Feds' psychology tricks fail miserably on global warming
Government program still can't get people to 'draw correct inferences'
20 16.09.19

President Obama’s executive order to federal agencies to integrate into their policies and programs “behavioral-science insights” about how people make decisions and act on them has had little effect on how Americans think about “climate change,” the government-approved theory that mankind is causing irreparable damage to the planet.

That’s according to the Social and Behavioral Sciences Team in the executive office of the president, part of the National and Science Technology Council.

It recently released its annual report describing how it worked in eight “policy areas.”

The work included “promoting retirement security, advancing economic opportunity, improving college access and affordability, responding to climate change, supporting criminal-justice reform, assisting job seekers, helping families get health coverage and stay healthy, and improving the effectiveness and efficiency of federal government operations.”

The SBST’s objective is to help federal agencies “leverage social and behavioral science insights to advance the goals of their policies and programs.”

Many of the efforts were simple applications of common sense. For example, the report’s executive summary explains it had Department of Defense bases start asking those arriving for new assignments whether they wanted to participate in a retirement savings program, and the participation rate rose 8.3 percent.

It also set up a procedure for Medicaid data submitted by families to be used by schools to “automatically enroll” students in free or reduced price school lunch programs.

It also is providing information to Social Security recipients about what their benefits will be if they start the payments at various times, to maximum the benefit to the individuals.

And the program has started a microloan program for farmers “who may have difficulty obtaining credit from a commercial source.”

It has had less success on global warming.

The report said consumer adoption of “green-power plans remains low at roughly 700,000 customers nationwide.”

To improve that, the team initiated a dialogue with the Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy to “identify the potential behavioral barriers underlying low take-up of clean energy, as well as a suite of behavioral tools that can be used to address these barriers.”

“For example, behavioral science research indicates that prompting consumers to select a power plan from among clean and non-clean options (rather than defaulting them into a standard electricity plan) and presenting plan options in ways that facilitate informed decision-making can improve take-up,” the report said.

It also wants to make consumers better understand what the government wants them to do about global warming.

“To help households, communities and decision-makers better understand and adapt to the effects of rising global temperatures, SBST, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the University of Maryland have worked to help the United States Global Change Research Program improve their ‘climate indicators,’ which convey important information about climate patterns to non-scientists,” the report said.

“This pilot yielded mixed results. For example, simplifying a graph showing changes in the Annual Greenhouse Gas Index increased successful interpretation of the indicator by 18 percent points, but did not significantly increase how well people were able to draw inferences from the indicator,” the report said.

It then goes into detail about how it did research to show that simply changing a graph around might help convince people of the agenda’s value.

“This project gauged comprehension of 14 existing USGCRP indicators using an online survey that asked people between three and six questions about the information presented in each indicator. The two indicators with the lowest proportion of correct responses – the Annual Greenhouse Gas Index and the Annual Heating and Cooling Degree Days – were redesigned.”

A subsequent survey then found “simple design changes hold promise for improving comprehension of climate information.”

But results for the other redesigned indicator – Annual Heating and Cooling Degree Days – “were similarly mixed,” the report said.

The report said the government is using “behavioral insights” better in other ways.

“For example, research shows that individuals reduce their residential energy consumption when provided with information about how their consumption compares with that of their neighbors. In another example, rates of clean-power adoption were dramatically higher in Germany when consumers had to opt out of clean energy plans rather than opt it.”

John Holdren, the director of the committee, said the effort allows federal officials to look at what information they want people to have and how to get it to them by the simplest route.

He wrote, “How individuals understand and respond to information depends on its presentation.”

The lesson?

“Agencies should present information in a manner that is meaningful to the intended audience and that effectively promotes the intended use of that information.”

He also advocated “framing” the information, such as requiring that the efficiency of cars be advertised based on gallons per mile, rather than miles per gallon.

On the topic of global warming, WND reported much of the information being used is simply wrong.

Marc Morano of Climate Depot warned the intent now is not to discuss, investigate or research, but to send “a chilling message to doubters and skeptics” to be silent.

Morano said on his website his movie, “Climate Hustle,” shows “the climate establishment comparing climate skeptics to Holocaust deniers.”

“It’s all an attempt to silence the debate, to silence any science and go right to centralized planning,” he said. “That’s what this is all about. The U.N. has admitted their goal is wealth redistribution and it doesn’t have anything to do with environmental policy.”

The solution offered by the climate establishment, he said, is always the same: “more centralized government.”

He said the result will be tragic for large populations who are being denied access to pumped water, power and heat because of antagonism to carbon-based fuels.

“The reason we know there’s a hustle is their predictions have failed to come true, on a whole host of issues,” Morano said. “That’s why they now want to stop the debate, suppress debate.”

Famous predictions

One of the more famous predictions came from former vice president and current carbon-credit entrepreneur Al Gore, who told an audience in a 2009 speech that “the entire north polar ice cap during some of the summer months could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years.”

His 2006 documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth,” famously predicted increasing temperatures would cause earth’s oceans to rise by 20 feet, a claim many scientists say is utterly without rational basis.

.....................................................

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/09/feds-psycholo...VMC1SBFF3LAv.99

For those who are intrested:


For Immediate Release
September 15, 2015
Executive Order -- Using Behavioral Science Insights to Better Serve the American People

EXECUTIVE ORDER

- - - - - - -

USING BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE INSIGHTS TO

BETTER SERVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

A growing body of evidence demonstrates that behavioral science insights -- research findings from fields such as behavioral economics and psychology about how people make decisions and act on them -- can be used to design government policies to better serve the American people.

Where Federal policies have been designed to reflect behavioral science insights, they have substantially improved outcomes for the individuals, families, communities, and businesses those policies serve. For example, automatic enrollment and automatic escalation in retirement savings plans have made it easier to save for the future, and have helped Americans accumulate billions of dollars in additional retirement savings. Similarly, streamlining the application process for Federal financial aid has made college more financially accessible for millions of students.

To more fully realize the benefits of behavioral insights and deliver better results at a lower cost for the American people, the Federal Government should design its policies and programs to reflect our best understanding of how people engage with, participate in, use, and respond to those policies and programs. By improving the effectiveness and efficiency of Government, behavioral science insights can support a range of national priorities, including helping workers to find better jobs; enabling Americans to lead longer, healthier lives; improving access to educational opportunities and support for success in school; and accelerating the transition to a low-carbon economy.

NOW, THEREFORE, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, I hereby direct the following:

Section 1. Behavioral Science Insights Policy Directive.

(a) Executive departments and agencies (agencies) are encouraged to:

(i) identify policies, programs, and operations where applying behavioral science insights may yield substantial improvements in public welfare, program outcomes, and program cost effectiveness;

(ii) develop strategies for applying behavioral science insights to programs and, where possible, rigorously test and evaluate the impact of these insights;

(iii) recruit behavioral science experts to join the Federal Government as necessary to achieve the goals of this directive; and

(iv) strengthen agency relationships with the research community to better use empirical findings from the behavioral sciences.

(b) In implementing the policy directives in section (a), agencies shall:

(i) identify opportunities to help qualifying individuals, families, communities, and businesses access public programs and benefits by, as appropriate, streamlining processes that may otherwise limit or delay participation -- for example, removing administrative hurdles, shortening wait times, and simplifying forms;

(ii) improve how information is presented to consumers, borrowers, program beneficiaries, and other individuals, whether as directly conveyed by the agency, or in setting standards for the presentation of information, by considering how the content, format, timing, and medium by which information is conveyed affects comprehension and action by individuals, as appropriate;

(iii) identify programs that offer choices and carefully consider how the presentation and structure of those choices, including the order, number, and arrangement of options, can most effectively promote public welfare, as appropriate, giving particular consideration to the selection and setting of default options; and

(iv) review elements of their policies and programs that are designed to encourage or make it easier for Americans to take specific actions, such as saving for retirement or completing education programs. In doing so, agencies shall consider how the timing, frequency, presentation, and labeling of benefits, taxes, subsidies, and other incentives can more effectively and efficiently promote those actions, as appropriate. Particular attention should be paid to opportunities to use nonfinancial incentives.

(c) For policies with a regulatory component, agencies are encouraged to combine this behavioral science insights policy directive with their ongoing review of existing significant regulations to identify and reduce regulatory burdens, as appropriate and consistent with Executive Order 13563 of January 18, 2011 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), and Executive Order 13610 of May 10, 2012 (Identifying and Reducing Regulatory Burdens).

Sec. 2. Implementation of the Behavioral Science Insights Policy Directive. (a) The Social and Behavioral Sciences Team (SBST), under the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) and chaired by the Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, shall provide agencies with advice and policy guidance to help them execute the policy objectives outlined in section 1 of this order, as appropriate.

(b) The NSTC shall release a yearly report summarizing agency implementation of section 1 of this order each year until 2019. Member agencies of the SBST are expected to contribute to this report.

(c) To help execute the policy directive set forth in section 1 of this order, the Chair of the SBST shall, within 45 days of the date of this order and thereafter as necessary, issue guidance to assist agencies in implementing this order.

Sec. 3. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to a department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) Independent agencies are strongly encouraged to comply with the requirements of this order.

(d) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
September 15, 2015.



pdf of eo 13707
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09.../2015-23630.pdf

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-off...-serve-american