Media Influence on Bystander Intervention for Health Protective Norms: The Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction Perspective.

Drawing upon the Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction (IM) and the Bystander Intervention Model, this study investigates the impact of media health information on individuals' intentions to address violations of health norms, specifically noncompliance with mask-wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our survey results (n=1,426) indicate a positive correlation between seeking health information from the media and the intention to confront norm violators regarding mask-wearing. This correlation is mediated through three intermediary pathways: attitudes, normative beliefs, and perceived behavioral control. These discoveries address a previously unexplored area concerning pro-social health behaviors, bystander intervention, and contribute to the field of health communication by linking them to research on media influences. Combining media and peer interventions could lead to more effective health outcomes. The discussion covers both theoretical and practical implications.

The Role of Fairness in Early Characterization of New Technologies: Effects on Selective Exposure and Risk Perception.

Previous research suggests that when individuals have limited knowledge to make sense of new or emerging technologies, they may rely more on available cues, such as the fairness of those managing the risks, when developing their attitudinal and behavioral responses to the technology. To examine this further, we designed an online experiment (N = 1,042) to test the effects of risk managers' nonoutcome fairness on individuals' selective exposure to additional information and perceived risk. As the study context, we used the development of enhanced geothermal systems (EGS), which uses drilling to tap deep underground sources of heat for district heating and electricity and remains low in familiarity among the U.S. public. The results suggest that participants who read about the fair risk manager were subsequently more likely to have positive attitudes toward EGS development. In turn, those with more positive attitudes were more likely to select and read positively valenced articles about EGS, resulting in an indirect effect of the fairness condition. Although this study also explored whether uncertainty moderated this fairness effect on information seeking, it found no evidence. Additionally, when participants were exposed to information featuring fair risk managers, perceived risk decreased, an effect that was mediated by beliefs that EGS was controllable and not dreadful. These results underscore the importance of using practices that will increase nonoutcome fairness in the introduction of new technologies.

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 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.