Imagine you've recently decided to eat less sugar. You arrive at work one day and a coworker puts out a plate of freshly baked homemade cookies to share. They smell delicious! Would you be tempted to take one? How much self-control would it take to resist?

What if instead, your coworker brought out just a single cookie for herself to eat with her coffee? Now, would you be tempted to take it? Would it be hard to resist? Probably not. We'd bet you wouldn't even consider it. That's because stealing the cookie from a colleague violates social norms—the beliefs held by a community, culture, or society about what behaviors are common and acceptable within a given context. As our research shows, social norms exert a powerful influence on what behaviors come to mind.

In our recent studies, we found that social norms act like a menu: when you enter a social situation, norms tell you what behaviors are available in that situation, and which are not. Just as menus constrain what options people consider at a restaurant, social norms constrain what behaviors people consider in a situation.

By excluding behaviors that are not "on the menu" from consideration, social norms invisibly yet powerfully shape people's experience of the world. They effectively define the realm of what behaviors seem possible in a given situation. In one study, we found that people mistake behaviors that go against norms—like asking a stranger at the library to dance—as being physically impossible. In another study, we showed that people are often blind to (don't notice, track, and remember) objects in their environment that would go against norms to engage with. Even if you are hungry, you might literally not notice a box of cookies that belongs to someone else.

Social Norms and Self-control

The power of social norms to automatically guide thought and behavior has big implications for problems of self-control. In life, people face many situations in which long-term goals—like saving money—come into conflict with temptations that offer more immediate gratification—like ordering takeout after a long day of work. The immediacy of temptations can make them difficult to resist. But if an otherwise tempting behavior is not "on the menu," it no longer needs to be resisted. Could this process be leveraged to help people reach their goals? 

To test this, we did a study in a college lecture course. We sought to help students overcome temptations—like checking social media—that can distract them from their learning goals. In one semester, we focused on individual self-control. We shared with students research on how technological distractions could harm learning and invited students to write their own personal strategies to resist the temptation to multitask. Students found this exercise useful and reported that they wanted to avoid multitasking. But it made little difference. Despite students' best intentions, the availability of using phones and laptops during class created strong temptations that were difficult for students to resist on their own.

So in another semester, we tried something else. Instead of focusing on individual willpower, we set a new norm. At the beginning of the term, the professor shared the same research on how technological distractions could harm learning, but then stated that laptops, cell phones, and tablets were not supposed to be used during class. There was no enforcement of this informal class policy—students were not penalized for using technology, and any student could opt out of it by simply talking with the instructor. Nevertheless, this statement set a strong norm for how to behave in class.

That worked. Compared to using personal strategies alone, students who experienced the no-tech norm spent less time multitasking, and strikingly, even found it easy to do so. Most said the urge to multitask with laptops in class simply didn't come to mind in an average lecture.

How did students feel about the new norm? Students who didn't experience it thought they'd hate it. But those who did overwhelmingly endorsed it. Over 85% thought it should be implemented in future classes and over 95% saw it as beneficial. One student said, "I was opposed to it at first, but as the semester went on, I realized I was much more engaged and was learning the concepts much more efficiently."

In effect, the no-tech norm took the behavior of checking social media and browsing the web off the menu. Students were freed from distracting urges to multitask. They no longer had to effortfully suppress these urges. This reduction in conflict is important. Even if a student doesn't check their phone during class, fighting the urge to do so can be just as distracting and detrimental to learning.

This research shows how social norms can offload the burdens of self-control to the social environment. That means, if you want to set yourself up for success, seek out situations where the "menu" of behaviors permitted by social norms aligns with your goals. Better yet, think about what's on the menu in your family, workplace, school, or friend groups—and decide whether it's worth trying to work together to write a new one.


For Further Reading

Kalkstein, D. A., Hook, C. J., Hard, B. M., & Walton, G. M. (2022). Social norms govern what behaviors come to mind—and what do not. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000412

Gaither, S., & Hard, B. M. (2019, September 23rd): Why you should consider a tech-free classroom. Psychology Today: Different Identities, Different Perspectives. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/different-identities-different-perspectives/201909/why-you-should-consider-tech-free-classroom


David Kalkstein is a postdoctoral scholar at Stanford University who studies social cognition, social learning, and social coordination.

Bridgette Hard is a Professor of the Practice in Psychology & Neuroscience at Duke University who studies the intersection of psychology and pedagogy.

Cayce Hook received her doctorate from Stanford University in 2020. Her research interests are in social norms, cultural psychology, and the design of social psychological interventions for health and well-being.

Greg Walton is the Michael Forman University Fellow in Undergraduate Education and Associate Professor of Psychology at Stanford University. He investigates psychological processes that contribute to major social problems and how "wise" interventions that target these processes can address such problems and help people flourish, even over long periods of time.