ArticlePeerJ2023
How does abstract and concrete garbage classification signage influence waste sorting behavior?
Article in PeerJ, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the issuance of standardized garbage classification signage, the rate of garbage classification in China remains low. We conducted a pair of laboratory experiments to explore the cognitive processing differences between abstract (including recyclables, hazardous garbage, and food signs) and concrete (including paper, plastic, glass, metal, textiles, batteries, household chemicals, tubes, and food signs) classification signs. We tested a nudging strategy to enhance garbage classification behavior. In Experiment 1, we divided garbage classification signs into two conditions: an abstract condition (comprising abstract signs) and a concrete condition (comprising concrete signs). The Go/No Go task was used to simulate garbage classification behavior. Participants were instructed to press a key when the garbage stimulus matched the classification signs (Go condition) and to refrain from pressing the key when there was a mismatch (No Go condition). The results showed that responses under the concrete condition were expedited compared to those under the abstract condition. This suggests that concrete signage requires less cognitive exertion, thereby enhancing the efficiency of waste classification. In Experiment 2, we optimized the existing bin signage, which predominantly featured abstract signs (traditional condition), and transformed it into a bin signage that emphasized concrete classification signs. These concrete signs were strategically positioned on the upper part of the bins to draw attention (nudging condition). The results suggested that the nudging condition required fewer cognitive resources than the traditional condition, which in turn increased the efficiency of processing garbage classification. This study not only validates the effects of concreteness in garbage classification but also provides effective nudge strategies to complement existing garbage classification management policy tools in a realistic Chinese context.
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.