The Effect of Strength of Commitment on Newspaper Recycling

To investigate the impact of commitment on newspaper recycling, thirty households were randomly assigned to one of the following three conditions: Information, where subjects were informed about the recycling project through a leaflet; Minimal Commitment, where subjects were asked to make a verbal commitment to recycle newspapers; and Strong Commitment, where subjects signed a statement saying their household would participate in the project. The frequency of participation and the weight of the newspapers recycled was assessed during a two-week intervention period and a two-week follow-up period. The results on both measures indicated that the stronger the commitment, the greater the degree of recycling. In addition, the Strong Commitment group continued to maintain these gains throughout the follow-up period. The effects of commitment were viewed as a successful application of the minimal justification principle and were contrasted with the outcomes of incentive-based programs which rely on powerful external inducements. This experiment explores the implications of the minimal justification principle in confronting a major environmental problem by investigating the impact of commitment techniques in promoting recycling behavior. It emerges in the context of the increasingly serious environmental problems produced by the excessive disposal of solid waste products in our country. For example, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality estimates that in a typical year, Americans discard 30 million tons of paper, 26 billion bottles and 48 billion tin cans [1 ] . The collection and disposal of these products is costly, their disposal often degrades the environment, and their continual production and distribution depletes a variety of non-renewable energy resources.

[1]  Richard D. Katzev,et al.  The effects of non-contingent free bus tickets and personal commitment on urban bus ridership , 1982 .

[2]  D. Bem Self-Perception Theory , 1972 .

[3]  Carol A. Scott Modifying Socially-Conscious Behavior: The Foot-in-the-Door Technique , 1977 .

[4]  Jon S. Bailey,et al.  Evaluating Participation in a Residential Recycling Program , 1982 .

[5]  E S Geller,et al.  Facilitating paper recycling: effects of prompts, raffles, and contests. , 1976, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[6]  M. Pallak,et al.  Commitment and Voluntary Energy Conservation , 1976 .

[7]  E. Scott Geller,et al.  Promoting Paper Recycling on a University Campus , 1975 .

[8]  Paul D. Luyben,et al.  Motivating Beverage Container Recycling on a College Campus , 1981 .

[9]  L. J. Becker Joint effect of feedback and goal setting on performance: a field study of residential energy conservation , 1978 .

[10]  Thomas F. Pettigrew,et al.  Social Psychological Approaches to Promoting Lifestyle and Device-Oriented Conservation Behaviors , 1983 .

[11]  Marc Wayner,et al.  The Induction of Sustained Recycling Behavior Through the Foot-in-the-Door Technique , 1976 .

[12]  J. Freedman,et al.  Compliance without pressure: the foot-in-the-door technique. , 1966, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[13]  R. Katzev,et al.  A social-psychological analysis of residential electricity consumption: the impact of minimal justification techniques , 1983 .

[14]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Low-ball procedure for producing compliance: Commitment then cost. , 1978 .

[15]  W. DeJong An examination of self-perception mediation of the foot-in-the-door effect. , 1979 .