RESUMEN

The relationship between self-control and happiness is often considered antithetical because self-control would require effortful discipline precluding the experience of pleasure. However, recent research reveals a robust (but moderate) association with all parameters that are seen as relevant in happiness research: satisfaction with life, positive affect, and the experience of meaning in life. Factors moderating this relationship suggest a significant role for strategies that are employed during the early stages of a self-control conflict and, to a lesser extent, making (some) progress towards one's goals. Together, this calls for a different understanding of self-control with more emphasis on adaptive routines and strategically avoiding conflicts which, in turn, leaves more room for attending to what one finds important in life.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Which kind of self-regulatory strategies contribute to life satisfaction in adolescence? MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the present research, we tested two competing hypotheses arguing that either a strategy of vigilant monitoring of opportunities for working towards goal achievement or a calm perseverance strategy steadily working towards goals in a slower pace would promote life satisfaction in a large and diverse sample of adolescents. We also tested whether the employment of these strategies would hinge on perceptions of goal importance and goal attainability. RESULTS: Employing a longitudinal design, we found support that calm perseverance was the sole significant predictor of life satisfaction regardless of goal perceptions. Vigilant monitoring only contributed indirectly to life satisfaction through its positive effects on calm perseverance. Using a calm perseverance strategy was supported by perceiving one's goals as attainable. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: These findings bear important implications for self-regulation theory that has highlighted goal progress as a prerequisite for well-being.

RESUMEN

Food choice behavior plays a large role in achieving sustainability goals. Meat in particular has a negative environmental impact as compared with plant-based food - and is more frequently chosen in restaurant contexts. To increase plant-based meal choices in restaurants, we tested three nudges for menus that are likely to be implemented by restaurant owners: a hedonic label (e.g., artisanal vegetable burger), a chef's recommendation (specifying the vegetarian option as the chef's favorite), and a salience nudge (a box around the vegetarian option). In an online experiment, we showed participants (n = 513) in four conditions (no nudge, hedonic label, chef's recommendation, and salience nudge) five menus with four meal options each, one of which was vegetarian. We asked participants to choose a meal and subsequently to rate these meals on how tasty and indulgent they were (taste and indulgence attributions). We then revealed which nudge was used to the participants and asked how participants received it. Results show that the hedonic label and chef's recommendation nudge (but not the salience nudge) both increase vegetarian meal choices. The hedonic label increased participants' attributions of indulgence of the meal, but not of tastiness. This finding fits with restaurants' gastronomic, pleasure-seeking context and shapes future directions of labeling interventions, namely that indulgence attributions can be increased in vegetarian foods. Furthermore, the nudges were generally well accepted and participants' intention to return to the (virtual) restaurant was high. Finally, customers expected the hedonic label nudge to be more effective in promoting vegetarian food choices than the other two nudges, partially corresponding with our findings of actual effectiveness.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Context-specific interventions may contribute to sustained behaviour change and improved health outcomes. We evaluated the real-world effects of supermarket nudging and pricing strategies and mobile physical activity coaching on diet quality, food-purchasing behaviour, walking behaviour, and cardiometabolic risk markers. METHODS: This parallel cluster-randomised controlled trial included supermarkets in socially disadvantaged neighbourhoods across the Netherlands with regular shoppers aged 30-80 years. Supermarkets were randomised to receive co-created nudging and pricing strategies promoting healthier purchasing (N = 6) or not (N = 6). Nudges targeted 9% of supermarket products and pricing strategies 3%. Subsequently, participants were individually randomised to a control (step counter app) or intervention arm (step counter and mobile coaching app) to promote walking. The primary outcome was the average change in diet quality (low (0) to high (150)) over all follow-up time points measured with a validated 40-item food frequency questionnaire at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months. Secondary outcomes included healthier food purchasing (loyalty card-derived), daily step count (step counter app), cardiometabolic risk markers (lipid profile and HbA1c via finger prick, and waist circumference via measuring tape), and supermarket customer satisfaction (questionnaire-based: very unsatisfied (1) to very satisfied (7)), evaluated using linear mixed-models. Healthy supermarket sales (an exploratory outcome) were analysed via controlled interrupted time series analyses. RESULTS: Of 361 participants (162 intervention, 199 control), 73% were female, the average age was 58 (SD 11) years, and 42% were highly educated. Compared to the control arm, the intervention arm showed no statistically significant average changes over time in diet quality (ߠ- 1.1 (95% CI - 3.8 to 1.7)), percentage healthy purchasing (ß 0.7 ( - 2.7 to 4.0)), step count (ߠ- 124.0 (- 723.1 to 475.1), or any of the cardiometabolic risk markers. Participants in the intervention arm scored 0.3 points (0.1 to 0.5) higher on customer satisfaction on average over time. Supermarket-level sales were unaffected (ß - 0.0 (- 0.0 to 0.0)). CONCLUSIONS: Co-created nudging and pricing strategies that predominantly targeted healthy products via nudges were unable to increase healthier food purchases and intake nor improve cardiometabolic health. The mobile coaching intervention did not affect step count. Governmental policy measures are needed to ensure more impactful supermarket modifications that promote healthier purchases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register ID NL7064, 30 May 2018, https://www.onderzoekmetmensen.nl/en/trial/20990.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introduction: Nudging is a promising intervention technique that supports people in pursuing their healthy eating goals. Recent research suggests that, despite previous assumptions, disclosure of the presence of a nudge does not compromise nudge effectiveness. However, it is unknown whether attention to a nudge affects nudge effects. We assessed the role of attention systematically, by examining explicit and implicit attention to nudges, while also exploring healthy eating goals as a potential moderator. Methods: Participants were assigned to a nudge (i.e., a shopping basket inlay with pictures of healthy items) or control condition (i.e., a shopping basket inlay with neutral pictures) and chose a snack in an experimental supermarket field study. Explicit and implicit attention (with a mobile eye-tracker) to nudges, healthiness of snack choice, and healthy eating goals were assessed. Results: Results showed that attention to the nudge did not hamper the nudge's effect. Furthermore, individuals with strong healthy eating goals made healthier food choices in the nudge condition. Individuals with weak to non-existent healthy eating goals were not influenced by the nudge. Discussion: Findings are in line with the viewpoint that nudging does not by definition work 'in the dark', and suggests that nudges support people in adhering to their healthy eating goal.

RESUMEN

In spite of the growing availability of COVID-19 vaccines, a substantial number of people is reluctant or uncertain about getting the vaccine. Nudges may improve vaccine uptake but it is unclear how this plays out with the experience of autonomous choice, decision competence, decision satisfaction, and being pressured to make a choice. In an online experiment among a representative sample (N = 884), we examined whether a social norm nudge or a default nudge (either or not transparent) was effective in steering the desired choice of making a hypothetical early vaccination appointment as compared to making a later appointment or no appointment. We also examined how both nudges affected autonomy and related downstream consequences. None of the nudges proved effective in making the desired choice of early vaccination and neither did they impact on downstream consequences. Rather, our results indicate that participants who were certain about their choice (i.e., opted for the earliest available vaccination opportunity or not getting vaccinated at all) reported higher levels of autonomy, competence and satisfaction than participants who did not know yet about vaccination or who postponed the moment of getting their vaccination. We conclude that the experience of autonomy and related downstream consequences is determined by having made up one's mind about vaccination, and is not affected by attempts to nudge the individual.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The protein transition is one of today's major societal challenges to mitigate climate change. To support lasting consumer engagement, it has been suggested to look into consumers' understanding of the protein transition to identify barriers that go beyond the practical issues of changing one's diet. The current study explored consumers' mental models of how the transition unfolds to examine which factors consumers perceive as important drivers of the transition. With a fixed set of factors and actors identified with a questionnaire, Dutch consumers (N = 214) mapped their mental models. The content and structure of the mental models were analyzed with a focus on how consumers perceive their own role. Animal well-being and environmental concerns were most often included as important drivers. The findings showed a lack of consensus about which actor(s) drive the transition (i.e., none of the actors were included by a majority of the participants). This diffusion of responsibility may be a barrier for consumers to act. Moreover, the relative simplicity of the observed mental models suggests that consumers do not yet employ systems thinking. A systems thinking mindset may help consumers understand how the system behind the transition works and how their individual contributions matter. Two avenues to encourage consumer engagement were identified: 1) emphasizing the responsibility of different actors and what consumers can contribute, and 2) encouraging a systems thinking mindset.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: COVID-19 mitigation measures intend to protect public health, but their adverse psychological, social, and economic effects weaken public support. Less favorable trade-offs may especially weaken support for more restrictive measures. Support for mitigation measures may also differ between population subgroups who experience different benefits and costs, and decrease over time, a phenomenon termed "pandemic fatigue." Methods: We examined self-reported support for COVID-19 mitigation measures in the Netherlands over 12 consecutives waves of data collection between April 2020 and May 2021 in an open population cohort study. Participants were recruited through community panels of the 25 regional public health services, and through links to the online surveys advertised on social media. The 54,010 unique participants in the cohort study on average participated in 4 waves of data collection. Most participants were female (65%), middle-aged [57% (40-69 years)], highly educated (57%), not living alone (84%), residing in an urban area (60%), and born in the Netherlands (95%). Results: COVID-19 mitigation measures implemented in the Netherlands remained generally well-supported over time [all scores >3 on 5-point scale ranging 1 (low)-5 (high)]. During the whole period studied, support was highest for personal hygiene measures, quarantine and wearing face masks, high but somewhat lower for not shaking hands, testing and self-isolation, and restricting social contacts, and lowest for limiting visitors at home, and not traveling abroad. Women and higher educated people were more supportive of some mitigation measures than men and lower educated people. Older people were more supportive of more restrictive measures than younger people, and support for more socially restrictive measures decreased most over time in higher educated people or in younger people. Conclusions: This study found no support for pandemic fatigue in terms of a gradual decline in support for all mitigation measures in the first year of the pandemic. Rather, findings suggest that support for mitigation measures reflects a balancing of benefits and cost, which may change over time, and differ between measures and population subgroups.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The supermarket is a promising location for stimulating healthier food choices by nudging interventions. However, nudging healthy food choices in the supermarket has shown weak effects to date. The present research introduces a new nudge based on the concept of affordances - i.e., an animated character - that invites interaction with healthy food products and examines its effectiveness and appreciation in a supermarket context. We present findings of a series of three studies. In Study 1, evaluations of the new nudge were collected, revealing that the nudge was appreciated. In Studies 2 and 3, field experiments were conducted to test the nudge's effect on vegetable purchases in a real-life supermarket. Study 3 demonstrated that vegetable purchases increased significantly (up to 17%) when the affordance nudge was placed on the vegetable shelves. Furthermore, customers appreciated the nudge and its potential for implementation. Taken together, this set of studies presents compelling findings illustrating the potential of the affordance nudge for increasing healthy choices in the supermarket.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

People are increasingly eating out in restaurants, where meals tend to be higher in calories, less nutritious, and contain more meat. In this paper, we argue that differences in the motivational processes underlying people's food choices could help to explain why food choices made in restaurants are typically unhealthier and less sustainable than at home. Using online survey data from 301 Dutch participants, we compared the influence of stable personal values and transient food choice motives on the healthiness and sustainability of meals chosen in a hypothetical choice task, which was geared to the home and restaurant consumption contexts. As expected, participants opted for unhealthy and meat-based meals more often in the restaurant than the home context. Conservation values related negatively and self-transcendence values positively to choosing sustainable meals both in the home and in the restaurant context, although the relation with self-transcendence values was significantly weaker in the restaurant context. Also, taste and social eating were considered more important for choosing restaurant meals, while health was a more important motive for food choices at home. Finally, model comparisons revealed that motives were better predictors of healthy meal choices in both contexts, while the influence of values and motives on sustainable meal choices was more similar. In conclusion, the results from the present study enhance our understanding of differences between choosing home and restaurant meals by providing an account of the values and motives associated with the healthiness and sustainability of home and restaurant meal choices.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: As snacking can be considered a cornerstone of an unhealthy diet, investigating psychological drivers of snacking behaviour is urgent, and therefore the purpose of this study. Socio-economic position (SEP) and stress are known to affect many behaviours and outcomes, and were therefore focal points in the study. METHODS: In a cross-sectional survey study, we examined whether Socio-economic position (SEP) would amplify associations between heightened stress levels and self-reported negative-affect related reasons for snacking. Next, we investigated whether Socio-economic position (SEP) predicted frequency of snacking behaviour, and how stress and other reasons for snacking could explain this association. Outcome measures were reasons people indicated for snacking, and frequency of snacking behaviour. RESULTS: Analyses revealed that people seem to find more reasons to snack when they are stressed, and that this association was more pronounced for people with a high compared to low socio-economic position. Furthermore, a higher socio-economic position was associated with a higher frequency of snacking, and both snacking to reward oneself and snacking because of the opportunity to do so remained significant mediators. CONCLUSION: Whereas low socio-economic position was associated with higher stress levels, this did not translate into increased snacking. Contrarily, those with higher socio-economic position could be more prone to using 'reasons to snack', which may result in justification of unhealthy snacking behaviour.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To describe the mental models people hold about the COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on how they understand the factors that drive the spread of COVID-19 and what kind of beliefs are associated with these models. DESIGN: In a series of three studies (total N = 461), we asked participants to identify factors that are relevant for COVID-19 proliferation (Study 1a), rate the importance of factors (Study 1 b), and create a mental model of how these factors relate to virus spread by employing a validated tool for mental model elicitation (Study 2). Main outcome measures: inclusion and centrality of factors in mental models of COVID-19 infection spread. RESULTS: Mitigation measures issued by government, adherence to measures, and virus characteristics were most strongly represented in participants' mental models. Participants who perceived measures as appropriate or who experienced more control and more worry over the spread of the virus created more complex models compared to participants who were less satisfied with measures or who felt lower control and less worry. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that people are able to create sensible mental models of virus transmission but may appreciate transparent communication to comprehend the bigger picture behind the governmental mitigation strategy.

RESUMEN

The current food environment communicates the social norm that it is normal to consume large amounts of unhealthy and unsustainable foods. However, it is unknown whether people endorse this norm because they agree with it, or whether they endorse it because they overestimate the degree to which other people agree with this norm - a phenomenon that is labeled as 'pluralistic ignorance'. We examined the possible presence of pluralistic ignorance by corroborating previous pluralistic ignorance literature in the food environment among a large representative sample of community residents (N = 433). In addition, we aimed to better assess pluralistic ignorance by comparing multiple dimensions, including how participants perceived themselves and other people in the importance, frequency, normalcy, and intentions of consuming healthy and sustainable food. We analyzed the perceptions with paired t-tests and our findings show that participants considered themselves to be healthier and more sustainable eaters than other people on all four dimensions. However, they did not think that other people were eating unhealthy or unsustainable. Participants themselves held low intentions to eat more healthily or sustainably and believed others had similar low intentions. Together, these findings reveal that there is a discrepancy between the perception of oneself and others regarding healthy and sustainable eating norms, which may suggest pluralistic ignorance. However, it is unclear whether this discrepancy would actually influence behavior, as suggested by the pluralistic ignorance literature, since people consider themselves healthier and more sustainable consumers who may not adjust their standards to perceptions of other people. We speculate they may use this discrepancy as justification in order to be complacent. In the discussion we consider these implications and next steps for future research.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Self-control is of vital importance for human wellbeing. Hare et al. (2009) were among the first to provide empirical evidence on the neural correlates of self-control. This seminal study profoundly impacted theory and empirical work across multiple fields. To solidify the empirical evidence supporting self-control theory, we conducted a preregistered replication of this work. Further, we tested the robustness of the findings across analytic strategies. Participants underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging while rating 50 food items on healthiness and tastiness and making choices about food consumption. We closely replicated the original analysis pipeline and supplemented it with additional exploratory analyses to follow-up on unexpected findings and to test the sensitivity of results to key analytical choices. Our replication data provide support for the notion that decisions are associated with a value signal in ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC), which integrates relevant choice attributes to inform a final decision. We found that vmPFC activity was correlated with goal values regardless of the amount of self-control and it correlated with both taste and health in self-controllers but only taste in non-self-controllers. We did not find strong support for the hypothesized role of left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) in self-control. The absence of statistically significant group differences in dlPFC activity during successful self-control in our sample contrasts with the notion that dlPFC involvement is required in order to effectively integrate longer-term goals into subjective value judgments. Exploratory analyses highlight the sensitivity of results (in terms of effect size) to the analytical strategy, for instance, concerning the approach to region-of-interest analysis.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Defaults have been shown to increase the number of organ donor registrations but it is unclear whether they violate personal autonomy of the people being registered. The implementation of a new Donor Act in the Netherlands, providing people with the opportunity for active registration before being defaulted, allowed for examining to what extent default registration affects personal autonomy and associated concepts. In an online survey among a representative sample (N = 1259), four groups were compared regarding autonomy, decision-making competence, decision satisfaction, and being pressured to register as a donor: people (1) who had registered their status prior to the Donor Act, (2) who had not yet received an invitation for default registration, (3) who had received an invitation and then registered their choice, and (4) who had received an invitation but took no action and were defaulted into donor registration. We found that among the three groups who were the target population of the new arrangement, people who registered their status reported relatively high levels of autonomy and related concepts. However, people who were invited to register but passed the opportunity to respond reported lower scores on these outcomes. We conclude that default organ donation registration may bear negative consequences for a minority of people who feel unable to take action after having been invited to make a choice for registration.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The outbreak of COVID-19 has turned out to be a major challenge to societies all over the globe. Curbing the pandemic requires rapid and extensive behavioural change to limit social interaction, including physical distancing. In this study, we tested the notion that inducing empathy for people vulnerable to the virus may result in actual distancing behaviour beyond the mere motivation to do so. In a large field experiment with a sequential case-control design, we found that (a) empathy prompts may increase distancing as assessed by camera recordings and (b) effectiveness of prompts depends on the dynamics of the pandemic and associated public health policies. In sum, the present study demonstrates the potential of empathy-generating interventions to promote pro-social behaviour and emphasizes the necessity of field experiments to assess the role of context before advising policy makers to implement measures derived from behavioural science. Please refer to Supplementary Material to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.

RESUMEN

The negative effects of overconsumption of food have been extensively studied, with a focus on overweight and negative food attitudes. In this overview, we argue that this negative perspective has spilled over to food consumption in general, which is in contrast with eating as a pleasurable activity that contributes to people's well-being. We review four areas of research that have recently emerged: (de)moralization of food consumption, moderate eating for pleasure, intuitive and mindful eating, and the social benefits of eating. Throughout these four themes, it becomes clear that there needs to be a clear distinction between overconsumption of food, bearing negative consequences, and normal levels of food consumption. The latter is positively associated with enjoyment, contentment, and our social and psychological well-being.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Hand washing has been at the core of recommendations and guidelines that aim to curb infectious diseases in general, and COVID-19 in particular. As hand washing comes down to an individual's behaviour, we aimed to study how individual psychological variables influence hand washing over time during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Over the course of 20 weeks, participants answered questions about their hand washing behaviour, goal importance, habit strength and self-control. Participants from an experimental and a control condition completed a baseline and final measurement, and the experimental condition was invited to bi-weekly measurements through reminders. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Hand washing behaviour over the past 14 days was assessed by self-report at baseline and final measurement, and additionally repeatedly over the course of 20 weeks in the experimental condition. RESULTS: Hand washing behaviour decreased over time, but this decrease was buffered by habit strength and goal importance. The decrease was smaller in the experimental condition that received reminders every 2 weeks. CONCLUSION: Sending personal reminders on hand washing behaviour contributes to hand washing behaviour. Moreover, taking habit strength and goal importance, and to a lesser extent self-control into account is important when designing interventions to promote hand washing behaviour.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Nudges are behavioral interventions to subtly steer citizens' choices toward "desirable" options. An important topic of debate concerns the legitimacy of nudging as a policy instrument, and there is a focus on issues relating to nudge transparency, the role of preexisting preferences people may have, and the premise that nudges primarily affect people when they are in "irrational" modes of thinking. Empirical insights into how these factors affect the extent to which people are susceptible to nudge influence (i.e., "nudgeable") are lacking in the debate. This article introduces the new concept of nudgeability and makes a first attempt to synthesize the evidence on when people are responsive to nudges. We find that nudge effects do not hinge on transparency or modes of thinking but that personal preferences moderate effects such that people cannot be nudged into something they do not want. We conclude that, in view of these findings, concerns about nudging legitimacy should be softened and that future research should attend to these and other conditions of nudgeability.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Public acceptability of nudging is receiving increasingly more attention, but studies remain limited to evaluations of aspects of the nudge itself or (inferred intentions) of the nudger. Yet, it is important to investigate which individuals are likely to accept nudges, as those who are supposed to benefit from the implementation should not oppose it. The main objective of this study was to integrate research on self-regulation and nudging, and to examine acceptability of nudges as a function of self-regulation capacity and motivation. METHOD: Participants (N = 301) filled in questionnaires about several components of self-regulation capacity (self-control, proactive coping competence, self-efficacy, perceived control and perceived difficulty) and motivation (autonomous motivation and controlled motivation). To evaluate nudge acceptability, we used three vignettes describing three types of nudges (default, portion size, and rearrangement) that stimulated either a pro-self behavior (healthy eating) or pro-social behavior (sustainable eating) and asked participants to rate the nudges on (aspects of) acceptability. RESULTS: Results revealed that there were substantial differences in acceptability between the three types of nudges, such that the default nudge was seen as less acceptable and the rearrangement nudge as most acceptable. The behavior that was stimulated did not affect acceptability, even though the nudges that targeted healthy eating were seen as more pro-self than the nudges targeting sustainable eating. From all self-regulation components, autonomous motivation was the only measure that was consistently associated with nudge acceptability across the three nudges. For self-regulatory capacity, only some elements were occasionally related to acceptability for some nudges. CONCLUSION: The current study thus shows that people are more inclined to accept nudges that target behaviors that they are autonomously motivated for, while people do not meaningfully base their judgments of acceptability on self-regulatory capacity.

Asunto(s)