Ok, Boomers: Generational Differences in Pro-Environmental Behavior

Existing literature shows positive correlation between age and sustainability efforts, as well as the influence life experience has on generational differences. However, it is unclear how generational influences impact pro-environmental behavior (PEB). Using 244 MTurk participants (64% men, 69% White), the study participants were categorized by cohort; Millennials, ages 22-38 (74.4%), Gen X, ages 39-54 (17.4%), and Baby Boomers, ages 55-73 (8.2%). We predicted that Baby Boomers will show stronger support towards Reusable PEBs when compared to Gen X and Millennials. We also hypothesized that Gen X and Millennials will show stronger support towards Travel PEBs and Food PEBs when compared to Baby Boomers. We found significant generational differences for all PEB categories investigated (Climate Policy Support, p = .003; Plastic Policy Support, p = .033; Recycling PEBs, p = .045; Food-Related PEBs,

Save the Turtles! Examining Motivators for Pro-Environmental Behaviors

In response to multiple vivid images about plastic straw pollution, multiple major corporations have started to reduce their straw waste or completely ban straw use. These images are assumed to lead to increased guilt, environmental identity, and environmental concern that is thought to then motivate additional pro-environmental behaviors (PEBs). In the first part of the study (Time 1), participants were randomly assigned to either watch a saddening video of a turtle struggling with a plastic straw stuck in its nose (the environmental appeal), or to not watch the video (controls). They were then surveyed on their levels of guilt, pro-environmental identity, and concern for the environment. The participants who watched the video were then asked to reduce their use of single-use plastic straws and to track their use for one week, while control participants were only asked to track their straw use for one week. After a week (Time 2), the participants were surveyed on their straw use, environmental policy support, levels of guilt, pro-environmental identity, and concern. This study supports the idea of guilt being a powerful motivator, but that eco-guilt can be reduced over time. On the other hand, other motivators, such as pro-environmental identity and concern, may not be affected by this particular environmental appeal. Overall, an individual’s straw use seems to be unaffected by the chosen environmental appeal, as well as an individual’s support for policies against single-use plastics

The Spillover Effect: Fact or Fiction

In light of recent pro-environmental behavior (PEB) campaigns like banning plastic straws, some have raised concerns that performing small behaviors may undermine support for more difficult, and arguably more effective, political PEBs. Recent psychological research has focused on understanding how performing one PEB may spill over to increase (positive spillover) or decrease (negative spillover) the likelihood of performing additional PEB. We hypothesized that participants asked to perform a PEB due to identity reasons would display positive spillover and that participants asked to perform a PEB due to guilt reasons would display negative spillover. 120 student participants (93 women) were randomly assigned to conditions fostering pro-environmental identity or guilt, or to a control condition. The participants were then asked to commit to use a reusable cup for an entire week (PEB1). One week later participants were asked if they would be willing to write a letter to the governor in support of alternative energy sources (PEB2). We found no evidence of the condition affecting PEB1 or PEB2. Additionally, there was no significant relationship between performing PEB1 and performing PEB2. Therefore, we found no evidence of spillover effects. Worry about negative PEB spillover to political behaviors may be unwarranted

Blue is Green and Red is too: The Political Divide on Environmental Policy Support

As political polarization has accelerated over the past decade, both Congress and the general population have become increasingly divided on policies for environmental protection. This division may be due to the recent trend of political affiliation being treated as a social identity from which to base ideological beliefs about the existence of climate change as well as the need for environmental programs targeting plastic consumption (Dunlap et al., 2016). We hypothesized that participants that classified themselves as Democrats would show more support for climate and plastic policies than participants that classified themselves as Republicans. We recruited a sample of 251 participants from MTurk. 179 participants classified themselves as either Democrat (n = 120) or Republican (n = 59) and were examined in this study. The study sample was predominantly male (59%), with an average age of 35 years old. Participants indicated their support for 4 items relating to Plastic Policy Support (α = .86) and 6 items relating to Climate Policy Support (α = .86). Republicans scored significantly lower than Democrats on Plastic Policy Support Score (p = .027) and Climate Policy Support Scale (p = .001). However, when we examined the individual items that made up the scales, Republicans did not differ from Democrats in their support for several specific policies. These results indicate that while political identity may contribute to the division in beliefs about overall climate and plastic policies, support for policies targeting specific pro-environmental policies may not be influenced by party affiliation