Differences in how and why social comparisons and real-time feedback impact resource use: Evidence from a field experiment

We compare the behavior and welfare effects of two popular behavioral interventions for resource conservation. The first intervention is social comparison reports (SC), primarily providing consumers with information motivating behavioral change. The second intervention is real-time feedback (RTF), primarily providing consumers with information facilitating behavioral change. In a field experiment with around 1,000 participants, SC reduces water use per shower by 9.4%, RTF by 28.8%, and the combination of both interventions by 35.0%. Participants' willingness to pay for RTF and the combination is higher than for SC. We find that all interventions enhance welfare.