I have a fairly straightforward research question that I was unable to find answers to anywhere on this site. FSB specifies that "in order for commitment to be effective, the commitment must be voluntary. My question is, does incentivizing an individual to make a commitment have a positive effect, a negative effect, or no effect? Or asked another way, does it make the commitment un-voluntary? For example, does offering students a free water bottle or a raffle ticket if they commit to one (or three or more) conservation actions (such as turning off their lights when they leave the room, taking shorter showers etc.) have a positive, neutral, or negative effect on their ultimate behavior?
I assume that no one has looked into this question, but wanted to confirm that I did not miss any research on this topic!
Warmly, Chelsea
Chelsea Hodge
Client Consultant
Lucid Design Group
United States
Can Commitments & Incentives be Combined?
Sign in or Sign up to comment
Hi Chelsea:
In general you shouldn't combine commitments and incentives. Commitments are believed to work because of self-perception theory. That is, when someone goes along with a small request (e.g., I'll put a sticker on my recycling container showcasing that I don't fertilize my lawn) they come to see themselves as the type of person who believes it is important to protect our waterways. In short, the fact that the action is voluntary leads them to alter their view of themselves. However, if we combine an incentive with a commitment we undercut the likelihood that they will view themselves differently. Why? Incentives provide extrinsic, or external, justification for engaging in an action. Whereas, commitments work because of intrinsic, or internal, motivation. Incentives essentially override the likelihood of the individual viewing their behavior as voluntary and, therefore, self-perception occurring. If you would like to learn more, see the following review of the commitment literature:
http://media.cbsm.com/uploads/1/BurgerCommitmentReview.pdf
If you haven't already, you can also review the chapter on commitments in my book:
http://www.cbsm.com/pages/guide/preface/
Hope this helps.
Best, Doug
Doug McKenzie-Mohr
Environmental Psychologist
McKenzie-Mohr & Associates Inc.
Canada
http://www.cbsm.com
Ken & Doug,
Thank you both for your responses. I postulated that commitments would not be as effective if individuals had an external motivation for making them, so it's great to see that there is literature that bears this out.
Doug - I have already read the chapter on commitments in your book and will review the Burger article you recommended.
Ken - I reviewed a number of the articles on Dr. David Uzzell website but didn't come across any on the topic of commitments. Were the articles you were recommending on the ability (or lack there of) of short-term incentives to changing behavior? If so, which specific Uzzell articles speak to this point?
Warmly,
Chelsea
Chelsea Hodge
Client Consultant
Lucid Design Group
United States
www.luciddg.com
Hi Chelsea,
The issue with incentivized commitments is that some people will make a commitment in order to get the incentive and not because they intend to do the behaviour. Generally, short-term incentives like that are not considered to be effective in changing behaviour. Another one we see sometimes is where people are told that if they make a written commitment their name will be included in a draw for a big prize. That is not making a commitment, that is filling out a ballot.
Dr. David Uzzell of the University of Surrey has done some research in this area. He has a lot of good research on his site, you can find it via Google.
Personally, I don't have a problem with contests and give-aways that help to raise awareness of an issue and a behaviour. But I don't use them at all to gather commitments.
Cheers,
Ken
Ken Donnelly
Vice President, Atlantic Canada
Lura Consulting
Canada
www.beyondattitude.com