Increasing Recycling in Academic Buildings: A Systematic Replication

Abstract

We placed recycling receptacles in two locations in academic buildings and studied recycling behavior within an ABA multiple baseline design. During baseline, recycling receptacles were placed in a central location. During the intervention, receptacles were moved into classrooms where beverages were primarily consumed. Baseline conditions were then reinstated. The percentage of cans recycled daily increased during intervention and returned to near-baseline levels during withdrawal. The percentage of cans discarded daily in the trash decreased during the intervention and increased to near-baseline levels during withdrawal. Implications of this study include making recycling more convenient in institutional settings.DESCRIPTORS: aluminum can recycling, stimulus control, response covariationBehavioral research has identified numerous interventions that increase recycling behaviors. Austin, Hatfield, Grindle, and Bailey (1993) used signs and education to increase paper recycling in two college departments. By placing signs over the trash containers and recycling containers, they increased recyclables from 51% in baseline to 84% in the experimental condition. Williams (1991) reported that less than half of the students in residence halls recycled their daily newspapers. He suggested that a majority of students would recycle if drop-off facilities were convenient for them. Brothers, Krantz, and McClannahan (1994) found that when recycling containers were placed in a central location of an office building, 28% of recyclable paper was recycled. When the containers were moved closer to the workers, recycling increased to 88% of all The authors acknowledge the helpfulness of Denise Martz and Stan Aeschleman for their comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript. Portions of this research were presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Behavior Analysis, Washington, DC, 1995. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Timothy D. Ludwig, Appalachian State University, 114 Smith-Wright Hall, Boone, North Carolina 28608 (E-mail: ludwigtd@appstate.edu).paper, and similar results were maintained for up to 7 months afterward.The present study provided a systematic replication of the study by Brothers et al. (1994) applied to student recycling behaviors in university academic buildings. By making recycling more convenient, it was predicted that patrons of two academic buildings would increase their aluminum can recycling. METHOD Participants and SettingsParticipants in the study included patrons of two academic buildings at a southeastern university over a 6-month period. Building A was a rectangular structure with three floors containing nine classrooms (no classrooms on the first floor, four on the second floor, and five on the third floor). Building B was a three-story building that contained 25 classrooms. To make the two buildings comparable, two perpendicular halls containing 10 classrooms on the second floor of Building B were used in the study. Trash containers were located inside each cl...

The Effects of Bin Proximity and Visual Prompts on Recycling in a University Building

“…Although the results of this study partially replicate previous findings that recycling bin proximity influences rates of recycling (e.g., Ludwig et al, 1998), they differ from those reported by O'Connor et al (2010) in that simply placing bins in the classrooms did not lead to a large increase in recycling. The finding that prompting in the form of informational signs improved rates of recycling was consistent with the effects reported by previous research as well (e.g., Reid, Luyben, Rawers, & Bailey, 1976).…”

“…Researchers have successfully increased recycling through consequence-based interventions such as contingent rewards (e.g., Geller, Chaffee, & Ingram, 1975), public feedback (e.g., Kim, Oah, & Dickinson, 2005), and commitment (e.g., 1 Email: ndmiller@memphis.ed DeLeon & Fuqua, 1995). Two antecedent-based procedures that are particularly promising for institutional efforts to improve recycling are the placement of recycling bins in close proximity to the point of consumption (e.g., Ludwig, Gray, & Rowell, 1998;O'Connor, Lerman, Fritz, & Hodde, 2010), and providing antecedent prompts or signs (e.g., Austin, Hatfield, Grindle, & Bailey, 1993;Duffy & Verges, 2008). These procedures may be relatively easy and inexpensive to implement on a large scale, and require fewer resources than consequence-based strategies.…”

“…However, some questions remain regarding the generalizability of this result, particularly with regard to other recycling behaviors. Most behavioral research on recycling behavior has focused on a single type of recycling, such as paper (e.g., DeLeon & Fuqua, 1995), plastic bottles (O'Connor et al, 2010), or aluminum cans (Ludwig et al, 1998). Although the independent effects of an intervention on each of these behaviors may be of interest, many current recycling programs have expanded to include a wider array of recyclable materials, and have adopted a single-stream approach in which various types of recyclables are co-mingled in the same receptacle.…”

Heritage tourism, CSR and the role of employee environmental behaviour

“…The few studies that have included a study of an intervention are: an intervention of recycling behaviour (Ludwig, Gray, & Rowell, 1998), a feedback intervention (Carrico & Riemer, 2011) and an intervention with office paper recycling (Brothers, Krantz, & McClannahan, 1994 McClannahan's (1994) intervention increased paper recycling to 85%. Gregory- Smith et al (in press) found that self-reported behaviour was lower after an intervention and suggested that this may be because, after the intervention, the employees became more critical of their behaviour.…”

Behavioural psychology, marketing and consumer behaviour: a literature review and future research agenda

“…Foxall (1993) notes the focus of applied behaviour analysis on the effectiveness of prompts (which he states act as antecedent verbal stimuli) and highlights feedback and incentives as two types of reinforcement. These two types have largely centred on issues of social importance, such as domestic energy use (Kohlenberg, Phillips, & Proctor, 1976;Winett, Leckliter, Chinn, Stahl, & Love, 1985;Winett, Neale, & Grier, 1979), waste disposal and recycling (Brothers, Krantz, 20 & McClannahan, 1994;Craig & Leland, 1983;Ludwig, Gray & Rowell, 1998), and disease prevention (Winett, Moore, & Anderson, 1991). Because of this, interest in applied behaviour analysis from the social marketing perspective has increased (Donovan, 2011), as reflected in relevant developments in the area, such as choice architecture (Thaler & Sunstein, 2009).…”