Why people reject new rules – but only until they are in force

08.05.2025 16:33

Whether it's a smoking ban or a speed limit, many people's opposition to political regulations that restrict personal freedom decreases significantly once the measures are introduced. This is shown by a study by the Technical University of Munich (TUM) and the University of Vienna. The research team also uncovered the underlying psychological mechanism, thus providing important insights for communicating such measures.

Political measures that prohibit or restrict something are often met with strong opposition. In psychology, the resistance that occurs when people perceive their personal freedom is restricted is called reactance. These emotional debates can cause politicians to shy away from decisions they actually consider necessary to achieve important goals such as climate or health protection.

Often, however, reactance seemed to decrease significantly once the measures had been introduced. However, this phenomenon has been insufficiently researched so far. Armin Granulo (Technical University of Munich), Christoph Fuchs, and Robert Böhm (both University of Vienna) have therefore seven individual studies not only investigated whether this observation was correct, but also demonstrated the underlying psychological mechanism.

The researchers analyzed representative surveys on the introduction of smoking bans in workplaces in several European countries, on seat belt use in the USA, and on the tightening of speed limits in the Netherlands. They also tested reactance to political regulations in several experiments. Participants in Great Britain and Germany indicated their attitudes toward mandatory vaccination, a speed limit, new taxes on alcohol and meat, and other measures. Half of the participants were asked to evaluate the statement that the measures would be introduced soon, and the other half that they had already been introduced a year ago.

Resistance often less stable than feared in politics

Both the real-world surveys and the experiments show that opposition to restrictive measures is significantly greater before their introduction than afterward. This applies regardless of the participants' fundamental attitudes toward the respective issue, such as vaccinations. "Reactance is often only temporary and decreases considerably shortly after the introduction of restrictive measures," says study leader Dr. Armin Granulo. "So the resistance is less stable than many politicians fear."

How does this effect occur? The researchers suspected a well-known mechanism of our perception: When people are faced with a change, they pay more attention to the change itself than to the two states before and after the change. Once the change process is complete, they can view the new state more objectively.

Psychologist Prof. Robert Böhm explains: "When a new rule is announced, people first think of what they're losing: freedom, habit, comfort. After the introduction, these personal losses fade into the background. Then we pay much more attention to what the measure brings to society, for example, in terms of health or climate protection."

The researchers were able to confirm with their experiments that this mechanism is an important cause of reactance. They asked the participants, among other things, how restricted they felt in their personal freedom and whether they were more concerned about the personal or societal consequences of the measures. The people for whom the measures had already been introduced in the experiment demonstrated an attitude toward the regulations that was less influenced by their individual situation and more by the societal situation than the group in whose experiment the measures were yet to be implemented.

Emphasize social benefits

The study also shows how new measures can be better communicated. Prof. Christoph Fuchs explains: "In an experiment, we emphasized the social benefits of a systemic measure before it was introduced. Study participants who immediately addressed the benefits were significantly less likely to reject the measure even before its introduction."

The researchers see the findings as an important basis for social debate and policy and recommend researching further psychological factors. "Regulatory measures are not the only, but an important, building block for addressing social challenges," says Armin Granulo. "Those who are aware of the psychological mechanisms can better assess the reactions of many people, the course of debates, and the prospects of success of laws and act accordingly."

Original publication

Granulo, A., Fuchs, C., & Böhm, R. (2025). Psychological reactance to system-level policies before and after their implementation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2409907122