Developing and validating the Dragons of Inaction Psychological Barriers (DIPB) scale

Lacroix, Karine; Gifford, Robert; Chen, Angel

doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2019.03.001

Cited by 167 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Taste is rated as the most important factor in food purchases. Lacroix, Gifford, & Chen (2019) Conflicting goals and aspirations (e.g., limited time, difficulty changing habits) and lacking knowledge (e.g., not knowing how to change) are important psychological barriers for eating less meat. Larsson, Rönnlund, Johansson, & Dahlgren (2003) Three types of vegans, from less committed to more committed.…”

Section: Hodson and Earlementioning

confidence: 99%

Reducing meat consumption: Identifying group-specific inhibitors using latent profile analysis

Lacroix

Gifford

2019

Appetite

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change mitigation requires changes in greenhouse gas emitting behaviours. This dissertation aims to provide insights into the influences of behaviour change for two high-impact pro-environmental behaviours: climate policy support and consumption of animal products. It does so by using quasi-and randomized experiments and by monitoring changes in behaviour over time. Study 1 examined changes in climate policy support and climate change risk perception over the course of a naturally occurring event: seasonal forest fires. It employed growth curve modeling techniques in a structural equation modeling framework to analyze longitudinal relations between these two constructs over time, and to examine growth in climate change risk perception while controlling for the effect of exposure to forest fires and other extreme weather. Indirect exposure to forest fires (e.g., media) had a modest effect on climate change risk perception. Climate change risk perception for individuals with above-mean perceptions of scientific agreement tended to increase faster than for those with below-mean perceptions. Individuals whose climate change risk perception grew at a faster-than-average rate tended to also grow at a faster-than-average rate for climate policy support. Study 2 provided insight into the psychological influences on consumption of animal products and on willingness to reduce. Following a comprehensive literature review, known influences were examined using Latent Profile Analysis to identify groups of individuals with similar perceptions of facilitators of meat consumption and obstacles to reducing it. Three groups were identified: stronghindrance meat eaters, moderate-hindrance meat eaters, and reducers. Validation variables confirmed the practicality of the three profiles: groups differed in their current consumption of animal products and in their willingness to reduce. Using these findings, three group-matched interventions were designed in Study 3. Intervention design was informed by four behaviour-iv change frameworks. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: control condition, implementation-intention condition, information-and-healthy-recipe condition, and information-and-substitution condition. Then, they completed up to 28 days of food diaries.Multilevel model analyses were employed to examine changes in the consumption of animal products over time. Participants reduced their consumption by 20 grams of CO2 per day on average. Individuals that were randomly assigned to an intervention condition that matched their meat-eater profile reduced their consumption of animal products by 40 grams CO2 per day on average. Taken together, these studies highlight the importance of considering individual differences (i.e., tailoring) when designing pro-environmental behaviour interventions. v

show abstract

Section: Hodson and Earlementioning

confidence: 99%

Reducing meat consumption: Identifying group-specific inhibitors using latent profile analysis

Lacroix

Gifford

2019

Appetite

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Little is known about the effects of multiple goals [67] or goal hierarchies [58] and their relation to goal conflict. However, goal conflict represents an important psychological barrier to PEBs [68]. Following Schultheiss and Brunstein's [65] suggestion to examine the effects of goal imagery on outcomes, we propose that people who utilize goal imagery may experience less goal conflict.…”

Section: The Effect Of Multiple Goalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Goal Setting Approaches to Boosting Pro-Environmental Behaviors

2020

J Sustain Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Corporations face challenges to adopting appropriate practices to effectively respond to environmental sustainability concerns.To help address this, the present research focuses on improving employees' pro-environmental behaviors related mostly to information technology and system use. To do so, we draw on and extend goal-setting theory by comparing three goal interventions: goal-setting, goal-setting plus implementation plans, and goal-setting with both implementation plans and visualization of success. For these, we also examine the role of individuals' environmental values as well as their conflicts with competing goals.Methods: Two longitudinal studies examine individuals' self-set goals: the first examines employees' computer-based electricity usage in the workplace over six weeks and the second utilizes a diary approach method over four weeks to examine the effects of different environmental goal setting conditions on students' environmental outcomes. The impacts of environmental values (self-congruence) and conflicting goals are also explored in the second study.Results: Both studies find that setting goals increases pro-environmental behaviors. However, rebound effects can occur when interventions are removed. Visualization of success appears to reduce this rebound effect and we suggest that future research continue to investigate methods for reducing rebound.Conclusions: This paper contributes to environmental sustainability research in several ways: conceptually (by responding to calls for more theory-based research), methodologically (by measuring objective computer-based energy usage in study 1 and by utilizing a diary method in study 2), and practically (by demonstrating the effectiveness of visualization to goal setting and exploring the role of competing goals in this process).

show abstract

“…The RAF assessment challenge for each zone and location is to improve future biodiversity and human wellbeing trajectories whilst not necessarily being tied to any specific framing of the past. This is not easy, because multiple psychological barriers constrain us from embracing change, uncertainty and unfamiliar options (Gifford 2011;Lacroix, Gifford & Chen 2019). Collective decision-making will, therefore, benefit from professional support to articulate Resist expenditure and opportunity costs and to help identify (via future scenarios) realistic Accept or Facilitate options within the RAF framework.…”

Section: Everywhere Matters But For Different Reasonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Facilitating dynamic and inclusive biodiversity conservation in Britain: an Anthropocene perspective

Thomas¹,

Hill²,

Ward³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryWe propose an approach to conservation centred on achieving positive future trajectories of dynamic change, applied to all locations and species, and based on societal inclusiveness. Strategies to facilitate change. We take an Anthropocene perspective, in which human society and biodiversity have been inextricably linked for over 10,000 years, and continuing biodiversity change is inevitable. The challenge is to identify circumstances under which change is acceptable or beneficial, without being tied to specific historic baselines. We outline a Resist-Accept-Facilitate (RAF) framework that could be applied to all conservation activities, from high-level planning and measurement (indicators) through to practical land and species management, to ensure that the facilitation of future biodiversity benefits receives as much attention as the resistance of change.Everywhere is important. Different places are important for different things, such as particular species or ecosystem services, and people vary in how they value these features. We suggest a perspective whereby we evaluate what every area is most important for, and what they could be most important for in future by considering possible trajectories of biodiversity and ecosystem change. We propose zoning any region of interest, such as the UK, and applying the RAF framework in an inclusive manner to develop conservation strategies that are appropriate in each location and zone. This RAF approach will reconcile different conservation philosophies (such as traditional management, land-sharing/sparing, rewilding, novel ecosystems, ecosystem services, human wellbeing) because different conservation outcomes will emerge in different zones.Enabling species to move. Genes and species undertake changes to their abundances and distributions in response to climatic and other environmental changes. We suggest that trans situ conservation be developed as a complement to traditional in situ (sites in the wild) and ex situ (in captivity) conservation. Trans situ conservation primarily involves Accept and Facilitate interventions within the RAF framework. It requires consideration of the connectedness and permeability of regions (facilitating colonisation for a majority of species and genes) and the value of new populations of colonising species and novel communities that arise from species range shifts. Trans situ conservation also considers the potential to translocate (assisted colonisation) species and genes that are unable to shift their distributions without direct intervention, highlighting the transnational needs of globally-threatened species rather than locally-rare ones whose future is secure elsewhere.For everyone. The justification for conservation commonly focuses attention on the benefits that individuals and society derive from the natural world, yet the benefits are not shared equitably. The RAF approach asks people from a wide range of backgrounds ‘what they want’ from local landscapes so as to inform the development of more inclusive approaches to conservation both now and in the future. We identify ways in which the processes of conservation could incorporate an increased diversity of perspectives, whilst continuing to be informed by data and professional expertise.

show abstract

Developing and validating the Dragons of Inaction Psychological Barriers (DIPB) scale

Cited by 167 publications

References 33 publications

Reducing meat consumption: Identifying group-specific inhibitors using latent profile analysis

Reducing meat consumption: Identifying group-specific inhibitors using latent profile analysis

Comparing Goal Setting Approaches to Boosting Pro-Environmental Behaviors

Facilitating dynamic and inclusive biodiversity conservation in Britain: an Anthropocene perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About