Efficacy, Action, and Support for Reducing Climate Change Risks
Efficacy, Action, and Support for Reducing Climate Change Risks
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/risa.13210
复制
发表时间：
2019-04-01
期刊：
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Crosman, Katherine M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bostrom, Ann;Hayes, Adam L.;Crosman, Katherine M.
越来越多的研究表明，相信减少气候变化风险的行动是可能的（自我效能）和有效的（应对效能），对于激励和维持减少风险的努力至关重要。尽管功效信念具有潜在的关键作用，但在气候变化风险认知和沟通研究中，措施及其使用存在很大差异，因此很难从功效研究中进行比较和学习。为了解决这个问题，并推进我们对效能信念的理解，本文做出了三个贡献。首先，我们提出了一个理论上有动机的方法来衡量气候变化减缓的功效，根据不同的建议，感知和以前研究的战略。其次，我们在两个全国性调查样本中对此进行了测试（亚马逊的Mechanical Turk N = 405，GfK Knowledge Panel N = 1，820），通过行动水平和功效类型之间的歧视来展示基本一致的信念。四个附加效能量表出现：个人自我效能，个人反应效能，政府和集体自我效能，政府和集体反应效能。第三，我们采用由此产生的功效尺度调解模型来测试如何有效的信念预测气候变化政策的支持，控制特定的知识，风险认知和意识形态，并允许调解的关注。关注完全介导的相对较强的影响感知风险的政策支持，但只有部分介导的功效信念。更强的政府和集体反应效能信念和个人自我效能信念与减少气候变化风险的更大支持直接或间接相关，即使在控制了意识形态和气候变化因果信念之后。
A growing body of research demonstrates that believing action to reduce the risks of climate change is both possible (self-efficacy) and effective (response efficacy) is essential to motivate and sustain risk mitigation efforts. Despite this potentially critical role of efficacy beliefs, measures and their use vary wildly in climate change risk perception and communication research, making it hard to compare and learn from efficacy studies. To address this problem and advance our understanding of efficacy beliefs, this article makes three contributions. First, we present a theoretically motivated approach to measuring climate change mitigation efficacy, in light of diverse proposed, perceived, and previously researched strategies. Second, we test this in two national survey samples (Amazon's Mechanical Turk N = 405, GfK Knowledge Panel N = 1,820), demonstrating largely coherent beliefs by level of action and discrimination between types of efficacy. Four additive efficacy scales emerge: personal self-efficacy, personal response efficacy, government and collective self-efficacy, and government and collective response efficacy. Third, we employ the resulting efficacy scales in mediation models to test how well efficacy beliefs predict climate change policy support, controlling for specific knowledge, risk perceptions, and ideology, and allowing for mediation by concern. Concern fully mediates the relatively strong effects of perceived risk on policy support, but only partly mediates efficacy beliefs. Stronger government and collective response efficacy beliefs and personal self-efficacy beliefs are both directly and indirectly associated with greater support for reducing the risks of climate change, even after controlling for ideology and causal beliefs about climate change.