IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envman/v26y2000i6d10.1007_s002670010117.html

Choosing to Encourage or Discourage: Perceived Effectiveness of Prescriptive Versus Proscriptive Messages

Author

Listed:
  • Patricia L. Winter

    (Pacific Southwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 4955 Canyon Crest Drive, Riverside, California 92507, USA)

  • Brad J. Sagarin

    (Department of Psychology, Arizona State University, Box 871104, Tempe, Arizona 85287-1104, USA)

  • Kelton Rhoads

    (Department of Psychology, Arizona State University, Box 871104, Tempe, Arizona 85287-1104, USA)

  • Daniel W. Barrett

    (Department of Psychology, Arizona State University, Box 871104, Tempe, Arizona 85287-1104, USA)

  • Robert B. Cialdini

    (Department of Psychology, Arizona State University, Box 871104, Tempe, Arizona 85287-1104, USA)

Abstract

The estimated cost of repairing damage caused to recreational sites annually is in the hundreds of millions of dollars. These depreciative activities also reduce the quality of visitors' experiences in the damaged areas. Indirect methods, such as visitor education through brochures and signs, continue to be the least controversial management approaches to depreciative acts. Yet, the literature on studies examining the most effective message presentations remains sparse. A survey mailed to randomly selected National Association for Interpretation members assessed the perceived effectiveness of communications that encouraged positive conduct (prescriptive messages) versus those that discouraged negative conduct (proscriptive messages) in wildland and urban settings. Almost invariably, respondents viewed the encouragement-based prescriptive messages as more effective than the discouragement-based proscriptive messages. This finding stands in sharp contrast to an earlier study that discovered a preponderance of proscriptive versus prescriptive messages on signs in both wildland and urban recreational environments. Thus, although the great majority of interpreters see the encouragement of positive conduct as more effective, in practice, messages on signs are much more likely to discourage negative conduct. Reasons for this discrepancy are considered.

Suggested Citation

  • Patricia L. Winter & Brad J. Sagarin & Kelton Rhoads & Daniel W. Barrett & Robert B. Cialdini, 2000. "Choosing to Encourage or Discourage: Perceived Effectiveness of Prescriptive Versus Proscriptive Messages," Environmental Management, Springer, vol. 26(6), pages 589-594, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:envman:v:26:y:2000:i:6:d:10.1007_s002670010117
    DOI: 10.1007/s002670010117
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s002670010117
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s002670010117?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
    ---><---

    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:spr:envman:v:26:y:2000:i:6:d:10.1007_s002670010117. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.