A Social Identity Approach to Engaging Christians in the Issue of Climate Change

Abstract

Using two nationally representative surveys (total N = 2,544) and two experiments (total N = 1,620), we investigate a social identity approach to engaging Christians in the issue of climate change. Results show Christian Americans say “protecting God’s creation” is a top reason for wanting to reduce global warming. An exploratory experiment and a preregistered replication tested a “stewardship frame” message with Christian Americans and found significant increases in pro-environmental and climate change beliefs, which were explained by increases in viewing environmental protection as a moral and religious issue, and perceptions that other Christians care about environmental protection.

Keywords

social identity climate change global warming attitudes

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Arah

O. A.

(2008). The role of causal reasoning in understanding Simpson’s paradox, Lord’s paradox, and the suppression effect: Covariate selection in the analysis of observational studies. Emerging Themes in Epidemiology, 5(1), 5. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2266743/

Baumeister

R. F.

Leary

M. R.

(1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497-529.

Bloom

P. B. N.

(2013). The public’s compass: Moral conviction and political attitudes. American Politics Research, 41, 937-964.

Bolsen

Shapiro

M. A.

(2018). The US news media, polarization on climate change, and pathways to effective communication. Environmental Communication, 12, 149-163.

Chong

Druckman

J. N.

(2007). Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 103-126.

Druckman

J. N.

Lupia

(2017). Using frames to make scientific communication more effective. In Jamieson

K. H.

Kahan

D. M.

Scheufele

D. A.

(Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the science of science communication (pp. 243-252). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Ehret

P. J.

Van Boven

Sherman

D. K.

(2018). Partisan barriers to bipartisanship: Understanding climate policy polarization. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9, 308-318. doi:10.1177/1948550618758709

Enders

C. K.

Bandalos

D. L.

(2001). The relative performance of full information maximum likelihood estimation for missing data in structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 430-457.

Fishbein

Ajzen

(2011). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. London, England: Psychology Press.

10.

Gerten

Bergmann

(Eds.). (2011). Religion in environmental and climate change: Suffering, values, lifestyles. London, England: Bloomsbury.

11.

Goldberg

M. H.

van der Linden

Leiserowitz

Maibach

(2019). Perceived social consensus can reduce ideological biases on climate change. Environment and Behavior. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0013916519853302

12.

Hart

P. S.

Feldman

(2018). Would it be better to not talk about climate change? The impact of climate change and air pollution frames on support for regulating power plant emissions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 60, 1-8. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2018.08.013

13.

Hogg

M. A.

Reid

S. A.

(2006). Social identity, self-categorization, and the communication of group norms. Communication Theory, 16, 7-30.

14.

International Panel on Climate Change. (2018). Global warming of 1.5°C. Retrieved from https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/

15.

Leiserowitz

Feinberg

Rosenthal

Smith

Anderson

Roser-Renouf

Maibach

(2014). What’s in a name? Global warming vs. climate change (Yale Program on Climate Change Communication). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

16.

Leiserowitz

Maibach

Roser-Renouf

Rosenthal

Cutler

Kotcher

(2017). Climate change in the American mind: October 2017 (Yale Program on Climate Change Communication). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

17.

Leiserowitz

Maibach

Roser-Renouf

Rosenthal

Cutler

Kotcher

(2018). Climate change in the American mind: March 2018 (Yale Program on Climate Change Communication). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

18.

Maibach

Leiserowitz

Roser-Renouf

Myers

Rosenthal

Feinberg

(2015). The Francis effect: How Pope Francis changed the conversation about global warming (Yale Program on Climate Change Communication). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

19.

Morgan

G. S.

Skitka

L. J.

Wisneski

D. C.

(2010). Moral and religious convictions and intentions to vote in the 2008 presidential election. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 10, 307-320.

20.

Myers

T. A.

Nisbet

M. C.

Maibach

E. W.

Leiserowitz

A. A.

(2012). A public health frame arouses hopeful emotions about climate change. Climatic Change, 113, 1105-1112.

21.

Nabi

R. L.

Gustafson

Jensen

(2018). Framing climate change: Exploring the role of emotion in generating advocacy behavior. Science Communication, 40, 442-468.

22.

Nisbet

M. C.

(2009). Communicating climate change: Why frames matter for public engagement. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 51, 12-23.

23.

Pearson

A. R.

Schuldt

J. P.

Romero-Canyas

(2016). Social climate science: A new vista for psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11, 632-650. doi:10.1177/1745691616639726

24.

Pew Research Center. (2015). America’s changing religious landscape. Retrieved from http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/

25.

Posas

P. J.

(2007). Roles of religion and ethics in addressing climate change. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 2007, 31-49. Retrieved from https://www.int-res.com/articles/esep/2007/E80.pdf

26.

Rice

R. E.

Gustafson

Hoffman

(2018). Frequent but accurate: A closer look at uncertainty and opinion divergence in climate change print news. Environmental Communication, 12, 301-321.

27.

Schipper

E. L. F.

(2010). Religion as an integral part of determining and reducing climate change and disaster risk: An agenda for research. In Voss

(Ed.), Der klimawandel (pp. 377-393). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

28.

Schuldt

J. P.

Pearson

A. R.

Romero-Canyas

Larson-Konar

(2017). Brief exposure to Pope Francis heightens moral beliefs about climate change. Climatic Change, 141, 167-177.

29.

TurkPrime. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.turkprime.com/

30.

van der Linden

S. L.

Leiserowitz

A. A.

Feinberg

G. D.

Maibach

E. W

. (2015). The scientific consensus on climate change as a gateway belief: Experimental evidence. PLoS One, 10(2), e0118489. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0118489

31.

van der Linden

Leiserowitz

Maibach

(2018). Scientific agreement can neutralize politicization of facts. Nature Human Behaviour, 2, 2-3. doi:10.1038/s41562-017-0259-2

32.

Yzerbyt

Muller

Batailler

Judd

C. M.

(2018). New recommendations for testing indirect effects in mediational models: The need to report and test component paths. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115, 929-943. doi:10.1037/pspa0000132