Center for Social Innovation

Published: April 18, 2012

Most observers agree that human consumption is on a crash course with the environment. Although recycling programs have been implemented in many cities around the world, people often do not participate as often as they could. This research examines the effectiveness of messages that highlight the negative consequences of not recycling (loss frames) versus those that emphasize the positive consequences of recycling (gain frames) in influencing people’s behavior. The authors find that the effectiveness of one type of messaging over another depends on whether interventions activate concrete thinking, which focuses on behaviors (such as how one might go about recycling), or abstract thinking (such as why one might go about recycling). Loss frames were more effective in stimulating recycling behavior when paired with concrete action steps, whereas gain frames were more effective when paired with abstract ideas as to why recycling was beneficial. Moreover, when focused on the present, people reported more positive recycling intentions in response to the loss framed messages, whereas when focused on the future, people reported more positive recycling intentions in response to gain frames. The study suggests that the proper match of messaging makes meanings easier to understand, which leads people to have enhanced beliefs about their ability to engage in recycling and results in more positive recycling intentions.

Read the full paper here.