Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Collective responsibility amplifies mitigation behaviors

  • Published:
Climatic Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

How can individuals be convinced to act on climate change? It is widely assumed that emphasizing personal responsibility for climate change is effective at increasing pro-climate behavior whereas collectively framing the causes of climate change diffuses responsibility and dampens the incentive for individual action. We observe the opposite result. Here we find, across three experiments, that emphasizing collective responsibility for the causes of climate change increases pro-climate monetary donations by approximately 7 % in environmental group members and by 50 % in the general public. Further, highlighting collective responsibility amplifies intent to reduce future carbon emissions. In contrast, focusing on personal responsibility for climate change does not significantly alter donations to climate change advocacy or the intent for future pro-climate behavior. These effects replicate and persist multiple days after treatment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aknin LB, Dunn EW, Norton MI (2012) Happiness runs in a circular motion: evidence for a positive feedback loop between prosocial spending and happiness. J Happiness Stud 13:347–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basil DZ, Ridgway NM, Basil MD (2006) Guilt appeals: the mediating effect of responsibility. Psychol Mark 23(12):1035–1054

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger J, Meredith M, Wheeler SC (2008) Contextual priming: where people vote affects how they vote. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105(26):8846–8849

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berinsky AJ, Huber GA, Lenz GS (2012) Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon.com’s Mechanical Turk. Polit Anal 20(3):351–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolsen T, Druckman JN, Cook FL (2014) Communication and collective actions: a survey experiment on motivating energy conservation in the US. Journal of Experimental Political Science 1(01):24–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brekke KA, Johansson-Stenman O (2008) The behavioural economics of climate change. Oxf Rev Econ Policy 24(2):280–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brügger A, Dessai S, Devine-Wright P, Morton TA, Pidgeon NF (2015) Psychological responses to the proximity of climate change. Nat Clim Chang

  • Buhrmester M, Kwang T, Gosling SD (2011) Amazon’s Mechanical Turk a new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspect Psychol Sci 6(1):3–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen J (1990) Things I have learned (so far). Am Psychol 45(12):1304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doherty TJ, Clayton S (2011) The psychological impacts of global climate change. Am Psychol 66(4):265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn EW, Aknin LB, Norton MI (2008) Spending money on others promotes happiness. Science 319(5870):1687–1688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden SE (1993) Individual environmental responsibility and its role in public environmentalism. Environ Plan A 25(12):1743–1758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliot AJ, Devine PG (1994) On the motivational nature of cognitive dissonance: dissonance as psychological discomfort. J Pers Soc Psychol 67(3):382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson MA, Branscombe NR (2010) Collective guilt mediates the effect of beliefs about global warming on willingness to engage in mitigation behavior. J Environ Psychol 30(2):135–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Festinger L (1957) A theory of cognitive dissonance, vol 2. Stanford University Press

  • Fujita K, Clark SL, Freitas AL (2014) Think globally, act locally: construal levels and environmentally relevant decision-making. Encouraging Sustainable Behavior: Psychology and the Environment:87–107

  • Galinsky AD, Gruenfeld DH, Magee JC (2003) From power to action. J Pers Soc Psychol 85(3):453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gifford R (2011) The dragons of inaction: Psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. Am Psychol 66(4):290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gneezy U, Meier S, Rey-Biel P (2011) When and why incentives (don’t) work to modify behavior. J Econ Perspect:191–209

  • Hassin RR, Ferguson MJ, Shidlovski D, Gross T (2007) Subliminal exposure to national flags affects political thought and behavior. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104(50):19757–19761

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hibbert S, Smith A, Davies A, Ireland F (2007) Guilt appeals: persuasion knowledge and charitable giving. Psychol Mark 24(8):723–742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill SE, DelPriore DJ, Vaughan PW (2011) The cognitive consequences of envy: attention, memory, and self-regulatory depletion. J Pers Soc Psychol 101(4):653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howe PD, Mildenberger M, Marlon JR, Leiserowitz A (2015) Geographic variation in opinions on climate change at state and local scales in the USA. Nat Clim Chang 5(6):596–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howell RA (2014) Investigating the long-term impacts of climate change communications on individuals attitudes and behavior. Environ Behav 46(1):70–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones WH, Schratter AK, Kugler K (2000) The guilt inventory. Psychol Rep 87(3f):1039–1042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kercher K (1992) Assessing subjective well-being in the old-old: the PANAS as a measure of orthogonal dimensions of positive and negative affect. Res Aging 14 (2):131–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein RA, Ratliff KA, Vianello M, Adams RB Jr., Bahník Š, Bernstein MJ, Bocian K, Brandt MJ, Brooks B, Brumbaugh CC, et al. (2014) Investigating variation in replicability: A many labs replication project. Soc Psychol 45 (3):142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kugler K, Jones WH (1992) On conceptualizing and assessing guilt. J Pers Soc Psychol 62(2):318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackinnon A, Jorm AF, Christensen H, Korten AE, Jacomb PA, Rodgers B (1999) A short form of the positive and negative affect schedule: evaluation of factorial validity and invariance across demographic variables in a community sample. Personal Individ Differ 27(3):405–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manucia GK, Baumann DJ, Cialdini RB (1984) Mood influences on helping: Direct effects or side effects?. J Pers Soc Psychol 46(2):357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz EM, Shariff AF (2012) Climate change and moral judgement. Nat Clim Chang 2(4):243–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rickard LN, Yang ZJ, Seo M, Harrison TM (2014) The I in climate: The role of individual responsibility in systematic processing of climate change information. Glob Environ Chang 26:39–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riley RD, Lambert PC, Abo-Zaid G, et al. (2010) Meta-analysis of individual participant data: rationale, conduct, and reporting. Bmj:340

  • Sniderman PM, Piazza T, Tetlock PE, Kendrick A (1991) The new racism. Am J Polit Sci:423–447

  • Staats H, Harland P, Wilke HAM (2004) Effecting durable change: a team approach to improve environmental behavior in the household. Environ Behav 36 (3):341–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoll-Kleemann S, O’Riordan T, Jaeger CC (2001) The psychology of denial concerning climate mitigation measures: evidence from Swiss focus groups. Glob Environ Chang 11(2):107–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tangney JP, Stuewig J, Mashek DJ (2007) Moral emotions and moral behavior. Annu Rev Psychol 58:345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Sierra Club (2014) The Sierra Club e-newsletters. http://web.archive.org/web/20150518182149/, https://secure.sierraclub.org/site/SPageServer/?pagename=ArchiveInsider

  • Tomz M, Van Houweling RP (2009) The electoral implications of candidate ambiguity. Am Polit Sci Rev 103(01):83–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trope Y, Liberman N (2010) Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychol Rev 117(2):440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A (1988) Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol 54 (6):1063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells VK, Ponting CA, Peattie K (2011) Behaviour and climate change: Consumer perceptions of responsibility. J Mark Manag 27(7–8):808–833

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White H (1980) A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society:817–838

  • Wohl MJA, Branscombe NR, Klar Y (2006) Collective guilt: emotional reactions when one’s group has done wrong or been wronged. Eur Rev Soc Psychol 17 (1):1–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimbardo PG, Cohen AR, Weisenberg M, Dworkin L, Firestone I (1966) Control of pain motivation by cognitive dissonance. Science 151(3707):217–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the NSF (grant #DGE0707423 to N.O.), and by the Skoll Global Threats Fund (to N.O. and S.M.G.). We thank G. Kreitler, L. Pomper, and the National Audubon Society for their assistance with recruitment and thank J. Burney, J. Fowler, E. Keenan, S. Kerosky, R. Migliorini, D. Victor, members of the UCSD Human Nature Group, and anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.

Author contributions

N.O. designed the experiment, analyzed the data, produced figures and tables, and drafted the manuscript and supplementary information. S.M.G. edited the manuscript and supplementary information. Both authors developed the research question.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, #0521, La Jolla, CA, 92093-0521, USA

    Nick Obradovich

  2. Department of Political Science, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, #0521, La Jolla, CA, 92093-0521, USA

    Scott M. Guenther

Authors
  1. Nick Obradovich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Scott M. Guenther
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nick Obradovich.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

(PDF 2.26 MB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Obradovich, N., Guenther, S.M. Collective responsibility amplifies mitigation behaviors. Climatic Change 137, 307–319 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1670-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1670-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation