Hans-Rüdiger Pfister’s research while affiliated with University of Bergen and other places

We present a study of emotional reactions to climate change utilizing representative samples from France, Germany, Norway, and the United Kingdom (UK). Drawing on appraisal theories of emotion, we examine relations between appraisals, emotions, and behavioral intentions in the context of climate change. We compare the four countries concerning emotional differences and commonalities and relate our findings to pertinent models of cultural values. Five distinct emotions were measured: worry, hope, fear, outrage, and guilt. In addition, the survey asked respondents to appraise a set of climate-related statements, such as the causality of climate change, or the efficacy of mitigation efforts. Also, a set of climate-relevant actions, such as willingness to reduce energy consumption or support for climate policies, was assessed. Findings show that appraisals of human causation and moral concern were associated with worry and outrage, and appraisals of efficacy and technological solutions were associated with hope. Worry and outrage are associated with intentions to reduce one’s energy consumption, whereas hope and guilt are related to support for policies such as tax and price increases. A country comparison shows that French respondents score high on outrage and worry and tend to engage in individual behaviors to mitigate climate change, whereas Norwegian respondents score high on hope and show a tendency to support policies of cost increase. Generally, worry is the most and guilt the least intense emotion. Moral concerns and perceived collective efficacy of one’s country in addressing climate change are relatively strong in France, while beliefs in human causation and in negative impacts of climate change prevail in Germany, and confidence in technological solutions are prevalent in Norway. In sum, findings reveal typical patterns of emotional responses in the four countries and confirm systematic associations between emotions and appraisals as well as between emotions and behaviors. Relating these findings to models of cultural values reveals that Norway, endorsing secular and egalitarian values, is characterized by hope and confidence in technological solutions, whereas France and Germany, emphasizing relatively more hierarchical and traditional values, are rather characterized by fear, outrage, and support for behavioral restrictions imposed by climate change policies.

This study examines what individuals expect will be the most important impacts of climate change on their respective countries, and how these expectations relate to individual risk judgments. Open-ended responses from representative samples in four European countries (each n > 1000), were sorted into six categories: expectations of climate change leading to changes in attitudes and goals, human activities, emissions and pollution, environmental changes, impacts on humans, or few or no impacts. The results showed that the most frequently mentioned climate change impacts were related to environmental changes. Although most results were consistent across the UK, Norway, Germany, and France, some differences were identified. For example, respondents in the UK and Norway more frequently mentioned changes in human actions and activities among the most important climate change impacts. We also found differences between demographic groups; men, those in the oldest age groups, and those placing themselves further right on the political spectrum were more likely to expect few or no consequences of climate change on their country. Additional analyses examined relationships between the six impact categories and two different measures of individual risk judgments. Those expecting climate change to lead to changes in attitudes and goals, environmental changes, or impacts on humans reported higher levels of worry about climate change and expected more negative effects on their country. Climate change worry, but not the evaluation of how positive or negative effects will be on one’s country, was further related to the number of consequences mentioned in response to the open-ended question and the specificity conveyed.

This study examines how people perceive possible pathways of a societal transition towards less carbon intensive means of energy production and use. Data were collected with questionnaires among samples of university students in Norway (N = 106) and Germany (N = 142). Participants selected from a set of 15 motives those which they considered to be strongly associated with each of 25 pathways, including examples such as public transportation and nuclear power. Participants also rated the effectiveness of each single pathway, that is, their perceived impact on climate change. Results indicate that the various pathways were associated with specific motives; for example, individual actions such as taking public transportation were closely associated with a self-restraint motive, pathways such as nuclear power and market strategies such as carbon offsets were closely associated with motives supporting free market and progress, and technological solutions such as solar panels and hydro power were associated with the motive for sufficient energy supply. The German and the Norwegian sample did not differ markedly in which pathways were associated with which motives; nor did effectiveness ratings for pathways differ between samples. Solar panels, wind farms, and hydropower were on average regarded as having a mitigating impact on climate change, whereas nuclear power was on average considered to have no mitigating impact. The findings are discussed in the context of public engagement with several of the suggested pathways, noting differences in perceptual patterns across samples.

Psychological factors play a major role in shaping public acceptance and engagement concerning energy transition pathways. Research addressing the mental representation of pathways to change current energy systems remains scarce however, especially with respect to national differences. We use a facet theoretical approach to test the assumption that people’s mental representation of energy transition pathways is structured according to three facets: Facet A, the Level of a pathway (individual behaviours vs. societal actions vs. technologies), Facet B, the Type of a pathway (efficiency vs. curtailment), and Facet C, the Impact Domain that is affected (economy vs. community vs. human health vs. nature vs. quality of life). A German student sample (N = 142) rated thirty items derived from the facet design. Multidimensional scaling was used to identify regional patterns corresponding to the facets. Facet A yields wedge-like regions for individual, societal, and technological pathways, respectively. Facet B yields a circular pattern with curtailment pathways located in the centre and efficiency pathways in the periphery. Facet C yields a pattern contrasting impacts on economy with those on nature. Results support our assumptions and closely replicate the findings from a previous study with a Norwegian student sample (Böhm, Doran, Rødeseike & Pfister, 2019).

The article deals with the public perception of energy transition pathways, that is, of strategies towards sustainable ways of energy use. Implementing sustainable pathways poses a major challenge for organizations and society. Using a facet theoretical approach, we investigate the structure of people’s mental models of such pathways. Three facets are defined capturing the conceptual structure of transition pathways. Facet A (Level) distinguishes three elements: individual behaviors, societal actions, and technologies. Facet B (Type) distinguishes energy efficiency from curtailment pathways. Facet C (Impact domain) distinguishes five domains of potential impact of an energy transition pathway: economy, community, human health, nature, and life quality. A computer-administered survey with items derived from the facet design was administered to a student sample (N = 106). A multidimensional scaling analysis yields regional regularities for Facets A and B. For Facet A polar regions can be clearly distinguished according to the facet elements. Facet B shows regions exhibiting a modular structure with curtailment pathways located in the center and efficiency pathways in the periphery. Facet C shows a less clear pattern, showing the two elements economy and nature at opposing ends of an axial structure. Implications for the communication and management of sustainable energy transitions in society and organizations are discussed.

We examine how people remember stories about climate change and how they communicate these stories to others. Drawing on theories of reconstructive memory and cultural theory, we assume that recollection is systematically affected by an individual’s world view as well as by the world view of the target audience. In an experimental study with a Norwegian representative sample (N = 266), participants read a story about three politicians, in which each protagonist was described as holding a specific world view and as trying to tackle climate change with a corresponding strategy (individualistic/free market oriented, hierarchical/technology-oriented, or egalitarian/sustainability-oriented). After 1 day and then after 1 week, participants were asked to retell the story as if to somebody who was characterized as being either an individualist, a hierarchist, or an egalitarian; in addition, a neutral recall control condition without a specified audience was included. Participants’ own world view was assessed and they were classified as endorsing individualism, or hierarchism, or egalitarianism. We hypothesized that retellings would be selectively reconstructed according to the world view of the participant, as well as tuned to the audience’s world view. We assessed the cognitive structure of the recollected story, and, using methods from computational text analysis, we computed similarities among retellings and the original narrative, and among retellings and world views. Results suggest that (i) retellings become less accurate over time, (ii) retelling to an audience with an explicit world view leads to more strongly filtered retellings than recalling without a specified audience, but the filter operates in a non-specific manner with respect to world views, (iii) the cognitive structure of the recollected story shows small but systematic differences concerning the link between story problem and solution as a function of the participant’s and the audience’s world view. No interaction was found between the world view of the participant and that of the audience. Results emphasize the role of world views in communicating climate change, and might help to better understand phenomena such as polarization and echo chamber effects.