Do one’s moral foundations impact how they respond to information on climate change emissions? A vehicle choice experiment

IF 3.5 2区 工程技术 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED
Bobin Wang , E.O.D. Waygood , Xun Ji , Mahdie Asl Javadian , Long Pan , Matthew Feinberg
{"title":"Do one’s moral foundations impact how they respond to information on climate change emissions? A vehicle choice experiment","authors":"Bobin Wang ,&nbsp;E.O.D. Waygood ,&nbsp;Xun Ji ,&nbsp;Mahdie Asl Javadian ,&nbsp;Long Pan ,&nbsp;Matthew Feinberg","doi":"10.1016/j.trf.2024.07.026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Transportation is a major source of climate change emissions. Providing people with better information on those emissions is one means of helping individuals make climate-friendly choices. However, not everyone is influenced by the same type of information. Previous research has demonstrated that Goal Framing Theory could help improve the influence of climate change emissions information and that different framings have different levels of influence depending on a number of socio-demographic and attitudinal characteristics. However, apart from climate change motivation, what other underlying psychological factors might help us understand why the framings vary in their influence between individuals? Moral Foundation Theory (MFT) identifies key values that influence people’s moral decisions, providing a useful framework for understanding diverse responses to information. The objective of this study is to understand whether MFT can help explain different responses by individuals and identify which framings are associated with stronger responses for different moral foundations. This study investigates the moderating effects of moral foundations on individuals’ responsiveness to different emission information framings. Utilizing data from discrete choice experiments involving 2015 Canadian drivers, we examine how different moral foundations impact the willingness-to-pay (WTP) for reducing emissions. The results reveal that the impact of emissions information framing varies significantly according to individuals’ moral foundations. Specifically, moral values associated with Authority, Fairness, and Purity play negative moderating roles on WTP for CO<sub>2</sub> emissions under different framings, whereas Ingroup and Harm foundations have positive moderating effects on WTP with the framings tested. Additionally, innovative communication tools like new emojis demonstrated strong positive effects on WTP, especially among those with strong Ingroup, Fairness, and Purity values. Conversely, individuals with a strong Authority value showed the lowest WTP when presented with pressure gauge visuals. Using appropriate framing based on Moral Foundation Theory can considerably change the willingness-to-pay for climate change emissions for different parts of the population, with a notable increase in WTP observed among individuals inclined to alter their behavior. Future framings should incorporate MFT in their design.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48355,"journal":{"name":"Transportation Research Part F-Traffic Psychology and Behaviour","volume":"106 ","pages":"Pages 90-111"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369847824001955/pdfft?md5=c4ae60f85ec7f3eb73ca5d5a4527277d&pid=1-s2.0-S1369847824001955-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation Research Part F-Traffic Psychology and Behaviour","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369847824001955","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Transportation is a major source of climate change emissions. Providing people with better information on those emissions is one means of helping individuals make climate-friendly choices. However, not everyone is influenced by the same type of information. Previous research has demonstrated that Goal Framing Theory could help improve the influence of climate change emissions information and that different framings have different levels of influence depending on a number of socio-demographic and attitudinal characteristics. However, apart from climate change motivation, what other underlying psychological factors might help us understand why the framings vary in their influence between individuals? Moral Foundation Theory (MFT) identifies key values that influence people’s moral decisions, providing a useful framework for understanding diverse responses to information. The objective of this study is to understand whether MFT can help explain different responses by individuals and identify which framings are associated with stronger responses for different moral foundations. This study investigates the moderating effects of moral foundations on individuals’ responsiveness to different emission information framings. Utilizing data from discrete choice experiments involving 2015 Canadian drivers, we examine how different moral foundations impact the willingness-to-pay (WTP) for reducing emissions. The results reveal that the impact of emissions information framing varies significantly according to individuals’ moral foundations. Specifically, moral values associated with Authority, Fairness, and Purity play negative moderating roles on WTP for CO2 emissions under different framings, whereas Ingroup and Harm foundations have positive moderating effects on WTP with the framings tested. Additionally, innovative communication tools like new emojis demonstrated strong positive effects on WTP, especially among those with strong Ingroup, Fairness, and Purity values. Conversely, individuals with a strong Authority value showed the lowest WTP when presented with pressure gauge visuals. Using appropriate framing based on Moral Foundation Theory can considerably change the willingness-to-pay for climate change emissions for different parts of the population, with a notable increase in WTP observed among individuals inclined to alter their behavior. Future framings should incorporate MFT in their design.

一个人的道德基础会影响他们对气候变化排放信息的反应吗?车辆选择实验
交通是气候变化的一个主要排放源。向人们提供有关这些排放的更多信息是帮助个人做出气候友好型选择的一种手段。然而,并非每个人都会受到同一类信息的影响。以往的研究表明,目标框架理论有助于提高气候变化排放信息的影响力,而且不同的框架会根据一些社会人口和态度特征产生不同程度的影响。然而,除了气候变化动机之外,还有哪些潜在的心理因素可以帮助我们理解为什么不同的框架对不同个体的影响不同?道德基础理论(MFT)确定了影响人们道德决定的关键价值观,为理解人们对信息的不同反应提供了一个有用的框架。本研究的目的是了解道德基础理论是否有助于解释个人的不同反应,并确定哪些框架与不同道德基础的更强反应相关联。本研究调查了道德基础对个人对不同排放信息框架的反应的调节作用。利用 2015 年加拿大司机离散选择实验的数据,我们考察了不同道德基础对减排支付意愿(WTP)的影响。结果表明,排放信息框架的影响因个人道德基础的不同而存在显著差异。具体来说,在不同的框架下,与权威、公平和纯洁相关的道德价值观对二氧化碳排放的 WTP 起着消极的调节作用,而 Ingroup 和 Harm 基金会在测试的框架下对 WTP 起着积极的调节作用。此外,新表情符号等创新交流工具对 WTP 有很强的正向影响,尤其是在具有强烈的 "群体"(Ingroup)、"公平"(Fairness)和 "纯洁"(Purity)价值观的人群中。相反,具有强烈权威价值观的人在看到压力表的视觉效果时,其 WTP 值最低。使用基于道德基础理论的适当框架可以大大改变不同人群对气候变化排放的支付意愿,在倾向于改变其行为的人群中,观察到他们的 WTP 显著增加。未来的框架设计应纳入道德基础理论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
14.60%
发文量
239
审稿时长
71 days
期刊介绍: Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour focuses on the behavioural and psychological aspects of traffic and transport. The aim of the journal is to enhance theory development, improve the quality of empirical studies and to stimulate the application of research findings in practice. TRF provides a focus and a means of communication for the considerable amount of research activities that are now being carried out in this field. The journal provides a forum for transportation researchers, psychologists, ergonomists, engineers and policy-makers with an interest in traffic and transport psychology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信