Toward Surmounting the Psychological Barriers to Climate Policy—Appreciating Contexts and Acknowledging Challenges: A Reply to Weber (2018)

Abstract

The authors acknowledge and respond to three concerns raised by Weber (2018) about oversimplifying psychological barriers to climate policy. First, skepticism about climate change remains a major barrier to climate policy, along with political partisanship. Second, recognizing multifaceted barriers to climate policy calls for multiple targeted interventions to be implemented at critical junctures. Finally, translating pro-environmental attitudes into action requires an appreciation of proximate sociopolitical contexts and cultures. Rather than a one-size-fits-all approach, psychological scientists are well equipped to understand and address the complex barriers to climate policy within the natural flow of everyday social life.

Keywords

climate change environment social cognition judgment intergroup relations attitudes application policy

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Brenan

Saad

(2018). Global warming concern steady despite some partisan shifts. Retrieved from http://news.gallup.com/poll/231530/global-warming-concern-steady-despite-partisan-shifts.aspx

Brick

Sherman

D. K.

Kim

H. S.

(2017). “Green to be seen” and “brown to keep down”: Visibility moderates the effect of identity on pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 51, 226–238. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.04.004

Campbell

T. H.

Kay

A. C.

(2014). Solution aversion: On the relation between ideology and motivated disbelief. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 809–824. doi:10.1037/a0037963

Cohen

G. L.

(2003). Party over policy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 808–822. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.808

Ehret

P. J.

Sparks

A. C.

Sherman

D. K.

(2017). Support for environmental protection: an integration of ideological-consistency and information-deficit models. Environmental Politics, 26, 253–277. doi:10.1177/1948550618758709

Ehret

P. J.

Van Boven

Sherman

D. K.

(2018). Partisan barriers to bipartisanship: Understanding climate policy polarization. Social Psychological & Personality Science. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1948550618758709

Eom

Kim

H. S.

Sherman

D. K.

(2018). Social class, control, and action: Socioeconomic status differences in antecedents of support for pro-environmental action. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 77, 60–75. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2018.03.009

Eom

Kim

H. S.

Sherman

D. K.

Ishii

(2016). Cultural variability in the link between environmental concern and support for environmental action. Psychological Science, 27, 1331–1339. doi:10.1177/0956797616660078

Green

D. P.

Gerber

A. S.

(2015). Get out the vote: How to increase voter turnout. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

10.

Griskevicius

Tybur

J. M.

Van den Bergh

(2010). Going green to be seen: Status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 392–404. doi:10.1037/a0017346

11.

Hempstead

DeLia

Cantor

J. C.

Nguyen

Brenner

(2014). The fragmentation of hospital use among a cohort of high utilizers: Implications for emerging care coordination strategies for patients with multiple chronic conditions. Medical Care, 52(Suppl. 3), S67–S74. doi:10.1097/MLR.0000000000000049

12.

Kahan

D. M.

(2015). Climate-science communication and the measurement problem. Advances in Political Psychology, 36, 1–43. doi:10.1111/pops.12244

13.

Lewin

(1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: Concept, method and reality in social science; social equilibria and social change. Human Relations, 1, 5–41. doi:10.1177/001872674700100103

14.

Paluck

E. L.

Shepherd

(2012). The salience of social referents: A field experiment on collective norms and harassment behavior in a school social network. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 899–915. doi:10.1037/a0030015

15.

Paluck

E. L.

Shepherd

Aronow

P. M.

(2016). Changing climates of conflict: A social network experiment in 56 schools. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 11, 566–571. doi:10.1073/pnas.1514483113

16.

Pearson

A. R.

Schuldt

J. P.

(in press). A diversity science approach to climate change. In Clayton

Manning

(Eds.), Psychology and climate change: Human perceptions, impacts, and responses. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press.

17.

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

18.

Rozin

(2001). Social psychology and science: Some lessons from Solomon Asch. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 2–14. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0501_1

19.

Saad

(2017). Global warming concern at three-decade high in U.S. Retrieved from http://news.gallup.com/poll/206030/global-warming-concern-three-decade-high.aspx

20.

Tam

K. P.

Chan

H. W.

(2017). Environmental concern has a weaker association with pro-environmental behavior in some societies than others: A cross-cultural psychology perspective. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 53, 213–223. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.09.001

21.

Tabuchi

(2017, January 28). In America’s Heartland, discussing climate change without saying ‘climate change.’ The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/28/business/energy-environment/navigating-climate-change-in-americas-heartland.html

22.

Van Boven

Ehret

P. J.

Sherman

D. K

. (2018). Psychological barriers to bipartisan public support for climate policy. Perspectives on Psychological Sciences, 13, 492–507. doi:10.1177/1745691617748966.

23.

Weber

E. U.

(2018). The pitfalls of misperceiving psychological barriers to climate policy. Perspectives on Psychological Sciences, 13, 508–511. doi:10.1177/1745691618767910

24.

Zaller

(1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.