The effect of moral appeals on pro-environmental behavior
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
It is a widely known fact that climate change is a manmade problem that has immense repercussions and is affecting us all. Given the major impact that people’s acts and behaviors have on the environment, the only way to combat climate change is by changing people’s environmentally destructive behavior, and making them act more pro-environmentally. However, creating behavior change in people is a difficult task. Therefore, it is important for research to look into different ways that could help to change the behavior of people in a positive way. As established by self-determination theory, motivation, which can be defined as the engagement with goal-directed behavior, is an integral factor for creating behavior change (Deci and Ryan, 2008). Even in the absence of attractive external incentives, intrinsic motivation to combat climate change and its effects has been found to increase people’s engagement with pro-environmental behavior (Balunde, 2023). Appeals to morality could be one way of increasing people’s intrinsic motivation. Moral appeals can be defined as messages aiming to invoke a sense of moral responsibility. Because acting morally and being seen as moral agents is of great importance to people, reminding people of their moral responsibility may have a positive impact on their behavior, as it may make them engage in more pro-environmental behavior (Ellemers and Van Nunspeet, 2020). Therefore, playing into people’s morality might be a good way to increase people’s motivation, thereby encouraging them to act more pro-environmentally. However, the opposite could also be true. As some people may perceive appeals to their moral responsibility as a threat to their identities, such reminders of their moral responsibility might instead lead to counterproductive reactions (Van Nunspeet and Ellemers, 2023). The purpose of this research study is to compare the effect of moral appeals priming individual responsibility and moral appeals priming collective responsibility, on pro-environmental behavior. Participants of the study will perform a time estimation task in which different conditions allow them to receive monetary gains either for themselves, for the Climate Disaster Fund, or to receive no money at all. Before and during the task, participants are shown a text including a moral appeal, either priming their collective or individual responsibility to take care of the climate. Based on their performance in the different conditions, conclusions will be drawn about the effectiveness of the two types of moral appeals to encourage pro-environmental behavior. Additionally, a questionnaire will be used to measure behavioral intentions and responsibility towards the climate. Balunde, A. (2023). The power of environmental considerations to guide pro-environmental behavior among different people and in different contexts: [University of Groningen]. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 49(3), 182-185. Ellemers, N., & Van Nunspeet, F. (2020). Neuroscience and the social origins of moral behavior: How neural underpinnings of social categorization and conformity affect everyday moral and immoral behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(5), 513-520. Van Nunspeet, F., & Ellemers, N. (2023). Regulating other people’s moral behaviors: Turning vicious cycles into virtuous cycles. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 136843022311595.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,045 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,021 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».