Green when seen? No support for an effect of observability on environmental conservation in the laboratory: a registered report.
conservation (ecological behaviour)
observability
pro-environmental behaviour
pro-environmental behaviour task
prosocial behaviour
signalling
Journal
Royal Society open science
ISSN: 2054-5703
Titre abrégé: R Soc Open Sci
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101647528
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2020
Apr 2020
Historique:
received:
30
01
2019
accepted:
09
03
2020
entrez:
21
5
2020
pubmed:
21
5
2020
medline:
21
5
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Understanding how humans navigate the tension between selfish and prosocial behaviour is central to addressing social dilemmas and several environmental issues. Many accounts predict that human prosociality would increase in the presence of observing individuals. Previous studies on this observability effect predominantly relied on artificial observability manipulations and low-cost measures of prosociality. In the present Registered Report, we used a recently validated laboratory procedure of repeated dilemmas to test whether the presence of actual observers affects costly prosocial behaviour in the domain of environmental conservation. When completing this dilemma task, participants repeatedly chose between minimizing the length of the laboratory session and minimising wasted energy from a bank of LED lights. Their choices were made either in private or in the presence of actual observers. Contrary to our expectation, we did not observe higher rates of energy-conserving behaviour when participants' choices were being observed. Manipulation and robustness checks indicate that this lack of a finding is unlikely to be owing to arbitrary methodological choices. In view of these findings, we argue that a more comprehensive analysis of situation- and behaviour-specific consequences might be necessary to predict how particular behaviours are affected by observability.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32431855
doi: 10.1098/rsos.190189
pii: rsos190189
pmc: PMC7211877
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
190189Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
We declare we have no competing interests.
Références
PeerJ. 2015 Dec 01;3:e1443
pubmed: 26644979
Wellcome Open Res. 2019 Apr 1;4:63
pubmed: 31069261
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2008 Jul;34(7):913-23
pubmed: 18550863
J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 1994 Mar;25(1):49-59
pubmed: 7962581
Behav Res Methods. 2007 May;39(2):175-91
pubmed: 17695343
Science. 1965 Jul 16;149(3681):269-74
pubmed: 14300526
Proc Biol Sci. 2018 Mar 28;285(1875):
pubmed: 29593114
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2010 Mar;98(3):392-404
pubmed: 20175620
PLoS One. 2017 Feb 7;12(2):e0170216
pubmed: 28170399
Am Psychol. 2011 May-Jun;66(4):290-302
pubmed: 21553954
J Soc Psychol. 2014 Mar-Apr;154(2):97-100
pubmed: 24765814
Behav Res Methods. 2012 Jun;44(2):314-24
pubmed: 22083660
Soc Sci Med. 2013 Nov;96:86-94
pubmed: 24034955