Understanding the Paradoxical Effects of (Environmental) Activists and Their Discourses: When and How are They Penalized for Seeking Change?

ABSTRACT Activists are often negatively stereotyped and appraised, yet they can also influence the change they seek. This suggests that the dimensions and processes involved in their stereotyping and their influence are still unclear, as are the impacts of their argumentative style and the level of social consensus about the cause they defend. We focus on clarifying through an experimental study (n = 226): (1) how the argumentative style – radical or moderate – environmental activists employ and the level of societal consensus about their cause affect how they are viewed in three stereotypical dimensions (warmth, competence, and trustworthiness); (2) how these dimensions are associated with a general appraisal of the activist and with (3) respondents’ pro-environmental behavioral intentions. Results both corroborate and challenge previous findings, suggesting that activists are penalized on warmth, but not competence, that trustworthiness elicited by (radical) activists, and societal consensus play relevant roles. Suggestions for more nuanced communication strategies informed by these findings are discussed.