The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Overcoming Salience Bias: How Real-Time Feedback Fosters Resource Conservation
Open accessAbstract
Inattention and imperfect information bias behavior toward the salient and immediately visible. This distortion creates costs for individuals, the organizations in which they work, and society at large. We show that an effective way to overcome this bias is by making the implications of one’s behavior salient in real time, while individuals can directly adapt. In a large-scale field experiment, we gave participants real-time feedback on the resource consumption of a daily, energy-intensive activity (showering). We find that real-time feedback reduced resource consumption for the target behavior by 22%. At the household level, this led to much larger conservation gains in absolute terms than conventional policy interventions that provide aggregate feedback on resource use. High baseline users displayed a larger conservation effect, in line with the notion that real-time feedback helps eliminate “slack” in resource use. The approach is cost effective, is technically applicable to the vast majority of households, and generated savings of 1.2 kWh per day and household, which exceeds the average energy use for lighting. The intervention also shows how digitalization in our everyday lives makes information available that can help individuals overcome salience bias and act more in line with their preferences. This paper was accepted by Uri Gneezy, behavioral economics.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
(1982) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511809477 · Cited by 8,240
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254 · Cited by 5,882
The Constructive, Destructive, and Reconstructive Power of Social Norms
Schultz, P. W., Nolan, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Goldstein, N. J., & Griskevicius, V. (2007) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01917.x · Cited by 3,643
Social norms and energy conservation
Allcott, H. (2011) · Journal of Public Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2011.03.003 · Cited by 2,802 · cited 4×
“Previous studies have found that conservation effects are larger for high-baseline users than for users who start out with a more efficient resource use (Allcott 2011, Ferraro and Price 2013, Degen et al. 2013, Allcott and Rogers 2014, Schultz et al. 2014, Brent et al. 2015).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialA review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation
Abrahamse, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C., & Rothengatter, T. (2005) · Journal of Environmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.08.002 · Cited by 2,668
Out of Control: Visceral Influences on Behavior
Loewenstein, G. (1996) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.0028 · Cited by 2,610
Psychometric Properties of the HEXACO Personality Inventory
Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2004) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3902_8 · Cited by 1,961 · cited 2×
“of behavior change (Milfont and Sibley 2012), we also interact the treatment effect with the complete set of personality factors measured by the HEXACO Personality Inventory (Lee and Ashton 2004).”
MethodThe Quantified Self: Fundamental Disruption in Big Data Science and Biological Discovery
Swan, M. (2013) · Big Data · doi:10.1089/big.2012.0002 · Cited by 931
Gasoline prices, fuel economy, and the energy paradox
Allcott, H., & Wozny, N. (2014) · Review of Economics and Statistics · doi:10.1162/rest_a_00419 · Cited by 504
Kehr, F., Kowatsch, T., Wentzel, D., & Fleisch, E. (2015) · Information Systems Journal · doi:10.1111/isj.12062 · Cited by 410
Self-citation
Cited by
How to SHIFT Consumer Behaviors to be More Sustainable: A Literature Review and Guiding Framework
White, K., Habib, R., & Hardisty, D. J. (2019) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/0022242919825649 · Cited by 2,386
Digital transformation challenges: strategies emerging from a multi-stakeholder approach
Brunetti, F., Matt, D. T., Bonfanti, A., De Longhi, A., Pedrini, G., & Orzes, G. (2020) · The TQM Journal · doi:10.1108/tqm-12-2019-0309 · Cited by 544
Metadata
- Authors
- Tiefenbeck, V., Goette, L., Degen, K., Tasic, V., Fleisch, E., Lalive, R., & Staake, T.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 2018-03
- Volume
- 64
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1458-1476
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2507332899
- Cited by
- 292
- References
- 12
- FWCI
- 41.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Overcoming Salience Bias: How Real-Time Feedback Fosters Resource Conservation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2646
- The paper
- Tiefenbeck, V., Goette, L., Degen, K., Tasic, V., Fleisch, E., Lalive, R., & Staake, T. (2018). Overcoming Salience Bias: How Real-Time Feedback Fosters Resource Conservation. Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2646
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.