Denying or Underestimating Environmental Problems: Psychological Barriers to Responsible Consumption
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-8623.2014.3.17316Keywords:
Pro-environmental behavior, responsible consumption, psychological barriers.Abstract
Although the search for solutions to environmental problems is typically associated with technology and largescale interventions, behavioral changes at the individual level directly contribute to sustainable consumption. This study investigated psychological barriers that people report for not behaving pro-environmentally in situations where they could easily do it. A measure based on 12 of 29 of the “dragons of inaction” in Gifford’s (2011) theoretical framework was translated, adapted and answered by 272 participants. Factor analyses suggested that the psychological barriers have a two-dimensional structure, involving: (1) denial of the problem; (2) conflicting priorities. The measure presented evidences of validity and reliability. Potential applications of these results in the promotion of sustainability are discussed, which can involve everyday actions such as household energy saving, the use of public transportation and proper waste disposal.Downloads
References
American Psychological Association (2010). Psychology and
global climate change: Addressing a multifaceted phenomenon
and set of challenges. Report of the American Psychological
Association Task Force on the Interface Between Psychology
and Global Climate Change. Obtido em http://www.apa.org/
science/about/publications/climate-change.aspx
Bamberg, S. & Möser, G. (2007). Twenty years after Hines,
Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psychosocial
determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. Journal
of environmental psychology, 27(1), 14-25. doi:10.1016/j.
jenvp.2006.12.002
Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of
inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3),
-209. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3
Barros, H. C. L. & Pinheiro, J. Q. (2013). Dimensões psicológicas
do aquecimento global conforme a visão de adolescentes
brasileiros. Estudos de Psicologia, 18(2), 173-182.
Bawden, D. & Robinson, L. (2009). The dark side of information:
Overload, anxiety and other paradoxes and pathologies.
Journal of Information Science, 35, 180-191. doi: 10.1177/
Blair, I. & Smith, J. (2010). Tokenism. In J. Levine, & M. Hogg
(Eds.), Encyclopedia of group processes & intergroup relations
(pp. 925-928). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi: http://dx.doi.
org/10.4135/9781412972017.n287
Brehm, J. W. & Brehm, S. S. (1981). Psychological reactance:
A theory of freedom and control. San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Cialdini, R. B. (2011). The focus theory of normative conduct.
In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins
(Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 2;
pp. 295-312). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi: http://dx.doi.
org/10.4135/9781446249222
Clayton, S. & Brook, A. (2005). Can psychology help save the
world? A model for conservation psychology. Analyses of Social
Issues and Public Policy, 5(1), 87-102. doi: 10.1111/j.1530-
2005.00057.x
Cristo, F. (no prelo). Hábito e comportamento de viagem In P. W. G.
Taco, I.. L. Neto, L. Santos, & M. Takano (Orgs.). Comportamento
em transportes: Uma abordagem multidisciplinar. São Paulo:
Casa do Psicólogo.
Coelho, J. A. P. D. M., Gouveia, V. V., & Milfont, T. L. (2006).
Valores humanos como explicadores de atitudes ambientais
e intenção de comportamento pró-ambiental. Psicologia em
Estudo, 11(1), 199-207.
Dunlap, R. E. (2008). The New Environmental Paradigm Scale:
From marginality to worldwide use. Journal of Environmental
Education, 40(1), 3-18. doi: 10.3200/JOEE.40.1.3-18
Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E.
(2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm:
A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 425-442.
Felippe, M. L. & Kuhnen, A. (2012). O apego ao lugar no contexto
dos estudos pessoa-ambiente: Práticas de pesquisa. Estudos
de Psicologia (Campinas), 29(4), 609-617. doi: http://dx.doi.
org/10.1590/S0103-166X2012000400015
Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and hanging behavior:
The reasoned action approach. New York: Psychology Press.
Fransson, N., & Gärling, T. (1999). Environmental concern:
Conceptual definitions, measurement methods, and research
findings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19, 369-382.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1999.0141
Gardner, G. T. & Stern, P. C. (2008). The short list: The most
effective actions U.S. households can take to curb climate
change. Environment, 50, 13-24. doi: 10.3200/ENVT.50.5.12-25
Gärling, T. & Steg, L. (Orgs.). (2007). Threats from car traffic to the
quality of urban life: Problems, causes and solutions. Oxford:
Elsevier.
Gifford, R. (1976). Environmental numbness in the classroom.
Journal of Experimental Education, 44(3), 4-7.
Gifford, R. (2008). Psychology’s essential role in climate change.
Canadian Psychology, 49, 273-280. doi:10.1037/a0013234
Gifford, R. (2011). The dragons of inaction: Psychological barriers
that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. American
Psychologist, 66, 290-302. doi: 10.1037/a0023566
Gifford, R., Iglesias, F., & Casler, J. (2009). Development of a
measure of individuals obstacles to pro-environmental behaviour
(IOPB). Trabalho apresentado no 11th European Congress of
Psychology, Oslo, Noruega.
Goldstein, N. J., & Cialdini, R. B. (2009). Normative influences on
consumption and conservation behaviors. In M. Wänke, Social
psychology of consumer behavior (pp. 273-296). New York:
Psychology Press.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R., & Black, W.C., (2005).
Análise multivariada de dados. Porto Alegre: Bookman.
Iglesias, F., Gifford, R., & Casler, J. (2009). Environmentally (ir)
responsible behaviour: A measure of psychological justifications.
Trabalho apresentado na 2009 Convention da Canadian
Psychological Association, Montreal, Canada.
Hawcroft, L. J., & Milfont, T. L. (2010). The use (and abuse)
of the new environmental paradigm scale over the last 30
years: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology,
, 143-158. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.
003
Kennedy, E. H., Beckley, T. M, McFarlane, B. L., & Nadeau, S. (2009). Why we don’t “walk the talk”: Understanding the environmental values/behaviour gap in Canada. Human Ecology Review, 16(2), 151-160.
Koger, S. M., & Winter, D. D. (2010). The psychology of
environmental problems. New York: Psychology Press.
Kollmus, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to proenvironmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239-260. doi:10.1080/13504620220145401
Levav, J. & Zhu, R. (2009). Seeking freedom though variety.
Journal of Consumer Research, 36, 600-610. doi: 10.1086/
Lewicka, M. (2011). Place attachment: How far have we come in
the last 40 years? Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31 (3),
-230. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.10.001
Lokhorst, A. M., Werner, C., Staats, H., van Dijk, E., & Gale,
J. L. (2013). Commitment and behavior change: A metaanalysis
and critical review of commitment-making strategies in environmental research. Environment & Behavior, 45, 3-34.
Doi 10.1177/0013916511411477
Neal, D., Wood, W., Labrecque, J., & Lally, P. (2011). How do
habits guide behavior? perceived and actual triggers of habits
in daily life. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48,
-498. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.01
Osbaldiston, R. & Schott, J. P. (2012). Environmental sustainability
and behavioral science: Meta-analysis of proenvironmental
behavior experiments. Environment & Behavior, 44, 257-299.
doi: 10.1177/0013916511402673
Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias.
In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.),
Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes
(pp. 17-59). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Pelletier, L. G., Tuson, K., Green-Demers, I., Noels, K., & Beaton,
A. (1998). Why are you doing things for the environment? The
Motivation Toward the Environment Scale (MTES). Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 28, 437-468. doi 10.1111/j.1559-
1998.tb01714.x
Ross, L., Lepper, M., & Ward, A. (2010). History of social
psychology: Insights, challenges and contributions to theory and
application. In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert & G. Lindzey (Orgs.).
Handbook of social psychology (5th ed.) (Vol. 1; pp. 3-50). New
York: Wiley.
Schultz, P. W., Gouveia, V. V., Cameron, L. D., Tankha, G.,
Schmuck, P., & Franek, M. (2005). Values and their relationship
to environmental concern and conservation behavior. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 457-475. doi:
1177/0022022105275962
Schultz, P. W., Nolan, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Goldstein, N. J., &
Griskevicius, V. (2007). The constructive, destructive, and
reconstructive power of social norms. Psychological Science,
(5), 429-434. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01917.x
Schwartz, S. H. (2012). An overview of the Schwartz theory of
basic values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1).
doi: org/10.9707/2307-0919.1116
Shah, P. (2012). Toward a neurobiology of unrealistic
optimism. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(3), 344. doi: 10.3389/
fpsyg.2012.00344.
Steg, L., Bolderdijk, J. W., Keizer, K. E., & Perlaviciute, G. (2014).
An integrated framework for encouraging pro-environmental
behaviour: The role of values, situational factors and goals.
Journal of Environmental Psychology, 38, 104-115. doi: http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.01.002
Stern, P. C. (2008). Environmentally significant behavior in
the home. In A. Lewis (Ed.). The Cambridge handbook of
psychology and economic behaviour (pp. 363-382). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Verplanken, B. & Roy, D. (no prelo). Consumer habits and
sustainable consumption. In L. Reisch & J. Thogersen (Eds.).
Handbook of sustainable consumption. Cheltenham, UK:
Edward Elgar.
Vijver, F. J. R. van de, & Leung, K. (2011). Equivalence and bias:
A review of concepts, models, and data analytic procedures.
In D. Matsumoto, & F. J. R. van de Vijver (Eds.). Cross-cultural
research methods in psychology (pp. 17-45). New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright
The submission of originals to Psico implies the transfer by the authors of the right for publication. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication. If the authors wish to include the same data into another publication, they must cite Psico as the site of original publication.
Creative Commons License
Except where otherwise specified, material published in this journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license, which allows unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is correctly cited.
