A new study suggests collective guilt can inspire action, but only if people feel reasonably hopeful that things can get better. The study, based on questionnaires to ~150 undergraduate students, also found that guilt was a more effective emotion in encouraging mitigation behavior than anxiety. The article is titled Collective guilt mediates the effect of beliefs about global warming on willingness to engage in mitigation behavior and is in press at the Journal of Environmental Psychology.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
The September 2007 issue of JCOM - Journal of Science Communication - (issue 3, volume 7) is online.: Next issue will be online on the 18th December 2008. There are several articles in this issue that I find interesting and bloggable.
Contents:
EDITORIAL - The better you know, the better you make…
Anytime I hear songs from when I was in high school or college, I get very nostalgic. I remember people I knew, places I went, good times I had. It's a powerful and complex feeling, with all sorts of interesting psychological aspects, but for some reason, I'd never really thought about studying it…
At some point, terror management theorists are going to attempt to explain everything in the universe with their theory (I suspect we'll see a paper titled "Mortality Salience and the Bose-Einstein Condensate" in the next few years). Since I've already talked about terror management theory work on…
In celebration of Thanksgiving in the U.S., I'm reposting this piece, originally posted in April, 2008.
How often do you take time to reflect on the things you're grateful for? Once a month? Once a week, at church, perhaps? Maybe you say "grace" at mealtime every day. But even prayers that do…
No problem here, I'm carrying plenty. These days, every action I take is preceded by an analysis of the consequences for the environment and the planet. I'm doing everything I can to mitigate my impact, sometime under a burden of depression. Will it make a difference? Watching the behavior of some of my fellow Americans around me, I'm doubtful. I don't know how some people live with themselves.
Are students really representative sample of the population?
sounds interesting, but i couldn't find the full .pdf... i agree with romunov, students seem to be the most optimistic (idealistic maybe more fitting...naive?) about global change and sampling strictly undergraduates seems misleading.
"As suspected, people who felt that warming impacts were minor and fixable felt more guilt than people who believed that warming impacts would be severe. They were also more willing to do something about it."
i am more compelled to action through my belief and associated guilt of imminent and severe warming impacts. seeing headlines like "90% of fish stocks gone by 2050," it seems that the media and scientists to a degree work the doomsday angle thoroughly, not just to move units but to entice action.
I don't think the media or some scientists gross distortion of science helps any situation - it makes people worried and worried people aren't good for much except worrying.
Will it make a difference? Watching the behavior of some of my fellow Americans around me, I'm doubtful. I don't know how some people live with themselves.
Have you looked at FEASTARIAN ? For healthy eating and saving the planet have a feast.
By changing the way we think about our food and when we eat it, we can make a real difference.
It is not just buying the right fish, it is making it special and only occasionally [if we eat fish at all].
A Feastarian only eats fish or meat up to a maximum of three times a week.
We are encouraging everyone to take this simple step of eating less meat and fish as an immediate way of making a difference to a sustainable planet.
This is a way of making a positive difference through our choice of foods.
Please have a look at the website www.feastarian.org
It is not just buying the right fish, it is making it special and only occasionally [if we eat fish at all].
A Feastarian only eats fish or meat up to a maximum of three times a week.