Signs say something interesting about the herd mentality in people.
For example, psychologist Robert Cialdini did an experiment a few years ago to get people to be more respectful of public parks. He found that negative messages actually made people more likely to take items from the park (which they weren't supposed to do). [1]
Interestingly, the most effective way to change people's behavior was to leverage peer pressure, making them feel like everyone around them was already performing the desired action. E.g. "98% of hikers don't remove rocks; please don't be the 2%"
I'm not saying these two cases are identical, but to me what makes the U.K. signs so effective is that they suggest, in a subtle way, "Hey, you should have a good time because everyone else is enjoying themselves."
In the back of NYC taxis there is a PSA that often plays about wearing your seatbelt. In it, the rider is urged to buckle up and is told that "65 Percent Of New York Cab Riders Don't Buckle Up". The message is intended as 'do better New York!' but it always comes across as validation for not choosing to wear a seatbelt.
When I was a kid I remember the older kids used to drop litter on purpose, not because it was too much effort to put it in the bin but to show how rebellious they were.
If you put up something that looks like an authority that will try and punish you if you disobey then you look brave and smart by disobeying it and getting away with it.
Cialdini's book, Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, is easily one of the most interesting books I've ever read. It's not long and it's an easy read too -- I'd highly recommend reading it:
The UK government had a Behavioural Insights Team, also known colloquially as the "Nudge unit".
> When the unit advised the HMRC to change the wording on income tax letters, for example, it resulted in an extra £200million being collected on time. Another experiment with the British Courts Service used personalised text messages to remind people to pay their fines on time. The result? Bailiff interventions were reduced by 150,000, saving around £30million.
Each week my municipality sends out an email the night before garbage collection stating which items are to be picked up the next day (e.g. blue box, garbage, bulk items, garden bags).
Historically it was a friendly, we're-all-in-this-together sort of email sharing information about what helps the recycling process go most smoothly, maximizes taxpayer return, etc. Recently they had a change of responsible parties, and now the new emails are full of stark, accusatory statements of absolutes and rules -- the classic underlined/bold/italic "DO NOT" type list of exclusions.
It is absolutely remarkable the effect this has. Suddenly we're not all in this together, but it's factions working against each other. I and my fellow taxpayers are now suddenly trouble in someone's life.
I've always been against hostile communications where they aren't necessary, but this has absolutely opened my eyes to how much of an impact this sort of adversarial approach can have. It's purely an anecdotal datapoint, but it really struck me.
Even explicitly knowing I was looking at signs telling me to "relax and enjoy myself," I found myself interpreting the sign as the warning/restriction counterpart message until my second or third (even more careful) reading.
It's a lot like the phenomenon where if you include and and twice in a row, you'll likely not realize the typo.
that first one took me the longest.. i kept reading it as 'keep off the grass'. really confused me as to why that was there among all the other more pleasant signs..?
it was only after going through all the others that i got it. seems my brain is conditioned that in the presence of 'keep' and 'grass' i should remain off.
"I found myself interpreting the sign as the warning/restriction counterpart message"
Couldn't you just read the whole sign properly on the first try? Why did you glance over the rest of it? I think that's your fault - and our society these days - and not the fault of the signs, which were cute and funny.
The 'Reserved' sign is the only one I'd object to. It's likely to be read from afar, and never approached close enough to get the joke. Even then, it would be easy to reason that 'fun and games' was an in-joke from whichever party made the reservation.
True but only if it's the first sign you come across. If I'd read any of the other signs beforehand I'd have laughed and made a special effort to inspect the 'reserved' sign.
This is a really cool idea. I like how it plays on the idea of NT properties being boring fusty places where you go for rubbish school trips. I don't know if it's a function of age but I'm actually quite excited about visiting a National Trust property on the weekend if the weather stays nice. I encourage others to do the same and support a really worthwhile charity.
Funny, but I don't want bright signs all over the place. If I go to see some place, I want to see the place, not some smart aleck's stupid bright signs all over.
On the subject of historical sites... We did a tour of an ancient monument on Orkney last week only to discover that thugs had broken in and scrawled graffiti over the inside of a 5,000 year old building:
The problem for me is I would think it was a spoof by some (forgive the apparently hated word) hipster designer. I'd think something like "this was made to 'subvert' the whatever, but we're actually supposed to stay off the grass".
As soon as I saw the large "KEEP GRASS" text I would have immediately interpreted it as "keep off the grass", I wouldn't have read the two smaller words in between.
I think this is a fantastic idea. Historical sites, and history in general, are the collective property of everyone, held in trust by the historical community, be it historians in universities or tour guides at museums. We preserve history to keep it alive for subsequent generations, so everyone experience where we came from and who we are. What's the point of preserving history if it is going to be locked up in a stuffy old archive? Public engagement in history is such an important part of keeping history alive, since if no one cares about it, why should it be preserved?
It should be noted that the National Trust is also concerned with the natural environment as well as historic sites. For example, their Enterprise/Project Neptune campaign is focussed on securing the British coastline.
What's nice about the NT is that they're not an in-you-face political campaign group, they just go about conservation on a daily basis.
Last time I was in Paris, I noticed new signs on the lawns of the Luxembourg Gardens advising people that they are now permitted to walk on the grass. They were not nearly as playful as these signs.
This is a terrible idea. There is this whole thing called familiarity, and most people will interpret this signs negatively because they won't stop to read the small text.
In the UK, the kind of people who visit National Trust properties are the kind of people who carefully read all the signage and actually listen to the tour guide.
I really like it. I guess the people who've designed were aware of this problem and solved it. Perhaps there's a really obviously tounge-in-cheek sign at the beginning, so people expect all of the signs to be.
I live in a tourist destination city and see people taking pictures from boring spots. I've considered placing or lobbying to place small signs or markings for spots that make extraordinary photo opportunities.
If you need to tell people to relax and have fun ("Mandatory fun day"), it's an indication that you have a more fundamental problem. It's probably better to address that instead of making playful signs.
I think you're missing the point. This is not about "mandatory fun", it's about recognizing the runaway restrictiveness of public parks and historical sites that has resulted in people expecting that common activities will be prohibited. It's poking fun at the uptight reputation that such places have, and attempting to reverse the trend by loosening those irrational restrictions.
[+] [-] hawkharris|13 years ago|reply
For example, psychologist Robert Cialdini did an experiment a few years ago to get people to be more respectful of public parks. He found that negative messages actually made people more likely to take items from the park (which they weren't supposed to do). [1]
Interestingly, the most effective way to change people's behavior was to leverage peer pressure, making them feel like everyone around them was already performing the desired action. E.g. "98% of hikers don't remove rocks; please don't be the 2%"
I'm not saying these two cases are identical, but to me what makes the U.K. signs so effective is that they suggest, in a subtle way, "Hey, you should have a good time because everyone else is enjoying themselves."
[1] http://www.freakonomics.com/2012/06/21/riding-the-herd-menta...
[+] [-] sethbannon|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jiggy2011|13 years ago|reply
If you put up something that looks like an authority that will try and punish you if you disobey then you look brave and smart by disobeying it and getting away with it.
[+] [-] profquail|13 years ago|reply
http://www.amazon.com/Influence-Psychology-Persuasion-Busine...
[+] [-] shrikant|13 years ago|reply
> When the unit advised the HMRC to change the wording on income tax letters, for example, it resulted in an extra £200million being collected on time. Another experiment with the British Courts Service used personalised text messages to remind people to pay their fines on time. The result? Bailiff interventions were reduced by 150,000, saving around £30million.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9853384/Inside-the-...
[+] [-] corresation|13 years ago|reply
Historically it was a friendly, we're-all-in-this-together sort of email sharing information about what helps the recycling process go most smoothly, maximizes taxpayer return, etc. Recently they had a change of responsible parties, and now the new emails are full of stark, accusatory statements of absolutes and rules -- the classic underlined/bold/italic "DO NOT" type list of exclusions.
It is absolutely remarkable the effect this has. Suddenly we're not all in this together, but it's factions working against each other. I and my fellow taxpayers are now suddenly trouble in someone's life.
I've always been against hostile communications where they aren't necessary, but this has absolutely opened my eyes to how much of an impact this sort of adversarial approach can have. It's purely an anecdotal datapoint, but it really struck me.
[+] [-] Trufa|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rtpg|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Sambdala|13 years ago|reply
It's a lot like the phenomenon where if you include and and twice in a row, you'll likely not realize the typo.
[+] [-] lutze|13 years ago|reply
Isn't the brain a wonderful and scary thing.
[+] [-] simba-hiiipower|13 years ago|reply
it was only after going through all the others that i got it. seems my brain is conditioned that in the presence of 'keep' and 'grass' i should remain off.
[+] [-] easytiger|13 years ago|reply
issue when you put them on line breaks.
[+] [-] klibertp|13 years ago|reply
Couldn't you just read the whole sign properly on the first try? Why did you glance over the rest of it? I think that's your fault - and our society these days - and not the fault of the signs, which were cute and funny.
[+] [-] dave1010uk|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vog|13 years ago|reply
I didn't find the original source when I submitted it to HN. Unfortunately, it is too late now to edit my submission for the improved link.
[+] [-] curiousdannii|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] muxxa|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] amirmc|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] jumblesale|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lnanek2|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lukevdp|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] robwgibbons|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] arethuza|13 years ago|reply
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maeshowe
:-)
[+] [-] shurcooL|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sanoli|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jiggy2011|13 years ago|reply
Same with "KEEP MOBILE PHONE".
[+] [-] MrDOS|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] salmonellaeater|13 years ago|reply
The grammar nerd in me is grinding his teeth.
[+] [-] minimax|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nijk|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] wavefunction|13 years ago|reply
Take a break from the dull monotony of 140 characters, please!
[+] [-] Naga|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] timthorn|13 years ago|reply
What's nice about the NT is that they're not an in-you-face political campaign group, they just go about conservation on a daily basis.
[+] [-] adnam|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] RyanMcGreal|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] adlpz|13 years ago|reply
I hope this doesn't spread.
[+] [-] inopinatus|13 years ago|reply
This idea is delightful.
[+] [-] Peroni|13 years ago|reply
Considering how popular the campaign has been online, I'd say it's an outstanding idea.
[+] [-] RivieraKid|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] LanceH|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] sixothree|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mseebach|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mistercow|13 years ago|reply