IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v172y2022i1d10.1007_s10584-022-03372-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Political ideology and psychological reactance: how serious should climate change be?

Author

Listed:
  • Eugene Y. Chan

    (Toronto Metropolitan University)

  • Jack Lin

    (California State University Northridge)

Abstract

The divide in how people with different political views act upon climate change is evident, with conservatives generally less likely to take action to limit the effects of climate change. Typical communications aimed at conveying the importance of climate change and its effects on both the environment and human well-being typically stress the “seriousness” of such effects. In the current examination, we posit that using such adjectives can actually exacerbate the left–right divide. This is likely because, we propose, conservatives are higher on psychological reactance, and so they see communications conveying the “gravity” of climate change to be a limitation of their free will, thus producing the opposite behaviors of what such communications intend. We find support for our hypothesis in two studies with Americans with both dispositional as well as situational psychological reactance measures. Our results offer novel policy implications regarding by suggesting how a typical communication tactic could actually hamper the very aims of such communications.

Suggested Citation

  • Eugene Y. Chan & Jack Lin, 2022. "Political ideology and psychological reactance: how serious should climate change be?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 172(1), pages 1-22, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:172:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10584-022-03372-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-022-03372-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-022-03372-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-022-03372-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Clee, Mona A & Wicklund, Robert A, 1980. "Consumer Behavior and Psychological Reactance," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 6(4), pages 389-405, March.
    2. John Loomis & Robert Richardson, 2006. "An external validity test of intended behavior: Comparing revealed preference and intended visitation in response to climate change," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(4), pages 621-630.
    3. James N. Druckman & Mary C. McGrath, 2019. "The evidence for motivated reasoning in climate change preference formation," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(2), pages 111-119, February.
    4. Krupnikov, Yanna & Levine, Adam Seth, 2014. "Cross-Sample Comparisons and External Validity," Journal of Experimental Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 59-80, April.
    5. Blair Kidwell & Adam Farmer & David M. Hardesty, 2013. "Getting Liberals and Conservatives to Go Green: Political Ideology and Congruent Appeals," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 40(2), pages 350-367.
    6. Aaron McCright, 2011. "Political orientation moderates Americans’ beliefs and concern about climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 104(2), pages 243-253, January.
    7. Robert J. Brulle & Galen Hall & Loredana Loy & Kennedy Schell-Smith, 2021. "Obstructing action: foundation funding and US climate change counter-movement organizations," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 1-7, May.
    8. Kevin E. Levay & Jeremy Freese & James N. Druckman, 2016. "The Demographic and Political Composition of Mechanical Turk Samples," SAGE Open, , vol. 6(1), pages 21582440166, March.
    9. Ann Bostrom & Adam L. Hayes & Katherine M. Crosman, 2019. "Efficacy, Action, and Support for Reducing Climate Change Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(4), pages 805-828, April.
    10. Ana-Maria Bliuc & Craig McGarty & Emma F. Thomas & Girish Lala & Mariette Berndsen & RoseAnne Misajon, 2015. "Public division about climate change rooted in conflicting socio-political identities," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(3), pages 226-229, March.
    11. David J. Hauser & Norbert Schwarz, 2015. "It’s a Trap! Instructional Manipulation Checks Prompt Systematic Thinking on “Tricky†Tasks," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(2), pages 21582440155, April.
    12. Kiju Jung & Ellen Garbarino & Donnel A. Briley & Jesse Wynhausen, 2017. "Blue and Red Voices: Effects of Political Ideology on Consumers’ Complaining and Disputing Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 44(3), pages 477-499.
    13. Berinsky, Adam J. & Huber, Gregory A. & Lenz, Gabriel S., 2012. "Evaluating Online Labor Markets for Experimental Research: Amazon.com's Mechanical Turk," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 351-368, July.
    14. Adam Mayer & E. Keith Smith, 2019. "Unstoppable climate change? The influence of fatalistic beliefs about climate change on behavioural change and willingness to pay cross-nationally," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 511-523, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jessica R. Murfree, 2023. "Exploring Major League Baseball Fans’ Climate Change Risk Perceptions and Adaptation Willingness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-17, May.
    2. Rains, Stephen A. & Colombo, Paulina M. & Quick, Brian L. & Kriss, Lauren A., 2022. "State mask mandates and psychological reactance theory: The role of political partisanship and COVID-19 risk in mask adoption and resistance," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 314(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pierce, Jonathan J. & Boudet, Hilary & Zanocco, Chad & Hillyard, Megan, 2018. "Analyzing the factors that influence U.S. public support for exporting natural gas," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 666-674.
    2. Beth L. Fossen & Girish Mallapragada & Anwesha De, 2021. "Impact of Political Television Advertisements on Viewers’ Response to Subsequent Advertisements," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(2), pages 305-324, March.
    3. John Hulland & Jeff Miller, 2018. "“Keep on Turkin’”?," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 789-794, September.
    4. Alexsandros Cavgias & Raphael Corbi, Luis Meloni, Lucas M. Novaes, 2019. "EDITED DEMOCRACY: Media Manipulation and the News Coverage of Presidential Debates," Working Papers, Department of Economics 2019_17, University of São Paulo (FEA-USP).
    5. Carola Binder, 2020. "Coronavirus Fears and Macroeconomic Expectations," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 102(4), pages 721-730, October.
    6. Sönke Ehret & Sara M. Constantino & Elke U. Weber & Charles Efferson & Sonja Vogt, 2022. "Group Identities Make Fragile Tipping Points," CESifo Working Paper Series 9737, CESifo.
    7. Soojong Kim, 2019. "Directionality of information flow and echoes without chambers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-22, May.
    8. Verena Schoenmueller & Oded Netzer & Florian Stahl, 2023. "Frontiers: Polarized America: From Political Polarization to Preference Polarization," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(1), pages 48-60, January.
    9. Ulf J. J. Hahnel & Christian Mumenthaler & Tobia Spampatti & Tobias Brosch, 2020. "Ideology as Filter: Motivated Information Processing and Decision-Making in the Energy Domain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-19, October.
    10. Septianto, Felix & Northey, Gavin & Dolan, Rebecca, 2019. "The effects of political ideology and message framing on counterfeiting: The mediating role of emotions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 206-214.
    11. John T. Jost & Melanie Langer & Vishal Singh, 2017. "The Politics of Buying, Boycotting, Complaining, and Disputing: An Extension of the Research Program by Jung, Garbarino, Briley, and Wynhausen," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 44(3), pages 503-510.
    12. Katherine M. Crosman & Ann Bostrom & Adam L. Hayes, 2019. "Efficacy Foundations for Risk Communication: How People Think About Reducing the Risks of Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(10), pages 2329-2347, October.
    13. Bell Elizabeth & Fryar Alisa Hicklin & Johnson Tyler, 2021. "Exploring Public Perceptions of Nonprofit Policy Advocacy," Nonprofit Policy Forum, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 311-340, July.
    14. Knollenborg, Leonard & Sommer, Stephan, 2021. "Diverging beliefs on climate change and climate policy in Germany: The role of political orientations," Ruhr Economic Papers 909, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    15. Binder, Carola Conces, 2022. "Time-of-day and day-of-week variations in Amazon Mechanical Turk survey responses," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    16. van Esch, Patrick & Cui, Yuanyuan (Gina) & Jain, Shailendra Pratap, 2021. "The effect of political ideology and message frame on donation intent during the COVID-19 pandemic," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 201-213.
    17. Cafferata, Alessia & Dávila-Fernández, Marwil J. & Sordi, Serena, 2021. "Seeing what can(not) be seen: Confirmation bias, employment dynamics and climate change," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 567-586.
    18. Adam Seth Levine & Reuben Kline, 2017. "A new approach for evaluating climate change communication," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 142(1), pages 301-309, May.
    19. Ketron, Seth & Kwaramba, Shingirai & Williams, Miranda, 2022. "The “company politics” of social stances: How conservative vs. liberal consumers respond to corporate political stance-taking," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 354-362.
    20. Logan S. Casey & Jesse Chandler & Adam Seth Levine & Andrew Proctor & Dara Z. Strolovitch, 2017. "Intertemporal Differences Among MTurk Workers: Time-Based Sample Variations and Implications for Online Data Collection," SAGE Open, , vol. 7(2), pages 21582440177, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:172:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10584-022-03372-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.