Two studies investigated whether performing green behaviors may influence people’s political attitudes regarding climate change. A survey study revealed that self-reported green behaviors indirectly predicted American participants’ political attitudes regarding climate change, and that this relationship was mediated by their green self-perceptions. This relationship was relatively stronger for conservatives than for liberals. An experimental study included two conditions: one which led people to perceive that they often performed green behaviors and another that led them to perceive that they failed to perform green behaviors. Political-orientation was found to moderate the effect of green behavior perceptions on ratings of the importance of climate-related issues and on support for emissions-reducing policies. Liberals reported greater importance and greater policy support when perceiving that they failed to act green, while conservatives did not. Implications for green behavior campaigns and their political spillover effects are discussed.
AbbottJ. A.KasprzykK. (2012). Hot air: University climate action plans and disarticulated federalism. The Professional Geographer, 64, 572-585.
2.
AikenL. S.WestS. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
3.
BambergS.MöserG. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27, 14-25.
4.
BannonB.DeBellM.KrosnickJ. A.KoppR.AldhousP. (2007). Americans’ evaluations of policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
5.
BemD. (1972). Self-perception theory. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 1-62). New York, NY: Academic Press.
6.
BrechinS. R. (2003). Comparative public opinion and knowledge on global climatic change and the Kyoto Protocol: The U.S. versus the world?International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 23, 106-134.
7.
BurgerJ. M.CaldwellD. F. (2003). The effects of monetary incentives and labeling on the foot-in-the-door effect: Evidence for a self-perception process. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 25, 235-241.
8.
ChaikenS.BaldwinM. W. (1981). Affective-cognitive consistency and the effect of salient behavioral information on the self-perception of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 1-12.
CornelissenG.DewitteS.WarlopL.YzerbytV. (2007). Whatever people say I am, that’s what I am: Social labeling as a social marketing tool. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 24, 278-288.
11.
CornelissenG.PandelaereM.WarlopL.DewitteS. (2008). Positive cueing: Promoting sustainable consumer behavior by cueing common environmental behaviors as environmental. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25, 46-55.
12.
DickersonC. A.ThibodeauR.AronsonE.MillerD. (1992). Using cognitive dissonance to encourage water conservation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 841-854.
13.
DiekmannA.PreisendörferP. (1998). Environmental behavior: Discrepancies between aspirations and reality. Rationality and Society, 10, 79-102.
14.
DietzT.GardnerG. T.GilliganJ.SternP. C.VandenberghM. P. (2009). Household actions can provide a behavioral wedge to rapidly reduce U.S. carbon emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106, 18452-18456.
15.
DolinskiD. (2000). On inferring one’s beliefs from one’s attempt and consequences for subsequent compliance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 260-272.
16.
DonoJ.WebbJ.RichardsonB. (2010). The relationship between environmental activism, pro-environmental behaviour and social identity. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 178-186.
FazioR. H.ZannaM. P.CooperJ. (1977). Dissonance and self-perception: An integrative view of each theory’s proper domain of application. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 464-479.
19.
GarnefeldI.HelmS.EggertA. (2011). Walk your talk: An experimental investigation of the relationship between word of mouth and communicators’ loyalty. Journal of Service Research, 14, 93-107.
20.
GiffordR.KormosC.McIntyreA. (2011). Behavioral dimensions of climate change: Drivers, responses, barriers, and interventions. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 2, 801-827.
21.
GreeningL.GreenD.DifiglioC. (2000). Energy efficiency and consumption: The rebound effect. Energy Policy, 28, 389-401.
22.
HayesA. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling [White paper]. Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf
23.
HeathY.GiffordR. (2006). Free-market ideology and environmental degradation: The case of belief in global climate change. Environment and Behavior, 38, 48-71.
24.
HollandR. W.VerplankenB.Van KnippenbergA. (2002). On the nature of attitude–behavior relations: The strong guide, the weak follow. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 869-876.
JacobsenG. D.KotchenM. J.VandenberghM. P. (2012). The behavioral response to voluntary provision of an environmental public good: Evidence from residential electricity demand. European Economic Review, 56, 946-960.
27.
KantolaS. J.SymeG. J.CampbellN. A. (1984). Cognitive dissonance and energy conservation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 416-421.
28.
KrosnickJ. A.HolbrookA. L.LoweL.VisserP. S. (2006). The origins and consequences of democratic citizens’ policy agendas: A study of popular concern about global warming. Climatic Change, 77, 7-43.
29.
KrosnickJ. A.HolbrookA. L.VisserP. S. (2000). The impact of the fall 1997 debate about global warming on American public opinion. Public Understanding of Science, 9, 239-260.
30.
LeeY. J.de YoungR.MaransR. W. (1995). Factors influencing individual recycling behavior in office settings: A study of office workers in Taiwan. Environment and Behavior, 27, 380-403.
31.
LeiserowitzA. (2006). Climate change risk perception and policy preferences: The role of affect, imagery, and values. Climatic Change, 77, 45-72.
32.
LeiserowitzA.MaibachE.Roser-RenoufC.FeinbergG.HoweP. (2013). Global warming’s six Americas in September 2012. New Haven, CT: Yale University and George Mason University; Yale Project on Climate Change Communication. Retrieved from http://environment.yale.edu/climate/publications/Six-Americas-September-2012
33.
LeiserowitzA.MaibachE.Roser-RenoufC.HmielowskiJ. D. (2012). Climate change in the American mind: Public support for climate and energy policies in March 2012. New Haven, CT: Yale University and George Mason University; Yale Project on Climate Change Communication. Retrieved from http://environment.yale.edu/climate/files/Policy-Support-September-2012.pdf
ManiatesM. F. (2001). Individualization: Plant a tree, buy a bike, save the world?Global Environmental Politics, 1(3), 31-52.
36.
McCrightA. M.DunlapR. E. (2011). The politicization of climate change and polarization in the American public’s views of global warming, 2001-2010. The Sociological Quarterly, 52, 155-194.
37.
McFarlaneB. L.BoxallP. C. (2003). The role of social psychological and social structural variables in environmental activism: An example of the forest sector. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 79-87.
OsbaldistonR.SchottJ. P. (2012). Environmental sustainability and behavioral science: Meta-analysis of proenvironmental behavior experiments. Environment and Behavior, 44, 257-299.
40.
Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (2011). Less optimism about America’s long-term prospects: Economy dominates public’s agenda, dims hopes for the future. Retrieved from http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/696.pdf
ReynoldsL. (2010). The sum of the parts: Can we really reduce carbon emissions through individual behavior change?Perspectives in Public Health, 130, 41-46.
SalancikG. R.ConwayM. (1975). Attitude inferences from salient and relevant cognitive content about behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 829-840.
46.
SchuldtJ. P.KonrathS. H.SchwarzN. (2011). “Global warming” or “climate change”? Whether the planet is warming depends on question wording. Public Opinion Quarterly, 75, 115-124.
SternN. Z.AnderW. N. (2008). Greentailing and other revolutions in retail: Hot ideas that are grabbing customers’ attention and raising profits. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
TangneyJ. P.StuewigJ.MashekD. J. (2007). Moral emotions and moral behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 345-372.
51.
ThøgersenJ. (1999). Spillover processes in the development of a sustainable consumption pattern. Journal of Economic Psychology, 20, 53-81.
52.
ThøgersenJ. (2004). A cognitive dissonance interpretation of consistencies and inconsistencies in environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 93-103.
53.
ThøgersenJ.NobletC. (2012). Does green consumerism increase the acceptance of wind power?Energy Policy, 51, 854-862.
54.
ThøgersenJ.ÖlanderF. (2003). Spillover of environment-friendly consumer behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 225-236.
55.
ThøgersenJ.CromptonT. (2009). Simple and painless? The limitations of spillover in environmental campaigning. Journal of Consumer Policy, 32, 141-163.
TiefenbeckV.StaakeT.RothK.SachsO. (2013). For better or for worse? Empirical evidence of moral licensing in a behavioral energy conservation campaign. Energy Policy, 57, 160-171.
58.
VandenberghM.BarkenbusJ.GilliganJ. (2008). Individual carbon emissions: The low hanging fruit. UCLA Law Review, 55, 8-36.
59.
WagnerG. (2011, September8). Going green but getting nowhere. The New York Times, p. A29.
60.
WeberE. U. (2006). Experience-based and description-based perceptions of long-term risk: Why global warming does not scare us (yet). Climatic Change, 77, 103-120.
61.
WhitmarshL.O’NeillS. (2010). Green identity, green living? The role of pro-environmental self-identity in determining consistency across diverse pro-environmental behaviours. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 305-314.
62.
WillisM. M.SchorJ. B. (2012). Does changing a light bulb lead to changing the world? Political action and the conscious consumer. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 644, 160-190.
63.
WoodW. (1982). Retrieval of attitude-relevant information from memory: Effects susceptibility to persuasion and on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 798-810.
