All environmental Flashcards
defintion of environmental psychology
The study of transactions between indivudals and their physical settings- gifford 2007
Key points about environmental psychlogy
- problem over approach theory- solve real life problems and have applications
- environment is not an external factor but a key figure in the relationship
- the environment as context for behaviour vs impact of human behaviour on the environment
- theoretically and methodologically eclectic
Kurt lewin
founder of modern social psych and kind of the founder of environmental psychology
- use naturalistic settings and base action from these observations
- field theory= Lewin’s field theory rule states that ‘analysis starts with the situation as a whole’. By gaining an overview as early as possible, we intend to broaden the perspective from which we as scholarly practitioners engage with the general characteristics of the challenge or opportunity facing our organisational clients.
Barker
first to use ecological psychology
need to understand the setting behaviour takes place in
behaviour patterns are coded to their setting, they are molar (distinct and specific to a setting). This is situationism.
he did a behaviour setting survey and found 884 places which had distinct behaviour streams
when and why did environmental psychology start to make head way
60s/70s
After the war there was so much pollution and chemicals, carson released a book called silent spring and it urged people to think about how our actions had effected the environment
Nasas first pictures of the earth
crime rates
Place identity
where you are from affects your identity
Paris aggreement 2015
- policy to avoid ‘dangerous’ climate change: 2°C temperature increase, urging efforts for 1.5°C limit
UK climate change act 2008
25% reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) by 2020 (didn’t reach); 80% GHG reduction by 2050 (2019: ‘net zero’ amendment)
First legally binding rule setting limits
COP26 2021
climate pledges on emission reductions
Policies on climate change prevention
- UK climate change act 2008
- Paris agreeement 2015
- COP26 2021
why is the built environment key in achieving environmental sustainbility
20-25% of all energy consumption is used for space and water heating- a part of built environments
proenvironmental behaviour
“The extent to which [a behaviour] changes the availability of materials or energy from the environment or alters the structure and dynamics of ecosystems or the biosphere” (Stern, 2000) not a very clear definition.
“Behaviours that harm the environment as little as possible, or even benefit the environment” (Steg and Vlek, 2009)
differing perspectives on how to define environmental behaviour
-consumption
- relative impact, comparing a behaviour to another and seeing which has a less bad impact (poor way to look at it and can justify still bad actions)
- environmental impact
indirect vs direct energy use
indirect is how extraction, production, distribution and disposal of goods uses energy
direct is our consumption
energy efficient behaviours
energy efficient equipment
curtailment behaviours
change and reduce use of certain things
why are people more likely to pick EE behaviour to save energy rather than CB behaviours
consumption shift makes energy saving measures less acceptable
CB have to be repeated and may be viewed as decreasing a persons comfort or quality of life whereas making one big change to a more energy efficient equipment is a one off
framework used in germany to try encourage energy efficient behaviour
Dalkmann and brannigan 2007
avoid- e.g. travel and the need to travel
shift e.g. to more efficient modes of transport such as public transport
Improve e.g. existing vehicle effieciency such as electric cars
Dalkmann and brannigan 2007 model in terms of CB, EE and consumption shift
CB = avoid such as shorter showers
Consumption shift = shift such as meatless
energy efficiency = improve such as house insulation
discussion points for having less kids
- if we all had less kids this the the most proenvironmental thing we can do
- BUT this is only due to western standards of living as more people mean more things and more electricity
- must consider that if you are in a tribe or a rural place having more children doesnt mean the extra energy use so this isnt as big a deal
- is it a point rather than making everyone conform to our standards whether we should adopt other cultures way of life to reduce energy impact
orientations of environmental behaviour as said by stern 2000
Intent-oriented environmental behaviour
– behaviour defined by its motivation (e.g., recycling)
– behaviours you think are good - and are willing to do - for the environment
– symbolic behaviours
Impact-oriented environmental behaviour
– behaviour defined by its impact
– …in terms of (reduction in) energy use; water consumption, or waste production
3 distinctions between direct and indirect environemntal behaviours in terms of private/public
private sphere environmentalism- direct and personal such as recycling
non activist behaviours in the public sphere such as environmental citizenship (supporting environmental policies)-indirect
- environmental activisism- indirect
distinction between sustainable behaviour and sustainable lifestyle
Sustainable Behaviour often refers to individual actions that are beneficial for the environment (e.g., recycling, buying energy saving light bulbs etcetera).
Sustainable Lifestyle refers to a pattern of behaviour/consumption in line with environmental values and attitudes – with minimal impact on the environment
what is sustainable energy use? what is the real probelm regarding this energy use?
ideally energy comes from non polluting renewable sources
not so mcuh the amount of energy which we use as it is the source that the energy comes from. Fossil fuels which are for petrol, gas and electric are polluting
compare wind energy and coal use from now to the 90s
In 2020 more than 50% of electriivty at a point was generated by wind when in the 90s 50% was generated by coal.
personal energy/carbon budgets
Durr 1994 suggested a personal energy budget, this makes sense since there is such an uneven distribution of energy use across the classes. 50% of carbon emissions are from the elite, top 10%. The poorest 50% only responsible for 10% of total lifestyle consumption emissions.
Research methods used in environemtnal psych
questionnaire studies
laboratory experiments
simulation studies
field studies
case studies
Consideratio points when evaluating research methods
- cost effectiveness
- inferring causality
- control of variables
- realistic (even simulation studies may be perceived as fictitious to those using them)
- richness of data
- generalisability
what does sustainability mean
using, developing and protecting resources at a rate and in a manner that enables people to meet their own needs and ensures future generations can meet their own needs to achieving an optimal balance between environmental, social and economic qualities.
How has the field of psychology contributed to psychology as a field/ expanded our knowledge
- development of novel constructs and methods for analyzing the links between environment and behavior,
*increased emphases on cross-paradigm research, - transactional models of environment and behavior
*group-environment as well as individual-environment relationships,
*expanded application of environment and behavior research to the development of public policies and community problem-solving efforts
Ittelson 1973 definition/ distinctions about what environment means
distinctions between environment and object percpetion, object is a thing whereas the environment surrounds and engulfs us, no one can be isolated from it.
novel research methods from environmental psych
sketch maps, wayfinding, and photographic recognition tasks were combined to measure the “imageability” of urban environments.
Indexes of perceived environmental quality and techniques of environmental simulation were developed to evaluate people’s reactions to existing or imagined setting.
Behavioral mapping protocols and behavior setting surveys were used to assess activity patterns within buildings, public parks, and whole communities.
physiological probes to measure people’s reactions to environmental demands
Situationist vs interactional vs transactional theories
Interactional theories account for the joint influence of environmental and personal factors on behavior
Situationist theories account for behavioral change in terms of the specific stimuli and events occurring within an individual’s social or physical environment.
Both situationist and interactional theories are linear or unidirectional, in that they predict behavioral changes from environmental conditions, alone, or from both situational and intrapersonal factors
Transactional theories emphasize the reciprocal or bidirectional nature of people-environment relations—individuals not only respond to environmental conditions but also take steps to influence and restructure their surroundings. They highlight the interdependence between people and their environments.
real life examples where environemntal psychology has made changes to places
research on people’s reactions to density and crowding, conducted during the 1970s, yielded guidelines for improving the design of residential environments (Aiello & Baum, 1979)
And experimental evidence for the psychological and behavioral benefits of exposure to natural environments was applied in offices and health care settings to reduce stress and enhance occupants’ well-being (Kaplan, 1993;
postoccupancy evaluation (POE) techniques were used to assess people’s reactions to newly designed or renovated buildings, parks, and public plazas (Carr, Francis, Rivlin, & Stone, 1992
The New Environmental Paradigm Scale (NEP)
measuring people’s views on the human-environment relationship. NEP can be considered as a worldview on the vulnerability of the environment to human interference
Poortinga et al. 2004 research
Poortinga et al. 2004 -
home and transport energy use were especially related to sociodemographic variables like income and household size
people who valued environmental quality more had a higher environmental concern.
The Self-Enhancement value dimension was (negatively) related to environmental concern
support for government regulation was positively related to the Environmental Quality dimension, whereas support for market strategies was positively related to the Self-Enhancement value dimension. These results indicate that the relationships between values, environmental concern, and environmental behavior might be more complex than assumed
values vs world views
values are situation-transcending beliefs about what is important in life
worldviews are general beliefs related to a specific domain of life.
why would support for government regulation was positively related to the Environmental Quality dimension,
but support for market strategies be positively related to the Self-Enhancement value dimension?
people with a low environmental concern think that market-oriented policies are less strict. By preferring freemarket solutions, as opposed to government regulation, people shift the responsibility for solving environmental problems to others.
personal quality related to engaging in prosnevironmental behaviour
Openness to Change was significantly related to transport energy use. (Poortinga 2004)
defining environmentally significant behaviour
defined by its impact: the extent to which it changes the availability of materials or energy from the environment or alters the structure and dynamics of ecosystems or the biosphere itself (see Stern, 1997). intent vs impact orientated
why do we need to consider both impact orietated and intent orientated definitions of environmentally significant behaviour
adopt an impact-oriented definition to identify and target behaviors that can make a large difference to the environment (Stern & Gardner, 1981a). This focus is critical for making research useful.
It is necessary to adopt an intent-oriented definition that focuses on people’s beliefs, motives, and so forth in order to understand and change the target behaviors. Understand why they do or do not do something
environmental impact is largely a biproduct of what?
environmental impact has largely been a by-product of human desires for physical comfort, mobility, relief from labor, enjoyment, power, status, personal security, maintenance of tradition and family and of the organizations and technologies humanity has created to meet these desires.
4 types of environmentally significant behaviour
environmental activism
non acitivist behaviours in the public sphere
private spehre environmentalism
other
what is environmentalism
defined behaviorally as the propensity to take actions with pro environmental intent.
sterns value belief norm theory
believed to be the best explanatory account to date of a variety of behavioral indicators of non-activist environmentalism.
e.g.
{ values ] biospheric and altruistic values –[ beliefs ] > ecological worldview –> beliefs about adverse consequcnes for valued objects —> percieved ability to reduce threat –> proenvironmental personal norms (sense of obligation to do proenvironmental activities) –> environmentally significant behaviours
how values impact proenvironmental norms/ action
the values most strongly implicated in activating proenvironmental personal norms are, as norm-activation theory presumes, altruistic or self-transcendent values.
Self-enhancement or egoistic values and “traditional” values such as obedience, self-discipline, and family security are negatively associated with proenvironmental norms and action in some studies. The ways these values affect behavior are not well understood, but they may be important bases for principled opposition by some individuals to environmental movement goals.
ABC theory
Guagnano 1995- behaviour is a product of the organism and their environment
behavior (B) = personal-sphere attitudinal variables (A) + contextual factors (C)
The attitude-behavior association is strongest when contextual factors are neutral.
4 causes of environmentally significant behaviour
- Attitudinal (Norms, beliefs and values)
- Contextual forces (interpersonal influences like modelling and other things like community expectations
- Personal capabilities (knowledge and skills required for actions)
- Habit or routine
gardner and stern 1996 review of intervention for changing environmentally significant behaviour- what were the intervntions
4 types of intervention
religious and moral approaches that appeal to values and aim to change broad worldviews and beliefs;
education to change attitudes and provide information;
efforts to change the material incentive structure of behavior by providing monetary and other types of rewards or penalties;
community management, involving the establishment of shared rules and expectations.
gardner and stern 1996 review of intervention for changing environmentally significant behaviour- findings
each of these intervention types can change behavior.
moral and educational approaches have generally disappointing track records, and even incentive- and community-based approaches rarely produce much change on their own.
the most effective behavior change programs involve combinations of intervention types.
These findings underline the limits of single-variable explanations for informing efforts at behavior change. The behavior is determined by multiple variables, sometimes in interaction. Often the nature of the interaction can be well described in terms of barriers to behavior change. Interventions do little or nothing until one of them removes an important barrier to change.
example of how a good intervention can not work based on barriers to change
public policy saying solar panels needs to be adopted is no good unless solar panels are made cheaper, giving suggestions of good providers and making information easily available.
how can we make interventions for stopping environmentally destructive behaviours good ?
- consider barriers for change, how to get rid of these
- multiple inervention types is most successful
-take the actors perspective
-make limitted cognitive demands - consider credibility
- reevaluate
- give people choice so they feel like they have more power
two broad ways of world view
Anthropocentrism – emphasises the function of nature for humans, i.e., our wants and needs (extrinsic value)
Ecocentrism – nature has value in its own right, independent of humans (intrinsic value)
what is the dominant social paradigm
(anthropocentrism) where humans control and manage the environment, natural resources are infinite, industrial growth is unlimited
what is the dominant social paradigm
(anthropocentrism) where humans control and manage the environment, natural resources are infinite, industrial growth is unlimited
paradigm shift since the 70s?
Shift from DSP to NEP since the 1970s in tandem with
growth of environmental movement, e.g. Silent Spring (‘the environmental decade’; Dunlap et al., 2000)
what has the new environmental paradigm been used to predict in research? issue with this?
Xue 2018 in china predicted climate change perceptions
Capstick 2016 NEP score predicts concern about ocean acidification
Circular reasoning: environmental concern predicts itself?E.g. nature is fragile predicting we need to look after nature will obviously be related
issues with the new environmental paradigm
Circular reasoning: environmental concern predicts itself? E.g. nature is fragile predicting we need to look after nature will obviously be related
Construct validity and cross-cultural variability is unclear. Western-centric?
May be an outdated measure; alternatives exist including ‘connectedness to nature’ (Mayer and Frantz, 2004
are we actually gettng greener as a nation? evidence
mixed thoughts-
Kesebir prevalence of nature related wpords in popular songs and finds a decline over time this is also replaicted in films and fiction so dspite encoromwemtnalism is on the rise this is not present in our media.
BUT number of Britons reached record levels of reporting what their top national issues are in 2021
August 2022 the environment was rated very highly even above the NHS for top concerns
how intent vs impact orientated world view affects our perceptions of others
These definitions effect who we view as more pro environmental (someone who doesn’t care about the environment but doesn’t drive, small flat, poor vs someone who cares but drives and has a big house etc). Negative again as it means we view more poverse people as trying less hard even though they aren’t even the main causers and are actually contributing less than say a rich person recycling.
evidence that intent orientated approaches are more popular
Whitmarsh and oneil 2010 we spend more of our time doing things which intend to be green but probably aren’t impact rather than doing more impactful things, so 70% of people recycled but only 33% cut down on car use. Intent orientated behaviours are ore common than impact
are proenvironmental behaviours always caused by proenvironmental intent, if not why?
Whitmarsh 2009
Reasons for things like turning off lights are more likely to be caused by saving money or habit (an unconscious driver) and things like walking to work are more likely to be done for health reasons than the environment. e.g. implementing a government recommendation for walking to work in january will be heavily confounded by people tryign to get fit in january as this is when the health kicks kick in
Have to control for this when looking at people undergoing proencigornmental behaviour.
One reason people might not engage in impact orientated proenvironmental behaviour
Awareness of what actually works/ personal comfort
Wynes et al 2020 when asking people whats the most effect thing you can do to reduce green house gases they say drive less etc but they don’t consider things like getting a green energy supplier- need to make people more aware of their options.
Peoples perceptions of how impactful things are aren’t always well aligned such as being vegan. Also some people have dietary restrictions and/ or would rather have the comfort of sticking to what they know so would rather remain eating meat.
issue with classifying impact of different categories of envrionmtnally signfiant behaviour
Sometimes it is hard to measure the impact of certain indirect actions such as public sphere non activist behaviours like voting which leads to a cascade of things not directly positive environmental impact.
can private and public sphere actions be classified as such easily? research example
private and public sphere contrast is blurred due to social contexts and roles, e.g. as Consumers, Investors, Participants in organisations, Members of communities (incl. families), Citizens
Graziano and Gillingham (2015) saw “a strong relationship between adoption [of solar panels] and the number of nearby previously installed systems”- solar panels might be private sphere but it has wider social consequences
can EE and CB behaviours be easily seperated? example
energy efficient behaviours such as buying an electric car is more energy efficient but it may also put you off driving such long distances due to the lack of charging points and the fact you cant drive as far without top up so it is also a curtailment behaviour
How a persons wealth might affect what their carbon emissions pimary source is
In europe a massive proportion of the top 1%s CO2 is from air travel whereas less weathly CO2 comes from other sources primarily
biospheric values
values which relate to helping the environment
examples of norms effecting proenvironmental behaviour
- descriptive norms for the fact we recycle becuase everyone does it we feel inclined to
- normative appeals such as towel reuse in hotels
- injunctive (behaviours that one is expected to follow and expects others to follow in a given social situation) / personal norms for energy conservation
we want to align with norms
environmental self identity
Van der Werff et al. (2013)
- Environmental self-identity* is related to a broad range of PEBs (e.g. energy conservation, driving). Environmental self-identity mediates the relationship between values and behaviour
Whitmarsh and O’Neill (2010)
- Environmental self-identity predicted waste, shopping and conservation PEBs but not political action, transport PEBs, one-off domestic actions
three ingrients to create a habit
frequency
automaticity
stable context
is PEB always intentional?
no it can be habitual, once it is a habit it is easier,need to create interventions to faciliate the creation of habits
also need to consider how we break environmentally destructive habits
klockner 2013 - habits research
found that a third of peoples environmental behaviour was influenced by psychological variables. tells us that policy needs to consider things like attitudes, worldview, behavioural control, norms etc
Ajzen theory of planned behaviour
attitude– subjective norms (outsider approval)– percieved behavioural control —> intention to do behaviour —> behaviour
how much do intentions predict variations in behaviour?
Sheeran 2002 found intentions expain 25% of variation in behaviour
theory of planned behaviour in terms of PEB
- just because someone thinks they can do something, others approve and you want to thus have the intent doesnt mean this is actually doable
- harland 1999 sees subjective norms not contribute to behavioural variance
- should include self identity and group membership as behaviour and expectations of the group contribute to behaviour
- is altruism as rational as the TPB makes out?
list the models of PEB
- theory of planned behaviour
-protection motivation theory - norm activation model
- value belief norm model
- social identity model of collective action
- goal framing theory
protection motivation theory
Rogers 1975
People are more likely to act proenvironmentally when both threat appraisal and coping appraisal are high (perceived risk and perception of whether engaging in PEB to control said threat).
Coping potential is based on percievd self efficacy (like behavioural control in TPB), perceived outcome efficacy and perceived costs of the PEB.
PMT successfully explained adotopion of electric cars, more likely when people think fossil fuel use risk is high and how capable of driving an electric vehicle and how effective one will be.
norm activation model swartz 1977
swartz 1977
awareness of consequcnes interats with ascription of responsibility (feeling responsible for adverse consequcnes of not doing PEB) leading to personal norms/ obligation and then behaviour
NAM research
Steg and de groot 2010
higher problem awareness (which was manipulated by text given) resulted in stronger ascription of responsibility, personal norms and intention to participate in actions to reduce the emission of particulate matters.
what are personal norms activated by
- problem awareness
- ascription of responsbility
- outcome efficacy
- self efficacy (an individual’s belief in his or her capacity to execute behaviors necessary to produce specific performance attainments)
value belief model
stern 2000
very comprehensive
extension of the norm activation model
values (biospheric, altruistic, egoistic) lead to ….
beliefs (ecological world view –> awareness of consequences –> ability to reduce threat/ our responsbility –> sense of obligation to do PEB) leads to …
behaviours (activism, non activist public sphere, private sphere PEB, behaviours in organisations
why all models can be helpful at some points
VBN able to predict environmental citizenship, household energy use, policy acceptability. Overall, NAM and VBN can explain ‘low-cost’ PEBs
TPB better at explaining ‘high-cost’ or difficult PEBs (see Steg and Nordlund, 2012) as these are often more rational and require hard thinking
social identity model of collective action
SIMCA van Zomeren 2008
moral conviction –> injustice, identity, efficacy –> collectiv action
Most research on PEBs assumes action at the individual leve but public sphere PEBs and activism are done with others and/or are a form of collective action
The SIMCA takes into account group identity and emotional response to perceived injustice
Identity- Do you feel like you belong to an environmentally friendly movement?
Injustice- emotional response to injustice like anger
Efficacy- do you think your actions make a difference
Moral conviction (added later)- having a moral foundation is a driver
what has the SIMCA been able to explain
Bamberg et al. (2015) found supportive evidence for social identity and the SIMCA model for: student intentions to participate in an environmental initiative, local energy groups, attending a talk
Brügger et al. (2020) found social identity explained participation by young people in climate strikes
goal framing theory
Lindenberg and steg 2007
Three general gaols frame the way people process information and act on it
- Hedonic goal (to feel better right now)
- Gain goal (guard and improve resources)
- Normative goal (act appropriately)
One goal is focal and influences information processing the most while the other are in the background. Normative goals provide the most stable basis for PEB. If people do PEB for the sake of gain/ hedonic they will not do so consistently, only when it is beneficial to them.
Different values mean different goals are salient for different people.
Why does goal framing theory offer an integrative framework for understanding environmental behaviour?
Three goals coincide either the three theories commonly used in enviropsych
- Affect focussed theories= hedonic goals
- TPB= gain goals
- NAM and VBN = normative goals
- PMT= gain and normative.
Social / behavioural contagion
how interpersonal influence develops ad spreads over time so we all end up doing the same thing
how can awareness and creating new norms affect flight behaviour ?
awareness of the harmful impacts of flying has begun to shape new social norms set against this and to influence demand for flights
in Sweden, where the phenomenon of flygskam (flight shame) took root, domestic air passenger numbers fell by 9 per cent between 2018 and 2019 as a result.
not only do the wealthy disprortionalty impact CO2 emissions but they have more control over reducing it, why
their personal resources put them in a better position than most to invest ethically and influence professional practice
if they are famous they are also often trend setters so people will follow
government need to lead by example as they cant expect people to follow rules set by them if they dont do it themself
who first made the case of needing to consider climate change in terms of risk perception
pidgeon and fishoff 2011