Energy conservation goals: What people adopt, what they recommend, and why

Failures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by adopting policies, technologies, and lifestyle changes have led the world to the brink of crisis, or likely beyond. Here we use Internet surveys to attempt to understand these failures by studying factors that affect the adoption of personal energy conservation behaviors and also endorsement of energy conservation goals proposed for others. We demonstrate an asymmetry between goals for self and others (“I’ll do the easy thing, you do the hard thing”), but we show that this asymmetry is partly produced by actor/observer differences: people know what they do already (and generally do not propose those actions as personal goals) and also know their own situational constraints that are barriers to action. We also show, however, that endorsement of conservation goals decreases steeply as a function of perceived difficulty; this suggests a role for motivated cognition as a barrier to conservation: difficult things are perceived as less applicable to one’s situation.

[1]  Deepak Rajagopal,et al.  Enabling energy conservation through effective decision aids , 2015 .

[2]  Aaron C. Kay,et al.  Solution aversion: On the relation between ideology and motivated disbelief. , 2014, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[3]  Michael D. Buhrmester,et al.  Amazon's Mechanical Turk , 2011, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[4]  M. Dekay,et al.  Public perceptions of energy consumption and savings , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[5]  Thomas Dietz,et al.  Design principles for carbon emissions reduction programs. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[6]  G. T. Gardner,et al.  Household actions can provide a behavioral wedge to rapidly reduce US carbon emissions , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  Lisa M. Schwartz,et al.  The Role of Numeracy in Understanding the Benefit of Screening Mammography , 1997, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[8]  P. Slovic,et al.  A psychological study of the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit. , 1994, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[9]  Z. Kunda,et al.  The case for motivated reasoning. , 1990, Psychological bulletin.

[10]  E. E. Jones Attribution: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior , 1987 .

[11]  Edward Nelson,et al.  Syntax and Semantics , 1974 .

[12]  R. Dunlap,et al.  Measuring Endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: A Revised NEP Scale , 2000 .

[13]  E. E. Jones,et al.  The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. , 1972 .