IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v210y2025ics1364032124009353.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The influence of information format and framing on acceptance of energy storage technologies

Author

Listed:
  • Zumofen, Guillaume
  • Stadelmann-Steffen, Isabelle
  • Sträter, Rebeka

Abstract

New technologies are necessary for energy system transition and meeting climate targets. However, obstacles to social acceptance, often linked to limited understanding and awareness, impede their integration. This article focuses on the acceptance of seasonal thermal energy storage technologies. This energy technology enables the storage of surplus heat in summer for heating in winter and the transfer of cold from winter to summer for cooling purposes. Combining theoretical insights from research on public opinion formation and social acceptance, this article constructs a model to explore how different information framings and formats influence individual opinion formation and the social acceptance of these technologies. It presents data from an experiment conducted in Switzerland through two online cross-sectional surveys (N = 1749; N = 614). The participants were given varied information framing conditions and formats. Based on independent sample t-tests, Kruskal–Wallis tests, and generalized structural equation models, the findings reveal that providing identical information in a video rather than as text increases general technology acceptance directly, as well as indirectly through reduced information complexity. Emphasizing technological readiness also positively affects general technology acceptance. However, these effects do not extend to more concrete market and community acceptance. The research highlights the significance of tailored and accessible information in facilitating information processing for unknown (energy) technologies in enhancing their social acceptance.

Suggested Citation

  • Zumofen, Guillaume & Stadelmann-Steffen, Isabelle & Sträter, Rebeka, 2025. "The influence of information format and framing on acceptance of energy storage technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:210:y:2025:i:c:s1364032124009353
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2024.115209
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032124009353
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2024.115209?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Bernauer & Liam F. McGrath, 2016. "Simple reframing unlikely to boost public support for climate policy," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(7), pages 680-683, July.
    2. Oskar Juszczyk & Juliusz Juszczyk & Sławomir Juszczyk & Josu Takala, 2022. "Barriers for Renewable Energy Technologies Diffusion: Empirical Evidence from Finland and Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-14, January.
    3. Bel, Germà & Joseph, Stephan, 2018. "Climate change mitigation and the role of technological change: Impact on selected headline targets of Europe's 2020 climate and energy package," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 3798-3807.
    4. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    5. Hilary S. Boudet, 2019. "Public perceptions of and responses to new energy technologies," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 4(6), pages 446-455, June.
    6. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    7. Devine-Wright, Patrick & Batel, Susana & Aas, Oystein & Sovacool, Benjamin & Labelle, Michael Carnegie & Ruud, Audun, 2017. "A conceptual framework for understanding the social acceptance of energy infrastructure: Insights from energy storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 27-31.
    8. Aitken, Mhairi, 2010. "Why we still don't understand the social aspects of wind power: A critique of key assumptions within the literature," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 1834-1841, April.
    9. Charles S. Taber & Milton Lodge, 2006. "Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(3), pages 755-769, July.
    10. B. Dan Wood & Arnold Vedlitz, 2007. "Issue Definition, Information Processing, and the Politics of Global Warming," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(3), pages 552-568, July.
    11. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    12. Dermont, Clau & Ingold, Karin & Kammermann, Lorenz & Stadelmann-Steffen, Isabelle, 2017. "Bringing the policy making perspective in: A political science approach to social acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 359-368.
    13. Wolsink, Maarten, 2007. "Planning of renewables schemes: Deliberative and fair decision-making on landscape issues instead of reproachful accusations of non-cooperation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2692-2704, May.
    14. Aklin, Michaël & Cheng, Chao-Yo & Urpelainen, Johannes, 2018. "Social acceptance of new energy technology in developing countries: A framing experiment in rural India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 466-477.
    15. Thomas, Gareth & Demski, Christina & Pidgeon, Nick, 2019. "Deliberating the social acceptability of energy storage in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    16. Bögel, Paula Maria & Upham, Paul & Shahrokni, Hossein & Kordas, Olga, 2021. "What is needed for citizen-centered urban energy transitions: Insights on attitudes towards decentralized energy storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    17. Stadelmann-Steffen, Isabelle, 2019. "Bad news is bad news: Information effects and citizens’ socio-political acceptance of new technologies of electricity transmission," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 531-545.
    18. Ambrosio-Albala, P. & Upham, P. & Bale, C.S.E. & Taylor, P.G., 2020. "Exploring acceptance of decentralised energy storage at household and neighbourhood scales: A UK survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    19. Agnew, Scott & Dargusch, Paul, 2017. "Consumer preferences for household-level battery energy storage," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 609-617.
    20. Shah, Sheikh Khaleduzzaman & Aye, Lu & Rismanchi, Behzad, 2018. "Seasonal thermal energy storage system for cold climate zones: A review of recent developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 38-49.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zumofen, Guillaume, 2025. "Combining a conjoint experiment and machine learning model to include end-users in a constructive technology assessment: The case of seasonal thermal energy storage," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    2. Stadelmann-Steffen, Isabelle, 2019. "Bad news is bad news: Information effects and citizens’ socio-political acceptance of new technologies of electricity transmission," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 531-545.
    3. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Beyond the triangle of renewable energy acceptance: The five dimensions of domestic hydrogen acceptance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    4. Maurizio Sibilla & Esra Kurul, 2023. "Towards Social Understanding of Energy Storage Systems—A Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-11, September.
    5. Rohe, Sebastian & Chlebna, Camilla, 2021. "A spatial perspective on the legitimacy of a technological innovation system: Regional differences in onshore wind energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    6. Schneider, Nina & Rinscheid, Adrian, 2024. "The (de-)construction of technology legitimacy: Contending storylines surrounding wind energy in Austria and Switzerland," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    7. Devine-Wright, Patrick & Wiersma, Bouke, 2020. "Understanding community acceptance of a potential offshore wind energy project in different locations: An island-based analysis of ‘place-technology fit’," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    8. Hübner, Gundula & Leschinger, Valentin & Müller, Florian J.Y. & Pohl, Johannes, 2023. "Broadening the social acceptance of wind energy – An Integrated Acceptance Model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    9. Cousse, Julia, 2021. "Still in love with solar energy? Installation size, affect, and the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    10. Maarten Wolsink, 2020. "Framing in Renewable Energy Policies: A Glossary," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-31, June.
    11. Xexakis, Georgios & Hansmann, Ralph & Volken, Sandra P. & Trutnevyte, Evelina, 2020. "Models on the wrong track: Model-based electricity supply scenarios in Switzerland are not aligned with the perspectives of energy experts and the public," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    12. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2023. "Price promises, trust deficits and energy justice: Public perceptions of hydrogen homes," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    13. Alam, Syed Shah & Nik Hashim, Nik Hazrul & Rashid, Mamunur & Omar, Nor Asiah & Ahsan, Nilufar & Ismail, Md Daud, 2014. "Small-scale households renewable energy usage intention: Theoretical development and empirical settings," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 255-263.
    14. Shyu, Chian-Woei & Yang, Tzu-I, 2025. "Socio-technical tensions from community acceptance, energy transition, and energy justice: Lessons from solar photovoltaic projects in Taiwan," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 384(C).
    15. Samiha Mjahed Hammami & Sahar Chtourou & Heyam Al Moosa, 2018. "A holistic approach to understanding the acceptance of a community‐based renewable energy project: A pathway to sustainability for Tunisia's rural region," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1535-1545, December.
    16. Lombard, Andrea & Ferreira, Sanette, 2014. "Residents' attitudes to proposed wind farms in the West Coast region of South Africa: A social perspective from the South," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 390-399.
    17. Choi, Jihye & Kim, Justine Jihyun & Lee, Jongsu, 2024. "Public willingness to pay for mitigating local conflicts over the construction of renewable energy facilities: A contingent valuation study in South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    18. Schumacher, K. & Krones, F. & McKenna, R. & Schultmann, F., 2019. "Public acceptance of renewable energies and energy autonomy: A comparative study in the French, German and Swiss Upper Rhine region," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 315-332.
    19. Ambrosio-Albala, P. & Upham, P. & Bale, C.S.E. & Taylor, P.G., 2020. "Exploring acceptance of decentralised energy storage at household and neighbourhood scales: A UK survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    20. Maja Farstad & Pia Piroschka Otte & Erika Palmer, 2024. "Socio-cultural conditions for social acceptance of bioeconomy transitions: the case of Norway," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(7), pages 18559-18574, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:210:y:2025:i:c:s1364032124009353. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.