Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Collective responsibility framing also leads to mitigation behavior in East Asia: a replication study in Taiwan

  • Published:
Climatic Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Mitigating climate change will require the participation of citizens and consumers. A recent study in Climatic Change by Obradovich and Guenther reported that framing responsibility for climate change in terms of collective—as opposed to personal—behaviors generated greater donations to environmental groups as well as higher self-reported levels of willingness to adopt environmentally-friendly behaviors. As East Asia is the leading emitter of greenhouse gases globally, these findings are or clear relevance to the region. Nonetheless, recent findings in cultural psychology suggest that this framing intervention may not have the same results in an East Asian cultural context. We therefore sought to determine whether these findings could be replicated in East Asia. For this study, 2085 university students in Taiwan were randomly assigned to receive either a collective responsibility priming task, a personal responsibility priming task, or a daily routine priming task (control). They were then given the opportunity to donate to a climate-related cause and asked to report on their likelihood of changing their personal behaviors to reduce carbon emissions. Participants in the collective and personal conditions donated significantly more than those in the control condition and those in the personal responsibility condition reported significantly lower probabilities of changing their behaviors than those in both the control and collective responsibility conditions. Our study provides a partial replication with a different demographic group and in a different cultural setting, strengthening the argument for collective responsibility framing and setting the stage for research into practical implementations.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Existing reviews of the validity of data from MTurk participants, such as Buhrmester et al. 2011 and Berinsky et al. 2012, fail to consider experiments involving rewards or donations.

References

  • Arnett JJ (2008) The neglected 95%: why American psychology needs to become less American. Am Psychol 63(7):602–614. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.63.7.602

    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 

  • Bernauer T, McGrath LF (2016) Simple reframing unlikely to boost public support for climate policy. Nat Clim Chang. https://doi.org/10.1038/NCLIMATE2948

  • Bissing-Olson MJ, Fielding KS, Iyer A (2016) Experiences of pride, not guilt, predict pro-environmental behavior when pro-environmental descriptive norms are more positive. J Environ Psychol 45:145–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanken I, van de Ven N, Zeelenberg M, Meijers MH (2014) Three attempts to replicate the moral licensing effect. Soc Psychol 45(3):232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boden TA, Marland G, and Andres RJ (2017) National CO2 emissions from fossil-fuel burning, cement manufacture, and gas flaring: 1751–2014, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, doi https://doi.org/10.3334/CDIAC/00001_V2017

  • Brick C, Lai CK (2018) Explicit (but not implicit) environmentalist identity predicts pro-environmental behavior and policy preferences. J Environ Psychol 58:8–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2018.07.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Burck J, Marten F, Bals C (2015) The climate change performance index: results 2016. Germanwatch, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Burck J, Marten F, Bals C, Hohne N (2017) The climate change performance index: results 2018. Germanwatch, Berlin

  • Chen C, Lee SY, Stevenson HW (1995) Response style and cross-cultural comparisons of rating scales among east Asian and north American students. Psychol Sci 6:170–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper H, Patall EA (2009) The relative benefits of meta-analysis conducted with individual participant data versus aggregated data. Psychol Methods 14(2):165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Giusto B, Lavallee JP, Yu TY (2018) Towards an east Asian model of climate change awareness: a questionnaire study among university students in Taiwan. PLoS One 13(10):e0206298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Economy Watch (2016) Implied PPP Conversion Rate Data for Year 2016, All Countries. Retrieved from http://www.economywatch.com/economic-statistics/economic-indicators/Implied_PPP_Conversion_Rate/#yearListing

  • EIA (2013) International Energy Outlook 2013. US Energy Information Administration (EIA)

  • Henrich J, Heine SJ, Norenzayan A (2010) The weirdest people in the world? Behav Brain Sci 33(2–3):61–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IBM Corp Released. (2011). IBM SPSS statistics for windows, version 20.0. Armonk: IBM Corp

  • IPCC, 2018: Summary for policymakers. In: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/summary-for-policy-makers/. Accessed Dec 2018

  • Johnson T, Kulesa P, Cho YI, Shavitt S (2005) The relation between culture and response styles: evidence from 19 countries. J Cross-Cult Psychol 36(2):264–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitayama S, Markus HR, Matsumoto H, Norasakkunkit V (1997) Individual and collective processes in the construction of the self: self-enhancement in the United States and self-criticism in Japan. J Pers Soc Psychol 72(6):1245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitayama S, Mesquita B, Karasawa M (2006) Cultural affordances and emotional experience: socially engaging and disengaging emotions in Japan and the United States. J Pers Soc Psychol 91(5):890

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitayama S, Park J (2013) Culture and the self: implications for consumer behavior. In: Ruvio AA, Belk RW (eds) The Routledge companion to identity and consumption. Routledge

  • Lee JW, Jones PS, Mineyama Y, Zhang XE (2002) Cultural differences in responses to a Likert scale. Res Nurs Health 25(4):295–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, N, Su, LY (2018) Message framing and climate change communication: a meta-analytical review. J Appl Commun, 102(3), doi:https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.2189

  • Markus HR, Kitayama S (1991) Culture and the self: implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychol Rev 98(2):224–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markus HR, Kitayama S (1994) A collective fear of the collective: implications for selves and theories of selves. Personal Soc Psychol Bull 20(5):568–579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mascolo MF, Fischer KW, Li J (2003) Dynamic development of component systems in emotions: pride, shame and guilt in China and the United States. In: Davidson RJ, Schere KR, Goldsmith HH (eds) Handbook of affective sciences. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 375–408

    Google Scholar 

  • McNeill BJ, Pauker SG, Sox H, Tversky A (1982) On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies. N Engl J Med 306(2):1259–1262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merritt AC, Effron DA, Monin B (2010) Moral self-licensing: when being good frees us to be bad. Soc Personal Psychol Compass 4(5):344–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mesquita B, Karasawa M (2004) Self-conscious emotions as dynamic cultural processes. Psychol Inq 15(2):161–166

    Google Scholar 

  • Obradovich N, Guenther SM (2016) Collective responsibility amplifies mitigation behaviors. Clim Chang 137(1–2):307–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1670-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riley RD, Lambert PC, Abo-Zaid G (2010) Meta-analysis of individual participant data: rationale, conduct, and reporting. Bmj 340:c221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2013) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria URL http://www.R-project.org/

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider CR, Zaval L, Weber EU, Markowitz EM (2017) The influence of anticipated pride and guilt on pro-environmental decision making. PLoS One 12(11):e0188781. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0188781

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonsohn U (2015) Small telescopes: detectability and the evaluation of replication results. Psychol Sci 26(5):559–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stipek D (1998) Differences between Americans and Chinese in the circumstances evoking pride, shame, and guilt. J Cross-Cult Psychol 29(5):616–629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tauber S, van Zomeren M, Kutlaca M (2015) Should the moral core of climate issues be emphasized or downplayed in public discourse? Three ways to successfully manage the double-edged sword of moral communication. Clim Chang 130(3):453–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas D, Radji S, Benedetti A (2014) Systematic review of methods for individual patient data meta-analysis with binary outcomes. BMC Med Res Methodol 14(1):79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tracy JL, Robins RW (2004) Putting the self into self-conscious emotions: a theoretical model. Psychol Inq 15(2):103–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Triandis HC, Carnevale P, Gelfand M, Robert C, Wasti SA, Probst T, Kashima ES, Dragonas T, Chan D, Chen XP, Kim U (2001) Culture and deception in business negotiations: a multilevel analysis. Int J Cross-cult Manag 4(1):73–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Truelove HB, Carrico AR, Weber EU, Raimi KT, Vandenbergh MP (2014) Positive and negative spillover of pro-environmental behavior: an integrative review and theoretical framework. Glob Environ Chang 29:127–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A, Kahneman D (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211(4481):453–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNEP (2018) The emissions gap report 2018. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi http://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/26895/EGR2018_FullReport_EN.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. Accessed Dec 2018

  • Vicente-Molina MA, Fernández-Sainz A, Izagirre-Olaizola J (2018) Does gender make a difference in pro-environmental behavior? The case of the Basque Country University students. J Clean Prod 176:89–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wachholz S, Artz N, Chene D (2014) Warming to the idea: university students' knowledge and attitudes about climate change. Int J Sust Higher Ed 15(2):128–141. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-03-2012-0025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallbott HG, Scherer KR (1995) Cultural determinants in experiencing shame and guilt. In: Tangney JP, Fischer KW (eds) Self-conscious emotions. The psychology of shame, guilt, embarrassment, and pride. Guilford, New York, pp 465–487

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiao C, McCright AM (2015) Gender differences in environmental concern: revisiting the institutional trust hypothesis in the USA. Environ Behav 47(1):17e37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeileis A (2004) Econometric computing with HC and HAC covariance matrix estimators. J Stat Softw 11(10):1–17 URL http://www.jstatsoft.org/v11/i10/

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are deeply grateful for the constructive comments and suggestions offered by the anonymous reviewers of the earlier versions of this manuscript.

Funding

Support for this study was from Taiwan’s Ministry of Science and Technology (grant number 104-2410-H-130-020).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. International Business and Trade Program, Ming Chuan University International College, 250 Zhongshan North Road Section 5, Taipei, 111, Taiwan

    Joseph P. Lavallee

  2. Journalism and Mass Communication Program, Ming Chuan University International College, 250 Zhongshan North Road Section 5, Taipei, 111, Taiwan

    Bruno Di Giusto

  3. Department of Risk Management and Insurance, Ming Chuan University, 250 Zhongshan North Road Section 5, Taipei, 111, Taiwan

    Tai-Yi Yu

Authors
  1. Joseph P. Lavallee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bruno Di Giusto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tai-Yi Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bruno Di Giusto.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 37 kb).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lavallee, J.P., Di Giusto, B. & Yu, TY. Collective responsibility framing also leads to mitigation behavior in East Asia: a replication study in Taiwan. Climatic Change 153, 423–438 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02402-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02402-z

Search

Navigation