CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 53Psychology of Social InfluenceEnvironmental Education and SustainabilityDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

The DOs and DON’Ts in social norms: A descriptive don’t‐norm increases conformity

Open access
Bergquist, Magnus, Nilsson, Andreas·2019·Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology
DOI 10.1002/jts5.43
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Descriptive norms guide social behavior by informing what other people do. In a conceptual proposition, we suggest that descriptive norms also could signal what other people don’t do. Building on the evolutionary predisposition to more urgently attend to negative than positive information, we hypothesize that people are more strongly influenced by choices that other people avoid, than by choices that other people choose. Descriptive data in three experiments consistently demonstrated that more participants conformed to information about what other people don’t do (i.e., the don’t-norm) than information about what other people do (i.e., the do-norm). We found that don’t-norms more strongly influenced pro-environmental choices related to both energy efficiency (Experiment 1) and sustainable food consumption (Experiments 2 and 3). The increased influence of the don’t-norm were supported in two cultures (Sweden and USA), in two decision contexts (accepting and rejecting), and when using two wordings (want vs. avoid and preferred vs. unpreferred). These results suggest that descriptive do- and don’t-norms are conceptually distinct and that don’t-norms exert stronger influential power.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jts5.43

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Some kinds of descriptive norms, such as dynamic norms or don't-versus do-norms, have been found to be more powerful than others.

    “And some kinds of descriptive norms (for example, dynamic norms, or don't-versus do-norms) have been found to be more powerful than others (Sparkman and Walton [2017]; Bergquist and Nilsson [2019]; Mortensen et al. [2019]).”

    From Science Communication and the Problematic Impact of Descriptive Norms (2023) · cites this paper as Bergquist and Nilsson [2019]

  • Norms phrased as 'don't' are more effective at inducing conformity than norms phrased as 'do'.

    “there is evidence that don't-descriptive norms are in fact more powerful in eliciting conformity than do-descriptive norms (seeBergquist and Nilsson [2019]).”

    From Science Communication and the Problematic Impact of Descriptive Norms (2023) · cites this paper as Bergquist and Nilsson [2019]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Bergquist, M., & Nilsson, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Gothenburg (SE)
  • Department of Psychology University of Gothenburg Göteborg Sweden
Corresponding author
Bergquist, Magnus
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-02-10
Volume
3
Issue
3
Pages
158-166
ISSN
2475-0387 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1002/jts5.43
OpenAlex
W2914758582
Cited by
53
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2
FWCI
10.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Energimyndigheten (40242‐1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Psychology of Social Influence
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental Education and Sustainability
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
descriptive norms, conformity, negative information processing, pro-environmental behavior, energy efficiency, sustainable food consumption, cross-cultural comparison

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review