Climate Change From a Distance: An Analysis of Construal Level and Psychological Distance From Climate Change

The public perception of climate change as abstract and distant may undermine climate action. According to construal level theory, whether a phenomenon is perceived as psychologically distant or close is associated with whether it is construed as abstract or concrete, respectively. Previous work has established a link between psychological distance and climate action, but the associated role of construal level has yet to be explored in depth. In two representative surveys of Australians (N = 217 and N = 216), and one experiment (N = 319), we tested whether construal level and psychological distance from climate change predicted pro-environmental intentions and policy support, and whether manipulating distance and construal increased pro-environmental behaviors such as donations. Results showed that psychological closeness to climate change predicted more engagement in pro-environmental behaviors, while construal level produced inconsistent results, and manipulations of both variables failed to produce increases in pro-environmental behaviors. In contrast with the central tenet of construal level theory, construal level was unrelated to psychological distance in all three studies. Our findings suggest that the hypothesized relationship between construal level and psychological distance may not hold in the context of climate change, and that it may be difficult to change pro-environmental behavior by manipulating these variables.

[1]  N. Pidgeon,et al.  Spatial Framing, Existing Associations and Climate Change Beliefs , 2018, Environmental Values.

[2]  Mark J. Hurlstone,et al.  Emotions predict policy support: Why it matters how people feel about climate change , 2018 .

[3]  Z. J. Yang,et al.  Does reduced psychological distance increase climate engagement? On the limits of localizing climate change , 2018 .

[4]  M. Hulme,et al.  A Reply to Cook and Oreskes on Climate Science Consensus Messaging , 2017 .

[5]  S. Sacchi,et al.  Myopic about climate change: Cognitive style, psychological distance, and environmentalism , 2016 .

[6]  Z. J. Yang,et al.  Here and now, there and then: How “departure dates” influence climate change engagement , 2016 .

[7]  S. Moser.  Reflections on climate change communication research and practice in the second decade of the 21st century: what more is there to say? , 2016 .

[8]  B. Newell,et al.  Personal experience and the ‘psychological distance’ of climate change: An integrative review , 2015 .

[9]  Thomas A. Morton,et al.  Psychological responses to the proximity of climate change , 2015 .

[10]  Linda Steg,et al.  Psychological research and global climate change , 2015 .

[11]  Alison Ledgerwood,et al.  The effects of psychological distance on abstraction: Two meta-analyses. , 2015, Psychological bulletin.

[12]  S. Dessai,et al.  Hand in Hand: Public Endorsement of Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation , 2015, PloS one.

[13]  D. Decker,et al.  How Motivated Reasoning and Temporal Frames May Polarize Opinions About Wildlife Disease Risk , 2015 .

[14]  Gerhard Reese,et al.  Feeling Global, Acting Ethically: Global Identification and Fairtrade Consumption , 2015, The Journal of social psychology.

[15]  Kelly S. Fielding,et al.  Developing a social psychology of climate change , 2014 .

[16]  Steven Arnocky,et al.  Time Perspective and Sustainable Behavior , 2014 .

[17]  K. Fiedler,et al.  Response Category Width as a Psychophysical Manifestation of Construal Level and Distance , 2014, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[18]  L. Williams,et al.  The Distinct Affective Consequences of Psychological Distance and Construal Level , 2014 .

[19]  F. Boschetti,et al.  Measuring cultural values and beliefs about environment to identify their role in climate change responses , 2014 .

[20]  Jennifer Price,et al.  Fourth annual survey of Australian attitudes to climate change: interim report , 2014 .

[21]  A. Chasteen,et al.  THE TIME FOR ACTION IS NOW: SUBJECTIVE TEMPORAL PROXIMITY ENHANCES PURSUIT OF REMOTE-FUTURE GOALS , 2014 .

[22]  Gail L. Markle.  Pro-Environmental Behavior: Does It Matter How It’s Measured? Development and Validation of the Pro-Environmental Behavior Scale (PEBS) , 2013, Human Ecology.

[23]  Y. Trope,et al.  When time flies: how abstract and concrete mental construal affect the perception of time. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[24]  Sabine Pahl,et al.  Overcoming the Distance , 2013 .

[25]  Patrick Devine-Wright,et al.  Think global, act local? The relevance of place attachments and place identities in a climate changed world , 2013 .

[26]  R. Gifford,et al.  Personally Relevant Climate Change , 2013 .

[27]  P. Sol Hart,et al.  Boomerang Effects in Science Communication , 2012, Commun. Res..

[28]  Taciano L Milfont,et al.  Time perspective and environmental engagement: a meta-analysis. , 2012, International journal of psychology : Journal international de psychologie.

[29]  Jeff Joireman,et al.  Promotion Orientation Explains Why Future-Oriented People Exercise and Eat Healthy , 2012, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[30]  A. Spence,et al.  The Psychological Distance of Climate Change , 2012, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[31]  K. White,et al.  It's the Mind-Set that Matters: The Role of Construal Level and Message Framing in Influencing Consumer Efficacy and Conservation Behaviors , 2011 .

[32]  R. Gifford.  The dragons of inaction: psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. , 2011, The American psychologist.

[33]  L. Whitmarsh.  Scepticism and uncertainty about climate change: Dimensions, determinants and change over time , 2011 .

[34]  Nicholas Frank Pidgeon,et al.  Framing and Communicating Climate Change: The Effects of Distance and Outcome Frame Manipulations , 2010 .

[35]  Yaacov Trope,et al.  Flexibility now, consistency later: psychological distance and construal shape evaluative responding. , 2010, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[36]  Y. Trope,et al.  Construal-level theory of psychological distance. , 2010, Psychological review.

[37]  Tom Postmes,et al.  Time perspective and attitude-behaviour consistency in future-oriented behaviours. , 2010, The British journal of social psychology.

[38]  Leaf Van Boven,et al.  Feeling Close: Emotional Intensity Reduces Perceived Psychological Distance , 2010, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[39]  B. Verplanken,et al.  Think global, act local: The effect of goal and mindset specificity on willingness to donate to an environmental organization , 2009 .

[40]  C. Vlek,et al.  Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour : An integrative review and research agenda , 2009 .

[41]  David J. Hardisty,et al.  Discounting future green: money versus the environment. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[42]  S. Owens,et al.  How to change attitudes and behaviours in the context of energy , 2008 .

[43]  Y. Trope,et al.  The Psychology of Transcending the Here and Now , 2008, Science.

[44]  Thomas Dietz,et al.  The effects of information and state of residence on climate change policy preferences , 2008 .

[45]  Yaacov Trope,et al.  Automatic processing of psychological distance: evidence from a Stroop task. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[46]  Tommy Gärling,et al.  Cognitive and affective risk judgements related to climate change , 2007 .

[47]  Yaacov Trope,et al.  Probability as a psychological distance: Construal and preferences , 2007 .

[48]  Edgar Erdfelder,et al.  G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences , 2007, Behavior research methods.

[49]  Yaacov Trope,et al.  Construal levels and self-control. , 2006, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[50]  Paula Castro,et al.  Applying social psychology to the study of environmental concern and environmental worldviews: contributions from the social representations approach , 2006 .

[51]  Anthony A Leiserowitz,et al.  American Risk Perceptions: Is Climate Change Dangerous? , 2005, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[52]  M. Lima,et al.  Cultural theory meets the community : Worldviews and local issues , 2005 .

[53]  E. A. Locke,et al.  Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation. A 35-year odyssey. , 2002, The American psychologist.

[54]  David Uzzell,et al.  THE PSYCHO-SPATIAL DIMENSION OF GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS , 2000 .

[55]  Robin R. Vallacher,et al.  Levels of personal agency: Individual variation in action identification. , 1989 .

[56]  T. Pettigrew.  The measurement and correlates of category width as a cognitive variable1 , 1958 .

[57]  Encouraging Pro-Environmental Behaviour , 2019 .

[58]  P. Devine‐Wright,et al.  My country or my planet? Exploring the influence of multiple place attachments and ideological beliefs upon climate change attitudes and opinions , 2015 .

[59]  Andrea C. Samson.  Psychological Distance , 2014 .

[60]  Katherine M. Darwent.  Individual Differences in Travel Across Psychological Distances , 2012 .

[61]  G. Bradley,et al.  Public Risk Perceptions, Understandings, and Responses to Climate Change and Natural Disasters in Australia, 2010 and 2011 , 2012 .

[62]  Yaacov Trope,et al.  The effect of level of construal on the temporal distance of activity enactment , 2007 .

[63]  Yaacov Trope,et al.  Temporal construal. , 2003, Psychological review.

[64]  Eleanor Rosch,et al.  Principles of Categorization , 1978 .

[65]  M. Smith.  Field Theory in Social Science: Selected Theoretical Papers. , 1951 .