Trevor S. Lies , Syed Muhammad Omar , Harrison J. Schmitt , Glenn Adams
{"title":"保护自然,抵制变化:政治保守主义与反体制环保主义的回避","authors":"Trevor S. Lies , Syed Muhammad Omar , Harrison J. Schmitt , Glenn Adams","doi":"10.1016/j.jenvp.2025.102724","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Conventional wisdom and scientific research suggest that political conservatism is at odds with support for environmentalism. Across two survey studies and an experiment (total N = 1995) we consider the possibility that this relationship varies by environmentalism type and ethnic-racial category. Whereas political conservatism was negatively related to support for environmentalism, this relationship was significantly weaker for initiatives that prioritize conservation of supposedly pristine nature (Wilderness Preservation; WP) than initiatives that advocate techno-fixes to ecological degradation (Ecomodernism; EM) or acknowledge and address power structures and the suffering of marginalized groups (Environmental Justice; EJ; Studies 1–3), and these patterns were generally more pronounced among White compared to Black and Latine participants (Studies 2 and 3). Study 3 provides causal evidence that the relationship of conservatism with support varies by environmentalism type and shows that this relationship varies by ethnic-racial category. Mediation analyses reveal that the weaker relationship of conservatism with WP support (versus EM and EJ) stemmed in part from the perception of EM and especially EJ as threats to U.S. society. We emphasize the importance of foregrounding sociocultural context in the study of political ideology, ‘polarization,’ and environmentalism.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48439,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Psychology","volume":"106 ","pages":"Article 102724"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conserving nature, resisting change: Political conservatism and evasion of anti-systemic environmentalisms\",\"authors\":\"Trevor S. Lies , Syed Muhammad Omar , Harrison J. Schmitt , Glenn Adams\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jenvp.2025.102724\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Conventional wisdom and scientific research suggest that political conservatism is at odds with support for environmentalism. Across two survey studies and an experiment (total N = 1995) we consider the possibility that this relationship varies by environmentalism type and ethnic-racial category. Whereas political conservatism was negatively related to support for environmentalism, this relationship was significantly weaker for initiatives that prioritize conservation of supposedly pristine nature (Wilderness Preservation; WP) than initiatives that advocate techno-fixes to ecological degradation (Ecomodernism; EM) or acknowledge and address power structures and the suffering of marginalized groups (Environmental Justice; EJ; Studies 1–3), and these patterns were generally more pronounced among White compared to Black and Latine participants (Studies 2 and 3). Study 3 provides causal evidence that the relationship of conservatism with support varies by environmentalism type and shows that this relationship varies by ethnic-racial category. Mediation analyses reveal that the weaker relationship of conservatism with WP support (versus EM and EJ) stemmed in part from the perception of EM and especially EJ as threats to U.S. society. We emphasize the importance of foregrounding sociocultural context in the study of political ideology, ‘polarization,’ and environmentalism.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48439,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Environmental Psychology\",\"volume\":\"106 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102724\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-08\",\"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/S0272494425002075\",\"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/S0272494425002075","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Conserving nature, resisting change: Political conservatism and evasion of anti-systemic environmentalisms
Conventional wisdom and scientific research suggest that political conservatism is at odds with support for environmentalism. Across two survey studies and an experiment (total N = 1995) we consider the possibility that this relationship varies by environmentalism type and ethnic-racial category. Whereas political conservatism was negatively related to support for environmentalism, this relationship was significantly weaker for initiatives that prioritize conservation of supposedly pristine nature (Wilderness Preservation; WP) than initiatives that advocate techno-fixes to ecological degradation (Ecomodernism; EM) or acknowledge and address power structures and the suffering of marginalized groups (Environmental Justice; EJ; Studies 1–3), and these patterns were generally more pronounced among White compared to Black and Latine participants (Studies 2 and 3). Study 3 provides causal evidence that the relationship of conservatism with support varies by environmentalism type and shows that this relationship varies by ethnic-racial category. Mediation analyses reveal that the weaker relationship of conservatism with WP support (versus EM and EJ) stemmed in part from the perception of EM and especially EJ as threats to U.S. society. We emphasize the importance of foregrounding sociocultural context in the study of political ideology, ‘polarization,’ and environmentalism.
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