In the United States, climate change is a hotly debated topic with people polarized on either side. On one side, you have the those that believe climate change is occurring and affecting climates worldwide. On the other side is the climate change skeptic community, who either questions or refuses to accept whether or not climate change is happening. A recent article by Lavandera and Morris (2017) focused on climate change and how fisherman in Southern Louisiana are noticing the changes occurring around them but refuse to accept the role climate change could be playing. According to Loarie, Duffy, Hamilton, Asner, and Field (2009) climate change is continuing to disrupt, change, or possible even destroy the various climates around the world. Additionally, scientists have begun to caution how these rapid changes could lead the death of numerous species due to their inability to adapt from to the rapid changing climate conditions (Hoffmann & Sgrò, 2011). Despite the lack of scientific agreement and evidence offered to them in the segment, why do these fishermen refuse to believe or acknowledge the changes are a result of climate change?
One possible reason for the denial in the face of the scientific evidence could be explained by cognitive dissonance theory. Developed by Leon Festinger, cognitive dissonance theory suggests that when people encounter a situation where they become psychologically discomforted by an opposing cognition that is not consistent with their current belief, it is this discomfort felt from the dissonance that causes a drive in the person to resolve the dissonance (Schneider, Gruman, & Coutts, 2005). There are multiple ways for someone to reduce dissonance. One way is to change the cognition causing the dissonance to match the initial belief in order to help reduce the dissonance, rather than admitting you were wrong (Schneider, Gruman, & Coutts, 2005). Additionally, it is also possible create a new cognition or reduce the importance of the cognition, which will help to ease the discomfort felt by cognitive dissonance (Schneider, Gruman, & Coutts, 2005). For example, in the segment, one of the fishermen explains he would only accept climate change if a 500-year-old scientist would tell him it was happening (Lavandera & Morris, 2017). This could be a way to attempt to reduce or change the dissonance in the mind of the fishermen since his request is impossible (Lavandera & Morris, 2017). Thus, by altering the contradicting dissonance, he is able to distort the validity of scientific finding by limiting the findings, while simultaneously requiring additional information that is unobtainable. As a result, the fisherman’s beliefs remain intact and unrefuted (Lavandera & Morris, 2017).
Using framework similar to Dickerson, Thibodeau, Aronson, and Miller (1992), an intervention could be developed to help utilize cognitive dissonance in a way to help implement positive change in attitudes and behaviors towards climate change. The solution for an intervention to combat climate change is to inform the public by attempting to reduce the effects of climate change in the areas of energy, waste, and water conservation. An intervention would entail a massive information campaign attempting to solicit the buy-in of community populations. The intervention would focus on increased public knowledge, while simultaneously attempting to enlist support with targeted reduction goals over the next few years from the public. Moreover, the intervention could use media campaigns, community advocates, and school level interventions to help increase knowledge and gain commitments from people regarding their conservation efforts. By including people into the process and allowing them to define their personal goals the intervention will establish a link between the person’s conservation efforts and the results. By creating additional buy-in it may be possible to generate cognitive dissonance if the targets are not achieved similar to Dickerson et al. (1992). Thus, the person might seek to remove the dissonance through increased participation (Dickerson et al., 1992). Finally, as the program in evaluated, results can be provided to the various participants to help show the fruits of their efforts to generate additional buy-in towards the program. If the desired targeted results are not promising during the evaluation phase then it is possible to adjust the intervention as needed in order to increase its effectiveness.
In conclusion, cognitive dissonance theory helps to provide an explanation social psychological behavior. We encounter a wide variety of social situations on a daily basis and some may conflict with our previously held cognitions. According to cognitive dissonance theory, we have an intrinsic motivation to resolve the dissonance in order to protect our self-esteem (Schneider, Gruman, & Coutts, 2005). As a result, cognitive dissonance is nothing more than a social response to stressful social psychologically situations to help us understand our world cognitively (Schneider, Gruman, & Coutts, 2005). Therefore, it may be possible to use cognitive dissonance to enhance the effectiveness of climate change efforts currently underway by providing people exposure to knowledge about climate change in a way they have not been exposed to before.
References
Dickerson, C.A., Thibodeau, R., Aronson, E., & Miller, D. (1992). Using cognitive dissonance to encourage water conservation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22. 841-854.
Hoffmann, A. A., & Sgrò, C.,M. (2011). Climate change and evolutionary adaptation. Nature, 470(7335), 479-85. Retrieved from http://ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/docview/855200411?accountid=13158
Lavandera, E., & Morris, J. (2017, May 31). As the seas around him rise, this fisherman denies climate change. Retrieved August 28, 2017, from http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/20/us/louisiana-climate-change-skeptics/index.html
Loarie, S. R., Duffy, P. B., Hamilton, H., Asner, G. P., Field, C. B., & Ackerly, D. D. (2009). The velocity of climate change. Nature, 462(7276), 1052-5. Retrieved from http://ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/docview/204548344?accountid=13158
Schneider, F. W., Gruman, J. A., & Coutts, L. M. (2005). Applied social psychology: Understanding and addressing social and practical problems. Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications.
This post served as an excellent introduction to the opposing sides of the climate change debate as well as the potential role of cognitive dissonance regarding the matter. Additionally, you described an important example regarding the phenomenon of climate change denial on behalf of individuals who have an in-depth view into wildlife systems. You provide the reader with excellent climate projections and the underlying effect on wildlife habitats and species. I completely agree that the concept of cognitive dissonance theory relative to climate change behaviors is worth taking note of. After reading through your argument, I agree that cognitive dissonance likely plays a significant role in the disbelief climate change and its implications. When humans encounter ambiguous situations that challenge an existing viewpoint, it has been proven that they will attempt to resolve the situation in any way possible.
I decided to research cognitive dissonance theory as it remains a central topic within applied social psychology. According to Festinger (1957), cognitive dissonance relies on: a sensitivity to differences between actions and beliefs, the evolution of dissonance and dissonance reduction. Additionally, individuals who are experience high levels of dissonance can choose to: change their beliefs and actions or continue to justify one’s original way of thinking (Festinger, (1957). I agree with your argument that southern fisherman likely feel the need to justify their position as they are met with a differing viewpoint. Interestingly, this technique of dissonance reduction is actually the most intricate method available. It would be much easier to reduce dissonance by changing one’s beliefs or actions. It is also worth noting that concept of dissonance theory and climate beliefs opens up a separate, yet equally important, ongoing discussion regarding why individuals may prefer to choose a more difficult form of dissonance reduction when their climate beliefs are challenged.
References
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance, Evanston, IL: Row & Peterson.