Test 2: John McClure Readings Flashcards
House Insulation Study:
(7) DV Measures
> Indoor temperature and relative humidity > Energy consumption > Self-reported health > Admission to hospitals > Wheezing > Days off school and work > Visits to general practitioners
House Insulation Study:
Results:
> Small increase in bedroom temperature and a decrease in relative humidity. > Energy consumption in insulated homes was 81% of that in uninsulated homes (lower usage in insulated homes). > Insulated homes were below 10 degrees Celsius (cold in winter perceived to be cause of health issues) for fewer hours of the day.
These Indoor Environment measures were linked to these health outcomes:
Note: odd ratios is the likelihood of the event occurring due to exposure to x. If OR > 1 (increased likelihood of event) and OR < 1 (decreased likelihood of event).
> Poor Health outcomes (0.5) reduced likelihood of poor health outcomes in insulated homes. > Self-Reports of Wheezing (0.57) reduced likelihood of wheezing in insulated homes. > Self-reports of children taking days off school (0.49) reduced likelihood children taking days off school in insulated homes. > Self-Reports of adults taking days off work (0.62) is less likely in insulated homes. > Visits to general practitioner (0.73) is less likely in insulated homes. **self- reported not actual visits! > Hospital visits reduced in insulated homes but this was insignificant.
Is insulating homes an effective preparative action that can be used to improve health outcomes?
Yes, insulated homes are significantly warmer, drier indoor environment that resulted in improved self-reports of health related outcomes i.e. wheezing days off school and work, visits to general practitioners office and fewer hospital admissions for respiratory conditions.
**income & housing are interrelated factors that lead to poor health outcomes but changing housing standards is easier.
Why is improving indoor environments an effective prevention?
> people in western countries
spend 90% of their time
indoors.
> intervening at a home level
rather than an individual
level is a practical way to
improve health outcomes
by targeting households.
> Old homes are incredibly
hard to heat. Money spent
on heating is money that
can not be spent on other
necessities like food.
> Colder homes place
physiological stress on.
select populations like old
people, sick people and
babies who's
thermoregulation system is
not as robust as most
people.
> Cold homes are often damp
with mold that can lead to
respiratory conditions.
> Increased mortality rates in
winter suggests that homes
are not effectively being
heated or staying warm.Insulated Homes Study:
Participants
> Overrepresentation of Maori
and Pacifica in low income
neighbourhoods and poor
insulated homes.
Insulated homes and social functioning:
> 0.56 less likely to be have
poor mental health.
Climate change, Powerlessness and the comms dilemma: Assessing NZ’s preparedness to act
Main Findings:
(A) Perceptions of
powerlessness and the
comms dilemma were
strong predictors of
inaction to climate change
(When included both constructs in
analysis powerlessness
Become insignificant. Indicating that it is secondary to the comms dilemma in decisions of action.
(B) the comms dilemma is a strong predictor of climate change action. If people perceive other to have taken action they are more likely to do so.
(C) Perceived Risk and the
perception that humans
influenced climate change
were the strongest
predictors (they are conceptually distinct
constructs but were so
strongly correlated that
they were joint together to
form "Risk and Human
Influence".
(D) more knowledge is linked to higher risk perceptions but is not a main influence to action.
(E) high powerlessness linked to lower risk perceptions of cc and more uncertainty about ccWhat is the comms dilemma?
How does it link to climate change?
Groups would benefit from cooperation between group members but individuals are conflicted by incentives to free-ride:
(A) Belief it is unfair that they
should contribute to the
group goal if others are
not.
(B) Belief that the groups goal
is unobtainable.
How does this relate to climate change?
Climate change is a global issue, with a uncertain time frame and contributions to mitigation are often anonymous.
Thus, if people are uncertain about climate change, are unaware of others contributions than people are less likely to cooperate.
***our perceptions on others
contributions to the group
goal can act as a
psychological barrier that
leads to inaction.
What is Powerlessness?
- Media
Individuals perceptions that their contributions will make a significant impact on mitigating climate change will strongly influence peoples likelihood to engage in voluntary mitigating actions.
Media portrayal’s of the issue influences the publics sense of powerlessness, increases fatalism and inaction.
> If reports focus on the damage caused by climate change without recommending mitigation behaviours this can increase fear that leads to inaction.
> Mixed media reports can increase the uncertainty in the public about the issue and leads to A) less cooperation between groups B) to avoid overwhelming uncertainty people deny the the problem exists or justifying inaction by saying they are waiting for more information.
Other factors which influence climate change mitigation:
(A) Norms:
environmentalism is the
socially desirable behaviour
but it conflicts with peoples
personal interests and
comes with a cost.
(B) Guilt:
Powerlessness is used to
justify their inaction and
explain away guilt.
(C) Group Size:
there is a negative
correlation between group
size and active involvement
in mitigation for climate
change.
in groups peoples self-
efficacy is reduced and they
feel that people they are
unable to change the
groups outcome.Climate Change:
Perceptions of Risk- role of knowledge
People who perceive climate change to more of a risk (i.e. a serious concern) than people are more likely to take voluntary actions to mitigate the risk.
More knowledge on the issue is associated with higher risk perceptions because people understand the role of human behaviour on climate change and are more willing to engage in mitigating behaviour (they’re less uncertain and less powerless).
**weak predictor-it is a factor but not a main factor in peoples decisions to act or ignore climate change.
Campaigns on climate change would be more effective if….
They acknowledged the psychological barriers that lead to inaction towards climate change. For example, if they highlighted the role of human behaviour and identify specific mitigating behaviours could be adopted.
What are the 7 Dragons of Inaction?
1. Limited Cognition about the
problem.
2. Ideological world views that
tend to prelude pro-
environmental attitudes and
behaviour.
3. Comparisons with key other
people.
4. Sunk costs& Behaviour
momentum.
5. Disceredence to experts
and authorities.
6. Perceived risks of change.
7. Limited Behaviour.What are examples of Limited Cognition about the Problem:
(A) Ancient Brain:
The human brain has not
evolved much from our
ancestors. Thus, concerns
about the environment,
that fall outside immediate
danger and hunting, do
not come easy to people.
(B) Ignorance:
- Not knowing the problem
exists (small proportion of
the population are
ignorant to climate change
exisiting).
- Being aware of the
problem but not knowing
how to fix it (majority of the
population).
> people are not experts, even
experts do not know the best
course of action & media
presents mixed messages.
(C) Environmental Numbness:
- It's known that there are
too many stimuli in our
environment for us to
monitor- we are selective
with our attention.
- Climate change is often a
concern that falls outside
of our immediate
attention.
- Seeing the same
environment
conservation messages
can lead to habituation or
numbness to the issue.
(D) Uncertainty:
- Perceived and real
uncertainty reduces the
frequency of pro-
environmental behaviour.
- Uncertainty is used as a
justification for inaction
and excuse for behaving
out of self-interest.
- Scientists admitting that
there will be a level of
uncertainty to any model
cause the public to
perceive them as being
uncertain themselves and
subsequently people
underestimate the risk of
the issue.
(E) Judgemental Discounting:
- Discounting future risk
- Spatial discounting-
where people perceive
the risk to be greater for
other countries.
- Neutralisation Theory:
try to rationalise their
inaction and absolve
themselves pro-
environmental
responsibilities.
(F) Optimism Bias:
- It is known that climate
change is expected to get
worse over the next 25
years but people
optimistically assume it
will be in other countries
in the world then theirs.
(G) Perceived Behavioural
Control and Self-Efficacy:
- Since climate change is a
global issue many
individuals feel that their
contribution will not be
sufficient to mitigate this
issue.
- Perceived behavioural
control is a good predictor
take public transport to
reduce green house gas
emissions.
- Linked to Fatalism
What are examples of Ideological world views that tend to prelude pro-environmental attitudes and behaviour.
*Some belief systems are so broad that effect all domains of our lives i.e. political ideologies. These may conflict with climate change mitigation attitudes and behaviours.
(A) World Beliefs:
- Free-Enterprise belief
systems are a strong
predictor for an individuals
disbelief in climate change.
- Being a stakeholder in
large corporations who
contribute to climate
change is linked to
discrediting climate
change.
(B) Superhuman Powers:
- Some people abstain from
climate change mitigation
because they hold the
belief that mother nature
or their religious deity will
NOT forsake them anyway.
(C) Technosalvation:
- Belief that technological
advancements will find a
way to solve climate
change without any
voluntary behaviour
necessary.
(D) Systems Justification:
- a tendency to justify
existing social hierarchies
and inequalities.
- "don't rock the boat
thinking"
*it is possible to portray
climate change mitigation
as a social norm and apart
of the system.
What are examples of comparisons with other people?
(A) Social Comparisons:
(B) Social Norms and
Networks:
- societal norms can justify a
resistance to change or be
used to build momentum
for societal change.
- double edged sword
- when people were told
how their neighbours
conserved energy people
tended to change their
behaviour to match their
neighbours (+ or -'ly) or
- people maintained low
consumption if they were
given positive feedback.
(C) Perceived Inequity:
- A common motive for
innovation "why should I
change if they won't
change?"
- Perceived or real inequity
exists than cooperation
decreases.
- Important figures show
resistance to change
the public uses this as a
justification for their own
inaction .
What examples of Sunk-costs?
(A) Financial Investments:
- once investments have
been perceived to be
spent, people continue a
task despite it being a
sunk cost.
- Why? Loss aversion
people do not want to
appear as being wasteful.
- If you are apart of a big
corporation and you learn
about your contribution to
climate change, as a form
of mitigating cognitive
dissonance they deny
that climate change exists
or is a risk- a solution that
does not involve solving
climate change.
(B) Behavioural Momentum:
- HABIT is the "enormous
fly wheel of society"
- habit gives us a sense of
stability and enough
momentum to keep
society ordered.
- Habit is a barrier because
old habits die hard. They
are incredibly resistant to
change and require
gradual change over a
long period of time!
- more behaviour
momentum = the more
resistant to change!
(C) Conflicting values, goals
and aspirations:
- Peoples values are not
always compatible with
each other. For instance
pro-environmentalism
values conflict with
capitalist values.
- Aspirations to get ahead
lead to behaviours which
are not environmentally
friendly.
- Environmental concerns
often come secondary to
other goals and aspirations.
(D) Lack of Place Attachments:
- Theory that people would
be more concerned about
environmentalism if they
felt more connected to the
land.
- Evidence is mixed on this.
