Examining the Justification for Residential Recycling

Municipalities in the United States have for the past two decades initiated two policies to reduce residential solid waste generation by increasing recycling. The first policy, implemented in over 4,000 municipalities in the United States, requires households to pay a fee for each unit of garbage presented at the curb for collection. The second policy, initiated in 8,875 municipalities, subsidizes household recycling efforts by providing free curbside collection of certain recyclable materials. Both initiatives serve as examples of incentive-based environmental policies favored by many economists. But before economists can celebrate this wide-spread adoption of incentive-based environmental policies, further examination reveals that potentially inefficient command and control policies have been more instrumental in promoting recycling than might be commonly known. This article examines the empirical lessons gained from studying twenty years of solid waste policy in the United States and argues for the replacement of several state recycling mandates with a system of state and/or national landfill taxes.

Capuchin Monkeys Exercise Self-control by Choosing Token Exchange Over an Immediate Reward

Self-control is a prerequisite for complex cognitive processes such as cooperation and planning. As such, comparative studies of self-control may help elucidate the evolutionary origin of these capacities. A variety of methods have been developed to test for self-control in non-human primates that include some variation of foregoing an immediate reward in order to gain a more favorable reward. We used a token exchange paradigm to test for self-control in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Animals were trained that particular tokens could be exchanged for food items worth different values. To test for self-control, a monkey was provided with a token that was associated with a lower-value food. When the monkey exchanged the token, the experimenter provided the monkey with a choice between the lower-value food item associated with the token or another token that was associated with a higher-value food. If the monkey chose the token, they could then exchange it for the higher-value food. Of seven monkeys trained to exchange tokens, five demonstrated that they attributed value to the tokens by differentially selecting tokens for higher-value foods over tokens for lower-value foods. When provided with a choice between a food item or a token for a higher-value food, two monkeys selected the token significantly more than expected by chance. The ability of capuchin monkeys to forego an immediate food reward and select a token that could then be traded for a more preferred food demonstrated some degree of self-control. Thus, results suggest a token exchange paradigm could be a successful technique for assessing self-control in this New World species.

Investigating the Role of System Justification in Mental Illness Stigma

The current study integrates system justification theory with research on mental illness stigma. Stereotypes of both low- and high-status groups in society can be a means of satisfying the system justification motive, or the motive to view societal inequalities as justified (as reviewed in Jost, Banaji, & Nosek, 2004). Corrigan, Watson, and Ottati (2003) proposed that system justification theory may be able to explain the origins of particular stereotypes of people with mental illness, such as dangerousness and incompetence. The primary goal of the present study was to investigate whether the stigmatization of people with mental illness – a specific form of stigmatization of a lowstatus group – can be at least partially attributed to a broader motive to justify societal inequalities. To test this, the current study included both an experimental manipulation of the perceived legitimacy of the social system and a measure of system-justifying beliefs. Stigmatization of individuals with mental illness was measured with both explicit selfreport measures (semantic differentials and the Attribution Questionnaire) and an implicit measure (a computer-based Implicit Association Test). The relationships between participant characteristics, such as personal experience with mental illness, and stigma were also investigated. Consistent with past research demonstrating only modest correlations between explicit and implicit stigma, greater self-reported fear toward a person with a chronic mental illness was weakly associated with increased implicit bias against mental illness in favor of physical disability. There was little support for the involvement of system justification in explicit stigma. Participants with personal experience with mental illness were less likely to self-report fear and avoidance of a person with a chronic mental illness. These findings have implications for stigmareduction efforts.