their own internal convictions, rather than to external pressures imposed upon them. This, in turn, may lead them to develop their own reasons for conserving energy and, as they begin to take steps in that direction, to appreciate the value of conservation and the importance of continuing to act in this way on their own. It is as if the initial commitments individuals make begin to grow their own roots, which can very quickly spread across a wide area. In short, I believe minimal justification techniques, especially those employing commitment procedures, might go a long way toward overcoming the limited effectiveness of most current energy conservation programs and that they hold considerable promise for producing widespread, enduring reductions in consumer energy consumption.
Arbuthnot J. Tedeschi R., Wayner M., Turner J., Kressel S., and Rush R., 1976. "The induction of sustained recycling behavior through the foot-in-thedoor technique." J. Environ. Systems, 6, 353-66.
Becker L., 1978. "The joint effect of feedback and goal setting on performance: A find study of residential energy consumption." J. Applied Psych., 63, 428-33.
Bachman W. and Katzev R., 1982. "The effects of noncontingent free bus tickets and personal commitment on urban bus ridership." Transport. Res., 16A, 103-8.
Frieden B. and Baker K., 1983. "The market needs help: The disappointing record of home energy conservation." J. Policy Anal. Mgmt., 2, 432-48.
Jacobs. and Bailey J., 1982/83. "Evaluating participation in a residential recycling program." J. Environ. Syst., 12, 141-52.
Katzev R. and Johnson T., 1983. "A social-psychological analysis of residential electricity consumption: The impact of minimal justification techniques." J. Econ. Psych., 3, 267-84.
Katzev R. and Johnson T., 1984. "Comparing the effectsof monetary incentives and foot-in-the-door strategies in promoting residential electricity conservation."