Western citizens perceive human behaviour as a significant cause of climate change and increasingly adopt proenvironmental behaviours. However, such positively connoted behaviours can either increase (consistency) or decrease (compensation) the probability that one acts in a similar way in the future. Drawing from social influence and social identity literatures, we propose that numerical support for proenvironmental values (majority vs. minority) moderates the effect of past behaviour on intention to adopt proenvironmental behaviour. Across three studies (N = 500), past behaviour, either measured (Study 1) or manipulated (Studies 2 and 3) interacted with numerical support, manipulated (Studies 1 and 2) or measured (Study 3), to predict proenvironmental intention and behaviour. Results showed that majority support results in balancing dynamics, whereas minority support results in a consistency effect. These findings highlight the importance of the normative context for proenvironmental behaviour adoption and offer leads for developing behaviour change strategies.
AbramsD. (1994). Political distinctiveness: An identity optimising approach. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 357–365. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420240305
2.
AdamsR. J.KhooS.-T. (1996). ACER Quest – The interactive test analysis system. Victoria, Australia: The Australian Council for Educational Research.
3.
AronsonE. (1969). The theory of cognitive dissonance: A current perspective. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 2–35). New York, NY: Academic Press.
4.
AschS. E. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 70, 1–70. doi:10.1037/h0093718
5.
BemD. J. (1967). Self-perception: An alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance phenomena. Psychological Review, 74, 183–200. doi:10.1037/h0024835
6.
BergerI. E.CorbinR. M. (1992). Perceived consumer effectiveness and faith in others as moderators of environmentally responsible behaviors. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 11, 79–89.
7.
BlankenI.van de VenN.ZeelenbergM. (2015). A meta-analytic review of moral licensing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 540–558. doi:10.1177/0146167215572134
8.
BlantonH.ChristieC. (2003). Deviance regulation: A theory of action and identity. Review of General Psychology, 7, 115–149. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.7.2.115
9.
BlantonH.StuartA. E.van den EijndenR. J. J. M. (2001). An introduction to deviance-regulation theory: The effect of behavioral norms on message framing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 848–858. doi:10.1177/0146167201277007
10.
BrewerM. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 475–482. doi:10.1177/0146167291175001
11.
ButeraF.Falomir-PichastorJ. M.MugnyG.QuiamzadeA. (2017). Minority influence. In HarkinsS. G.WilliamsK. D.BurgerJ. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of social influence (pp. 317–337). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
12.
CialdiniR. B. (1984). Influence: How and why people agree to things. New York, NY: Morrow.
13.
CodolJ.-P. (1975). On the so-called “superior conformity of the self” behavior: Twenty experimental investigations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 457–501. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420050404
14.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15.
ConwayP.PeetzJ. (2012). When does feeling moral actually make you a better person? Conceptual abstraction moderates whether past moral deeds motivate consistency or compensatory behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 907–919. doi:10.1177/0146167212442394
16.
CookJ.OreskesN.DoranP. T.AndereggW. R. L.VerheggenB.MaibachE. W.. . . RiceK. (2016). Consensus on consensus: A synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming. Environmental Research Letters, 11, 1–7. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002
17.
CummingG. (2014). The new statistics: Why and how. Psychological Science, 25, 7–29. doi:10.1177/0956797613504966
18.
DavidB.TurnerJ. C. (1996). Studies in self-categorization and minority conversion: Is being a member of the out-group an advantage?British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 179–199. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1996.tb01091.x
19.
DeutschM.GerardH. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629–636. doi:10.1037/h0046408
20.
EriksenM.LebretonL. C. M.CarsonH. S.ThielM.MooreC. J.BorerroJ. C.. . . ReisserJ. (2014). Plastic pollution in the world’s oceans: More than 5 trillion plastic pieces weighing over 250,000 tons afloat at sea. PLoS ONE, 9, e111913. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0111913
Falomir-PichastorJ. M.MugnyG.QuiamzadeA.GabarrotF. (2008). Motivations underlying attitudes: Regulatory focus and majority versus minority support. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 587–600. doi:10.1002/ejsp.494
23.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA.-G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. doi:10.3758/BF03193146
24.
FestingerL. (1950). Informal social communication. Psychological Review, 57, 271–282. doi:10.1037/h0056932
25.
FestingerL. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
26.
GerardH. B. (1985). When and how minority prevails. In MoscoviciS.MugnyG.van AvermaetE. (Eds.), Perspectives on minority influence (pp. 171–186). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
27.
GöckeritzS.SchultzP. W.RendónT.CialdiniR. B.GoldsteinN. J.GriskeviciusV. (2010). Descriptive normative beliefs and conservation behavior: The moderating roles of personal involvement and injunctive normative beliefs. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 514–523. doi:10.1002/ejsp.643
28.
HigginsE. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280–1300. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280
29.
JoostenA.van DijkeM.van HielA.De CremerD. (2014). Feel good, do-good!? On consistency and compensation in moral self-regulation. Journal of Business Ethics, 123, 71–84. doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1794-z
30.
JouleR.-V. (1991). Practicing and arguing for abstinence from smoking: A test of the double forced compliance paradigm. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21, 119–129. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420210203
31.
KaiserF. G.WilsonM. (2004). Goal-directed conservation behavior: The specific composition of a general performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1531–1544. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2003.06.003
32.
KelleyH. H. (1973). The processes of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28, 107–128. doi:10.1037/h0034225
33.
KelmanH. C. (1958). Compliance, identification, and internalization: Three processes of attitude change. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, 51–60. doi:10.1177/002200275800200106
34.
KieslerC. A. (1971). The psychology of commitment. New York, NY: Academic Press.
35.
LeonardelliG. J.BrewerM. B. (2001). Minority and majority discrimination: When and why. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 468–485. doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1475
36.
LeonardelliG. J.PickettC. L.BrewerM. B. (2010). Optimal distinctiveness theory: A framework for social identity, social cognition, and intergroup relations. In ZannaM. P.OlsonJ. M. (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 43, pp. 63–113). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
37.
LevineJ. M.MorelandR. L. (2006). Small groups: Key readings in social psychology. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
38.
LevineJ. M.RussoE. M. (1987). Majority and minority influence. In HendrickC. (Ed.), Group processes (pp. 13–54). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
39.
LongoniC.GollwitzerP. M.OettingenG. (2014). A green paradox: Validating green choices has ironic effects on behavior, cognition, and perception. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 50, 158–165. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2013.09.010
40.
LorenzoniI.PidgeonN. F. (2006). Public views on climate change: European and USA perspectives. Climatic Change, 77, 73–95. doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9072-z
41.
MartinR.HewstoneM. (2008). Majority versus minority influence, message processing and attitude change: The source-context-elaboration model. In ZannaM. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 40, pp. 237–326). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
42.
MartinR.HewstoneM.MartinP. Y. (2008). Majority versus minority influence: The role of message processing in determining resistance to counter-persuasion. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 16–34. doi:10.1002/ejsp.426
43.
MartinR.MartinP. Y.SmithJ. R.HewstoneM. (2007). Majority versus minority influence and prediction of behavioral intentions and behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 763–771. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.06.006
44.
MerrittA. C.EffronD. A.MoninB. (2010). Moral self-licensing: When being good frees us to be bad. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4, 344–357. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00263.x
45.
MorrisonK. R.WheelerS. C. (2010). Nonconformity defines the self: The role of minority opinion status in self-concept clarity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 297–308. doi:10.1177/0146167209358075
46.
MoscoviciS. (1980). Toward a theory of conversion behavior. In LeonardB. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 13, pp. 209–239). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
47.
MoscoviciS. (1985). Innovation and minority influence. In MoscoviciS.MugnyG.AvermaetE. V. (Eds.), Perspectives on minority influence (pp. 9–51). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
48.
MoscoviciS. (2000). Le mouvement écologiste devrait se considérer comme une minorité [The environmental movement should see itself as a minority]. Retrieved from http://ecorev.org/spip.php?article41
49.
MugnyG. (1982). The power of minorities. London, UK: Academic Press.
50.
MugnyG.PérezJ. A. (1991). The social psychology of minority influence. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
51.
MullenB. (1991). Group composition, salience, and cognitive representations: The phenomenology of being in a group. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27, 297–323. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(91)90028-5
NemethC. J. (1986). The differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93, 23–32. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.93.1.23
54.
NolanJ. M.SchultzP. W.CialdiniR. B.GoldsteinN. J.GriskeviciusV. (2008). Normative social influence is underdetected. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 913–923. doi:10.1177/0146167208316691
55.
OppenheimerD. M.MeyvisT.DavidenkoN. (2009). Instructional manipulation checks: Detecting satisficing to increase statistical power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 867–872. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.03.009
56.
ReedA.IIAquinoK.LevyE. (2007). Moral identity and judgments of charitable behaviors. Journal of Marketing, 71, 178–193. doi:10.1509/jmkg.71.1.178
57.
RosenthalR. (1994). Parametric measures of effect size. In CooperH.HedgesL. V. (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 231–244). New York, NY: SAGE.
58.
SalancikG. R.ConwayM. (1975). Attitude inferences from salient and relevant cognitive content about behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 829–840. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.32.5.829
59.
Sanchez-MazasM.PérezJ. A.NavarroE.MugnyG.JovanovicJ. (1993). De la paralysie intragroupe au conflit normatif: études sur l’avortement, la contraception et la xénophobie. In PérezJ. A.MugnyG. (Eds.), Influences sociales. La théorie de l’élaboration du conflit (pp. 121–143). Neuchâtel, Switzerland: Delachaux et Niestlé.
60.
SchaumbergR. L.WiltermuthS. S. (2014). Desire for a positive moral self-regard exacerbates escalation of commitment to initiatives with prosocial aims. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 123, 110–123. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.10.012
61.
SchultzP. W.NolanJ. M.CialdiniR. B.GoldsteinN. J.GriskeviciusV. (2007). The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychological Science, 18, 429–434. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01917.x
62.
SchumannS.KleinO. (2015). Substitute or stepping stone? Assessing the impact of low-threshold online collective actions on offline participation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 308–322. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2084
63.
ShahJ.HigginsE. T. (2001). Regulatory concerns and appraisal efficiency: The general impact of promotion and prevention. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 693–705. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.80.5.693
64.
SheppardB. H.HartwickJ.WarshawP. R. (1988). The theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 325–343. doi:10.1086/209170
65.
SimonB.HastedtC.AufderheideB. (1997). When self-categorization makes sense: The role of meaningful social categorization in minority and majority members’ self-perception. Journal of Personal Social Psychology, 73, 310–320. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.2.310
66.
SnyderC. R.FromkinH. L. (1980). Uniqueness: The human pursuit of difference. Boston, MA: Springer.
67.
StawB. M. (1976). Knee-deep in the big muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 27–44. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(76)90005-2
68.
SusewindM.HoelzlE. (2014). A matter of perspective: Why past moral behavior can sometimes encourage and other times discourage future moral striving. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 44, 201–209. doi:10.1111/jasp.12214
69.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior. In WorchelS.AustinL. W. (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
70.
ThøgersenJ. (2004). A cognitive dissonance interpretation of consistencies and inconsistencies in environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 93–103. doi:10.1016/S0272-4944(03)00039-2
71.
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. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.01.021
72.
TonerK.GanM.LearyM. R. (2014). The impact of individual and group feedback on environmental intentions and self-beliefs. Environment and Behavior, 46, 24–45. doi:10.1177/0013916512451902
73.
VerkooijenK. T.StokF. M.MollenS. (2015). The power of regression to the mean: A social norm study revisited. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 417–425. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2111
74.
ViechtbauerW. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Softwares, 36, 1–48. doi:10.18637/jss.v036.i03
75.
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. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.01.003
76.
WoodW.LundgrenS.OuelletteJ. A.BuscemeS.BlackstoneT. (1994). Minority influence: A meta-analytic review of social influence processes. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 323–345. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.115.3.323
ZaalM. P.van LaarC.StåhlT.EllemersN.DerksB. (2012). Social change as an important goal or likely outcome: How regulatory focus affects commitment to collective action. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51, 93–110. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02006.x
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
