Environment & Energy

octoberlib

(14,971 posts) Thu Dec 13, 2012, 03:31 AM Dec 2012

What Moves Conservatives On The Environment? Show Them Pictures Of What Happens Without The EPA

If you’re a conservative, this image of Cleveland from 1973 taken before the Environmental Protection Agency started cleaning up our skies should make you care about the environment:

That’s according to a new paper from UC Berkeley, anyway.
In a study released this week, UC Berkeley researchers looked at how conservatives respond to messages about protecting the environment. Rather than being moved by the moral arguments that progressives often make, the study found that conservatives responded to images and videos within a “purity/sanctity” frame:
The purity/sanctity-themed article stressed how pollution has contaminated Earth and people’s bodies, and argued for cleaning up and purifying the environment. To enhance those themes and elicit disgust, the accompanying images showed a person drinking filthy water, a city under a cloud of pollution and a forest full of garbage. The neutral article talked about the history of neckties.
Participants were then asked to rate how strongly they felt certain emotions, including disgust, in response to what they’d read. Next, they reported how strongly they agreed or disagreed with such statements as “It is important to protect the environment,” “I would support government legislation aimed at protecting the environment” and ‘I believe humans are causing global warming.”
Overall, the study found that the purity-themed message inspired conservatives to feel higher levels of disgust, which in turn increased their support for protecting the environment.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/12/12/1322831/what-moves-conservatives-on-the-environment-show-them-pictures-of-what-happens-without-the-epa/

7 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What Moves Conservatives On The Environment? Show Them Pictures Of What Happens Without The EPA (Original Post) octoberlib Dec 2012 OP

Big business moved the pollution to China and Korea. JDPriestly Dec 2012 #1

The EPA helped though because with the stronger rules in place companies cstanleytech Dec 2012 #2

Without the EPA, or, for example, the EPA under a Republican ... Scuba Dec 2012 #3

Facts? What facts? DarkBlue4Ever Dec 2012 #4

That's EXACTLY why you need the pictures caraher Dec 2012 #5

Thanks! DarkBlue4Ever Dec 2012 #7

My goodness, that is a 1967 Rambler Marlin machI Dec 2012 #6

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)

1. Big business moved the pollution to China and Korea.

Reply to octoberlib (Original post)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 04:06 AM

Dec 2012

There is a good side and a bad side to that.

I would like to think that the EPA really cleaned things up, but I'm not sure that the cleaner air is just due to the EPA.

We simply exported a lot of the dirtiest industries -- and the good jobs along with them.

cstanleytech

(26,302 posts)

2. The EPA helped though because with the stronger rules in place companies

Reply to JDPriestly (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 04:35 AM

Dec 2012

could not pollute at all thus some cleaned up their act and some just moved the pollution overseas like you mentioned so in the end it "was" the rules from the EPA that helped the most.
As for what the article discusses its very interesting and perhaps its info the democrats in washington and across the nation should consider using to get their message across to conservative voters.

Scuba

(53,475 posts)

3. Without the EPA, or, for example, the EPA under a Republican ...

Reply to octoberlib (Original post)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 05:57 AM

Dec 2012

DarkBlue4Ever

(5 posts)

4. Facts? What facts?

Reply to octoberlib (Original post)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 07:47 AM

Dec 2012

GOP can't be bothered by "fact-checkers". It wasn't just the Romney campaign, it's the whole Faux News entertainment complex and the corporations that fund them (ALEC). Pictures of pollution won't move ANY teapublicans. After all, humans have nothing to do with global climate change. If they actually believed in science GOPers corporate donations would dry up.

They also conveniently forget that it was a Republican who created the EPA (Nixon).

caraher

(6,278 posts)

5. That's EXACTLY why you need the pictures

Reply to DarkBlue4Ever (Reply #4)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 09:17 AM

Dec 2012

You're right, they're not moved by facts, but there's an argument due to Jonathan Haidt and others that says liberals and conservatives base moral judgments on different kinds of factors. Liberals tend to base those on principles of fairness and harm prevention, while conservatives also weigh strongly factors like respect for authority and feelings of disgust.

So the whole idea is to evoke that "disgust/purity" response by using images. The research suggests this is more effective in getting them to care about the environment than any amount of information about harms caused by environmental degradation.

Oh, and welcome to DU!