Fight or unite?

1

Fight or unite?

The effect of motivation messages and framing

on consumers’ willingness to sign up for

a collective energy reducing project

University of Groningen

Faculty of Economics and Business Master Thesis, Marketing Management

Completion date: 24-05-2020

2

Abstract

While sustainable consumption and the promotion of energy conservation are of paramount importance to hindering the deterioration of the environment, many firms fail to position their sustainable products and services in the minds of target consumers. This then raises the question how these consumers should be approached in order to stimulate them to behave sustainably and consume energy in a sustainable manner. This thesis aimed to identify whether the use of specific motivation messages and moderating task frames influences people’s willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project and thus participate in sustainable consumption behaviour. Three main findings are done in this thesis, including (1) a self-transcendent versus a self-interested motivation message has a positive effect on consumers’ willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project; (2) using a congruent versus a non-congruent frame only has a significant, positive moderation effect when consumers are shown a self-transcendent motivation message and a collaborative frame; (3) using a collaborative versus a competitive frame has a significant positive moderation effect on the relationship between the type of motivation message and the willingness to sign up, but the effect is primarily activated when being shown a self-transcendent motivation message.

Keywords: motivation message, framing, collective energy reducing project, sustainable

3

Table of content

1. Introduction p.4

2. Theoretical framework p.8

2.1. Collective energy reducing projects p.8

2.2. Motivation messages p.9

2.3. Framing p.11

3. Methodology p.16

3.1. Participants and design p.16

3.2. Procedure p.17

3.3. Measures p.18

3.4. Analysis plan p.19

4. Results p.20

4.1. Manipulation check p.20

4.2.1. Main analyses: Hypothesis 1 p.20

4.2.2. Main analyses: Hypothesis 2 p.21

4.3. Additional analyses p.25 5. Discussion p.28 5.1. Main findings p.28 5.2. Theoretical implications p.30 5.3. Practical implications p.31 5.4. Limitations p.32

5.5. Suggestions for further research p.33

Reference list p.34

4

1. Introduction

Instead of starting this thesis with a non-personal and general introduction, I want you to ask yourself: How much fossil- or renewable energy do I use annually and why? During my part-time job at the customer service of an electricity company, I observed that most customers preferred to get a contract for non-renewable energy instead of a contract for renewable energy. I observed this many times despite the minimal price differences, with a contract for renewable energy costing approximately €1 more per €75 of energy usage (gas and

electricity). Depending on the household, this is on average a difference of €10-50 per year compared to a non-renewable contract. Next to that, when I was working at a rental

department for solar panels, I observed customers accepting quotes that would cost them more than €100 a year while other customers did not even accept quotes that would gain them more than €300 annually. Whereas most literature states that people are more willing to behave sustainably for self-transcendent reasons (acting with regards to being part of society and the universe as a whole; presumably the customers that accepted the annual loss), during my job it often seemed that self-interest was the main motivational driver to reduce energy

consumption. Additionally, there were even consumers who accepted a quote because they would have one solar panel more than their neighbours (competition) whereas others wanted to rent solar panels with their entire street to reduce their energy consumption together (collaboration). This kept me thinking for many months: What motivates people more to reduce their energy consumption (thus behave more sustainable) and how should we frame this act of reducing energy consumption to push these people into the right direction?

Research into the effect of self-transcendent and self-interested motivations on consumers’ attitudes towards green consumption behaviour shows us that consumers’ sustainable purchase intentions are higher when green products can fulfil an individual need (self-interested motivation) versus when it would satisfy a collective, more abstract and unknown need (self-transcendent motivation) (Schuitema & de Groot, 2015). This is in line with my empirical observation prior to writing this thesis that self-interest is often the main

5 According to the goal-framing theory it is however not only the targeted motivations or motivation messages that matter, but also how the marketing communications are delivered to the customer (framing). Goal-framing theory has shown that in order to stimulate sustainable behaviour the most, one has to use a frame that is congruent with the goal (motivation message) (Lindenberg & Steg, 2007). Such a congruent frame could, for example, be a collaborative frame combined with a self-transcendent motivation message or a competitive frame combined with a self-interested motivation message. Next to congruent framing, research has shown that even for the simplest and most transparent decisions, framing can have a substantial effect on the choice outcome (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). It is therefore unsurprising that the importance of these cognitive framing effects is widely recognized in marketing and advertising (Jackson, 2005). However, despite the importance of framing, not much research has been done on the effect of congruent and non-congruent frames combined with motivational messages on green consumption behaviour.

Regarding reducing energy consumption, prior research has shown that active energy

reducing projects have the potential to reduce consumers’ energy consumption by 10 to 15% (Winett, Neale & Grier, 1979). In these collective projects, one has to temporarily work together with other employees (or classmates) on assignments to help one get insight into one’s energy consumption and subsequently reduce it at home and at the workplace

(Bedrijfkracht, 2019). This is important for the global transition towards a more sustainable lifestyle, as it could considerably reduce emissions. It is therefore that this thesis focuses on people’s willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project.

This thesis attempts to identify which type of motivation message (self-transcendent versus self-interested) has a stronger effect on people’s willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project and how this project should subsequently be (non-)congruently framed (competitive versus collaborative) in order to attract most people. Thus, in line with goal-framing theory, I aim to answer the following research questions:

1. Is a self-interested or a self-transcendent motivation message more effective in increasing

people’s willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project?

2. And is this relation moderated by using a congruent (self-transcendent motivation message

6

Contributions

Even though we globally need to reduce our energy consumption to make the transition towards a more sustainable lifestyle a success, research into motivation messages and how to attract people to participate in sustainable (consumption) behaviour is scarce. To contribute to the academic literature, various elements of the current knowledge on green consumption behaviour are tackled in this thesis.

First, literature shows two distinct scientific movements in research on the relationship between self-transcendent and self-interested motivation messages on consumers’ sustainable consumption behaviour (Schuitema & de Groot, 2015; Stern et al., 1995). This study aims to provide additional evidence that one of the two types of motivation messages is actually a stronger predictor of sustainable behaviour than the other.

Second, studies on the goal-framing theory are primarily literature-based (e.g. Etienne, 2010; Lindenberg & Steg, 2007). Except for a few experiments conducted by Lindenberg and Foss (2011), there is no empirical evidence for the validity of this theory. I therefore attempt to provide empirical evidence regarding the (in)validity of the goal-framing theory.

Third, studies have mainly focused on identifying the elements of the collective energy reducing project itself that are most effective in reducing individuals’ energy consumption, instead of identifying how to actually convince people to participate in these projects in the first place (Darby, 2006). This study also aims to partially fill that gap.

Last but not least, research on the effect of motivation messages on consumers’ willingness to sign up for collective energy reducing projects moderated by framing is, to my knowledge, non-existent (as can be read in the theoretical framework), yet extremely important. In this thesis, I contribute to the current research on the effects of (non-) congruent task framing and motivation messages on individuals' willingness to sign up for collective energy reducing projects and thus their willingness to participate in sustainable (consumption) behaviour.

Relevance

7

often not translated into green actions, partially because firms fail to position their sustainable products and brands into the minds of target consumers (Kanchanapibul et al., 2014). This is also supported by Chekima et al. (2016), stating that the current information on promoting green behaviour of consumers is insufficient, sometimes contradicting and also lacking the necessary tools.

The abovementioned problems have to be addressed in order to make the transition towards a more sustainable lifestyle easier for consumers all around the world. It is therefore that this thesis aims to identify how to get firms and consumers to make the right (sustainable) decisions. This is done by focusing on two main points: First, by looking into the effect of self-transcendent versus self-interested motivation messages, this study aims to provide marketers with a deeper understanding of motivation messages and motivational drivers stimulating consumers’ green consumption behaviour. Second, as the importance of framing is widely acknowledged but barely studied in the world of sustainable marketing (Jackson, 2005), I attempt to identify whether marketers should use certain (non-)congruent frames in their green marketing communications. This should subsequently help firms to position their sustainable products and services in the minds of the correctly targeted consumers.

Structure

This thesis is structured as follows: In chapter 2, I provide an overview of the current

knowledge and theories on motivation messages, framing and consumers’ willingness to sign up for collective energy reducing projects. Based on this, two hypotheses are formed.

8

2. Theoretical framework

2.1. Collective energy reducing projects

A collective energy reducing project can be defined as a project in which one has to

temporarily work together with other colleagues on assignments in order to get insight into one’s energy consumption and where one is provided with feedback and (collective) options to subsequently reduce one’s energy consumption at home and at the workplace

(Bedrijfkracht, 2019). The willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project can thus be defined as the willingness of the participant to sign up for such a project.

It is important to keep in mind that collective energy reducing projects, in general, have three main functions; (1) address local problems of high fuel costs and high energy consumption; (2) contribute to wider regional and (inter)national objectives to reduce emissions; and (3) serve as an exemplary set of actions for others wishing to reduce their energy consumption (Rogers et al., 2008). Thus, most existing collective energy reducing projects have this same set of goals and therefore share important similarities.

9 how to subsequently improve and thus reduce their energy usage (e.g. Bedrijfkracht, 2019).

2.2. Motivation messages

To attract people to sign up for a collective energy reducing project, one has to target the right consumers and show them the right messages. In other words, to target and acquire the right consumers, companies need to know or manipulate why people are motivated to act in a certain way and subsequently modify their marketing communications based on this. Therefore, it is important to know which type of motivation message has the most positive effect on people their willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project and thus behave sustainable (de Groot, 2008; Stern et al., 1995).

Although there is no generally agreed-upon definition of the term motivation, it usually refers to ‘why a given behaviour occurs’ (Moisander, 2007). In other words, it is the reason why someone behaves in a certain way. Next to that, motivation has two important components; strength of the motivation and direction of the motivation (Moisander, 2007). In this thesis the strength of both manipulated motivation messages are equal, the direction differs

(self-interested versus self-transcendent). This self-transcendent motivation message can be defined as a motivation message that emphasizes serving the interests of others and society as a

whole, tolerating everyone and looking for social justice (Rahman & Reynolds, 2019). This also means making sure that the future of the environment is sustained. A self-interested motivation message can then be defined as a motivational message intended to stimulate individuals to achieve social status and prestige, to control and dominate people and resources and to achieve the best (short term) outcomes for oneself (Roccas et al., 2010). Please note that a self-transcendent motivation message can still serve a self-interested goal by achieving a warm glow in return for doing good for others (Taufik et al., 2014). In this thesis, this is still considered a self-transcendent motivation (message).

10

(Schuitema & de Groot, 2015). Next to that, self-interested status motives can influence green purchase intentions, but primarily when shopping in public and when the green product is more expensive than the non-green product (Griskevicius, van den Bergh & Tybur, 2010). These studies support the claim that the effect of self-interest on sustainable behaviour is higher than that of self-transcendent motivation messages. It would thus make sense to see this same effect when examining people’s willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project, as this is also a sustainable behaviour.

In contrast to the previous paragraph, Zavestoski (2002) has found that both self-transcendent and self-enhancing (self-interested) value orientations correlate positively to green

consumerism. However, these self-interested motivation messages only have a positive effect on green consumption when the outcomes of this behaviour are positive for the individual in the short term. Per contra, it is stated that interested motivations conflict with self-transcendent values and thus only one of the two can positively impact green consumption behaviour (Evans et al., 2012). These different findings are presumably caused by the fact that self-transcendent motivation messages (primarily regarding sustainable behaviour) mainly serve long term ‘invisible’ goals, whereas self-interest mainly serves short term goals. However, self-transcendent motivation messages can serve short term goals as well, but this depends on the associated behaviour (buying solar panels versus signing a household-contract for renewable energy). Thus, one could then assume that both types of motivation messages will have a positive effect on consumers’ willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project.

11 effective, but because the positive effect of self-interested motivation messages on green consumption is less than that of self-transcendent motivation messages (Evans et al., 2012).

The ecological value theory supports the effect of the self-transcendent motivation message. It states that pro-environmental behaviours are a direct result of activated pro-social (self-transcendent) or moral values (Jackson, 2005). This theory draws upon the earlier research of Schwartz (1977), distinguishing between a self-enhancement value orientation (what does it do for me?) and a self-transcendent orientation (what does it do for others?).

Self-enhancement is closely related to self-interest whereas self-transcendence is related to looking at the consequences for the environment and society. Thus, it means that if I am shown a motivation message stating that I have to participate in sustainable behaviour because it is better for society, then this will have more effect on my willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project than when I am shown a self-interested motivation message.

The aforementioned studies clearly show that there are two groups contradicting each other’s research, however, theory and research supporting the self-transcendent motivation message has provided the most abundant and reliable evidence, stating that both motivation messages have a positive effect on sustainable behaviour, the effect of self-transcendence simply being stronger. Thus, I hypothesise that a self-transcendent motivation message has a more positive effect than a self-interested motivation message on people’s willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project. This results in the following hypothesis:

H1: A self-transcendent motivation message in comparison to a self-interested motivation

message has a positive effect on consumers’ willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project.

2.3. Framing

To increase the effect of the motivation message on consumers’ willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project, framing can be used. Based on goal-framing theory (which will be explained later in this chapter), the strength of this frame is influenced by the situation in which the individual currently finds him or herself (motivation message). It is therefore that this is an important subject to examine. Framing can be defined as creating a situation,

12 bias or extract a specific cognitive response from someone (Jackson, 2005). In other words, framing (a goal, task or message) means the way in which a message or task is set up and how it is shown to the consumer. Competitive framing in this context can therefore be defined as presenting the collective energy reducing project in such a way that it seems that one has to compete with others to be able to fulfil the task. Next to that, collaborative framing can then be defined as presenting the collective energy reducing project in such a way that it seems that one has to work together with others to be able to fulfil the task.

This framing phenomenon builds upon prospect theory, which states that individuals react differently to the same information depending on how the message or task is framed (Tversky & Kahneman, 1981). This is caused by the fact that our cognitive responses rely on various elements of the way in which a message is framed and these elements, consisting of

sometimes unconscious signals, are capable of biasing our reaction towards a specific action (Jackson, 2005). It is therefore that message framing is one of the most chosen features manipulated by marketers to influence consumer attitudes and behaviours (Maheswaran & Meyers-Levy, 1990).

Although the importance of framing is widely acknowledged in marketing, the effect of framing on green consumption behaviour has scarcely been researched (Jackson, 2005). Only a handful of contributions have been made. Several scholars have conducted a study on the effect of gain/loss framing on green consumption behaviour (Amatulli et al., 2019; Chang et al., 2015). It is shown that the effect of loss frames (the negative consequences of not

pursuing an action) on green consumption behaviour and green advertisement effectiveness is higher than that of gain frames (the positive benefits of pursuing an action). This is caused by the fact that humans are relatively more averse to an e.g. €100 loss than they are receptive to the same €100 gain (Wilson & Dowlatabadi, 2007). Because of this aversion to losing, it is possible that competitive framing also has a more positive effect than collaborative framing on the willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project. The reason behind this is that in a competition one has something to lose (can be worse than the rest), whereas in a collaboration one does not.

13 much added practical relevance. No research has yet been conducted on the effect of framing a collective energy reducing project as a competitive versus a collaborative task. However, studies on the effect of competitive versus collaborative framing on the engagement

(willingness to participate) of gamers and employees have been conducted. It is shown that employees are more willing to engage in energy-efficient behaviour when they compare their performance to that of others, like in a competition (Yun et al., 2017). Next to that, research has shown that gamers are more willing to engage in a game when told that their score is competition-based versus when their score is based on conventional collaborative scoring mechanisms (Siu et al., 2014). Thus, it seems that a competitive frame has more effect than a collaborative frame on participants’ willingness to engage (and thus their willingness to participate in an energy reducing project).

Research into the relationship between self-transcendent motivations, collaboration and engagement has also been conducted. It is shown that collaborative game modes should be preferred when one is pro-social and thus transcendently motivated or shown a self-transcendent motivation message (Brondi et al., 2015). Subsequently, engagement is higher when one is in the collaborative mode or frame (Emmerich & Masuch, 2013). Thus,

collaborative framing should have a positive moderation effect on the relationship between a self-transcendent motivation message and the willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project.

14

Three general goal frames have been identified in goal-framing theory. These are the hedonic goal (to feel better right now), the gain goal (to protect and improve one’s resources) and the normative goal (to act in an appropriate way) (Lindenberg & Steg, 2007). The hedonic goal frame stimulates one or several subgoals with the intention to improve how an individual feels in a specific situation (Lindenberg & Steg, 2007). The gain goal frame, however, increases individuals’ sensitivity to changes in their resources (Lindenberg & Steg, 2007). A normative goal frame stimulates various types of subgoals associated with acting appropriately, ranging from displaying table manners to contributing to a clean and sustainable environment

(Lindenberg & Steg, 2007). This thesis only works with two of these goal frames: the gain goal frame and the normative goal frame. It is important to note that when consumers want to act appropriately but do not know how to do so, the gain goal presumably replaces the

normative goal frame (Lindenberg & Steg, 2007). This possibility is eliminated in this thesis, as respondents are only shown one motivation message and one frame. Thus, I removed respondents’ possibility to switch to another goal frame.

Next to the three types of goal frames, social values are one of the three important values of the goal-framing theory. It states that the social values people hold can activate a normative goal frame (Lindenberg & Steg, 2013). These social values can be values or preferences that have always been present in the individual or motivations that have just been activated, as with a motivation message. The effect of the frame then depends on the motivation message shown to the individual and its alignment with the frame. Thus, collaborative framing should have a positive effect on self-transcendent motivation messages whereas competitive framing should have a positive effect on self-interested motivation messages. In other words, framing the collective energy reducing project as a competitive task should have a positive effect on people’s willingness to sign up when they are shown a self-interested motivation message (congruent frame), but a negative effect when someone is shown a self-transcendent

motivation message (non-congruent frame). The opposite can be expected when framing the collective energy reducing project as a collaborative task; this should have a positive effect on consumers’ willingness to sign up when they are shown a self-transcendent motivation

15

H2: A congruent versus a non-congruent frame positively moderates the effect of the

motivation message on consumers’ willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project.

The hypotheses lead to the conceptual framework as seen in figure 1.

16

3. Methodology

To examine the hypotheses of this thesis, primary data is collected through an online

experiment. The goal of this experiment is to identify whether participants who are shown a self-transcendent motivation message are more willing than participants who are shown a self-interested motivation message to sign up for a collective energy reducing project. Additionally, it examines if using a congruent frame (self-transcendent motivation message and collaborative frame, self-interested motivation message and competitive frame) versus a non-congruent frame for the collective energy reducing project increases participants’ willingness to sign up.

3.1. Participants and design

To investigate how motivation messages and task framing influence people’s willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project, an experiment with a 2 (motivation message: self-transcendent vs. self-interested) x 2 (frame: congruent vs. non-congruent) between-subjects design was conducted. Motivation messages and frames were both experimentally manipulated. Thus, participants were only manipulated into one type of motivation message and one type of frame, leaving us with four cells (Fig. 2).

congruent frame

non-congruent frame

self-transcendent

motivation message

N=146

N=141

self-interested motivation

message

N=143

N=141

Figure 2. The number of valid respondents in each condition.

17 respondents voluntarily participated in the experiment and were given the opportunity to additionally participate in a lottery to win €50. Of these respondents, 327 were excluded because they did not finish the survey, 50 because they failed the attention check, 20 because they did not follow instructions properly or did not understand the situation and 1 because the participant entered an age of 150. Therefore, the final analysis is conducted on a sample of 571 respondents (NDutch= 563, Nmale= 128, Nfemale= 442, Nother gender= 1, Mage= 37.88, SDage=

15.18, RangeAge= 18-77). This resulted in a response rate of 59 percent.

3.2. Procedure

Context

After the motivation message manipulation described below, all participants are shown an objective text about the collective energy reducing project. This text gives a short objective description of the structure, assignments and goals of the project and is primarily based on the collective energy reducing project of Bedrijfkracht (2019). By showing all respondents in every condition the same objective text, I concretize what such a collective energy reducing project entails. This text can be found in Dutch in appendix A.

Motivation manipulation

The goal of the first part of the study is to manipulate participants into either a self-interested or self-transcendent motivation. The independent variable is manipulated by showing

participants a motivation message which is a partial adaptation of the procedure used by De Dominicis et al. (2017) and having the participants answer five additional motivation statements adapted from Evans et al. (2012). The message states that participants have to imagine that they rent a house of a housing corporation and that this housing corporation wants to reduce the amount of energy used by its tenants. In order to do so, this housing corporation has created an incentive to either stimulate energy conservation by providing financial discounts (self-interested motivation message) or by providing tenants with environmental feedback about the impact of their energy conservation (self-transcendent motivation message). The motivation messages can be found in Dutch in appendix B.

18 (not) sign up based on personal benefits/consequences and based on societal/environmental benefits/consequences. Then, an analysis of variance (ANOVA) is executed twice to check whether both motivation messages were effective (Sevillano et al., 2007).

Framing the collective energy reducing project

The second part of the study is primarily designed to identify the effects of a competitive versus a collaborative frame (congruent versus non-congruent frame) on the relation between motivation messages and the willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project. To study the effects of (non-)congruent frames, either a competitively framed poster or a collaboratively framed poster about the project is shown. This is based on research of Siu et al. (2014) into engagement levels in a gaming environment where the game mode was framed as either collaborative or competitive. Participants are told that the posters are an addition to the objective text about the collective energy reducing project they had just read about. Both posters can be seen in Dutch in Appendix C.

3.3. Measures

Several measures are used in the experiment. First, five general questions are asked regarding age, gender, nationality, living area (town) and the number of inhabitants in this town. The other measures are described below.

Willingness to sign up for collective energy reducing project

The willingness to sign up for the collective energy reducing project was measured by four 7-point Likert scale items, i.e. willing to sign up, willing to participate because... and willing to learn, with answers ranging from ‘not at all willing’ to ‘totally willing’ (De Dominicis et al., 2017; de Groot, 2018; Southwell et al., 2014). Responses for all four items were averaged into one unidimensional scale of which the internal consistency was α= 0.951 (M= 5.15, SD= 1.37).

Environmental self-identity

19

Personal importance of energy transition

Personal importance of energy transition is measured by three 7-point Likert scale items about energy conservation behaviour with answers ranging from ‘totally disagree’ to ‘totally agree’ (Sloot, Jans & Steg, 2018). However, the individual Cronbach Alpha of item 3 was rather low (α= 0.450 | α= 0.457) and the overall Cronbach Alpha if item 3 deleted was considerably higher (α = 0.851). It is therefore that statement 3 is excluded for analysis. Responses for all items except item 3 were averaged into one unidimensional scale of which the internal consistency was αafter deletion of item 3= 0.851 (M= 5.88, SD= 0.86, αbefore deletion of item 3= 0.785).

Attention check

Whether participants were paying attention to the experiment or not is measured by a 7-point Likert scale item stating that participants have to select the answer ‘a lot’.

3.4. Analysis plan

Data from the experiment is analysed using statistical methods and tests in SPSS. Descriptive statistics are used to get a general idea about the sample and respondents. Before conducting the main analyses to test our hypotheses, the internal consistency of our confounding

variables and the motivational statements are measured by calculating the Cronbach’s Alpha. By doing so, I tested whether or not the statements actually measure the same concept. Then, an ANOVA is executed twice on the manipulation checks to check whether both manipulated motivation messages are effective.

An analysis of variance (ANOVA) supported by a moderation analysis is used to identify which of the two motivation messages is more effective in increasing consumers’ willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project. To test hypothesis 2, a dummy variable identifying collaborative versus competitive frames is constructed. After this, a moderation analysis is conducted by using the PROCESS macro of Andrew F. Hayes. All values in the moderation analysis are mean centered in order to reduce multicollinearity and large standard errors in the direct effect of each variable. By using mean centered values, not only the interaction effect but also the main effects can be interpreted. The output of the moderation analysis together with a bar chart showing the mean willingness to sign up of each of the four conditions is examined to identify whether a congruent versus a non-congruent frame

20 collective energy reducing project. Additional findings are done by conducting several analyses of covariance (ANCOVA) and an analysis of variance (ANOVA).

4. Results

Before testing whether or not hypothesis 1 and 2 are true, reliability analyses were conducted on the various sets of statements. These analyses were conducted on the four willingness statements, the three statements about the personal importance of the energy transition and the three statements about environmental self-identity. This resulted in Cronbach Alphas of αwillingness to sign up for collective energy reducing project= 0.951, αpersonal importance of energy transition= 0.785 &

0.851 and αenvironmental self-identity= 0.920. These results indicate that all sets of statements are

internally consistent (α > 0.7) and can therefore be used for further analysis.

4.1. Manipulation check

Two manipulation checks were included in the experiment to check whether or not the manipulations were effective and to identify if further analysis based on these manipulations is justified. A one-way ANOVA with the type of motivation message as factor and the transcendent manipulation check as the dependent variable (Table. 1) shows us that the self-transcendent manipulation was effective (p= 0.012 < 0.05). Another one-way ANOVA for the self-interested manipulation check (Table. 1) indicates that this manipulation was also

effective (p= 0.047 < 0.05). Thus, further analysis based on these manipulations is justified.

Table 1. ANOVA of the self-transcendent and self-interested manipulation check by type of motivation message.

Source Sum of squares df F-value P-value

Self-transcendent manipulation check 9.56 1 6.32 0.012*

Self-interested manipulation check 6.73 1 3.96 0.047*

Note: **:p < 0.01. *:p < 0.05.

4.2.1. Main analyses: Hypothesis 1

21

of homogeneity of variances is met (p= 0.143). In line with hypothesis 1, the result of the one-way ANOVA is significant (F= 6.207, p=0.013 < 0.05). The willingness to sign up for the collective energy reducing project is significantly higher for respondents who are shown a self-transcendent motivation message (M= 5.29, SD= 1.33) than for respondents who are shown a self-interested motivation message (M= 5.00, SD= 1.39) (Fig. 3). Therefore, we can state that a self-transcendent motivation message in comparison to a self-interested motivation message has a positive effect on consumers’ willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project.

Table 2. ANOVA of the type of motivation message on the willingness to sign up for the collective energy reducing project.

Source Sum of squares df F-value P-value

Type of motivation message 11.51 1 6.21 0.013*

Note: **:p < 0.01. *:p < 0.05.

Figure 3. Mean willingness to sign up for the collective energy reducing project of each manipulated group.

4.2.2. Main analyses: Hypothesis 2

22 (congruent vs. non-congruent), but at the individual effect each frame (collaborative vs. competitive) has on the relationship between the different types of motivation messages and the willingness to sign up. A frame is considered either congruent or non-congruent based on the criteria in figure 4. The moderation analysis itself uses collaborative and competitive framing as moderator.

collaborative frame

competitive frame

self-transcendent

motivation message

congruent frame

non-congruent frame

self-interested motivation

message

non-congruent frame

congruent frame

Figure 4. Criteria used to identify a frame as being either congruent or non-congruent.

A moderation analysis (appendix D) is conducted by using the PROCESS macro of Andrew F. Hayes (2020). Willingness to sign up is used as the dependent variable, type of motivation message as the independent variable and (collaborative vs. competitive) framing as

moderator. Results (Table. 3) support the main finding of the previous one-way ANOVA that the type of motivation message has a significant effect on the willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project (motivation message: t(571)= 2.4842, p= 0.0133 < 0.05). Next to that, (collaborative vs. competitive) framing has a significant negative main effect on the willingness to sign up (type of frame: t(571)= -2.7672, p= 0.0058 < 0.05). Most

23

Table 3A. Moderation analysis of motivation message, frame (collaborative vs. competitive)and interaction on the willingness to sign up.

Source Coefficient SE t P-value

Constant 5.145 0.056 91.253 0.000**

Motivation message 0.280 0.113 2.484 0.013*

Frametype -0.312 0.113 -2.767 0.006**

Interaction -0.575 0.225 -2.550 0.011*

Note: R= 0.187, R Squared = 0.035. **:p < 0.01. *:p < 0.05.

Table 3B. Conditional effects of the moderation analysis.

Frametype Effect SE t P-value

Collaborative 0.566 0.159 3.559 0.000**

Competitive -0.009 0.160 -0.056 0.955

Note: **:p < 0.01. *:p < 0.05.

The negative direct effect of (collaborative vs. competitive) framing and the interaction can be explained by looking at the conditional effects table and the mean willingness to sign up of each of the four conditions (Fig. 5). The conditional effects table shows that using a

collaborative frame significantly and positively moderates the relationship between the motivation message and the willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project by 0.5662 based on a scale from 1-7 (collaborative framing: t(571)= 3.5595, p= 0.0004 < 0.05). Figure 5 subsequently shows that this effect is mainly visible when being shown a self-transcendent motivation message. Thus, using a congruent (collaborative) frame when being shown a self-transcendent motivation message has a significant positive effect on the

24

Figure 5. Bar chart showing the mean willingness to sign up of each of the four conditions.

In contrast to collaborative framing, the conditional effects table shows that competitive framing does not have a significant effect on the relationship between the motivation message and the willingness to sign up (competitive framing: t(571)= -0.0561, p= 0.9553 > 0.05). Figure 5 additionally reveals that the mean willingness to sign up with a self-interested motivation message is even higher when using a non-congruent, collaborative frame then when using a congruent, competitive frame. Thus, using a congruent (competitive) frame when being shown a self-interested motivation message does not have a significant effect on the willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project.

25

Test Hypothesis Supported

one-way ANOVA

H1: A self-transcendent motivation message

in comparison to a self-interested motivation message has a positive effect on consumers’ willingness to sign up for a collective energy

reducing project.

✓

Moderation analysis

H2: A congruent versus a non-congruent

frame positively moderates the effect of the motivation message on consumers’ willingness to sign up for a collective energy

reducing project.

✘/✓

Table 4. Summary of results.

4.3. Additional analyses

To check if variables other than motivation messages and framing have a confounding effect, I ran an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) which included the willingness to sign up as dependent variable, the type of motivation message and the type of frame (collaborative vs. competitive) as factors and the type of citizenship, the composite score for the personal importance of the energy transition and the composite score of environmental self-identity as covariates. By analysing the type of ‘citizenship’ (living in an urban versus a rural area), I aim to identify whether it is more interesting for sustainable marketers to target urban versus rural customers and if they should segment their target groups based on this. The analysis of covariance revealed that environmental self-identity does not significantly influence the willingness to sign up (F= 1.934, p= 0.165 > 0.05).

Subsequently running the analysis of covariance again (Table. 5) without environmental self-identity revealed that urban/rural citizenship (F= 10.529, p= 0.001 < 0.05) and personal

26

Table 5. ANCOVA of citizenship, personal importance energy transition, type of motivation message and type of frame (collaborative vs. competitive) on the willingness to sign up.

Source

Type III sum of

squares df Mean square F-value P-value

Citizenship 15.66 1 15.66 10.53 0.001**

Pers. imp. energy transition 135.19 1 135.19 90.90 0.000**

Motivation message 2.45 1 2.45 1.64 0.200

Frame 21.20 1 21.20 14.26 0.000**

Motivation message * Frame 4.50 1 4.50 3.03 0.082

Error 739.16 497 1.49

Note: R Squared = 0.198, Adjusted R Squared = 0.190. **:p < 0.01. *:p < 0.05.

Figure 6. Chart showing the difference in mean willingness to sign up between urban and rural citizens.

In contrast to urban citizens, further analysis of variance revealed that hypothesis 1 still holds when targeting rural citizens (p= 0.041 < 0.05). However, for collective energy reducing projects at a company level, one usually targets both rural and urban citizens. Therefore, when one aims to promote a collective energy reducing project in a single campaign, one can still expect a substantial difference in the willingness to sign up between using a self-transcendent versus a self-interested motivation message. Thus, the significant effect of living in an urban versus a rural area can be ignored in such a case.

27 caused by the fact that the underlying statements appeal to both transcendent and self-interested motivations. Furthermore, analysis shows that there is an almost linear positive relationship between respondents’ personal importance of energy transition and their willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project (Fig. 7).

Table 6. ANCOVA of personal importance energy transition, type of motivation message and type of frame (collaborative vs. competitive)on the willingness to sign up.

Source

Type III sum of

squares df Mean square F-value P-value

Pers. imp. energy transition 163.45 1 163.45 106.86 0.000**

Motivation message 6.08 1 6.08 3.97 0.047*

Frame 21.63 1 21.63 14.14 0.000**

Motivation message * Frame 5.92 1 5.92 3.87 0.050*

Error 865.74 566 1.53

Note: R Squared = 0.188, Adjusted R Squared = 0.182. **:p < 0.01. *:p < 0.05.

28

5. Discussion

5.1. Main findings

The purpose of this study was to identify whether self-transcendent versus self-interested motivation messages have a positive effect on consumers’ willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project and if this relationship is positively moderated by framing the project as being a congruent versus a non-congruent task. Additionally, I analysed whether any covariates explained part of the potential significance of the independent variables.

Several conclusions can be drawn based on the conducted experiment.

Previous research primarily hinted at the more positive effect of transcendent versus self-interested motivation messages on consumers’ willingness to partake in sustainable behaviour (e.g. de Groot, 2008; Jackson, 2005). This study has shown that, in line with my expectations and existing research, showing consumers a self-transcendent versus a self-interested

motivation message has a positive effect on consumers’ willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project. However, it is important to note that in this experiment the positive effect of using a self-transcendent versus a self-interested motivation message totally

diminished when not being accompanied by a congruent, collaborative frame. A possible explanation might be that using this specific non-congruent, competitive frame when being shown a self-transcendent motivation message (the comparison condition) lowers the

willingness so much that it roughly equals that of respondents who are shown a self-interested motivation message. Thus, the effect of the self-transcendent motivation message then seems to disappear when not being joined by a congruent, collaborative frame. Another explanation could be that a self-transcendent motivation message is only effective when the task or accompanying message is congruently framed. This is, however, in contrast to other research, showing that even when the motivation message is not accompanied by a congruent frame or set of attributes, the effect of the motivation message should still be significant (Schuitema & de Groot, 2015). Further research on this topic is needed, as it might be that not every version (e.g. collaborative or competitive) of a (non-)congruent frame has the same moderating influence on the effect of a self-transcendent motivation message.

29

Steg, 2007). In contrast to my expectations and the goal-framing theory, this study has shown that using a congruent versus a non-congruent frame does not always significantly moderate the relationship between the type of motivation message and the willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project. The hypothesized positive moderation effect of using a congruent frame is only significant when being accompanied by a self-transcendent

motivation message. This could be caused by respondents’ personal preferences (for specific project types), which is not accounted for in this experiment. Furthermore, I found that using a collaborative frame on itself has a significant positive effect on the relationship between the motivation message and the willingness to sign up, but primarily when being shown a self-transcendent instead of a self-interested motivation message. Next to that, using a competitive frame does not have a significant effect on the relationship between the motivation message and the willingness to sign up.

Additional analysis revealed that respondents’ level of personal importance of the energy transition has a significant effect on their willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project and should therefore be taken into account when one aims to stimulate sustainable behaviour.

Next to that, I found that targeting urban versus rural customers has a significant effect on their willingness to sign up, as the significant effect of the type of motivation message

disappears when citizen type is included. This is in contrast to other research stating that there are no differences between urban and rural consumers regarding their general sustainable consumption levels and personal drivers to consume sustainably (Marzouk, 2019). One could then think of several reasons why living in an urban versus a rural area increases the

willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project, which is a relatively specific sustainable behaviour. Amongst others, urban citizens often have fewer possibilities to decrease their energy usage by obvious, well-known actions, given that their homes are often rented instead of bought. As a result, they cannot improve their isolation, replace heating installations or install solar panels, which are all obvious actions that are frequently

30 motivation message shown to them. However, for collective energy reducing projects at a company level one usually targets both rural and urban citizens. Therefore, the significant effect of living in an urban versus a rural area can be ignored in such a case.

5.2. Theoretical implications

This study has several theoretical implications. First of all, previous research has shown two distinct scientific movements in research on the relationship between self-transcendent and self-interested motivations on consumers’ sustainable (consumption) behaviour (Schuitema & de Groot, 2015; Stern et al., 1995). The results of this thesis provide additional evidence and support for the movement claiming that stimulating (and thus showing) a self-transcendent motivation (message) has a more positive effect than a self-interested motivation (message) on individuals’ willingness to participate in sustainable behaviour.

Second, research on the effect of motivation messages on consumers’ intention to behave sustainable moderated by framing is, to my knowledge, non-existent. This is an important deficiency, as the importance of framing is already widely acknowledged, yet scarcely

researched in the world of sustainable marketing (Jackson, 2005). Thus, by demonstrating the positive effect of self-transcendent motivation messages combined with a congruent,

collaborative frame on consumers’ willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project, this study crucially adds to the current scarce literature on the effect of framing on sustainable behaviour.

Third, by analysing the effect of certain motivation messages and frames, this thesis provides additional information and tools to supplement the insufficient knowledge on promoting sustainable behaviour (Chekima et al., 2016). Next to that, it provides scholars with future directions to look into when studying how to persuade consumers to participate in collective energy reducing projects.

Last but not least, this thesis adds to the scarce amount of empirical studies on the goal-framing theory (Lindenberg & Foss, 2011). More importantly, it surprisingly provides

evidence against the full validity of the goal-framing theory. Whereas the goal-framing theory indirectly states that motivation messages and frames should be matched to stimulate

31 empirical evidence that this theorized effect is only significant when combining a

self-transcendent motivation message with a congruent, collaborative frame. Therefore, it provides important empirical evidence supporting, as well as counter-evidence rejecting, the goal-framing theory. I hope that this contrasting evidence stimulates scholars to study this topic even further.

5.3. Practical implications

In addition to its theoretical contributions, this thesis has several relevant practical

implications as well. The proven positive effect of self-transcendent motivation messages on consumers’ willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project provides marketers with a deeper understanding of motivation messages and motivational drivers increasing consumers’ green consumption behaviour. Sustainable companies willing to benefit from this knowledge should create marketing strategies and communications in such a manner that they elicit a self-transcendent motivation in the minds of consumers. Subsequently, these

marketing communications should be accompanied by a congruent, collaborative frame to be most effective. This could be a collaboratively framed message, but also a collaboratively framed offering. As many firms currently fail to position their sustainable products and brands in the minds of target consumers (Kanchanapibul et al., 2014), framing their offering as being a collaborative solution (e.g. if everyone in your household buys this biodegradable product, the emissions of your household will decrease by 30%) may help these companies to correctly position their product or service in the minds of consumers. However, it might be debatable whether it is ethical for a company to claim that its offering is a collaborative solution, while in reality, it is not.

32

using a self-transcendent motivation message accompanied by a collaborative frame. Last but not least, although urban consumers’ willingness to sign up was slightly higher when being shown a self-transcendent versus a self-interested motivation message, it was not significant and it might be that another combination of motivation messages and frames might be more effective in persuading urban citizens to participate in green consumption behaviour.

5.4. Limitations

Although the results of this thesis fully support one of the two hypotheses, which is that a self-transcendent versus a self-interested motivation message has a positive effect on consumers’ willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project, only partially significant congruent framing effects were found. The lack of full statistical significance for hypothesis two cannot be attributed to the sample size, neither can it be attributed to the demographic composition of the respondents in each condition, as they are rather similar. It might be that different results will be found when using other types of (non-) congruent frames or differently formulated frames.

Another limitation might be that, even though all experimental manipulations in this

experiment originate from valid, previous studies, there are presumably more ways in which the manipulations could have been formed and written. This study only uses one example for each manipulation and frame and does therefore not account for the differential effects of using other methods or structures. In addition, the absence in my sample of a control group in relation to both types of motivation messages and frames may be a limitation. It could be, for example, that using a self-interested motivation message does have a positive effect on consumers’ willingness to sign up when comparing it to consumers who are not shown a motivation message at all.

Regarding the measures in this experiment, there are three potential limitations. First, the experiment measures individuals’ intention to sign up for a collective energy reducing project. It does not measure actual behaviour and therefore the results could differ when replicating this study in a field experiment. Thus, it does not overcome the intention-behaviour gap (Nguyen et al., 2019). Second, I did not pre-measure respondents’ personal preference for specific project styles. I, for example, always prefer a competitive project above a

33 be an important covariate which is not accounted for in this study. Last but not least, the willingness to sign up of urban and rural respondents is significantly different, but not

properly accounted for in the experiment. An important question could have been whether the respondents own or rent their home and what they have already done to reduce their energy consumption. This could then also explain why there is such a difference between the willingness to sign up of urban and rural consumers.

5.5. Suggestions for further research

I primarily focused on the effects of motivation messages and framing on respondents’ willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project. It would be interesting and promising for further research to examine whether the same motivation message and framing effects are visible for other types of sustainable (consumption) behaviour and when measuring actual behaviour instead of intentions. It is also highly suggested that future scholars try to identify if (non-)congruent frames other than the ones used in this study have a significant effect on consumers’ green consumption behaviour. By following these research suggestions, scholars should be able to identify whether or not the goal-framing theory holds for other types of motivation messages, frames and sustainable behaviour.

Another topic highly suggested to be investigated is research into the underlying mechanisms that make that the positive effect of a self-transcendent (versus a self-interested) motivation message is so highly dependent on the match with a congruent, collaborative frame. These mechanisms could potentially explain why only stimulating consumer motivations through a motivation message might not be sufficient to persuade consumers into partaking in

sustainable consumption behaviour. Subsequently, it may help future scholars and marketers to create even more effective psychological methods for stimulating sustainable behaviour.

Last but not least, I would like to suggest three things to scholars replicating this study in the future: Add a covariate to pre-measure respondents’ personal preference for specific project styles; add a control group in relation to all manipulations and frames; and include a covariate measuring whether or not respondents own or rent their home.

34

Reference list

Amatulli, C., De Angelis, M., Peluso, A. M., Soscia, I. and Guido, G. 2019. The effect of negative message framing on green consumption: An investigation of the role of shame. Journal of Business Ethics, 157: 1111-1132.

Bedrijfkracht. 2019. Animatievideo - wat is Bedrijfkracht? | Bedrijfkracht. Accessed 4th of March, 2020. Retrieved from: https://bedrijfkracht.nl/animatievideo-wat-is-bedrijfkracht/

Brondi, R., Avveduto, G., Alem, L., Faita, C., Tecchia, F., Pisan, Y. and Bergamasco, M. 2015. Evaluating the effects of competition vs collaboration on user engagement in an immersive game using natural interaction. The 21st ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology. Beijing: VRST.

Chang, H., Zhang, L. and Xie, G. 2015. Message framing in green advertising: the effect of construal level and consumer environmental concern. International Journal of Advertising, 34(1): 158-176.

Chekima, B., Wafa, S. A. W. S. K., Igau, O. A., Chekima, S. and Stephen, L. S. Jr. 2016. Examining green consumerism motivational drivers: Does premium price and demographics matter to green purchasing? Journal of Cleaner Production, 112: 3436-3450.

Darby, S. 2006. The effectiveness of feedback on energy consumption: A review for defra of the literature on metering, billing and direct displays. Oxford: University of Oxford.

De Dominicis, S., Schultz, P. W. and Bonaiuto, M. 2017. Protecting the environment for self-interested reasons: Altruism is not the only pathway to sustainability. Frontiers in

Psychology, 8(1065): 1-13.

35 Etienne, J. 2010. The impact of regulatory policy on individual behaviour: a goal framing theory approach. In LSE Research Online Documents on Economics (36541). London: London School of Economics and Political Science.

Evans, L., Maio, G. R., Corner, A., Hodgetts, C. J., Ahmed, S. and Hahn, U. 2012. Self-interest and pro-environmental behaviour. Nature Climate Change: 1-4.

Graauw, S. 2016. Hoe de internationale overheden de aarde verpesten door er alleen maar over te praten. Accessed 18th of February, 2020. Retrieved from: http://ballinnn.com/hoe-de-internationale-overheden-de-aarde-verpesten-door-er-alleen-maar-over-te-praten/

Griskevicius, V., van den Bergh, B. and Tybur, J. M. 2010. Going green to be seen: Status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(3): 392-404.

Groot, de, J. M. 2008. Mean or green? Value orientations, morality and prosocial behaviour. Unpublished dissertation, University of Groningen.

Hayes, A. F. 2020. The PROCESS macro for SPSS, SAS, and R - PROCESS macro for SPSS and SAS. Accessed 2nd of April, 2020. Retrieved from: http://processmacro.org/index.html

Hayes, S. C. and Cone, J. D. 1977. Reducing residential electrical energy use: Payments, information, and feedback. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 103(3): 425-435.

Jackson, T. 2005. Motivating sustainable consumption: A review of evidence on consumer behaviour and behavioural change. Sustainable Development Research Network, 1-170.

Kanchanapibul, M., Lacka, E., Wang, X. and Chan, H. K. 2014. An empirical investigation of green purchase behaviour among the young generation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 66: 528-536.

36 Lindenberg, S. and Steg, L. 2007. Normative, gain and hedonic goal frames guiding environmental behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 63(1): 117-137.

Lindenberg, S. and Steg, L. 2013. Goal-framing theory and norm-guided environmental behavior. In H. van Trijp (ed.), Encouraging Sustainable Behavior: 37-54. New York: Psychology Press.

Maheswaran, D. and Meyers-Levy, J. 1990. The influence of message framing and issue involvement. Journal of Marketing Research, 27(3): 361-367.

Marzouk, O. A. 2019. A qualitative examination of urban vs rural sustainable consumption behaviours of energy and water consumers in the emerging Egyptian market. Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences, 1(2): 98-114.

Moisander, J. 2007. Motivational complexity of green consumerism. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31: 404-409.

Nagtegaal, B. and Geels, M. 2019. Bouwers en boeren protesteren met versnipperde blokkades – NRC. Accessed 18th of February, 2020. Retrieved from:

https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2019/12/18/protest-van-bouwers-en-boeren-leidt-door-het-hele-land-tot-files-a3984215/

Nguyen, H. V., Nguyen, C. H. and Hoang, T. T. B. 2019. Green consumption: Closing the intention‐behavior gap. Sustainable Development, 27: 118-129.

Rahman, I. and Reynolds, D. 2019. The influence of values and attitudes on green consumer behavior: A conceptual model of green hotel patronage. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 20(1): 47-74.

Roccas, S., Schwartz, S. H. and Amit, A. 2010. Personal value priorities and national identification. Political Psychology, 31(3): 393-419.

4217-37 4226.

Southwell, B., Ronneberg, K., Shen, K., Jorgens, E., Hazel, J., Alemu, R., Ross, J., Richman, L. and Vermeer, D. 2014. Energy information engagement among the poor: Predicting participation in a free workshop. Energy Research & Social Science, 4: 21-22.

Schuitema, G. and de Groot, J. M. 2015. Green consumerism: The influence of product attributes and values on purchasing intentions. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 14: 57-69.

Schwartz, S. H. 1977. Normative influences on altruism. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 10: 222-279.

Segev, S., Fernandes, J. and Wang, W. 2015. The effects of gain versus loss message framing and point of reference on consumer responses to green advertising. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 36(1): 35-51.

Sevillano, V., Aragonés, J. I. and Schultz, P. W. 2007. Perspective taking, environmental concern, and the moderating role of dispositional empathy. Environment and Behavior, 39: 685-705.

Siu, K., Zook, A. and Riedl, M. O. 2014. Collaboration versus competition: Design and evaluation of mechanics for games with a purpose. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games. Lauderdale: FDG’14.

Sloot, D., Jans, L. and Steg, L. 2018. Can community energy initiatives motivate sustainable energy behaviours? The role of initiative involvement and personal pro-environmental motivation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 57: 99-106.

Stern, P., Dietz, T., Kalof, L. and Guagnano, G. 1995. Values, beliefs and proenvironmental action: attitude formation towards emergent attitude objects. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25: 1611-1636.

38 Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. 1974. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science, 185: 1124-31.

Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. 1981. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481): 453-458.

Van der Werff, E., Steg, L. and Keizer, K. 2013. The value of environmental self-identity: The relationship between biospheric values, environmental self-identity and environmental preferences, intentions and behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34: 55-63.

Wilson, C. and Dowlatabadi, H. 2007. Models of decision making and residential energy use. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 32: 169-203.

Winett, R. A., Neale, M. S. and Grier, H. C. 1979. Effects of self-monitoring and feedback on residential electricity consumption. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 12(2): 173-184.

Yun, R., Aziz, A., Lasternas, B., Loftness, V., Scupelli, P. and Zhang, C. 2017. The persistent effectiveness of online feedback and controls for sustainability in the workplace. Energy Efficiency, 10: 1143-1153.

39

Appendix A

Objective text about collective energy reducing project

Gelieve je nog steeds het scenario voor te stellen waarbij jij als huurder gebruik kunt maken van het initiatief van de eerder genoemde woningcorporatie.

Energie verminderingsproject

Jouw werkgever heeft zich toevallig op hetzelfde moment aangesloten bij een energie verminderingsproject en jij als medewerker mag zelf bepalen of je hier aan mee wilt doen.

Tijdens dit energieproject ga je samen met je collega's aan de slag om je energieverbruik thuis en op de werkvloer te verminderen met behulp van acties als Speur de

Energieslurper en Check je Warmtelek. Je krijgt onder andere een energiestekker om het

verbruik van je individuele apparaten op te meten en een warmtecamera om te bekijken waar je huis het meeste warmte verliest. Daarnaast vinden er enkele bijeenkomsten plaats om besparingsmaatregelen te bespreken en je energieverbruik te vergelijken met je collega's.

Op deze manier leer je precies welke apparaten in jouw huis het meeste energie verbruiken en aan vervanging toe zijn en welke maatregelen je kunt nemen om je

40

Appendix B

Self-transcendent motivation message

Voor dit deel van het onderzoek willen we je vragen om onderstaande tekst goed en aandachtig door te lezen. Nadat je de tekst helemaal hebt gelezen mag je door naar de volgende pagina.

Energie verminderen

Stel je voor dat je je woning huurt van een grote woningcorporatie. Je betaalt maandelijks je kosten voor de huur en je energieverbruik aan deze woningcorporatie. Na een jaar heeft de woningcorporatie besloten om een programma op te zetten om er voor te zorgen dat haar huurders hun energieverbruik met 25% gaan verminderen.

Om dit doel te bereiken heeft de woningcorporatie besloten om maandelijks het bespaarde equivalent aan uitstoot (CO₂) door te geven aan de huurder, zodat deze precies weet wat zijn of haar impact is op het milieu. Wanneer je 25% minder energie verbruikt in een maand

ten opzichte van jouw verbruik in diezelfde maand een jaar eerder, stop je met het produceren van een hoeveelheid CO₂ onttrokken uit de atmosfeer gelijk aan 92m2 bos. Jaarlijks bespaar je dus zelfs 1104m2 bos en 114 liter benzine!

41

Self-interested motivation message

Voor dit deel van het onderzoek willen we je vragen om onderstaande tekst goed en aandachtig door te lezen. Nadat je de tekst helemaal hebt gelezen mag je door naar de volgende pagina.

Energie verminderen

Stel je voor dat je je woning huurt van een grote woningcorporatie. Je betaalt maandelijks je kosten voor de huur en je energieverbruik aan deze woningcorporatie. Na een jaar heeft de woningcorporatie besloten om een programma op te zetten om er voor te zorgen dat haar huurders hun energieverbruik met 25% gaan verminderen.

Om dit te stimuleren heeft de woningcorporatie besloten om de besparing van haar huurders te verdubbelen. In andere woorden, elke maand dat je 25% bespaart op je

energieverbruik krijg je een korting van 50% op je energierekening. Als je in mei 2019

dus bijvoorbeeld €40 aan energie hebt verbruikt en je verbruikt in mei 2020 voor €30 aan energie (een besparing van €10 á 25%), krijg je nog eens 25% (in dit geval €10) extra korting op je energierekening van die maand. Je hoeft die maand dan dus maar €20 te betalen. Deze

42

Appendix C

Competitively framed poster

43

Appendix D

1 |

1 |

Faculty of Economics and Business

Fight or unite?

The effect of motivation messages and framing on consumers’

willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project

Laurens Wals S2865610

2 |

2 |

Faculty of Economics and Business

- Introduction

- Theoretical framework

3 |

3 |

Faculty of Economics and Business

- Sustainable consumption and energy conservation important to hinder environmental

deterioration.

- Firms fail to position their sustainable products and services in consumers’ minds

(Kanchanapibul et al., 2014).

- Motivation (messages) are the reason why a given behaviour occurs (Moisander,

2007).

- Framing scarcely researched in sustainable marketing.

Aim of thesis: Identifying whether the use of self-transcendent vs. self-interested motivation messages influences people’s willingness to sign up for a collective energy reducing project, thus participating in

sustainable consumption behaviour, and if this effect is moderated by using a congruent vs. a non-congruent task frame.