Beyond Paperwork: How Stigma and Social Norms Affect Energy Assistance Program Participation

• In Event: How Policy Design and Social Context Shape Energy Behavior and Outcomes

Abstract

We examine how perceived administrative burdens – i.e., the hurdles individuals face when accessing assistance – shape intentions to use energy assistance programs and whether these effects differ across program provider types. We focus on two core dimensions of administrative burdens: compliance costs (e.g., paperwork) and psychological costs (e.g., stigma). Using an original survey experiment administered via Prolific to a nationally representative sample of 800 U.S. adults, respondents were randomly assigned to evaluate either a publicly funded energy assistance program or a utility-administered alternative. Our research asks: 1) how compliance and psychological costs influence intent to use assistance, 2) whether these relationships are impacted by institutional trust, attitudes toward the behavior, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control, and 3) if willingness to accept support varies as a function of whether assistance is provided by a public or private entity. To measure constructs in 1 and 2, we employ factor analysis to identify latent dimensions across multiple survey items capturing compliance burdens, stigma, trust in institutions, subjective norms, and attitudes toward the energy assistance program. We then estimate linear regression models with state fixed effects, cluster-robust standard errors at the state level, and respondent-level control measures.  

Our baseline models include administrative burden measures, respondent characteristics, and the experimental treatment. Findings show perceived compliance and psychological costs are negatively associated with intent to use energy assistance. Respondents assigned to the utility-administered program condition report significantly lower intent to use the program compared to those assigned to the publicly funded condition (β ≈ −0.11, p < 0.05), indicating that institutional framing influences intent to use the program. However, this shifts once trust is incorporated into the model: trust is positively associated with intent and both compliance costs and the experimental condition lose statistical significance. When attitudes, norms, and perceived control (e.g., whether the program helps maintain adequate indoor temperatures) are included, the model shifts further: all three of these constructs emerge as strong predictors of intent, while both compliance burdens and trust become statistically insignificant. Across all specifications, greater perceived psychological costs (e.g., stigma) remain associated with lower intent to use assistance.

These findings have several implications. First, administrative burden research that excludes social and psychological dimensions risks omitted variable bias and may misattribute participation to compliance costs alone. Second, intentions to use assistance appear to be driven more by perceptions of stigma and social context than by administrative requirements, suggesting that simplifying application processes alone may not increase program uptake. Third, differences between public and utility-administered programs appear to exist when administrative burdens are considered but vanish once broader behavioral factors are included in the models. Lastly, these results suggest policies aimed at increasing uptake should extend beyond reducing paperwork burdens to include stigma reduction (e.g., greater automation may be effective) and efforts to improve how programs are perceived and understood. Overall, the study highlights the importance of integrating administrative burden frameworks with behavioral theory to fully capture determinants of program participation.

Author

• Michelle Graff, Georgia Institute of Technology
  Presenting Author