Differentiating environmental concern in the context of psychological adaption to climate change
Differentiating environmental concern in the context of psychological adaption to climate change
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.11.012
复制
发表时间：
2018-01-01
影响因子：
8.9
通讯作者：
Craig, Zelieann R.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Helm, Sabrina V.;Pollitt, Amanda;Craig, Zelieann R.
尽管现有的证据表明生活在美国的人们面临着气候变化的威胁，这种威胁的心理影响在公共和科学讨论中被忽视，导致明显缺乏关于个人适应气候变化的研究。利用社会认知理论，我们研究了三种形式的环境关注如何自我（例如，关心自己;一个人的健康或生命），社会利他主义（例如，关心他人;后代或国家）和生物圈（例如，对动植物的关注;自然）影响同时发生的生态压力和生态应对策略。此外，我们还研究了生态压力和应对与抑郁症状和亲环境行为的关系。在对342名美国成年人的在线调查中，我们发现了三种形式的环境关注的独特模式。只有生物圈环境关注度较高的个体才能感知到生态压力并进行生态应对。与此相反，个人更高的社会利他主义的关注没有感知到生态压力，但确实从事生态应对。那些更高的自我关注既没有感知到生态压力，也没有参与应对。此外，感知生态压力与抑郁症状呈正相关;生态应对负向预测抑郁症状，而正向预测亲环境行为。总之，除了那些高度关注生物圈的人之外，研究参与者似乎并不认为气候变化威胁对他们自己或家人的生活产生了深远的影响。区分三种形式的环境关注提供了一个微妙的观点，即它们与生态压力和应对的关系，以及抑郁症状和亲环境行为。结果表明，目前的公共政策方法，往往侧重于自然环境时，描绘或解释气候变化的影响，可能会限制干预措施的有效性，对那些已经表现出高度关注所有生物的人，而未能影响那些出于利己主义或利他主义的关注，增加了与延迟适应气候变化相关的风险，并可能对我们社会的心理健康产生大规模负面影响。
Despite existing evidence for the threats of climate change facing people living in the U.S., the psychological impacts of this threat have been neglected in public and scientific discourse, resulting in a notable lack in studies on individuals' adaptation to climate change. Using social-cognitive theory, we examine how three forms of environmental concern egoistic (e.g., concern for oneself; one's health or life), social-altruistic (e.g., concern for others; future generations or country), and biospheric (e.g., concern for plants and animals; nature) influence concurrent ecological stress and ecological coping strategies. Further, we examine how ecological stress and coping are associated with both depressive symptoms and pro-environmental behaviors. In an online survey of 342 U.S. adults we found unique patterns of the three forms of environmental concern. Only individuals higher in biospheric environmental concern perceived ecological stress and engaged in ecological coping. In contrast, individuals higher in social-altruistic concern did not perceive ecological stress, but did engage in ecological coping. Those higher in egoistic concern neither perceived ecological stress, nor engaged in coping. In addition, perceived ecological stress was positively associated with depressive symptoms; ecological coping negatively predicted depressive symptoms, while positively predicting pro-environmental behaviors. In sum, with the exception of those high in biospheric concern, study participants did not seem to perceive climate change threats as having a profound effect on their own or their family's life.Differentiating three forms of environmental concern provides a nuanced view on their association with ecological stress and coping, and in turn depressive symptoms and pro-environmental behaviors. Results indicate that current public policy approaches that often focus on the natural environment when depicting or explaining the effects of climate change, may limit the effectiveness of interventions to those people who already show high concern for all living creatures, while failing to affect those motivated by egoistic or altruistic concern, increasing the risks associated with delaying climate change adaptation and the potential for large-scale negative mental health effects in our society.