ArticlePDF Available

Shrieking Sirens - Schemata, Scripts, and Social Norms: How Change Occurs

Authors:

Abstract

This paper investigates the causal relationships among scripts, schemata, and social norms. The authors examine how social norms are triggered by particular schemata and are grounded in scripts. Just as schemata are embedded in a network, so too are social norms, and they can be primed through spreading activation. Moreover, the expectations that allow a social norm‘s existence are inherently grounded in particular scripts and schemata. Using interventions that have targeted gender norms, open defecation, female genital cutting, and other collective issues as examples, the authors argue that ignoring the cognitive underpinnings of a social norm doom interventions to failure.
Shrieking Sirens
Schemata, Scripts, and Social Norms: How Change Occurs
Cristina Bicchieri and Peter McNally
PPE Working Paper
July 2015
University of Pennsylvania
Abstract: This paper investigates the causal relationships among scripts, schemata, and social norms. The
authors examine how social norms are triggered by particular schemata and are grounded in scripts. Just
as schemata are embedded in a network, so too are social norms, and they can be primed through
spreading activation. Moreover, the expectations that allow a social norm‘s existence are inherently
grounded in particular scripts and schemata. Using interventions that have targeted gender norms, open
defecation, female genital cutting, and other collective issues as examples, the authors argue that ignoring
the cognitive underpinnings of a social norm doom interventions to failure.
Keywords: script, schema, norms, social norms, gender, interventions, spreading activation
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
2
1. Introduction
“Labels of primary potency… act like shrieking sirens, deafening us to all finer
discriminations that we may otherwise perceive” (Allport 1954)
The social rules to which one adheres are largely dependent on how one interprets a situation and
the actors‘ behavior within it. How one reads people‘s behavior, speech, general appearance, and
the environment in which they are embedded informs one about how to appropriately respond.
Upon recognizing a situation to be of a particular type (e.g., a wedding, a soccer game, a play),
one simultaneously recognizes that certain actions are acceptable (or even praiseworthy) and
others are not (Bicchieri 2006). Social learning teaches people that they should not wear the tag
of their shirt facing outwards while in public, urinate in an elevator, or say ―I love you‖ when
greeting a stranger. As we learn the nature of particular situations and environments, we
simultaneously learn which behaviors are appropriate, expected, or prohibited within them.
These behaviors often crystallize into shared behavioral rules that prescribe or proscribe
behaviors within large classes of situations. These shared rules are what we call social norms
(Bicchieri 2006; Coleman 1990; Elster 1990). Social norms, as they are defined by Bicchieri
(2006) can be understood as a sort of ―grammar for social interactions‖ and are grounded in
scripted sequences of behavior (Bicchieri & Muldoon 2011, para. 1). Like any linguistic
grammar, social norms function as prescriptive rules. However, instead of dictating the way in
which words are formed and ordered, social norms dictate the behavior that people are expected
to engage in while in particular situations. All the behaviors regulated by norms are
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
3
interdependent: the individual choice to adhere to a particular norm is conditional on what one
expects others to do (empirical expectations) and what one expects others to think a person
should do in such a situation (normative expectations). In fact, one prefers to follow a norm on
condition of having such social expectations (Bicchieri 2006, Chapter 1). Having conditional
preferences for following a norm implies that, were our social expectations to change, our
conditions for following a social norm would cease to exist.
1
Bicchieri (2006) has already made it clear how important these social expectations (empirical
and normative) are for the existence of a social norm. Once a group of individuals hold the
aforementioned prerequisite social expectations and preferences conditional on them, then it is
possible for a social norm to exist. But what triggers the prescriptive behavior that people follow
once these conditions are met? What focuses people on a social norm relevant to their particular
situation (as discussed by Cialdini et al. 1990)?
Most importantly, where do these critical social expectations come from? We do not constantly
reform new expectations upon encountering any new situation. Such a task is unrealistically
daunting. We already have relevant expectations stored in memory that we activate with the use
of particular cognitive structures to new situations upon encountering them. This ability to call
upon existing expectations when encountering novel situations allows for the existence of social
2
norms and their activation. In this paper, we aim to show the deep relationship that exists
between social norms and certain cognitive structures. This relationship can explain the cognitive
dynamics of norm change that has, up until now, been left unexamined.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
4
What cognitive processes take place when one encounters a new situation that allows for a
norm‘s activation? First, an agent must categorize her situation as being of a particular type,
which in turn prompts the activation of a relevant schema, or, in the case of behavioral rules, a
relevant script. As we will discuss later, scripted interactions comprise social expectations, both
empirical and normative. In any new situation, once a schema or a script is activated,
expectations about typical behaviors (empirical expectations) will in turn be activated as well as
expectations (if relevant) about appropriate behaviors (normative expectations). The social
expectations that social norms are based on are grounded in these scripts.
The process of categorizing a new situation, and eliciting a script or a schema is extremely
sensitive to subtle environmental clues that tip one off to its nature. In a rich variety of work with
economic games, which we will soon discuss, variance in behavior can be easily explained by
the fact that different labels and descriptions may elicit different scripts or that the game itself is
interpreted through a particular schematic lens. Behavioral economists are often quick to assume
that variance in behavior in very similar games is due to the elicitation of different norms. Our
approach goes beyond this simple assumption and investigates the cognitive dynamics which
drive the activation of different scripted interactions (and hence different norms).
Understanding the cognitive structures within which norms are embedded is crucial to
understand how norms can change. The dynamics of norm change is highly complex and
involves many moving parts. We focus on one important and necessary element of such change.
The novelty of our work lies not only in the proposed connection among social norms, schemata,
and scripts, but also in providing guidance for how to enact a change, at least from a cognitive
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
5
viewpoint. Even seemingly small changes to scripts and schemata can have a major impact on
catalyzing broader norm change. We argue that in order to be truly effective, interventions aimed
at changing harmful or maladaptive collective practices (such as child marriage, racial
discrimination, corruption, or codes of silence) should take into account the cognitive
underpinnings of social norms in their designs.
In the coming sections, we first discuss literature on scripts, schemata, and the semantic
networks in which they are embedded to better understand their relationship with social norms.
In doing so, we explore norm activation in more detail. We next discuss insights on schema
change to highlight specific mechanisms by which norms themselves may be changed. To
demonstrate the relevance of the relationships among scripts, schemata, and social norms, we
end by discussing the cognitive relationships we have outlined in relation to past interventions
(both intentional and incidental) and how their impact (or lack thereof) on scripts and schemata
heavily influenced their efficacy. Current and new policy interventions are increasingly aware of
the importance of understanding the nature of social norms, since norms can enhance or prevent
effective social, political, and economic interventions (World Bank 2015). In this respect, our
analysis offers insights into how effective social norms interventions should be designed.
2. Schemata and Semantic Networks
In what follows, we will discuss the nature of schemata and the cognitive networks in which they
are embedded and how their nature has implications for how norms are activated. Schemata are
generic knowledge structures that help people interpret the world around them (Fiske & Taylor
1991; Piaget 1976; Rumelhart 1980; Rumelhart 1998; Rumelhart et al. 1986). The more elements
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
6
of a schema that we observe, the more likely that schema will be activated (Nadkarni &
Narayanan 2007; Rumelhart et al. 1986). The fewer elements relevant to a schema that one
observes or the less prototyptical the elements are, the less likely the schema will be activated. A
prototype is the ―standard‖ conceptualization of a particular kind, category, or phenomenon
(Rosch 1975; Rosch 1978). The closer something is to its prototype, the more input variables
would be present for the affiliated schema, and the more likely the schema would be activated
(Rosch et al. 1976).
An understanding of prototypes is useful when understanding how to measure or change a
schema. Even if something is relatively far from the prototype, we still are quite capable of
processing it through existing schemata, up to a certain point (Piaget 1976; Rumelhart et al.
1986). For example, when one encounters an unfamiliar breed of dog, people with a well-
established ―dog‖ schema will be quite capable of identifying the creature‘s species.
Schemata serve as tools that people use to extract the maximal useful information from an
environment using the least amount of effort (Rosch 1978). When certain elements of a person,
object, environment, or event are not readily observable, the remaining information is ―filled in‖
based on any schemata that are used to process the situation (Rosch 1978; Crocker et al. 1984).
Often times, objects, people, and events can be viewed through multiple schematic lenses, and
which lens one opts for will shift one‘s interpretation of future stimuli (e.g., Crocker et al. 1984).
Imagine a young child who wishes to show off an animal she has just drawn. The creature has a
tail, pointy ears, and whiskers. All of the other scribbles are indiscernible. If one determines that
the creature is a cat, then all of the other elements of the drawing which had previously been
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
7
uninterpretable will be processed anew through the ―cat‖ schema. If there was a circle next to the
creature, and one had settled on the ―cat‖ schema, then it would most likely be interpreted as a
ball of yarn. However, if one had settled on the ―dog‖ schema instead, the circle could be instead
seen as a tennis ball.
The capacity for multiple schemata to be activated in response to the same stimuli has a direct
relationship with the capacity for multiple social norms to be activated in response to the same
situation. In a trust game, trustees might be motivated to reciprocate out of a motivation to either
reciprocate or to create equality (Xiao & Bicchieri 2010). Depending on how one interprets the
situation, subjects could either decide that reciprocation or equality is more important, ultimately
resulting in completely different decisions. In this respect, changing these schematic lenses can
serve to alter how norms are activated.
As is implied by the connectionist underpinnings of schema theory (see McClelland et al. 1986;
Rumelhart et al. 1986), individual scripts and schemata do not exist in isolation; they are
inherently linked to each other to varying degrees, and the activation of one influences the
activation of another. The entirety of one‘s interconnected schemata is termed a semantic or
associative network (Collins & Loftus 1975; Collins & Quillian 1969; Woods 1975). A semantic
network is a model of conceptual interconnectivity, with each individual schema serving as a
node, and each relationship between schemata represented as a link of varying strengths. Chronic
activation of multiple schemata in tandem will increase the strength of their associative links.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
8
The interconnected nature of schemata and the semantic networks in which they are embedded
influences both perception and behavior. When one schema is activated, other schemata with
which it is associated are simultaneously primed for activation (Lerner et al. 2012). This process
is known as spreading activation (Collins & Loftus 1975). This interconnected nature of
schemata implies that social norms, which may be triggered by schemata, may in turn be
indirectly activated through spreading activation, as we will discuss in a coming section.
3. Cultural Schemata, Social Schemata, Scripts, and Social Norms
Social interaction and shared experiences drive people within a culture to construct certain
schemata in similar and converging manners (Casson 1983; D‘Andrade 1981; Strauss & Quinn
1997). Technically, anyone‘s schemata are unique unto him or herself, but many lay schemata
are largely shared within a culture. Schemata that are shared within a culture are more resistant
to change, as they are continually reinforced through social interaction (Strauss & Quinn 1997).
Whether or not a schema is shared is an important factor to take into consideration when
attempting to change it. The degree to which a schema is collectively held will strongly influence
how effective (and necessary) an intervention designed to change it will be.
Evolutionary-driven propensities and cultural pressures drive people to attend to and process
certain clusters of stimuli over others (Rosch 1973). One example of this tendency that is
particularly relevant to social norms is social schemata. Allport once described social categories
3
as ―exceedingly salient and powerful. They tend to prevent alternative classification, or even
cross-classification… ‗labels of primary potency‘… act like shrieking sirens, deafening us to all
finer discriminations that we might otherwise perceive‖ (1954, p. 179). In fact, not only are
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
9
people sensitive to what group they and others belong to, but they exaggerate the boundaries
between social categories (Dawes 1966; Saltz & Medow, 1971; Sigel et al. 1967).
The schemata through which we cognitively process individuals also have a considerable
influence on how we perceive people and their actions. Consider gender roles. If women are
associated with characteristics such as nurturing, caring, selflessness, and so forth, people will
expect that they act in line with these characteristics, and any deviation from what is considered
‗normal‘ will be accompanied by specific causal attributions, emotional reactions, and
appropriate actions. Domestic violence is not necessarily the result of a male‘s sudden, irrational
outburst of rage. It is often instead the result of a chain of inferences that are triggered by the
violation of a schema that is perceived as natural and right. If a prototypical good wife is
expected to take care of her husband, obey him, have children and take good care of them, be
nurturing and compliant, any violation of the schema will elicit a causal attribution. If the
abnormal behavior has no other explanation, a woman might be perceived as rebellious,
disrespectful, and mean. The husband‘s perceivably legitimate (normative) expectations have
been violated, and anger is the appropriate emotion. Domestic violence is thus justified by the
violation of what appear to be legitimate and normal expectations. It is important to explicitly
note how social expectations can be grounded in a social schema (in the previous example, a
―good wife‖). We have expectations about what particular groups of people do, and what they
think one should do; when we identify someone to belong to a particular group, these
expectations are elicited.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
10
In addition to their relationship with schemata, social norms are also grounded in scripts
(Bicchieri 2006). A script is, in its most basic form, a schema for an event, with varying levels of
specificity (Abelson 1981; Schank & Abelson 1977). We engage in scripts upon the activation of
situational triggers that inform us what chains behaviors to engage in. We identify and process
these triggering factors through other schemata (Bicchieri 2006). For example, the ―good wife‖
schema incorporates several scripts having to do with sort of specific behaviors are expected
from a wife: how and when she should prepare food, how often she should have sex with her
husband, the things she should say, how she should interact with the neighbors, and so on.
The ―appropriate behaviors‖ that are expected of a ―good wife‖ are the elements of a script that
are tied to social norms. Empirical expectations inform us of what people usually do and expect
us to do, and normative expectations inform us what people think we ―should‖ do. These
expectations help shape the strength of how prescriptive a scripted set of behaviors is. Without
normative expectations, a script could be seen as a sequence of actions in which one could, and
typically does, engage. With the presence of both empirical and normative expectations, the
same script in the same situation becomes a sequence of actions in which one should, and
typically does, engage. In these respects, specific scripts have the capacity to harbor social
expectations, just as broader social schemata do.
People‘s implicit sensitivity to such social expectations drives them to conform to shared
behavioral scripts (Bicchieri 2006). An American eating at a restaurant in a foreign country
where tipping is not expected might tip her waiter, not out of generosity, but simply because her
restaurant script had been activated. The American‘s ―restaurant‖ script could easily feature
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
11
―tipping the waiter‖ as a vital action-element. Failing to tip the waiter would mean an explicit
deviation from an ongoing behavioral script. Additionally, most Americans consider ―tipping the
waiter‖ to be an action element that one should engage in (given adequate service), rather than an
action in the restaurant script than one simply could and often does engage in.
If someone were to fail to tip the waiter while engaged in a ―restaurant‖ script while in a culture
in which most people think one should tip the waiter, then a third party‘s disdain or indignation
in reaction to the script deviation would feel justified, just as a man who feels that his wife has
violated his ―good wife‖ schema might feel justified in getting angry at her. However, if a
restaurant-goer were to deviate from the ―restaurant‖ script by failing to ―read the menu‖ or ―sit
down,‖ (both common action elements in the ―restaurant‖ script in which one could, rather than
should, engage), it might seem strange to third parties, but they would not react to it with the
same emotional intensity as they would if the restaurant-goer were to deviate from a should
element.
As in the case with schemata, the same situation can often be responded to with a variety of
potential scripts, especially when the situation is ambiguous. Bettenhausen and Murnighan
(1985; 1991) discuss this process in relation to economic games. They show how different
players may interpret the same game in different ways, depending on what the game reminds
them of most. More colorful evidence of this phenomenon is provided by Liberman, Samuels,
and Ross (2004) in which they demonstrate that when playing a simple dictator game, subjects
were much more likely to behave selfishly when told that they were playing the ―Wall Street
Game,‖ but they were much more likely to be generous when told that they were playing the
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
12
―Community Game. The provision of these two different labels for the same game served to
activate completely different scripts. The abstract process that the dictator game entails was seen
through dramatically different schematic lenses for subjects in each condition.
Henrich and colleagues (2004) provide particularly compelling evidence of the effect that
different schematic interpretations can have on behavior. They recruited members of many
small-scale societies across the world to engage in a series of economic games, and respondents‘
behavior varied wildly from culture to culture. The participants were not treating these games as
the abstract exchanges that they were instead, they were attempting to process them through
the most appropriate schematic lenses that they had available. As these schematic lenses varied
from society to society, so too did participants‘ behavior. The Orma, for example, recognized
that the public goods game was similar in nature to the harambee, a community-driven way to
contribute to a public good, and thus contributed generously. On the other hand, the Au and
Gnau of Papua New Guinea both provided and rejected large offers in the ultimatum game. For
them, gift-giving is a status-seeking mechanism, and accepting gifts entails a strong obligation to
reciprocate (with unrepaid debts resulting in a diminished social status), so a simple monetary
proposal in the ultimatum game was rebranded by the heavy cultural baggage of obligation and
reciprocation.
Recognizing the rich variety of ways that different schemata can lead us to interpret out world is
very important, and failing to do so has doomed past interventions designed to change harmful
practices to failure. For example, Yoder (1995) discusses how the nature and treatment of certain
childhood diseases for residents of Lubumbashi, Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
13
Congo) differs considerably from the contemporary biomedical approach. What a doctor might
consider to be diarrhea could be classified as one of six distinct diseases by locals, depending on
their perceived symptoms. Though all six disease classifications featured loose stool as a central
symptom, only Kuhara was equated with what a doctor would diagnose as ―diarrhea.‖ When
health organizations attempted to inform residents of Lubumbashi about the appropriate
treatment for diarrhea, locals likely interpreted the advice to be only relevant to Kuhara, and not
to the others. Indeed, respondents readily reported giving the appropriate diarrheal treatment to
cases of Kuhara, but not to in response to the other five diagnoses.
Situational trigger cues may orient people towards different expectations (which may be
empirical or normative), and by extension, different norms. As demonstrated by Cialdini and
colleagues (1990), particular environmental cues can make a littering norm salient, to varying
degrees. In one of their experiments, they stuffed flyers into the mailboxes of students and fixed
up a mailroom so that the floor was either littered with trash, completely clean, or clean with the
exception of a single partly eaten watermelon rind. In the messy condition, people tended to
throw their own unwanted flyers on the ground (likely as it was obvious that the cleanliness
script was not appropriate), while in the clean condition, people followed suit and were
reasonably clean themselves. Interestingly, subjects were the cleanest in the condition where the
mailroom was clean except for the half-eaten watermelon.
Though the clean and dirty environments served as cues for how collectively important a norm
of cleanliness was, the watermelon rind was the most effective trigger cue of all. The single piece
of garbage stood out in such contrast to the otherwise clean environment that it was likely
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
14
difficult not to think about the behavior of the one messy person who ruined the whole mailroom
this violation called the strongest attention to the should element in a cleanliness script (recall
how particular expectations, which are relevant to norms, are fundamentally grounded in scripts).
Not only does this particular experiment serve as a demonstration that not all trigger cues are
―created equal,‖ but also that a norm can be activated in a variety of ways.
Just as a schema can be primed for activation via the activation of an associated schema, so too
can a social norm be ―primed‖ for activation through the activation of relevant schemata and
scripts in its semantic network. For example, seeing someone shout obscenities at a beggar could
have the contrary effect of boosting the likelihood of donating for an observer. Viewing a norm
transgression calls attention to the norm itself, thereby making it more likely to be activated in
the observer (Bicchieri 2006; Harvey & Enzel 1981). Such a norm transgressor can indirectly
serve as a triggering cue for a norm of, say, beneficence (Macaulay 1970).
Harvey and Enzel (1981) discuss how social norms, like schemata, might be cognitively
organized in a network, and thus the activation of one will influence the activation of another.
Cialdini and colleagues (1990) provide support for this idea experimentally by placing flyers on
the windshields of strangers returning to their car. The flyers advertised a variety of messages,
and the semantically closer each individual message was to the norm of not littering (e.g., a flyer
encouraging recycling as opposed to a flyer encouraging voting), the less likely the recipient was
to throw the flyer on the ground. The stronger the association between the flyer‘s message and
littering, the more likely one‘s norm of not littering was to be activated via spreading activation.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
15
Aarts and Dijksterhuis (2003; see also Joly et al. 2008) provide further support for the hypothesis
that norms can be activated via spreading activation. They told subjects to scrutinize an image of
one of two locations. Some were told that they were going to have to visit the location later in the
experiment. Subjects were later presented with a series of 24 words and asked to decide as fast as
possible which words were real and which were made up. After being both shown the image of a
library and told that they were going to visit it, subjects were able to identify words more quickly
if they were linked to the normative behavior of being silent (words like silent, quiet, still, and
whisper). More interestingly, subjects under these same conditions also spoke with a
significantly lower volume than other subjects, providing behavioral evidence that their ―library‖
schema and associated scripts had been activated. Being told that they were going to visit a
library (as opposed to just looking at an image of one) made the subjects activate their ―library‖
schema and associated scripts more effectively.
It should be clear that norms share a close and complex relationship with scripts and schemata.
By changing the scripts and schemata through which people understand social interactions or
reconfiguring the semantic networks in which such schemata are embedded, one could
theoretically change what people consider ―appropriate‖ and thereby change the associated social
norm(s). Examples from behavioral economics (though they do not openly theorize about social
norms and related scripts‘ influence on behavior) provide evidence of this phenomenon with
respect to different interpretations of fairness (e.g., Frey & Bohnet 1995; Hoffman et al. 1994).
This change in perception of what is appropriate could similarly be accomplished by creating
novel schemata and shifting what scripts and schemata one typically relies upon when
understanding social situations.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
16
4. Script and Schema Change
―There is nothing so obdurate to education or criticism as the stereotype‖ (Lippmann 1922, p.
99). The same can be said of schemata in general. Most research on social schemata has
emphasized schemata‘s ability to assimilate schema-discrepant information and resist change
(e.g., Brown 2011; Crocker et al. 1984; Hilton & von Hippel 1996). As we argue that social
norms are embedded into scripts, the possibility of changing scripts and schemata is of foremost
importance in an analysis of norm change. Fortunately, schema change is possible. Certain
schemata are easier to change than others, and there are several theoretical models of how it can
be accomplished.
Piaget believed that people strive to maintain an equilibrium between the outside world and the
internal mental systems through which they process the world (1976). When perceived stimuli
and existing schemata do not match perfectly, there are two ways to resolve the conflict:
assimilation or accommodation. As it first develops, a new schema is loose and vague (Piaget
1964). For example, the internal structure of a new schema for ―dog‖ might consist of just a few
vague elements, like ―a living creature‖ and ―has four legs.‖ As we accumulate new experiences,
some of which defy our schematic interpretations of ―dog,‖ we either assimilate the new
information and cast aside the discrepancies or accommodate it by refining the schema and
change its boundaries. Information that confirms an existing schema reinforces it and makes it
even more difficult to change in the future (Mandler 1984). The more nuanced and well-
established a schema is, the better able one is to ignore disconfirmatory evidence.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
17
Some schemata can easily be disconfirmed through simple observation. However, not all
elements of schemata are so objectively verifiable (Crocker et al. 1984). Social schemata, in
particular, are highly subject to interpretation, more capable of assimilation, and thus more
resistant to change.
4
Stereotypes
5
are a classic example of this. For example, if one held a
stereotype for ―city people‖ that included the element of ―unfriendly, one could easily interpret
a range of behaviors exhibited by a ―city dweller‖ as unfriendly, especially if such behaviors are
ambiguous in nature.
In addition to the subjective nature of social schemata, there are several biases that can hamper
the process of schema revision. Due to biases like the confirmation bias and motivated reasoning
(e.g., Devine et al. 1990; Nickerson 1998; Kunda 1990), people often attend to and remember
schema-consistent information (with some exceptions), especially when one finds it undesirable
to reject the schema. A similar process hamper social norm change. As people might have
personal investments in particular maladaptive norms (as will be discussed later), anticipating
and taking steps to avoid potential biases like motivated reasoning and confirmation bias will
help keep an intervention to change a norm effective.
4.1. Specific models of schema change. There are several theoretical models of schema change,
and there are certain circumstances under which schema change is more likely than others
(Brown 2011; Crocker et al. 1984; Hilton & von Hippel 1996; Hewstone et al. 1992; Hewstone
et al. 1992; Poole et al. 1989; Queller & Smith 2002; Rothbart 1981; Weber & Crocker 1983).
Most empirical work on schema change has been performed in the specific realm of stereotype
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
18
change. Understanding these models will help inform how schemata that guide and trigger social
norms can arise and change.
The most prominent models of schema change are the bookkeeping model, the conversion
model, and the subtyping model (Crocker et al. 1984). Certain models are thought to be more
appropriate under certain circumstances. The most intuitive model (given a basic understanding
of schemata) is the bookkeeping model. It asserts that people continuously update their schemata
whenever they encounter discrepant information (Rothbart 1981; see also, Rumelhart & Norman
1976). A few instances of discrepant information will not change one‘s schemata much, but in
aggregate, many instances will.
The conversion model of schema change provides a more dramatic alternative to the
bookkeeping model. This model asserts that a few highly salient instances of discrepant
information will catalyze the process of schema revision (Rothbart 1981). Instead of many
instances of mildly schema-discrepant information resulting in many minor revisions to one‘s
schema, the conversion model asserts that the observation of a few highly salient schema
discrepant instances will trigger a single, sudden revision.
Finally, there is the subtyping model. The subtyping model asserts that the observation of
schema-discrepant information will not cause one to revise one‘s overall schema at all but rather
induce one to create a new, subschema that is capable of explaining‖ the discrepancy
(Hewstone et al. 1992a). This new schema is a specific subcategory of the original schema, and it
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
19
is specifically tailored to the class of observed information that is discrepant with the original
schema.
Empirical evidence has been found to support all three models of schema change to varying
degrees. Support for the conversion model is provided in a study by Gurwitz and Doge (1977) in
which they provided subjects with descriptions of three members of the same sorority. In one
condition all three members were described to be mildly discrepant from the common ―sorority‖
stereotype, or, in another condition, just one was described to be highly discrepant, depending on
the condition. When subjects rated a fourth member of the sorority on her likely qualities, being
presented with the single ―glaring exception‖ resulted in less stereotypical ratings than being
presented with all three mildly discrepant members.
Weber and Crocker (1983) compared all three models and found empirical support for the
bookkeeping and subtyping model but little support for the conversion model (for similar results,
see Hewstone et al. 1992a). In their first experiment, subjects were presented with descriptions of
either lawyers or librarians in groups of either 6 or 30. Schema-discrepant information was either
concentrated in a few individuals or dispersed across many individuals. Subjects rated how
typical each characteristic was of the overall group and provided an open-ended description of a
new, unknown lawyer or librarian. When many example individuals displayed non-stereotypical
behavior, subjects exhibited the strongest stereotype reduction, especially when presented with
30 rather than 6 examples, indicating that the bookkeeping model was at work. In a follow-up
experiment, the authors varied the ―extremeness‖ of a schema-discrepant piece of information.
This variation had little impact on how stereotypical the recalled information was, suggesting
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
20
that subjects explained the unusual behavior away as ―exceptions to the rule‖ through subtyping.
Weber and Crocker (1983) acknowledged that the conversion model might apply when subjects
do not have well-established schemata (see also Queller & Smith 2002). That is, when one is
unsure of the general characteristics of a prototype, a single piece of evidence could be treated as
highly informative.
It is important to address why subtyping prevents schema change in some circumstances and not
others. One proposed explanation is that the discrepant members in some cases are simply too
atypical, thereby making the classification of them as ―exceptions‖ more reasonable (Johnston
1992). In support of this prospect, a multiple regression analysis conducted by Johnston (1992)
found that the perceived typicality of stereotype disconfirmers mediated the degree to which an
overall stereotype changed. In Johnston‘s (1992) study, subjects judged slight disconfirmers to
be more typical than strong disconfirmers, and thus the slight disconfirmers had a greater impact
on the subjects‘ overall stereotypes.
Given schema theory, the proposed relationship between the prototypicality of a disconfirmer
and the degree to which a schema changes makes sense. If something is only mildly prototypical,
the associated schema will be activated less fully. The observation of a new pattern of behavior
that only partially overlaps with an existing schema may give rise to a related yet separate
schema. This reasoning explains why raising the extremeness of the discrepant qualities in
Weber and Crocker‘s (1983) second experiment failed to lead to further schema revisionthe
discrepant members were likely seen as more atypical (and thus easier to subtype), thereby
preserving the overarching schema of ―librarian‖ or ―lawyer.‖ For this reason, when attempting
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
21
to change a schema (or, by extension, a related social norm), measuring a prototype will be an
important early step to take.
6
Another dimension that influences a schema‘s susceptibility to change is how homogenous the
associated class is perceived to be. Recall how in Gurwitz and Doge‘s study (1977; see also
Hewstone et al. 1992b), the description of one highly discrepant individual had a bigger impact
on the degree to which subjects revised their stereotype, yet Weber and Crocker (1983) found the
opposite result. In Gurwitz and Doge (1977), subjects had more difficulty ―explaining away‖ the
concentrated discrepant behavior than subjects did in Weber and Crocker (1983). One proposed
explanation is that the members of the sorority in Gurwitz and Doge (1977) were perceived to be
more homogenous than the social categories used in other experiments (e.g., Brown, 2011;
Hewstone et al. 1992b). The increased homogeneity made perceiving the discrepant case as ―an
unusual category member‖ difficultafter all, a homogenous group has few unusual members
by definition. If the perception of group homogeneity does not change, then logically, either the
outlier must be perceived to be a member of a separate class (that is, be processed through
separate schemata) or the schematic understanding of the class as a whole must change.
In addition to the perceived typicality of a schema-discrepant instance and the perceived
homogeneity of the class to which it belongs, the saliency of the discrepant instance influences
the instance‘s potential to induce change (Crocker et al. 1984; Rothbart 1981). This point may be
intuitive, but it is worth noting. One will never be motivated to revise one‘s schemata if one
never notices a discrepancy between one‘s schematic models of the world and the world itself. In
addition to schema-defiers needing to be salient, the schema of interest must be accessible before
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
22
it can change (Crocker et al. 1984). One would never notice a discrepancy between the
observations and the schema of interest, if the schema of interest is never activated.
Although the activation of alternative schemata can prevent a schema of interest from changing,
the availability of alternative schemata can be used to one‘s advantage when attempting to
induce schema change. Crocker and colleagues (1984) discuss how schemata (especially in the
case of religious and scientific beliefs) are abandoned, rather than revised, only when there is an
available alternative to replace it.
7
This makes senseeven if one is aware that a mode of
understanding a phenomenon is flawed, one still needs to understand it, and a flawed
understanding is better than no understanding.
4.2. The role of semantic networks in norm activation and change. In addition to changing
the schemata that, when activated, serve as trigger cues to particular social norms, one can also
theoretically influence a social norm‘s activation by creating new links between existing
schemata in its semantic network. Little theoretical work has been conducted on the relation
between norm activation and associated elements within its semantic network. Regardless, we
believe such expansion of the semantic network is possible.
This expansion could be made possible by creating a novel schema and associating it with the
social norm of interest, thereby creating a new trigger cue for the norm. In creating a new trigger
cue, one would expand the circumstances under which a norm applies. Take the example of the
debate about whether a firm is only responsible towards its shareholders or also to stakeholders
who the firm may harm through negative externalities (e.g., pollution). Initially, the firm may
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
23
only believe that a norm of responsibility applies to shareholders, but protests and governmental
interventions make it clear that the firm also has a responsibility to communities that it affects.
Effectively, these protests and interventions serve to form a new link between the norm of
responsibility and a population of stakeholders. Conversely, one could disassociate an existing
trigger cue with a social norm, thereby destroying an existing trigger cue and restricting the
circumstances under which a norm is activated.
Similarly, the association of two originally unrelated norms could influence their respective
likelihood of activation. As mentioned earlier, Cialdini and colleagues (1990) demonstrated how
the activation of one norm (e.g., ―recycling‖ and, to a lesser extent, ―voting‖) primes a related
norm (―not littering‖) for activation. Creating associations between two otherwise unrelated
norms should yield similar results.
4.3. Script change. Unfortunately, less research has been conducted on how to change a script as
compared to how to change a schema. However, as a script is, by definition, a type of schema,
the lessons learned from the literature on schema change should generally apply to script change.
Anderson (1983) conducted research on how to manipulate script adherence. In his study,
subjects were asked to draw cartoons of a character either engaging or not engaging in a series of
scripts. For example, in a ―blood donation‖ script, subjects drew characters who either ended up
donating blood or refusing to donate blood. Depending on the condition, subjects were instructed
to treat the main character as themselves, a close friend, or a disliked acquaintance, and they
drew each script one, two, or three different times, with different versions of the cartoon each
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
24
time. Before and after drawing the cartoons, the subjects rated how likely they thought they were
to engage in each script if given the opportunity.
The more times subjects were instructed to draw themselves following the blood donation script,
the more likely they were to predict themselves engaging in it. The opposite was true for subjects
who were instructed to draw themselves rejecting the script. Drawing a friend or a disliked
acquaintance engaging or not engaging in a script had no impact on subjects‘ intentions.
Interestingly, in a follow-up study, Anderson (1983) found that the impact of drawing oneself
engaging (or not engaging) in a script remained unchanged three days later, indicating that the
manipulation sustainably influenced subjects‘ perceived likelihood of following the script.
People did not forget the alternate reality once they had learned of it.
5. Script and Schema Change and the Efficacy of Past Social Norm Interventions
There have been many attempts to curb or change maladaptive collective practices, especially
those linked to social norms. Too many of these attempts have been unsuccessful (e.g., Sanan &
Moulik 2007; Toubia & Sharief 2003). Changing the grammar of a society is not so easy.
Nevertheless, there are several interventions that have been successful in changing norms. We
will discuss the success (or lack thereof) of these interventions in light of the model of norms
being embedded into scripts and triggered by schemata. We will discuss how the successful ones
achieved meaningful progress precisely because they effectively shifted adherence to particular
scripts or schemata.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
25
5.1. Abandonment of Female Genital Cutting: The Saleema Initiative. In Sudan and many
surrounding countries, female genital cutting (FGC)
8
is a dominant social norm in many
communities. Women who undergo FGC tend to suffer from numerous health problems
throughout their lives and during childbirth, and many consider the practice to be a human rights
violation (e.g., Althaus 1997). In 1990, FGC rates in young girls were as high as 92% in Sudan,
and by 2006, these rates had only dropped to 89%, despite attempts to end the practice (Helmore
2012).
In Sudan, an uncut woman is commonly termed ―ghalfa,‖ a pejorative word that carries
connotations of prostitution, promiscuity, and impurity. Even if parents are aware of the negative
health consequences of FGC, they often continue to cut their daughters in order to protect them
from the negative social consequences of ―being ghalfa‖ (Toubia & Sharief 2003). The Saleema
campaign was designed in large part to rebrand women who have not undergone FGC as
―Saleema.‖ Saleema is an Arabic name that means whole, intact, healthy in body and mind,
unharmed, pristine, untouched, in a God-given condition, [and] perfect‖ (Helmore 2012, p. 18).
The campaign‘s primary tactic was to encourage FGC abandonment by rebranding uncut women
in a positive, socially acceptable light.
Prior to the Saleema campaign, there was no alternative term for an uncut woman. In other
words, the ―ghalfa‖ schema was the only one through which one could process an uncut woman.
As mentioned earlier, even if one is aware of the flaws present in an existing schema, an
insufficient schematic understanding is functionally superior to no schematic understanding at
all. Instead of taking on the difficult task of completely reversing the deeply pejorative ―ghalfa‖
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
26
schema, the designers of the Saleema campaign decided to orient the Sudanese people towards
the novel and positive ―Saleema‖ schema. This tactic required no change to the ―ghalfa‖ schema
at allonly the creation of an alternative one.
The initiative featured both educational elements that informed people of the nature of being
―Saleema‖ (which serve to create the novel ―Saleema‖ schema) and elements that spread the
belief that many people endorsed the Saleema perspective (which help combat pluralistic
ignorance; Helmore 2012). The initiative was public in nature and was broadcasted via radio,
television, and poster advertisements. The media discussed the many benefits of being Saleema
and how change is a good thing, thereby promoting Saleema without directly damning or
discrediting what many consider to be a venerable tradition.
Many Sudanese public figures and celebrities have come out in support of the campaign, helping
to establish its legitimacy. In their declarations of support, these figures wear traditional clothing
in the Saleema colors, mainly orange, red, yellow, and green (Helmore 2012). Men and women
who support the campaign are similarly encouraged to wear this Saleema ―uniform‖ to signal
their support for the Saleema perspective. In public maternity hospitals and health centers,
Sudanese women are told about the benefits of being ―Saleema‖ and are invited to join in the
campaign. Those who join agree to not cut their daughters and sign a pledge of their support that
is prominently displayed at the hospital. All these clear signals of collective support serve to
inform the unconvinced about a shift in perspective that is taking place.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
27
Without these outward signals of support, it would be possible that Sudanese people privately
embrace the Saleema perspective, but outwardly say nothing out of the fear that their fellow
citizens retain the traditional understanding of FGC. FGC is typically a taboo topic to bring up in
casual conversation (Behrendt 2005; Tostan 1999), so without the overt signals of collective
support, people may never adjust their empirical and normative expectations of how their peers
feel about FGC. In other words, these repeated, highly salient displays of support for the Saleema
perspective all serve to defy the traditional conceptualization of ―a Sudanese person‖ (the
relevant reference group) as someone who endorses FGC. Changing a population‘s attitudes
towards a practice is a good first step, but if such a population‘s behavior is contingent upon
what they expect their peers think one does and should do, then changes in personal perspective
will not be sufficient to change behavior.
These signals shift the target population‘s conceptualization of the average Sudanese person and,
by extension, what they expect from the average Sudanese person. This change would likely best
be modeled by the bookkeeping model of schema change. Every time one hears a publicized
endorsement of the campaign, every time one sees someone wearing the Saleema clothing, and
every time one sees a pledge of support or hears someone talking about the Saleema perspective
positively, the old conceptualization of a Sudanese person who endorses FGC is challenged.
These are not a handful of highly discrepant instances (which would imply the conversion
model), but a multitude of mild to moderately discrepant instances. Recall that the more
prototypical a schema-defiant piece of information is, the more difficult it will be to explain the
discrepant information as an ―exception‖ (Johnston 1992).
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
28
The Saleema campaign appears to have been fairly successful so far: as of 2013, over 600
communities had joined the Saleema campaign and signed a document pledging to boycott FGC
(Abbas 2013). In West Kordofan (a province of central Sudan), the local commissioner even
petitioned the authorities to change the name of the village to ―Saleema‖ (Helmore 2012). If
anything, this is an indicator of just how positive a signal the novel ―Saleema‖ schema is sending
to those who adopt it.
5.2. Tostan’s community approach to combating FGC. Another intervention strategy to
combat FGC is the Community Empowerment Program (CEP) run by Tostan, which is designed
to encourage positive behaviors and lifestyles (Diop et al. 2003; Diop & Askew 2009; Monkman
et al. 2007).
9
The CEP typically lasts about three years and has many goals, and one of them is to
impart community members with a formal understanding of human rights (Diop & Askew
2009; Monkman et al. 2007). Over the course of a year and 100 discussion sessions, villagers are
encouraged to think about their fundamental wants and needs with the intention of ultimately
developing a conceptualization of what people are fundamentally entitled to (i.e., specific
―human rights‖). As their ―human rights‖ conceptualization develops, community members are
encouraged to consider whether or not existing communal behaviors violate or are in line with
such rights. For example, rather than being told that FGC is ―wrong‖ and that they should stop it,
community members decide for themselves whether FGC violates their right to health and if they
should stop engaging in it. All of what occurs in the CEP is conducted in a very public,
transparent, and self-directed manner, and any decision-making is explicitly community driven.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
29
Assuming that the typical participants of the CEP indeed do not have a formal conceptualization
of human rights, then the many discussion sessions should serve to develop a new set of
schemata for ―human rights.‖ After such schemata are first developed, we predict that they
would be further refined through the bookkeeping model of schema change: Each discussion
session can gradually add further depth and nuance to the emerging schemata.
10
Additionally,
discussing human rights in the context of specific relevant behaviors serves to connect the
―human rights‖ schemata with behaviors in community members‘ semantic networks. For
example, asking questions like, ―does FGC violate your right to health?‖ would help facilitate a
negative associative link between the schemata for ―FGC‖ and ―right to health.‖ Such a new
schematic link functionally rebrands FGC as a violation of human rights. The fact that this
cognitive reframing is transparently happening at a collective level means that community
members recognize that their peers are experiencing the same shift in perspective that they
themselves are (Bicchieri & Mercier 2014).
Even if some community members decide not to involve themselves with the CEP, the
facilitators of the CEP encourage more involved participants to start discussions about the
program‘s material with the rest of their community. Uninvolved members should update their
schemata via such diffused discussion. These repeated interactions also serve to disconfirm the
element of ―supporting FGC‖ within the ―fellow community member‖ schema in a bookkeeping-
style mechanism of schema change. Discussing human rights and how practices like FGC violate
them clearly signal that members of the community are dropping their support for the practice.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
30
There are many other elements in Tostan, Saleema, and other interventions that point to other
necessary conditions for successful norm change (Bicchieri 2015). We are not discussing them
here because our goal is simply to highlight that a powerful avenue for successful social norm
change is the creation of a new schema or change to an existing one that leads people to re-
conceptualize traditional practices in a different light. Alternatively, a social norm may also
change by reconfiguring the structure of the script(s) into which it is embedded. These changes
may be simple or they may be broad in scope.
5.3. Ineffective FGC interventions. While the Saleema initiative and interventions led by
Tostan have found some success in reducing adherence to the FGC norm, many other attempts
have been unsuccessful. One of the most common methods of attempting to reduce FGC rates is
to simply inform a target population about the negative health consequences that stem from FGC
and hope that they respond accordingly (Toubia & Sharief 2003). Such methods have merely
caused target populations to hire trained health professionals to perform the cutting operation.
While hiring people with medical experience may lead to safer surgeries, such a behavioral shift
yields no actual reduction of FGC rates, and the majority of negative health consequences may
persist. Indeed, Toubia and Sharief (2003) review survey data that reveal that 97% of Egyptian
girls and women have still undergone the surgery, despite 20-30 years of health information-
based interventions. While informing people about physical risks of a maladaptive practice is
important, it is insufficientsuch methodology ignores the social pressures that drive people to
engage in them. Even if one were to reframe FGC as a dangerous practice, it is still linked to
many positive elements, such as purity and virginity, that are so socially important that they
overwhelm any health-related considerations in the decision-making process. We want to stress
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
31
that when practices are interdependent (as those that are or are supported by social norms), it is
necessary to target the entire network of norm-followers. In this sense, successful interventions
are effective precisely because they target people‘s collectively held social schemata or scripts
(thus changing social expectations).
Legal interventions on their own have similar limitations in that they ignore the important
cognitive underpinnings of certain practices. Legal norms that act contrary to social norms
typically result in little behavioral change (Bicchieri & Mercier 2014; Kahan 2000; Stunz 2000).
Just as how bribery persists in countries where it is explicitly illegal, FGC persists in countries
where practicing it has been made illegal and carries the risk of heavy penalties (Toubia &
Sharief 2003). Even if one is aware that cutting risks incurring a monetary fine, such sanctions
are difficult to enforce, and following the law would mean that one‘s daughter could be devalued
by her community, and she would have a more difficult time finding a husband.
5.4. Combating open defecation with Community Approaches to Total Sanitation. Other
effective social norm interventions are the Community Approaches to Total Sanitation (CATS)
and specifically the Community-Led Total Sanitation (CLTS)
11
program, which together are
designed to combat open defecation or OD (Galbraith & Thomas 2009; Kar & Chambers 2008).
OD is practiced by 1.2 billion people in the world and is the cause of many severe health issues,
including diarrhea, acute respiratory infections, and other diseases via the contamination of
ground water and agricultural products (Galbraith & Thomas 2009). The CLTS approach appears
to effectively motivate people to abandon OD by changing existing schemata and prompting the
development of novel scripted behavior.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
32
In many societies, feces are not always associated with disease, and OD is not always looked
upon in a negative light (Mukherjee et al. 2012; Wateraid 2008). Similar to Tostan‘s approach,
the CLTS is designed in such a manner to encourage community members to develop these
associations, and do so on their own (Kar & Chambers 2008). People have a harder time
discounting their own reasoning and conclusions than the arguments of a stranger, and so this
design is sensible. Additionally, the first thing an intervention leader does when implementing
the CLTS is establish a sense of trust and rapport with the target community to encourage them
to take his or her messages seriously (Galbraitht & Thomas 2009; Kar & Chambers 2008).
Once a rapport has been established, then what is known as the ―triggering process‖ begins, in
which the community is exposed to problems associated with OD (Kar & Chambers 2008). For
example, in the ―transect walk‖ the intervention leader escorts the entire community through OD
fields and has them analyze the fields in detail (Kar & Chambers 2008, p. 27). These walks are
implemented so as to make everyone feel as much collective embarrassment and disgust
12
as
possible and to attribute it to OD.
In addition to the transect walk, CLTS intervention leaders teach how OD can lead to disease by
visually simulating the disease transmission process (Kar & Chambers 2008). For example, a
facilitator can put food down next to a pile of feces and wait for flies to start travelling between
each pile. When asked to eat the food, community members inevitably refuse to do so, pointing
out how the travelling flies are infecting the food with fecal matter. Through realizations like this
one, community members independently form the link between OD and eating one‘s own (and
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
33
one‘s neighbors‘) excrement. Many similar connections can be made in the CLTS between OD
and disease transmission (see Kar & Chambers 2008).
Once the triggering processes are complete, and assuming people are effectively convinced that
OD is an unhealthy practice and needs to be stopped, people are encouraged to discuss how to go
about stopping OD (Kar & Chambers 2008). By discussing what is often a taboo subject in these
collective forums, people will not have to fear the kind of social whiplash that they might
otherwise experience if they were to broach the topic on their own (Bongartz et al. 2010). People
in many such communities are very hesitant to talk about defecation, and CLTS facilitators use a
range of tactics (such as jokes and songs) to make people more comfortable talking about it.
Without these tactics, even if someone were to independently identify OD‘s problems, he might
never bring it to public attention as such topics are unfit for public discourse.
The kind of schema change that is being induced by the CLTS would likely best be captured by
the conversion model of schema change. The handful of triggering processes collectively serve
as a small collection of highly salient, schema-discrepant observations. Each example is so
explicit and intense that only a few of them are necessary to induce schema revision.
Each triggering process is designed to link ―open defecation‖ with negative nodes (e.g., disgust,
disease, and shame) in its semantic network (Kar & Chambers 2008). Additionally, the CLTS
does not induce the association of these elements with the script
13
of ―private defecation,‖
thereby elevating it above ―open defecation‖ by comparison. At the beginning of the
intervention, the ideas of OD and private defecation were likely largely equivalent concepts. The
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
34
change that ―open defecation‖ experiences throughout the intervention process serves to
disassociate it from ―private defecation.‖
The fact that all community members experience the triggering processes collectively serves to
evenly distribute the blame of OD. People are made to feel that OD is both everyone‘s fault and
everyone‘s problem, and issues of pluralistic ignorance are avoided. Not only will everyone
associate OD with disgust and disease, but it will be apparent that one‘s peers are developing the
same associations. All of this script and schema change eventually leads to a change and creation
of normative and empirical expectations, and, by extension, the creation of a social norm of
latrine use (Bicchieri 2015).
Not only is the CLTS appealing from a theoretical point of view, but it is also very effective. For
example, in 2005, it was conservatively estimated that 2000 communities in Bangladesh were
100% open defecation-free as a result of CLTS interventions (Kar & Pasteur 2005). In Indonesia,
the Ministry of Health found the CLTS to be so successful that they changed ongoing sanitation
projects mid-stream and made the CLTS the primary tactic for improving rural sanitation
(Robiarto et al. 2012). CLTS interventions in Zambia have also met successbetween 2007 and
2008, sanitation increased from 38% to 93% in 517 villages, 402 of which have been declared
100% open defecation-free (Galbraith & Thomas 2009). In Sierra Leone, 754 communities were
triggered in 2009-2010, but only 169 of them have been declared 100% open defecation-free.
14
5.5. Simple latrine construction: an ineffective open defecation intervention. The low levels
of complete abandonment in Sierra Leone may be disheartening, but keep in mind that
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
35
established customs are hard to change. Defecating in the open is simply more convenient than
defecating in privateit can be done any time and does not require the construction of a latrine.
In order to be willing to change their behavior, people must develop a preference for latrine use.
Traditionally, many organizations and governments have attempted to curb OD by simply
subsidizing community latrine construction (Sanan & Moulik 2007). These attempts have been
widely unsuccessful, with the toilets eventually being abandoned or used for storage. Without the
preference for latrine use, people will not be motivated to use them (despite their availability).
Other interventions have focused on teaching individual households about the dangers of OD
(Sanan & Moulik 2007). These attempts have also not been as successful, as even if some
households are convinced that OD is detrimental to their health (and thus should stop engaging
in it), not all households will necessarily be reached or convinced. (Remember that 100%
abandonment is necessary for any meaningful improvement in health conditions to take place).
Additionally, learning about the health benefits of latrines is not as motivating as learning about
such benefits in conjunction with outside social pressure. We have stressed how a major change
to customary scripts and schemata relevant to OD is important for effective change. It should be
noted that such changes induce the creation of normative and empirical expectations that are the
hallmark of a new social norm of latrine use.
5.6. Litterbugs, tossers, and chauvinist pigs. The introduction of novel linguistic terms is a
common way to motivate compliance to a particular behavior. New terms such as ―litterbug‖ and
―chauvinist pig‖ have historically been used to motivate compliance with emerging and shifting
norms. With the resurgence of the feminist movement in the 1960s and 1970s, activist women
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
36
coined the term ―male chauvinist (which eventually evolved into ―male chauvinist pig‖) to
―derogate the conviction of men that they were better than women‖ (Mansbridge & Flaster 2005,
p. 261). The phrase soared in popularity, and soon many women reported using the term as a
form of everyday activism to combat male discrimination.
The introduction of ―male chauvinism‖ and ―chauvinist pig‖ was intended to demonize what was
originally seen as benign discriminatory behavior. These terms achieved the opposite of the
Saleema campaign: they provided a novel schematic lens through which to process existing
people and behaviors, but this time in a negative light. Their application sent clear normative
signals that sexism was not acceptable, likely changing men‘s normative expectations about what
was acceptable (particularly for the feminist reference group, who would be more likely to use
the terms; Mansbridge & Flaster 2005). Indeed, in phone interviews, many women who had used
the terms to describe acquaintances reported that it really had ―made the men think and
sometimes change‖ (Mansbridge & Flaster 2005, p. 263).
New linguistic terms have also been systematically used to encourage many other prosocial
behaviors, such as not littering. Though ―litterbug‖ is one of the more memorable antilittering
descriptors, its effectiveness has not been well-documented. Fortunately, similar campaigns have
been found to be effective (e.g., DEC 2005). For example, in 2002, Australia‘s Department of
Environment and Conservation targeted roadside littering by introducing the ―Don‘t be a Tosser‖
campaign, in which advertisements on television, the radio, taxis, and billboards all blasted the
slogan (DEC, 2005). Tying the negative label of ―tosser‖ to someone who litters served to make
the act more of a transgression. It appeared to have worked. After the campaign, the term
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
37
―tosser‖ was commonly used to describe litterers (indicating that it had become a shared
concept), and many people reported community members calling litterers ―tossers‖ to their face,
suggesting the term was being employed as an informal social sanctioning device. Importantly,
the campaign was effective. Nearly twice as many people (81% up from 44%) reported not
throwing trash from their cars, and the number of people who felt that vehicular littering was not
relevant to them decreased to 15% (from 51%). A similar campaign was replicated in London in
2003, after which the city experienced an estimated 39% improvement in road cleanliness
(Campbell 2007).
These are all examples of new ways of perceiving and judging existing behaviors that became
increasingly common. In this respect, the schema of ―good man‖ (or a ―litterer‖) was ostensibly
changed. The new schema involved different normative expectations and even the introduction
of new sanctions for newly transgressive behaviors. In this respect, one could claim that a new
norm was created as part newly emerging scripts and schemata. We see this change as an
example of the bookkeeping model of schematic change: the terminology was introduced and
used continuously, spreading to more and more individuals so as to become a household term.
5.7. Soap operas: a catalyst of social change. Soap operas, what may strike many as a banal
pastime, have been credited with the induction of a considerable range of behavioral and
attitudinal change (e.g., Brown 1990; Brown 1992; Jensen & Oster 2009; La Ferrara et al. 2008;
Paluck 2009a; Rogers et al. 1999; Trujillo & Paluck 2012). These shows present viewers with
characters who are easy to identify with yet frequently deviate from maladaptive behavioral
patterns. In many respects, the characters that viewers observe when watching certain soap
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
38
operas are the perfect instances of schema-discrepant information. They are largely prototypical
to a particular social group, yet they often deviate in specific, unambiguous, and positive ways.
According to the narrative transportation theory, even though such characters and stories are
obviously fictional, they can still feel real enough to the viewer to be persuasive (Green & Brock
2000; Green et al. 2004). When narratives are sufficiently immersive, they functionally replace
the viewers‘ reality with the fictional one, thereby opening up the door to belief (and schema)
change. When viewers identify with particular characters, they see ―the character‘s perspectives
as [their] own, [and] share his or her existence,‖ and thus vicariously experience their discoveries
(Green et al. 2004, p. 319). The more frequently particular characters are encountered, the more
connected viewers feel with them (assuming they support the characters‘ moral agenda—the
opposite may be true if they reject it; Green et al. 2004).
The behavioral impact of soap operas is typically both substantial and positive, impacting diverse
social phenomena ranging from fertility rates in Brazil, to appreciation for women‘s rights and
autonomy in India, to family planning and intergroup relations in Africa (e.g., Brown 1990;
Brown 1992; Jensen & Oster 2009; La Ferrara et al. 2008, Paluck 2009a; Rogers et al. 1999;
Trujillo & Paluck 2012). Here, we will present and review both theoretical considerations and
empirical evidence to show that soap operas induce schema, script, and ultimately, social norm
change.
Between 1960 and 2000, Brazil‘s total fertility rate dropped from 6.3% to 2.3% (Lam &
Marteleto 2005). La Ferrara and colleagues (2008) convincingly argue that this drop in fertility is
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
39
largely due to a combination of increased television ownership (from 8 to 81% between 1970
and 1991) and increased soap opera broadcasting levels. Telenovelas, which are currently
watched by between 60 and 80 million Brazilians of a range of socioeconomic classes, were
(until quite recently) exclusively broadcasted by the Rede Globo corporation (La Ferrara et al.
2008). They were made available to watch on a region-by-region basis as Rede Globo coverage
expanded. As their plots typically involve five or so families, the number of children each family
has is unrepresentatively low in order to keep the number of characters manageable.
The advent of Rede Globo coverage in an area was followed by significant drops in fertility rates
(La Ferrara et al. 2008). Additionally, the more time that had passed since Rede Globo started
covering an area, the lower the birth rates tended to be. These effects were stronger for women of
the same age as the telenovela protagonists (mostly women in the mid to late stages of their
childbearing life) and from lower socioeconomic classes (for whom literacy rates are lower and
television is one of the few accessible mediums of information transmission other than
interpersonal communication).
This reduction in birth rates is not just due to television exposure, but to specific exposure to the
reality portrayed in Rede Globo‘s telenovelas (La Ferrara et al. 2008). Specifically, if a family
gave birth to a child in an area covered by Rede Globo, there was a 33% chance they would
name him or her after one of the main novela characters, but if they lived outside such an area
there was only an 8% chance. Additionally, increased coverage of other stations had no impact
on birth rates.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
40
These shows stress not only feature female protagonists with few children, but they tend to stress
values including freedom, personal wealth, and female empowerment in the work world,
amongst others (La Ferrara et al. 2008). They were presented in the form of an alternative
lifestyle that featured few children and plenty of disposable income. La Ferrara and colleagues
(2008) observe that ―constant exposure to smaller, less burdened television families, may have
created a preference for fewer children and greater sensitivity to the opportunity costs of raising
children‖ (p. 9).
Not only do these telenovelas project prosocial messages and values, but audience members find
the soaps‘ characters easy to identify with (Brown 1992; Tufte 2004). Brazilian telenovelas
involve personally relevant and highly relatable everyday experiences, and this is true of many
soap operas in developing countries (Brown 1992). In other words, the characters on the
telenovelas appear to be largely prototypical of the particular segments of their viewer base that
they portray. That is, they conform to schematic expectations for the most part, yet they deviate
in several positive and unambiguous ways. The characters present lifestyles of relevant social
groups that are similar enough to reality to be relatable, yet deviant enough to shift one‘s
schematic expectations.
Assuming the soap opera characters are indeed largely prototypical with several notable
exceptions (which appears to be the case), then they would likely induce schematic adjustment in
the social groups with which they are associated rather than being subtyped and understood as
―an exception to the rule.‖ Recall that schema-defiant instances that are largely prototypical are
harder to subtype. As there are many different telenovelas that people can watch that all feature
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
41
the same relevant qualities (relatable characters that deviate from expectations in similar positive
ways) and these schema-defiant qualities are repeatedly observed each time one watches an
episode, we contend that the type of schema change that is likely occurring would be best
modeled by the bookkeeping model of schema change.
Recall that women in the later stages of their reproductive life were the ones who experienced
the most pronounced drop in birth rates in La Ferrara and colleagues‘ (2008) study. We suspect
that this disparity in birth rate change is due precisely to the fact that women who were and are
featured on the telenovelas (who have few children) match this older age profile. Women of all
ages who watch these shows likely update their schematic understanding of the type of woman
featured in the shows, but such a schematic readjustment is not as relevant to the younger
women. Indeed, women between the ages of 15 and 24 actually experienced no significant
change in birth rates between 1970 and 1991 in La Ferrara and colleagues‘ (2008) study.
For the relatively older women, the alternate life path of having a career and fewer children
would seem much more reasonable and appealing once they update their schematic
understanding of the group with which they identify. Prior to this revision, if their schema for a
woman like themselves exclusively featured a large family and no substantial career, then
choosing to have a smaller family would defy those ―legitimate‖ expectations. One might worry
that engaging in such a lifestyle and choosing a career over a large family would be seen as
deviant and incur a negative judgment from one‘s peers. Telenovela viewership both legitimizes
and even idealizes such an alternative lifestyle. However this legitimization may be seen as
relevant only to the older age group who the characters represent.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
42
While the fertility changes reviewed by La Ferrara and colleagues (2008) occurred incidentally,
other soap operas were explicitly designed to induce social change (Brown 1992; Tufte 2004).
For example, in a study on Latin American attitudes towards the U.S. census, Trujillo and Paluck
(2012) experimentally demonstrate similar findings by showing that a well-liked characters
behavior in a soap opera (Más Sabe El Diablo or The Devil Knows Best) could influence both the
audience‘s attitudes and behavior. Similarly, Hum Log (We People), a show that was developed
in India to promote respect for women, acceptance of cultural diversity, and other values met
with considerable success (Brown 1992; Singhal & Rogers 1989). Increased viewership fostered
increasingly strong links among positive social figures, positive life outcomes, and positive
ideologies in viewers‘ semantic networks.
By employing longitudinal survey data in several regions of rural India, Jensen and Oster (2009)
found that the advent of cable television access was associated with lower female acceptance
rates of spousal abuse, a diminished preference for sons, greater levels of female autonomy (as
measured by levels of female household decision-making), and lower fertility rates. Similar to
the Brazilian telenovelas described earlier, Indian soap operas typically feature both educated,
urbanite families and liberated female characters who marry later and have fewer children.
Unfortunately, Jensen and Oster (2009) did not indicate whether the audience members
identified with the soap opera‘s characters. However, other authors have suggested that Indian
audience members do indeed identify with the soap opera‘s characters and incorporate elements
of what they observe on television into their own behavior and sense of self (e.g., Johnson 2001;
Scrase 2002).
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
43
The elements of social change that Jensen and Oster (2009) investigate are particularly relevant
with respect to the changes in acceptance of domestic violence, which were assessed by asking
female participants whether they thought that a husband is justified in beating his wife in a
variety of situations. Most women answered that they felt it was justified in at least one situation
(such as when ―she does not cook food properly‖ see Jensen and Oster for further detail; 2009,
p. 1068). Each instance in which they thought domestic violence was justified could be
interpreted as both a violation of the ―good wife‖ schema and a triggering cue for the ―domestic
violence‖ script. If after being exposed to cable television, women are decreasing the number of
behaviors in which they believe domestic violence is an acceptable response, then either their
domestic violence script is changing or their ―good wife‖ schema is changing. This hypothesis
is partly speculative (explicit script and schema measurement would be needed to ascertain the
structure of the ―good wife‖ schema and triggering cues of the ―domestic violence script‖ with
certainty), but it makes sense given the available data.
In support of a causal relationship between schema change and behavioral change, Rogers and
colleagues (1999) demonstrate with a quasi-experimental field study that exposure to a radio
soap opera (Twende na Wakati or Let’s Go with the Times) effectively promotes discussion
about, positive attitudes towards, and use of family planning practices in Tanzania. We suspect
that these changes were largely driven by the formation of new links between existing schemata.
Many Tanzanians (46%) listen to the radio at least once a week but have limited exposure to
other media (Rogers et al. 1999), making the country a relatively controlled environment for a
radio intervention.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
44
In Twende na Wakati, unambiguously positive and negative role models are featured who
respectively adopt or reject family planning practices and attitudes. For example, Mkwaju, a
promiscuous, alcoholic, and chauvinistic truck driver has sex with many prostitutes, steals to
support his many mistresses, and ultimately loses his job, wife, and even life after contracting
HIV/AIDS (Rogers et al. 1999; Slater 2002). Most listeners identified with the positive role
models but few identified with the negative role models. Identification with positive models
increased over time, and the limited identification with negative models decreased over time.
The longer listeners followed the show, the stronger their links between the sexually unsafe
behaviors featured in the show and the negative life outcomes in their semantic networks became
(e.g., between ―unprotected sex‖ and ―venereal disease‖ or ―death‖ if such links did not already
exist).
All the areas of Tanzania that Rogers and colleagues (1999) tested were exposed to government-
sponsored informational messages in support of family planning, but only treatment areas
received coverage of Twende na Wakati. Most listeners in the treatment area felt positively
towards the show and indicated that they learned about family planning, how to prevent
HIV/AIDS, the dangers of alcohol abuse, and the importance of spousal communication from
listening to it. More importantly, self-reported family planning adoption by married women
increased by roughly 10% in the treatment areas, and such levels decreased by 11% in the
control areas over the experimental period. 25% of new family planning adopters at health
clinics across the country indicated Twende na Wakati as their main reference in adopting family
planning.
15
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
45
By specifically comparing those who listened to Twende na Wakati to those who did not within
treatment areas, the differences become much more pronounced. Forty-nine percent of married
women who actually listened to the show adopted family planning practices as compared to 19%
for those who did not listen, and adoption rates of female listeners increased to 64% if they
talked about the family planning content of the soap opera with their spouses (similar increases
Rogers et al. 1999). High levels of communication with spouses and general others (which was
also reported, especially in response to discussion questions posed at the end of each episode)
would make it easy to infer how relevant others feel about a particular matter, thereby facilitating
a shift in normative expectations. Interestingly, exposure had no impact on awareness of family
planning methods, which was already high at the beginning of the intervention. Here, we see
how purely informational campaigns might not be enough to change important structural
elements of family planning schemata. Instead, the availability of a long-term show that
presented models of action and characters that easily fit into societal roles became crucial in
changing the listeners‘ empirical expectations about the possibility and, indeed, advisability of
adopting new practices. Not only were links between family planning and other elements of
listeners‘ semantic network likely formed, but the public character these shows helped people
realize that many others are listening and induced discussion among friends who follow the same
program.
6. Conclusion
We have reviewed many instances of how the proposed relationship and dynamics among
scripts, schemata, and social norms can be used to explain the efficacy of a range of
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
46
interventions. To enact norm change, it would be necessary to induce a shared, collective
change to the trigger cue, the script, or to provide shared alternative schemata or scripts to
process the situation (in the case of schemata) or guide one‘s behavior (in the case of scripts).
We focus on the cognitive underpinnings of norm activation and change. Norm dynamics is a
highly complex process that also necessarily involves a change in social expectations (empirical
and normative). These social expectations are fundamentally grounded in shared social schemata
for relevant reference groups. Providing an adequate model of norm change cannot avoid the
scripts and schemata story, but it must also address the role of trendsetters in initiating change
and the nature of the mechanisms that coordinate change (Bicchieri 2015).
We have considered interventions aimed at changing collective practices. Any such intervention
should be supported by a meaningful theory. A particularly important theoretical element is the
rich web of scripts and schemata in which these practices are embedded. Taking steps to
understand this web and its elements should constitute a critical first step when designing
effective behavioral interventions. Existing interventions that have inadvertently tapped into this
intuition have met with considerable success. Just imagine how effective they could become if
they were explicitly designed with script or schema change in mind.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Dr. Barbara Mellers, Dr. Jon Baron, and Dr. Robert Seyfarth for their helpful
suggestions and comments on this paper.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
47
References
Abbas, R. (2013). Sudan's anti-FGM campaign avoids using the term. Retrieved from
http://womensenews.org/story/genital-mutilation/130818/sudans-anti-fgm-campaign-
avoids-using-the-term
Abelson, R. P. (1981). Psychological status of the script concept. American Psychologist, 36(7),
715-729.
Adhikari, S., & Shrestha, N. L. (2008). School-Led Total Sanitation: A successful model to
promote school and community sanitation and hygiene in Nepal. In Wicken, J.,
Verhagen, J., Sijbesma, C., Da Silva, C., & Ryan P. (Eds.), Beyond Construction: Use by
All: A Collection of Case Studies from Sanitation and Hygiene Promotion Practitioners
in South Asia (pp. 113-125). London and Delft: Water Aid and IRC International Water
and Sanitation Centre.
Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of human prejudice. Basic Books.
Althaus, F. A. (1997). Female circumcision: Rite of passage or violation of rights?. International
Family Planning Perspectives, 130-133.
Anderson, C. A. (1983). Imagination and expectation: The effect of imagining behavioral scripts
on personal influences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 293-305.
Behrendt, A. (2005). Female genital cutting in Moyamba and Bombali Districts of Sierra Leone:
Perceptions, attitudes and practice. Plan International, Dakar.
Bettenhausen, K., & Murnighan, J. K. (1985). The emergence of norms in competitive decision-
making groups. Administrative Science Quarterly. 30(3), 350-372.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
48
Bettenhausen, K. L., & Murnighan, J. K. (1991). The development of an intragroup norm and the
effects of interpersonal and structural challenges. Administrative Science Quarterly,
36(1), 20-35.
Bicchieri, C. (2006). The grammar of society: The nature and dynamics of social norms.
Cambridge University Press.
Bicchieri, C. (2015). Norms in the wild: How to diagnose, measure, and change social norms.
Cambridge University Press
Bicchieri, C., & Mercier, H. (2014). Norms and beliefs: How change occurs. In The complexity
of social norms (37-54). Springer International Publishing.
Bongartz, P., Musyoki, S. M., Milligan, A., & Ashley, H. (2010). Tales of shit: Community-Led
Total Sanitation in Africaan overview. Participatory Learning and Action, 61(1), 27-50.
Brown, W. J. (1990). Prosocial effects of entertainment television in India. Asian Journal of
Communication, 1(1), 113-135.
Brown, W. J. (1992). Sociocultural influences of prodevelopment soap operas in the third
world. Journal of Popular Film and Television, 19(4), 157-164.\
Brown, R. (2011). Prejudice: Its social psychology. John Wiley & Sons.
Campbell, D. F. (2007). People who litter. Wigan, UK: ENCAMS.
Casson, R. W. (1983). Schemata in cognitive anthropology. Annual Review of
Anthropology, 12, 429-462.
Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct:
recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 58(6), 1015.
Coleman, J. S. (1994). Foundations of social theory. Harvard university press.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
49
Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic
processing. Psychological Review, 82(6), 407.
Collins, A. M., & Quillian, M. R. (1969). Retrieval time from semantic memory. Journal of
Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8(2), 240-247.
Curtis, V. A. (2007). Dirt, disgust and disease: a natural history of hygiene. Journal of
Epidemiology and Community Health, 61(8), 660-664.
Crocker, J., Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1984). Schematic bases of belief change. In Attitudinal
judgment (pp. 197-226). Springer New York.
D‘Andrade, R. G. (1981). The cultural part of cognition. Cognitive Science, 5(3), 179-195.
Dawes, R. (1966). Memory and distortion of meaningful written material. British Journal of
Psychology, 57(12), 77-86.
Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC), Sustainability Programs Division.
(2005). Don't be a tosser: Litter prevention campaign 2002. Retrieved from website:
http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/warr/2005034_ed_dontbeatosser_cs.pdf
Devine, P. G., Hirt, E. R., & Gehrke, E. M. (1990). Diagnostic and confirmation strategies in
trait hypothesis testing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 952.
Diop, N. J., & Askew, I. (2009). The Effectiveness of a Communitybased Education Program
on Abandoning Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting in Senegal. Studies in Family
Planning, 40(4), 307-318.
Diop, N. J., Badge, E., Ouoba, D., Melching., M. (2003). Replication of the TOSTAN
programme in Burkina Faso: How 23 villages participated in a human rights-based
education programme and abandoned the practice of female genital cutting in Burkina
Faso. Frontiers in Reproductive Health, Population Council.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
50
Elster, J. (1989). Social norms and economic theory. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 99-
117.
Fehr, B. (1988). Prototype analysis of the concepts of love and commitment. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 55(4), 557-579.
Fehr, B. (2005). The role of prototypes in interpersonal cognition. In Baldwin, M.
(Ed.), Interpersonal cognition (180-205). Guilford Press.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition. MacGraw-Hill series in social psychology.
Frey, B. S., & Bohnet, I. (1995). Institutions affect fairness: Experimental investigations. Journal
of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), 151(2), 286-303.
Galbraith, C., & Thomas, A. UNICEF, Division of Policy and Practice. (2009). Community
approaches to total sanitation: Based on case studies from India, Nepal, Sierra Leone,
Zambia
Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public
narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(5), 701.
Green, M. C., Brock, T. C., & Kaufman, G. F. (2004). Understanding media enjoyment: The role
of transportation into narrative worlds. Communication Theory, 14(4), 311-327.
Hamilton, D. L., & Trolier, T. K. (1986). Steroetypes and stereotyping: An overview of the
cognitive approach. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination,
and racism (pp. 127-163). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Helmore, K. UNFPA, (2012). In Sudan: Changing labels, changing lives. Retrieved from United
Nations website: https://www.unfpa.org/public/home/news/pid/11223
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
51
Henrich, J., Boyd, R., Bowles, S., Camerer, C., Fehr, E., & Gintis, H. (2004). Foundations of
human sociality: Economic experiments and ethnographic evidence from fifteen small-
scale societies. Oxford University Press.
Hewstone, M., Hopkins, N., & Routh, D. A. (1992a). Cognitive models of stereotype change:(1).
Generalization and subtyping in young people's views of the police. European Journal of
Social Psychology, 22(3), 219-234.
Hewstone, M., Johnston, L., & Aird, P. (1992b). Cognitive models of stereotype change:(2)
Perceptions of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 22(3), 235-249.
Hoffman, E., McCabe, K., Shachat, K., & Smith, V. (1994). Preferences, property rights, and
anonymity in bargaining games. Games and Economic Behavior, 7(3), 346-380.
Jensen, R., & Oster, E. (2009). The power of TV: Cable television and women's status in
India. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(3), 1057-1094.
Johnson, K. (2001). Media and social change: The modernizing influences of television in rural
India. Media, Culture & Society, 23(2), 147-169.
Kar, K., & Chambers, R. (2008). Handbook on community-led total sanitation. London: Plan
UK.
Kar, K., & Pasteur, K. (2005). Subsidy or self-respect? Community led total sanitation. An
update on recent developments. Institute of Development Studies.
Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480.
Joly, J. F., Stapel, D. A., & Lindenberg, S. M. (2008). Silence and table manners: When
environments activate norms. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(8), 1047-
1056.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
52
La Ferrara, E., Chong, A., & Duryea, S. (2008). Soap operas and fertility: Evidence from
Brazil (No. 4573). Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
Lam, D., & Marteleto, L. (2005). Small families and large cohorts: The impact of the
demographic transition on schooling in Brazil. The changing transitions to adulthood in
developing countries: Selected studies, 56.
Le, B., Loving, T. J., Lewandowski, G. W., Feinberg, E. G., Johnson, K. C., Fiorentino, R., &
Ing, J. (2008). Missing a romantic partner: A prototype analysis. Personal
Relationships, 15(4), 511-532.
Lerner, I., Bentin, S., & Shriki, O. (2012). Spreading activation in an attractor network with
latching dynamics: Automatic semantic priming revisited. Cognitive Science, 36(8),
1339-1382.
Liberman, V., Samuels, S. M., & Ross, L. (2004). The name of the game: Predictive power of
reputations versus situational labels in determining prisoner‘s dilemma game
moves. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(9), 1175-1185.
Lippmann, W. (1922), Public Opinion, New York: Harcourt-Brace.
Mandler, J. M. (1984). Stories, scripts, and scenes: Aspects of schema theory. Psychology Press.
Mansbridge, J., & Flaster, K. (2005). Male chauvinist, feminist, sexist, and sexual harassment:
Different trajectories in feminist linguistic innovation. American Speech, 80(3), 256-279.
Macaulay, J. R. (1970). A shill for charity. JR Macaulay and L Berkowitz, Altruism and Helping
Behavior, 43-59.
McClelland, J. L., Rumelhart, D. E., & PDP Research Group. (1986). Parallel distributed
processing: Explorations in the microstructure, vol. 2: Psychological and biological
models.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
53
Monkman, K., Miles, R., & Easton, P. (2007). The transformatory potential of a village
empowerment program: The Tostan replication in Mali. In Women's Studies International
Forum, 30(6), 451-464.
Nadkarni, S., & Narayanan, V. K. (2007). Strategic schemas, strategic flexibility, and firm
performance: the moderating role of industry clockspeed. Strategic Management
Journal, 28(3), 243-270.
Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review
of General Psychology, 2(2), 175.
Padesky, C. A. (1994). Schema change processes in cognitive therapy. Clinical Psychology &
Psychotherapy, 1(5), 267-278.
Paluck, E. L. (2009a). Reducing intergroup prejudice and conflict using the media: a field
experiment in Rwanda. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(3), 574.
Paluck, E. L. (2009b). What's in a norm? Sources and processes of norm change. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 96(3), 594.
Piaget, J. (1964). Part I: Cognitive development in children: Piaget development and
learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2(3), 176-186.
Piaget, J. (1976). Piaget‘s theory (pp. 11-23). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Queller, S., & Smith, E. R. (2002). Subtyping versus bookkeeping in stereotype learning and
change: Connectionist simulations and empirical findings. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 82(3), 300-313.
Mukherjee, N., Robiarto, A., Saputra, E., & Wartono, D. (2012). Achieving and sustaining open
defecation-free communities: Learning from East Java. Water and Sanitation Program
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
54
Rogers, E. M., Vaughan, P. W., Swalehe, R., Rao, N., Svenkerud, P., & Sood, S. (1999). Effects
of an entertainmenteducation radio soap opera on family planning behavior in
Tanzania. Studies in Family Planning, 30(3), 193-211.
Rosch, E. H. (1973). Natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 4(3), 328-350.
Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. Concepts: core readings, 189-206.
Rosch, E., Simpson, C., & Miller, R. S. (1976). Structural bases of typicality effects. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2(4), 491.
Rothbart, M. (1981). Memory processes and social beliefs. In D. Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive
processes in stereotyping and intergroup behavior. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. Center for Human
Information Processing, University of California, San Diego.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1998). The architecture of mind: A connectionist approach. Mind readings,
207-238.
Rumelhart, D. E., McClelland, J. L., & PDP Research Group. (1986). Parallel distributed
processing: Explorations in the microstructures of cognition. Volume 1:
Foundations. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2, 560-567.
Rumelhart, D. E., & Norman, D. A. (1976). Accretion, tuning and restructuring: Three modes of
learning In Vi W. Cotton & R. C. Klatzky (Eds.), Schematic factors in cognition.
Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1978
Saltz, E., & Medow, M. L. (1971). Concept conservation in children: The dependence of belief
systems on semantic representation. Child Development, 42(5) 1533-1542.
Sanan D, Moulik SG (2007) Community-led total sanitation in rural areas. An approach that
works. Washington, DC: Water and Sanitation Program.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
55
Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding: An inquiry into
human knowledge structures. Psychology Press.
Schnall, S., Haidt, J., Clore, G. L., & Jordan, A. H. (2008). Disgust as embodied moral
judgment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(8), 1096-1109.
Scrase, T. J. (2002). Television, the middle classes and the transformation of cultural identities in
West Bengal, India. International Communication Gazette, 64(4), 323-342.
Sigel, I. E., Saltz, E., & Roskind, W. (1967). Variables determining concept conservation in
children. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74(4p1), 471-475.
Singhal, A., & Rogers, E. M. (1989). The" Hum Log" story.
Slater, M. D. (2002). Entertainment education and the persuasive impact of narratives. In Green,
M. C., Strange, J. J., & Brock, T. C. (Eds.), Narrative impact: Social and cognitive
foundations, 157-181.
Strauss, C., & Quinn, N. (Eds.). (1997). A cognitive theory of cultural meaning (Vol. 9).
Cambridge University Press.
Tostan. (1999). Breakthrough in Senegalthe process that ended female genital cutting in 31
villages.
Toubia, N. F., & Sharief, E. H. (2003). Female genital mutilation: Have we made
progress?. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 82(3), 251-261.
Trujillo, M. D., & Paluck, E. L. (2012). The devil knows best: Experimental effects of a televised
soap opera on Latino attitudes toward government and support for the 2010 US
Census. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 12(1), 113-132.
Tufte, T. (2004). Soap operas and sense-making: Mediations and audience ethnography.
Entertainment-education and social change: History, research, and practice, 399-415.
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
56
Wateraid (2008). Comparison and adaptation of social change dynamics for the collective
abandonment of open defecation report. Retrieved from Wateraid International website:
http://www.wateraid.org/~/media/Publications/open-defecation-social-change-dynamics-
ghana-study.pdf
Weber, R., & Crocker, J. (1983). Cognitive processes in the revision of stereotypic
beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(5), 961.
Woods, W. A. (1975). What's in a link: Foundations for semantic networks (No. BBN-3072).
BOLT BERANEK AND NEWMAN INC CAMBRIDGE MA.
World Bank. 2015. World Development Report 2015: Mind, Society, and Behavior. Washington,
DC: World Bank. doi: 10.1596/978-1-4648-0342-0. License: Creative Commons
Attribution CC BY 3.0 IGO
Xiao, E., & Bicchieri, C. (2010). When equality trumps reciprocity. Journal of Economic
Psychology, 31(3), 456-470.
1
This will not be the case with a moral norm, where preferences for following such a norm are typically socially
unconditional.
2
Most of what we say will also apply to descriptive norms (see Bicchieri 2006, Chapter 1).
3
He was specifically referring to ethnic categories when he said this, but we think his quotation applies to social
categories and social schemata in general.
4
This proves to be particularly problematic for social norms, as the stimuli that activates a norm are often highly
social in nature.
5
Defined as ―a cognitive structure that contains the perceiver‘s knowledge, beliefs, and expectancies about some
human group‖ (Hamilton & Trolier 1986, p. 133)
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
57
6
We consider a ―prototype analysis‖ to be the best way to measure a schema. Such measurement will be important
when attempting to determine the structure of a schema for a population and the degree to which such a structure is
shared. (For relevant work on prototype analyses, see Fehr 1988; 2005; Le et al. 2008.)
7
In fact, cognitive therapy largely relies on alternative schemata as replacements when attempting to reduce reliance
on maladaptive ones (Padesky 1994).
8
Also known as female genital mutilation (FGM).
9
While the Tostan‘s initiative has been touted as very successful in Senegal, questions have been raised whether it is
effective elsewhere. We will not be addressing the debate over their methods‘ efficacy, but rather just discussing
their model, which is of interest from our theoretical perspective.
10
We are thankful to Molly Melching, the founder of Tostan, for illuminating discussions on this issue.
11
See also the School-Led Total Sanitation program (e.g., Adhikari & Shrestha 2008).
12
It is worth noting that, from a psychological perspective, disgust (especially when elicited by exposing people to
fecal matter) is a particularly motivating emotion and one that is effective at making something seem ―wrong.‖ That
is, research has demonstrated that humans find fecal matter inherently disgusting, and disgust is an emotion that
people readily associate with morality (e.g., Curtis 2007; Schnall et al. 2008).
13
We say ―script‖ here as we are specifically referring to private defecation as an event. Open defecation is also a
loose script, without having highly ordered action elements. However, as we are more interested in open defecation
as a general concept, we have referred to it as a schematechnically either term is applicable.
14
Many more of these communities have experienced reduced but not entirely eliminated rates of defecation. It is
critical that these communities experience 100% abandonment, as even a small number of people defecating in the
open can trigger similar levels of disease transmission as if the whole community engaged in the practice (Sanan &
Moulik 2007).
SCRIPTS, SCHEMATA, AND SOCIAL NORMS
58
15
Presumably, any measurable differences between the control areas (that did not receive Twende na Wakati
coverage) and treatment areas were due to differences in exposure to the radio soap opera. The authors conducted
interview surveys in all areas before the broadcasts began (1993) and at one-year intervals up through 1997. They
also gathered additional data from 79 health clinics across the country, performed script analysis on the content of
the 305 episodes, analyzed letters that listeners sent into the radio station (which they were encouraged to do at the
end of each show), and analyzed annual content from Tanzania‘s Demographic Health Survey (TDHS).
... Social norms are conceived of as the shared unwritten rules that govern and constrain individual and social behavior. 20,21 Decades of research on social norms indicate that humans follow what others do. [22][23][24] Fear of receiving sanctions, being seen as part of the out-group, being isolated, wanting to be part of the in-group, and feeling identified with local groups can elicit conformity and motivate people to feel and behave how they think others do. ...
Article
Full-text available
Access to water safe for consumption is critical for health and well-being, yet substantial structural barriers often necessitate household action to make water safer. Social norms about water treatment practices are understudied as a driver of personal water treatment practice. This study assesses reported and perceived water treatment practices among women in a rural, water insecure setting. We used cross-sectional data from a population-based study of women living with children under 5 years old across eight villages in southwest Uganda. Participants reported their typical household water treatment practices and what they perceived to be the common practices among most other women with young children in their own village. Modified multivariable Poisson regression models estimated the association between individual behavior and perceptions. Of 274 participants (78% response rate), 221 (81%) reported boiling water and 228 (83%) reported taking at least one action to make water safer. However, 135 (49%) misperceived most women with young children in their village not to boil their water, and 119 (43%) misperceived most to take no action. Participants who misperceived these norms were less likely to practice safe water treatment (e.g., for boiling water, adjusted relative risk = 0.80; 95% CI 0.69–0.92, P = 0.002), adjusting for other factors. Future research should assess whether making actual descriptive norms about local water treatment practices visible and salient (e.g., with messages such as “most women in this village boil their drinking water”) corrects misperceived norms and increases safe water treatment practices by some and supports consistent safe practices by others.
... Butler argues that gender is not natural or binary, but rather an embodied structure in which traits are discursively naturalized through repetition (Butler, 2004). Building on this, Bichieri and McNally (2015) explain that gender identities are constructed by inscribing or de-inscribing from gender scripts, where a script is a very detailed blueprint for an event with varying degrees of specificity. In this case, gender scripts for women travelling in public transport or motorbikes (the event) can comprise how and where they should sit, how loud they can be, what dress is appropriate to wear and how they should interact with other commuters. ...
... The counterexample is not an individual, but a stereotype in and of itself. This could enable pragmatic undermining because of the larger number of counter-instances: an entire subgroup that defies a generic claim might be more convincing than one or two counterexamples (Bicchieri & McNally 2018). ...
Article
Full-text available
Is it harmful to make generic claims about social groups? Those who say yes cite the reinforcement of oppressive stereotypes and cognitive bias. Those who say no cite the potential of generics to do good, rather than harm, by taking advantage of the same mechanisms that perpetuate the harms. This paper analyzes generic utterances in the context of social justice efforts to weigh in on the debate about whether and how generic utterances contribute to stereotypes and oppression. We need to first pay more attention to what it means to utter generics in social justice contexts. Doing so will allow us to distinguish those generic utterances that are helpful for social justice projects from those that might impede their progress. I argue that there is an important pragmatic sense in which generics can be undermined: especially generics used in service of social justice claims. I then offer an epistemic thesis for why some generics are more susceptible to being undermined by counter-examples than others. I conclude that if we are interested in using generics in the service of social justice, then there is reason to restrict the contexts in which we utter generics. In doing so, I challenge the conventional wisdom that generics are resistant to counterexamples.
... These features aimed at creating a need for knowledge and at highlighting the importance of learning more about integrity issues [8][9][10]. Third, our quiz highlighted social comparisons and compared students' answers with those of previous users, thus enhancing the social value of integrity issues [11]. Fourth, based on the answers provided in the quiz, the program produced personalized recommendations regarding the most relevant serious games for the user. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Studies on academic integrity reveal high rates of plagiarism and cheating among students. We have developed an online teaching tool, Integrity Games (https://integgame.eu/), that uses serious games to teach academic integrity. In this paper, we test the impact of a soft intervention – a short quiz – that was added to the Integrity Games website to increase users’ interest in learning about integrity. Based on general principles of behavioral science, our quiz highlighted the intricacy of integrity issues, generated social comparisons, and produced personalized advice. We expected that these interventions would create a need for knowledge and encourage participants to spend more time on the website. Methods In a randomized controlled trial involving N = 405 students from Switzerland and France, half of the users had to take a short quiz before playing the serious games, while the other half could directly play the games. We measured how much time they spent playing the games, and, in a post-experimental survey, we measured their desire to learn about integrity issues and their understanding of integrity issues. Results Contrary to our expectations, the quiz had a negative impact on time spent playing the serious games. Moreover, the quiz did not increase participants' desire to learn about integrity issues or their overall understanding of the topic. Conclusions Our quiz did not have any measurable impact on curiosity or understanding of integrity issues, and may have had a negative impact on time spent on the Integrity games website. Our results highlight the difficulty of implementing behavioral insights in a real-world setting. Trial registration The study was preregistered at https://osf.io/73xty.
Book
Full-text available
This book argues that our success in navigating the social world depends heavily on scripts. Scripts play a central role in our ability to understand social interactions shaped by different contextual factors. In philosophy of social cognition, scholars have asked what mechanisms we employ when interacting with other people or when cognizing about other people. Recent approaches acknowledge that social cognition and interaction depend heavily on contextual, cultural, and social factors that contribute to the way individuals make sense of the social interactions they take part in. This book offers the first integrative account of scripts in social cognition and interaction. It argues that we need to make contextual factors and social identity central when trying to explain how social interaction works, and that this is possible via scripts. Additionally, scripts can help us understand bias and injustice in social interaction. The author’s approach combines several different areas of philosophy – philosophy of mind, social epistemology, feminist philosophy – as well as sociology and psychology to show why paying attention to injustice in interaction is much needed in social cognition research, and in philosophy of mind more generally. Scripts and Social Cognition: How We Interact with Others will appeal to scholars and graduate students working in philosophy of mind, philosophy of psychology, social epistemology, social ontology, sociology, and social psychology.
Chapter
This chapter considers when and under what conditions will laws lead to attitudinal and behavioral change in the long run. First, it considers the conditions necessary for continued compliance through acquiescence, identification, and internalization. Second, it considers the conditions under which individuals who may have complied with the law through acquiescence (fear of legal sanction) or weak identification (fear of social sanctions) can be motivated to comply with laws voluntarily (through strong identification and/or internalization). In the process, it identifies the social and institutional conditions that societies and policymakers can focus on to create a general culture in favor of legal compliance. As importantly, it highlights the limits of using only laws and formal enforcement mechanisms for creating lasting attitudinal change. In fact, as the chapter discusses in the last sections, over-emphasizing the role of law and legal enforcement can have the perverse effect of undermining conditions necessary for future compliance with the law.
Article
Full-text available
The phenomena of call-outs and call-ins are fiercely debated. Are they mere instances of virtue signaling? Or can they actually perform social justice work? This paper gains purchase on these questions by focusing on how language users negotiate norms in speech. The authors contend that norm-enacting speech not only makes a norm salient in a context but also creates conversational conditions that motivate adherence to that norm. Recognizing this allows us to define call-outs and call-ins: the act of calling-out brings with it the presupposition that its target's behavior is norm-violating, whereas the act of calling-in simply presupposes its target's willingness to revise their belief. With these definitions at hand, we evaluate whether call-outs and call-ins are suitable tools for combating social injustice.
Article
Full-text available
Inequity aversion and reciprocity have been identified as two primary motives underlying human decision-making. However, because income and wealth inequalities exist to some degree in all societies, these two key motives can point to different decisions. In particular, when a beneficiary is less wealthy than the benefactor, a reciprocal action can lead to greater inequality. In this paper, we report data from a trust game variant where trustees' responses to kind intentions generate inequality in favor of investors. In relation to a standard trust game treatment where trustees' responses reduce inequality, the proportion of non-reciprocating decisions is twice as large when reciprocity promotes inequality. Moreover , we find that investors expect that this will be the case. Overall, we find that a majority (more than half) of trustees do not reciprocate when reciprocity increases inequality that favors investors. Our results call attention to the potential importance of inequality in principal agent relationships and have important implications for policies aimed at promoting trust and cooperation. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Article
Full-text available
A distributed connectionst network can account for both bookkeeping (M. Rothbart, 1981) and subtyping (M. B. Brewer, V. Dull, & L. Lui, 1981: S. E. Taylor, 1981) effects. The finding traditionally regarded as demonstrating subtyping is that exposure to moderate (compared with extreme) disconfirmers leads to subsequent ratings of the group that are less stereotypic. Despite learning that is incremental and analogous to bookkeeping, the simulations replicate this finding and suggest that the "subtyping" pattern of results will be drastically reduced if disconfirmers are encountered before the stereotype is well-established. This novel prediction holds with human participants and offers a tantalizing suggestion: Although moderate disconfirmers may produce more stereotype change, stereotype development might be discouraged by exposure to either extreme or moderate disconfirmers.
Article
Chapter
This chapter focuses on the theoretical underpinnings for semantic network representations. It also focuses on several issues, such as the meaning of semantics, the need for explicit understanding of the intended meanings for various types of arcs and links, the need for careful thought in choosing conventions for representing facts as assemblages of arcs and nodes, and several specific difficult problems in knowledge representation—especially problems of relative clauses and quantification. When the semantics of the notations are made clear, many of the techniques used in existing semantic networks are inadequate for representing knowledge in general. The chapter presents the logical inadequacies of almost all current network notations for representing quantified information and also discusses some of the disadvantages of a few logically adequate techniques.
Chapter
It is a truism of human existence that people are seldom open-minded. We approach new situations and people, bringing to bear all our past experiences, knowledge, beliefs, and feelings about similar situations and people. For example, we go to a sporting event with a wealth of knowledge about the game, the players’ positions, and individual plays. That knowledge, which may have been gained through direct experience or secondhand sources, provides us with a variety of expectations about what will happen, who will be there, and what they will be like. It also guides our attention and interpretations of information while we are at the event and our memory of it after we leave.