Small Is Big: Interactive Trumps Passive Information in Breaking Information Barriers and Impacting Behavioral Antecedents

The wealth of information available on seemingly every topic creates a considerable challenge both for information providers trying to rise above the noise and discerning individuals trying to find relevant, trustworthy information. We approach this information problem by investigating how passive versus interactive information interventions can impact the antecedents of behavior change using the context of solar energy adoption, where persistent information gaps are known to reduce market potential. We use two experiments to investigate the impact of both passive and interactive approaches to information delivery on the antecedents (attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control in the Theory of Planned Behavior) of intentions and behavior, as well as their effect on intentions and behavior directly. The passive information randomized control trial delivered via Amazon Mechanical Turk tests the effectiveness of delivering the same content in a single message versus multiple shorter messages. The interactive information delivery uses an online (mobile and PC) trivia-style gamification platform. Both experiments use the same content and are carried out over a two-week time period. Our findings suggest that interactive, gamified information has greater impact than passive information, and that shorter multiple messages of passive information are more effective than a single passive message.

information seekers and discouraging or delaying a decision based on that information (3,4). Accordingly, outreach efforts are now beginning to learn and understand how to leverage digital media to effectively deliver information and overcome these barriers.
An important factor is the rise of interactive digital media. It is now trivially easy to develop experiences that allow consumers to interact with each other, to share information, or to compete in performing certain tasks. The use of such motivational affordances is often referred to as "gamification" and can increase a user's motivation and engagement with the information (5), thus potentially inducing behavior change.
Researchers have documented several such examples, including energy conservation (6) and health related behavior change (7,8). In contrast, passive information in this context denotes traditional, non-interactive media, such as TV Ads, newspaper ads, newsletters, flyers, posters, etc. that emphasize the passive nature of information dissemination. But few studies have examined the impact of interactive information campaigns on behavior change, especially in comparison to conventional passive information campaigns.
Both interactive and passive information campaigns have pros and cons. Interactive campaigns may engage consumers more, leading to higher impact, but come at a higher cost of creation and with potential subject sampling bias. Passive campaigns are cheaper and can reach a more diverse audience, but may not engage consumers in a meaningful or impactful way. The goal of this paper is to compare the effect of passive and interactive information campaigns on the antecedents of behavior. We address this goal using the context of solar energy adoption, where information gaps, technological advances, anchored perceptions of solar as expensive, and rapid changes in solar costs and available incentive and financing options present a wealth of dynamic information that can be challenging to navigate (4,(9)(10)(11)(12)(13). Additionally, the visibility of solar photovoltaic (PV) and single, unambiguous behavioral action (installed or not installed) is particularly well suited for study.
In a recent randomized control trial (RCT), dubbed "Energy Games," we evaluated changes in attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control (PBC) toward solar in the context of the Theory of Planned Behavior (14,15) in response to a mobile, trivia-style game (discussed in more detail in Section 5). Those initial results showed a significant increase in PBC and intentions toward solar adoption, which suggested that gamification has potential for accelerating solar adoption (16). Building on these results, in this study we completed two additional experiments to address some unresolved questions: Are the results (i.e., increase in PBC and intentions) repeatable? Will the results be similar in a different market context? Was it the game or the information that drove changes in behavioral attributes? In other words, while gamified information delivery in Rai and Beck (2016) showed encouraging results by positively impacting attributes toward adoption of solar, was it more successful than the same content delivered in a passive format? The game delivers one question at a time over a period of two weeks. Do smaller bits of information over time, as in Energy Games, have greater impact than all the information delivered at once?
To address these questions concerning interactive versus passive information we designed two new experiments, focusing on solar adoption information interventions: 1) a repeat of Energy Games using a within subjects design and a larger sample size and 2) an RCT design with participants from Amazon Mechanical Turk delivering the same content as in Energy Games but in a passive format. The within subjects design of Energy Games seeks to repeat the results of the initial Energy Games experiment (16) in a more mature solar market using a larger sample. The passive information study tests the effectiveness of delivering the same content as the game in a single passive message (single) and broken into two shorter messages (multi). As with the original Energy Games experiment in Rai & Beck (2016), both of these experiments use a pre-survey to capture demographic data, behavioral antecedents as defined by the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), intentions, and behavior toward solar (16). Further, a post-survey was used to measure changes in the TPB antecedents, intentions, and behavior after the information interventions. Our findings show that the interactive game is more effective at changing behavioral antecedents than the passive information. Furthermore, the multi message condition is more effective than the single message condition compared to a control group.

Background and Relevant Literature
The TPB model is frequently applied to understanding intentions and behavior across many disciplines, such as health, environment, education, and transportation choices (17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22). TPB identifies three antecedents of intentions: attitudes toward the behavior formed from behavioral beliefs -beliefs about the likely outcomes of a behavior and the evaluations of those outcomes; subjective norms formed from the normative expectations of others and motivation to comply with such expectations; and perceived behavioral control (PBC) based on beliefs regarding factors that may enable or hinder the behavior (14,23). The behavioral intention and PBC then directly impact behavior.
To carry out the two experiments in this study, we used Energy Games, discussed in Section 5, and Amazon Mechanical Turk (AMT), an online marketplace of tasks where workers can login to the site and complete "Human Intelligence Tasks" (HITs) posted by requestors. Anyone can be a worker and/or requestor. Workers receive small payments for completing tasks, on the order of $0.10 per task. Requestors can also provide bonuses for good work. HITs vary significantly in terms of content. Some HITs are simple image classification tasks, while other HITs require evaluating/summarizing text content, or completing surveys. Once workers complete a HIT, the requestor can decide whether to accept (and pay the described amount) or reject the HIT. The number of rejected HITs is tracked for individual workers.
Several surveys of workers on AMT indicate that (24,25): (1) workers come from many countries (>100, with the majority of workers from India and the U.S.); (2) workers have a mean age of 32, median of 30; (3) the majority of workers earn around $30K, some >$100K annually; (4) of workers who chose to give their gender, 55% were female and 45% male. These results indicate that the worker population is highly diverse, especially as compared to standard population used in university based laboratory experiments.
Importantly, requestors can require HITs to be completed by specific types of workers, which is implemented through a "qualification" system where requestors set certain qualifications workers must meet. Amazon provides system wide qualifications such as the location from where one is logging in, whether the user can view adult content, and a minimum percentage of accepted HITs. Requestors can also create custom worker qualifications.
AMT is rapidly becoming a popular method for conducting experiments due to its large and diverse subject pool, low relative cost, and the rapidity of collecting results. For instance, using AMT Paolacci et al. (2010) replicated the results of several classic psychology studies on framing effects, the conjunction fallacy, and outcome bias (24).
Experiments can be rapidly completed as with Mason & Suri's (2012) study showing that for a simple survey, at a cost of $.05 per survey response, 500 people responded within 10 days (26). A laboratory experiment of the same size could take months to complete and be significantly more expensive. The location qualification of AMT also allows researchers to conduct experiments specifically designed to understand the impact of culture on behavior. For instance, Eriksson and Simpson (2010) studied risk preferences as a function of gender and culture (U.S. or India) (27).
The interactive information study is implemented through "serious games" -games with a primary purpose other than entertainment. The terms serious games and "gamification" (the use of game elements in non-game settings) are often used interchangeably, and the difference is largely a matter of degree. A number of studies have investigated the effectiveness of serious games and gamification (5,28). In a gamification survey focusing on increasing user activity (engagement) and attention, the results are slightly positive that gamification can effect motivation and increase comprehension of material (29).
However, these results can be specific to the game design and mechanics, which have many facets (e.g., motivational affordances, subject matter, game genre, audience) making generalization difficult (8). Connolly et al. (2012) review gamification studies focusing specifically on computer games and serious games (28). They identify only twelve RCTs in their review of computer games and serious games studies related to learning, skill enhancement, and engagement, of which six focused on knowledge acquisition, only one focused on behavior change, and none of these addressed energy topics.
In our study, we mitigate potential ambiguities by: 1) employing a relatively simple game design (compared to designs such as multi-level, simulation, virtual world), with 2) a singular emphasis on information delivery, 3) in comparison to a standard mode of communication, 4) using an RCT design and repeatability of results. As our goal is to examine the impact on behavior, which will be measured by self-reported performance of that behavior, we have selected a specific and discrete behavior with a singular path to action (i.e., calling a solar installer to receive a quote and eventually have solar installed).
Our participants are adults living in single-family homes, who are, thus, a suitable population for the behavior under study, especially in comparison to student populations (not usually in a position to adopt solar) and employees (not acting in the context of personal decision making) that typically make up serious game and gamification study participants.

Survey Instrument
Both of the experiments in this study use the same survey instrument (with the exception of one question discussed below) based on the TPB framework to assess the impact of attitudes, normative beliefs, and perceived behavioral control on intentions and behavior related to residential solar adoption and how those constructs change in relation to passive and interactive information interventions. This survey instrument is an expanded version of the survey instrument used in our previous research (30), which was developed using the guidelines for a TPB questionnaire (21,31,32). Based on the prior results, we conducted a salient beliefs survey and further refined the survey instrument, keeping the original questions and adding more. By using the same questions in both experiments discussed in this paper, we are able to make direct comparisons between the two experiments. Additionally, the survey was administered during the fall (September and October) of the same year for both experiments, thus reducing sensitivity to high summer and winter bills.
The survey uses a 7-point bipolar Likert scale with "Agree" written by 7 and "Disagree" written beside 1, unless otherwise noted. The survey addresses measures of attitudes, norms, PBC, intentions, and behavior with respect to residential solar energy, as well as demographic data. Each TPB construct is measured using multiple questions selected via exploratory factor analysis and represented by an index variable calculated as the mean of responses to those questions. The full list of questions used for each variable is available in the Supporting Information (S1 Surveys).
Attitude toward solar was measured as a composite of the overall appeal of solar, expected cost savings, expected effect on home value, visual appeal (positive and negative framing), and environmental impact of solar. The subjective norms index variable was formed from two questions asking if those people who are important to the participant would support installing solar and would approve of installing solar. PBC includes the ease of installing solar, the perceived affordability, knowing what steps to take, and having the time to have the system installed. Intention toward solar was measured by asking the likelihood of calling a solar installer to request a quote. Behavior was measured through actually calling a contractor or solar installer to request a quote.
We did not measure solar adoption as a behavior, since participants would not have had enough time to have solar installed (typically a few months) given the short duration of the experiment (approximately two weeks).
The survey used for the passive information campaign also included a general measure of familiarity with solar energy; this was the only difference between the survey instruments used for the experiments. Additional questions asked participants about awareness of solar incentives, energy use and efficiency upgrades, and both intention and behavior toward energy audits. The content included in both the passive and interactive information campaigns includes energy efficiency information as a way to provide useful information to a broader range of participants, potentially reducing selection bias toward those exclusively interested in solar. Survey questions about energy use and audits serve the same purpose as the energy content. These studies are IRB exempt, and the participant consent statement is available in the Supporting Information (S1 Surveys).

Content
The content for both experiments included solar energy, as well as energy efficiency, in order to appeal to a broader audience and reduce selection bias amongst solar enthusiasts. The information focused on actionable information easily presented through the triviastyle game format. Since subjective norms by their nature of being subjective are harder to convey in factual trivia-style questions, the information favors content related to attitudes and PBC. Due to the limited content on norms, the emphasis of our analysis is on attitudes and PBC.

Experimental design
As noted above, the experimental design includes a pre-and post-survey to capture attitudes, subjective norms, PBC, intentions, and behavior before and after the treatment with a 17 day gap between surveys for the AMT passive information experiment. The time between the two surveys was designed to approximate the timing of Energy Games (the interactive information experiment described below). The AMT passive information experiment has three cohorts as shown in Figure 4.1 below: control (survey only, no information), single message (single), and multiple (but unrepeated) messages (multi) of the same information. The control group received no communication between the surveys. The two treatment groups received the same information on solar energy and energy efficiency as provided in the Energy Games experiment, which is discussed in more detail below. However, the single group received all the information at a single point mid-way (day 8) between the two surveys, whereas the multi group received the same content as the single group, but broken into two sections delivered at approximately equal intervals (day 4 and day 8). Each of the two sections was delivered only once to the multi group, i.e., no information was repeated. Multiple and single message groups receive the same content, except that the former receives it in two smaller pieces. The "first half content" and "second half content" together are exactly the same as "all content" received by the single message cohort.
The two treatment cohorts received the content in the form of information surveys (see S2 Supporting Information Content) with the content followed by two Likert scale questions: "The information provided here was useful to me," and "The information provided here was new to me." These questions were intended only to confirm that participants clicked through the information. The information survey concluded with a page of links to more information, corresponding to links provided in Energy Games.
Only responses from participants that completed all HITs for their cohort were retained in the final data. Respondents were compensated $1 per pre-or post-survey, $1 for the single message information survey, and $0.50 for each of the multiple message information surveys. Thus both treatment groups received the same total compensation for reviewing the same content.
This experiment was conducted as an RCT through AMT, where respondents were first screened for location in the U.S. and owning a single family home. After pre-screening, 699 qualified respondents were invited to complete the pre-survey. Based on prior experience, we planned for retention of approximately 75% at each contact point (34).
Thus, the total of 524 responses was randomly assigned to one of the three groups, with 25% assigned to the control, 25% to the single message condition, and 50% to the multi message condition. The multi group had a larger initial allocation to allow for greater attrition and fatigue due to the additional contacts for the multiple content messages.
After the post survey, the three cohorts had 117 (90% retention), 68 (52%), and 109 (42%) respondents for the control, single, and multi groups, respectively, that completed all the HITs for their respective cohort. The higher retention rate for the control group may be due to the higher HIT payment for the pre-and post-surveys compared to the typical AMT task. Mason & Watts (2009) demonstrated that higher payments increased the completion of HITs, but did not influence the quality of work (35). We note that the main purpose of the incentives was to encourage retention among the respondents and to ensure a robust control. Because this study does not involve an economic experiment, in the sense that the provision of monetary incentives are not associated with expected changes in the studied behavior (such as changes in TPB constructs), the provision of monetary incentives does not interact with changes in the variables of interest in the study.

Demographic Analysis
The three cohorts show no significant differences along demographic variables, which include age, gender, household income, educational attainment, home area, and home value. The mean age of participants is 38 years (sd = 12 years), with 50% female respondents. The modal and median incomes are between $50k-$75k. The modal educational attainment is a Bachelor's degree (42%), with 35% having lower educational attainment and 22% higher. The average home is 1820 sq ft (sd = 960 sq ft) and costs $215k (sd = $180k). Table 4.1 shows the mean response for Likert scale items and proportion responding "yes" for yes/no questions on both the pre-and post-survey, followed by the change in the means (or proportion) between the two surveys by cohort. The final three columns show the difference in the change in the mean, pairwise between cohorts. The significance of the change was determined using two-way repeated measures ANOVA with cohort as the between subjects variables and time as the within subjects variable, controlling for age, gender, household income, educational attainment, home area, and   This indicates that both information treatments are equally effective at increasing a general, non-specific sense of familiarity with the topic, with a small effect size. respectively. The single cohort shows no significant increase in PBC compared to the control group (F(1, 236) = 0.02, p = 0.9). These results suggest that more frequent, smaller amounts of information may be more effective for positively impacting solar PBC. This is noteworthy, since of the three TPB constructs PBC is the most important one to impact, based on prior TPB models that indicate that PBC has the greatest influence on intention and behavior for solar energy (30).

Survey Analysis
Given the relatively short length of the study (two weeks), measuring solar adoption was infeasible since the process of installing solar takes longer than two weeks. Instead, we measured the behavior of calling a solar installer for a quote (SBquote), an essential step in the final adoption decision, and the intention of that behavior as likelihood of calling an installer for a quote (SIquote). Solar intentions change significantly among cohorts This may not be high enough to activate changes in intention or behavior. Additionally, TPB models of SIquote using the pre-survey indicate that the behavioral antecedents account for approximately 28% of variance, which is further supported by models of the same variable in Rai & Beck (2015) showing 24% of variance explained (n = 417) (30).
Thus the effect responsible for the change in intentions and behavior in response to the passive information is likely explained by the remaining 70% of variance. For instance, information salience, or increased resonance of solar information, resulting from the information treatments could be driving increases in intentions toward the behavior.

Experimental design
This experiment was based on our previous Energy Games RCT (16); however, this experiment includes a within subjects repeated measures design only, since the method of recruitment did not permit the formation of a robust control group. To address this weakness to some extent in discussing the results below, we compare with the results in Rai and Beck (2016), which did have a control group and uses the same content and nearly the same pre/post survey design (see Section 3.1).
Energy Games is an interactive trivia-style game for mobile devices and PCs based on the Ringorang ® platform, which supports customizable content. As shown in Figure 5  This leaves a final sample size of 45 participants in the Energy Games experiment.
Following the pre-survey, participants played Energy Games for two weeks between September 14-27, 2015, leaving one week to complete the post-survey before the tour on October 3, 2015. The survey closed prior to the solar tour date in order to ensure that the game, rather than the tour, was the primary source of solar information.
For Energy Games the content was organized into two themes (low effort and high effort), each lasting one week for a total of 15 questions per week (five questions per day, three days a week) roughly split on solar energy and energy efficiency each week.
Overall, the Energy Games experiment lasted for two weeks and entailed 30 questions.
These questions covered the same content as the information surveys provided to the passive information study participants.

Demographic Analysis
Demographic variables include age, gender, household income, educational attainment, home area, and home value. The average mean age of participants is 42 years (sd = 10 years) with 33% female. The modal income is between $75k-$100k. Educational attainment is a Bachelor's degree for 75% of respondents, with the remaining 25% having a post-graduate degree. The average home is 2600 sq ft (sd = 860 sq ft) and costs $220k (sd = $125k), with a Pearson correlation of r = 0.75.

Survey Analysis
The mean response and standard deviation for Likert scale items and percentage responding yes/no for binomial questions on both the pre-and post-survey, followed by the change in the means (or percentage) between the two surveys are shown in Table 5.1.
The significance of the change was determined using a paired t-test and effect size   For solar behavior, SBquote, the percentage change is similar to the passive information study; however, the sample size for Energy Games is less than half that for the multi cohort. Thus, the absolute change is not large enough to register a significant change in behavior. Given that Energy Games was promoted with a community solar tour, it is also possible that participants were waiting until after the tour to move forward on calling an installer.
While the different designs of the passive and interactive information experiments can make direct comparison difficult, the consistency of results for Energy Games, here and in our prior RCT, makes this comparison more reliable. The prior Energy Games RCT used the same content (though specific program information reflected the local utility or relevant information source) and pre/post survey design, showed an increase in PBC and intention toward solar for the game cohort compared to the control, and resulted in similar effect sizes to the study reported here, thus supporting the results of the within subjects design.

Conclusion
We investigated the impact of both passive and interactive approaches to information delivery on the TPB antecedents (attitudes, subjective norms, PBC) of intentions and behavior, as well as their effect on intentions and behavior directly, with a focus on solar energy adoption. That PBC influences behavior both directly and indirectly, through intentions, indicates that impacting PBC has the greatest potential for a durable influence on intentions and, eventually, behavior. Thus the medium to large effect size for increasing PBC seen in the interactive information experiment is particularly promising.
The small effect size for PBC in the multi message cohort, particularly compared to no change for the single message cohort, suggests that smaller, more frequent interaction may prove to be a more effective means of communicating complex, multi-faceted information.
The results of our study indicate that both the single and multi message treatments increased familiarity with solar energy information, intentions toward solar, and a small (~5% over two weeks), but statistically significant, increase in the solar behavior of requesting a quote. However, only the multi message condition significantly impacted solar PBC compared to the control. This effect across these key behavioral attributes (in TPB) indicates greater potential for delivering smaller amounts of information more frequently. One limitation of our study is that we did not "test" participants for knowledge gain or accuracy of recall, as our primary interest was in how the information delivery mode impacted perceptions and intentions, rather than exploring which mode is most effective for learning. A difference in learning outcomes between the modes, if it exists, could explain why familiarity increased for both groups, while only the multi cohort showed a significant increase in PBC, which is a more specific metric.
The greater impact of the multi message condition over the single message condition could be related to a number of possible effects. Both groups received the exact same content in total and received that content only once (no repetition), but the single cohort spent less time engaging with the content compared to the multi cohort. Thus more, smaller batches of information may result in greater overall exposure to the content. This seems likely since the multi cohort spent less time per information survey, but more time cumulatively. Additionally, the multiple messages may bring more salience to the topic due to being prompted twice to think about solar energy instead of only once for the single cohort. To the extent that these aspects of multiple messages improves the efficacy of information, Energy Games would further enhance the effect since participants received the information with more frequency and shorter duration, and spent nearly three times as long engaging with the same content.
Energy Games participants exhibited a statistically significant increase in attitude, PBC, and intentions toward solar. These results were in agreement with our previous RCT study of Energy Games (16). Moreover, the effect size of the change in PBC and intentions was nearly twice that for the multi cohort, thus the interactive information showed increased impact over the passive information study, which may be related to the even smaller and higher frequency delivery of the content.
Overall, results from the two experiments in this study support the conclusion that the mode of information delivery is a significant factor in the time engaged, content consumed, and the subsequent impact that information has on the antecedents of behavior. This finding has practical implications. For example, currently, passive information is the predominant mode of communication for energy utilities. While there may be passive delivery modes that could replicate the frequency of Energy Games, the motivational affordances provided by serious games provides a means of engaging and retaining participants, a critical component as information alone is not sufficient (1,37,38). Further work will be required to determine the long-term impact and durability on behavior change, such as solar adoption. However, our results, which are unique in using a diverse adult population (as opposed to captive audience of employees or students), are encouraging for improving the design of behavioral interventions that can increase information salience and have impact on a wider scale.

S1 Supporting Information: Surveys
Small is Big: Interactive trumps passive information in breaking information barriers and impacting behavioral antecedents Intention. How likely is it that you will request a quote for a solar installation some time in the near future (within the next few months)?
Behavior. 1) Have you ever requested a quote for a solar installation? (Yes/No, pre); Since taking the initial survey, have you requested a quote for a solar installation? (Yes/No, post) Incentive Awareness. Are you aware of any incentives (federal, state, or local) to install solar? (pre); Since taking the initial survey, have you become aware of any incentives (federal, state, or local) to install solar? (post)

Energy conservation measures:
Intention. 1) How likely are you to make changes to how you use energy to save energy at home (thermostat setting, unplugging electronics, etc.) over the next few months? 2) How likely are you

Environmental concern:
In general, I am concerned about environmental issues. People need to change their lifestyles to protect the environment.

Solar Energy
Please read the following key points on solar energy and answer the following questions.
• A solar PV system is installed in the US every 2.5 minutes! The number of Solar PV installations increased over 50% this past year. • Many solar leases require no down payment, include free maintenance, and monthly lease payments will be more than covered by reduced electric bills with cash to spare. • Solar can be installed on most roof types or ground mounted and can face any direction, except north. Ask a solar professional to assess your home's potential and recommend the best design for your home. • Solar panel prices have dropped almost 50% in the last 5 years, but prices are expected to level off in the near future, while a lot of incentives and rebates are being phased out. That makes this a great time to invest in solar. • In many areas, a solar installation can pay for itself in less than 10 years, while producing electricity for over 30 years, making it quicker and easier than ever to get a good return on your investment. • Live a drought prone area? Neither solar PV nor wind power use water to produce energy, which makes renewable energy a great option for cities prone to drought or where water is scarce. • The Investment Tax Credit provides an incentive of 30% off the cost of a solar PV system. Many local utilities offer additional rebates and incentives. Check the Local Incentives quick link on the last page for more info. • After 25 years, solar panel output will decline slightly, but the panels will still produce power. Most solar panels come with 20-30 year warranties to guarantee it. • On a cloudy day solar panels produce less electricity, but they still produce. Don't worry, if you need more energy, the grid has you covered. • Many electricity providers will pay you for the extra energy you produce, but you may have to do a little research as policies change by state and utility. Check with your local utility for more information. • While producing energy for your home, solar panels can also reduce your cooling bill by absorbing the sun's heat, providing shade and keeping your house cool. The!University!of!Texas!at!Austin,!Austin,!TX!78712!
• You can't test-drive a solar installation, but talking to the neighbors can provide a lot of valuable experience and insight that can help you decide. Don't be shy, our research shows solar owners are very happy with their decision and love to share info on solar.
Rate from 1 to 7 how much you disagree or agree with each of the following statements. The information provided here was useful to me. The information provided here was new to me.

Energy Conservation
Please read the following key points on energy conservation and answer the following questions.
You can cut your electric bill up to 25% with simple energy efficiency tips. Big energy users are a great place to start saving, and heating and cooling are the biggest energy users for most homes.

Programmable Thermostats
• Programmable thermostats make it easy to save and can cost as little as $20 at your local hardware store. • Setting the AC thermostat to 78°F in the summer and 68°F in the winter. You can save 3% off your electric bill for each degree you increase/decrease (for cooling/heating) your thermostat setting. Check the Energy Star recommended settings provided in the "Keeping Cool" Quick Link on the next page of this survey. • Like coming home to a cool house? A programmable thermostat can start cooling your house before you get home. • Remember… To cool down your house to 78F, setting the thermostat to 70F does not cool it faster than setting it to 78F. Program it to start cooling about a half hour before you usually get home.
An AC Tune-up can save up to 30% off the cost of cooling your home. If it's time to replace your HVAC, look for the Energy Star -it could save you $200 per year. Oversized air conditioners can leave your home humid. Size your AC right to keep humidity, costs, and energy use lower! Ceiling Fans can save money on cooling, by making the room feel about 5 degrees cooler. The trick with ceiling fans is to remember to turn them off when you leave the room.
Weatherize your home! Adding insulation, sealing ductwork, and weather stripping doors and windows are inexpensive ways to save energy for the long term. You can reduce cooling costs 10%-25% by weatherizing your home. Weatherizing is an easy and inexpensive DIY project that can cost as little as $5.
Energy Star appliances save on energy and water! Use that Dishwasher! ENERGY STAR dishwashers annually save you 5,000 gallons of water, $40 on your energy bill, and 230 hours (that you get to spend NOT washing dishes).
Hot Water Heaters set at 120°F will save energy without sacrificing comfort. You'll still have plenty of hot water. Check your water heater today and turn it down if it's above 120F. Some water heaters mark 120F with an arrow for the optimal setting.
Clothes Washer water temp set to warm or cold can save half the cost of washing a load of laundry -90% of energy used for washing clothes is used heating the water. An ENERGY STAR washer saves about 20% of the energy and 35% of the water over other models.
LED Lighting can save $60/year by replacing 5 incandescent bulbs with LED bulbs. LEDs are more efficient and last 5 times longer than CFLs. You don't have to replace them all at once, start with the ones you use the most.
Refrigerators run more efficiently if kept full, set to 38F, and the seals are tight. Refrigerators and freezers are more efficient when full. Use water bottles to fill up extra space.
Stop Vampire Power! The average American household spends about $100 every year powering electronics when they're turned 'off'. Unplug power blocks when not in use. About 10% of home electricity costs are wasted on vampire power -that's all the electricity used by all of Italy in one year.
Rate from 1 to 7 how much you disagree or agree with each of the following statements. The information provided here was useful to me. The information provided here was new to me.
Quick Links were provided at the end of the survey with the same links provided in the "learn more" items in Energy Games.

Solar Energy
Please read the following key points on solar energy and answer the following questions.
• A solar PV system is installed in the US every 2.5 minutes! The number of Solar PV installations increased over 50% this past year. • Many solar leases require no down payment, include free maintenance, and monthly lease payments will be more than covered by reduced electric bills with cash to spare. • Solar can be installed on most roof types or ground mounted and can face any direction, except north. Ask a solar professional to assess your home's potential and recommend the best design for your home. • Solar panel prices have dropped almost 50% in the last 5 years, but prices are expected to level off in the near future, while a lot of incentives and rebates are being phased out. That makes this a great time to invest in solar. • In many areas, a solar installation can pay for itself in less than 10 years, while producing electricity for over 30 years, making it quicker and easier than ever to get a good return on your investment. • Live a drought prone area? Neither solar PV nor wind power use water to produce energy, which makes renewable energy a great option for cities prone to drought or where water is scarce.
Rate from 1 to 7 how much you disagree or agree with each of the following statements. The information provided here was useful to me. The information provided here was new to me.
• On a cloudy day solar panels produce less electricity, but they still produce. Don't worry, if you need more energy, the grid has you covered. • Many electricity providers will pay you for the extra energy you produce, but you may have to do a little research as policies change by state and utility. Check with your local utility for more information. • While producing energy for your home, solar panels can also reduce your cooling bill by absorbing the sun's heat, providing shade and keeping your house cool. • You can't test-drive a solar installation, but talking to the neighbors can provide a lot of valuable experience and insight that can help you decide. Don't be shy, our research shows solar owners are very happy with their decision and love to share info on solar.
Rate from 1 to 7 how much you disagree or agree with each of the following statements. The information provided here was useful to me. The information provided here was new to me.

Energy Conservation
Please read the following key points on energy conservation and answer the following questions.

Energy Star appliances save on energy and water!
Use that Dishwasher! ENERGY STAR dishwashers annually save you 5,000 gallons of water, $40 on your energy bill, and 230 hours (that you get to spend NOT washing dishes).
Hot Water Heaters set at 120°F will save energy without sacrificing comfort. You'll still have plenty of hot water. Check your water heater today and turn it down if it's above 120F. Some water heaters mark 120F with an arrow for the optimal setting.
Clothes Washer water temp set to warm or cold can save half the cost of washing a load of laundry -90% of energy used for washing clothes is used heating the water. An ENERGY STAR washer saves about 20% of the energy and 35% of the water over other models.
LED Lighting can save $60/year by replacing 5 incandescent bulbs with LED bulbs. LEDs are more efficient and last 5 times longer than CFLs. You don't have to replace them all at once, start with the ones you use the most.
Refrigerators run more efficiently if kept full, set to 38F, and the seals are tight. Refrigerators and freezers are more efficient when full. Use water bottles to fill up extra space.
Stop Vampire Power! The average American household spends about $100 every year powering electronics when they're turned 'off'. Unplug power blocks when not in use. About 10% of home electricity costs are wasted on vampire power -that's all the electricity used by all of Italy in one year.
Rate from 1 to 7 how much you disagree or agree with each of the following statements. The information provided here was useful to me. The information provided here was new to me.
Quick Links were provided at the end of the survey with the same links provided in the "learn more" items in Energy Games.

Energy Games
Week 1: Small Changes, Big Savings! Q1 Clue: Has your house sprung a leak? Question: Which two low-cost investments can reduce cooling costs by 10% to 25%? Answers: a) Curtains and ceiling fans; b) New windows and skylights; c) Caulk and weather stripping; d) Popsicles (Two-sided only) Insight: Weatherizing your home is an easy and inexpensive DIY project that can cost as little as $5. Q2 Clue: A bright future for Texas! Question: Which of these energy technologies saw over 50% increase in installations this year? Answers: a) Solar; b) Heat pumps; c) Energy Star HVAC; d) Small wind mills Insight: A solar system is installed in the US every 2.5 minutes! Q3 Clue: What does a 6 degree difference really feel like? Question: Which thermostat setting can save the typical Texas household 15% on cooling costs? Answers: a) 72F; b) 76F; c) 78F; d) 90F Insight: You can save 6-8% off your electric bill for each degree you increase your AC thermostat setting. Q4 Clue: What could power Texas through a drought? Question: Which energy source uses the least amount of water for the energy produced? Answers: a) Coal; b) Solar; c) Nuclear; d) Gas Insight: Neither solar PV nor wind power use water to produce energy, which makes renewable energy a great option for Texas where water can be scarce. Q5 Clue: Comfortable, but not too hot! Question: What temperature setting on your water heater will save you money without sacrificing comfort? Answers: a) 90F; b) 100F; c) 120F; d) 140F Insight: Check your water heater today and turn it down if it's above 120F. Some water heaters mark 120F with an arrow for the optimal setting. To cool down your house to 78F, will setting the thermostat to 70F cool it faster than setting it to 78F? Answers: a) ; b) ; c) Yes; d) No Insight: Like coming home to cool house? A programmable thermostat can start cooling your house before you get home.

Q14
Clue: There's sunshine in Texas everywhere you look... Question: Do solar panels have to face south? Answers: a) ; b) ; c) Yes; d) No Insight: Installing solar panels on the south side of your home produces the most energy, but solar panels still produce a lot of energy facing W, SW, SE, E. Your solar installer can recommend the best design for your home. Q15 Clue: When you're taking off for a trip Around the World… Question: How high should you set the thermostat when you leave the house to save money on cooling in the summer? Answers: a) 75F; b) 80F; c) 85F; d) 90F Insight: A programmable thermostat makes it easy to set the temperature higher when you are away, and can cost as little as $20 at your local hardware store.
water over other models. Q12 Clue: What does 'photovoltaic' mean anyway? Question: The Investment Tax Credit provides 30% off of what? Answers: a) A solar thermal system; b) Rain water collection ; c) A solar PV system; d) A wind farm Insight: In addition to the 30% Federal Investment Tax Credit (ITC), local utilities offer additional rebates and incentives. Click the learn more link to find yours. (PV: Photo = light, Voltaic = voltage) Q13 Clue: Since prices are dropping on LEDs... Question: How much money can you save per year by replacing 5 incandescent bulbs with LED bulbs? Answers: a) $10; b) $20; c) $40; d) $60 Insight: LEDs are more efficient and last 5 times longer than CFLs saving you more over the long run. You don't have to replace them all at once, start with the ones you use the most. Q14 Clue: Can you bill the electric company? Question: What does your solar system do when it produces more energy than you use? Answers: a) Turns all the lights on; b) Sends it to the grid; c) Shuts the system off; d) Signals the international space station Insight: Many retail providers will pay you for the extra energy you produce, but you may have to do a little research. Check with your utility or Retail Electric Provider (REP). Q15 Clue: Knowledge is (solar) power. Question: How can neighbors who have already installed solar help you? Answers: a) Share research; b) Give advice on solar installers; c)Share experience with installation; d) All of the above Insight: You can't test drive a solar installation, but talking to the neighbors can provide a lot of valuable experience and insight that can help you decide.