Thinking about an ecological utopia increases motivation to change current society

Abstract

In the news media, fiction, and conversations we are often presented with utopic and dystopic versions of the future related to the environment or technology. In this research, we ask how thinking about ecological or technological utopias—or dystopias—as potential future societies alters one’s motivation to change and justification of one’s current society. In Study 1a (n = 121) and 1b (n = 174), thinking about ecological, but not technological, utopias enhanced motivation to change one’s current society, whereas neither utopia changed justification with one’ current society. Study 2 (n = 196), which included ecological and technological dystopia conditions, showed that ecological and technological utopias and dystopias increased motivation to change one’s current society, whereas none of them changed justification with one’s current society. Moreover, thinking about an ecological utopia showed added effects: compared to the technological utopia, it was more positively evaluated, functioned more to bring about change, and further increased motivation to change one’s current society. All together these results show that thinking about possible future societies, especially ecological utopias, is a powerful way to motivate change in our present time.

Keywords

Dystopias future thinking motivation for change possible societies utopian thinking utopias

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baumber

Le Hunte

O’Neill

Pilon-Summons

(2022). Resilient utopias. Ecology and Society, 27(2), 1–27.

Baumeister

R. F.

Bratslavsky

Finkenauer

Vohs

K. D.

(2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323–370.

Carmony

D. F.

Elliott

J. M.

(1980). New Harmony. Indiana: Robert Owen’s seedbed for Utopia. Indiana Magazine of History, 76(3), 10250.

Dunlap

(1998). Lay perceptions of global risk: Public views of global warming in cross-national context. International Sociology, 13(4), 473–471.

Fernando

J. W.

Burden

Ferguson

O’Brien

L. V.

Judge

Kashima

(2018). Functions of utopia: How utopian thinking motivates societal engagement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(5), 779–792.

Fernando

J. W.

Burden

Judge

O’Brien

L. V.

Ashman

Paladino

Kashima

(2023). Profiles of an ideal society: The utopian visions of ordinary people. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 54(1), 43–60.

Fernando

J. W.

O’Brien

L. V.

Burden

N. J.

Judge

Kashima

(2020). Greens or space invaders: Prominent utopian themes and effects on social change motivation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 50(2), 278–291.

Francis

(1973). Circumstances and salvation: The ideology of the Fruitlands Utopia. American Quarterly, 25(2), 202–234.

Francis

(1977). The ideology of Brook Farm. Studies in the American Renaissance, 1, 1–48.

10.

Hallford

D. J.

D’Argembeau

(2020). Why we imagine our future: Introducing the functions of future thinking scale (FoFTS). Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 44, 376–395.

11.

Kay

A. C.

Jost

J. T.

(2003). Complementary justice: Effects of “poor but happy” and “poor but honest” stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation of the justice motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(5), 823.

12.

Levin

I. P.

Johnson

R. D.

Russo

C. P.

Deldin

P. J.

(1985). Framing effects in judgment tasks with varying amounts of information. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36(3), 362–377. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(85)90005-6

13.

Levitas

(1990). Educated hope: Ernst Bloch on abstract and concrete utopia. Utopian Studies, 1(2), 13–26.

14.

Litfin

(2012). Reinventing the future: The global ecovillage movement as a holistic knowledge community. In Kütting

Lipschutz

(Eds.), Environmental governance (pp. 124–142). Routledge.

15.

Miller

(1992). The roots of the 1960s communal revival. American Studies, 33(2), 73–93.

16.

Mulgan

(2023). Possibility space: The role of social sciences in understanding, mapping and shaping the future. Possibility Studies & Society, 1(1–2), 163–171.

17.

Pauketat

J. V.

Ladak

Anthis

J. R.

(2025). World-making for a future with sentient AI. British Journal of Social Psychology, 64, e12844.

18.

Polak

(1973). The image of the future (pp. 176–177). Elsevier Scientific.

19.

Preucel

R. W.

Pendery

S. R.

(2006). Envisioning utopia: Transcendentalist and Fourierist landscapes at Brook Farm, West Roxbury, Massachusetts. Historical Archaeology, 40, 6–19.

20.

Shrikanth

Szpunar

P. M.

Szpunar

K. K.

(2018). Staying positive in a dystopian future: A novel dissociation between personal and collective cognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147(8), 1200.

21.

Sterling

Jost

J. T.

Hardin

C. D.

(2019). Liberal and conservative representations of the good society: A (social) structural topic modeling approach. Sage Open, 9(2), 1–13.

22.

Sternberg

R. J.

Fischer

(2023). Diverging roads: Democracy, anocracy, autocracy, dictatorship? Possibility Studies & Society, 1(1–2), 216–225.

23.

Suleyman

(2023). The coming wave: Technology, power, and the twenty-first century’s greatest dilemma. Crown Publishing.

24.

Sun

(2020). Behavioral intention promotes generalized reciprocity: Evidence from the Dictator Game. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 772.

25.

Whitmarsh

(2008). Are flood victims more concerned about climate change than other people? The role of direct experience in risk perception and behavioural response. Journal of Risk Research, 11(3), 351–374.