Feedback to Minimize Household Waste a Field Experiment in The Netherlands

Households can reduce environmental problems by minimizing their waste. Studies suggest that feedback may promote waste minimization. We propose that the effectiveness of feedback depends on the standard to which the feedback is compared. We tested the effect of feedback on waste minimization compared to a personal goal (goal comparison feedback), the behaviour of others (social comparison feedback), or one’s past behaviour (historical comparison feedback). Furthermore, the underlying process explaining the effect of feedback on behaviour is yet unclear. We tested the influence of feedback on environmental self-identity, self-efficacy, and descriptive social norms to minimize waste. We conducted a field study in the Netherlands. Households received feedback during six months on the number of residual waste bags they produce. The results show that all intervention groups reduced their number of waste bags including the control group that only received information on how to reduce waste. Yet, a comparison neighbourhood did not reduce their actual waste during the same time period. We did not find clear differences between the different feedback comparison standards. Furthermore, the feedback did not influence any of the process variables. We found that environmental self-identity was most consistently related to self-reported waste behaviours.

Too Good to be Liked? When and How Prosocial Others are Disliked

Outstandingly prosocial individuals may not always be valued and admired, but sometimes depreciated and rejected. While prior research has mainly focused on devaluation of highly competent or successful individuals, comparable research in the domain of prosociality is scarce. The present research suggests two mechanisms why devaluation of extreme prosocial individuals may occur: they may (a) constitute very high comparison standards for observers, and may (b) be perceived as communal narcissists. Two experiments test these assumptions. We confronted participants with an extreme prosocial or an ordinary control target and manipulated comparative aspects of the situation (salient vs. non-salient comparison, Experiment 1), and narcissistic aspects of the target (showing off vs. being modest, Experiment 2). Consistent with our assumptions, the extreme prosocial target was liked less than the control target, and even more so when the comparison situation was salient (Experiment 1), and when the target showed off with her good deeds (Experiment 2). Implications that prosociality does not always breed more liking are discussed.

The Dynamic Interactive Pattern of Assimilation and Contrast: Accounting for Standard Extremity in Comparative Evaluations.

Social judgments are often influenced by comparison to some standard in the environment, either moving the judgment closer (assimilating) to or away (contrasting) from this standard. Which direction this effect will take depends heavily on the relative standing of these standards on the judgment dimension compared to the target of the judgment. In previous research, items and comparison standards are often selected arbitrarily, ignoring or simplifying their influence substantially. The current work takes a fine-grained holistic curve fitting approach to measure response patterns across a wide range of standard extremities, showing that a narrower approach can pose limits to the generalizability and validity of inferences. A series of 8 experiments (N = 4304) uncovered a dynamic interactive pattern between assimilative and contrastive forces on average, which proved sensitive to item level variation (1a, b & c), but showed stability at the level of the facial judgment dimensions (2a & b). Finally, it revealed how the current approach can offer new insights into the role of other moderating variables, such as focusing on similarities versus differences (3a & b) and cross-category standards (4), which traditional approaches may miss. Implications for study design and theory are discussed.

Comparisons Inform Me Who I Am: A General Comparative-Processing Model of Self-Perception

People’s self-concept contributes to their sense of identity over time. Yet self-perception is motivated and serves survival and thus does not reflect stable inner states or accurate biographical accounts. Research indicates that different types of comparison standards act as reference frames in evaluating attributes that constitute the self. However, the role of comparisons in self-perception has been underestimated, arguably because of lack of a guiding framework that takes into account relevant aspects of comparison processes and their interdependence. I propose a general comparative model of self-perception that consists of a basic comparison process involving the individual’s prior mental representation of the target dimension, the construal of the comparison standard, and the comparison outcome representing the posterior representation of the target dimension. The generated dimensional construal is then appraised with respect to one’s motives and controllability and goes on to shape emotional, cognitive, and behavioral responses. Contextual and personal factors influence the comparison process. This model may be informative in better understanding comparison processes in people’s everyday lives and their role in shaping self-perception and in designing interventions to assist people overcome undesirable consequences of comparative behavior.

Comparison of gentamicin MICs by agar dilution and Etest for clinical isolates of Neisseria gonorrhoeae

Background In South Africa, Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) is the predominant cause of male urethritis syndrome (MUS). The national MUS treatment guidelines recommend gentamicin as salvage therapy for ceftriaxone treatment failures. We ascertained and compared gentamicin MICs obtained by agar dilution and Etest for clinical isolates of NG. Methods Gentamicin MICs for NG culture isolates obtained from 272 MUS cases in 2017 were determined using agar dilution, as per CLSI agar dilution methods, and Etest® (bioMérieux, Marcy-l’Étoile, France). Previously published interpretive criteria were used: MIC ≤4 mg/L, susceptible (S); MIC 8–16 mg/L, intermediately resistant (IR); and MIC ≥32 mg/L, resistant (R). WHO 2008 NG reference strains were used as comparison standards. Results Gentamicin agar dilution versus Etest MIC results (mg/L) were as follows: MIC50 = 16 versus 4; MIC90 = 16 versus 8; minimum MIC = 4 versus 1; and maximum MIC = 32 versus 16. Interpretive categories for agar dilution versus Etest were as follows: S, 4.4% versus 86.8%; IR, 86.0% versus 13.4%; and R, 9.6% versus 0%. The gentamicin MIC50 by agar dilution was significantly higher than by Etest (sign test P value <0.001); overall MIC agreement was 7.4% [kappa statistic (κ) = −0.014 (95% CI −0.039 to 0.010)]. Correlation with expected MICs for WHO reference strains was consistently better with Etest than with agar dilution. Conclusions There was a significant discordance between NG gentamicin MICs by agar dilution versus Etest. NG gentamicin AST methodology must be standardized and interpretive criteria established to optimize the monitoring of susceptibility trends.

Telescopes and microscopes of motivation: Emulative goals in admiration and envy differ in abstractness and temporal orientation

Admiration and envy both stem from perceiving superior others. A recent debate centers on the motivational qualities of these emotions. Some scholars argue that, compared to admiration, envy is characterized by a stronger motivation to self-improve by emulating upward comparison standards. Mounting evidence suggests, however, that both admiration and (benign) envy can involve upward motivation. Yet, whether and how their motivational characteristics can be distinguished is unclear. We propose that emulative goals in admiration and envy differ in terms of their abstractness, explaining inconsistencies in prior research and pointing toward complementary functions of admiration and envy. In Study 1 (N = 193), participants recalled and re-experienced episodes of admiration or benign envy and listed goals elicited in these episodes. Additionally, in Study 2 (N = 416), some participants recalled episodes of malicious envy. Participants and blinded, external raters evaluated the concreteness versus abstractness of the goals. Furthermore, we assessed the goals’ temporal orientation. The results support that upward motivation in admiration is abstract and oriented toward improving in the long term, whereas upward motivation in benign envy involves specific goals and is oriented toward short-term gains. These findings suggest that admiration and envy fulfill their motivational functions in different ways.

Comparisons inform me who I am: A general comparative processing model of self-perception

Our self-concept contributes to our sense of identity over time. Yet, self-perception is motivated and serves survival and thus does not reflect stable inner states or accurate biographical accounts. Literature indicates that different types of comparison standards act as reference frames in evaluating attributes that constitute the self. However, the role of comparisons in self-perception has been underestimated, arguably due to lack of a guiding framework that takes into account relevant aspects of comparison processes and their interdependence. I propose a general comparative model of self-perception that consists of a basic comparison process involving the individual’s prior mental representation of the target dimension, the construal of the comparison standard, and the comparison outcome representing the posterior representation of the target dimension. The generated dimensional construal is then appraised with respect to one’s motives and controllability and goes on to shape emotional, cognitive, and behavioral responses. Contextual and personal factors influence the comparison process. This model may be informative in better understanding comparison processes in our everyday life, their role in shaping self-perception, as well as in designing interventions to assist people overcome undesirable consequences of comparative behavior.