Ego or Eco? Neither Ecological nor Egoistic Appeals of Persuasive Climate Change Messages Impacted Pro-Environmental Behavior

被引:10
|
作者
Kesenheimer, Jana Sophie [1 ]
Greitemeyer, Tobias [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Innsbruck, Inst Psychol, Innrain 52, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria
关键词
pro-environmental behavior; intervention; persuasion;
D O I
10.3390/su122310064
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Based on the 'Inclusion Model of Environmental Concern', we tested whether daily messaging intervention increases participants' pro-environmental behavior (PEB). In a two (time: pre vs. post, repeated measure) x three (condition: egoistic appeals, ecological appeals, control group) experimental design, two hundred and eighteen individuals received either daily messages containing egoistic appeals for action to prevent climate change (e.g., preventing personal consequences of released diseases in melting arctic ice), ecological appeals (e.g., ecological consequences of melting glaciers), or no messages (control). PEB was assessed via self-reports and donations to an environmental organization. Neither of the appeals had an effect on the two dependent measures. Irrespective of experimental conditions, self-reported PEB was higher in the post- compared with the pre-test. Overall, the present results do not provide support for the effectiveness of a daily messaging technique. Instead, it appears that 'being observed' is the more effective 'intervention'. Implications for how to foster PEB are discussed.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 15
页数:15
相关论文
共 26 条
  • [1] Pro-environmental behavior and public understanding of climate change
    Masud, Muhammad Mehedi
    Akhtar, Rulia
    Afroz, Rafia
    Al-Amin, Abul Quasem
    Kari, Fatimah Binti
    [J]. MITIGATION AND ADAPTATION STRATEGIES FOR GLOBAL CHANGE, 2015, 20 (04) : 591 - 600
  • [2] Pro-environmental behavior and public understanding of climate change
    Muhammad Mehedi Masud
    Rulia Akhtar
    Rafia Afroz
    Abul Quasem Al-Amin
    Fatimah Binti Kari
    [J]. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 2015, 20 : 591 - 600
  • [3] Media coverage of climate change, eco-anxiety and pro-environmental behavior: Experimental evidence and the resilience paradox
    Shao, Lei
    Yu, Guoliang
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2023, 91
  • [4] THE PRO-ENVIRONMENTAL BEHAVIOR PATTERNS OF COLLEGE STUDENTS ADAPTING TO CLIMATE CHANGE
    Fang, Shyang-Chyuan
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BALTIC SCIENCE EDUCATION, 2021, 20 (05): : 700 - 715
  • [5] Social representations of climate change and pro-environmental behavior intentions in Taiwan
    Chen, Mei-Fang
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL SOCIOLOGY, 2019, 34 (03) : 327 - 346
  • [6] The mediating role of pro-environmental attitude and intention on the translation from climate change health risk perception to pro-environmental behavior
    Shen, Tao
    Rasdi, Irniza Binti
    Ezani, Nor Eliani Binti
    San, Ong Tze
    [J]. SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2024, 14 (01):
  • [7] Media exposure to climate change information and pro-environmental behavior: the role of climate change risk judgment
    Vrselja, Ivana
    Pandzic, Mario
    Rihtaric, Martina Lotar
    Ojala, Maria
    [J]. BMC PSYCHOLOGY, 2024, 12 (01)
  • [8] Cognitive reappraisal and pro-environmental behavior: The role of global climate change perception
    Panno, Angelo
    Carrus, Giuseppe
    Maricchiolo, Fridanna
    Mannetti, Lucia
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2015, 45 (07) : 858 - 867
  • [9] Mindfulness, Pro-environmental Behavior, and Belief in Climate Change: The Mediating Role of Social Dominance
    Panno, Angelo
    Giacomantonio, Mauro
    Carrus, Giuseppe
    Maricchiolo, Fridanna
    Pirchio, Sabine
    Mannetti, Lucia
    [J]. ENVIRONMENT AND BEHAVIOR, 2018, 50 (08) : 864 - 888
  • [10] Personality and environmental outcomes: The role of moral anger in channeling climate change action and pro-environmental behavior
    Panno, Angelo
    De Cristofaro, Valeria
    Oliveti, Camilla
    Carrus, Giuseppe
    Donati, Maria Anna
    [J]. ANALYSES OF SOCIAL ISSUES AND PUBLIC POLICY, 2021, 21 (01) : 853 - 873