Designing information provision to serve as a reminder of altruistic benefits: A case study of the risks of air pollution caused by industrialization

Autoři: Hidenori Komatsu aff001;  Hiromi Kubota aff002;  Nobuyuki Tanaka aff002;  Hirotada Ohashi aff003
Působiště autorů: Energy Innovation Center, Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, Kanagawa, Japan aff001;  Environmental Science Research Laboratory, Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, Abiko-shi, Chiba, Japan aff002;  School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan aff003
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 15(1)
Kategorie: Research Article


A well-known phenomenon is that humans perceive risks to threaten future generations as more dangerous in many cases. However, this tendency could be changed depending on certain conditions and could potentially be explained by the evolution of altruism. Our multi-agent simulation model, which was constructed to identify attributes contributing to subjective assessment of a risk source based on kin selection theory, showed that support from relatives can affect the agents’ subjective risk assessment. We utilize this insight, which has never been explored in the context of nudge, to show that real-world messages reminding respondents that they are supported by their relatives can moderate the perception of a risk source as extremely dangerous. A randomized control trial based on an internet questionnaire survey was conducted to identify the intervention effect of such messages, using air pollution caused by industrialization as the risk source for the case study. Our analysis suggests that messages moderate extreme attitudes. Presentation of additional visual information can boost the sense of familial support and increase the effect of a message compared with a message comprising only textual information. The attributes and personality traits of the respondents who are responsive to the intervention message are also discussed.

Klíčová slova:

Air pollution – Altruistic behavior – Decision making – Evolutionary adaptation – Human evolution – Questionnaires – Simulation and modeling – Vision


1. Thaler RH, Sunstein CR. Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 2008.

2. Szaszi B, Palinkas A, Palfi B, Szollosi A, Aczel B. A Systematic Scoping Review of the Choice Architecture Movement: Toward Understanding When and Why Nudges Work. J Behav Decis Mak. 2018;31: 355–366.

3. Cabinet Office. MINDSPACE: Influencing behaviour through public policy. 2010.

4. Kahneman D, Thaler RH. Anomalies: Utility maximisation and experienced utility. J Econ Perspect. 2006;20(1): 221–34.

5. Novemsky N, Kahneman D. The boundaries of loss aversion. J Marketing Res. 2005;42(2): 119–28.

6. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science. 1974;185(4157): 1124–31. doi: 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 17835457

7. Kenrick DT, Griskevicius V, Sundie JM, Li NP, Li YJ, and Neuberg SL. Deep rationality: The evolutionary economics of decision making. Soc Cogn. 2009;27(5): 764–85. doi: 10.1521/soco.2009.27.5.764 20686634

8. Kahneman D. Maps of bounded rationality: A perspective on intuitive judgment and choice. In: Frängsmyr T, editor. Les Prix Nobel: The Nobel Prizes 2002. Stockholm: Nobel Foundation; 2002. pp. 449–489.

9. Slovic P. Affect, reason, risk and rationality. Newsletter of the European Working Group “Multicriteria Aid for Decisions”. 2006;3: 1–5.

10. Haselton MG, Bryant GA, Wilke A, Frederick DA, Galperin A, Frankenhuis W et al. Adaptive rationality: An evolutionary perspective on cognitive bias. Soc Cogn. 2009;27: 733–763.

11. Johnson DDP, Fowler JH. Evolution of overconfidence. Nature. 2011;477: 317–320. doi: 10.1038/nature10384 21921915

12. Cosmides L, Tooby J. Cognitive adaptations for social exchange. In: Barkow JTJ, Cosmides L, editors. The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1992. pp. 163–228.

13. Covello VT, McCallum DB, Pavlova MT. Effective risk communication. New York: Springer; 2004.

14. Roos P, Nau D. Risk preference and sequential choice in evolutionary games. Adv Complex Sys. 2010;13: 559–578.

15. Axelrod R. The evolution of cooperation. New York: Basic Books; 1984.

16. McDermott R, Fowler JH, Smirnov O. On the evolutionary origin of prospect theory preferences. J Politics. 2008;70: 335–350.

17. Hamilton WD. The genetical evolution of social behavior. J Theor Biol. 1964;7: 1–16. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(64)90038-4 5875341

18. Komatsu H, Ohashi H. Evolution of risk-averse attitude rooted in altruism: An analysis using evolutionary multi-agent simulation model. T Jpn Soc Simulat Technol. 2016;8: 85–99.

19. Komatsu H, Tanaka N, Kubota H, Ohashi H. Do messages to remind of being supported by relatives affect responses to risks that are perceived to threaten future generations? [abstract] NorthEastern Evolutionary Psychology Society 2018; 2018 Apr 20; NY, USA.

20. Current population estimates as of October 1, 2017 [Internet]. Tokyo: Statistics Bureau, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (Japan); 2017 [cited Jun 20th, 2019]

21. Ministry of the Environment (Japan). Status of PM2.5 concentration; 2018 [cited Jun 20th, 2019]

22. Gosling SD, Rentfrow PJ, Swann WB. A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. J Res Pers. 2003;37: 504–528.

23. Smith GE, Venkatraman MP, Dholakia RR. Diagnosing the search cost: Waiting time and the moderating impact of prior category knowledge. J Econ Psychol. 1999;20: 285–314.

24. Speier C, Valacich J, Vessey I. The influence of task interruption on individual decision making: An information overload perspective. Decis Sci. 1999;30: 337–356.

25. Babin LA, Burns AC. Effects of print ad pictures and copy containing instructions to imagine on mental imagery that mediates attitudes. J Advert. 1997;26: 33–44.

Článek vyšel v časopise


2020 Číslo 1
Nejčtenější tento týden