Between the technology acceptance model and sustainable energy technology acceptance model: Investigating smart meter acceptance in the United States

Energy Research and Social Science

Volumn 25, Issue , 2017, Pages 93-104

  Chen, Chien fei ^a   Xu, Xiaojing ^a   Arpan, Laura ^b  

^a University of Tennessee Knoxville   (United States)

^b FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Energy; Privacy concern; Smart meters; Sustainable energy technology acceptance model and Technology acceptance model; Trust

Indexed keywords

EID: 85009152778     PISSN: 22146296     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2016.12.011     Document Type: Article

References (126)

1. [1] Department of Energy, Glossary: Smart Meter Residential. 2013 Retrieved from http://www.smartgrid.gov/glossary/term/138.
2. [2] Energy Information Administration (EIA), How Many Smart Meters Are Installed in the U.S. and Who Has Them?. 2013 Retrieved on June 16, 2016 from http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=108&t=3.
3. [3] Institute for Electric Innovation (IEI), Utility-scale Smart Meter Deployments: Building Block of the Evolving Power Grid. 2014 Retrieved from http://www.edisonfoundation.net/iei/Documents/IEI_SmartMeterUpdate_0914.pdf.
4. [4] Burgess, J., Nye, M., Rematerialising energy use through transparent monitoring systems. Energy Policy 36 (2008), 4454–4459.
5. [5] S., Darby (2006). The effectiveness of feedback on energy consumption. A Review for DEFRA of the Literature on Metering, Billing and direct Displays, 486, 2006.
6. [6] Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Assessment of Demand Response and Advanced Metering. 2012, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
7. [7] Siddiqui, A.S., Marnay, C., Edwards, J.L., Firestone, R., Ghosh, S., Stadler, M., Effects of carbon tax on microgrid combined heat and power adoption?. J. Energy Eng. 131:1 (2008), 2–25.
8. [8] Faruqui, A., Sergici, S., Sharif, A., The impact of informational feedback on energy consumption – a survey of the experimental evidence. Energy 35:4 (2010), 1598–1608.
9. [9] Kaufmann, S., Künzel, K., Loock, M., Customer value of smart metering: explorative evidence from a choice-based conjoint study in Switzerland. Energy Policy 53 (2013), 229–239.
10. [10] Hess, D.J., Transitions in energy systems: the mitigation-adaptation relationship. Sci. Cult. 22:2 (2013), 197–203.
11. [11] Mah, D.N., van der Vleuten, J.M., Hills, P., Tao, J., Consumer perceptions of smart grid development: results of a Hong Kong survey and policy implications. Energy Policy 49 (2012), 204–216.
12. [12] Raimi, K.T., Carrico, A.R., Understanding and beliefs about smart energy technology. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 12 (2016), 68–74.
13. [13] Pepermans, Guido, Valuing smart meters. Energy Econ. 45 (2014), 280–294.
14. [14] Hess, D.J., Coley, J.S., Wireless smart meters and public acceptance: the environment, limited choices, and precautionary politics. Public Underst. Sci. 23:6 (2014), 688–702.
15. [15] Sullivan, C., Kahn, D., Smart Grid: California Agency Mulls ‘Opt Out’ or Wired Substitutes as Fallout Persists. 2011 January 14, Retrieved from http://www.eenews.net/Greenwire/print/2011/01/14/1S.
16. [16] Huijts, N.M.A., Molin, E.J.E., Steg, L., Psychological factors influencing sustainable energy technology acceptance: a review-based comprehensive framework. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16:1 (2012), 525–531.
17. [17] Perlaviciute, G., Steg, L., Contextual and psychological factors shaping evaluations and acceptability of energy alternatives: integrated review and research agenda. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 35 (2014), 361–381.
18. [18] Kranz, J., Picot, A., Is it money or the environment? An empirical analysis of factors influencing consumers’ intention to adopt the smart metering technology. AMCIS 2012 Proceedings, 2012.
19. [19] Park, C.K., Kim, H.J., Kim, Y.S., A study of factors enhancing smart grid consumer engagement. Energy Policy 72 (2014), 211–218.
20. [20] Joachain, H., Klopfert, F., Smarter than metering: coupling smart meters and complementary currencies to reinforce the motivation of households for energy savings. Ecol. Econ. 105 (2014), 89–96.
21. [21] Nachreiner, M., Mack, B., Matthies, E., Tampe-Mai, K., An analysis of smart metering information systems: a psychological model of self-regulated behavioural change. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 9 (2015), 85–97.
22. [22] Wunderlich, P., Veit, D., Sarker, S., Examination of the Determinants of Smart Meter Adoption: An User Perspective. 2012.
23. [23] Davis, F.D., Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. Manag. Inf. Syst. Q. 13:3 (1989), 319–339.
24. [24] Hong, S.J., Tam, K.Y., Understanding the adoption of multipurpose information appliances: the case of mobile data services?. Inf. Syst. Res. 17:2 (2006), 162–179.
25. [25] Wang, C., Lo, S., Fang, W., Extending the technology acceptance model to mobile telecommunication innovation: the existence of network externalities?. J. Consum. Behav. 7:1 (2008), 101–110.
26. [26] Venkatesh, V., Thong, J., Xu, X., Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Manag. Inf. Syst. Q. 36:1 (2012), 157–178.
27. [27] Are Smart Meters Safe?. 2016 Retrieved November 16, 2016, from http://www.smartme.co.uk/technical.html.
28. [28] Hargreaves, T., Nye, M., Burgess, J., Making energy visible: a qualitative field study of how householders interact with feedback from smart energy monitors. Energy Policy 38 (2010), 6111–6119.
29. [29] Rimal, R.N., Lapinski, M.K., A re-explication of social norms, ten years later. Commun. Theor. 25:4 (2015), 393–409.
30. [30] Stern, P.C., Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. J. Soc. Issues 56:3 (2000), 407–424.
31. [31] Arpan, L.M., Opel, A.R., Lu, J., Motivating the skeptical and unconcerned: considering values, worldviews, and norms when planning messages encouraging energy conservation and efficiency behaviors. Appl. Environ. Educ. Commun. 12:3 (2013), 207–219.
32. [32] Gromet, D.M., Kunreuther, H., Larrick, R.P., Political ideology affects energy-efficiency attitudes and choices. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 110:23 (2013), 9314–9319.
33. [33] Gofen, D., Karahanna, E., Straub, D.W., Trust and TAM in online shopping: an integrated model. Manag. Inf. Syst. Q. 27:1 (2003), 51–90.
34. [34] Wunderlich, P., Kranz, J., Totzek, D., Veit, D., Picot, A., The impact of endogenous motivations on adoption of IT-enabled services: the case of transformative services. Energy Sect. J. Serv. Res. 16:3 (2013), 356–371.
35. [35] Angner, E., Loewenstein, G., Behavioral economics. Handbook of the Philosophy of Science: Philosophy of Economic, 2007, 641–690.
36. [36] Lichtenstein, D.R., Ridgway, N.M., Netemeyer, R.G., Price perceptions and consumer shopping behavior: a field study. J. Mark. Res. 30:2 (1993), 234–245.
37. [37] Zeithaml, V.A., Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. J. Mark. 52:3 (1988), 2–22.
38. [38] Kim, B., Choi, M., Han, I., User behaviors toward mobile data services: the role of perceived fee and prior experience?. Expert Syst. Appl. 36:4 (2009), 8528–8536.
39. [39] Kuo, Y.F., Yen, S.N., Towards an understanding of the behavioral intention to use 3G mobile value-added services. Comput. Hum. Behav. 25:1 (2009), 103–110.
40. [40] McKenna, E., Richardson, I., Thomson, M., Smart meter data: balancing consumer privacy concerns with legitimate applications. Energy Policy 41 (2012), 807–814.
41. [41] Quinn, E.L., Smart Metering & Privacy: Existing Law and Competing Policies. 2009 Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1462285.
42. [42] Nesbitt, J., Westerville City Council Reconsiders ‘Smart Meter’ Program. 2011, The Colombus Dispatch 10 February, 2011: online. Retrieved from: http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2011/02/10/city-council-reconsiders-smart-meter-program.html.
43. [43] Soto, O.R., SDG&E's New Smart Meters Could Damage TVs. 2010, San Diego Union-Tribune 30 March, 2010: online. Retrieved February 22, 2011 from http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/mar/30/bn30meters/S.
44. [44] Molina-Markham, A., Shenoy, P., Fu, K., Cecchet, E., Irwin, D., Private memoirs of a smart meter. Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Workshop on Embedded Sensing Systems for Energy-Efficiency in Building, 2010, 61–66.
45. [45] Lisovich, M.A., Mulligan, D.K., Wicker, S.B., Inferring personal information from demand-response systems. IEEE Secur. Priv. 8:1 (2010), 11–20.
46. [46] Horne, C., Darras, B., Bean, E., Srivastava, A., Frickel, S., Privacy technology, and norms: the case of Smart Meters. Soc. Sci. Res. 51 (2015), 64–76.
47. [47] Bamberg, S., Schmidt, P., Incentives, morality, or habit? Predicting students’ car use for university routes with the models of Ajzen, Schwartz and Triandis. Environ. Behav. 35:2 (2003), 264–285.
48. [48] Triandis, H.C., Values, attitudes, and interpersonal behavior. Howe, H.E., Page, M.M., (eds.) Nebraska Symposium on Motivation 1979, 1980, University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, 195–259.
49. [49] Kim, S.S., Malhotra, N.K., A longitudinal model of continued IS use: an integrative view of four mechanisms underlying post-adoption phenomena. Manag. Sci. 5 (2005), 741–755.
50. [50] Bamberg, S., Ajzen, I., Schmidt, P., Choice of travel mode in the theory of planned behavior: the roles of past behavior, habit, and reasoned action. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 24:3 (2003), 175–187.
51. [51] Matthies, E., Klockner, C.A., Preissner, C.L., Applying a modified moral decision making model to change habitual car use: how can commitment be effective?. Appl. Psychol. 55:1 (2006), 91–106.
52. [52] Viklund, M., Energy policy options—from the perspective of public attitudes and risk perceptions. Energy Policy 32 (2004), 1169–1171.
53. [53] Siegrist, M., Cvetkovich, G., Perception of hazards: the role of social trust and knowledge?. Risk Anal. 20:5 (2000), 713–720.
54. [54] Karlin, B., Davis, N., Sanguinetti, A., Gamble, K., Kirkby, D., Stokols, D., Dimensions of conservation: exploring differences among energy behaviors. Environ. Behav. 46:4 (2014), 423–452.
55. [55] Karlin, B., Public acceptance of smart meters: integrating psychology and practice. Proceedings of the 2012 Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings, ACEEE, Also, 2012.
56. [56] Demski, C., Spence, A., Pidgeon, N., Transforming the UK Energy System: Public Values, Attitudes and Acceptability: Summary Findings from a Survey Conducted August 2012. 2013.
57. [57] Poortinga, W., Spence, A., Whitmarsh, L., Capstick, S., Pidgeon, N.F., Uncertain climate: an investigation into public scepticism about anthropogenic climate change. Global Environ. Change 21:3 (2011), 1015–1024.
58. [58] Chen, C.-F., Knight, K., Energy at work: social psychological factors affecting energy conservation intentions within Chinese electric power companies. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 4 (2014), 23–31.
59. [59] Bamberg, S., Möser, G., Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: a new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behavior. J. Environ. Psychol. 27:1 (2007), 14–25.
60. [60] Klockner, C.A., Blobaum, A., A comprehensive action determination model: toward a broader understanding of ecological behaviour using the example of travel mode choice?. J. Environ. Psychol. 30:4 (2010), 574–586.
61. [61] Steg, L., Promoting household energy conservation?. Energy Policy 36:12 (2008), 4449–4453.
62. [62] Chen, C.-F., Xu, X., Frey, S., Who wants solar water heaters and alternative fuel vehicles? Assessing social-psychological predictors of adoption intention and policy support in China. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 15 (2016), 1–11.
63. [63] Kahan, D., Why we are poles apart on climate change: the problem isn't the public's reasoning capacity; it's the polluted science-communication environment that drives people apart. Nature, 488(7411), 2012, 255.
64. [64] Schultz, P.W., Gouveia, V.V., Cameron, L.D., Tankha, G., Schmuck, P., Franek, M., Values and their relationship to environmental concern and conservation behavior?. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 36:4 (2005), 457–475.
65. [65] Slimak, M.W., Dietz, T., Personal values, beliefs, and ecological risk perception. Risk Anal. 26:6 (2006), 1689–1705.
66. [66] Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C., Hmielowski, J., Global Warming's Six Americas. 2012, Yale Univ. & George Mason Univ (March 2012 & Nov. 2011).
67. [67] Wildavsky, A., Dake, K., Theories of risk perception: who fears what and why?. Daedalus 119:4 (1990), 41–60.
68. [68] Dietz, T., FitzGerald, A., Shwom, R., Environmental values. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 30 (2005), 335–372.
69. [69] Dunlap, R.E., Xiao, C., McCright, A.M.1, Politics and environment in America: partisan and ideological cleavages in public support for environmentalism. Environ. Polit. 10:4 (2001), 23–48.
70. [70] Dunlap, R.E., Van Liere, K.D., Mertig, A.G., Jones, R.E., New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP scale. J. Soc. Issues 56:3 (2000), 425–442.
71. [71] Schwartz, S.H., Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 25 (1992), 1–65.
72. [72] Daneshvary, N., Daneshvary, R., Schwer, R.K., Solid-waste recycling behavior and support for curbside textile recycling. Environ. Behav. 30:2 (1998), 144–161.
73. [73] Schultz, P.W., Zelezny, L., Reframing environmental messages to be congruent with American values. Human Ecol. Rev. 10:2 (2003), 126–136.
74. [74] Zettler, I., Hilbig, B.E., Attitudes of the selfless: explaining political orientation with altruism. Pers. Individ. Differ. 48:3 (2010), 338–342.
75. [75] Hornsey, M.J., Harris, E.A., Bain, P.G., Fielding, K.S., Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 6 (2016), 622–626.
76. [76] Dietz, T., Dan, A., Shwom, R., Support for climate change policy: social psychological and social structural influences. Rural Sociol. 72:2 (2007), 185–214.
77. [77] Devos, T., Spini, D., Schwartz, S.H., Conflicts among human values and trust in institutions. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 41:4 (2002), 481–494.
78. [78] Kahan, D.M., Braman, D., Cohen, G.L., Gastil, J., Slovic, P., Who fears the HPV vaccine, who doesn't, and why? an experimental study of the mechanisms of cultural cognition. Law Hum. Behav. 34:6 (2010), 501–516.
79. [79] Rathbun, B.C., The ‘Magnificent Fraud’: trust, international cooperation, and the hidden domestic politics of American Multilateralism after world war II. Int. Stud. Q. 55:1 (2011), 1–21.
80. [80] Abrahamse, W., Steg, L., How do socio-demographic and psychological factors relate to households’ direct and indirect energy use and savings?. J. Econ. Psychol. 30 (2009), 711–720.
81. [81] Barr, S., Gilg, A.W., Ford, N., The household energy gap: examining the divide between habitual-and purchase-related conservation behaviors. Energy Policy 33 (2005), 1425–1444.
82. [82] Brown, S.A., Venkatesh, V., A model of adoption of technology in the household: a baseline model test and extension incorporating household life cycle. Manag. Inf. Syst. Q., 29(3), 2005, 4.
83. [83] Morris, M.G., Venkatesh, V., Ackerman, P.L., Gender and age differences in employee decisions about new technology: an extension to the theory of planned behavior. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 52:1 (2005), 69–84.
84. [84] Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., Gosling, S.D., Amazon's Mechanical Turk a new source of inexpensive yet high-quality, data?. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 6:1 (2011), 3–5.
85. [85] US Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States. 2012.
86. [86] Schierz, P.G., Schilke, O., Wirtz, B.W., Understanding consumer acceptance of mobile payment services: an empirical analysis. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 9 (2010), 209–216.
87. [87] Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., Warshaw, P.R., User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manag. Sci. 35:8 (1989), 982–1002.
88. [88] Brown, T.A., Confirmatory factor analysis of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire: multiple factors or method effects?. Behav. Res. Ther. 41 (2003), 1411–1426.
89. [89] Botetzagias, I., Malesios, C., Poulou, D., Electricity curtailment behaviors in Greek households: different behaviors different predictors. Energy Policy 69 (2014), 415–424.
90. [90] Metlay, D., Institutional trust and confidence: a journey into a conceptual quagmire. Cvetkovich, G., Lofstedt, R., (eds.) Social Trust and the Management of Risk, 1999, Earthscan, London, 110–116.
91. [91] Steg, L., Dreijerink, L., Abrahamse, W., Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies: a test of VBN theory?. J. Environ. Psychol. 25:4 (2005), 415–425.
92. [92] L.K. Muthén, B.O. Muthén, Mplus User's Guide, Sixth edition, Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles, CA, 1998–2010.
93. [93] Anderson, J., Gerbing, D., Assumptions and comparative strengths of the two-step approach: comment on Fornell and Yi?. Sociol. Methods Res. 20:1 (1992), 321–333.
94. [94] Brown, T.A., Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research. 2006, Guilford Press, New York, NY.
95. [95] Byrne, B.M., Structural Equation Modeling with Mplus: Basic Concepts, Applications and Programming. 2001, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
96. [96] Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th ed., 2010, Prentice-Hall, Inc, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
97. [97] McDonald, R.P., Ho, M.H.R., Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychol. Methods, 7(1), 2002, 64.
98. [98] Balta-Ozkan, N., Boteler, B., Amerighi, O., European smart home market development: public views on technical and economic aspects across the United Kingdom, Germany and Italy. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 3 (2014), 65–77.
99. [99] Poortinga, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C., Values, environmental concern and environmental behavior: a study into household energy use. Environ. Behav. 36 (2004), 70–93.
100. [100] U.S. Department of Energy, Data Privacy and the Smart Grid: A Voluntary Code of Conduct (VCC). 2015, Department of Energy, Washington, D.C.
101. [101] Bolderdijk, J.W., Steg, L., Postmes, T., Fostering support for work floor energy conservation policies: accounting for privacy concerns. J. Organ. Behav. 34:2 (2013), 195–210.
102. [102] Krishnamurti, T., Schwartz, D., Davis, A., Fischhoff, B., Bruine, W., Lave, L., Wang, J., Preparing for smart grid technologies: a behavioral decision research approach to understanding consumer expectations about smart meters. Energy Policy 41 (2012), 790–797.
103. [103] McCright, A.M., Dunlap, R.E., Challenging global warming as a social problem: an analysis of the conservative movement's counter claims. Soc. Probl. 47:4 (2000), 499–552.
104. [104] McCright, A.M., Dunlap, R.E., Defeating Kyoto: the conservative movement's impact on US climate change policy. Soc. Probl. 50:3 (2003), 348–373.
105. [105] McCright, A.M., Dunlap, R.E., Anti-reflexivity: the American conservative movement's success in undermining climate science and policy. Theor. Cult. Soc. 27:2–3 (2010), 100–133.
106. [106] Oreskes, N., Conway, E.M., Merchants of Doubt. 2010, Bloomsbury Press, New York.
107. [107] Dunlap, R.E., McCright, A.M., Challenging climate change: the denial countermovement. Dunlap, R.E., Brulle, R.J., (eds.) Climate Change and Society: Sociological Perspectives, 2015, Oxford University Press, New York, 300–331.
108. [108] Powell, J.L., The Inquisition of Climate Science. 2012, Columbia University Press.
109. [109] McCright, A.M., Dunlap, R.E., Marquart-Pyatt, S.T., Political ideology and views about climate change in the European Union. Environ. Polit. 25:2 (2016), 338–358.
110. [110] Kahan, D.M., Jenkins-Smith, H., Braman, D., Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. J. Risk Res. 14:2 (2011), 147–174.
111. [111] Ibtissem, M.H., Application of value beliefs norms theory to the energy conservation behaviour. J. Sustain. Dev., 3(2), 2010, 129.
112. [112] Claudy, M., O'Driscoll, A., Beyond economics: a behavioural approach to energy efficiency in domestic buildings. Euro Asian J. Sustain. Energy Dev. Policy 1 (2008), 27–40.
113. [113] Cardwell, D., Cities Weigh Taking over from Private Utilities. 2013 March 13. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/14/business/energy-environment/cities-weigh-taking-electricity-business-from-private-utilities.html.
114. [114] Cook, T.E., Gronke, P., The skeptical American: revisiting the meanings of trust in government and confidence in institutions?. J. Polit. 67:3 (2005), 784–803.
115. [115] Gauchat, G., Politicization of science in the public sphere a study of public trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010. Am. Sociol. Rev. 77:2 (2012), 167–187.
116. [116] Efron, B., The bootstrapping and modern statistics. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 82 (2000), 171–185.
117. [117] Toft, M.B., Schuitema, G., Thøgersen, J., Responsible technology acceptance: model development and application to consumer acceptance of Smart Grid technology. Appl. Energy 134 (2014), 392–400.
118. [118] Marangunić, N., Granić, A., Technology acceptance model: a literature review from 1986 to 2013. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 14:1 (2015), 81–95.
119. [119] Yzer, M., Reasoned Action Theory: persuasion as a belief-based behavior change. Dillard, J.P., Shen, L., (eds.) The Persuasion Handbook: Developments in Theory and Practice, 2nd edition, 2013, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 120–136.
120. [120] Fishbein, M., Yzer, M.C., Using theory to design effective health behavior interventions. Commun. Theor. 13:2 (2003), 164–183.
121. [121] Delmas, M.A., Fischlein, M., Asensio, O.I., Information strategies and energy conservation behavior: a meta-analysis of experimental studies from 1975 to 2012. Energy Policy 61 (2013), 729–739.
122. [122] Kaiser, F.G., Hübner, G., Bogner, F.X., Contrasting the theory of planned behavior with the value-belief-norm model in explaining conservation behavior. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 35:10 (2005), 2150–2170.
123. [123] Nolan, J.M., Schultz, P.W., Cialdini, R.B., Goldstein, N.J., Griskevicius, V., Normative social influence is underdetected?. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 34:7 (2008), 913–923.
124. [124] Read, D.L., Brown, R.F., Thorsteinsson, E.B., Morgan, M., Price, I., The theory of planned behaviour as a model for predicting public opposition to wind farm developments. J. Environ. Psychol. 36 (2013), 70–76.
125. [125] Schultz, P.W., Nolan, J.M., Cialdini, R.B., Goldstein, N.J., Griskevicius, V., The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychol. Sci. 18 (2007), 429–434.
126. [126] Slovic, P., Peters, E., Finucane, M.L., MacGregor, D.G., Affect, risk, and decision making. Health Psychol., 24(4S), 2005, S35.