Effects of fear on donations to climate change mitigation

被引:10
作者
Palosaari, Esa [1 ,2 ,5 ]
Herne, Kaisa [1 ]
Lappalainen, Olli [4 ]
Hietanen, Jari K. [3 ]
机构
[1] Tampere Univ, Fac Management & Business, Tampere, Finland
[2] Aalto Univ, Sch Sci, Espoo, Finland
[3] Tampere Univ, Fac Social Sci Psychol, Tampere, Finland
[4] Univ Turku, Dept Econ, Turku, Finland
[5] Valuemot Oy, Helsinki, Finland
基金
芬兰科学院;
关键词
Threat appeal; Pro-environmental behavior; Climate change; THREAT APPEALS; POLICY SUPPORT; IMPACT; METAANALYSIS; INFORMATION; DISSONANCE; PUNISHMENT; BEHAVIOR; EMOTION; SCIENCE;
D O I
10.1016/j.jesp.2022.104422
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Despite 70 years of research, there is no consensus about the effects of threat messages on behavior, partly because of publication bias. The lack of consensus concerns situations such as climate change where people tend to believe that they cannot easily make a major difference. Using a 2 x 2, (threat, neutral) x (efficacy, no efficacy) between-subjects design, we tested four hypotheses: the effect of threat stimuli on (1) mitigation of climate change and (2) experienced fear depends on efficacy information, (3) threat stimuli increase monetary donations to mitigation regardless of efficacy information, and (4) the effect of the threat stimuli depends on political identity. The threat stimuli were climate change related pictures and a prompt to write either about one's knowledge of or about the threat of climate change. The efficacy stimuli were an efficacy related picture and written information about the efficacy of a climate change mitigating organization. We collected a representative online sample of 1517 U.S. citizens. The manipulations affected experienced fear and self-efficacy, but there was no statistically significant main effect of threat on donations nor a statistically significant interaction between threat and efficacy or between threat and political identity. It is concluded that threat appeals do not increase climate change mitigation behavior by more than a very small amount compared to making people think about the subject.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 52 条
[1]  
Aristotle B., 2000, Politics
[2]  
Aristotle W. R., 2004, Rhetoric
[3]   Trust, Punishment, and Cooperation Across 18 Societies: A Meta-Analysis [J].
Balliet, Daniel ;
Van Lange, Paul A. M. .
PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2013, 8 (04) :363-379
[4]   Cognitive dissonance and post-decision attitude change in six presidential elections [J].
Beasley, RK ;
Joslyn, MR .
POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2001, 22 (03) :521-540
[5]   Efficacy, Action, and Support for Reducing Climate Change Risks [J].
Bostrom, Ann ;
Hayes, Adam L. ;
Crosman, Katherine M. .
RISK ANALYSIS, 2019, 39 (04) :805-828
[6]   Striking a responsive chord: How political ads motivate and persuade voters by appealing to emotions [J].
Brader, T .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2005, 49 (02) :388-405
[7]  
Carsey ThomasM., 2014, Monte Carlo Simulation and Resam-pling Methods for Social Science, DOI 10.4135/9781483319605
[9]   Communicating complex information: The interpretation of statistical interaction in multiple logistic regression analysis [J].
Chen, JJ .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2003, 93 (09) :1376-1377
[10]  
Cismaru M., 2007, MARKETING THEOR, V7, P249, DOI [https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593107080344, DOI 10.1177/1470593107080344]