Online experiment reveals how a conspicuous-conservation nudge improves used smartphone demand, suggesting racial and personality factors influence effectiveness.
Purpose: This study tests whether a conspicuous-conservation nudge, which combines an eco-message with an invitation to publicly share one’s choice, can shift demand from new to used smartphones. It also examines how race and Big Five personality traits jointly influence nudge effectiveness—a rarely explored intersection in e-waste research.Study design/methodology/approach: In an online experiment, 488 U.S. adults were randomly assigned to six conditions that varied the presence of the nudge and the price discount on certified-refurbished iPhones. Logistic regressions were used to analyze how the nudge, price, race, and personality scores affect the willingness to choose a used phone. Sample and data: Respondents were 63% male and 73% White. Each completed structured choice tasks plus a validated Big Five inventory embedded in the survey.Results: The conspicuous-conservation nudge markedly boosted selection of used iPhones, with minority participants benefiting more than Whites. Extraversion amplified the racial gap, whereas neuroticism dampened it, while price discounts remained a significant driver of second-hand adoption.Originality/value: By uniting conspicuous-conservation theory with racial and personality moderators in a secondary-technology context, this study shows that making environmental virtue publicly shareable can unlock latent demand for device reuse, particularly in communities historically burdened by digital and ecological inequities. The findings extend behavioral-economics scholarship and offer practical levers for e-waste mitigation. Research limitations/implications: The study’s online-panel sample may limit broad generalizability. However, its evidence equips retailers and policymakers with actionable guidance, while inviting cross-segment and cross-product future replications to perfect personalized nudges that curb e-waste.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abdullah Alhauli (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: