Systems thinking as a pathway to global warming beliefs and attitudes through an ecological worldview.

Prior research has found that systems thinking, the tendency to perceive phenomena as interconnected and dynamic, is associated with a general proenvironmental orientation. However, less is known about its relationship with public understanding of climate change and/or whether this relationship varies across people with different political views. Because climate change is a highly politicized issue, it is also important to understand the extent to which systems thinking can foster acceptance of climate science across political lines. Using an online sample of US adults (n = 1,058), we tested the degree to which systems thinking predicts global warming beliefs and attitudes (e.g., believing that global warming is happening, that it is human-caused, etc.), independent of an ecological worldview (i.e., the New Ecological Paradigm). We found that although systems thinking is positively related to global warming beliefs and attitudes, the relationships are almost fully explained by an ecological worldview. Indirect effects of systems thinking are consistently strong across political ideologies and party affiliations, although slightly stronger for conservatives and Republicans than for liberals and Democrats, respectively. We did not find evidence of the converse: Systems thinking does not seem to mediate the relationship between an ecological worldview and global warming beliefs and attitudes. Together, these findings suggest that systems thinking may support the adoption of global warming beliefs and attitudes indirectly by helping to develop an ecological ethic that people should take care of and not abuse the environment.

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.