Search

In order to minimize climate change it is important that people take up a sustainable lifestyle. Sustainable lifestyles call for pro-environmental behaviors (PEBs) in several domains, such as in-home energy use, mobility, and consumption of food and goods. However, studies show that people often do not consistently behave pro-environmentally in all domains. In this study we investigated how a combination of personal motivation, and the difficulty and the perceived effort of a PEB, predicts the performance of PEBs in various domains, using a survey (n = 1,536). By means of Rasch analysis we identified the difficulty of 17 PEBs and estimated respondents’ pro-environmental motivations. In addition, we investigated if performance of certain PEBs increased the probability of performing other PEBs. This way we could identify for each level of motivation which behaviors respondents were (probably) performing and which behaviors they did not yet perform, but would be least effortful new behaviors. Furthermore, using a non-recursive structural equation model we investigated the relations between perceived effort, PEB performance, motivation, underlying traits, and demographics. Results showed a feedback loop between motivation and perceived effort: when respondents were motivated they perceived behaviors as less effortful and also lower perception of effort was related to higher motivation. Our results imply that people mainly perform PEBs that fit their level of pro-environmental motivation and that they are inclined to do the things of which they can justify the effort they need to invest. This amount of effort seems quite similar for people: no one wants to invest too much effort, but people highly differ in how effortful they assess different behaviors. Our study thus indicates that rationalizations play a key role. Encouraging people to embrace more sustainable lifestyles may involve step-by-step increases in PEB performance. We propose that people should be encouraged to perform behaviors that are closest to their current motivation level in order for them to progress from performing easy to more difficult PEBs.

Growing evidence suggests that relative disadvantage is more relevant than absolute socioeconomic factors in explaining disparities in healthfulness of diet. In a series of pre-registered experiments, we tested whether personal relative deprivation (PRD), i.e. the sense that one is unfairly deprived of a deserved outcome relative to others, results in choosing more palatable, rewarding foods. Study 1 (N = 102) demonstrated the feasibility and effectiveness of a game for inducing real-time experiences of PRD. Study 2 (N = 287) showed no main effect of PRD condition on hypothetical food choices, but an interaction between chronic PRD and condition revealed that those in the PRD condition chose more rewarding foods when feeling chronically deprived. In Study 3 (N = 260) the hypothesized main effect was found on real, non-hypothetical food choices: those in the PRD condition chose more rewarding foods, controlling for sensitivity to palatable food. Our results provide preliminary indications that the experience of being relatively deprived, rather than the objective amount or resources, may result in a higher preference for high-caloric and palatable foods. It may be suggested that efforts to reduce societal disparities in healthfulness of diet may need to focus on perceptions of injustice beyond objective inequalities.

Ideally, pro-environmental consumer behavior leads to a lower impact on the environment. However, due to negative behavioral spillovers environmentally friendly behavior could lead to an overall higher environmental impact if subsequent environmentally unfriendly behavior occurs. In this exploratory interview study we focused on two pathways leading to negative spillover: a psychological path (perceived effort, moral licensing) and an economic path (rebound effects). We wanted to gain insight into people’s motivations to behave environmentally unfriendly and to explore people’s level of awareness of both pathways. Our results indicate that pro-environmental behaviors that are associated with higher effort are performed less frequently, and that when people do not perform these behaviors they associate them with higher effort levels. When people perceive behaviors as more effortful they increasingly seem to use arguments to motivate and rationalize why performing the behavior is difficult or impossible. Moreover, we found that although some people can imagine that moral licensing and rebound effects could occur and can provide examples from their own lives, most people assess these concepts as not rational. People seem unaware of the relation between a first pro-environmental behavior (PEB) and a subsequent behavior, and therefore inconsistencies in behavior go unnoticed. As people are good at rationalizing why they do not perform specific PEBs, they in general feel satisfied with their own pro-environmental actions. In order to discourage negative spillovers, we describe a number of approaches and research ideas aimed at taking away the grounds for rationalization.