{"title":"Perceived support for climate policy in Australia: The asymmetrical influence of voting behaviour","authors":"Zoe Leviston , Samantha K. Stanley , Iain Walker","doi":"10.1016/j.jenvp.2024.102488","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>A comprehensive policy response from wealthy nations is a necessary step to limiting catastrophic climate change. Community attitudes toward policy, and polarisation along political lines, may threaten this response. Using two representative cross-sectional survey studies of Australian voters (<em>N</em> = 2013; <em>N</em> = 3834), we test levels of support for a range of climate policies, levels of partisan polarisation, and whether people misperceive support among other partisans (false polarisation). Importantly, we investigate how perceptions differ across voting groups spanning left-wing, centre-left-wing, centre-right-wing, and right-wing voting orientations. In Study 1, we find support for climate policy across the political spectrum. However, assumed support from others is routinely underestimated, with support estimates decreasing the less socially proximal the group being estimated is. Meanwhile, perceptions of others’ support relates positively to perceptions of policy legitimacy. While policy support is associated with partisanship, in Study 2 we find left-wing voters perceive partisan polarisation to be greater than it actually is (false polarisation), while right-wing voters <em>underestimate</em> actual polarisation. We also find perceived polarisation is associated with higher levels of issue relevance. We discuss our findings with respect to intergroup processes, and recommend that community consensus regarding support for climate policy action be emphasised.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48439,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Psychology","volume":"100 ","pages":"Article 102488"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272494424002615","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
A comprehensive policy response from wealthy nations is a necessary step to limiting catastrophic climate change. Community attitudes toward policy, and polarisation along political lines, may threaten this response. Using two representative cross-sectional survey studies of Australian voters (N = 2013; N = 3834), we test levels of support for a range of climate policies, levels of partisan polarisation, and whether people misperceive support among other partisans (false polarisation). Importantly, we investigate how perceptions differ across voting groups spanning left-wing, centre-left-wing, centre-right-wing, and right-wing voting orientations. In Study 1, we find support for climate policy across the political spectrum. However, assumed support from others is routinely underestimated, with support estimates decreasing the less socially proximal the group being estimated is. Meanwhile, perceptions of others’ support relates positively to perceptions of policy legitimacy. While policy support is associated with partisanship, in Study 2 we find left-wing voters perceive partisan polarisation to be greater than it actually is (false polarisation), while right-wing voters underestimate actual polarisation. We also find perceived polarisation is associated with higher levels of issue relevance. We discuss our findings with respect to intergroup processes, and recommend that community consensus regarding support for climate policy action be emphasised.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Environmental Psychology is the premier journal in the field, serving individuals in a wide range of disciplines who have an interest in the scientific study of the transactions and interrelationships between people and their surroundings (including built, social, natural and virtual environments, the use and abuse of nature and natural resources, and sustainability-related behavior). The journal publishes internationally contributed empirical studies and reviews of research on these topics that advance new insights. As an important forum for the field, the journal publishes some of the most influential papers in the discipline that reflect the scientific development of environmental psychology. Contributions on theoretical, methodological, and practical aspects of all human-environment interactions are welcome, along with innovative or interdisciplinary approaches that have a psychological emphasis. Research areas include: •Psychological and behavioral aspects of people and nature •Cognitive mapping, spatial cognition and wayfinding •Ecological consequences of human actions •Theories of place, place attachment, and place identity •Environmental risks and hazards: perception, behavior, and management •Perception and evaluation of buildings and natural landscapes •Effects of physical and natural settings on human cognition and health •Theories of proenvironmental behavior, norms, attitudes, and personality •Psychology of sustainability and climate change •Psychological aspects of resource management and crises •Social use of space: crowding, privacy, territoriality, personal space •Design of, and experiences related to, the physical aspects of workplaces, schools, residences, public buildings and public space