Center for Compassion and Altruism Research and Education, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Psychol Sci. 2013 Jan 1;24(1):56-62. doi: 10.1177/0956797612449177. Epub 2012 Dec 10.
Americans' attitudes about the environment are highly polarized, but it is unclear why this is the case. We conducted five studies to examine this issue. Studies 1a and 1b demonstrated that liberals, but not conservatives, view the environment in moral terms and that this tendency partially explains the relation between political ideology and environmental attitudes. Content analyses of newspaper op-eds (Study 2a) and public-service announcements (Study 2b) found that contemporary environmental discourse is based largely on moral concerns related to harm and care, which are more deeply held by liberals than by conservatives. However, we found that reframing proenvironmental rhetoric in terms of purity, a moral value resonating primarily among conservatives, largely eliminated the difference between liberals' and conservatives' environmental attitudes (Study 3). These results establish the importance of moralization as a cause of polarization on environmental attitudes and suggest that reframing environmental discourse in different moral terms can reduce the gap between liberals and conservatives in environmental concern.
美国人对环境的态度高度两极分化,但不清楚为什么会这样。我们进行了五项研究来探讨这个问题。研究 1a 和 1b 表明,自由派人士,而不是保守派人士,从道德角度看待环境,这种倾向部分解释了政治意识形态和环境态度之间的关系。对报纸专栏文章(研究 2a)和公益广告(研究 2b)的内容分析发现,当代环境话语主要基于与伤害和关怀有关的道德关注,而自由派人士比保守派人士更强烈地持有这些关注。然而,我们发现,用主要在保守派人士中产生共鸣的道德价值观——纯洁——重新构建亲环境言论,在很大程度上消除了自由派和保守派人士环境态度之间的差异(研究 3)。这些结果确立了道德化作为环境态度两极分化的一个原因的重要性,并表明用不同的道德术语重新构建环境话语可以减少自由派和保守派人士在环境问题上的差距。