Buy solar, get cashback : do consumer subsidies described as promotions influence electricity choices?

Introduction: Most countries want to make the transition to increased or even exclusive use of renewable energy. To achieve this goal, how can individuals be persuaded to use more renewable electricity? For example, does the way energy companies communicate so-called consumer subsidies matter in this regard, and if so, which communication strategy is best? For example, is a monetary promotion (e.g., cashback) better than a non-monetary one (e.g., gift)? Methods: In a total of four studies (with a total of more than 1700 participants), we investigated what type of promotion most influenced the choice of a renewable energy product, varying, for example, the environmental friendliness of the renewable energy product. Results: The monetary promotion (e.g., get $35 back through subsidies) appeared to be the most successful; it significantly increased the choice of the renewable electricity product (i.e., between 12–22%). However, this result was only evident when the subsidized renewable product was not the product already preferred by most individuals. Other measures, such as the willingness to pay (WTP), showed no differential effects. Discussion: Overall, the observed pattern suggests that promoting renewable energy choices, is similar to promoting donations to a charity. Accordingly, the description of the consumer subsidy as a monetary promotion (i.e., cashback or negative labeling) is most effective in terms of promotion. However, the effect of monetary promotions seems to diminish if the subsidized product is already the product preferred by most consumers. Nevertheless, the use of monetary promotions can encourage the transition to renewable energy

Certification Labels for Trustworthy AI: Insights From an Empirical Mixed-Method Study

Auditing plays a pivotal role in the development of trustworthy AI. However, current research primarily focuses on creating auditable AI documentation, which is intended for regulators and experts rather than end-users affected by AI decisions. How to communicate to members of the public that an AI has been audited and considered trustworthy remains an open challenge. This study empirically investigated certification labels as a promising solution. Through interviews (N = 12) and a census-representative survey (N = 302), we investigated end-users' attitudes toward certification labels and their effectiveness in communicating trustworthiness in low- and high-stakes AI scenarios. Based on the survey results, we demonstrate that labels can significantly increase end-users' trust and willingness to use AI in both low- and high-stakes scenarios. However, end-users' preferences for certification labels and their effect on trust and willingness to use AI were more pronounced in high-stake scenarios. Qualitative content analysis of the interviews revealed opportunities and limitations of certification labels, as well as facilitators and inhibitors for the effective use of labels in the context of AI. For example, while certification labels can mitigate data-related concerns expressed by end-users (e.g., privacy and data protection), other concerns (e.g., model performance) are more challenging to address. Our study provides valuable insights and recommendations for designing and implementing certification labels as a promising constituent within the trustworthy AI ecosystem

A healthier beverage choice is based on a subjective assessment of sweet taste

Despite promising interventions to lower people’s daily sugar consumption, such as health- or taste-focused labels, the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) continues to rise. To improve the effectiveness of existing labels, the way people process sugar amounts in grams (g) as displayed on beverages seems to merit elucidation. For example, do people perceive the difference in the amount of sugar, and thus in the subjective sweet taste, between two beverages according to Weber’s law? Additionally, is that perceived difference the cause of their beverage choice? In order to investigate these questions, participants in this online experiment first had to estimate the sugar difference between two beverages based on grams and then decide whether they would switch to a lower-sugar beverage. We found that participants’ different estimates followed Weber’s law. The choice of the lower-sugar beverage, however, depended on how large they personally perceived that difference. In other words, the choice was independent of the ratio. These results show that future labels, rather than indicating the total amount of sugar, should indicate whether the reduction, for example in the amount of sugar compared to another beverage, was perceived as significant by others

Can carbon labels encourage green food choices?

IntroductionA conventionally grown kiwi from Spain or an organic pineapple from Ghana? Which is the more environmentally friendly option? Given that the production and distribution of food is responsible for about a quarter of our CO2e emissions and thus plays a role in climate change the answer to such questions and, accordingly, making the right food product choices is crucial. The problem, however, is that it is difficult for consumers to calculate the CO2e value of food as it depends on several specifications such as the type of food, origin, etc. Could carbon labeling of food circumvent this problem and help consumers make more environmentally friendly choices?MethodsIn an online experiment, 402 participants had to choose 20 food products from a fictitious online shop. The participants were randomly assigned to either one of three food labeling conditions (Star Rating, Green Foot, and Traffic Light Label, short TLL) or the control condition.ResultsThe labeling conditions resulted in lower overall CO2e emissions, the purchase of more green food products and fewer red food products than in the control condition. The TLL outperformed the other two labels and was also the most accepted.DiscussionThe carbon TLL is therefore a promising intervention to help consumers to not only choose more environmentally friendly foods, but also make a significant contribution to the fight against climate change

Labels affect food choices, but in what ways?

To reduce obesity and thus promote healthy food choices, front-of-pack (FOP) labels have been introduced. Though FOP labels help identify healthy foods, their impact on actual food choices is rather small. A newly developed so-called swipe task was used to investigate whether the type of label used (summary vs. nutrient-specific) had differential effects on different operationalizations of the “healthier choice” measure (e.g., calories and sugar). After learning about the product offerings of a small online store, observers (N = 354) could, by means of a swipe gesture, purchase the products they needed for a weekend with six people. Observers were randomly assigned to one of five conditions, two summary label conditions (Nutri-Score and HFL), two nutrient (sugar)-specific label conditions (manga and comic), or a control condition without a label. Unexpectedly, more products (+7.3 products)—albeit mostly healthy ones—and thus more calories (+1732 kcal) were purchased in the label conditions than in the control condition. Furthermore, the tested labels had different effects with respect to the different operationalizations (e.g., manga reduced sugar purchase). We argue that the additional green-labeled healthy products purchased (in label conditions) “compensate” for the purchase of red-labeled unhealthy products (see averaging bias and licensing effect)

Can carbon labels encourage green food choices?

Introduction: A conventionally grown kiwi from Spain or an organic pineapple from Ghana? Which is the more environmentally friendly option? Given that the production and distribution of food is responsible for about a quarter of our CO2e emissions and thus plays a role in climate change the answer to such questions and, accordingly, making the right food product choices is crucial. The problem, however, is that it is difficult for consumers to calculate the CO2e value of food as it depends on several specifications such as the type of food, origin, etc. Could carbon labeling of food circumvent this problem and help consumers make more environmentally friendly choices? Methods: In an online experiment, 402 participants had to choose 20 food products from a fictitious online shop. The participants were randomly assigned to either one of three food labeling conditions (Star Rating, Green Foot, and Traffic Light Label, short TLL) or the control condition. Results: The labeling conditions resulted in lower overall CO2e emissions, the purchase of more green food products and fewer red food products than in the control condition. The TLL outperformed the other two labels and was also the most accepted. Discussion: The carbon TLL is therefore a promising intervention to help consumers to not only choose more environmentally friendly foods, but also make a significant contribution to the fight against climate change

Well-designed medical pictograms accelerate search

Two types of newly designed pharmaceutical pictograms (with and without context) were compared with an existing type of certified pictograms regarding their search efficiency. Each of the 30 participants had to search a total of 1'090 "fictitious" medical shelves for a certain box defined by the amount and type of medical instructions given (memory size) and presented among a variable number of other boxes (set size). The boxes contained the different types of pictograms mentioned above. Calculated factorial analyses on reaction time data, among others, showed that the two newly designed pictogram types make search more efficient compared to existing types of pictograms (i.e., flatter reaction time x set size slopes). Furthermore, regardless of the type of pictogram, this set size effect became more pronounced with larger memory sizes. Overall, the newly designed pictograms need fewer attentional resources and therefore might help to increase patient adherence

Nudging Healthy Food and Sustainable Choices

Reducing overweight and the overuse of natural resources are two of the biggest challenges facing humanity today. The roots of those challenges lie in, amongst other things, our everyday behavior such as the food and electricity products we choose. Although there are attempts to address these challenges, such as information campaigns, these traditional interventions have been ineffective in changing behavior. In recent years, however, the nudge approach has shown that interventions that use so-called “irrelevant factors” (e.g., defaults) have the potential to promote healthy eating and environmentally friendly behavior. This dissertation describes the results of three published manuscripts that investigate different nudges (i.e., frames, defaults, set size, position effects) and the additional factors (e.g., preference, weighting of aspects) that influence their effectiveness in changing behavior in the two targeted fields. The results indicate that nudges can be effective, but they also show the complexity of the interaction of the variables. For example, one manuscript indicates that the preference for a cuisine style mediates whether a center-stage effect (i.e., that we tend to choose a dish in the middle of a menu) occurs or not. Those additional factors have so far barely been investigated or brought into a consistent theory. The dissertation thereby contributes to a theoretical understanding of the studied nudges and discusses current and future challenges such as the lack of theory, freedom of choice and hedonic consequences of the nudge approach

Nudging healthy food and sustainable choices

Reducing overweight and the overuse of natural resources are two of the biggest challenges facing humanity today. The roots of those challenges lie in, amongst other things, our everyday behavior such as the food and electricity products we choose. Although there are attempts to address these challenges, such as information campaigns, these traditional interventions have been ineffective in changing behavior. In recent years, however, the nudge approach has shown that interventions that use so-called “irrelevant factors” (e.g., defaults) have the potential to promote healthy eating and environmentally friendly behavior. This dissertation describes the results of three published manuscripts that investigate different nudges (i.e., frames, defaults, set size, position effects) and the additional factors (e.g., preference, weighting of aspects) that influence their effectiveness in changing behavior in the two targeted fields. The results indicate that nudges can be effective, but they also show the complexity of the interaction of the variables. For example, one manuscript indicates that the preference for a cuisine style mediates whether a center-stage effect (i.e., that we tend to choose a dish in the middle of a menu) occurs or not. Those additional factors have so far barely been investigated or brought into a consistent theory. The dissertation thereby contributes to a theoretical understanding of the studied nudges and discusses current and future challenges such as the lack of theory, freedom of choice and hedonic consequences of the nudge approach

Buy solar, get cash back : do rebate description of subsidies influence your electricity choice?

Research or practical problem and objectives: In countries such as Switzerland, energy companies receive governmental subsidies to promote electricity generation from renewable energy sources (e.g., solar). Companies usually pass these subsidies on to customers who buy electricity from these sources. Now, research in areas other than energy has shown that the way a bonus is paid – as a monetary amount (e.g., cashback), voucher, etc. – affects behavior differently. The question now is whether the way in which the afore mentioned subsidies or rebates are passed on to customers can also influence the decision to buy, for example, solar electricity. Methods and process (for empirical research): For this purpose, we conducted an online experiment with 303 participants, in which the participants had to choose between a green electricity product and a solar electricity product. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: One of 3 rebate conditions (cashback, voucher, or a choice between the two) or the baseline condition. In the baseline condition the price shown was net of subsidies. Main results preview and importance (or main arguments in the case of critical reviews): Results showed a significant effect of the conditions on choice, x²(1) = 6.31, p < .01. Thereby the cashback condition increased the choice of the solar electricity product (by 22.5%), as did the choice condition, albeit marginally (by 14.5%), but not the voucher condition compared to the baseline condition. The choice effects likely arouse due to an underestimation of the annual incremental price of solar electricity in the cashback and choice condition. Furthermore, we found that regardless of the condition, participants were willing to pay (WTP) an additional 12.3% on average for solar electricity. In summary, the way subsidies are presented seems to affect their evaluation by consumers and, accordingly, influences their choice of electricity products. The description of subsidies as monetary rebates could therefore contribute to increased purchases of solar electricity and thus to the achievement of government climate goals