Lot of great points here and angles to follow up on.
I do want to re-assert that enormous 80% recidivism rate, and how strong these (very valid) counter-narratives would have to be to defeat our original assumptions. Consider:
A huge number of people would have to actively curate their Facebook profiles to give current-vegetarians the majority in these groups.
A curiously large number of current-vegetarians would have to click on an ad that claims to “help you eat vegetarian again” and order a “Vegetarian Starter Guide” to make the majority of the respondents non-recidivists.
Again, there have been a lot of great points raised and I’m tempted now to fund a follow up implementing some of these fixes. At the same time, I think it’s important to step back and think about how strong these influences would have to be to overcome that monster 80%.
I’m not sure your interpretation of the 80% number is correct. As you originally presented it, 80% of people becoming vegetarian stop within a few years.
However:
Sampling the population at a given time (e.g. the time the facebook group has been running) will be more likely to catch long-term vegetarians, because they make up a much greater proportion of vegetarian-years.
Facebook hasn’t been going that long and I don’t think has reached equilibrium. You may have collected a reasonable number of people in the couple of years after they joined the group, who would eventually be recidivists but aren’t yet (this could actually be a pretty good group to target).
Possible selection effects will mean even at a given time long-term vegetarians are more likely to join a facebook group, if it’s more of a core part of their identity (this could also go the other way).
Lot of great points here and angles to follow up on.
I do want to re-assert that enormous 80% recidivism rate, and how strong these (very valid) counter-narratives would have to be to defeat our original assumptions. Consider:
A huge number of people would have to actively curate their Facebook profiles to give current-vegetarians the majority in these groups.
A curiously large number of current-vegetarians would have to click on an ad that claims to “help you eat vegetarian again” and order a “Vegetarian Starter Guide” to make the majority of the respondents non-recidivists.
Again, there have been a lot of great points raised and I’m tempted now to fund a follow up implementing some of these fixes. At the same time, I think it’s important to step back and think about how strong these influences would have to be to overcome that monster 80%.
I’m not sure your interpretation of the 80% number is correct. As you originally presented it, 80% of people becoming vegetarian stop within a few years.
However:
Sampling the population at a given time (e.g. the time the facebook group has been running) will be more likely to catch long-term vegetarians, because they make up a much greater proportion of vegetarian-years.
Facebook hasn’t been going that long and I don’t think has reached equilibrium. You may have collected a reasonable number of people in the couple of years after they joined the group, who would eventually be recidivists but aren’t yet (this could actually be a pretty good group to target).
Possible selection effects will mean even at a given time long-term vegetarians are more likely to join a facebook group, if it’s more of a core part of their identity (this could also go the other way).