Navigating Environmental Attitudes—A Look at the Scientific Watershed Thomas A. Heberlein ISSRM-2014 Hannover, Germany.

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


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


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


The Results of Good Social Habitat

-Summer farms (predation 6/)


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




start










1 sekund







2 sekunder







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%


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%


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

Navigating Environmental Attitudes—A Look at the Scientific Watershed Thomas A. Heberlein ISSRM-2014 Hannover, Germany.

Documents

cover attitudes

role of attitudes

study attitudes

public attitudes

environmental problemsexplores

environmental attitudesa

recent book

water flows