Increasing people's acceptance of anthropogenic climate change with scientific facts: Is mechanistic information more effective for environmentalists?

Taube, Oliver; Ranney, Michael; Henn, Laura

doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101549

Cited by 26 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Information had direct effects of low magnitude on acceptance but played an important role through positive emotions and utility. Information seems to be more associated with personal experience and emotions than with acceptance of renewable energy [ 50 ]. However, empirically supported information is necessary to build trust and promote a positive attitude in the population toward renewable energies [ 13 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Acceptance of Gas, Wind, and Solar Energies in the Canary Islands

Marrero

Hernández‐Cabrera

Fumero

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: This study tested a theoretical model including key psychosocial factors that could be involved in the acceptance of different energy sources (gas, wind, and solar); Methods: Participants were 550 adult residents of the Canary Islands. Variables assessed were information and utility (normative motives), perceived risk and perceived benefits (gain motives), and negative and positive emotions (hedonic motives), with acceptance of each of the three energy sources as outcome variables; Results: It was found that renewable energies (wind and solar) had a higher degree of acceptance than non-renewable energy (gas). The proposed model satisfactorily explained the social acceptance of the three energy sources, although the psychosocial factors involved differed by energy source. The gain motives, mainly perceived benefits, were associated to a greater extent with gas energy, whereas normative motives, such as utility, and hedonic motives, such as positive emotions, had greater weight for renewables. Gender differences in gas energy were found. Information about renewable energy increased positive emotions and acceptance, whereas information about fossil fuel-based energy generated more negative emotions and perceived risk, decreasing acceptance; Conclusions: Utility, perceived benefits and positive emotions were involved on the acceptance of both renewables and non-renewables. The theoretical model tested seems to be useful for understanding the psychosocial functioning of the acceptance of the various energy sources as an essential aspect for the transition of non-renewable to renewable energies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Acceptance of Gas, Wind, and Solar Energies in the Canary Islands

Marrero

Hernández‐Cabrera

Fumero

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As scientists we expect to provide factual information, but evidence refutes the simplistic 'information deficit model' , by which climate inaction is entirely explained by an ignorance that we can correct with education (Bauer et al, 2007). The picture is far more nuanced (Zhao and Luo, 2021), as education interacts with people's pre-existing attitudes and socio-political affiliations (Taube et al, 2021). For example, those who are politically conservative are more likely to be climate skeptics (McCright and Dunlap, 2003), although this may vary by country (Hornsey et al, 2018).…”

Section: Changing Minds: How Scientists Can Influence Societymentioning

confidence: 98%

Climate crisis and ecological emergency: why they concern (neuro)scientists, and what we can do

Rae¹,

Farley²,

Jeffrey³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our planet is experiencing severe and accelerating climate and ecological breakdown caused by human activity. As professional scientists we are better placed than most to understand the data that evidence this fact. However, like most other people, we ignore this inconvenient truth and lead our daily lives, at home and at work, as if these facts weren’t true. In particular, we overlook that our own neuroscientific research practices, from our laboratory experiments to our often global travel, help drive climate change and ecosystem damage. We also hold privileged positions of authority in our societies but rarely speak out. Here, we argue that to help society create a survivable future, we neuroscientists can and must play our part.In April 2021, we delivered a symposium at the British Neuroscience Association (BNA) meeting outlining what we think neuroscientists can and should do to help stop climate breakdown. Building on our talks, we here outline what the climate and ecological emergencies mean for us as neuroscientists. We highlight the psychological mechanisms that block us from taking action, and then outline what practical steps we can take to overcome these blocks and work towards sustainability. In particular, we review environmental issues in neuroscience research, scientific computing, and conferences. We also highlight the key advocacy roles we can all play in our institutions, and in society more broadly. The need for sustainable change has never been more urgent, and we call on all (neuro)scientists to act with the utmost urgency.

show abstract

“…As scientists we expect to provide factual information, but evidence refutes the simplistic ‘information deficit model’, by which climate inaction is entirely explained by an ignorance that we can correct with education ( Bauer et al, 2007 ). The picture is far more nuanced ( Zhao and Luo, 2021 ), as education interacts with people’s pre-existing attitudes and socio-political affiliations ( Taube et al, 2021 ). For example, those who are politically conservative are more likely to be climate sceptics ( McCright and Dunlap, 2003 ), although this may vary by country ( Hornsey et al, 2018 ).…”

Section: Changing Minds: How Scientists Can Influence Societymentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate crisis and ecological emergency: Why they concern (neuro)scientists, and what we can do

Rae

Farley

Jeffery

et al. 2022

Brain and Neuroscience Advances

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our planet is experiencing severe and accelerating climate and ecological breakdown caused by human activity. As professional scientists, we are better placed than most to understand the data that evidence this fact. However, like most other people, we ignore this inconvenient truth and lead our daily lives, at home and at work, as if these facts weren’t true. In particular, we overlook that our own neuroscientific research practices, from our laboratory experiments to our often global travel, help drive climate change and ecosystem damage. We also hold privileged positions of authority in our societies but rarely speak out. Here, we argue that to help society create a survivable future, we neuroscientists can and must play our part. In April 2021, we delivered a symposium at the British Neuroscience Association meeting outlining what we think neuroscientists can and should do to help stop climate breakdown. Building on our talks (Box 1), we here outline what the climate and ecological emergencies mean for us as neuroscientists. We highlight the psychological mechanisms that block us from taking action, and then outline what practical steps we can take to overcome these blocks and work towards sustainability. In particular, we review environmental issues in neuroscience research, scientific computing, and conferences. We also highlight the key advocacy roles we can all play in our institutions and in society more broadly. The need for sustainable change has never been more urgent, and we call on all (neuro)scientists to act with the utmost urgency.

show abstract

Increasing people's acceptance of anthropogenic climate change with scientific facts: Is mechanistic information more effective for environmentalists?

Cited by 26 publications

References 57 publications

Social Acceptance of Gas, Wind, and Solar Energies in the Canary Islands

Social Acceptance of Gas, Wind, and Solar Energies in the Canary Islands

Climate crisis and ecological emergency: why they concern (neuro)scientists, and what we can do

Climate crisis and ecological emergency: Why they concern (neuro)scientists, and what we can do

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About