Family dynamics are a missing piece in understanding residential solar adoption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No abstract is available for this record. The assistant can identify its topic from the title, but cannot infer the study’s results.
Source: Not provided · Quality: missing
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Sustainability and Climate Change Governance · Social Acceptance of Renewable Energy · Child Welfare and Adoption
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (62)
Show source-provided references
1. Electricity information. IEA https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-product/electricity-information (2025).
2. Huijts, N. M. A., Molin, E. J. E. & Steg, L. Psychological factors influencing sustainable energy technology acceptance: a review-based comprehensive framework. Renewable Sustain. Energy Rev. 16, 525–531 (2012).10.1016/j.rser.2011.08.018 ↗
3. Perlaviciute, G. & Steg, L. Contextual and psychological factors shaping evaluations and acceptability of energy alternatives: integrated review and research agenda. Renewable Sustain. Energy Rev. 35, 361–381 (2014).10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.003 ↗
4. Sintov, N. D. & Schultz, P. W. Unlocking the potential of smart grid technologies with behavioral science. Front. Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00410 (2015).10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00410 ↗
5. Electricity customers. US EPA https://www.epa.gov/energy/electricity-customers (2015).
6. Wolske, K. S., Gillingham, K. T. & Schultz, P. W. Peer influence on household energy behaviours. Nat. Energy 5, 202–212 (2020).10.1038/s41560-019-0541-9 ↗
7. Creutzig, F. et al. in Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change (eds Shukla, P. R. et al.) Ch. 5 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2022); https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157926.00710.1017/9781009157926.007 ↗
8. U.S. energy consumption by source and sector, 2023. US EIA https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/images/consumption-by-source-and-sector.pdf (2025).
9. Home solar panel adoption continues to rise in the U.S. Pew Research Center https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/10/14/home-solar-panel-adoption-continues-to-rise-in-the-u-s/ (2022).
10. Gaston, Z. The US residential solar total addressable market will exceed the current US generation fleet. Wood Mackenzie https://www.woodmac.com/news/opinion/the-us-residential-solar-total-addressable-market-will-exceed-the-current-us-generation-fleet/ (2025).
11. Solar PV. IEA https://www.iea.org/energy-system/renewables/solar-pv (2025).
12. Bollinger, B. & Gillingham, K. Peer effects in the diffusion of solar photovoltaic panels. Market. Sci. 31, 900–912 (2012).10.1287/mksc.1120.0727 ↗
13. Bollinger, B., Gillingham, K. & Kirkpatrick, A. J. Valuing Solar Subsidies NBER Working Paper Series 33368 (NBER, 2025).10.3386/w33368 ↗
14. Yozwiak, M. et al. The effect of residential solar on energy insecurity among low- to moderate-income households. Nat. Energy 10, 569–580 (2025).10.1038/s41560-025-01730-y ↗
15. Schulte, E., Scheller, F., Sloot, D. & Bruckner, T. A meta-analysis of residential PV adoption: the important role of perceived benefits, intentions and antecedents in solar energy acceptance. Energy Res. Social Sci. 84, 102339 (2022).10.1016/j.erss.2021.102339 ↗
16. Günther, A. et al. Psychological and contextual determinants of clean energy technology adoption. Nat. Rev. Clean Technol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44359-025-00075-9 (2025).10.1038/s44359-025-00075-9 ↗
17. Outcault, S., Sanguinetti, A. & Pritoni, M. Using social dynamics to explain uptake in energy saving measures: lessons from space conditioning interventions in Japan and California. Energy Res. Social Sci. 45, 276–286 (2018).10.1016/j.erss.2018.07.017 ↗
18. Brown, D. et al. Rethinking retrofit: relational insights for the design of residential energy efficiency policy. Energy Res. Social Sci. 120, 103863 (2025).10.1016/j.erss.2024.103863 ↗
19. Hurst, K. F., Sintov, N. D. & Donnelly, G. E. Increasing sustainable behavior through conversation. J. Environ. Psychol. 86, 101948 (2023).10.1016/j.jenvp.2022.101948 ↗
20. United States Census Bureau. Occupancy characteristics. American Community Survey Occupancy Statistics https://data.census.gov/table?q=United%20States%20household%20size (2024).
21. Dillman-Hasso, N. H. & Sintov, N. D. Can we achieve equity in residential solar adoption? Public perceptions of rooftop and community solar in the United States. Energy Res. Social Sci. 122, 104022 (2025).10.1016/j.erss.2025.104022 ↗
22. Biswas, S., Fuentes, T. L., McCord, K. H., Rackley, A. L. S. & Antonopoulos, C. A. Decisions and decision-makers: mapping the sociotechnical cognition behind home energy upgrades in the United States. Energy Res. Social Sci. 109, 103411 (2024).10.1016/j.erss.2024.103411 ↗
23. Bartiaux, F. Gender roles and domestic power in energy-saving home improvements. Build. Cities 3, 824–841 (2022).10.5334/bc.232 ↗
24. Kastner, I. & Stern, P. C. Examining the decision-making processes behind household energy investments: a review. Energy Res. Social Sci. 10, 72–89 (2015).10.1016/j.erss.2015.07.008 ↗
25. Stevanovic, M. in Research Handbook on Social Interaction (ed. Stevanovic, M.) Ch. 25 (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2025); https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035317264.0002910.4337/9781035317264.00029 ↗
26. Hart, G. From ‘rotten wives’ to ‘good mothers’: household models and the limits of economism. IDS Bull. 28, 14–25 (1997).10.1111/j.1759-5436.1997.mp28003002.x ↗
27. Samuelson, P. Social indifference curves. Q. J. Econ. 70, 1–22 (1956).10.2307/1884510 ↗
28. Castilla, C. What’s yours is mine, and what’s mine is mine: field experiment on income concealing between spouses in India. J. Dev. Econ. 137, 125–140 (2019).10.1016/j.jdeveco.2018.11.009 ↗
29. Iversen, V., Jackson, C., Kebede, B., Munro, A. & Verschoor, A. Do spouses realise cooperative gains? Experimental evidence from rural Uganda. World Dev. 39, 569–578 (2011).10.1016/j.worlddev.2010.09.011 ↗
30. Schaner, S. Do opposites detract? Intrahousehold preference heterogeneity and inefficient strategic savings. Am. Econ. J. Appl. Econ. 7, 135–174 (2015).10.1257/app.20130271 ↗
31. Sunstein, C. R. in Conformity: The Power of Social Influences 79–100 (New York Univ. Press, 2019).10.18574/nyu/9781479896585.001.0001 ↗
32. Hurst, K. F., Sintov, N. D., Hobbs, L. & Donnelly, G. E. Self-silencing predicts behavioral conformity in sustainability contexts. J. Environ. Psychol. 102, 102555 (2025).10.1016/j.jenvp.2025.102555 ↗
33. Goldberg, M. H., Van Der Linden, S., Maibach, E. & Leiserowitz, A. Discussing global warming leads to greater acceptance of climate science. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 14804–14805 (2019).10.1073/pnas.1906589116 ↗
34. Van Swol, L. M., Bloomfield, E. F., Chang, C.-T. & Willes, S. Fostering climate change consensus: the role of intimacy in group discussions. Public Understanding Sci. 31, 103–118 (2022).10.1177/09636625211020661 ↗
35. Southwell, B. G. & Murphy, J. Weatherization behavior and social context: the influences of factual knowledge and social interaction. Energy Res. Social Sci. 2, 59–65 (2014).10.1016/j.erss.2014.03.019 ↗
36. Sintov, N. D., White, L. V. & Walpole, H. Thermostat wars? The roles of gender and thermal comfort negotiations in household energy use behavior. PLoS ONE 14, e0224198 (2019).10.1371/journal.pone.0224198 ↗
37. Cooney, G., Mastroianni, A. M., Abi-Esber, N. & Brooks, A. W. The many minds problem: disclosure in dyadic versus group conversation. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 31, 22–27 (2020).10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.06.032 ↗
38. Huang, K., Yeomans, M., Brooks, A. W., Minson, J. & Gino, F. It doesn’t hurt to ask: question-asking increases liking. J. Personality Social Psychol. 113, 430–452 (2017).10.1037/pspi0000097 ↗
39. Berekméri, E. & Zafeiris, A. Optimal collective decision making: consensus, accuracy and the effects of limited access to information. Sci. Rep. 10, 16997 (2020).10.1038/s41598-020-73853-z ↗
40. Cialdini, R. B. & Jacobson, R. P. Influences of social norms on climate change-related behaviors. Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci. 42, 1–8 (2021).10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.01.005 ↗
41. Schultz, P. W. Secret agents of influence: leveraging social norms for good. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 31, 443–450 (2022).10.1177/09637214221109572 ↗
42. Bonan, J., Cattaneo, C., d’Adda, G. & Tavoni, M. The interaction of descriptive and injunctive social norms in promoting energy conservation. Nat. Energy 5, 900–909 (2020).10.1038/s41560-020-00719-z ↗
43. Bergquist, M., Thiel, M., Goldberg, M. H. & van der Linden, S. Field interventions for climate change mitigation behaviors: a second-order meta-analysis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 120, e2214851120 (2023).10.1073/pnas.2214851120 ↗
44. Rai, V. & Robinson, S. A. Effective information channels for reducing costs of environmentally-friendly technologies: evidence from residential PV markets. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 014044 (2013).10.1088/1748-9326/8/1/014044 ↗
45. Wenzel, M. & Woodyatt, L. The power and pitfalls of social norms. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 76, 583–606 (2025).10.1146/annurev-psych-020124-120310 ↗
46. Sovacool, B. K., Martiskainen, M., Osborn, J., Anaam, A. & Lipson, M. From thermal comfort to conflict: the contested control and usage of domestic smart heating in the United Kingdom. Energy Res. Social Sci. 69, 101566 (2020).10.1016/j.erss.2020.101566 ↗
47. Li, H., Wang, Z.-H. & Zhang, B. How social interaction induce energy-saving behaviors in buildings: interpersonal & passive interactions v.s. public & active interactions. Energy Econ. 118, 106515 (2023).10.1016/j.eneco.2023.106515 ↗
48. Moezzi, M., Ingle, A., Lutzenhiser, L. & Sigrin, B. O. A Non-Modeling Exploration of Residential Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Adoption and Non-Adoption NREL/SR-6A20-67727, 1379469 (OSTI, 2017); http://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1379469/10.2172/1379469 ↗
49. Fikru, M. G. Residential photovoltaics adopters versus considerers in the United States. Energy Res. Lett. https://doi.org/10.46557/001c.28129 (2021).10.46557/001c.28129 ↗
50. Lee, S. & Lee, D. K. What is the proper way to apply the multiple comparison test? Korean J. Anesthesiol. 71, 353–360 (2018).10.4097/kja.d.18.00242 ↗
51. Rogers, E. M. Diffusion of Innovations 5th edn (Simon and Schuster, 2003).
52. Rai, V., Reeves, D. C. & Margolis, R. Overcoming barriers and uncertainties in the adoption of residential solar PV. Renewable Energy 89, 498–505 (2016).10.1016/j.renene.2015.11.080 ↗
53. Bolton, E. et al. The relational dimensions of renovation: implications for retrofit policy. Energy Res. Social Sci. 96, 102916 (2023).10.1016/j.erss.2022.102916 ↗
54. Lazo, J., Haddad, A. & Watts, D. Third-party ownership in rooftop solar: a critical review of its structure, performance, and equity implications. Energy Res. Social Sci. 127, 104312 (2025).10.1016/j.erss.2025.104312 ↗
55. Peer, E., Brandimarte, L., Samat, S. & Acquisti, A. Beyond the Turk: alternative platforms for crowdsourcing behavioral research. J. Exp. Social Psychol. 70, 153–163 (2017).10.1016/j.jesp.2017.01.006 ↗
56. Douglas, B. D., Ewell, P. J. & Brauer, M. Data quality in online human-subjects research: comparisons between MTurk, Prolific, CloudResearch, Qualtrics, and SONA. PLoS ONE 18, e0279720 (2023).10.1371/journal.pone.0279720 ↗
57. Vasileiou, K., Barnett, J., Thorpe, S. & Young, T. Characterising and justifying sample size sufficiency in interview-based studies: systematic analysis of qualitative health research over a 15-year period. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 18, 148 (2018).10.1186/s12874-018-0594-7 ↗
58. Kindsiko, E. & Poltimäe, H. The poor and embarrassing cousin to the gentrified quantitative academics: what determines the sample size in qualitative interview-based organization studies? Forum Qual. Soc. Res. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-20.3.3200 (2019).10.17169/fqs-20.3.3200 ↗
59. Morse, J. M. in Handbook of Qualitative Research (eds Lincoln, Y. S. & Denzin, N. K.) 220–235 (Sage Publications, 1994).
60. Saldana, J. The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers (Sage, 2025).10.4135/9781036235611 ↗
61. O’Connor, C. & Joffe, H. Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: debates and practical guidelines. Int. J. Qual. Methods 19, 1609406919899220 (2020).10.1177/1609406919899220 ↗
62. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2025).