Diverse segments of the US public underestimate the environmental concerns of minority and low-income Americans.

In a nationally representative survey experiment, diverse segments of the US public underestimated the environmental concerns of nonwhite and low-income Americans and misperceived them as lower than those of white and more affluent Americans. Moreover, both whites and nonwhites and higher- and lower-income respondents associated the term "environmentalist" with whites and the well-educated, suggesting that shared cultural stereotypes may drive these misperceptions. This environmental belief paradox-a tendency to misperceive groups that are among the most environmentally concerned and most vulnerable to a wide range of environmental impacts as least concerned about the environment-was largely invariant across demographic groups and also extended to the specific issue of climate change. Suggesting these beliefs are malleable, exposure to images of a racially diverse (vs. nondiverse) environmental organization in an embedded randomized experiment reduced the perceived gap between whites' and nonwhites' environmental concerns and strengthened associations between nonwhites and the category "environmentalists" among minority respondents. These findings suggest that stereotypes about others' environmental attitudes may pose a barrier to broadening public engagement with environmental initiatives, particularly among populations most vulnerable to negative environmental impacts.

Does Question Wording Predict Support for the Affordable Care Act? An Analysis of Polling During the Implementation Period, 2010-2016.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) continues to be the subject of fierce political debate in the United States. Drawing on issue framing theory, together with research on wording effects in survey responding, we tested how common differences in the wording of ACA surveys relate to apparent public support for the law. We report on a content analysis of N = 376 U.S. national opinion surveys fielded during a more than six-year period, beginning 23 March 2010 (when President Obama signed the bill into law) and ending 8 November 2016 (Election Day), and use ordinary least squares (OLS) regression models to predict public support for the law as a function of variation in question wording. We coded questions gauging general sentiment toward the law for differences in issue labeling (e.g., Obamacare, Affordable Care Act), whether or not they referenced particular political entities (e.g., President Obama, Congress) or segments of the public (e.g., You, Your Family), various opinion metrics (e.g., Support, Favor), and different response options (e.g., Repeal, Expand) which we used to model aggregate levels of support. The results revealed several key differences in question wording-for example, generic references to the Healthcare Law were employed much more frequently than Obamacare or Affordable Care Act-a number of which reliably predicted aggregate levels of public support. The discussion considers possible explanations for these patterns and reiterates the value of attending to questionnaire design features when interpreting survey data about politically contentious health policy issues.

Health Halo Effects from Product Titles and Nutrient Content Claims in the Context of "Protein" Bars.

Research on front-of-package (FOP) labeling demonstrates that nutrient content claims (e.g., "low fat") can lead consumers to perceive foods as healthier in general-effects that have been interpreted using halo effect theories of impression formation. Extending this work, the present study investigates whether these effects may depend on whether nutrient information comes in the form of a nutrient content claim ("good source of protein") or embedded within the product title itself ("protein" bar)-an important question given the popularity of energy/nutrition bars and ongoing policy debates over food-labeling regulation. Results from a between-subjects experiment (n = 274) revealed that although both conditions increased perceived protein content for a nutritional bar, only the product title condition increased overall perceptions of product healthfulness-an effect mediated by increased perceptions of additional non-claimed "healthy" nutrients (fiber, iron). Finally, although the presence of a traffic light warning label increased perceived sugar and calorie content, it did not counteract the effect of the product title on perceived healthfulness. We conclude with a discussion focused on implications for policy and health halo effects in the context of food labeling.

Communicating Zika Risk: Using Metaphor to Increase Perceived Risk Susceptibility.

Effectively communicating the risks associated with emerging zoonotic diseases remains an important challenge. Drawing on research into the psychological effects of metaphoric framing, we explore the conditions under which exposure to the "nation as a body" metaphor influences perceived risk susceptibility, behavioral intentions, and policy support in the context of Zika virus. In a between-subjects experiment, 354 U.S. adults were randomly assigned to one of four experimental conditions as part of a 2 (severity message: high vs. low) × 2 (U.S. framing: metaphoric vs. literal) design. Results revealed an interaction effect such that metaphoric (vs. literal) framing increased perceived risk susceptibility in the high-severity condition only. Further analyses revealed that perceived risk susceptibility and negative affect mediated the path between the two-way interaction and policy support and behavioral intentions regarding Zika prevention. Overall, these findings complement prior work on the influence of metaphoric framing on risk perceptions, while offering practical insights for risk communicators seeking to communicate about Zika and other zoonotic diseases.

Communicating Conservation Status: How Different Statistical Assessment Criteria Affect Perceptions of Extinction Risk.

Although alternative forms of statistical and verbal information are routinely used to convey species' extinction risk to policymakers and the public, little is known about their effects on audience information processing and risk perceptions. To address this gap in literature, we report on an experiment that was designed to explore how perceptions of extinction risk differ as a function of five different assessment benchmarks (Criteria A-E) used by scientists to classify species within IUCN Red List risk levels (e.g., Critically Endangered, Vulnerable), as well as the role of key individual differences in these effects (e.g., rational and experiential thinking styles, environmental concern). Despite their normative equivalence within the IUCN classification system, results revealed divergent effects of specific assessment criteria: on average, describing extinction risk in terms of proportional population decline over time (Criterion A) and number of remaining individuals (Criterion D) evoked the highest level of perceived risk, whereas the single-event probability of a species becoming extinct (Criterion E) engendered the least perceived risk. Furthermore, participants scoring high in rationality (analytic thinking) were less prone to exhibit these biases compared to those low in rationality. Our findings suggest that despite their equivalence in the eyes of scientific experts, IUCN criteria are indeed capable of engendering different levels of risk perception among lay audiences, effects that carry direct and important implications for those tasked with communicating about conservation status to diverse publics.

Sizing Up a Superstorm: Exploring the Role of Recalled Experience and Attribution of Responsibility in Judgments of Future Hurricane Risk.

Research suggests that hurricane-related risk perception is a critical predictor of behavioral response, such as evacuation. Less is known, however, about the precursors of these subjective risk judgments, especially when time has elapsed from a focal event. Drawing broadly from the risk communication, social psychology, and natural hazards literature, and specifically from concepts adapted from the risk information seeking and processing model and the protective action decision model, we examine how individuals' distant recollections, including attribution of responsibility for the effects of a storm, attitude toward relevant information, and past hurricane experience, relate to risk judgment for a future, similar event. The present study reports on a survey involving U.S. residents in Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York (n = 619) impacted by Hurricane Sandy. While some results confirm past findings, such as that hurricane experience increases risk judgment, others suggest additional complexity, such as how various types of experience (e.g., having evacuated vs. having experienced losses) may heighten or attenuate individual-level judgments of responsibility. We suggest avenues for future research, as well as implications for federal agencies involved in severe weather/natural hazard forecasting and communication with public audiences.

Prejudice and the Plate: Effects of Weight Bias in Nutrition Judgments.

As millions of people turn to social media for health information, better understanding the factors that guide health-related judgments and perceptions in this context is imperative. We report on two Web experiments (n>400 total) examining the power of society's widespread weight bias and related stereotypes to influence nutrition judgments in social media spaces. In Experiment 1, meals were judged as lower in nutritional quality when the person who recommended them (the source) was depicted as obese rather than of normal weight, an effect mediated by stereotypic beliefs about the source as a generally unhealthy person. Experiment 2 replicated this effect, which--notably--remained significant when controlling for objective nutritional information (calories and fat content). Results highlight spillover effects of weight bias that extend beyond person perception to color impressions of objects (here, food) that are associated with stigmatized attributes. Implications for everyday nutrition judgments and public health are considered.

When good deeds leave a bad taste. Negative inferences from ethical food claims.

Consumer research has demonstrated halo effects arising from advertising claims on food packaging (e.g., "organic," "no cholesterol") that promote misperceiving products more positively on other dimensions (e.g., low-calorie, low-fat). However, little research has explored the conditions under which such claims might give rise to more negative rather than positive evaluations. This paper highlights two domains of judgment in which an ethical or values-based claim ("organic") can promote negative impressions. In Study 1, participants judged organic foods relative to conventional foods on healthfulness and expected taste quality. Results suggest that whereas organics are perceived as more healthful than conventional foods (consistent with previous findings), they are also perceived as less tasty, especially among participants low in environmental concern. In Study 2, participants judged the effectiveness of a formula drink intended to help alleviate malnourishment that was described as organic or not, depending on experimental condition. Results showed that participants high in environmental concern (who typically evaluate organic products positively) judged the drink more negatively (i.e., as less effective) when it was described as "organic." Discussion focuses on possible mechanisms for these effects, as well as the moderating role of judgment type and perceivers' values in halo effects more broadly.

Does green mean healthy? Nutrition label color affects perceptions of healthfulness.

The food industry has recently implemented numerous front-of-package nutrition labels to readily convey key aspects a food product's nutritional profile to consumers (e.g., calories and fat content). Although seemingly well-intentioned, such labels might lead consumers to perceive relatively poor nutrition foods in a healthier light. The present research explores whether one underresearched aspect of nutrition labels-namely, their color-might influence perceptions of a product's healthfulness. In Study 1, participants perceived a candy bar as healthier when it bore a green rather than a red calorie label, despite the fact that the labels conveyed the same calorie content. Study 2 examined the perceived healthfulness of a candy bar bearing a green versus white calorie label and assessed individual differences in the importance of healthy eating. Overall, results suggest that green labels increase perceived healthfulness, especially among consumers who place high importance on healthy eating. Discussion focuses on implications for health-related judgment and nutrition labeling.

Climate change and health equity: A research agenda for psychological science.

Climate change poses unique and substantial threats to public health and well-being, from heat stress, flooding, and the spread of infectious disease to food and water insecurity, conflict, displacement, and direct health hazards linked to fossil fuels. These threats are especially acute for frontline communities. Addressing climate change and its unequal impacts requires psychologists to consider temporal and spatial dimensions of health, compound risks, as well as structural sources of vulnerability implicated by few other public health challenges. In this review, we consider climate change as a unique context for the study of health inequities and the roles of psychologists and health care practitioners in addressing it. We conclude by discussing the research infrastructure needed to broaden current understanding of these inequities, including new cross-disciplinary, institutional, and community partnerships, and offer six practical recommendations for advancing the psychological study of climate health equity and its societal relevance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Using qualitative approaches to improve quantitative inferences in environmental psychology.

This article describes the qualitative approach used to generate and interpret the quantitative study reported by Song and colleagues' (2020) in their article, "What counts as an 'environmental' issue? Differences in environmental issue conceptualization across race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status." Song and colleagues (2020) describe the results of a survey documenting that, in the United States, White and high-SES respondents perceive environmental issues differently than their non-White and lower-SES counterparts, reflecting structural differences in environmental risks. While Song and colleagues (2020) discuss the survey results in detail, the discussion of the qualitative research that led to the creation of that survey was limited due to space constraints. The current article provides a more holistic account of the methods behind the Song and colleagues (2020) study by discussing the qualitative component of the research in detail. In addition to discussing how the qualitative research complements and critically informs the findings reported by Song et al., we also consider the broader implications and value of integrating qualitative and quantitative methods in environmental psychology.•Conduct qualitative study to inform quantitative design.•Use qualitative patterns to make inferences about quantitative indicators.

Communicating about ocean health: theoretical and practical considerations.

As anthropogenic stressors threaten the health of marine ecosystems, there is a need to better understand how the public processes and responds to information about ocean health. Recent studies of public perceptions about ocean issues report high concern but limited knowledge, prompting calls for information campaigns to mobilize public support for ocean restoration policy. Drawing on the literature from communication, psychology and related social science disciplines, we consider a set of social-cognitive challenges that researchers and advocates are likely to encounter when communicating with the public about ocean health and emerging marine diseases--namely, the psychological distance at which ocean issues are construed, the unfamiliarity of aquatic systems to many members of the public and the potential for marine health issues to be interpreted through politicized schemas that encourage motivated reasoning over the dispassionate consideration of scientific evidence. We offer theory-based strategies to help public outreach efforts address these challenges and present data from a recent experiment exploring the role of message framing (emphasizing the public health or environmental consequences of marine disease) in shaping public support for environmental policy.

Social Climate Science: A New Vista for Psychological Science.

The recent Paris Agreement to limit greenhouse gas emissions, adopted by 195 nations at the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference, signaled unprecedented commitment by world leaders to address the human social aspects of climate change. Indeed, climate change increasingly is recognized by scientists and policymakers as a social issue requiring social solutions. However, whereas psychological research on intrapersonal and some group-level processes (e.g., political polarization of climate beliefs) has flourished, research into other social processes-such as an understanding of how nonpartisan social identities, cultural ideologies, and group hierarchies shape public engagement on climate change-has received substantially less attention. In this article, we take stock of current psychological approaches to the study of climate change to explore what is "social" about climate change from the perspective of psychology. Drawing from current interdisciplinary perspectives and emerging empirical findings within psychology, we identify four distinct features of climate change and three sets of psychological processes evoked by these features that are fundamentally social and shape both individual and group responses to climate change. Finally, we consider how a more nuanced understanding of the social underpinnings of climate change can stimulate new questions and advance theory within psychology.

Nutrient-centrism and perceived risk of chronic disease.

This experiment explored consequences of two common lay theories about the diet-disease link: nutrient-centrism, the belief that nutrients (e.g. potassium) are crucial to staving off disease, and whole-food centrism, the belief that whole foods (e.g. bananas), containing these nutrients in their natural context, are most beneficial. Depicting an individual's diet in terms of nutrients rather than whole foods containing these nutrients reduced the perceived likelihood that the individual would experience leading diet-related diseases (e.g. heart disease, diabetes). Although nutrition experts increasingly emphasize the health benefits of natural whole foods, people nevertheless appear to privilege nutrients when estimating disease risks.

Disfluent fonts don't help people solve math problems.

Prior research suggests that reducing font clarity can cause people to consider printed information more carefully. The most famous demonstration showed that participants were more likely to solve counterintuitive math problems when they were printed in hard-to-read font. However, after pooling data from that experiment with 16 attempts to replicate it, we find no effect on solution rates. We examine potential moderating variables, including cognitive ability, presentation format, and experimental setting, but we find no evidence of a disfluent font benefit under any conditions. More generally, though disfluent fonts slightly increase response times, we find little evidence that they activate analytic reasoning.

Where there's a will: can highlighting future youth-targeted marketing increase support for soda taxes?

OBJECTIVE: Amid concern about high rates of obesity and related diseases, the marketing of nutritionally poor foods to young people by the food industry has come under heavy criticism by public health advocates, who cite decades of youth-targeted marketing in arguing for reforms. In light of recent evidence that the same event evokes stronger emotional reactions when it occurs in the future versus the past, highlighting youth-targeted marketing that has yet to occur may evoke stronger reactions to such practices, and perhaps, greater support for related health policy initiatives. METHOD: In a between-subjects experiment, Web participants (N = 285) read that a major soda company had already launched (past condition) or was planning to launch (future condition) an advertising campaign targeting children. Measures included support for a soda tax and affective responses to the company's actions. RESULTS: Greater support for the soda tax was observed in the future condition than in the past condition. Moreover, participants in the future condition reported heightened negative emotions about the company's actions, which mediated the observed effect on soda tax support. CONCLUSION: The same action undertaken by the food industry (here, marketing soda to children) may evoke stronger negative emotions and greater support for a health policy initiative when it is framed prospectively rather than retrospectively.

Can evolutionary design of social networks make it easier to be 'green'?

The social Web is swiftly becoming a living laboratory for understanding human cooperation on massive scales. It has changed how we organize, socialize, and tackle problems that benefit from the efforts of a large crowd. A new, applied, behavioral ecology has begun to build on theoretical and empirical studies of cooperation, integrating research in the fields of evolutionary biology, social psychology, social networking, and citizen science. Here, we review the ways in which these disciplines inform the design of Internet environments to support collective pro-environmental behavior, tapping into proximate prosocial mechanisms and models of social evolution, as well as generating opportunities for 'field studies' to discover how we can support massive collective action and shift environmental social norms.

The allocation of time in decision-making.

We study the allocation of time across decision problems. If a decision-maker (1) has noisy estimates of value, (2) improves those estimates the longer he or she analyzes a choice problem, and (3) allocates time optimally, then the decision-maker should spend less time choosing when the difference in value between two options is relatively large. To test this prediction we ask subjects to make 27 binary incentive-compatible intertemporal choices, and measure response time for each decision. Our time allocation model explains 54% of the variance in average decision time. These results support the view that decision-making is a cognitively costly activity that uses time as an input allocated according to cost-benefit principles.

Individual laboratory-measured discount rates predict field behavior.

We estimate discount rates of 555 subjects using a laboratory task and find that these individual discount rates predict inter-individual variation in field behaviors (e.g., exercise, BMI, smoking). The correlation between the discount rate and each field behavior is small: none exceeds 0.28 and many are near 0. However, the discount rate has at least as much predictive power as any variable in our dataset (e.g., sex, age, education). The correlation between the discount rate and field behavior rises when field behaviors are aggregated: these correlations range from 0.09-0.38. We present a model that explains why specific intertemporal choice behaviors are only weakly correlated with discount rates, even though discount rates robustly predict aggregates of intertemporal decisions.