减缓气候变化:人道主义动机还是环境动机?

IF 6.1 1区 心理学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Nicolas E. Neef , Sarah Zabel , Siegmar Otto
{"title":"减缓气候变化:人道主义动机还是环境动机?","authors":"Nicolas E. Neef ,&nbsp;Sarah Zabel ,&nbsp;Siegmar Otto","doi":"10.1016/j.jenvp.2024.102483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Addressing climate change at the individual level and the associated conflict between self-interest and the common good is viewed primarily as a motivational challenge in the environmental domain. However, due to this conflict, climate change mitigation has also been framed as a classical social dilemma that requires direct, overt cooperation with other people. Thus, there seems to be a lack of clarity in the extents to which climate change mitigation depends on humanitarian-prosocial motivation or environmental motivation. This study investigates the extents to which individual climate change mitigation is driven by humanitarian and environmental motivation – two motivations that are rooted in an inherent human prosocial propensity that stems from a combination of our genetic makeup and our established culture of prosocial behavior. We conducted a laboratory experiment using an adapted Public Goods Game in an environmental context with <em>N</em> = 201 participants. We found that both humanitarian and environmental motivation positively predicted pro-environmental choices in the Public Goods Game, with humanitarian motivation as the stronger predictor. On a theoretical level, these results suggest that environmentally positive behaviors that demand significant cooperation could be more accurately understood as both humanitarian-prosocial behaviors and pro-environmental actions. On a practical level, interventions should be tailored to the required level of cooperation, for instance, through framing or by promoting a sense of connectedness with either fellow humans or nature.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48439,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Psychology","volume":"100 ","pages":"Article 102483"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Climate change mitigation: A question of humanitarian or environmental motivation?\",\"authors\":\"Nicolas E. Neef ,&nbsp;Sarah Zabel ,&nbsp;Siegmar Otto\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jenvp.2024.102483\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Addressing climate change at the individual level and the associated conflict between self-interest and the common good is viewed primarily as a motivational challenge in the environmental domain. However, due to this conflict, climate change mitigation has also been framed as a classical social dilemma that requires direct, overt cooperation with other people. Thus, there seems to be a lack of clarity in the extents to which climate change mitigation depends on humanitarian-prosocial motivation or environmental motivation. This study investigates the extents to which individual climate change mitigation is driven by humanitarian and environmental motivation – two motivations that are rooted in an inherent human prosocial propensity that stems from a combination of our genetic makeup and our established culture of prosocial behavior. We conducted a laboratory experiment using an adapted Public Goods Game in an environmental context with <em>N</em> = 201 participants. We found that both humanitarian and environmental motivation positively predicted pro-environmental choices in the Public Goods Game, with humanitarian motivation as the stronger predictor. On a theoretical level, these results suggest that environmentally positive behaviors that demand significant cooperation could be more accurately understood as both humanitarian-prosocial behaviors and pro-environmental actions. On a practical level, interventions should be tailored to the required level of cooperation, for instance, through framing or by promoting a sense of connectedness with either fellow humans or nature.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48439,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Environmental Psychology\",\"volume\":\"100 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102483\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-08\",\"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/S0272494424002561\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272494424002561","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

摘要

在个人层面应对气候变化以及与之相关的自身利益和共同利益之间的冲突,主要被视为环境领域的一项激励挑战。然而,由于这种冲突,减缓气候变化也被视为一种典型的社会困境,需要与其他人进行直接、公开的合作。因此,气候变化减缓在多大程度上取决于人道主义--社会动机或环境动机,这一点似乎并不明确。本研究调查了个人减缓气候变化的行为在多大程度上受人道主义动机和环境动机的驱动,这两种动机根植于人类固有的亲社会倾向,而人类固有的亲社会倾向源于我们的基因构成和我们既有的亲社会行为文化。我们进行了一项实验室实验,在环境背景下使用改编过的公益游戏,参与者人数为 201 人。我们发现,在公益游戏中,人道主义动机和环境动机都能积极预测亲环境选择,而人道主义动机的预测作用更大。在理论层面上,这些结果表明,需要大量合作的积极环保行为可以更准确地理解为人道主义-社会行为和环保行动。在实践层面上,干预措施应根据所需的合作程度进行调整,例如,通过框架或促进与人类或自然的联系感。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Climate change mitigation: A question of humanitarian or environmental motivation?
Addressing climate change at the individual level and the associated conflict between self-interest and the common good is viewed primarily as a motivational challenge in the environmental domain. However, due to this conflict, climate change mitigation has also been framed as a classical social dilemma that requires direct, overt cooperation with other people. Thus, there seems to be a lack of clarity in the extents to which climate change mitigation depends on humanitarian-prosocial motivation or environmental motivation. This study investigates the extents to which individual climate change mitigation is driven by humanitarian and environmental motivation – two motivations that are rooted in an inherent human prosocial propensity that stems from a combination of our genetic makeup and our established culture of prosocial behavior. We conducted a laboratory experiment using an adapted Public Goods Game in an environmental context with N = 201 participants. We found that both humanitarian and environmental motivation positively predicted pro-environmental choices in the Public Goods Game, with humanitarian motivation as the stronger predictor. On a theoretical level, these results suggest that environmentally positive behaviors that demand significant cooperation could be more accurately understood as both humanitarian-prosocial behaviors and pro-environmental actions. On a practical level, interventions should be tailored to the required level of cooperation, for instance, through framing or by promoting a sense of connectedness with either fellow humans or nature.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
8.70%
发文量
140
审稿时长
62 days
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
×
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