Search for: All records

Achieving global sustainability in the face of climate change, pandemics, and other global systemic threats will require collective intelligence and collective action beyond what we are currently experiencing. Increasing polarization within nations and populist trends that undercut international cooperation make the problem even harder. Allegiance within groups is often strengthened because of conflict among groups, leading to a form of polarization termed “affective.” Hope for addressing these global problems will require recognition of the commonality in threats facing all groups collective intelligence that integrates relevant inputs from all sources but fights misinformation and coordinated, cooperative collective action. Elinor Ostrom’s notion of polycentric governance, involving centers of decision-making from the local to the global in a complex interacting framework, may provide a possible pathway to achieve these goals.

 

Pluralistic ignorance—a shared misperception of how others think or behave—poses a challenge to collective action on problems like climate change. Using a representative sample of Americans (N = 6119), we examine whether Americans accurately perceive national concern about climate change and support for mitigating policies. We find a form of pluralistic ignorance that we describe as afalse social reality: a near universal perception of public opinion that is the opposite of true public sentiment. Specifically, 80–90% of Americans underestimate the prevalence of support for major climate change mitigation policies and climate concern. While 66–80% Americans support these policies, Americans estimate the prevalence to only be between 37–43% on average. Thus, supporters of climate policies outnumber opponents two to one, while Americans falsely perceive nearly the opposite to be true. Further, Americans in every state and every assessed demographic underestimate support across all polices tested. Preliminary evidence suggests three sources of these misperceptions: (i) consistent with a false consensus effect, respondents who support these policies less (conservatives) underestimate support by a greater degree; controlling for one’s own personal politics, (ii) exposure to more conservative local norms and (iii) consuming conservative news correspond to greater misperceptions.

 

Behavioral responses influence the trajectories of epidemics. During the COVID-19 pandemic, nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) reduced pathogen transmission and mortality worldwide. However, despite the global pandemic threat, there was substantial cross-country variation in the adoption of protective behaviors that is not explained by disease prevalence alone. In particular, many countries show a pattern of slow initial mask adoption followed by sharp transitions to high acceptance rates. These patterns are characteristic of behaviors that depend on social norms or peer influence. We develop a game-theoretic model of mask wearing where the utility of wearing a mask depends on the perceived risk of infection, social norms, and mandates from formal institutions. In this model, increasing pathogen transmission or policy stringency can trigger social tipping points in collective mask wearing. We show that complex social dynamics can emerge from simple individual interactions and that sociocultural variables and local policies are important for recovering cross-country variation in the speed and breadth of mask adoption. These results have implications for public health policy and data collection. 

Emotions shape judgments and decisions, including actions in response to climate change. Despite growing interest in the cognitive, social, and political determinants of climate (in)action, the role of emotions has received limited attention. This review discusses the role of hope in climate action. While many emotional states are oriented to the past or present, hope offers a positive vision of the future. In exploratory analyses of a nationally representative survey of US residents, we identify the most important predictors of hope, climate action, and policy support from a large set of potential variables. We find suggestive evidence that hope, a construct comprised of cognitive, emotional, and contextual factors, is an important motivator of future-oriented action.

 

Abstract Transformation toward a sustainable future requires an earth stewardship approach to shift society from its current goal of increasing material wealth to a vision of sustaining built, natural, human, and social capital—equitably distributed across society, within and among nations. Widespread concern about earth’s current trajectory and support for actions that would foster more sustainable pathways suggests potential social tipping points in public demand for an earth stewardship vision. Here, we draw on empirical studies and theory to show that movement toward a stewardship vision can be facilitated by changes in either policy incentives or social norms. Our novel contribution is to point out that both norms and incentives must change and can do so interactively. This can be facilitated through leverage points and complementarities across policy areas, based on values, system design, and agency. Potential catalysts include novel democratic institutions and engagement of non-governmental actors, such as businesses, civic leaders, and social movements as agents for redistribution of power. Because no single intervention will transform the world, a key challenge is to align actions to be synergistic, persistent, and scalable. 

Prosocial behavior is critical to address global social, environmental, and economic challenges. Yet humans often do not act with the benefit of others in mind, especially when those others are distant and unknown. We suggest that a failure to act prosocially may stem in part from cognitive and emotional capacity limitations. Hence an intervention that reduces worry about the self and thereby increases available resources may foster prosociality. Starting from self‐affirmation theory which posits that affirming the self can establish self‐integrity, we propose that a values affirmation intervention can motivate prosociality through fostering positive self‐regard. Across two studies we find that, compared to control participants, affirmed participants display greater willingness to volunteer time and exhibit increased actual prosocial behavior by completing an unpaid study and donating real money to charity. As hypothesized, increases in positive self‐regard mediate the effect of values affirmation on prosocial behavioral intentions as well as behavior.

 

For positive experiences (e.g., when to eat a snack), consumers generally prefer to have them immediately, and for negative experiences (e.g., when to pay a bill), consumers often prefer to delay. Yet, across three studies (plus twelve supplemental studies) we find that anticipatory feelings push in the opposite direction, and do so differently for positive vs. negative events, leading to different time preferences: The desire for immediate positives is stronger than the desire to delay negatives. For negative events, anticipatory utility is strongly negative, reducing the desire to delay bad things (i.e., consumers want to “get it over with” to minimize the psychological discomfort), but for positive events, overall anticipatory utility is weakly positive, and therefore does little to reduce consumers’ desire to expedite good things. This anticipatory asymmetry happens because when consumers think about a futurepositiveevent, they both enjoy imagining it (savoring) while simultaneously disliking the feeling of waiting for it (impatience), but when consumers think about anegativeevent, they both dislike imagining it (dread) and dislike the feeling of waiting for it. We demonstrate the managerial implications of these findings in a pair of field studies using online advertisements for retirement planning.