Behaviors? - CU Scholar

How Does Climate Change Content on Social Media Influence Individual Pro-environmental

Behaviors?

By

Izzy Sofio

University of Colorado at Boulder

A thesis submitted to the

University of Colorado at Boulder

in partial fulfillment

of the requirements to receive

Honors designation in

Environmental Studies

May 2020

Thesis Advisors:

Dale Miller, Environmental Studies Department, Committee Chair

Cassandra Brooks, Environmental Studies Department

Maxwell Boykoff, Environmental Studies Department

Phaedra Pezzullo, Communications Department

2020 by Izzy Sofio

All rights reserved

ii

Abstract

Environmental media has been known to shape attitudes and perceptions towards climate

change, while also expanding an individual’s knowledge of pro-environmental action. Social

media, an increasingly popular communication and media platform, is known to influence human

behavior. With both the rise of social media usage, especially amongst youth aged individuals,

and the increasing severity of our climate crisis, it is worthwhile to investigate how a

communication tool known to be influential could create pro-environmental behavioral change.

Creating more environmentally friendly behavioral norms through individual pro-environmental

behavior can help alleviate environmental degradation. However, it is not well known how social

media can play a role in influencing individual’s pro-environmental behaviors. Through a survey

based approach, this research investigates social media usage, current presentation and influence

of climate change content on social media, as well as how social media can be used to promote

more environmentally friendly behavior. This research was conducted amongst college students

at the University of Colorado at Boulder who were enrolled in the Fall section of Introduction to

Environmental Studies. With a 15.6% response rate, a sub-population amongst the survey

respondents was identified and further investigated to strengthen this research’s investigation

into how social media with climate change is currently influencing individual pro-environmental

behaviors.

iv

Table of Contents

Abstract ..................................................................................................................................................................ii

Lists of Tables and Figures ............................................................................................................................. v

Preface .................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Acknowledgments ...................................................................................................................................................................................2

Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... 3

Background .......................................................................................................................................................... 4 Climate Change Discussion Across Social Media Platforms ................................................................................................4 Ability to “Alert, Amplify, and Engage” ..........................................................................................................................................5 Pro-environmental Behavior .............................................................................................................................................................6 Past Studies On Media and Environmental Behaviors...........................................................................................................7

Methods.................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Survey Population ...................................................................................................................................................................................8 Survey Design ............................................................................................................................................................................................9 Survey Data Collection ....................................................................................................................................................................... 10 Survey Data Analysis ........................................................................................................................................................................... 10

Results and Discussion .................................................................................................................................. 11 Survey Demographics ......................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Social Media Usage and Exposure to Climate Content ........................................................................................................ 12 Ecological Beliefs Presented on Social Media ......................................................................................................................... 15 Comparing the 25% ............................................................................................................................................................................. 17

Limitations and Shortcomings ................................................................................................................... 24

Conclusion and Implications ....................................................................................................................... 26

Appendices ........................................................................................................................................................ 29 Appendix A:.............................................................................................................................................................................................. 29 Appendix B:.............................................................................................................................................................................................. 29 Appendix C -Survey question reasoning.................................................................................................................................... 32 Appendix D – Answers from survey respondents who selected ‘Other’ where possible................................... 34 Appendix E – Answers for ‘person of importance’ ............................................................................................................... 34 Appendix F – Behavioral Engagement Averages across the entire survey population, Group 1, and Group 2. .................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 34

References ......................................................................................................................................................... 35

v

Lists of Tables and Figures

Figure 1.1 List of other terms used interchangeably with ‘pro-environmental behavior’

Figure 1.2 Figure of the survey population age demographics

Figure 1.3 Figure representing ‘post memorability’

Figure 1.5 Figure depicting the percentage breakdown of ecological beliefs presented on

climate change covering social media

Figure 1.6 Figure expressing the ways in which survey respondents interact with climate

change content on social media

Table 1.1 Table expressing the percentage breakdown of post memorability

Table 1.2 Table expressing statistical significance amongst Group 1 and Group 2 behavioral

engagement rates

1

Preface

I have always wondered why people behave the way they do. When I first began to brainstorm

what topic to pursue for my Honors Thesis, I was interested in how media could influence people

to act in more environmentally friendly ways. As I researched this broad topic, I began to think

about social media, specifically – how often we use it, how business and politicians use it, and

how much time we spend on it. The ‘we’ being people my age, people in college, people who

spend a great deal of their time consuming information, entertainment, and content on social

media. We are also the same group of people who face an uncertain future. We are the ones who

will feel the true weight of the oncoming climate crisis. Considering these ideas: time spent on

social media, how social media is already used to influence behavior, how individuals act around

information about climate change, and what this engagement could mean for our collective

future, this research came to be. The intent of this research is meant to produce an understanding

of how college-aged individuals, using a sample of students from the University of Colorado at

Boulder, use social media i.e., their platform preferences, how they interact with it, the

memorability of the content consumed, and how different encounters with climate change

content on social media influences their pro-environmental behaviors. The findings of this

research can be used to educate those interested in learning how to influence higher rates of pro-

environmental behavior in the face of our current climate crisis.

2

Acknowledgments

I would like to extend my gratitude to my committee members, Cassandra Brooks, Dale Miller,

Max Boykoff, and Phaedra Pezzullo. My primary advisor and committee chair, Cassandra

Brooks, was an immense help throughout this process. Without her support, thoughtfulness, and

suggestions this thesis would not be in existence. I feel very lucky to have gone through this

process learning from you. I would also like to give an extra big thank you to Dale. Many times

you reminded me, and our class, the value of this process, or any process that requires learning

something new. Your kind words of support and encouragement were very much appreciated

throughout this year and all its ups and downs.

Additionally, this research would have come to a halt without the survey-related and R-

studio advice and direction I received from Amanda Carrico and Matthew Bitters. Lastly, I

would like to thank my friends, roommates, and family for listening to my thesis related thought

tangents, supporting me through this year-long process, and encouraging me to keep working

through all of my ideas. Special thanks to Drake for the pretty graphs sprinkled throughout this

paper, and also for always being my sounding board for the various directions this research could

have, and did, head in. Lastly, extra special thanks to my parents who have supported me in all

my journeys, including this one! Thank you everyone.

3

Introduction

The purpose of this study is to understand and analyze the ways in which the five most

popular social media platforms (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, and YouTube)

influence an individual’s pro-environmental behaviors (Watson, 2018). This was accomplished

through a survey distributed to the Introduction to Environmental Studies course offered in the

Fall of 2019 at the University of Colorado at Boulder. This study seeks to answer the following

questions: What does an effective (i.e., habit-changing) social media post look like? Is there a

specific category of pro-environmental behaviors that are more frequently adopted through social

media exposure? The findings in this study aim to contribute to the discussion around the

relationships between behavioral changes, exposure to climate change-related information, and

social media usage.

The environment of the individual, both physical and social, has been continuously

proven to contribute to behavior (Garimella et al., 2018; Banisch & Olbrich, 2018; Ho et al.,

2015). In this research social media is considered an extension of the social environment, as it is

part of our complicated cultural systems (Boykoff, 2019). Most studies focus on social media

and climate change discussion through targeting Twitter and Facebook (Grouverman et al., 2018;

Pearce et al., 2019; Roxburgh et al., 2019). This research targets social media usage through

direct user experiences in order to outline where climate change related social media content is

seen, as well as the preferences of the study population. Overall the intention of this research is

to investigate these inquiries, and to contribute to the conversation around individual pro-

environmental behavior and exposure to climate change related social media.

This research aims to answer the following questions:

1. What does a memorable social media post with climate change content include?

2. How does social media with climate change content influence pro-environmental

behavior at an individual level?

3. How is social media with climate change content presented?

4. What about current social media with climate change content is influential and what

needs to be changed to create stronger social media with climate change?

4

Additionally, this research hopes to contribute further to the discussion of pro-environmental

behavior influences and how these influences work.

Background

In the following section an overview to topics that will aid in understanding the relevance

of the research will be provided. This section will cover climate change, climate change

discussion on social media, already established frameworks and understandings of environmental

media, pro-environmental behavior, and how environmental media has been found to influence

behavior in past studies.

Climate Change Discussion Across Social Media Platforms

According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, if our global temperature

rises above 1.5C, the Earth and Humanity is in for a disastrous future (First, 2019). If we, as a

global community, are to surpass this temperature increase our ability to adapt to a changing

climate significantly decreases, making this one of humanity’s greatest concerns to date.

Already, the world has been impacted by intensifying natural disasters that have displaced

thousands of people, and destroyed much of our world’s ecosystem infrastructures (First, 2019).

Increased rates of pro-environmental behaviors amongst individuals can have a large impact on

our shared environmental footprint, helping to alleviate human related environmental stressors

(Truelove & Gillis, 2018, Clayton et al., 2015; Dietz et al., 2009; Gardner and Stern, 2008).

Social media has provided the world with an expanded sense of community via its novel

platform for communication. Americans on average spend almost two hours on social media

every day (Global World Index, 2016), and thus will inherently influence how Americans think

and behave. Social media has interrupted the historically established communication hierarchies,

oftentimes seeing new information or news before traditional information sources (Pearce et al.

2018). Used to share content instantly across both nations and oceans, social media has become a

place to share both information and experiences related to extreme weather events associated

with climate change (Roxburgh et al., 2019).

Media shapes public opinions around climate change, and influences pro-environmental

behavior (Hansen, 2011). The representation of environmental issues in media, climate change

https://www-sciencedirect-com.colorado.idm.oclc.org/science/article/pii/S0959378017308579#bib0045



5

included, influences behavioral options an individual has regarding environmental action or

engagement in pro-environmental behaviors (Boykoff & Luedecke, 2017). With the increasing

popularity of non-traditional media types, social media is becoming a more important factor in

understanding how individual attitudes and behaviors are influenced (Williams et al. 2015).

Considering that it is known that we need to better understand how climate communication

functions (Boykoff, 2019), incorporating social media into the scope is quite necessary. Social

media has been found by many studies in the past to influence behavior (Centola, 2010).

Platforms, like Twitter and Facebook especially, are beginning to be used as a communicative

force in promoting individual-level action worldwide (Fernandez et al. 2016). This research is

interested in how social media influences college-aged individual’s pro-environmental behavior

through exposure to climate change related content on social media.

When the Internet first became popular, researchers were interested in the relationship

that college-aged individuals had with the emerging technology. The college-aged demographic

was the first group to grow up with the technology of the Internet, henceforth the relationship

with the technology was considered unique. Younger generations that have grown up with new

technologies, social media for example, provides them with a unique relationship with the novel

platform (Lee-Post, 2019). Additionally, younger generations, college-aged individuals included,

compose the portion of the global population who will be most impacted by climate change

(First, 2019). The relationship this demographic has with social media, as well as their

relationship with climate change makes them an interesting demographic to study.

Ability to “Alert, Amplify, and Engage”

Popular social media platforms (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, Instagram) have created a new

space for discussion, recording of catastrophic natural disasters and climate change related

events, calls to act or change, and connecting with others (Pezzullo & Cox, 2016). “Alert,

Amplify, and Engage” is a framework used to understand the influence of environmental digital

media (Pezzullo & Cox, 2016). Digital media alone holds the power to share, often in live-time,

an environmental issue – serving as an ‘alert’ to viewers and users (Pezzullo & Cox, 2016). The

immediate nature and highly connective characteristic of social media also makes it a great

‘amplifier’ for environmental issues -- ‘amplification’ is defined as the ability of a movement to

gain traction in support while also flooding the media (Pezzullo &Cox, 2016). The ‘engagement’

6

aspect of this framework focused on how individuals engage through digital platforms (Pezzullo

& Cox, 2016). Although online, or digital, engagement has led to change in large scaled realms,

such as policy, individual level behavioral shifts, or engagement in pro-environmental behavior,

are essential to achieve necessary greenhouse gas reductions.

This research takes the idea of ‘Engagement’ to another level, and is interested in how

digitized climate change communication engages individuals in their everyday, offline behavior.

Individual behavioral changes, while seemingly small, harness the potential to alter current

environmentally degrading social norms. If environmentally friendly behavior is displayed by

many individuals, the society the individuals belong to is more likely to reach sustainable

practices too (Schultz and Kaiser, 2012).

Pro-environmental Behavior

Pro-environmental behaviors (also known as ecological behaviors or environmentally

friendly behaviors) generally refer to a direct intention to conserve the environment as well as an

overall consciousness for the environment and human impact (Kurisu, 2015). Examples of pro-

environmental behaviors include, consciously recycling, environmental activism, and conserving

water. Pro-environmental behaviors are individual choices that represent the psychological

foundation and willingness to act environmentally (Ones et. al, 2015), and are influenced by a

variety of factors, including social media.

7

Figure 1.1 Other terms used interchangeably with ‘pro-environmental behavior.’ Taken from

Kurisu (2015).

Past Studies On Media and Environmental Behaviors

Individuals rely on media for their climate-related information and the relationship an

individual has with that media influences their adoption of pro-environmental behaviors

(Williams et al. 2015). Further, factual based television viewing, rather than fictional or

entertainment-based nature and environmental documentaries, have a greater impact on pro-

environmental behaviors (Holbert et al. 2010) Mass media and online media play a significant

role in influencing environmental behavior even at low exposure rates of once or twice a week

(Ostman, 2014).

Studies designed to understand how media influences awareness of environmental issues,

environmentally related beliefs and behaviors often discuss a concept known as the ‘attitude-

behavior gap.’ Although individuals may hold strong environmental beliefs, their actions may

not align with their attitude (Pezzullo & Cox, 2016). It is noted that awareness does not always

motivate change in action because the simple act of educating is not always powerful enough to

influence (Pezzullo & Cox, 2016). Although it is necessary to inform, simply informing

generally does not do enough to inspire behavioral engagement (Moser, 2009) Although people

8

are exposed, or have access, to information, change does not always follow. This concept

proposes a divide between behavior and information, as well as behavior and belief. What does

play a role in behavioral change are the values and cultural norms at play within an individual’s

surroundings (Pezzullo & Cox, 2016). Social media provides an extended environment for values

and cultural norms to evolve due to its characteristic of instantaneous sharing allowing for higher

rates of visibility around environmental issues and movements (Lester & Hutchins, 2012). Social

media connects people to information exposure in a variety of different ways. The structure of a

social network, who a user follows, and what a user sees and shares, can affect the spread of

behaviors across populations that may not normally interact (Centola, 2010). Clustered social

ties, those that spread across many social connections, are important in spreading behavior

(Centola, 2010). This finding aids in understanding the value of social networks within the

context of behavioral adoption and change.

Social media has become a powerful tool within the realm of communication and

influencing behavior. The unique social aspect of social media platforms differentiates it from

traditional media by providing a sense of community and space for discussion amongst content

on each platform. The findings of this research are meant to provide insight into how powerful

social media as a tool is now, as well as how different models and modes of social media can be

utilized in the future to further promote pro-environmental behavior in the face of drastic climate

change.

Methods

This research received ethics approval from the University of Colorado at Boulder’s

Institutional Review Board under Protocol 19-0683.

Survey Population

This research is designed to address how youth, which the UN defines as people between

the ages of 15 to 24 (“Youth”, 2020), are influenced by exposure to climate change content while

using popular social media outlets. This population has a unique relationship with climate

change, as it directly impacts their futures. Although the UN’s definition of ‘youth’ includes

individuals under 18, this research does not include anyone under the age of 18. Specifically, this

research targets college students enrolled in Introduction to Environmental Studies at the

9

University of Colorado at Boulder during the Fall of 2019. The 18-24 year age group embraces a

wide variety of social media platforms and are known to visit these platforms frequently

throughout each day (Smith & Anderson, 2018). This age group of Americans specifically

spends the most time with social media (Smith & Anderson, 2018), and has a unique relationship

to social media due to generational experience (Lee-Post, 2019). Media has been proved to shape

public opinion in the past (Hansen, 2011), so how does this form of media impact its most

frequented audiences?

The University of Colorado at Boulder is known to attract students from across the

country, as well as the world. This diverse population is also composed of varying majors, as this

course is often taken by students outside of the Environmental Studies major as a science

elective.

Survey Design

Building upon past research that focuses on exposure to climate change media and pro-

environmental behaviors, I designed this survey to investigate relationships between social media

usage, exposure, content, and pro-environmental behavior. The survey was also designed to

assess ecological beliefs measured through Dunlap’s NEP scale (Dunlap, 2008). The survey was

designed and deployed via Qualtrics and provided to the individuals enrolled within the

Introduction to Environmental Studies Fall 2019 course at the University of Colorado at Boulder.

Outside of the demographic based questions, the first four questions in the survey

measured the most popular social media platforms used within the study population (CU Boulder

students), the platforms that students see the most climate change-related content on, and what

makes these posts memorable (e.g., form, content, etc.). All survey respondents, answered a

matrix style question (Question 3) in which they ranked their three favorite social media

platforms among Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, and YouTube. The next question

(Question 4) asked respondents to share the social media platform they have seen the most

climate change-related content on (multiple choice). Next, (Question 5) respondents are asked

about the form that the most memorable climate change-related post has been displayed through.

The next questions were designed to understand how the thematic element of a post influences

how memorable and influential a post can be, as well as how respondents interact with the post

and bring it into their social lives. Then (Question 9 ) respondents were asked to associate an

10

ecological belief, defined by Dunlap’s NEP scale (Dunlap, 2008), with how climate change is

portrayed on social media (multiple choice).

The rest of the survey implements a Likert scale (choices: Never, Sometimes, About half

the time, Most of the time, Always) used to measure engagement with the surveyed pro-

environmental behaviors. These five questions address fifteen pro-environmental behaviors

broken up into five pro-environmental behavior categories (based on Kurisu, 2015) including

Consumerism, Diet, Water & Energy, Waste, and Transportation. The behaviors were selected

with the consideration of the population’s living situations and economic situations as college

students. For example, many pro-environmental behaviors related to homeowner behaviors (e.g.,

installing solar panels) are irrelevant to the study population who either live in campus dorms,

rent out apartments and older houses, or live at home. Each pro-environmental behavior set was

followed by the same multiple-choice question that asks what social-media form influenced this

change.

Survey Data Collection

The survey was created through Qualtrics and distributed via a link. Students were

invited to take it through my in-class announcement and follow-up email. The class received

access to the online survey through a link posted on their online course page, and an

announcement email sent to the entire class. The survey was open from November 5th until

December 15th of 2019.

Survey Data Analysis

Survey demographics were analyzed via Qualtrics XM, which provided many data

analyses tools. Percentages of survey respondents lived on/off campus and the ages of the survey

populations were quantified by the Qualtrics system. Additionally, percentage breakdowns for

favorite social media platforms, memorable post format, and content were also quantified in

Qualtrics. Survey respondents were asked to rank their top three favorite social media platforms

by selecting a first, second, and third favorite platform. The highest percentage from the first,

second, and third categories determined the first, second, and third favorite platforms. As for the

memorability of post format and content, I chose to combine these variables within Qualtrics,

export the data into Excel and calculate the various responses associated with the format and

11

content variables to create a single expression for memorability. Ecological beliefs presented by

social media with climate change content was also quantified in Qualtrics.

By using a Likert scale to measure pro-environmental behavior engagement amongst the

survey population, each of the 15 pro-environmental behaviors were expressed via a numerical

value, which I refer to as pro-environmental behavior engagement rates. These averages were

found for each of the 15 behaviors, as well as the sub-populations (Group 1 and Group 2) that

were later identified within the data set via Qualtrics. The pro-environmental behavior

engagement rates for Group 1 and Group 2 were used in a series of ANOVA tests run in R-

studio (version R-Studio 1.2.5033). This was done in order to compare the two populations, and

search for any statistical significance between Group 1 and Group 2 and the 15 pro-

environmental behaviors. Group 1 was comprised of the 25% of the survey population that

identified themselves as individuals who make conscious change in their lives using social media

with climate change content, and the other 75% were the portion of the survey population that

did not make conscious change, known as Group 2. Through exporting the survey data from

Qualtrics to Excel, the percentages of which social media formats were most influential in

engaging pro-environmental behavior for each surveyed group (Group 1 and Group 2) and pro-

environmental behavioral category were found by quantifying the social media platforms

selected by the two groups, and overall survey population, into percentages to express how the

populations (Group 1 and Group 2) were influenced by social media post format. The quantified

results were then discussed amongst other research and literature brought into the paper.

Results and Discussion

Survey Demographics

Sixty-four of the 411 enrolled in the course took the survey, providing a 15.6% response

rate. The survey respondents comprised ages 18-30 (average = 19.8, median = 19). 58.7% of the

survey population lives off-campus while the other 41.3% live on-campus.

12

Figure 1.2 In the figure above the age demographics of the survey population are visually

displayed. The population is composed of twenty-one 18 year-olds (32.8%), sixteen 19 year-olds

(25%), seven 20 year-olds (10.9%), fourteen 21 year-olds (21.9%), two 22 year-olds (3.1%), one

25 year-old, one 26 year-old, one 28 year-old, and one 30 year-old making up the other 6.4% of

the population.

Social Media Usage and Exposure to Climate Content

Survey results indicated that Instagram was the favorite social media ranked first by

45.45% (N=30), followed by Snapchat ranked as the second most used by 47.7% (N=31) as

second, and YouTube ranked third with 37.5% (N=24) as the third most popular platform.

Consistent with these results, a recent study suggested individuals aged 18 to 24 use YouTube,

Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat most often and further that this age group has the highest

percentages for partaking in online social media platforms in U.S. adults (Perrin & Anderson,

2019). From this survey we can see that Instagram, Snapchat, and YouTube appear as favorites,

informing us that these social media platforms should be targeted with climate change related

content that inspires individual pro-environmental behavioral change.

13

Almost 50% (46.9%; N= 30) of the population answered that in the last three months

they had seen the most climate change related content on Instagram. Twitter followed at 25%

(N=16) and then Facebook with 14.1% (N=9). Snapchat and YouTube accounted for a total of

14.1% of the answers (9.4% and 4.7%; N=6, N=3). The fact that most climate change related

content appeared on Instagram may be confounded by the fact that Instagram was also the

favorite, and likely most used, social media platform within this population. Or since Instagram

is the favorite, or most used, it may be where a user would say they see the most of any content,

potentially due to the echo-chamber concept.

Social media is sometimes described as an ‘echo-chamber’ defined as a space where “one

is only exposed to opinions that agree with their own….” (Garimella et al. 2018). Social media

allows users to choose who and what they follow: specific people, accounts, trends, and music

that mirror or complement their already established mindset and tastes. Therefore, social media

may not expose an individual to something they are not already aware of, or are ready for

(Garimella et. al, 2018, Sîrbu et.al, 2019), thus bringing into the picture the concept of the ‘echo

chamber.’ Many among (what population? Age, location) Twitter users were found to be

exposed mostly to content that agrees with their predetermined views (Garimella, et. al 2018).

But what makes climate change related social media memorable to social media

consumers? Fifty-percent (N=32) of survey respondents recalled that the most memorable post

they had seen was a ‘post with text and photo.’ Video posts were almost equally as memorable at

46.9% (N=30). The rest of the respondents answered that ‘a story’ was the most memorable

(15.6%; N=10), a post with a link (9.4%; N=6), an advertisement (4.7%; N=3), and a post with

text only was (1.5%; N=1) most memorable.

In response to their most memorable climate change related post, 45.3% (N=29) of

survey respondents chose ‘A natural area being destroyed in some way.’ While 28.1% (N=18)

chose ‘A conversation about how human action causes climate change.’ These content categories

may have been selected most frequently due to the rise in wildfires both before, and during, the

survey period in the Amazon and Australia. Only 14.1% (N=9) of respondents the population

answered that ‘Animals being mistreated or impacted by natural disasters in some way’ was most

memorable. Finally, 7.8% (N=5) chose ‘People being impacted by natural disasters.’ Those who

selected ‘other,’ accounted for 3.7%; 3 respondents of the survey (Appendix D).

14

Combining two variables from Questions 5 and 6 both the format and content of the most

memorable climate change related posts become known (Figure 1.3). There was a strong

statistically significant relationship between the content of the most memorable climate change

related posts and ecological beliefs presented through social media (P-value = 0.0293). The

combination chosen most frequently, with 25% of survey respondents selecting this combination,

was a post with text and a photo about a natural area being destroyed. Another 15.6% of the

survey population also chose a natural area being destroyed, but found that the post was more

memorable in a video format. Although it is understandable why content regarding a natural area

being destroyed is memorable, research has showed that dramatic and possibly frightening

climate change related messages may be more likely to inspire a disengagement with the issue

(Boykoff, 2019). Agreeing with past research, image based information, such as the popularity of

photos and videos in this research, proved to be memorable (Boykoff, 2019).

Figure 1.3 In the table above memorability of post based on their format and content are

combined into one variable shown in percentages.

15

Human

action

responsible

for climate

change

Natural area

being

destroyed

Animals

being

harmed

People being

impacted by

natural

disasters

Other

Text only 1.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Text & photo 15.6% 25% 4.7% 3.1% 1.6%

Video 12.5% 18.8% 7.8% 4.7% 3.1%

Post w/ link 3.1% 4.7% 1.6% 0.0% 0.0%

Story 6.3% 9.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Advertisement 3.1% 1.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Table 1.1 In the table above the percentage breakdown of memorability is concentrated most

between the categories of ‘Post with text and photo’ and ‘Video post’ with content of ‘A natural

area being destroyed…’ (25% and 18.8%) and ‘post with text and photo’ about ‘A conversation

about how human actions causes climate change” (15.6%).

Ecological Beliefs Presented on Social Media

The majority of the survey respondents answered that their climate change related content

on social media presents strong, environmentally concerned, ecological beliefs. Almost half of

survey respondents selected the NEP belief of, “If things continue on their present course, we

will soon experience a major ecological catastrophe” (44.44%; N=28). The other nearly half

selected the NEP belief of, “Humans are severely abusing the environment” (42.86%; N=27).

Only 4.76% (N=3) answered with the option “Plants and animals have as much rights as a

human to exist” and another 4.76% (N=3) selected the weaker ecological beliefs of “Humans

have the right to modify the natural environment to suit their needs,” and 3.17% (N=2) chose

“The earth has plenty of natural resources if we just learn how to use them.” The option, “The

so-called ‘ecological crisis’ facing humankind has been greatly exaggerated” was not selected by

anyone in the survey. These results suggest that the greater majority of the surveyed population

is exposed to social media that presents climate change and the climate crisis as a serious threat

that humans are responsible for.

Although for the most part, survey respondents are exposed to the severity of climate

change as well as information that cites humans to blame, action that aligns with these beliefs

16

does not necessarily follow. Boykoff (2019) discusses this concept stating that, “Even in the face

of a great deal of information about how our behaviors impact climate change, we nonetheless

cling to our carbon-based conveniences…” (pg.62). It is not quite that this survey population is

skeptical or doubtful of climate change related information, and it is not quite that the survey

respondents associate with the ecological beliefs that they are presented with on social media and

act in contrast to those values. It is more a combination, that the survey respondents, and social

media consumers, are exposed to information and values regarding climate change on social

media and perhaps do not act pro-environmentally, while others do. Additionally, the results to

this question inform only on a portion of the population exposed to strong climate change related

views and information. This brings up the question of who is seeing content opposite to what this

survey population is exposed to, and how may that affect pro-environmental behavior. Although

this research does not address this, it opens related discussions.

Figure 1.5 New Ecological Paradigm, or ecological belief, breakdowns of what survey

respondents state social media with climate change related content presents.

If exposure to strong ecological beliefs is at play, and people remember what they are

seeing and are moved in some way, can this enable pro-environmental behavioral change? In

order to determine how belief and information exposure may relate to action, it is valuable to

understand how the survey population interacts with the social media that presents climate

17

change related content. Three fourths of the survey population (76.6%; N=49; Figure 1.6), like

posts on social media with climate change related content. Two of the three most popular

interactions went beyond the digital world. Talking to friends and family was chosen by nearly

half of the survey population (43.75%; N=28; Figure 1.6), making it the second most popular

interaction choice.

The fourth most popular interaction choice, selected by 25% (N=16; Figure 1.6) of the survey

population was ‘Make a change in your life.’ I identify this as a subpopulation with the survey,

as this group consciously engages in the information they are exposed to via social media to

change their behavior. The following section will identify the differences between the 25% who

consciously change their behavior and the other 75% of the survey responses (who do not

consciously engage with social media outside of the online).

Figure 1.6 In the graph above, interactions are visually expressed. There is a total of 137 actions

from a 64 person sample size, as respondents could select more than one form of interaction.

Comparing the 25%

Although pro-environmental behaviors are individual choices and decisions, outside

factors contribute to the adoption of pro-environmental behaviors as well. This section addresses

how social media has influenced pro-environmental behavioral engagement amongst the sub-

population (the 25% who consciously change their behaviors) and the rest of the population (the

75% that do not consciously change their behaviors). This comparison works to outline how

interaction and exposure to social media with climate change content contributes to pro-

environmental behavior engagement. It aims to provide speculations on what kinds of pro-

environmental behaviors are being influenced, as well as what kinds are not, and the possible

influences for all fifteen of the behaviors.

18

Pro-

environmental

Behavior

Group 1

Averages

Group 2

Averages

F-value P-value

(bolded for

significance)

PEB 1 C 4.19 3.52 2.575 0.114

PEB 2 C 3.81 2.79 10.16 0.00225

PEB 3 C 3.75 2.51 12.06 0.000954

PEB 4 D 3.44 2.40 5.064 0.028

PEB 5 D 2.81 2.10 3.558 0.0639

PEB 6 D 3.19 2.08 4.941 0.0299

PEB 7 EW 3.25 2.75 2.114 0.151

PEB 8 EW 3.31 3.17 0.161 0.689

PEB 9 EW 3.38 2.83 1.908 0.172

PEB 10 W 4.75 4.49 1.058 0.308

PEB 11 W 4.69 4.30 2.669 0.108

PEB 12 W 4.69 3.15 14.3 0.000361

PEB 13 T 4.44 2.54 22.8 1.26e-05 *

PEB 14 T 4.19 3.33 6.017 0.0171 *

PEB 15 T 4.31 3.4 4.904 0.0307 *

Table 1.2 In the table above the behavioral engagement average rates for each of the 15 pro-

environmental behaviors surveyed are compared between Group 1 and Group 2. Additionally the

f-value and p-values are included for statistical significance. The * signifies that there were 2

unanswered survey responses for the Transportation category

Eight of the 15 pro-environmental behaviors tested were found to be statistically

significant (Table 1.2) – in other words, that there is a relationship between pro-environmental

behavioral engagement amongst some pro-environmental behaviors and social media with

climate change content working as an influence source. Group 1 tended to have higher

behavioral engagement rate averages across almost every pro-environmental behavior, even for

the behaviors that were not found to be statistically significant. The eight behaviors that were

found to be significant include the following: “I avoid products with excessive packaging,” (2) “I

try to thrift, shop second-hand, or ethical brands as much as possible, ” (3) “I try to avoid eating

meat,” (4) “I try to avoid eating seafood,” (6) “I compost as much as I am able,” (12) “I take the

bus as much as I can when I need to travel distances farther than I can walk or bike,” (13) “I bike

or walk when I need to get somewhere,” (14) and “I minimize my car usage” (15).

Survey respondents who answered that making conscious change in their lives was a way

in which they interacted with climate change related social media (Question 8) appeared to have

higher rates of pro-environmental behavior engagement. Although this finding was unintentional,

this trend emerged from within the dataset. Building on this trend, I wanted to test the hypothesis

19

that those who consciously make change in their offline lives may be engaging with more

memorable, or influential, climate change related social media posts.

This section will delve into the social media formats responsible for behavior change,

and a discussion of how and why the pro-environmental behaviors found to be statistically

significant, or not, were influenced by climate change related social media.

Consumerism

The ‘consumerism’ pro-environmental behavior category included 3 behaviors:

1. When I go to the store I bring my own bag(s)

2. I avoid products with excessive packaging

3. I try to thrift, shop second-hand, or ethical brands as much as possible

Of these three behaviors, the second and third behaviors were found to be statistically significant

when the behavioral engagement rates for Group 1 and Group 2 were compared through an

ANOVA test (respective p-values of 0.00225, 0.000954; Table 1.2). Group 1, the 16 survey

respondents who comprise the subpopulation, those who makes conscious change in their lives

from the climate change related social media posts they interact with, was most influenced by

social media posts in video (23.8%; 10 of 42 responses), photo (19%; 8 of 42 responses), and

through written post or articles (14.3%; 6 of 42 responses).

The first statistically significant behavior regards avoiding excessive packaging. This

relates to the sheer amount of packaging that accompanies many consumer products that is more

often than not, made of plastic. In recent years many environmental campaigns have emerged

addressing the plastic pollution issue. Lonely Whale, an environmental group dedicated to

protecting our oceans uses ‘impact campaigns’ via social media as one of the organization’s

three forms of influencing (lonelywhale.org, 2020). Other campaigns, like the “Be Straw Free”

movement swept across the world in 2018. This was a movement started and sustained via social

media (Bandura & Cherry, 2019). It began with a video of a sea turtle having a plastic straw

being very graphically and gorily removed from its nostril (Mosquera, 2019). This video went

viral, saturating the media, and initiating an environmental advocacy campaign. It was continued

through a social media challenge created by the Strawless Ocean Initiative in which a person

would first, post a picture of a cup with or without a straw, secondly, pledge to be straw free, and

20

lastly, tag three friends to do the same. The initiative started the famous hashtag that was

attached to these images as well, “#StopSucking” (lonelywhale.org, 2019). It is likely that the

presence of plastic pollution campaigns across social media in the past few years may be linked

to the statistical significance of pro-environmental behavior 2. Although these campaigns target

plastic specifically, rather than packaging in general, it is likely that these campaigns create an

overall greater awareness for all types of single use pollution, packaging included.

As for the significance of pro-environmental behavior 3, which regards thrifting,

shopping second-hand, or shopping with ethical brands for clothing, similarly to the issue of

plastic, there has been information released in recent years regarding the environmental footprint

of the fashion industry. Due to the natural resources required to make garment materials, the

globalized consumer market responsible for immense greenhouse gas emissions, and the

promotion of continuous consumption, the fashion industry is the third most polluting industry

around the world (reformation.com, 2020). Although industries may not be changing, Forbes

magazine notes that consumers are increasingly more environmentally conscious (Scott, 2019).

Campaigns and organizations have sprung up in response to the environmental degradation

caused by the fashion industry (fashionrevolution.org, 2020). Fashion Revolution, for example,

has almost 350K followers on Instagram, and uses social media platforms to promote its

message. The rising awareness of the environmental degradation caused by this industry also

pushes brands to be more sustainable, and brands utilize social media for marketing purposes.

Social media marketing was found to garner awareness and support of sustainable fashion brands

(Wang et al., 2019). Additionally, this pro-environmental behavior may be linked to a fact found

that those who believe that climate change has been caused by humans are more likely to support

green, or environmentally friendly, consumerism such as thrifting, second-hand, or shopping

ethical brands (Ottman, 2011).

Pro-environmental behavior 1( bringing your own bags to the store), was not statistically

significant and this may be due to the demographics of this study. More than half of the survey

population (57.8%) was between 18 - 19 years old, and 41.3% lived on campus. Thus a large

percentage of the population was eating in the dining halls, and not shopping for their own foods.

Thus bringing their own bags may not be relevant to their lives quite yet. To conclude, it seems

that pro-environmental behaviors 2 and 3 are more frequently discussed across social media,

21

with specifically designed campaigns somewhat successfully influencing the audience, including

Group 1 from within this survey population.

Diet

The ‘diet’ category included the following 3 pro-environmental behaviors:

4. I try to avoid eating meat

5. I try to avoid eating dairy

6. I try to avoid eating seafood (fish, crustaceans, etc.,)

Of these three behaviors, pro-environmental behaviors 4 and 6 were found to be statistically

significant (respective p-values 0.028, 0.0299; Table 1.2). Similarly to the findings within the

‘consumerism’ category, Group 1 was most influenced by social media posts in the style of

videos (25%; 7 of 28 responses), written posts and articles (25%; 7 of 28 responses), and photos

as well (14.3%; 4 of 28 responses).

Social media is often known for its ability to create an aesthetically appealing snapshot of

someone’s life or lifestyle. Western diets are meat-based, with about only 5% of the American

population avoiding meat consumption (Sanchez-Sabate & Sabate, 2019). Most Western

individuals who choose a vegetarian, vegan, or less meat based diet, do so for animal welfare and

health reasons, rather than environmental reasons (Sanchez-Sabate & Sabate, 2019). Health

professionals have found that social-media based communication can be used to shift and change

dietary behavior (McGloin and Eslami, 2015). Yet, the data from my research indicates that the

percentage of people who are interested in switching their diets for environmental reasons is

growing, and that some of them may be influenced by social media campaigns.

The alternative meat, or plant-based meat, category is growing rapidly in the United

States food market, as consumer demand for these products increases (meatlessfarm.com),

meaning that people are interested in avoiding meat. Social media is a hub for lifestyle

influencers, including those who focus on food and diet. It is possible that this form of social

media is partially responsible for the statistical significance found in pro-environmental behavior

4, as social media may likely be influencing decisions related to diet. Both survey respondents in

Group 1 and Group 2 answered that people, whether that being a ‘person of importance’ or an

‘influencer’ were influential in their diet related pro-environmental behavioral shifts 1(15.6%; 10

22

of the total 64 survey respondents). It appears that the visibility and aesthetic style of social

media, as its communication based formats, may promote less meat (and seafood) consumption.

Although limiting dairy, pro-environmental behavior 5, is still working its way into trending

social media diets.

This finding additionally suggests that ‘persons of importance’ and ‘influencers,’ usually

actors and actresses, professional athletes, presidents, and other people that are frequently looked

up to. In Appendix E, those ‘persons of importance’ and ‘influencers’ were listed out by survey

respondents. If people are able to see what the people they look up to and want to be like are

doing, and are learning why they are doing it, then perhaps higher rates of engagement will be

seen in pro-environmental behaviors. This finding has the opportunity to be a powerful tool!

Water and Energy

The ‘water and energy’ category included the following 3 pro-environmental behaviors:

7. I take short showers

8. I minimize my heating and A/C usage

9. I encourage people around me to use less water and energy

Of the above 3 pro-environmental behaviors, none were found to be statistically significant. Fifty

percent of Group 1 answered that behavioral changes within this category did not come from

social media. Of those who found social media to be influential in creating behavioral changes

within this category, written posts and articles as well as videos were found most influential

(15%; 3 of 20 responses for both social media forms). Here, the age demographics and the

coinciding living situations may again be the reason for the lack of statistical significance in this

category. Energy efficiency, tied to these pro-environmental behaviors, has been found to be

highly motivated by economic incentives (Trulove and Gillis, 2018). For example, survey

respondents who live on campus (41.3%) are not directly responsible for paying water or heating

bills, so they may be likely less incentivized to have high rates of pro-environmental behavior

engagement. Additionally, pro-environmental behaviors related to water conservation are

complicated. It seems that water related behaviors are also influenced by political stance, water

rights perceptions, as well as economic status and education level (Gilg and Barr, 2006).

23

Perhaps, if energy and water related pro-environmental behaviors were targeted the same

way as consumer and diet related pro-environmental behaviors using social media campaigns,

then maybe we would see statistical significance in this category. Overall, these pro-

environmental behaviors seem to be more influenced by economic and social experiences rather

than social media.

Waste

The ‘waste’ category included the following 3 pro-environmental behaviors:

10. I use a reusable water bottle and coffee cup

11. I recycle

12. I compost as much as I am able

Of these 3 pro-environmental behaviors, pro-environmental behavior 12, regarding composting,

was found statistically significant. Considering that 40% of Group 1 answered that behaviors in

this category were not learned from social media, and other social media formats were not

deemed very influential, it is likely that there is something else influencing behavioral

engagement rates within this pro-environmental behavior category. Interestingly, behavioral

engagement rates in both Group 1 and Group 2 within this category are noticeably higher than

the rest of the pro-environmental behavior averages across all the different surveyed behaviors.

For example, Group 1 sees behavioral engagement averages, in order of pro-environmental

behavior, of 4.75, 4.69, and 4.69. Group 2 sees averages of 4.49, 4.3, and 3.15. The difference in

behavioral engagement averages in pro-environmental behavior 12 is what makes this behavior

statistically significant. This may be due to the zero-waste information and infrastructure the

entire survey population is exposed to as both CU Boulder students and individuals who live in,

or near, the city of Boulder. Both the CU Boulder campus and the city of Boulder prioritize zero-

waste efforts (Colorado.edu, 2020. & bouldercolorado.gov, 2020). Waste related pro-

environmental behaviors have been found in past research to be the most commonly adopted

behaviors due to social pressure and visibility (Gould et al., 2016).

Transportation

The ‘transportation’ category included the following 3 pro-environmental behaviors:

13. I take the bus as much as I can when I need to travel distances farther than I can walk

or bike

24

14. I bike or walk when I need to get somewhere

15. I minimize my car usage

First, it is important to note that this category may be subject to bias, as some survey respondents

left the questions in this category blank (N=60 rather than N=64). Although every pro-

environmental behavior from this category was found to be significant, this category saw the

highest percentage (66.67%) from Group 1 that behaviors from within this category were not

learned from social media.

There are some potential explanations for why Group 1, those who make conscious

change in their lives from climate change related social media, would still engage in high rates of

behavioral engagement despite a lack of social media influence. Group 1 as a subpopulation is

more interested in adopting pro-environmental behaviors than Group 2. If they are more

interested in learning about and adopting these environmentally friendly behaviors, they are

probably likely to be seeking information about pro-environmental behavior in all aspects of

their lives. This does not limit or exclude social media, instead it emphasizes that social media is

indeed a place for individuals to learn and be influenced. This concept seems to lend itself to the

likely reasons behind Group 1’s high rates of behavioral engagement within this topic. If they are

interested in adopting new environmentally friendly behaviors, they are likely to be aware of the

severity of climate change. If they are likely aware of the severity of climate change, then they

probably understand the large environmental footprint associated with fossil-fuel reliant

transportation and may make more of an effort to avoid such known environmentally degrading

behaviors.

Limitations and Shortcomings

It is important to note that all individuals have bias. In order to avoid surveying a

population with a bias towards strong pro-environmental behaviors, I chose a controlled

population composed of many different majors and ages within the CU Boulder college

population. This survey was released within a 411 person lecture as an optional survey. It is

likely that the participants in this survey have a bias, as they were willing to participate in an

optional survey. Perhaps, these are students interested in the topic of the course (Environmental

Studies), or are more motivated individuals compared to those who opted out of the survey.

These two possibilities may have led to a bias in the survey results. Additionally, any self-

25

reporting surveys allow for potential bias as the responses are up to the individual integrity of

each participant to answer with honesty.

Originally, I expected a higher response rate for the survey than I ultimately received.

This was due to the optional nature of the survey, as well as the nature of a large-scale lecture

course. When I made the announcement to the class in early November of 2019, informing them

of the opportunity to partake in the survey, it is more than likely that not all 411 members of the

class were present. Additionally, other ways to inform the study population about the survey

were through the online class page on Canvas. As a college student, I am fully aware that

oftentimes things are missed, or ignored, even when they are posted to the online class page or

are emailed out to the class. With a 15.6% response rate, 64 out of 411 people from the lecture

hall took the survey. While the survey response rate is low, it is still well within the range of

social science research response rates. Lastly, 5 responses from the survey were not fully

completed. Some survey participants did not answer questions about their PEBs in the

Transportation category.

Additionally, in hindsight, all of the options my survey provided for content were relatively

negative. During the survey development process, I asked people close to me about what they

see on social media regarding climate-change related content. This is largely how I gauged the

content of social media with climate change questions. If those I had spoken to had shared

positive climate change related content, I would have included it into my survey. The overall

negative tone surrounding climate change communication and information is a topic of

discussion across all fields of climate communication. If I were to do this study over, it would

have not only been interesting, but also important, to incorporate more positive options for

Question 6. Unfortunately, there is no way of knowing if individuals do see positive climate

change content, as the survey did not include positive content as an answer option. The lack of

positive climate change related options may have skewed the survey results.

Lastly, during the beginning of this research process I wanted to release this survey at other

universities as well. I had reached out to the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, but found

that their Environmental department was too different than CU’s, and that this may create an

inconsistency in the survey population. With some fine tuning and more time, it would have been

beneficial to the research conclusions to have reached other populations as well. Perhaps, this

will be a future step if this this research is to be continued.

26

Conclusion and Implications

Regardless of statistical significance the details found within this data set offer insight

into the relationship between individual pro-environmental behavioral patterns and exposure to

climate change related content on social media within individuals. Part of my initial interest in

this topic stemmed from a curiosity about how frequently social media is used. By identifying

patterns (and non-statistical relationships) within this data set, this research suggests that forms,

content, platform, and overall style of a social media post can influence further adoption of pro-

environmental behaviors. Individual level behaviors can help decrease our overall environmental

footprints through the creation of more environmentally friendly social norms. It is important to

know how these efforts can be increased to optimize the impact of further environmental impacts

contributing to climate change.

Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook are the most popular social media sites amongst this

college-aged survey population. The most memorable posts with climate change content are

either in the format of a ‘text with a photo’ or as a ‘video,’ presenting content about the

destruction of natural areas or conversations discussing how humans are responsible for climate

change (Figure 1.3). This research additionally suggested that influential people, those who this

age demographic look up to, respect, and want to be like are powerful sources of influence in

terms of increasing rates of behavioral engagements. This type of influence was seen most within

the diet category, suggesting that deeply rooted social norms, like eating a meat-based diet,

requires a more personal vessel of influence.

This study reinforces past research regarding the information-behavior gap, as 87.3% of

climate change content across social media platforms exhibits the strong ecological beliefs that

“If things continue on their present course, we will soon experience a major ecological

catastrophe” and “Humans are severely abusing the environment.” While this is the information

survey respondents are exposed to, average pro-environmental behavioral engagement rates

across the entire survey population, and the 15 pro-environmental behaviors surveyed, sits at a

3.3 behavioral engagement rate. In other words, survey respondents are generally engaging with

the 15 pro-environmental behaviors surveyed with an ‘About half the time’ attitude.

Pro-environmental behaviors that fall within the consumerism and diet categories showed

to be most influenced by social media. It seems that the influence responsible for behavioral

change is linked to varying environmental campaigns executed across social media that were

27

able to re-shape behaviors amongst some individuals. Additionally, consumerism and diet related

pro-environmental behaviors are more easily controllable by the individual. The other categories,

‘energy and water,’ ‘waste,’ and ‘transportation,’ behaviors may be constrained to systemic

infrastructure. These pro-environmental behavior categories did not see as much influence from

social media as the perhaps, sexier and more marketable, ‘consumerism’ and ‘diet’ related pro-

environmental behavior categories. Within the realm of influencing, what seems to be most

important is producing any amount of content related to a pro-environmental behavior, or a

category of pro-environmental behaviors. Yet, the ability to change a behavior is contingent on

the ease of adopting the new behavior. Consumerism and diet related behaviors are more flexible

than the other three behavioral categories. Based on the findings of this research, the behaviors

that had higher rates of behavioral engagement and influence from social media were

representative of content that was seen on social media more frequently, and also were behaviors

that individuals have more agency over compared to systemically driven and supported

behaviors more often seen in the energy and water, waste, and transportation categories.

Social media can be a great tool due its instant and visual attributes for sharing

information and experience. It creates an opportunity for global interaction, henceforth laying the

path for more clustered social connections and an increased spread of pro-environmental

behaviors. If environmental campaigners are looking to increase the rebates of behavioral

engagement across varying pro-environmental behaviors, they need to be producing in the form

of videos, photos, written posts or articles, and should definitely be involving people of

importance and influence. The concept of human connection is present in social media’s

influence of pro-environmental behavioral engagement, making this form of media a unique tool.

Content should focus on conversations revolving around how humans are responsible for

contributing to climate change, or the destruction of natural areas. The survey population deemed

that these formats and content were most memorable and influential.

In the Background section of this thesis, the framework, “Alert, Amplify, and Engage” is

discussed in depth. The framework inspired my research as I wanted to know how exactly

individuals ‘Engage’ with climate change-related social media, a form of environmental media,

in their day to day lives. After completing this research I have recognized how challenging it is

to truly measure engagement in pro-environmental behavior. With this being said, it would be

beneficial to add another layer to this framework that works to measure or quantify engagement.

28

This is relevant across all environmental realms. Being able to measure engagement seems

crucial to understanding the effectiveness of any climate change or environmental

communication vessel. I am unsure of how this fourth layer to the framework could come to be,

but believe it would be invaluable and insightful to somehow track pro-environmental

engagement in an, of course, non-invasive way.

29

Appendices

Appendix A:

Pro-environmental behaviors surveyed as well as behavior (categories)

1. When I go to the store I bring my own bag(s) (Consumerism)

2. I avoid products with excessive packaging (Consumerism)

3. I try to thrift, shop second-hand, or ethical brands as much as possible (Consumerism)

4. I try to avoid eating meat (Diet)

5. I try to avoid eating dairy (Diet)

6. I try to avoid eating seafood (fish, crustaceans, etc.,) (Diet)

7. I take short showers (Energy and Water)

8. I minimize my heating and A/C usage (Energy and Water)

9. I encourage people around me to use less water and energy (Energy and Water)

10. I use a reusable water bottle and coffee cup (Waste)

11. I recycle (Waste)

12. I compost as much as I am able (Waste)

13. I take the bus as much as I can when I need to travel distances farther than I can walk or

bike (Transportation)

14. I bike or walk when I need to get somewhere (Transportation)

15. I minimize my car usage (Transportation)

Appendix B:

Survey Questions

1. What is your age? (open ended)

2. Do you live on or off campus? (multiple choice)

3. What are your top 3 favorite social media platforms (matrix style – rank: first, second,

third)

a. Twitter

b. Instagram

c. Snapchat

d. Facebook

e. YouTube

4. In the last three months, on which social media platform have you seen the most climate

change related content? (multiple choice)

a. Twitter

b. Instagram

c. Snapchat

d. Facebook

e. YouTube

5. Think about the most memorable climate change post you've seen. In what form was this post

displayed? (multiple choice)

a. Post with text only

30

b. Post with text and photo

c. Video post

d. Post with a link

e. A story

f. An advertisement

6. Refer to your answer from the last question. What was the topic of that post?

a. People being impacted by natural disasters

b. Animals being mistreated, or impacted by natural disasters

c. A natural area being destroyed in some way (Ex. a fire, plastic pollution, etc.)

d. A conversation about how human action causes climate change

e. Other

7. If you answered ‘other’ above, explain what you would have said… (open ended)

8. When you see climate change content on social media you... (matrix style – able to pick

multiple answers)

a. Share/repost on social media

b. Ignore

c. Talk to friends or family

d. Like post

e. Report

f. Comment on post

g. Make a change in your life

9. In the last three months has climate change content on social media led you to believe any of

the following? (multiple choice)

a. The so-called 'ecological crisis' facing humankind has been greatly exaggerated.

b. Humans have the right to modify the natural environment to suit their needs.

c. The earth has plenty of natural resource if we just learn how to develop them.

d. Plants and animals have as much rights as a human to exist.

e. Humans are severely abusing the environment.

f. If things continue on their present course, we will soon experience a major

ecological catastrophe.

10. In the last three months how has climate change content on social media impacted your

consumer habits? (LIKERT SCALE RESPONSES: Never – Always)

a. When I go to the store I bring my own bag(s)

b. I avoid products with excessive packaging

c. I try to thrift, shop second-hand, or ethical brands as much as possible

11. What form of social media caused these changes?

a. A written post or written article

b. A photo

c. A video

d. An Instagram or Facebook story

e. An advertisement

f. Involved an ‘influencer’

g. Involved a person of importance

h. No change


diet? (LIKERT SCALE RESPONSES: Never – Always)

a. I try to avoid eating meat

31

b. I try to avoid eating dairy

c. I try to avoid eating seafood (fish, crustaceans, etc.,)



b. A photo

c. A video


e. An advertisement



h. No change 14. In the last three months how has climate change content on social media impacted your water

and energy usage? (LIKERT SCALE RESPONSES: Never – Always)

a. I take short showers

b. I minimize my heating and A/C usage

c. I encourage people around me to use less water and energy



b. A photo

c. A video


e. An advertisement



h. No change

16. In the last three months how has climate change content on social media impacted your waste

practices? (LIKERT SCALE RESPONSES: Never – Always)

a. I use a reusable water bottle and coffee cup

b. I recycle

c. I compost as much as I am able



b. A photo

c. A video


e. An advertisement



h. No change


transportation habits? (LIKERT SCALE RESPONSES: Never – Always)

a. I take the bus as much as I can when I need to travel distances farther than I can

walk or bike

b. I bike or walk when I need to get somewhere

c. I minimize my car usage



32

b. A photo

c. A video


e. An advertisement



h. No change

20. If you answered a 'person of importance' to any of the questions in this survey what was this

person's title? (Ex., president, professional football player, actor/actress, etc.,)

Appendix C -Survey question reasoning

The age and on or off-campus questions were asked to create a sense of background context for

the survey results. Age is an important part of understanding this data, as social media does serve

different roles amongst different generations (cite!!). The on/ off-campus question was meant to

provide an understanding of the degree of freedom to fully choose decisions within the

individual survey participants’ life. With the personal understanding of what it means to live on

the CU Boulder campus, I am aware that this may place certain constraints on pro-environmental

behaviors.

The next few questions (Questions 3-7) were asked to determine the popularity of the

social media platforms chosen for this research, the social media platform that offers the most

climate change content, and the format and content of the climate change content social media

posts that was most memorable to the survey participants. Question 4 was meant to be a small

investigation into the possible influence of echo-chambers in individual survey participant’s

experiences with climate change content on social media. In other words, how frequently will

survey respondents say that they see the most climate change related content on their most used

social media platform, and vice-a-versa? Questions 5,6, and 7, are designed to target what about

a social media post is effective in conveying a message of climate change.

A unique characteristic of social media is it’s interactive nature. Question 8 is meant to

determine how survey respondents interact with climate change related content they come across

on their feed. The answer options for this question expand beyond what is possible to do on

social media, i.e., ‘sharing,’ ‘reposting,’ ‘liking,’ ‘commenting,’ ‘reporting,’ but also allow

respondents to answer about if they ‘talk to their friends or family,’ ‘make a change in your life,’

or ‘ignore.’

33

Question 9 inquires about how social media in the last three months has impacted the

survey respondents ecological beliefs. The answers to this question are ecological beliefs taken

from Dunlap’s New Ecological Paradigm scale (Dunlap, 2008). His scale originally includes 15

different ecological beliefs, but I incorporated 6 different beliefs that covered a range of attitudes

to the environment and climate change. This question is a very important question as it connects

survey respondent individual ecological beliefs to their individual pro-environmental behaviors.

Many studies have been done to connect ecological beliefs to pro-environmental behaviors, and

the relationship between this question and the many questions regarding pro-environmental

behavior are quite important to this research.

Questions 10, 12, 14, 16, and 18 are designed to measure individual pro-environmental

behaviors that the individual survey respondents practice in their day to day lives. Divided into

five different pro-environmental behaviors, each category asks about three behaviors. Survey

participants mark their behaviors along a 5-point Likert scale starting with ‘Never,’ allowing for

‘Sometimes,’ ‘About Half the Time,’ and ‘Most of the Time,’ all the way up to ‘Always.’ The

pro-environmental behaviors were taken from the (Kurisu, 2015). Many pro-environmental

behaviors were left out due to the financial and living situations that this survey population is

constrained to.

Questions 11, 13, 15, 17, and 19 follow the pro-environmental behavior category

questions and ask where the pro-environmental behaviors were learned. The answer selections

include: ‘A written post or written article,’ ‘A photo,’ ‘A video’, ‘An Instagram or Facebook

story,’ ‘An advertisement,’ ‘Involved an ‘influencer’,’ ‘Involved a person of importance,’ and

‘Change did not come from social media.’ Participants can select multiple social media forms for

the source of any change in their behavior. For those who answer that the change ‘Involved a

person of importance’ a question at the very end asks who that person, or persons, of importance

was.

Overall the survey was designed to incorporate three important facets that would create the

discussion of this research; the first being social media. This research was designed to

understand what social media platforms are used most frequently, what social media platforms

are currently hosting the most climate change related content, what style of portrayal of climate

change is most memorable on social media, what specific content is the most memorable for

social media users, as well as which specific style of social media communication can instigate

34

change. The next branch of this research is the inclusion of the NEP scale and assigning

ecological beliefs to survey participants. The relevance of ecological beliefs in determining

likelihood to predict pro-environmental behaviors is important. It also provides an

understanding of what this population believes, as well as how beliefs can inform action. Lastly,

the survey includes the pro-environmental behaviors themselves. These are meant to measure

how individuals take action into their own hands as well as how social media usage and exposure

and ecological beliefs relate to the adoption of these behaviors.

Appendix D – Answers from survey respondents who selected ‘Other’ where

possible

Survey respondents could select ‘other’ as an answer for the question in the survey that

asked about memorable social media post content. Survey respondents were asked to explain

what the ‘other’ was. The ‘other’ answers are found here:

- “It was about the extinction of animals due to deforestation and habitat loss, it showed

pictures off endangered animals with the same pixels as the number of animals left in the

world, so the less animals left the blurrier the picture was”

- “It was describing the plastic pollution in the ocean.”

- “Extinction rates”

- “Amazon fires” (x2)

- “Tru moo milk company exposing cow abuse”

- “Greta Thunberg (UN girl)”

- “The tree planting challenge”

Appendix E – Answers for ‘person of importance’

UFC Fighter, Greta Thunberg (x2), roommate, professional athlete, professor (x2),

environmental activists, past presidents, CEOs of large companies, actresses and actors (x3), &

weathercaster

Appendix F – Behavioral Engagement Averages across the entire survey

population, Group 1, and Group 2.

PEBs Group 1 Group 2 Total Survey Pop.

35

1 4.19 3.52 3.69

2 3.81 2.79 3

3 3.75 2.51 2.83

4 3.44 2.395 2.66

5 2.81 2.104 2.28

6 3.19 2.208 2.45

7 3.25 2.75 2.88

8 3.31 3.167 3.2

9 3.38 2.83 2.97

10 4.75 4.489 4.56

11 4.69 4.304 4.4

12 4.69 3.15 3.55

13 4.44 2.54 3.05

14 4.19 3.33 3.56

15 4.31 3.4 3.64

References

Bandura, A., & Cherry, L. (2019). Enlisting the power of youth for climate change. American

Psychologist.

36

Banisch, S., & Olbrich, E. (2019). Opinion polarization by learning from social feedback. The

Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 43(2), 76-103.

Boykoff, M. (2019). Creative (Climate) Communications. Cambridge University Press.

Boykoff, M. T., & Goodman, M. K. (2009). Conspicuous redemption? Reflections on the

promises and perils of the ‘celebritization’ of climate change. Geoforum, 40(3), 395-406.

Boykoff, M., & Luedecke, G. (2016). Elite news coverage of climate change. In Oxford

Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science.

Centola, D. (2010). The spread of behavior in an online social network experiment. science,

329(5996), 1194-1197.

City of Boulder Colorado. (2020). We are Zero Waste Boulder. Retrieved from:

https://bouldercolorado.gov/zero-waste

Clayton, S., Devine-Wright, P., Stern, P. C., Whitmarsh, L., Carrico, A., Steg, L., ... & Bonnes,

M. (2015). Psychological research and global climate change. Nature Climate Change,

5(7), 640-646.

CU Environmental Center. (2020). Zero Waste at CU and Beyond. Retrieved from:

https://www.colorado.edu/ecenter/recycling

Dietz, T., Gardner, G. T., Gilligan, J., Stern, P. C., & Vandenbergh, M. P. (2009). Household

actions can provide a behavioral wedge to rapidly reduce US carbon emissions.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(44), 18452-18456.

Dunlap, R. (2008) The New Environmental Paradigm Scale: From

Marginality to Worldwide Use, The Journal of Environmental Education, 40:1, 3-18, DOI:

10.3200/JOEE.40.1.3-18

Fashion Revolution. (2020). About. Retrieved from: https://www.fashionrevolution.org/about/

Fernandez, M., Piccolo, L. S., Maynard, D., Wippoo, M., Meili, C., & Alani, H. (2016, May).

Talking climate change via social media: Communication, engagement and behaviour. In

Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Web Science (pp. 85-94). ACM.

First, P. J. (2019). Global Warming of 1.5 C An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global

Warming of 1.5 C Above Pre-Industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas

Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat

of Climate Change. Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty.

https://www. ipcc. ch/sr15/. Accessed, 1.

Garimella, K., De Francisci Morales, G., Gionis, A., & Mathioudakis, M. (2018, April). Political

discourse on social media: Echo chambers, gatekeepers, and the price of bipartisanship.

https://bouldercolorado.gov/zero-waste

https://www.colorado.edu/ecenter/recycling

https://www.fashionrevolution.org/about/

37

In Proceedings of the 2018 World Wide Web Conference (pp. 913-922). International

World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee.

Gardner, G. T., & Stern, P. C. (2008). The short list: The most effective actions US households

can take to curb climate change. Environment: science and policy for sustainable

development, 50(5), 12-25.

Gilg, A., & Barr, S. (2006). Behavioural attitudes towards water saving? Evidence from a study

of environmental actions. Ecological Economics, 57(3), 400-414.

Global World Index (2016). Daily time spent on social networking by internet users worldwide

from 2012 to 2016 (in minutes). Statista (accessed July 10, 2018), https://www. statista.

com/statis tics/433871/daily-social-media-usage-worldwide.

Gould, R.K., Ardoin, N.M., Biggar, M. et al. Environmental Management (2016) 58: 268.

https://doi-org.colorado.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s00267-016-0710-6

Grouverman, A., Kollanyi, B., Howard, P., Barash, V., & Lederer, T. Climate Change

Consensus and Skepticism: Mapping Climate Change Dialogue on Twitter and Facebook.

Hansen, A. (2011). Communication, media and environment: Towards reconnecting research on

the production, content and social implications of environmental communication.

International Communication Gazette, 73, 7-25.

Ho, S. S., Liao, Y., & Rosenthal, S. (2015). Applying the theory of planned behavior and media

dependency theory: Predictors of public pro-environmental behavioral intentions in

Singapore. Environmental Communication, 9(1), 77-99.

Holbert, R. L., Kwak, N., & Shah, D. V. (2003). Environmental concern, patterns of television

viewing, and pro-environmental behaviors: Integrating models of media consumption

and effects. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 47(2), 177-196.

Kurisu, K. (2015). Pro-environmental behaviors. Tokyo: Springer Japan.

Lee-Post, A. (2019). An Examination of Factors That Influence Social Networking Community

Participation Among Millennials.

Lee, K. (2011). The role of media exposure, social exposure and biospheric value orientation in

the environmental attitude-intention-behavior model in adolescents. Journal of

environmental psychology, 31(4), 301-308.

Lester, L. (2015). Three challenges for environmental communication research. Environmental

Communication 9(3): 392-397.

Lester, E. A., & Hutchins,B. (2012). The power of the unseen: Environmental conflict, the

media and invisibility. Media, Culture & Society,34(7), 847-863.

https://doi-org.colorado.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s00267-016-0710-6

38

Lonely Whale. (2020). Strawless Ocean — Lonely Whale. [online] Available at:

https://www.lonelywhale.org/strawlessocean [Accessed 17 Dec. 2019].

Mavrodieva, A. V., Rachman, O. K., Harahap, V. B., & Shaw, R. (2019). Role of Social Media

as a Soft Power Tool in Raising Public Awareness and Engagement in Addressing

Climate Change. Climate, 7(10), 122.

The Meatless Farm Co.. (2020). Americans’ Shifting Attitudes Towards Meat. Retrieved from:

https://meatlessfarm.com/us/americansshiftingattitudestowardmeat/

McGloin, A., & Eslami, S. (2015). Digital and social media opportunities for dietary behaviour

change. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 74(2), 139-148.

doi:10.1017/S0029665114001505

Mesmer-Magnus, J., Viswesvaran, C., Wiernik, B.M., 2012. The role of commitment in

bridging the gap between organizational sustainability and environmental sustainability.

In: Jackson, S.E.,

Moser, Susan. (2009). Costly Politics -- unaffordable denial: The politics of public

understanding and engagement in climate change. In Maxwell Boykoff (ed.) The Politics

of Climate Change: A Survey, pp.155-182. London: Routledge/ Europa

Mosquera, M. R. (2019). Banning Plastic Straws: The Beginning of the War against Plastics.

Earth Jurisprudence & Envtl. Just. J., 9, 5.

Ones, D.S., Dilchert, S. (Eds.), Managing Human Resources for Environmental Sustainability.

Jossey-Bass/Wiley, San Francisco, CA, pp. 155–186.

Ones, D. S., Wiernik, B. M., Dilchert, S., & Klein, R. (2015). Pro-environmental behavior. In

International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences: Second Edition (pp.

82-88). Elsevier Inc..

Östman, J. (2014). The influence of media use on environmental engagement: A political

socialization approach. Environmental Communication, 8(1), 92-109.

Ottman, J. (2011). The new rules of green marketing: Strategies, tools, and inspiration for

sustainable branding. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Pearce, W., Niederer, S., Özkula, S. M., & Sánchez Querubín, N. (2019). The social media life

of climate change: Platforms, publics, and future imaginaries. Wiley Interdisciplinary

Reviews: Climate Change, 10(2), e569.

Perrin, A., & Anderson, M. (2019). Share of US adults using social media, including Facebook,

is mostly unchanged since 2018. Pew Research Center.

Pezzullo, P. C., & Cox, R. (2016). Environmental communication and the public sphere. Sage

https://meatlessfarm.com/us/americansshiftingattitudestowardmeat/

39

Publications.

Roxburgh, N., Guan, D., Shin, K. J., Rand, W., Managi, S., Lovelace, R., & Meng, J. (2019).

Characterising climate change discourse on social media during extreme weather events.

Global environmental change, 54, 50-60.

Sanchez-Sabate, R., & Sabaté, J. (2019). Consumer attitudes towards environmental concerns of

meat consumption: A systematic review. International journal of environmental

research and public health, 16(7), 1220.

Schultz, P. W., & Kaiser, F. G. (2012). Promoting pro-environmental behavior. In S. D. Clayton

(Ed.), Oxford library of psychology. The Oxford handbook of environmental and

conservation psychology (p. 556–580). Oxford University Press.

Scott, Mike. (2019). Shoppers Want More Sustainable Products, But Brands Are Struggling to

Keep Up. Forbes. Retrieved from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikescott/2019/02/26/sh

oppers-want-more-sustainable-products-but-brands-are-struggling-to-keep-

up/#3dcad015364a

Smith, A., & Anderson, M. (2018). Social Media Use 2018: Demographics and Statistics.

Retrieved 4 October 2019, from https://www.pewresearch.org/internet /2018/03/01/

social-media-use-in-2018/

Sîrbu, A., Pedreschi, D., Giannotti, F., & Kertész, J. (2019). Algorithmic bias amplifies opinion

fragmentation and polarization: A bounded confidence model. PloS one, 14(3).

Truelove, H. B., & Gillis, A. J. (2018). Perception of pro-environmental behavior. Global

Environmental Change, 49, 175-185.

The Reformation. (2020). Impact of fashion. Retrieved from: https://www.thereformation.c

om/pages/impact-of-fashion

Wang, Y., Chowdhury Ahmed, S., Deng, S., & Wang, H. (2019). Success of Social Media

Marketing Efforts in Retaining Sustainable Online Consumers: An Empirical Analysis

on the Online Fashion Retail Market. Sustainability, 11(13), 3596.

Watson, A. (2018). Media use in the U.S. 2018 | Statista. [online] Statista. Available at:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/276683/media-use-in-the-us/ [Accessed 30 Sep. 2019].

Williams, H. T., McMurray, J. R., Kurz, T., & Lambert, F. H. (2015). Network analysis reveals

open forums and echo chambers in social media discussions of climate change. Global

environmental change, 32, 126-138.

United Nations. (2020). Youth. Retrieved from: https://www.un.org/en/sections/Issues-

depth/youth-0/index.html

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikescott/2

https://www.pewresearch.org/internet

https://www.thereformation.c/

Behaviors? - CU Scholar

Documents

Transcript of Behaviors? - CU Scholar