruber R, Traxler C . 2013 Testing enforcement strategies in the field: threat, moral appeal, and social information. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 11, 634-660. (doi:10.1111/jeea.12013) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 36.
Schultz PW, Nolan JM, Cialdini RB, Goldstein NJ, Griskevicius V . 2007 The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychol. Sci. 18, 429-434. (doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01917.x) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 37.
O'Gorman HJ, Garry SL . 1976 Pluralistic ignorance—a replication and extension. Public Opin. Q. 40, 449-458. (doi:10.1086/268331) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 38.
- 39.
Pasek MH, Ankori-Karlinsky LO, Levy-Vene A, Moore-Berg SL. 2022 Misperceptions about out-partisans' democratic values may erode democracy. Sci. Rep. 12, 16284. (doi:10.1038/s41598-022-19616-4) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 40.
Moore-Berg S, Ankori-Karlinsky L-O, Hameiri B, Bruneau E . 2020 Exaggerated meta-perceptions predict intergroup hostility between American political partisans. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 14 864-14 872. (doi:10.1073/pnas.2001263117) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 41.
Toff B, Suhay E . 2019 Partisan conformity, social identity, and the formation of policy preferences. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 31, 349-367. (doi:10.1093/ijpor/edy014) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 42.
Miller DT, Prentice DA . 2016 Changing norms to change behavior. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 67, 339-361. (doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015013) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 43.
Sunstein CR . 1996 On the expressive function of law. vol. 144, pp. 2021-2053 University of Pennsylvania Law Rev. (doi:10.2307/3312647) Google Scholar - 44.
Hodgson GM . 2006 What are institutions? J. Econ. Issues 40, 1-25. (doi:10.1080/00213624.2006.11506879) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 45.
Markus HR, Kitayama S . 2010 Cultures and selves: a cycle of mutual constitution. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 5, 420-430. (doi:10.1177/1745691610375557) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 46.
Weber EU, Constantino SM, Schlüter M . 2023 Embedding cognition: judgment and choice in an interdependent and dynamic world. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 32, 09637214231159282. (doi:10.1177/09637214231159282) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 47.
Tyler TR, Jackson J . 2014 Popular legitimacy and the exercise of legal authority: motivating compliance, cooperation, and engagement. Psychol. Public PolicyLaw 20, 78-95. (doi:10.1037/a0034514) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 48.
- 49.
Levi M, Sacks A, Tyler T . 2009 Conceptualizing legitimacy, measuring legitimating beliefs. Am. Behav. Sci. 53, 354-375. (doi:10.1177/0002764209338797) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 50.
Levi M, Stoker L . 2000 Political trust and trustworthiness. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 3, 475-507. (doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.3.1.475) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 51.
Jackson J, Bradford B, Hough M, Myhill A, Quinton P, Tyler TR . 2012 Why do people comply with the law? Legitimacy and the influence of legal institutions. Brit. J. Criminol. 52, 1051-1071. (doi:10.1093/bjc/azs032) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 52.
Levi M, Sacks A . 2009 Legitimating beliefs: sources and indicators. Regul. Govern. 3, 311-333. (doi:10.1111/j.1748-5991.2009.01066.x) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 53.
Tuxhorn KL, D'Attoma JW, Steinmo S . 2019 Trust in government: narrowing the ideological gap over the federal budget. J. Behav. Public Admin. 2, 1-13. (doi:10.30636/jbpa.21.47) Google Scholar - 54.
Ehret PJ, Van Boven L, Sherman DK . 2018 Partisan barriers to bipartisanship: understanding climate policy polarization. Soc. Psychol. Person. Sci. 9, 308-318. (doi:10.1177/1948550618758709) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 55.
Constantino SM, Pianta S, Rinscheid A, Frey R, Weber EU . 2021 The source is the message: the impact of institutional signals on climate change-related norm perceptions and behaviors. Clim. Change 166, 35. (doi:10.1007/s10584-021-03095-z) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 56.
Goode C, Balzarini RH, Smith HJ . 2014 Positive peer pressure: priming member prototypicality can decrease undergraduate drinking. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 44, 567-578. (doi:10.1111/jasp.12248) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 57.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2023 Summary of Inflation Reduction Act provisions related to renewable energy. See https://www.epa.gov/green-power-markets/summary-inflation-reduction-act-provisions-related-renewable-energy. Google Scholar
- 58.
Kennedy B, Funk C, Tyson A . 2023 Majorities of Americans Prioritize Renewable Energy, Back Steps to Address Climate Change. Pew Research Center. See https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2023/06/28/majorities-of-americans-prioritize-renewable-energy-back-steps-to-address-climate-change/. Google Scholar - 59.
Brenan M . 2021 Americans’ Trust in Government Remains Low. See https://news.gallup.com/poll/355124/americans-trust-government-remains-low.aspx. Google Scholar - 60.
Pew Research Center. 2019 Why Americans Don't Fully Trust Many Who Hold Positions of Power and Responsibility. See https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2019/09/19/why-americans-dont-fully-trust-many-who-hold-positions-of-power-and-responsibility/. Google Scholar
- 61.
Thomas EJ, Fink CF . 1963 Effects of group size. Psychol. Bull. 60, 371-384. (doi:10.1037/h0047169) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 62.
- 63.
Gustafson A, Goldberg MH, Kotcher JE, Rosenthal SA, Maibach EW, Balleuw MT, Leiserowitz A . 2020 Republicans and democrats differ in why they support renewable energy. Energy Policy 141, 111448. (doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111448) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 64.
Gilens M, Page B . 2014 Testing theories of American politics: elites, interest groups, and average citizens. Perspect. Politics 12, 564-581. (doi:10.1017/S1537592714001595) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 65.
Herre B, Ortiz-Ospina E, Roser M . 2023 Democracy. See https://ourworldindata.org/democracy. Google Scholar - 66.
Ehret S, Constantino SM, Weber EU, Efferson C, Vogt S . 2022 Group identities can undermine social tipping after intervention. Nat. Hum. Behav. 6, 1669-1679. (doi:10.1038/s41562-022-01440-5) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 67.
Syropoulos S, Sparkman G, Constantino SM . 2024 The expressive function of public policy: renewable energy mandates signal social norms - data, survey and R code. OSF repository. (https://osf.io/fvb6s/) Google Scholar - 68.
Syropoulos S, Sparkman G, Constantino SM . 2024The expressive function of public policy: renewable energy mandates signal social norms . Figshare. (doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.6991806) Google Scholar
