In our multinational study, we tested whether the palliative effect of climate change denial depends on the local level of climate change exposure. Building upon the literature of ecoanxiety and the palliative function of ideological beliefs, we assumed that the acknowledgment of climate change intensifies ecoanxiety while climate change denial eases it. More importantly, we also assumed that the extent of this ease is larger in countries being more threatened by the harmful consequences of climate change. To test this assumption, we analyzed data collected from representative samples of 23 European countries within European Social Survey Programme, and additional data on the actual exposure of these countries to the effects of climate change. Results of our multilevel models showed that climate change denial is related to lower ecoanxiety, and this negative relationship is stronger at high (vs. low) levels of climate change exposure. Our results support the general principle stating that the harsher reality is the larger emotional benefit can be achieved by its distorted perception and denial. This psychological defense mechanism can partly explain why many people are reluctant to fight against climate change even in countries that are threatened by it.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlbrechtG. (2005). “Solastalgia.” A new concept in health and identity. PAN: Philosophy Activism Nature, 3, 41–55.
2.
AlbrechtG. (2011). Chronic environmental change: Emerging “psychoterratic” syndromes. In I. Weissbecker (ed.), Climate change and human well-being. International and cultural psychology (pp. 43–56). Washington, DC: Springer.
3.
BahamondesJ., SibleyC. G., & OsborneD. (2019). “We look (and feel) better throughsystem-justifying lenses”: System-justifying beliefs attenuate the well-being gap between the advantaged and disadvantaged by reducing perceptions of discrimination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45, 1391–1408.
4.
BodnarS. (2008). Wasted and bombed: Clinical enactments of a changing relationship to the earth. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 18, 484–512.
ClaytonS., ManningC., KrygsmanK., & SpeiserM. (2017). Mental health and our changing climate: Impacts, implications, and guidance. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association and ecoAmerica.
7.
European Social Survey Round 8 Data (2016). Data file edition 2.1. NSD—Norwegian Centre for Research Data, Norway—Data Archive and distributor of ESS data for ESS ERIC. doi:10.21338/NSD-ESS8-2016
8.
FeyginaI., JostJ. T., & GoldsmithR. E. (2010). System justification, the denial of global warming, and the possibility of “system-sanctioned change.”. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 326–338.
9.
GillespieS. (2016). Climate change imaginings and depth psychology: Reconciling present and future worlds. In J. P. Marshall & L. H. Connor (eds.), Environmental change and the world's futures: Ecologies, ontologies and mythologies (pp. 181–195). New York, NY: Routledge.
10.
GodfreyE. B., SantosC. E., & BursonE. (2019). For better or worse? System-justifying beliefs in sixth-grade predict trajectories of self-esteem and behavior across early adolescence. Child Development, 90, 180–195.
HardingJ. F., & SibleyC. G. (2013). The palliative function of system justification: Concurrent benefits versus longer-term costs to wellbeing. Social Indicators Research, 113, 401–418.
13.
HornseyM. J., HarrisE. A., BainP. G., & FieldingK. S. (2016). Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change. Nature Climate Change, 6, 622–626.
14.
IBM Corp. (2017). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 25.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
15.
JostJ. T. (2019). A quarter century of system justification theory: Questions, answers, criticisms, and societal applications. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58, 263–314.
16.
JostJ. T., & BanajiM. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27.
17.
JostJ. T., & HunyadyO. (2003). The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology. European Review of Social Psychology, 13, 111–153.
18.
MallettR. K. (2012). Eco-guilt motivates eco-friendly behavior. Ecopsychology, 4, 223–231.
19.
McCoyS. K., WellmanJ. D., CosleyB., SaslowL., & EpelE. (2013). Is the belief in meritocracy palliative for members of low status groups? Evidence for a benefit for self-esteem and physical health via perceived control. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 307–318.
20.
NapierJ. L., & JostJ. T. (2008). Why are conservatives happier than liberals?. Psychological Science, 19, 565–572.
21.
NapierJ. L., ThorisdottirH., & JostJ. T. (2010). The joy of sexism? A multinational investigation of hostile and benevolent justifications for gender inequality and their relations to subjective well-being. Sex Roles, 62, 405–419.
22.
NorgaardK. M. (2011). Living in denial: Climate change, emotions, and everyday life. Cambridge: MIT Press.
OjalaM. (2012). Hope and climate change: The importance of hope for environmental engagement among young people. Environmental Education Research, 18, 625–642.
25.
OnraetE., Van AsscheJ., RoetsA., HaesevoetsT., & Van HielA. (2017). The happiness gap between conservatives and liberals depends on country-level threat: A worldwide multilevel study. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8, 11–19.
26.
OnraetE., Van HielA., & DhontK. (2013). The relationship between right-wing ideological attitudes and psychological well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 509–522.
27.
PihkalaP. (2016). The pastoral challenge of the Environmental Crisis: Environmental anxiety and Lutheran eco-reformation. Dialog, 55, 131–140.
28.
PihkalaP. (2018). Eco-anxiety, tragedy, and hope: Psychological and spiritual dimensions of climate change. Zygon, 53, 545–569.
29.
RandallR. (2009). Loss and climate change: The cost of parallel narratives. Ecopsychology, 1, 118–129.
30.
SenguptaN. K., GreavesL. M., OsborneD., & SibleyC. G. (2017). The sigh of the oppressed: The palliative effects of ideology are stronger for people living in highly unequal neighbourhoods. British Journal of Social Psychology, 56, 437–454.
31.
StanleyS. K., & WilsonM. S. (2019). Meta-analysing the association between social dominance orientation, authoritarianism, and attitudes on the environment and climate change. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 61, 46–56.
32.
SuppesA., NapierJ. L., & van der ToornJ. (2019). The palliative effects of system justification on the health and happiness of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45, 372–388.
33.
United Nations Development Programme. (2019). Human Development Data (1990–2018). Retrieved February 10, 2020, fromhttp://www.hdr.undp.org/en/data
34.
Vargas-SalfateS. (2017). The palliative function of hostile sexism among high and low-status Chilean students. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1733.
35.
WeintrobeS. (2013). The difficult problem of anxiety in thinking about climate change. In S. Weintrobe (ed.), Engaging with climate change. Psychoanalytic and interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 33–47). New York, NY: Routledge.
36.
Wong-ParodiG., & FeyginaI. (2020). Understanding and countering the motivated roots of climate change denial. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 42, 60–64.
