The Interplay Between Knowledge, Perceived Efficacy, and Concern About Global Warming and Climate Change: A One-Year Longitudinal Study

Risk Analysis

Volumn 32, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 1003-1020

  Milfont, Taciano L ^a  

^a VICTORIA UNIVERSITY OF WELLINGTON   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Concern; Efficacy; Global warming and climate change; Knowledge; Longitudinal

Indexed keywords

CONCERN; DATA POINTS; EFFICACY; KEY VARIABLES; KNOWLEDGE; LONG-TERM GOALS; LONGITUDINAL; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; NEW ZEALAND; POLITICAL LEADERSHIP; PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE; PUBLIC SUPPORT; RISK COMMUNICATION; TEMPORAL STABILITY;

GAS EMISSIONS; GREENHOUSE GASES;

GLOBAL WARMING;

DATA SET; ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE; GLOBAL WARMING; GREENHOUSE GAS; KNOWLEDGE; LEADERSHIP; MITIGATION; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK PERCEPTION;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLIMATE CHANGE; FEMALE; GREENHOUSE EFFECT; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEW ZEALAND; PERCEPTION; POLICY; POLITICS; RISK; TEMPERATURE;

ADULT; AGED; CLIMATE CHANGE; COMMUNICATION; FEMALE; GLOBAL WARMING; HUMANS; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEW ZEALAND; PERCEPTION; POLITICS; PUBLIC POLICY; RISK; TEMPERATURE;

NEW ZEALAND;

EID: 84862615206     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01800.x     Document Type: Article

References (85)

1. Anderegg WRL, Prall JW, Harold J, Schneider SH. Expert credibility in climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 2010; 107:12107-121109.
2. Arndt DS, Baringer MO, Johnson MR. State of the climate in 2009. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 2010; 91:S1-S224.
3. Doran PT, Kendall Zimmerman M. Examining the scientific consensus on climate change. EOS, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 2009; 90:22-23.
4. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2007.
5. Min S-K, Zhang X, Zwiers FW, Hegerl GC. Human contribution to more-intense precipitation extremes. Nature, 2011; 470:378-381.
6. Oreskes N. The scientific consensus on climate change. Science, 2004; 306(5702):1686.
7. Nobel Laureates. The next hundred years, 2001. Available at:, Accessed on March 29, 2011.
8. Vidal J. Nobel laureates compare climate crisis to threat from nuclear weapons. Guardian, May 29, 2009. Available at:, Accessed on April 13, 2011.
9. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Outcome of the work of the ad hoc working group on long-term cooperative action under the convention, 2010. Available at:, Accessed on March 29, 2011.
10. Eurobarometer. Europeans' attitudes towards climate change (Special Eurobarometer 313, European Parliament and European Commission), 2009. Available at:, Accessed on March 29, 2011.
11. Leiserowitz A, Maibach E, Roser-Renouf C. Climate Change in the American Mind: Americans' Global Warming Beliefs and Attitudes in January 2010. Yale University and George Mason University New Haven, CT : Yale Project on Climate Change, 2010. Available at:, Accessed on March 29, 2011.
12. The World Bank. Public attitudes toward climate change: Findings from a multi-country poll, 2009. Available at:, Accessed on April 7, 2011.
13. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate change 2007: Mitigation of climate change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2007.
14. Grob A. A structural model of environmental attitudes and behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1995; 15:209-220.
15. Hines JM, Hungerford HR, Tomera AN. Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Education, 1987; 18:1-8.
16. Hornik J, Cherian J, Madansky M, Narayana C. Determinants of recycling behavior: A synthesis of research results. Journal of Socio-Economics, 1995; 24:105-127.
17. Hwang Y-H, Kim S-I, Jeng J-M. Examining the causal relationships among selected antecedents of responsible environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Education, 2000; 31:19-25.
18. Kaiser FG, Fuhler U. Ecological behaviour's dependency on different forms of knowledge. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 2003; 52:598-613.
19. Meinhold JL, Malkus AJ. Adolescent environmental behaviors: Can knowledge, attitudes, and self-efficacy make a difference? Environment and Behavior, 2005; 37:511-532.
20. McFarlane BL, Hunt LM. Environmental activism in the forest sector: Social psychlogical, social-cultural, and contextual effects. Environment and Behavior, 2006; 38:266-285.
21. Spence A, Poortinga W, Butler C, Pidgeon NF. Perceptions of climate change and willingness to act sustainably influenced by flood experiences. Nature Climate Change, 2011; 1:46-49.
22. Burgess J, Harrison C, Filius P. Environmental communication and the cultural politics of environmental citizenship. Environment and Planning A, 1998; 30:1445-1460.
23. Owens S "Engaging the public": Information and deliberation in environmental policy. Environment and Planning A, 2000; 32:1141-1148.
24. Gifford R. Psychology's essential role in alleviating the impacts of climate change. Canadian Psychology, 2008; 49:273-280.
25. Kasperson RE, Kasperson JX. Hidden hazards. Pp. 9-28 in Mayo DG, Hollander RD (eds). Acceptable evidence: Science and values in risk management. New York : Oxford University Press, 1991.
26. Van Vugt M. Averting the tragedy of the commons: Using social psychological science to protect the environment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2009; 18:169-173.
27. Ockwell D, Whitmarsh L, O'Neill S. Reorienting climate change communication for effective mitigation: Forcing people to be green or fostering grass-roots engagement? Science Communication, 2009; 30:305-327.
28. Aitken C, Chapman R, McClure J. Climate change, powerlessness and the commons dilemma: Assessing New Zealanders' preparedness to act. Global Environmental Change, 2011; 21:752-760.
29. Bord RJ, O'Connor RE, Fisher A. In what sense does the public need to understand global climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 2000; 9:205-218.
30. Heath Y, Gifford R. Free-market ideology and environmental degradation: The case of beliefs in global climate change. Environment and Behavior, 2006; 38:48-71.
31. O'Connor RE, Bord RJ, Fisher A. Risk perceptions, general environmental beliefs, and willingness to address climate change. Risk Analysis, 1999; 19:461-471.
32. O'Connor RE, Bord RJ, Yarnal B, Wiefek N. Who wants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions? Social Science Quarterly, 2002; 83:1-17.
33. Sundblad E-L, Biel A, Gärling T. Knowledge and confidence in knowledge about climate change among experts, journalists, politicians, and laypersons. Environment and Behavior, 2009; 41:281-302.
34. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1991; 50:179-211.
35. Bandura A. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York : Worth Publishers, 1997.
36. Brody SD, Zahran S, Vedlitz A, Grover H. Examining the relationship between physical vulnerability and public perceptions of global climate change in the United States. Environment and Behavior, 2008; 40:72-95.
37. Kellstedt PM, Zahran S, Vedlitz A. Personal efficacy, the information environment, and attitudes toward global warming and climate change in the United States. Risk Analysis, 2008; 28:113-126.
38. Malka A, Krosnick JA, Langer G. The association of knowledge with concern about global warming: Trusted information sources shape public thinking. Risk Analysis, 2009; 29:633-647.
39. Harré N, Atkinson Q. (eds). Carbon Neutral by 2020. Nelson : Craig Potton Publishing, 2007.
40. Ministry for the Environment. Gazetting New Zealand's 2050 emissions target, 2011. Available at:, Accessed on April 6, 2011.
41. Wilson N, Chapman R, Howden-Chapman P. New Zealand Government response to climate change: Largely fogged up? New Zealand Medical Journal, 2009; 122:111-113.
42. Milfont TL, Harré N, Sibley CG, Duckitt J. The climate change dilemma: Examining the association between parental status and political party support. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, in press.
43. New Zealand Institute of Economic Research. Emissions trading scheme (ETS) research: A summary of quantitative research amongst the general public, 2008. Available at:, Accessed on April 5, 2011.
44. Zahran S, Brody S, Grover H, Vedlitz A. Climate change vulnerability and policy support. Society and Natural Resources, 2006; 19:1-19.
45. Hughey KFD, Kerr GN, Cullen R. Public Perceptions of New Zealand's Environment: 2008. Christchurch, New Zealand : EOS Ecology, 2008.
46. Stuart D. Survey on public attitudes to climate change and the emissions trading scheme. Report for the Greenhouse Policy Coalition, Wellington, 2009. Available at:, Accessed on April 5, 2011.
47. New Zealand Business Council for Sustainable Development. ShapeNZ : New Zealanders' attitudes to climate change, Auckland, 2009. Available at:, Accessed on March 29, 2011.
48. Converse PE. The nature of belief systems in mass publics. Pp. 206-261 in Apter DE (ed). Ideology and Discontent. London : Free Press of Glencoe, 1964.
49. Little TD, Schnabel KU, Baumert J (eds). Modeling Longitudinal and Multilevel Data: Practical Issues, Applied Approaches, and Specific Examples. Mahwah, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum, 2000.
50. McArdle JJ, Aber MS. Patterns of change within latent variable structural equation models. Pp. 151-224 in von Eye A (ed). Statistical Methods in Longitudinal Research: Principles and Methods of Structuring Change. New York : Academic Press, 1990.
51. Willet JB, Sayer AG. Using covariance structure analysis to detect correlates and predictors of individual change over time. Psychological Bulletin, 1994; 116:363-381.
52. Curran PJ, Harford TC, Muthén BO. The relation between heavy alcohol use and bar patronage: A latent growth model. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 1996; 57:410-418.
53. Walker AJ, Acock AC, Bowman SR, Li F. Amount of care given and caregiving satisfaction: A latent growth curve analysis. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 1996; 51B:130-142.
54. Dunlap RE, Van Liere KD, Mertig A, Jones RE. Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 2000; 56:425-442.
55. Hawcroft LJ, Milfont TL. The use (and abuse) of the new environmental paradigm scale over the last 30 years: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2010; 30:143-158.
56. Sibley CG, Wilson MS. Political attitudes and the ideology of equality: Differentiating support for liberal and conservative political parties in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 2007; 36:72-84.
57. Aiken LS, West SG. Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. London : SAGE, 1991.
58. Whitmarsh L. Scepticism and uncertainty about climate change: Dimensions, determinants and change over time. Global Environmental Change, 2011; 21:690-700.
59. Lord CG, Ross L, Lepper MR. Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1979; 37:2098-2109.
60. Ross L, Lepper MR, Hubbard M. Perseverance in self-perception and social perception: Biased attributional processes in the debriefing paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975; 32:880-892.
61. IJzerman H, Koole SL. From perceptual rags to metaphoric riches-Bodily, social, and cultural constraints on socio-cognitive metaphors: Comment on Landau, Meier, and Keefer (2010). Psychological Bulletin, 2011; 137:355-361.
62. Williams LE, Huang JY, Bargh JA. The scaffolded mind: Higher mental processes are grounded in early experience of the physical world. European Journal of Social Psychology, 2009; 39:1257-1267.
63. Van Vugt M, Samuelson CD. The impact of metering in a natural resource crisis: A social dilemma analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1999; 25:731-745.
64. Abrahamse W, Steg L, Vlek C, Rothengatter T. A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2005; 25:273-291.
65. Dietz T, Gardner GT, Gilligan J, Stern PC, Vandenberghe, MP. Household actions can provide a behavioral wedge to rapidly reduce US carbon emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 2009; 106:18452-18456.
66. McKenzie-Mohr D. Fostering Sustainable Behaviour: An Introduction to Community-Based Social Marketing, 3rd ed. Gabriola Island, Canada : New Society Publishers, 2011.
67. Schultz PW. Knowledge, education, and household recycling: Examining the knowledge-deficit model of behavior change. Pp. 67-82 in Dietz T, Stern P (eds). New Tools for Environmental Protection. Washington, DC : National Academy of Sciences, 2002.
68. Schultz PW, Kaiser F. Promoting proenvironmental behavior. In Clayton S (ed). Handbook of Environmental and Conservation Psychology. Oxford : Oxford University Press, in press.
69. Environment Canada. Evaluation of the One-Tonne Challenge program, 2006. Available at:, Accessed on March 29, 2011.
70. Conway EM. Communicating the science of climate change: Lessons from history. Paper presented at the Climatefutures Conference, New Zealand Climate Change Research Institute. Wellington, New Zealand, 2011.
71. Oreskes N, Conway EM. Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming. New York : Bloomsbury Press, 2010.
72. Boykoff MT, Boykoff JM. Balance as bias: Global warming and the US prestige press. Global Environmental Change, 2004; 14:125-136.
73. Sterman JD. Risk communication on climate: Mental models and mass balance. Science, 2008; 322:532-533.
74. Antilla L. Self-censorship and science: A geographical review of media coverage of climate tipping points. Public Understanding of Science, 2010; 19:240-256.
75. Frick J, Kaiser FG, Wilson, M. Environmental knowledge and conservation behavior: Exploring prevalence and structure in a representative sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 2004; 37:1597-1613.
76. Budescu DV, Broomell S, Por H-H. Improving communication of uncertainty in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Psychological Science, 2009; 20:299-308.
77. Gattig A, Hendrickx L. Judgmental discounting and environmental risk perception: Dimensional similarities, domain differences, and implications for sustainability. Journal of Social Issues, 2007; 63:21-39.
78. Pelletier LG, Sharp E. Persuasive communication and proenvironmental behaviours: How message tailoring and message framing can improve the integration of behaviours through self-determined motivation. Canadian Psychology, 2008; 49:210-217.
79. Morton TA, Rabinovich A, Marshall D, Bretscheneider P. The future that may (or may not) come: How framing changes responses to uncertainty in climate change communications. Global Environmental Change, 2011; 21:103-109.
80. Spence A, Pidgeon NF. Framing and communicating climate change: The effects of distance and outcome frame manipulations. Global Environmental Change, 20; 2010:656-667.
81. Halpert J. Incremental? Yes. But a growing role for social sciences in climate change dialog. The Yale Forum on Climate Change and the Media, February 16, 2011. Available at:, Accessed on April 9, 2011.
82. Milfont TL. Global warming, climate change and human psychology. Pp. 19-42 in Corral-Verdugo V, García-Cadena CH, Frías-Arment M (eds). Psychological Approaches to Sustainability: Current Trends in Theory, Research and Practice. New York : Nova Science, 2010.
83. Swim J, Clayton S, Doherty T, Gifford R, Howard G, Reser JP, et al. Psychology and Global Climate Change: Addressing a Multi-Faceted Phenomenon and Set of Challenges (Report by the Task Force on the Interface Between Psychology and Global Climate Change). Washington, DC : American Psychological Association, 2009.
84. Cialdini RB. Crafting normative messages to protect the environment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2003; 12:105-109.
85. Schultz PW, Nolan JM, Cialdini RB, Goldstein NJ, Griskevicius V. The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychological Science, 2007; 18:429-434.