Laura McGuire

An inconvenient truth? Can a film really affect psychological mood and our explicit attitudes towards climate change?

Abstract Previous research has claimed that providing people with information about global warming may have a negative (and unanticipated) effect on their explicit attitudes towards climate change. One study found that more informed respondents felt less personally responsible for global warming and also showed less concern for the problem as a whole. This earlier study was, however, correlational in design and did not allow for firm conclusions regarding the direction of causality. For this reason, in our study we used an experimental approach — highly informative (and emotional) clips from An Inconvenient Truth were played to sets of participants and their mood states were measured as well as their explicit social attitudes/social cognitions on five critical scales (message acceptance/motivation to do something about climate change/empowerment/shifting responsibility for climate change/fatalism). Our study found that the clips did affect emotion, and in particular, they decreased the happiness and calmness levels of our participants, but they also felt more motivated to do something about climate change, more able to do something about climate change and, in addition, they were significantly less likely to think that they had no control over the whole climate change process. These were much more optimistic conclusions than the previous study had allowed, and they remind us of the power of strong informative and emotional messages on explicit attitude change and social cognition generally.

Harnessing the unconscious mind of the consumer: How implicit attitudes predict pre-conscious visual attention to carbon footprint information on products

Abstract Consumers clearly have a role to play in the global fight against climate change, since even relatively small changes in patterns of household consumption could significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But what evidence is there that consumers do consider the environmental impacts of products when shopping? Indeed, how psychologically salient the carbon footprint labels that are now appearing on a range of products in various countries? Here we test the psychological salience of this information using eye tracking to identify, on a frame-by-frame basis, individual fixations on various features of the packaging, including carbon footprint. We found that the mean fixation level for carbon footprint was 12.2%, indicating it was indeed as salient as other important features. High or low levels of carbon footprint had no significant effect on gaze fixation. We also found no significant relationship between self-reported attitudes to low carbon products and overall level of fixation, nor was there any significant relationship between implicit attitude and level of fixation. But implicit attitude did significantly impact on the point of first fixation, in that those with a strong positive implicit attitude were significantly more likely to fixate first on carbon footprint information. This suggests that carbon labelling could potentially be effective for some consumers – those with the right implicit attitude. Measures of explicit attitude, on the other hand, seemed to be largely irrelevant. The implications of this finding for sparking a “green revolution” in consumer habits through the provision of carbon footprint information for consumers is discussed.

An exploration of possible unconscious ethnic biases in higher education: The role of implicit attitudes on selection for university posts

Abstract Despite efforts to deal with the underrepresentation of Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) staff in higher education, progress to date has been limited. We investigate the role of possible implicit attitudes towards ethnic diversity among staff and students at a leading British university. Ninety-six participants (48 White and 48 non-White) were presented with matched C.V.s of White and non- White applicants and were instructed to rate the suitability of candidates against two pre-defined job descriptions for positions at the same university (Lectureship versus Administrative role). Participants were also asked to shortlist two applicants for a subsequent interview, before completing a new multi-ethnic IAT. The new IAT assesses implicit attitudes towards BME groups as a whole, rather than focusing exclusively on a single ethnic minority. Evidence of implicit bias was observed in the IAT scores and in the White participants showing an own-race bias in terms of the proportion of Whites that they selected for the academic post, but not the administrative position. Implicit measures were a better predictor than explicit measures of actual shortlisting decisions. Policy recommendations are discussed.

Staying over-optimistic about the future: Uncovering attentional biases to climate change messages

Abstract There is considerable concern that the public are not getting the message about climate change. One possible explanation is “optimism bias,” where individuals overestimate the likelihood of positive events happening to them and underestimate the likelihood of negative events. Evidence from behavioral neuroscience suggest that this bias is underpinned by selective information processing, specifically through a reduced level of neural coding of undesirable information, and an unconscious tendency for optimists to avoid fixating negative information. Here we test how this bias in attention could relate to the processing of climate change messages. Using eye tracking, we found that level of dispositional optimism affected visual fixations on climate change messages. Optimists spent less time (overall dwell time) attending to any arguments about climate changes (either “for” or “against”) with substantially shorter individual fixations on aspects of arguments for climate change, i.e., those that reflect the scientific consensus but are bad news. We also found that when asked to summarize what they had read, non-optimists were more likely to frame their recall in terms of the arguments “for” climate change; optimists were significantly more likely to frame it in terms of a debate between two opposing positions. Those highest in dispositional optimism seemed to have the strongest and most pronounced level of optimism bias when it came to estimating the probability of being personally affected by climate change. We discuss the importance of overcoming this cognitive bias to develop more effective strategies for communicating about climate change.

Mapping our underlying cognitions and emotions about good environmental behavior: Why we fail to act despite the best of intentions

Abstract Despite the widespread recognition of climate change as the single biggest global threat, the willingness of people to change their behavior to mitigate its effects is limited. Past research, often focusing on specific categories of behavior, has highlighted a very significant gap between people’s intentions to behave more sustainably and their actual behavior. This paper presents a new approach to this issue, by using more open-ended questions to map a much broader range of cognitions and emotions about good environmental behavior. Two key findings emerged. Firstly, participants were aware of the contradiction between their level of concern about the environment and their willingness to act in more sustainable ways. The qualitative analysis further revealed that this discrepancy often hinged on a lack of knowledge about how to act more sustainably; the analysis also revealed a desire for more information about genuinely green behavior. Secondly, pro-environmental behavior was often conceptualized by participants in essentially “social” terms; anticipated emotions relating to sustainable/non-sustainable behavior were as closely tied to the behavior of one’s peers as to one’s own behavior. This finding suggests that we must highlight the social dimension in any interventions to increase sustainable behaviors amongst the public.

Consumption and climate change: Why we say one thing but do another in the face of our greatest threat

Abstract There is clear evidence that human beings have contributed to climate change through their patterns of consumption, and, it could be argued that, since we are part of the problem then we must be part of the solution. The apparently good news is that people report that they have very positive attitudes to environmentally-friendly products and they also consistently say that they are prepared to adapt their behavior to ameliorate the effects of climate change. However, numerous studies have found little behavior change on the part of consumers. This study investigates this critical issue experimentally. It does this by exploring whether self-reported attitudes to low carbon products, or alternatively implicit attitudes to such products (measured using an associative task and not requiring self-report), predict consumer choice of products varying on a range of dimensions including environmental consequences, in an experimental context where time for selection was also systematically varied. We found firstly, in line with previous research, that human beings have explicit and implicit attitudes that are not correlated. Secondly, in terms of brand choice, we found that consumers are particularly sensitive to both brand information and value in their selection of products, particularly under time pressure. Organic/eco brands are, however, much less favoured, especially under any time pressure, where processes that are more automatic prevail. Thirdly, color-coded carbon footprint information can influence choice even under time pressure but only for those consumers with a strong positive implicit attitude to carbon footprint. The conclusions from this research are that humans beings may well have a “divided self” when it comes to the environment and climate change, and this underlying “dissociation” in attitude (implicit versus explicit) might be critical to their behavior as consumers. This concept of the“divided self” may help us understand why relatively little has changed thus far with regard to more sustainable consumption, but might open up new lines of enquiry about how we might attempt to promote more sustainable consumption in the future.