Social comparison and energy conservation: the role of reference groups and room dynamics in a field experiment

Tseng Yz et al.

Economica2026https://doi.org/10.1111/ecca.70038article
AJG 3ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

This paper presents a non‐price‐based conservation experiment performed among 6723 college dorm residents. We analyse the effectiveness of a behavioural intervention delivered through email, featuring one of two types of social‐comparison‐based energy consumption feedback: a quintile social comparison message and a mean comparison message. The quintile social comparison message ranks residents' relative energy consumption in quintiles, while the mean comparison message compares their consumption to the average. Our results show that the relative effectiveness of these messages depends on residents' baseline consumption patterns. Users in the higher quintiles (fourth and fifth) are more likely to reduce their energy consumption, while those in the lower quintiles (first and second) tend to increase their electricity usage after receiving the messages. We also observe that this adjustment towards the median consumption level appears to be more pronounced in single‐ and double‐student rooms compared to multiple‐student rooms. Using a causal forest approach to examine heterogeneity, we find that certain individual traits and physical factors may influence these room dynamics.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/ecca.70038

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{tseng2026,
  title        = {{Social comparison and energy conservation: the role of reference groups and room dynamics in a field experiment}},
  author       = {Tseng Yz et al.},
  journal      = {Economica},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/ecca.70038},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Social comparison and energy conservation: the role of reference groups and room dynamics in a field experiment

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.