Prosocial behaviour: design prompts that support citizenship

Can design help to make people better citizens? Civil behaviour has been getting lots of attention recently—and research suggests that there are innovative ways to enhance it.

New research from Vienna by Gangl and colleagues, set to be published in the Journal of Environmental Psychology in February 2025, indicates that people are less likely to litter when they can see nature posters. As the researchers report, ‘Littering has negative effects on the environment and is seen as a sign of social disorder.’

The study tested the impact of nature posters against a control group of posters explicitly warning of the financial costs of littering. It found that while nature posters did not enhance objective cleanness, they did enhance ‘the subjective experiences of cleanness, which can be an important driving force for feelings of social order and comfort’.

‘We learn what any organisation expects of us from non-verbal messages projected by the spaces provided…’

At a more elevated level than littering, we learn what any organisation expects of us and how we should behave from non-verbal messages projected by the spaces provided, including the use of artworks in place as a key signifier. As West and Wind (2007) report, ‘Values encapsulated in words are just not as clear and concrete as those embodied in the office itself.’

There are multiple other ways that design can help communities function more smoothly and pleasantly across the spectrum of potential civil behaviours, according to research.  

Lighting affects behaviour

Esteky, Wooten, and Bos’s work (2020) found that people in more brightly lit spaces (say 1000 lux instead of 200-300 lux) were more likely to act in a prosocial way. Prosocial behaviour benefits others and includes being agreeable, generous, trusting, helpful and empathetic.

Chiou and Cheng (2013) reported similar findings: ‘Based on metaphorical associations between light and goodness, we hypothesised that experiencing brightness increases the salience of moral considerations and the likelihood of engaging in ethical behaviour. The results of three experiments supported these predictions.’ Their study found that participants in a well-lit room acted less selfishly than those in a moderately or a dimly lit room. Also, participants in a well-lit room volunteered to code more data sheets than participants in moderate brightness. 

Steidle and Werth (2014) determined that people in brighter spaces (1500 lux) have significantly more self-control than those in darker ones (150 lux), while Wessolowski, Koenig, Schulte-Markwort and Barkmann (2014) found ‘an increase in prosocial behaviours as a result of using warm [as opposed to cool], dimmed lighting in work environments.’

Orderly space matters

Chae and Zhu (2012) ran four experiments placing people in more orderly and less orderly spaces. The research found that, compared to people in organised spaces, ‘individuals who were exposed to a disorganised environment exhibited more self-regulatory failures in subsequent tasks, such as impulsive buying, less persistence on challenging tasks, and unhealthy eating.’

Physical disorder and rule breaking seem to go hand in hand.  Kotabe, Kardan and Berman (2016) report that ‘research suggests that basic visual disorder cues may be sufficient to encourage complex rule-breaking behaviour.’

Impact of scent

De Lange and teammates (2012) reported that ‘the scent of a cleaning product was subtly dispersed in [Dutch] train compartments. Compared to passengers in unscented compartments, passengers littered less as measured by the weight and number of items left behind in compartments containing cleaner scent [a citrus smell].’

Similarly, Liljenquist, Zhong, and Galinsky (2010) determined that ‘clean scents not only motivate clean behaviour, but also promote virtuous behaviour by increasing the tendency to reciprocate trust and to offer charitable help. The link from cleanliness to virtuous behaviour appears to be a nonconscious one.’

Mirrors and awe

Seeing ourselves in mirrors makes it much more likely that we’ll follow social norms, according to Wiekens and Stapel, 2008. When passersby can see themselves in a mirror, they are less likely to litter, for example (de Kort, McCalley and Midden, 2008).

Multiple research studies link feeling a sense of awe with increased prosocial behaviour. Design can awe us in multiple ways in the workplace, via exquisite workmanship and materials, for example, or via a grand scale. Jiang and Sidikides (2022) found, for instance, that the emotion of awe invigorates the pursuit of the authentic self which is ‘linked with higher general prosociality’ – acts that benefit others.

Biophilic design also influences following social norms. Via a literature review, Bakker and van der Voordt (2010) found that plants can have a positive social effect in relation to morality.

‘Humans are more likely to behave in a prosocial way when people seem to be looking at them…’

Conty, George, and Hietanen (2016) meanwhile report that humans are more likely to behave in a prosocial way when people seem to be looking at them, even when the human eyes looking at them are part of an image (for example, on a poster). If that sounds a bit creepy, consider that generally there’s no shortage of design inputs that can help shape better citizens in the workplace – from lighting, mirrors plants and scents to artworks and order.

Read more of the latest research insights from Sally Augustin in Research Roundup, her regular column in the Innovation Zone for WORKTECH Academy members and partners here.

Research sources

Iris Bakker and Theo van der Voordt.  2010. ‘The Influence of Plants On Productivity: A Critical Assessment of Research Findings and Test Methods.’ Facilities, vol. 28, no. 9/10, pp. 416-439.

Boyoun Chae and Rui Zhu.  2012. ‘Environmental Disorder Leads to Self-Regulatory Failure.’ Proceedings, Annual Winter Conference, Society for Consumer Psychology, February 16-18, Las Vegas, pp.171-172.

Wen-Bin Chiou and Ying-Yao Cheng. 2013. ‘In Broad Daylight, We Trust in God! Brightness, the Salience of Morality, and Ethical Behavior.’  Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 36, pp. 37-42.

Laurence Conty, Nathalie George and Jari Hietanen. 2016. ‘Watching Eyes Effects: When Others Meet the Self.’ Consciousness and Cognition, vol. 45, pp. 184-197.

De Lange, L. Debets, K. Ruitenburg and R. Holland. 2012. ‘Making Less of a Mess: Scent Exposure as a Tool for Behavioral Change.’ Social Influence, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 90-97.

Sina Esteky, David Wooten, and Maarten Bos. 2020. ‘Illuminating Illumination: Understanding the Influence of Ambient Lighting on Prosocial Behaviors.’ Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 68, 101405.

Gangl, M. Seifert, P. Van Lange, and S. Pahl. ‘Nature Posters Enhance Subjective But Not Objective Cleanness in Public Housing: Evidence from a Field Experiment.’ Journal of Environmental Psychology, in press.

Jiang and C. Sidikides.  2022. ‘Awe Motivates Authentic-Self Pursuit Via Self-Transcendence:  Implications for Prosociality.’ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 123, no. 3, pp. 576-596.

Hiroki Kotabe, Omid Kardan, and Marc Berman. 2016. ‘The Order of Disorder:  Deconstructing Visual Disorder and Its Effect on Rule-Breaking.’  Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, vol. 145, no. 12, pp. 1713-1727.

Liljenquist, C. Zhong, and A. Galinsky.  2010. ‘The Smell of Virtue:  Clean Scents Promote Reciprocity and Charity.’  Psychological Science, vol. 21, pp. 381-383.

Anna Steidle and Lioba Werth. 2014. ‘In the Spotlight: Brightness Increases Self-Awareness and Reflective Self-Regulation.’ Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 39, pp. 40–50.

Nino Wessolowski, Heiko Koenig, Michael Schulte-Markwort, and Claus Barkmann.  2014 ‘The Effect of Variable Light on the Fidgetiness and Social Behavior of Pupils in School.’  Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 39, pp. 101-108.

Alfred West and Yoram Wind. 2007. ‘Putting the Organization on Wheels: Workplace Design at SEI.’ California Management Review, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 138 – 153.

Carina Wiekens and Diederik Stapel. 2008. ‘The Mirror and I: When Private Opinions are in Conflict with Public Norms.’ Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 1160-1166.