Guilty conscience: motivating pro-environmental behavior by inducing negative moral emotions

Abstract

Conceptual frameworks in the realm of climate-related policy, attitudes and behavior frequently argue that moral emotions play a crucial role in mobilizing pro-environmental action. Yet, little is known about the direct impact of moral emotions on environmental attitudes and behavior. Drawing on emotion research in the context of intergroup relations, the current paper investigates the role of guilty conscience (guilt and shame) as well as other emotions (anger, sadness, pride, and emotional coldness) in motivating pro-environmental behavior intentions and actual behavior as a specific form of reparative action. When confronted with human-caused (vs. seemingly natural) environmental damages, participants (N=114) reported significantly more guilty conscience. Importantly, participants in the humancaused condition were significantly more likely to spontaneously display actual proenvironmental behavior (sign a petition addressing environmental issues). Highlighting its psychological significance in motivating pro-environmental behavior, a guilty conscience mediated the experimental manipulation's effect on behavioral intentions as well as on actual behavior. We conclude by discussing the potential of moral emotions in developing timely and sustainable climate policies and interventions.

Experiences of pride, not guilt, predict pro-environmental behavior when pro-environmental descriptive norms are more positive

“…The current study is the first to show that personal feelings of pride are related to one's own engagement in pro-environmental behavior; previous work has only demonstrated that feedback about an in-group's behavior invokes a feeling of pride (Harth et al, 2013). The current study is also the first to demonstrate that findings about the relationships between pride and guilt and pro-environmental behavior generalize outside of an experimental setting (see Harth et al, 2013;Mallett et al, 2013;Rees et al, 2015) to people's experiences as they live their daily lives.…”

“…The low guilt experienced by participants could arise for a number of reasons: The lack of pro-environmental action during any small period of time might not be enough to make most people experience more than weak feelings of guilt in relation to their environmental behavior. As suggested by previous research (Harth et al, 2013;Mallett, 2012;Mallett et al, 2013;Rees et al, 2015), perhaps feedback on lack of action over a longer period of time or about larger, more impactful behaviors is required to elicit feelings of guilt that are strong enough to trigger subsequent action. Another possibility is that in the course of their day, perhaps people find other ways to alleviate their guilt and this releases them from the need to take reparative action by engaging in subsequent pro-environmental behavior.…”

“…Being confronted with an in-group's (e.g., national) larger-than-average carbon footprint (Mallett et al, 2013) or humanity's impact on climate change (Rees et al, 2015) have been shown to lead to feelings of collective guilt, and reading about one's country's responsibility for environmental damage or protection has been shown to induce feelings of collective guilt or pride, respectively (Harth et al, 2013).…”

“…Our contributions are both conceptual and methodological in nature. Previous research has only examined the emotions of pride or guilt induced through external feedback about a person's overall environmental behavior (Mallett et al, 2013) or the behavior of an in-group (Ferguson & Branscombe, 2010;Harth et al, 2013;Mallett, 2012;Mallett et al, 2013;Rees et al, 2015).…”

Influencing Factors on the Ecological Protection Behaviors of Entrepreneurial Farmers in Chinese Forest Zones

“…Importantly, the relationship between ecological attitudes and environmental protection behavior was verified by Ramkissoon et al [11], Rees, Klug, and Bamberg [12], and others who demonstrated that ecological emotion and ecological attitudes were significantly related to actual ecological protection. The research on ecological attitudes by Fraj and Martinez [13] and others, that investigate attitudes in terms of elements, divide ecological attitudes into three dimensions: cognition, emotion, and intention.…”