Motivating Change: Combining Social Comparison and Equivalency Frames Influence Pro-Environmental Behaviors

Individual-level behaviors account for a majority of global emission levels, but motivating people to adopt morepro-environmental behaviors (PEB) remains a critical challenge. Research shows that brief, behavioral nudgescan encourage PEBs. However, limited research has tested the efficacy of multi-dimensional framing.Through an online experiment (N = 1,535), we tested the effects of multi-dimensional message frames, or thecombination of norms-based feedback (social comparisons, collective impact, or individual impact) paired withanalogical framing (emissions in tons or gallons of gasoline), compared to a control condition. We test howthese interventions change their willingness, likelihood, ability, and commitment to modifying their mostfrequent environmentally harmful behavior.Feedback that compared an individual's environmental behavior to the norm (“typical Americans”), or sharedthe collective emissions impact, when combined with equivalency framing, increased the likelihood andcommitment to shift toward pro-environmental behaviors. All other combination frames had non-significanteffects. We find that the intervention effects are fully mediated by a theory of planned behavior-like funnel,with social norms and interventions influencing willingness, likelihood, and commitment to behavior change.When individuals felt stronger control over the future of the environment, multi-dimensional frames morestrongly motivated change across several treatment conditions. Otherwise, we find evidence of income as amoderator, with some numeric multi-dimensional frames backfiring for higher-income participants.This research offers insights into the efficacy, segmentation potential, and psychological limitations ofmultidimensional frames in sustainable decision-making. Leveraging these nuances could improve low-cost,scalable environmental framing strategies for policy, environmental advocacy, and other climate efforts.