We have previously argued thatbehavioral scientists have been testing and advocating individualistic (i-frame) solutions to policy problems that have systemic (s-frame) causes and require systemic solutions. Here, we consider the implications of adopting an s-frame approach for research. We argue that an s-frame approach will involve addressing different types of questions, which will, in turn, require a different toolbox of research methods.

Phishing emails cost companies millions. In the absence of technology to perfectly block phishing emails, the responsibility falls on employees to identify and appropriately respond to phishing attempts and on employers to train them to do so. We report results from an experiment with around 11,000 employees of a large U.S. corporation, testing the efficacy of just-in-time feedback delivered at a teachable moment – immediately after succumbing to a phishing email – to reduce susceptibility to phishing emails. Employees in the study were sent an initial pseudo-phishing email, and those who either ignored or fell victim to the phishing email were randomized to receive or not receive feedback about their response. Just-in-time feedback for employees who fell victim to or ignored the initial pseudo-phishing email reduced susceptibility to a second pseudo-phishing email sent by the research team. Additionally, for employees who ignored the initial email, feedback also increased reporting rates.

Intervention development frameworks offer the behavioral sciences a systematic and rigorous empirical process to guide the translation of basic science into practice in pursuit of desirable public health and clinical outcomes. The multiple frameworks that have emerged share a goal of optimization during intervention development and can increase the likelihood of arriving at an effective and disseminable intervention. Yet, the process of optimizing an intervention differs functionally and conceptually across frameworks, creating confusion and conflicting guidance on when and how to optimize. This paper seeks to facilitate the use of translational intervention development frameworks by providing a blueprint for selecting and using a framework by considering the process of optimization as conceptualized by each. First, we operationalize optimization and contextualize its role in intervention development. Next, we provide brief overviews of three translational intervention development frameworks (ORBIT, MRC, and MOST), identifying areas of overlap and divergence thereby aligning core concepts across the frameworks to improve translation. We offer considerations and concrete use cases for investigators seeking to identify and use a framework in their intervention development research. We push forward an agenda of a norm to use and specify frameworks in behavioral science to support a more rapid translational pipeline.

Understanding how sustainable preference change can be achieved is of both scientific and practical importance. Recent work shows that merely responding or not responding to objects during go/no-go training can influence preferences for these objects right after the training, when people choose with a time limit. Here we examined whether and how such immediate preference change in fast choices can affect choices without time limit one week later. In two preregistered experiments, participants responded to go food items and withheld responses toward no-go food items during a go/no-go training. Immediately after the training, they made consumption choices for half of the items (with a time limit in Experiment 1; without time limit in Experiment 2). One week later, participants chose again (without time limit in both experiments). Half of the choices had been presented immediately after the training (repeated choices), while the other half had not (new choices). Participants preferred go over no-go items both immediately after the training and one week later. Furthermore, the effect was observed for both repeated and new choices after one week, revealing a direct effect of mere (non)responses on preferences one week later. Exploratory analyses revealed that the effect after one week is related to the memory of stimulus-response contingencies immediately after the training, and this memory is impaired by making choices. These findings show mere action versus inaction can directly induce preference change that lasts for at least one week, and memory of stimulus-response contingencies may play a crucial role in this effect.

An influential line of thinking in behavioral science, to which the two authors have long subscribed, is that many of society's most pressing problems can be addressed cheaply and effectively at the level of the individual, without modifying the system in which the individual operates. We now believe this was a mistake, along with, we suspect, many colleagues in both the academic and policy communities. Results from such interventions have been disappointingly modest. But more importantly, they have guided many (though by no means all) behavioral scientists to frame policy problems in individual, not systemic, terms: To adopt what we call the “i-frame,” rather than the “s-frame.” The difference may be more consequential than i-frame advocates have realized, by deflecting attention and support away from s-frame policies. Indeed, highlighting the i-frame is a long-established objective of corporate opponents of concerted systemic action such as regulation and taxation. We illustrate our argument briefly for six policy problems, and in depth with the examples of climate change, obesity, retirement savings, and pollution from plastic waste. We argue that the most important way in which behavioral scientists can contribute to public policy is by employing their skills to develop and implement value-creating system-level change.

As the world reckons with the existential threat posed by climate change, the US remains deeply divided about the need for action. The solution to this problem, many have argued, begins with teaching environmentalism in primary and secondary schools and fostering receptivity to environmental issues and environmental science among the next generation. This strategy, of course, comes with its own set of challenges. Where does climate change fit in the school curriculum? What can teachers do in their classrooms to mitigate the influence of partisan politics? How can an abstract global phenomenon be made real at the local level? If K-12 education has a role to play in the broader project of environmental conservation, such questions need to be answered.

For this Policy Dialogue, the HEQ editors asked Zeke Baker and Hunter Gehlbach to explore the challenges and opportunities inherent in educating the next generation about climate change, drawing on analogues from the past and scholarship from the present to help us better understand the future. Gehlbach is a professor and vice dean at the Johns Hopkins University School of Education. Thanks to a mid-career fellowship from the Spencer Foundation, much of his research focus has shifted toward investigating how social psychological approaches might improve environmental education. Baker is an assistant professor of sociology at Sonoma State University. His research explores the development and use of climate science, especially insofar as climate knowledge is embedded in social relationships of power.

HEQ Policy Dialogues are, by design, intended to promote an informal, free exchange of ideas between scholars. At the end of the exchange, we offer references for readers who wish to follow up on sources relevant to the discussion.

In 1994, a general population survey was conducted to evaluate Montanans’ knowledge about noxious weeds, and results from that survey launched an ongoing statewide education campaign. In 2019, we conducted another general population survey to assess the views and behaviors of Montanans as they relate to noxious weeds and to identify new approaches for disseminating noxious weed information. We also asked questions to evaluate changes over the 25-yr period, although our ability to make direct comparisons is subject to limitations. We implemented a mail-based survey in March through May 2019. The response rate was 18%, with 830 responses from 4,582 valid mailing addresses. Just under half (48%) of respondents report “little” or “no” knowledge about noxious weeds, which would constitute a 19-point improvement since 1994. A large majority (68%) of respondents indicate that noxious weeds are a “serious” or “very serious” problem, and appreciation for the range of negative impacts associated with noxious weeds is considerable. Most respondents (61%) identify humans as contributing “a lot” to noxious weed spread, and respondents report that their behaviors to prevent the spread of noxious weeds have increased over time. While the 1994 respondents rated television, newspaper, and radio as the best ways to disseminate information about noxious weeds, respondents now also recognize methods such as websites and social media pages as effective. Our survey identifies a need for increased educational messaging for women and people in the 18 to 39 age group. Overall, our results indicate that individuals who have seen different forms of advertisements and have participated in educational programs are more likely to consider noxious weeds a serious problem and to engage in behaviors to stop their spread.

Smoking is a major cause of worldwide morbidity and mortality. Almost no evidence-based intervention programs are available to help youth quit smoking. We argue that ineffective targeting of peer influence and engagement difficulties are significant barriers to successful youth smoking cessation. To address these barriers, we developed the mobile game intervention HitnRun. A two-armed randomized controlled trial (RCT; n = 144) was conducted and young smokers (Mage = 19.39; SDage = 2.52) were randomly assigned to either play HitnRun or read a psychoeducational brochure. Prior to, directly following the intervention period, and after three-month follow-up, weekly smoking behavior, abstinence rates, intervention dose, and peer- and engagement-related factors were assessed. Results indicated similar reductions in weekly smoking levels and similar abstinence rates for both groups. Yet, we found a dose effect with HitnRun only: The longer participants played HitnRun, the lower their weekly smoking levels were. In the brochure group, a higher dose was related to higher weekly smoking levels at all measurement moments. Exploratory analyses showed the most powerful effects of HitnRun for participants who connected with and were engaged by the intervention. Future work should build on the promising potential of HitnRun by increasing personalization efforts and strengthening peer influence components.

Several fall prevention programs have been implemented to reduce falls among seniors. In some rural areas or in French-speaking minority communities, the availability of such programs is limited. The objectives of this paper are to: (a) describe the Fall Prevention Program Marche vers le futur, offered in French, by videoconference; and (b) present the results of the evaluation of the program objectives. Results demonstrate that participants have improved their physical abilities, gained knowledge, adopted new behaviors and lifestyle habits. In short, Marche vers le futur reduces fall risk factors in a manner equal or superior to other programs. Marche vers le futur has made possible the provision of services in French in communities where availability of French-language resources is very limited, therefore fostering equity in access to health services.

A qualitative study was conducted with a subset of a Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) membership base in Wisconsin, USA to examine attitude and behavior change associated with membership. Changes that were examined included: modified eating or cooking habits, increased consideration of food seasonality and associated consumer preferences for seasonal products, and an enhanced appreciation for farming. Although this study investigated ‘spillover’ attitude or behavior changes (e.g. reduced driving or increased use of environmentally friendly cleaning products), none were observed. This study indicates that attitude and behavior changes are generated by the structural elements of CSA including exposure to the farm, interactions with the farmer, and the constraints imposed by a pre-selected bundle of vegetables. There was no indication that changes occur due to the development and enforcement of social norms within the CSA membership base. Community, in the context of this CSA, is expressed primarily as a conceptual community of interest. Our results suggest that demonstrated attitude and behavior change increases the likelihood that a consumer will renew their CSA membership.