Department of Psychology, The University of Texas at Austin.
Cogn Sci. 2020 Oct;44(10):e12909. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12909.
Examining variation in reasoning about sustainability between diverse populations provides unique insight into how group norms surrounding resource conservation develop. Cultural institutions, such as religious organizations and formal schools, can mobilize communities to solve collective challenges associated with resource depletion. This study examined conservation beliefs in a Western industrialized (Austin, Texas, USA) and a non-Western, subsistence agricultural community (Tanna, Vanuatu) among children, adolescents, and adults (N = 171; n = 58 7-12-year-olds, n = 53 13-17-year-olds, and n = 60 18-68-year-olds). Participants endorsed or rejected four types of justifications for engaging in land and animal conservation: sustainability, moral, religious, or permissible. In both populations, participants endorsed sustainability justifications most frequently. Religious justifications increased with age in Tanna and decreased with age in Austin. Tannese participants were also more likely to endorse multiple justifications for conservation than Austin participants. Data across all justification types show a main effect of age in both communities; endorsement of conservation decreased with age in Austin, but increased with age in Tanna. Across age groups, participants were more likely to endorse the conservation of animals than land in Austin, yet equally as likely to endorse the conservation of land and animals in Tanna. Overall, these results reveal similarities and differences in the beliefs that support the conservation of natural resources across populations.
考察不同人群对可持续性推理的差异,可以深入了解围绕资源保护的群体规范是如何发展的。文化机构,如宗教组织和正规学校,可以动员社区解决与资源枯竭相关的集体挑战。本研究考察了美国德克萨斯州奥斯汀市(Western industrialized)和瓦努阿图塔纳岛(non-Western, subsistence agricultural community)的儿童、青少年和成年人(N=171;n=58 7-12 岁,n=53 13-17 岁,n=60 18-68 岁)对资源保护的信念。参与者对四种参与土地和动物保护的理由(可持续性、道德、宗教或允许)表示赞成或反对。在这两个群体中,参与者最常赞成可持续性的理由。在塔纳,宗教理由随着年龄的增长而增加,而在奥斯汀则随着年龄的增长而减少。塔纳参与者比奥斯汀参与者更有可能为保护提供多种理由。所有理由类型的数据都显示了两个社区的年龄主要影响;在奥斯汀,随着年龄的增长,对保护的支持减少,但在塔纳,随着年龄的增长,对保护的支持增加。在所有年龄组中,奥斯汀参与者更倾向于赞成保护动物而不是土地,而在塔纳,他们同样有可能赞成保护土地和动物。总的来说,这些结果揭示了不同人群支持自然资源保护的信念的异同。