Cited by 141Environmental Education and SustainabilityPsychology of Social InfluenceEnergy, Environment, and Transportation Policies

Using Social Cognition and Persuasion to Promote Energy Conservation: A Quasi‐Experiment1

Gonzales, Marti Hope, Aronson, Elliot, Costanzo, Mark A.·1988·Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Abstract

A quasi‐experiment was conducted to determine if the effectiveness of the R.C.S. Home Energy Audit Program could be improved by training auditors to use social‐psychological principles during the audit procedure. Nine experienced home energy auditors attended two 1‐day workshops in which they were trained to: (a) communicate vividly; (b) personalize their recommendations to homeowners; (c) induce commitment; and (d) frame their recommendations in terms of “loss” rather than “gain”. The effectiveness of the trained auditors was compared with a control group of experienced auditors who did not receive specific training. Both telephone interview data and utility company records pointed to the success of the auditor training. In interviews, customers served by the trained auditors reported a greater likelihood of acting on the auditors' recommendations, and a large number of these customers reported applying for utility programs to finance retrofits. Utility records validated these customer claims: A significantly larger number of customers served by trained auditors actually did apply for retrofit finance programs. A longitudinal measure of actual energy consumption showed no difference between experimental and control households. Taken as a whole, these findings demonstrate the potential for using principles uncovered in the social psychological laboratory to design applied interventions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1988.tb01192.x

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Empirical studies in environmental psychology have consistently supported the applicability of Prospect Theory, demonstrating that loss-framed messages are generally more persuasive than gain-framed messages in encouraging pro-environmental behaviors.

    “Empirical studies in environmental psychology have consistently supported the applicability of Prospect Theory, demonstrating that loss-framed messages are generally more persuasive than gain-framed messages in encouraging pro-environmental behaviors.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gonzales, M. H., Aronson, E., & Costanzo, M. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • University of California System (US)
  • Portland State University (US)
Venue
Journal of Applied Social Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1988-09
Volume
18
Issue
12
Pages
1049-1066
ISSN
  • 0021-9029 (ISSN-L)
  • 1559-1816
OpenAlex
W1983826924
Cited by
141
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 11
FWCI
9.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Applied Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental Education and Sustainability
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Psychology of Social Influence
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Energy, Environment, and Transportation Policies
Keywords
energy conservation, home energy audits, social cognition, persuasion, auditor training, framing effects, personalization, utility programs, behavioral interventions, energy consumption

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