SynthesisNature communications2019
Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials testing behavioural interventions to promote household action on climate change.
Synthesis in Nature communications, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06004531 (Planetary Health and Loneliness), which is not on this map. Cited by 59 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Planetary Health and Loneliness: Survey and Mini-intervention to Study the Interrelations of Multiple Behavior Change and Perception of Social Isolation
Who cites it
59 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness of bullying prevention-associated interventions among children and adolescents: an umbrella review of systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials examining social comparison as a behaviour change technique across the behavioural sciences.Nature human behaviour · 2025Pooled it
- Promising behavior change techniques for climate-friendly behavior change - a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2024Pooled it
- Field interventions for climate change mitigation behaviors: A second-order meta-analysis.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Pooled it
- Systematic review of conservation interventions to promote voluntary behavior change.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2023Pooled it
- The effectiveness of nudging: A meta-analysis of choice architecture interventions across behavioral domains.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Pooled it
- A systematic review to assess the evidence-based effectiveness, content, and success factors of behavior change interventions for enhancing pro-environmental behavior in individuals.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Pooled it
- Norms, prices, and commitment: A comprehensive overview of field experiments in the energy domain and treatment effect moderators.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Pooled it
- Social incentive factors in interventions promoting sustainable behaviors: A meta-analysis.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Psychological Predictors of Energy Saving Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Approach.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Pooled it
- Theory-based promotion of diet and transportation behavior change to reduce carbon footprint among students: Randomized parallel trial of the GROW app.Applied psychology. Health and well-being · 2026Trial
- A randomized trial testing the effectiveness of virtual reality as a tool for pro-environmental dietary change.Scientific reports · 2022Trial
- A climate action intervention increases four psychological motivators, as well as climate advocacy, activism and civic participation.Royal Society open science · 2026Article
- Fighting fire with fire: Prebunking with the use of a plausible meta-conspiracy framing.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2026Article
- Impact of anger, compassion, and hope on climate action taking.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Educational policies can strengthen climate coalitions.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- No evidence that nonincentivized behavioral interventions effectively mitigate climate change after adjusting for publication bias.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Meta-analysis on comparative impact of behavioral, information, and monetary interventions on energy-efficient appliance adoption.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Intention to reduce meat consumption in relation to perceived economic benefits and meat purchase expenditure among Japanese adults.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Climate change mitigation and synergies with primary cancer prevention in Europe: time to implement opportunities.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
No consensus exists regarding which are the most effective mechanisms to promote household action on climate change. We present a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comprising 3,092,678 observations, which estimates the effects of behavioural interventions holding other factors constant. Here we show that behavioural interventions promote climate change mitigation to a very small degree while the intervention lasts (d = -0.093 95% CI -0.160, -0.055), with no evidence of sustained positive effects once the intervention ends. With the exception of recycling, most household mitigation behaviours show a low behavioural plasticity. The intervention with the highest average effect size is choice architecture (nudges) but this strategy has been tested in a limited number of behaviours. Our results do not imply behavioural interventions are less effective than alternative strategies such as financial incentives or regulations, nor exclude the possibility that behavioural interventions could have stronger effects when used in combination with alternative strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.