The Moral Roots of Environmental Attitudes

Feinberg, Matthew; Willer, Robb

doi:10.1177/0956797612449177

Cited by 733 publications

(691 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

634

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Political conservatism is associated with a preference for the status quo (14), traditionalism (31), and a lesser reliance on harm and fairness principles in moral domains (32). Environmental protection (particularly in the context of proposed "solutions" to the problems created by climate change) typically challenges the economic status quo and tradition (10,17), and relies on harm/ fairness notions of morality (33). Hence any or all of these basic psychological factors might contribute to the present findings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 75%

“…Indeed, when only cost information was available to participants in study 2 (i.e., the blank-label conditions), there were no ideological differences in the selection of the energy-efficient option. Alternatively, there may be sources of political common ground with regard to the environment itself, because framing environmental protection in terms of psychological values that appeal to those on the political right (such as purity or patriotism) increases concern for the environment among political conservatives (17,33). Future research should identify whether tapping these less polarizing concerns, morals, and values can bridge the ideological gap in the willingness to pay for energy-efficient options.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Political ideology affects energy-efficiency attitudes and choices

Gromet

Kunreuther

Larrick

2013

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

345

178

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research demonstrates how promoting the environment can negatively affect adoption of energy efficiency in the United States because of the political polarization surrounding environmental issues. Study 1 demonstrated that more politically conservative individuals were less in favor of investment in energyefficient technology than were those who were more politically liberal. This finding was driven primarily by the lessened psychological value that more conservative individuals placed on reducing carbon emissions. Study 2 showed that this difference has consequences: In a real-choice context, more conservative individuals were less likely to purchase a more expensive energy-efficient light bulb when it was labeled with an environmental message than when it was unlabeled. These results highlight the importance of taking into account psychological value-based considerations in the individual adoption of energy-efficient technology in the United States and beyond.C limate change presents a major challenge to our current level of energy consumption. Much attention has been given to the development of energy-efficient technology as a way of addressing the problem of global warming and reducing the cost of energy use for consumers, but the demand for energy efficiency has not met expectations (1, 2). There are a number of potential roadblocks to the adoption of energy-efficient technology. People do not know the cost and energy savings associated with different technologies (3-5), and climate change is not viewed as an immediate threat requiring action now (6, 7). In addition, people tend to have short time horizons and discount the future hyperbolically, so that the upfront costs of switching to a new technology, even when it results in long-term net savings, can deter investment in more expensive energy-efficient products (8).Given these issues, one strategy for making energy-efficient technology attractive to consumers has been to focus on its environmental benefits (9). For example, a 2010 North American advertising campaign for the Toyota Prius (arguably the bestknown hybrid car) emphasized its environmental upside by telling viewers that "the world gets fewer smog-forming emissions" with a Prius, resulting in "harmony between man, nature, and machine." Similarly, the ENERGY STAR website (jointly run by the United States Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency) promotes energy-efficient products as providing ways for people to "save energy and fight climate change." Because these messages explicitly emphasize environmental benefits, they likely resonate well with individuals who value protecting the environment. However, this emphasis on the environment might detract from the appeal of energy efficiency among individuals who do not want to be associated with environmental concern.This research investigated whether relying on environmental concern to promote energy-efficient technology may, in fact, present an additional roadblock to increasing demand by deterring otherwise interested co...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 75%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Political ideology affects energy-efficiency attitudes and choices

Gromet

Kunreuther

Larrick

2013

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

345

178

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example Sheldon (2011) found that conservatives, who may be more likely to hold self-enhancing value orientations, were more supportive of environmental behavior when first asked to consider traditional US-American values. Feinberg and Willer (2013) found that conservatives were more environmentally concerned when the issue was framed around purity and sanctity instead of the harm/care moral framing typically used when discussing environmental issues. Perhaps, when debating real, local consequences of climate change, it will be necessary to include reminders of traditional conservative values or moral pleas framed to appeal to strong self-enhancing values.…”

Section: Values and Climate Impact Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Local is not always better: the impact of climate information on values, behavior and policy support

Schoenefeld

McCauley

2015

J Environ Stud Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the current research, we experimentally examined the effect of providing local or global information about the impacts of climate change on individuals' perceived importance of climate change and on their willingness to take action to address it, including policy support. We examined these relationships in the context of individuals' general value orientations. Our findings, from 99 US residents, suggest that different kinds of climate information (local, global, or none) interact with values vis-à-vis our dependent variables. Specifically, while self-transcendent values predict perceived importance and pro-environmental behavior across all three information conditions, the effect on policy support is less clear. Furthermore, we detected a Breactance effect^where individuals with self-enhancing values who read local information thought that climate change was less important and were less willing to engage in pro-environmental behavior and support policy than self-enhancing individuals in the other information conditions. These results suggest that policy makers and public communicators may want to be cognizant of their audience's general value orientation. Local information may not only be ineffective but may also prove counterproductive with individuals whose value orientations are more self-enhancing than self-transcendent.

show abstract

“…It has even been argued that moral considerations are primary and shape our understanding of actions and events (Knobe 2007). It seems that environmental risks in particular are considered moral issues by many people (Böhm and Tanner 2013;Feinberg and Willer 2013;McDaniels, Axelrod, and Slovic 1995).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The perceiver’s social role and a risk’s causal structure as determinants of environmental risk evaluation

Böhm

Pfister

2015

Journal of Risk Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a dual-process risk perception model that integrates cognitive and emotional as well as consequentialist and deontological components by distinguishing between two modes of evaluative processing: (a) a consequentialist evaluation that focuses on potential consequences and (b) a deontological evaluation that focuses on moral values. Each of these two modes is assumed to trigger specific cognitive evaluations, specific emotions, and specific behavioral tendencies concerning a perceived risk. We conducted an experiment (N = 270) that tested whether the relative dominance of the two evaluative modes would depend on the causal structure of the environmental risk being evaluated and on the social role of the evaluator. Three types of causal structure were varied by providing scenario information: (a) anthropogenic risks that endanger only nature, (b) naturally caused risks with potential harmful consequences for humans, and (c) anthropogenic risks that may harm humans. Participants evaluated each scenario from the perspective of one of three social roles: mayor, expecting parent, and environmental activist. For each scenario, participants specified their focus and evaluated the event's morality and perceived risk, the intensity of specific emotions, and their preferences for prospective behaviors. Results showed that the consequentialist evaluation was generally stronger than the deontological evaluation and was less affected by the experimental manipulations. The deontological evaluation was substantially affected by the risk's causal structure. It was stronger for anthropogenic than for natural causation; risks caused by humans were associated with greater perceived moral blameworthiness, more intense morality-based emotions (e.g. outrage), and a stronger tendency to perform agent-related behaviors (e.g. aggression) than naturally occurring risks. The effect of the social role was less pronounced than that of the causal structure. Furthermore, the effect of an evaluative focus on behavior was fully mediated by emotions for deontological evaluations and partially mediated for consequentialist evaluations. The implications for environmental risk perception and communication are discussed.

show abstract

The Moral Roots of Environmental Attitudes

Cited by 733 publications

References 35 publications

Political ideology affects energy-efficiency attitudes and choices

Political ideology affects energy-efficiency attitudes and choices

Local is not always better: the impact of climate information on values, behavior and policy support

The perceiver’s social role and a risk’s causal structure as determinants of environmental risk evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About