915024
| Question | Answer |
| What is the interplay between knowledge, perceived efficacy and environmental concern | Knowledge -> concern -> greater percieved efficacy and responsibility to help solve the problem |
| one year longitudinal study by milfont | info -> concern -> efficacy Knowledge deficit theory - but this isnt the only thing which predicts/results in action |
| Strategies for successful resourse management: Four core psychological motives | Understanding Belonging Trusting Self-enhancing |
| Understanding is increased | by providing information |
| Belonging is increased | by setting up an identity which incorporates pro-environmental ideals/values/motives |
| Trusting | when institutions are able to increase trust then the relationship will be deeper and institutional intentions will be shared by individuals |
| Self-enhancing | Offer incentives for each person which incentivise pro-environmental acts |
| Psychological distance | Personal, if it is something which will affect you or is important personally to you; time, something which occurs now rather than later; spacial, something that occurs here rather than there; and certainty, something that is certainly going to happen rather than maybe going to happen |
| Evan, Milfont, Lawrence (local adaptation) | Considering local adaptation increases willingness to mitigate reducing psych distance enhances willingness to mitigate |
| system justification | People have a motivation to defend and justify the status quo "Most policies serve the greater good" "Society is set up so that people usually get what they deserve" |
| Experiment considering system justification | a message that restated pro-environmental action as patriotic, to protect and preserve the American way of life, resulted in more pro-environmental intentions and less system justification in Americans |
| Moral roots of environmental attitudes | Conservatives increased proenvironmental attitudes when messages were concerned with purity and sanctity of environment, compared to control and harm/care condition. |
| Normative Social influence | Social norms: An individual's beliefs about the common and accepted behaviour in a specific situation. Reality and normative beliefs may differ. Formed through social interaction, powerful influence on behaviour, most powerful in novel situations |
| Examples of social norms (social validation) | Skypointing/Gawking experiment milgram et al. tip jars vs empty jars seeing others not act latane & Darley |
| Latane and Darley experiment | smoke filled room Alone, two other naive participants, 2 non-active confederates Acted on smoke fast when alone, slower/less when with others, and less when the confederates were not acting |
| Social norms guide our actions as well as our non-actions | Wait and see game |
| Cialdini, Kallgren and Reno | parking lot littering experiment model litters/model doesnt (affects norm salience) environment clean/littery (illustrates descriptive norm "other people do what?" |
| Descriptive norms | common behaviour your belief about what other people do move people to act via social information |
| injunctive norms | accepted behaviour your beliefs about what other people think you should do "other people value it" Move people to act via social evaluation |
| Schultz, Khazian and Zaleski | towel experiment By making the descriptive norm more explicit Generic descriptive norm “Nearly 75% of hotels guests choose to reuse their towels each day” the behaviour increases |
| Stern, Dietz and Guagnano (1995) and Cameron (2002) Complex socio-political constraints also influence our decision-making process |
Image:
Picture1 (image/png)
|
Want to create your own Flashcards for free with GoConqr? Learn more.