Time and Psychology: How Rules We Initially Reject Often Stick Around
Resistance Suggests Imminent Implementation of Smoking Restrictions and Speed Regulations - Rule Defiance: Failure to Adhere to Stipulated Regulations
Ever wondered why we often find ourselves accepting rules and regulations that we initially resisted? According to a fascinating multi-study collaboration, led by the Technical University of Munich (TUM) and the University of Vienna, it might just come down to the flow of time and psychology [1][3].
This groundbreaking research delved into the psychological mechanisms behind our reactions to restrictive measures like smoking bans, speed limits, and more, using survey and experimental data from the US, Netherlands, UK, and Germany [1][3].
The Ebb and Flow of Resistance
Here's the lowdown: when new restrictive measures are first announced, we're likely to experience a strong pushback. This resistance arises from reactance, a psychological response triggered by perceived threats to our freedom [1][2][3].
But guess what? Over time, this resistance significantly decreases once the measures have been put into place [1][2][3]. So, what's behind this change in attitude?
Designing the New Normal
Psychologist Robert Böhm explains it as follows: when faced with a change, our attention is drawn to the innovation itself and the losses associated with it rather than the conditions before and after the change [1][2][3].
When new rules are introduced, the personal losses, such as freedom, habits, and comfort, take center stage. However, these losses gradually recede into the background once the rules are in place longer. At this point, people shift their focus to the benefits the measure brings to society, such as health or climate protection [3].
- Smoke Ban
- Speed Limit
- Rejection
- University of Vienna
- Technical University of Munich
- USA
- Netherlands
Breaking it Down:
- We initially resist due to threats to our freedom (reactance).
- Over time, our resistance wanes, and we come to accept the rules as routine.
- With time, we begin to recognize the collective benefits.
Why This Matters
Policymakers often overestimate the long-term opposition to restrictive measures. Early, transparent communication about the collective benefits, such as public health or climate benefits, is key to fostering acceptance and reducing initial resistance [1][3].
These findings are particularly relevant to policies like smoking bans in workplaces across Europe, seatbelt laws in the US, stricter speed limits in the Netherlands, and vaccine mandates, taxes, and other regulations in the UK and Germany [1][2][3].
- The study led by the Technical University of Munich and the University of Vienna suggests that our resistance to community policies, such as smoking bans and speed limits, shrinks over time, easing our acceptance of these measures.
- Psychologist Robert Böhm explains this shift in attitude by stating that our focus shifts from the losses associated with changes, like restrictions on freedom, to the benefits the policies bring to society, like health improvements or climate protection.
- Initial rejection of policies often stems from reactance, a psychological response triggered by perceived threats to our freedom that decrease in intensity as the measures become routine.
- Vaccination mandates, taxes, and regulations may follow a similar pattern, as public acceptance can increase over time despite initial resistance.
- Policymakers can reduce initial resistance by communicating the collective benefits of their policies transparently and early on.
- This research offers valuable insights for policy-and-legislation makers, particularly when it comes to implementing vocational training policies, as the findings suggest that people may come to accept such policies over time due to the health-and-wellness and mental-health benefits.
