Peer Composting in School Cafeterias

ISEF Category: Behavioral and Social Sciences

Subcategory: Social Psychology  ·  Difficulty: Intermediate  ·  Setup: School Lab  ·  Time: 1 to 2 Months

The Hook

One student can change what an entire table does. In a cafeteria, composting can spread the same way a yawn spreads. That makes this a smart project if you want to study how social cues shape everyday choices.

What Is It?

This project studies behavioral contagion, which means one action can spread from person to person. In your case, the action is composting. You are asking whether a visible model at the table makes other students more likely to compost too.

Think of it like dominoes. The first student’s choice gives the next student a cue about what is normal and expected. If you record the table from above and code each composting action in BORIS, you can turn that social effect into data. That gives you a way to test peer influence in a place where real choices happen fast.

Why This Is a Good Topic

This is a strong science fair topic because you can measure it, compare it, and repeat it. The question connects to waste reduction, school culture, and social norms, which makes it useful beyond one cafeteria. You can learn experimental design, video coding, and basic statistics without needing a university lab.

Research Questions

• How does the presence of one visible peer composting affect the odds that other students at the same table compost?
• What is the effect of table size on peer composting contagion?
• Does the first student to compost change the number of later composting actions at the same table?
• To what extent does the seating position of the visible composting student change follow-on composting rates?
• Which lunch periods produce the strongest same-table composting spread?
• How does prior friendship among tablemates affect peer composting influence?

Basic Materials

• Overhead webcam or phone camera with a fixed mount.
• Laptop with enough storage for video files.
• BORIS event-coding software.
• Spreadsheet software for table-level counts.
• Printed table map or seating chart.
• Consent and assent forms approved by your school.
• Clipboard, pens, and observation log sheets.
• Clear table labels or temporary ID cards for coding.

Advanced Materials

• University-style overhead camera system with stable framing.
• Second camera for validation of hard-to-see actions.
• Secure encrypted video storage drive.
• Anonymized participant ID system.
• Survey packets for norms or attitude measures.
• Interrater coding packets for multiple observers.
• Data dictionary for event timing and table-level variables.
• Statistical software for mixed-effects or logistic models.

Software & Tools

• BORIS: Codes each observed composting event and keeps time-stamped records from video.
• Google Sheets: Organizes table IDs, counts, and quick summaries.
• R: Runs logistic regression, chi-square tests, and effect-size plots.
• Jamovi: Gives a point-and-click option for basic statistical tests.
• OBS Studio: Records the overhead video feed if you need a free capture tool.

Experiment Steps

1. Define the behavior you will count, and decide exactly what counts as one composting event.
2. Choose the comparison you will test, such as tables with one visible model versus matched tables without that cue.
3. Set up a coding plan that records who composts, when the first compost happens, and how many follow-on actions happen after it.
4. Build a control strategy for table size, meal period, and bin placement so those factors do not explain the results.
5. Plan a reliability check by having a second coder score part of the video and compare agreement.
6. Pre-plan the statistics that will turn table counts and time stamps into a clear test of peer influence.

Common Pitfalls

• Recording from an angle that hides the compost bin, which makes later coding impossible.
• Counting general trash disposal as composting, which inflates the behavior rate.
• Letting bin visibility differ between tables, which mixes peer influence with simple access.
• Comparing crowded lunch periods with calm ones, which confuses peer effects with rush-time behavior.
• Using one coder without agreement checks, which makes the results too subjective.

What Makes This Competitive

A competitive version goes beyond simple before-and-after counts. Match tables on size, lunch period, and bin access, then test whether one visible model changes the odds that later tablemates compost. Add interrater reliability and a model like logistic regression or mixed-effects analysis so you can separate peer influence from table and time effects. A short exit survey on composting norms can also connect the behavior to the social reason behind it.

Project Variations

• Compare composting contagion in lunch versus breakfast periods to see whether crowding changes peer influence.
• Test whether a student who composts first, last, or from a seat near the bin changes follow-on composting rates.
• Compare composting spread in tables of friends versus mixed tables to see whether social familiarity strengthens the effect.

Learn More

• PubMed: Search review articles on social norms, behavioral contagion, and pro-environmental behavior.
• NIH National Library of Medicine: Use PubMed and MedlinePlus for plain-language background on observation studies and behavior research.
• NOAA Education: Find resources on human behavior and environmental decision-making in real settings.
• U.S. EPA Sustainable Materials Management: Read about composting and waste diversion to ground your project in the problem.
• MIT OpenCourseWare: Search social psychology lectures on norms, conformity, and observational learning.
• BORIS documentation: Learn how to code video events and export data for analysis.