Previous behavioural studies have shown that learning new information can lead to forgetting.

This behaviour may have evolved as dogs gradually learned they could benefit from avoiding conflicts with humans.

Even problems with crime and aggressive behaviour are reduced when there is contact with the natural world.

Dr William Bird, researcher from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, states in his study, A natural environment can reduce violent behaviour because its restorative process helps reduce anger and impulsive behaviour.

Dr William Bird suggests in his study that wild places may induce impulsive behaviour in people.

wild places may induce impulsive behaviour in people.

The reason for these and countless other patterns of social behaviour is that they are controlled by social norms--shared rules or guidelines which prescribe the behavior that is appropriate in a given situation.

According to the same study, efforts to reduce consumption should focus on improving consumer awareness and behaviour.

Well, my current research is really about consumer behaviour.

just perceiving norms is enough to cause people to adjust their behaviour in the direction of the crowd.

Social science can also teach politician, how to avoid our collective capacity for self-destructive behaviour.

Other studies show that simply providing the facility for people to compare their energy use with the local average is enough to cause them to modify their behaviour.

One study shows that our neighbours' actions are influential in changing our behaviour.

Instead of normalising the undesirable behaviour, the message needs to marginalise it, for example, by stating that if even one person buys yet another SUV, it reduces our ability to be energy-independent.

In the US, the House of Representatives Science Committee has approved a bill allocating $10 million a year to studying energy-related behaviour.

Fortunately for the planet, social science and behavioural economics may be able to do that for us.

Existing social networks can be more effective in creating change in people's behaviour.

Environmental campaigns that tell us how many people drive SUVs unwittingly ( ' , 不经意地 ) imply that this behaviour is widespread and thus permissible.

But the most pervasive problem is less obvious: our own behaviour.

However, characteristics associated with modern consumer culture mean produce is often wasted through retail and customer behaviour.

Their work is already starting to reveal how the \Obama effect\ is changing people's views and behaviour.

birds flock together, fish school together, cattle herd together...just perceiving norms is enough to cause people to adjust their behaviour in the direction of the crowd.

Currently, I teach consumer behaviour to undergraduates in their second year, and we look at all kinds of things in consumer behaviour and particularly how consumers are presented in advertising.

Environmental campaigns that tell us how many people drive SUVs unwittingly (不经意地) imply that this behaviour is widespread and thus permissible.

I'm also interested in how consumers operate online, and how that online behaviour might be different from how they operate offline when they go to the shops.

So they get involved by looking at advertising and really critically assessing the consumer behaviour aspects of it and getting involved sometimes doing primary research.

Social science can also teach politicians, how to avoid our collective capacity for self-destructive behaviour.

The key thing about consumer behaviour is that it's very much about how consumers change.

Unable to tell whether someone really objects to behavioural ads or whether they are sticking with Microsoft’s default, some may ignore a DNT signal and press on anyway.

In the past couple of weeks a quarrel has illustrated the value to advertisers of such fine-grained information: Should advertisers assume that people are happy to be tracked and sent behavioural ads? Or should they have explicit permission?.

I assumed that phase was something experts developed after years of research into children's behaviour: wrong.