From the Start of Fall

It is already mid-September, but I am just starting this blog to connect Social Psychology with all of my other courses (especially those that are closely tied with Environmental Sustainability). I figured I would do a longer blog post this week to sum up everything that has related so far during the semester.

Environmental Science: So far in Environmental Science we have discussed global warming/climate change/whatever a more accpetable or politically correct term is for this issue, a fair amount. There are a lot of problems with getting people to change their ways to help the environment. One of the problems is simply the knowledge of climate change. Even though at least 90-95% of scientists believe in climate change, many citizens resist believing it because there isn't any supposed "proof". Even though there is much research to show that it is very highly likely that climate change is occuring and that humans are at least somewhat contributing, scientists hardly ever say that they exactly 100% have perfectly proven something, because then it wouldn't be science. A lot of "normal" people, and even politicians, don't fully understand this about science and believe that when scientists can't say that they 100% have proven something that there is a flaw in the scientists' arguments.

Another reason people are reluctant to change their behavior is because climate change isn't something that is going to immediately affect a citizen. A singular person probably won't be able to tell if by he/she carpooling to work, biking most places, turning down the A/C and the heat, using CFL's or LED's, and reducing their overall consumption his/her carbon footprint will decrease and he/she will be helping to slow global warming. Since there is no immediate reward, many people don't see the importance of changing their behavior.

A couple of things that are working in changing people's behavior dealing with climate change is the messages of fear and the example set by companies and/or other individuals. In Social Psychology, we studied that messages of fear only work very well if followed by very specific instructions on what to do next. When movies are shown, commercials are played, or advertisements are seen by citizens that have frightening or sad messages about global warming, we will, for the most part, immediately make a peripheral, emotional connection. We might be scared about what is becoming of our planet and the poor animals and the poor ecosystem, etc. and wonder what we can do to help. If the ads, movies, and commercials have a specific goal, they will usually be fairly effective. For example, if a sad poster is up in the hallway at school that has a picture of a sad looking polar bear on a melting ice berg that says something like "Polar bears are losing their homes. Help save the planet by recycling, and go to our website to find out how else you can help," the primary message from this poster is to recycle and some students may even go to the website for further instructions. However if there was just a picture of a sad polar bear, it probably wouldn't convince many people to recycle.

The examples set by companies or other people is even more important because humans depend so much on their environment to make decisions. If a citizen sees another citizen (especially one who looks professional and trustworthy) recycling, reducing electricity use, bringing reusable bags to the grocery store, etc., they are more likely to start doing it too, or at least think about doing it. This is because humans rely on their surroundings for information and so they often conform to the behavior of other people, especially ones they can relate to or who they look up to in some way. Also, when big companies agree to participate in being green, it gets people in the habit of having green behavior. For example, Whole Foods has a large array of recycling bins right in the front of their store next to the trash cans. If it is conveniant and simple for people to recycle, they are more likely to participate and even feel pressured to do so at least when they're at Whole Foods being watched, and/or seeing signs to do so.

Environmental Economics: We have been reviewing a lot of Micro and Macro economics, but we have touched on a few environmental issues that relate to Social Psych. In Economics, one of the only ways we've talked about influencing people's decisions is to change supply, so that demand responds to it. For example, since we know incandescent bulbs are worse for the environment, we will put an excise tax on companies for producing those bulbs, which will increase their costs and decrease their output and raise the cost, thus lowering demand for those bulbs.. On the other hand, we know CFL bulbs are better, so we can subsidize the companies for producing those bulbs, which will increase production and decrease price, thus increasing demand for those bulbs.

Other than that, the only relation to Social Psychology I can think of is conformity in shopping. We spoke about how in a free market, usually a product that is the same will sell for the lowest price. However, when the brand matters, people will pay more for whatever reason. One of the reasons people will pay more is for the tastefulness of the brand. Say Johnny's friends all wear Ralph Lauren polos to school every day. All of the cool kids also wear Ralph Lauren polos. In order to conform with the cool people as well as his friends, Johnny is willing to pay twice or three times as much for a Ralph Lauren polo shirt than for a polo shirt from Wal-Mart, because the brand is popular, expensive, and trendy. That is why companies can get away with charging a lot more for a similar product.

I hope you will excuse the length of this blog post! I attempted to wrap up my classes from the last month. They will obviously be shorter and more specific in the coming weeks.