The potential role of descriptive and dynamic norms in promoting climate change advocacy

Abstract

Political advocacy is arguably the most powerful form of action that citizens concerned about climate change can take. One motivator for political advocacy is the perception that there is a social norm (i.e., inherently understood social rules and standards that serve to guide social behaviors) for doing so. Using nationally representative survey data (N = 1,303), we examined the association of three types of social norms—descriptive norms (i.e., perceptions about how many other people perform a behavior) and retrospective and prospective dynamic norms (i.e., perceptions that a behavior has become more or less common in the past or will in the future)—with intentions to engage in political advocacy in the upcoming year and past advocacy. We found that descriptive norms and prospective dynamic norms were positively related to advocacy intentions, while only prospective dynamic norms were positively related to past advocacy (retrospective dynamic norms were negatively related to both outcomes, contrary to our theorized direction). Further, we examined whether the relationship between norms and intentions/behaviors differed based on political party identification and four potential mediators of this relationship: identification with climate activists; collective efficacy (i.e., the belief that people can engage in climate advocacy and that it will make a difference); collective response efficacy (i.e., beliefs about the results of advocacy); and injunctive norms (i.e., perceptions of others’ approval of advocacy). In the moderated-mediation models, we found that party identification moderated the relationships between descriptive norms and prospective dynamic norms and advocacy intention, while retrospective dynamic norms were not related as theorized. These relationships were mediated by identification with climate activists and collective efficacy, as well as by injunctive norms in the case of descriptive norms. Party identification also moderated the relationship between descriptive norms and past advocacy; this relationship was mediated by identification with climate activists and injunctive norms. Taken together, these findings underscore the potential importance of perceived descriptive norms and prospective dynamic norms on political advocacy to address climate change, extending both well-established and emerging research and providing insights useful for academics and practitioners alike. Lay Summary Political advocacy (e.g., contacting elected officials via phone or email, attending a march or public demonstration, etc.) is a powerful form of climate action available to citizens in democratic societies. A relationship may exist between various forms of perceived social norms (i.e., inherently understood social rules and standards that serve to guide social behaviors) about political advocacy and a citizen’s likelihood of engaging in such advocacy. To investigate, we examined the association of descriptive norms (i.e., perceptions about how many other people perform the behavior) and dynamic norms (i.e., perceptions about the behavior becoming more or less common in the recent past or in the near future) with climate advocacy. We found that descriptive norms were associated with advocacy intentions and dynamic norms were associated with both advocacy intentions and behaviors, although the dynamic norm about past behaviors was in the opposite direction of what we expected. We also examined the roles of several theoretically relevant beliefs—identification with climate activists, collective efficacy (i.e., the belief that people can engage in climate advocacy and that it will make a difference), collective response efficacy (i.e., beliefs about the results of advocacy), and injunctive norms (i.e., perceptions of others’ approval of advocacy)—to determine if they help explain the relationship between perceived social norms and climate advocacy, and to determine if the relationships differ between Democrats and Republicans. We found that the relationships between descriptive and dynamic norms about future changes and advocacy intentions differed by party identification. Descriptive norms were related to increased advocacy intentions for Independents and Republicans while dynamic norms were related to increased advocacy intentions for Democrats. Identification with climate activists, collective efficacy, and (for descriptive norms only) injunctive norms helped explain these relationships. The relationship between descriptive norms and past advocacy behaviors was the only relationship that differed by party identification, though we found other nuanced relationships. These findings indicate the potential importance of different social norms on climate advocacy.

Understanding Sociodemographic Differences in Climate Behavior, Climate Policy Acceptance, and Political Participation

“…Political participation. The items for this measure were taken from existing scales [25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33] and adapted for the climate topic and the German context [10]. The final scale consisted of 11 items reflecting conventional participation (e.g., signing petitions), activism (e.g., participating in demonstrations), and peer group-related participation (e.g., discussions with friends).…”

Storytelling as a Catalyst for Climate Change Communication and Empowerment

“…Over time, more Americans are moving toward the alarmed and concerned groups (Leiserowitz et al, 2023). Their survey data from December 2022 also showed that one in ten Americans reported feeling distressed about global warming, and the climate distressed are more likely to take actions such as signing a petition or volunteering at an organization on global warming (Ballew et al, 2023).…”

Study Protocol of the Planetary Health Action Survey PACE – A serial cross-sectional survey to assess the readiness to act against climate change

“…12 statements into 25 categories (35,36,(68)(69)(70)(71)(72)(73)(74). Then, one item was developed for each category, and those items were tested as indicators of general participation (i.e., not contextualized to climate change).…”