Navigating Environmental Attitudes—A Look at the Scientific Watershed
Thomas A. HeberleinISSRM-2014
Hannover, Germany
• A (Sociological) Social Psychology Text– Trying to reach a broader audience
• A Research Memoir– To communicate my own research
• A Statement: Importance of Social Science to Solve Environmental Problems– Explores attitudes the role of attitudes and norms
as they influence pro environmental behaviors
Navigating Environmental Attitudes
Sometimes it is OK to judge book by its cover
Attitudes are like rocks in a river
Many are underwater and you cannot see them –perhaps the most dangerous
You don’t go down the river trying to move them out of the way (dynamite!)
But you must know their location and how to read the water to successfully navigate.
Why do we spend so much time and money studying attitudes?
• Managers often want to know what public attitudes are so they can:– Solve problems by changing attitudes– Which presumably changes behavior
• Called the Knowledge Deficit Model by Environmental Social Psychologists
• I call this THE COGNITIVE FIX to differentiate it from Technological Fixes and Structural Fixes
Lesson 1The Cognitive Fix doesn’t usually work. But That Does Not Mean Attitudes Are NOT Important
PROBLEM 1: Attitude Change
Attitudes are stable, that is what makes them importantChange slowly—if at all
When they do change:The direction of change is unpredictable
MOST IMPORTANT WE CANNOT CHANGE THEM AT WILL
Aldo Leopold 1887 - 1948
4
Most famous case of EnvironmentalAttitude change was Leopold’s Attitude toward Wolves
In his early years Leopold had a negative attitude toward wolves
• 1915 called for the “wise control” [extermination] of wolves, mountain lions, coyotes, bears, bobcats, foxes and birds of prey
• 1919 “It is going to take patience and money to catch the last wolf or lion in New Mexico. But the last one must be caught before the job can be called successful.”
What caused his change in Leopold’s attitude?
• Time– 25 years between 1919 and 1944
• Role Change– Forester US Forest Service to wildlife scientist– Professor of game management at UW Madison
• Direct Experience– Saw the effects of herd irruptions in the SW
• Identity Changes– Founded Wilderness Society– Elected President of the Ecological Society of America
PROBLEM 2: A Gap Between Attitudes And Behavior!
This gap has been a major topic in social psychology for the last 50 years.
Others have noticed this gap as well
Leopold Illustrates the GapIn 1944 he completed the essay “Thinking Like a Mountain”, his 2nd most famous essay detailing his changed attitudes toward wolves
“At the January (1945) meeting of the Conservation Commission, Leopold voted in favor of a reenacted bounty on predators, even over the objections of his friend and wolf defender, Bill Feeney” Meine p. 468
Attitude as a necessary but not sufficient condition for behavior
Hunter Non-HunterPositive attitude toward hunting 31Negative attitude toward hunting 0 84
Hunter Non-HunterPositive attitude toward hunting 31 337Negative attitude toward hunting 0 84
Why Attitudes Are ImportantHunter Non-Hunter
Positive attitude toward hunting 31 337Negative attitude toward hunting 0 84
Hunter Non-HunterPositive attitude toward hunting 31 (7%) 0Negative attitude toward hunting 0 421 (93%)
This big boulder in the middle of the rapids
The 75% of the Swedes who don’t hunt but
support hunting
The anti-hunters cannot move this boulder to end hunting in Sweden
You can’t change it and it is fundamentally Important
The Bruskotter Challenge
I have an extremely positive attitude toward ice cream. In fact, I might even go so far as to say that I love ice cream. However, yesterday, while out for my evening walk I passed by our local ice cream shop without stopping. Does that mean that attitudes don’t explain (or predict) behavior?
So by all means, lets help ecologists ‘navigate’ environmental attitudes. But let’s be careful about it. It would be a shame (and we would be doing them a great disservice) if they simply traded the myth that attitude=behavior for the myth that attitudes never explain behavior.
Heberlein’s Ice Cream Shop on Timmermansgatan in Stockholm
http://www.18smaker.se/
Of Course We Did Attitude Surveys
• Neighborhood 1: 40% liked ice cream • Neighborhood 2: 20% liked ice cream• So we opened our store in Neighborhood 2!• Because Neighborhood 1 had FOUR ice cream
stores—but Neighborhood 2 had NONEFactors Outside the Individual Play a Major Role
in Behavior—this is missed in attitude studiesAttitude is a NECESSARY but not SUFFICENT
condition for behavior
Where would you locate the next ice cream shop on Södermalm?
Think about the Social Habitat of Feeding Humans
Lesson 2Favorable Attitudes are Part of (but only one part) of Good SOCIAL Habitat
Positive Attitudes toward WolvesPositive Support for Wolves (All Studies
between 1972-2000)◦51% positive toward wolves ◦58% positive toward restoration
Attitudes Toward Wolves in Sweden (2001)◦61% positive◦49% positive in wolf areas
Attitudes in Michigan (1990)◦64% support in wolf areas (UP)◦57% support in non-wolf areas (LP)
Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012
Negative Attitudes in MinorityAll Studies 1972-2000
◦25% NegativeSwedish Population (2001)
◦General Public 8% Negative◦Public in Wolf Areas 21% Negative
Michigan (1990)◦Wolf Area (UP) 15% Negative◦Non Wolf Area (LP) 9% Negative
Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012
Wolf Population Growth Consistent with Positive Attitudes
Western US ◦ 1976 virtually no wolves in Montana, Idaho, Wyoming◦ Today over 1600 wolves (hunting seasons in Montana
and Idaho)Sweden
◦ 1980 virtually no wolves◦ Today about 225
Michigan◦ 1990 about 20 wolves◦ Today over 600 wolves
Wisconsin◦ 1980 about 25 wolves◦ 2012 about 800 wolves
The last 40 years has been good “social habitat”for wolves-attitudesand institutions
Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012
Good Social Habitat IncludesThe Federal Endangered Species
ActA good science basePredictable funding from huntersState based wildlife management
agenciesAnti poaching laws and
enforcement AND positive attitudes by the
general public AND positive attitudes among
hunters
Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012
The Results of Good Social Habitat
-Summer farms (predation 6/)
Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012
Term Social Habitat is Spreading
Smack Rock@665 CFS
Clear sailing @1220 CFSOur Assessment of the Attitudes and
the River Depends on the Water Flows
What we do upstream affects the flow in the river
What has been Going On in the Watershed of Science over the last 50 years??
How do current practices affect water flows and our ability to understand
attitudes?
Looking Backward—50 Years
How we keep on course
today!
Increase in the Amount of Science
• Compare Rural Sociological Society 1969– 17 years BEFORE the first ISSRM
• 1986 First ISSRM in Corvallis Oregon– I have attended 13 of the 23 meetings– Co chaired the 2005 meeting in Sweden
• 1988 Society and Natural Resources– Human Dimensions of Wildlife in 1996 and many
other journals—LOTS OF PLACES TO PUBLISH TODAY
The Quality of the Science?
• The Response Rate Problem• Dominance of Psychological-Social Psychology• Dominance of One Shot Surveys• Failure to Study Emotions• The Disciplinary Paradox
AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT
1970-2000 Mailed Survey Response
Data from the Cornell UniversityHuman Dimensions Unit. Connellyet. al 2003
105 SurveysOver 30 Years
Cornell Surveys 2001-2013
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 20140%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
65%
87%
52%
43%
63%
26%
84%
69%
45%
71%
63%
36%
50%
38%
47%
62%
40%
53%
38%
77%
63%
54%
38%
64%
73%
82%
74%
80%
72%
80%
71%
77%81%
74%
38%
71%
63%
52%
64%
26%24%
54%
60%
54%
29%28%
37%
46%
29%33%37%
67%
54%
72%
47%
62%
42%
65%
56%54%
40%
46%
24%
30%
58%
Decline over time in Sweden
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 20160%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
73%
65%60%
47%54%53%
44% 42%
Swedish Wildlife Attitude Surveys
Average 54%
Replication is the basis of science
• We should be able to replicate experiments• In survey research if I disagree with what you
found then I need to replicate the study.• If you get a 20% response and I get a 20%
response how do we know these are the same people.–We don’t!
• To get stable and reproducible measures of attitudes we MUST have representative data
Dominance of Psychological Social Psychology
Decline of Sociological Social Psychology+
Rise of Behavioral Economics
Theory of Planned Behavior—over 20,000 cites
Psychological Social Psychology
Even Psycholgists are becoming critical of this Model
Sebastian Bamberg Professor of Social Psychology and Quantitative Research Methods at the University of Applied Science, Bielefeld. Presented at the Environmental PsychologyMeetings in 2011
Because . . . it doesn’t work
• Meta-analyses indicate a significant, however, surprizingly low, intention - behavior relation.–On average, intention accounts only for 30 % of behavioral variance.
– Systematic comparison of 12 TPB vs. 12 not TPB based interventions. TPB not more effective• Hardeman, Johnston, Bonetti, et al. (2002):
– Meta-analysis of 53 intervention studies, targeting the TPB components attitude, subjective norm, and PBC had negligible behavioral outcomes.• Michie, Abraham, Whittington, et al. (2009):
Emotions Neglected
• The driving force of attitudes– Margret, Joe and Howard– Aldo Leopold and Pine Trees and Wolves
• We focus on cognitions– Partly because they are easier to study with a
questionnaire.
Exception Excellent Chapter on Emotions
Over Reliance on One Shot Surveys
Instead
• Behavioral Observations• Panel Studies• Time series data• Experiments and Quasi Experiments• Field Studies• Most of the studies I reported in Navigating
are these types of studies—not a single survey
Isolation of the Environmental Social Science Disciplines
1988 Volume 1 No 1Society and Natural Resources
Today’s Problem: Isolation of the Environmental Social Sciences
• Environmental/Conservation Psychology• Environmental/Resource Sociology• Environmental/Resource Economics
I agree with your concern about the situation in environmental social sciences, especially the lack of . . . cross-disciplinary exchange. In part this may be caused by the lack of incentives for such a cross-disciplinary exchange. At least in Germany doing cross-disciplinary work is still a career killer. Prof. Dr. Sebastian Bamberg(University of Applied Sciences, Bielefeld)
The Discipline Paradox
• "Being equally vague about all disciplines does not indicate interdisciplinary competence."
Richard Stedman
• Disciplinary competence is a necessary condition to do good interdisciplinary work
• Disciplinary blinders, theories, and methods hinder interdisciplinary applied work.
• Good scientists doing work outside their discipline are dangerous if they work alone.
Write or delete: DATEWrite or delete at the masterslide: YOUR NAME and TITLE
AARHUS UNIVERSITETINSTITUT FOR BIOSCIENCE
Brugergruppemøde reservater på Nordfyn 3. marts 2010AARHUS UNIVERSITET, Danmarks Miljøundersøgelser, Afdeling for Vildtbiologi & Biodiversitet
Fangst af Mørkbugede Knortegæs med kanonnet Terschelling, Holland
Capturing an Attitude—An Example of Interdisciplinary Competence
Write or delete: DATEWrite or delete at the masterslide: YOUR NAME and TITLE
AARHUS UNIVERSITETINSTITUT FOR BIOSCIENCE
Brugergruppemøde reservater på Nordfyn 3. marts 2010AARHUS UNIVERSITET, Danmarks Miljøundersøgelser, Afdeling for Vildtbiologi & Biodiversitet
start
Write or delete: DATEWrite or delete at the masterslide: YOUR NAME and TITLE
AARHUS UNIVERSITETINSTITUT FOR BIOSCIENCE
Brugergruppemøde reservater på Nordfyn 3. marts 2010AARHUS UNIVERSITET, Danmarks Miljøundersøgelser, Afdeling for Vildtbiologi & Biodiversitet
Write or delete: DATEWrite or delete at the masterslide: YOUR NAME and TITLE
AARHUS UNIVERSITETINSTITUT FOR BIOSCIENCE
Brugergruppemøde reservater på Nordfyn 3. marts 2010AARHUS UNIVERSITET, Danmarks Miljøundersøgelser, Afdeling for Vildtbiologi & Biodiversitet
Write or delete: DATEWrite or delete at the masterslide: YOUR NAME and TITLE
AARHUS UNIVERSITETINSTITUT FOR BIOSCIENCE
Brugergruppemøde reservater på Nordfyn 3. marts 2010AARHUS UNIVERSITET, Danmarks Miljøundersøgelser, Afdeling for Vildtbiologi & Biodiversitet
1 sekund
Write or delete: DATEWrite or delete at the masterslide: YOUR NAME and TITLE
AARHUS UNIVERSITETINSTITUT FOR BIOSCIENCE
Brugergruppemøde reservater på Nordfyn 3. marts 2010AARHUS UNIVERSITET, Danmarks Miljøundersøgelser, Afdeling for Vildtbiologi & Biodiversitet
Write or delete: DATEWrite or delete at the masterslide: YOUR NAME and TITLE
AARHUS UNIVERSITETINSTITUT FOR BIOSCIENCE
Brugergruppemøde reservater på Nordfyn 3. marts 2010AARHUS UNIVERSITET, Danmarks Miljøundersøgelser, Afdeling for Vildtbiologi & Biodiversitet
2 sekunder
Write or delete: DATEWrite or delete at the masterslide: YOUR NAME and TITLE
AARHUS UNIVERSITETINSTITUT FOR BIOSCIENCE
Brugergruppemøde reservater på Nordfyn 3. marts 2010AARHUS UNIVERSITET, Danmarks Miljøundersøgelser, Afdeling for Vildtbiologi & Biodiversitet
Write or delete: DATEWrite or delete at the masterslide: YOUR NAME and TITLE
AARHUS UNIVERSITETINSTITUT FOR BIOSCIENCE
Brugergruppemøde reservater på Nordfyn 3. marts 2010AARHUS UNIVERSITET, Danmarks Miljøundersøgelser, Afdeling for Vildtbiologi & Biodiversitet
3 sekunder
•Could grad students in sociology or psychology catch and band geese? Why do we expect those with no training in attitude theory or measurement to do decent attitude surveys???
Street Light Science
• Low Response Rates• One Shot Surveys• Measure Intention rather than behavior• Few experiments (psychologists doing surveys)
• Lack of time series and panel data• Study cognitions rather than emotions
WE DO WHAT IS EASY RATHER THAN WHAT IS IMPORTANT
How do we get back on course?
Mailed Surveys—a closer look at the data
Still most above50%
Data from the Cornell UniversityHuman Dimensions Unit. Connellyet. al 2003
Average Response Rate 65%
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 20140%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
65%
87%
52%
43%
63%
26%
84%
69%
45%
71%
63%
36%
50%
38%
47%
62%
40%
53%
38%
77%
63%
54%
38%
64%
73%
82%
74%
80%
72%
80%
71%
77%81%
74%
38%
71%
63%
52%
64%
26%24%
54%
60%
54%
29%28%
37%
46%
29%33%37%
67%
54%
72%
47%
62%
42%
65%
56%54%
40%
46%
24%
30%
58%
Average Response Rate 54%
Response Rates for European Wolf and Bear Attitude Surveys (Dressel)
1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 20100%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
52%
68%67%
58%
31%
41%
61%65%
80%
53% 53%
Average Response Rate 57%
Some good scientists aredefying gravity!
So What do We Do?
• Quit congratulating ourselves on low response rates– Even with the declines response rates below 50%
are • below average• not considered GOOD by anyone other than author
who hopes to get his or her work published
• Dan Decker: “I am so tired of seeing papers with statements like: ‘We experienced a 20% response rate, which is normal for….’ e-mail 5/5/2014
Design Better Surveys
• (Bad) surveys are too easy to design• (Bad) samples (internet) are too easy to get• A good survey is the intersection of theory and
method– It is like a good poem—looks simple but is complex
• The respondents are essentially voting, asking if this is worth their time
• Less than 50%, in my opinion, means you have lost the scientific election!
Biologists Know it costs money and resources to get a sample
90,000 Euros to get data from 30 moose
Wolf data costs money too
• 60,000 € to capture and collar 10 wolves a year
• But you want to have field work done to collect some real data then you may add € 10-20 000 per year.(2 packs 4 collared wolves)
Invest More In Data Collection
• Get Higher Response Rates– Incentives – Panels– Personal Interviews
• Measure observed (not reported)behavior– Lawn mowing as a dependent variable– Use technology– Sending checks back—as a way to estimate value
Apply Sanctions?
Dan Decker e-mail 5/5/2014 “When I am asked to review papers involving survey methodology, I first check response rate and then whether a non-respondent follow-up was conducted, and how rigorously. If low response rate (below 60-65%) and no follow-up, I usually just return the paper to editor with note about inadequacy—not real science.”
Labeling and Norm Change• My position as a reviewer is to consider the innovativeness and
contribution of the paper. If the response rate is below 50% but the findings are really important then
• I would require the author to say in the manuscript. “These rates are NOT up to the standards of the field” and then describe how he/she would go about getting higher rates (or more representative samples) in the future and discuss the problems and what this might cost.
• The problem with the low and self congratulatory rates is that future readers have no idea 20% is BAD (I mean it got published didn’t it?).
• AND they have advice on how to do it better. This kind of stuff could go into a proposal to support paying respondents, creating panels, using normative information etc.
• To which Dan replied: I agree about innovativeness etc., but we may differ a bit on one thing in your note. That is, I am not sure how I would know “findings are really important” if response rates . . . are low. e-mail 5/30/2014
Do Fewer Mailed SurveysHuman Dimensions at Cornell
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 20140%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
65%
87%
52%
43%
63%
26%
84%
69%
45%
71%
63%
36%
50%
38%
47%
62%
40%
53%
38%
77%
63%
54%
38%
64%
73%
82%
74%
80%
72%
80%
71%
77%81%
74%
38%
71%
63%
52%
64%
26%24%
54%
60%
54%
29%28%
37%
46%
29%33%37%
67%
54%
72%
47%
62%
42%
65%
56% 54%
40%
46%
24%
30%
58%
Only 6 Mailed Surveys in Four Years
Instead . . .
• Field experiment with residents’ willingness to tend to street trees (information treatment)
• Framing experiment (word choice): “shale gas development” vs “fracking” on Cornell national survey (ongoing phone survey that we are including questions on)
• Framing experiment (word choice): on empire state poll (ongoing phone survey that we are including questions on) assessing support for hunting based on different motives/rationales.
• Photo methods assessing attachment to place and recovery post disaster• Indepth interviews with “non-traditional” hunters (female, urban, non-white,
non family socialized) to understand opportunities and barriers• Indepth interviews with GL fishery managers about human dimensions research
needs/barriers to integrating into ecosystem based resource management• Key informant interviews with leaders of landowner coalitions around the
growth of Marcellus shale gas exploration in the NE US and in Canada.• “Q sort” methods assessing different groups’ cognitive structures (organization of
beliefs) around gas development across Canada.• Delphi techniques of aquatic ecologists to develop scenarios around invasive
species presence/growth in the great lakes• Ethnographic (participatory observation/interviews) work assessing illegal
hunting (poaching) of tigers in Laos
Do More Field Experiments
• Catch and Release• Try to create a norm!• Set signs on one
stretch of river on some days
• Observe behavior—• Conduct exit interviews
Work with Psychologists to Study Emotion
• Heart Monitor Study to study hunter and non-hunters (and anti hunters)
• Emotions can be measured physiologically
• Easy to do in labs and now in the field
• Help bridge our work with environmental psychologists
But there are Bright Spots in the Watershed
• Experiment where Information failed to change attitudes/direct experience did
• Choice experiment revised in mid stream to reflect unique aspects of the situation
• New (and testable) Model of Attitudes • TPB Personal Interviews—73% response rate• Time series data showed no attitude change at
time one, but had effect 10 months later
Session 1.6
Thanks To
Sebastian Bamberg
Nancy Connelly Dan Decker Sabrina Dressel Goran Ericsson Max Eriksson
Doug Whittaker Håkan Sand Rich Stedman Camilla
Sandström Elizabeth
Thomson
For providing data and help with this lecture
Interested in Learning More
Copies of two papers available
Available here for sale OR from Amazon .com in paper back and in a Kindle edition
Top Related