Different Explanations ofClimate ChangeEconomics

Explanations of human responses to climate change arise due to factors related to economic structures

Psychology: Explanations of human responses to climate

change arise due to factors related to individualsSociology (next week):

Explanations of human responses to climate change arise due to factors related to social groups

Before we beginShort game, related to psychology that we

will be discussing today

Game OneImagine I have just given you $30 Now, I give you a choice based on my flipping

a coinHeads: you win $9Tails: you lose $9

Do you want to do the coin flip?

Final Paper Discussion

General Pointsfor Research Paper Highlight your research question right up frontDon’t do research on a question that you

already know the “right” answer for – its uninteresting!

Consider alternative explanations seriouslyWrite a draft and then delete, delete, delete

Only leave in those parts that relate to your research question

Keep the “background” section short (or non-existent)

General Pointsfor Research Paper -- continuedQuestion must relate to climate change!Can’t just be description or summary of prior

research – must be analytic in some way, looking at some relationship or variation and applying theoryE.g.: If interested in affects of climate change,

then look at vulnerability/adaptation/resilience literature and make the argument be about which countries will be more (or less) successful in responding to similar climate impacts

Final Paper Discussion:One Option“Apply concepts to empirical cases” option

IntroReview literature that categorizes things in the

social world related to climate change (adaptive capacity, vulnerability, or similar)

Show how these concepts allow you to see differences between different cases, e.g., which country is more vulnerable to climate change

Conclusion

Final Paper Discussion:Another Option“Comparison of alternative policies” option

IntroCriteria of comparisonDescribe the alternatives Assess the alternatives against your criteriaConclusion

Final Paper Discussion:Another Option“Explaining something” option

IntroTheory

How scholars discuss the DV What IVs scholars suggest cause variation in the DV

Describe your case(s)Assess which of the IVs does the best job of

explaining the variation you see in your casesConclusion

Logistics and Style StuffBe a ProfessionalNO experiments or surveys – its illegal

without “human subjects clearance” which takes too long to do during a quarter

Use headings to structure your argumentRun spell-checkProofread as a separate stepAlphabetize and be consistent in formatting

of citationsUse in-text citations to keep things simple

Introduction to psychology of climate change

Many slides courtesy of Ezra MarkowitzUsed with permisson

Psychology and Climate ChangeWe are not “rational” as a basic assumptionPeople use 2 types of thinking (Kahneman, 2011)

Associative/affective reasoning: fast, intuitive, emotional, personal

Analytic/intellectual reasoning: “slower, deliberative, logical, statistical

Psych and what we understand: Availability heuristics

Psych and what we worry about:Finite pool of worry

Psych and what we doSingle action biasSocial norms

Psychological assumptionsPeople lack information about climate changeMore information = better decision-making“Right” information = more support for

policyInformation availability = use of informationScare people = more actionMake people feel guilty = more engagement

THESE ARE ALL FALSE (at least some of the time)

How people get and use climate change informationDecision-makers only pay attention to certain

sources, types of infoRepublicans go to FoxNews, Democrats go to

MSNBCWe tend to reject information that goes

against core beliefs, valuesOr that suggests something be done that we

disagree with (motivated reasoning)We evaluate information both emotionally

(“System 1”) and cognitively (“System 2”)

Two systemsAffective system:

Fast, automatic, associative, emotionalCognitive or rational system:

Slower, deliberative, “cold and calculating”Two systems operate in parallel to interpret

information about CCWhen outputs are in disagreement (e.g.,

Affect says CC isn’t a problem but Cognitive says it is), decision-making is generally driven by affective system

Risk perceptionsExperience more important than descriptionLearn about risks from description vs.

experienceLearn about CC mostly from description from

scientistsLearning from experience is more powerful

driver of risk perception (but directly experience weather, not climate)

Game TwoImagine I give you a different choice based

on my flipping a coinHeads: you win $39Tails: you win $21

If don’t do coin flip, you get $30 for sureDo you want to do the coin flip?

Results of two gamesOnly difference is whether I “primed” you to think

of yourself as having the $30 before you start or notGame One: losses frame – might go down from $30

to $21Generally, more people take the bet Risk seeking behavior

Game Two: gains frame – going up from $0 to $21 or $39Generally, more people go for “sure thing”Risk averse behavior

Similar to gambling or stock market

How info is presentedHumans are sensitive to how information is

presentedCC can be “framed” in multiple ways:

Content frames: public health, national security, environmental conservation

Structure frames: loss vs. gain; present vs. futureWe generally accept risk if thinking about possible

losses; but avoid risk if thinking about possible gainsSo, take more risks when come across loss-framed info

Climate change generally presented as losses frame

Lots of evidence that we do not act rationallyGame presented you with information that is

objectively the same, but often people make different decisions in the two cases

Small, irrelevant, things often influence our decisions (parole judges)

Women overestimate risk of breast cancer but underestimate risk of heart disease

We don’t perceive risks “rationally”Estimates of Probabilities of Death From Various Causes

Amos Tversky study: http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/prospect.htm

Cause Subject Estimates Statistical Estimates

Heart Disease 0.22 0.34

Cancer 0.18 0.23

Other Natural Causes 0.33 0.35

All Natural Causes 0.73 0.92

Accident 0.32 0.05

Homicide 0.10 0.01

Other Unnatural Causes 0.11 0.02

All Unnatural Causes 0.53 0.08

Psychology: barriers to understandingBeliefs influence perceptions, not vice versa

Farmers see what they believe, not believe what they see

We believe personal experience, not the statistics

Perceptions about climate change causes and consequences are socially constructed within communities and lead us to “attend to, fear, and socially amplify some risks while ignoring, discounting, or attenuating others” (Weber 2010)

Psychology:barriers to worrying about climateFinite pool of worry

Can only worry about so much: if worry more about climate change, we worry less about other things

If worry more about other things (like the economy), we worry less about climate change, with no change in the objective risks

Psychology:barriers to worrying about climateAvailability heuristic: whether we believe something

depends on whether we can think of examplesUse easily-available and recent memories to

estimate likelihood of things happening, regardless of how rare we know them to be

OVER-worry about things that have happened recentlyUNDER-worry about rare things that haven’t

happened for awhileNot scared enough by rare events, but scared too

much when they happen (Sandy/Katrina; Fukushima; earthquakes). Overreact after major event but then “falls off radar”

Psychology: barriers to taking actionSingle action bias

“Regardless of which single action is taken first, decision makers have a tendency not to take any further action, presumably because the first action suffices in reducing the feeling of worry or vulnerability.”

Psychology: barriers to taking actionStatus quo bias

“People do not move away from hazards even when they are aware of them”

Won’t move into bad situation but will stay in one

“Nudge” issues: wherever we start, there we stay Netflix subscriptions Automatic enrollment in retirement plans

Optimistic biases (Weinstein, 1980): Uncertainty promotes optimism

Psychology: barriers to taking actionNot my faultCommons dilemma

Undercuts responsibility and actionLack of “efficacy” – feeling that you can make a

differenceMoral judgment system ill-equipped to

recognize and deal with unintended outcome of our own behavior (Markowitz & Shariff, 2012)No obvious villain to blameUnintentional side-effect of modern life

We take “unsmart” risks when we FRAME (“think of”) things as lossesImplications for climate change

Take more chances and risks if believe we are faced with losses

If see climate change as mainly framed as a “loss” which means we are likely to take unrealistic risks to get back to the “no climate change world”

Alternatively, if see climate change as going to happen and our behavior allows us to get the less-warmed world as a “sure thing” if we take certain actions, we might take actions that are more in line with the “real” odds

Psych discussionHow can we use these insights to address the

problem of climate change?Default options: e.g., green energyFraming: risk seeking