Samantha K. Stanley, Zoe Leviston, Kirsti M. Jylhä, Iain Walker
{"title":"Conservative Opposition to Climate Policy May be Partially Threat-Based: A Test and Critique of the Integrated Threat Model of Climate Attitudes","authors":"Samantha K. Stanley, Zoe Leviston, Kirsti M. Jylhä, Iain Walker","doi":"10.1111/jasp.13104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>One explanation for the link between political conservatism and rejection of the science and solutions of climate change is based on perceived threats. Yet, until recently, this claim has not been studied by simultaneously considering the different levels at which individuals may experience a sense of threat (i.e., threat of climate change or climate policy, at personal or collective level, on economic or cultural domains). A recent theoretical advance integrated the existing threat-based explanations for conservatives' lower acceptance of climate change and support for pro-climate policy. We aimed to subject aspects of this integrated threat model of climate change attitudes to empirical testing through a series of three studies (Study 1 <i>N</i> = 5110, Study 2 <i>N</i> = 299, Study 3 <i>N</i> = 552). We found the hypothesized threat asymmetry in risk assessments of climate change and its solutions, whereby conservative ideologies predict greater perceived threat from climate policy, and lower perceived threat from climate change itself. Also consistent with the model, we found evidence that cross-sectionally, threat partially mediated associations between ideology and policy support. However, we also report on an unsuccessful experimental test of the model. Prompting people to think about the economic or cultural consequences of climate policy did not heighten conservatives' perceptions of policy threat (i.e., a manipulation failure), and thus did not have the expected exacerbating effect on their climate policy concern. Findings suggest conservatives' threat-based concerns about climate policy may be difficult to shift experimentally and provide only a partial explanation for their lower policy support.</p>","PeriodicalId":48404,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Social Psychology","volume":"55 7","pages":"497-510"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jasp.13104","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jasp.13104","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
One explanation for the link between political conservatism and rejection of the science and solutions of climate change is based on perceived threats. Yet, until recently, this claim has not been studied by simultaneously considering the different levels at which individuals may experience a sense of threat (i.e., threat of climate change or climate policy, at personal or collective level, on economic or cultural domains). A recent theoretical advance integrated the existing threat-based explanations for conservatives' lower acceptance of climate change and support for pro-climate policy. We aimed to subject aspects of this integrated threat model of climate change attitudes to empirical testing through a series of three studies (Study 1 N = 5110, Study 2 N = 299, Study 3 N = 552). We found the hypothesized threat asymmetry in risk assessments of climate change and its solutions, whereby conservative ideologies predict greater perceived threat from climate policy, and lower perceived threat from climate change itself. Also consistent with the model, we found evidence that cross-sectionally, threat partially mediated associations between ideology and policy support. However, we also report on an unsuccessful experimental test of the model. Prompting people to think about the economic or cultural consequences of climate policy did not heighten conservatives' perceptions of policy threat (i.e., a manipulation failure), and thus did not have the expected exacerbating effect on their climate policy concern. Findings suggest conservatives' threat-based concerns about climate policy may be difficult to shift experimentally and provide only a partial explanation for their lower policy support.
对于政治保守主义与拒绝气候变化的科学和解决方案之间的联系,一种解释是基于对威胁的感知。然而,直到最近,这一说法还没有同时考虑到个人可能经历威胁感的不同水平(即,气候变化或气候政策的威胁,在个人或集体层面,在经济或文化领域)。最近的一项理论进展整合了现有的基于威胁的解释,以解释保守派对气候变化的接受程度较低和对气候政策的支持。我们的目标是通过一系列三项研究(研究1 N = 5110,研究2 N = 299,研究3 N = 552),对气候变化态度的综合威胁模型的各个方面进行实证检验。我们发现在气候变化及其解决方案的风险评估中存在假设的威胁不对称,即保守意识形态预测气候政策的感知威胁更大,而气候变化本身的感知威胁更低。同样与模型一致的是,我们发现证据表明,威胁在横截面上部分介导了意识形态和政策支持之间的关联。然而,我们也报告了一个不成功的实验测试的模型。促使人们思考气候政策的经济或文化后果并没有增强保守派对政策威胁(即操纵失败)的看法,因此没有对他们的气候政策担忧产生预期的加剧作用。研究结果表明,保守派对气候政策基于威胁的担忧可能很难从实验上改变,并且只能部分解释他们较低的政策支持。
期刊介绍:
Published since 1971, Journal of Applied Social Psychology is a monthly publication devoted to applications of experimental behavioral science research to problems of society (e.g., organizational and leadership psychology, safety, health, and gender issues; perceptions of war and natural hazards; jury deliberation; performance, AIDS, cancer, heart disease, exercise, and sports).