Methods to discourage the behavior of littering and promote the proper disposal of trash have been studied for many years; however, littering remains a problem in various settings (Almosa, Parkinson, & Rundle-Thiele, 2017, “Littering Reduction: A Systematic Review of Research 1995–2015,” Social Marketing Quarterly, 23[3], 203–222). The purpose of this field study was to further explore features and influences of signage posted alongside trash cans—signs aimed at discouraging littering and encouraging pedestrians to make use of the nearby receptacle when appropriate. To evaluate littering across sign versus no-sign preparations and to examine whether littering was differentially sensitive to symmetrically worded “do” versus “don’t” sign conditions, we prepared an alternating-treatments design with condition reversals. Results indicated that the condition without a sign was inferior to conditions with signs and that there were negligible differences between the “do” and “don’t” sign conditions. We discuss our findings in the context of methodological and social validity considerations.

中文翻译：

---

“做”与“不做”格式标牌对乱抛垃圾的比较影响

多年来，人们一直在研究阻止乱扔垃圾行为和促进垃圾正确处置的方法；然而，乱扔垃圾在各种环境中仍然是一个问题（Almosa、Parkinson 和 Rundle-Thiele，2017 年，“减少乱扔垃圾：系统性研究回顾 1995-2015”，《社会营销季刊》，23[3]，203-222）。本实地研究的目的是进一步探索张贴在垃圾桶旁边的标志的特征和影响——这些标志旨在阻止乱扔垃圾并鼓励行人在适当的时候使用附近的容器。为了评估在有标志和无标志准备之间乱扔垃圾，并检查乱扔垃圾是否对对称措辞的“做”和“不做”标志条件不同敏感，我们准备了一个交替处理设计和条件逆转。结果表明，没有标志的情况不如有标志的情况，并且“做”和“不”标志的情况之间的差异可以忽略不计。我们在方法论和社会有效性考虑的背景下讨论我们的发现。