Abstract
Current energy debates are often framed in terms of the extent to which energy sources may mitigate global climate change (GCC) and facilitate energy independence (EI). However, little is understood about whether and how attitudes towards GCC and EI influence attitudes toward energy sources. Our study included 277 undergraduate students enrolled in introductory psychology classes at a large, Southeastern university. As hypothesized, results from ordinal and binary logistic regression analyses revealed that the likelihood participants would support the use of solar, wind, coal or nuclear energy decreased as a function of their belief that an energy source contributed to GCC. The belief that an energy source contributed to EI increased participants’ likelihood of support. Results suggest that beliefs about GCC and EI are important to determining support for energy sources and will likely contribute to effective marketing strategies and efforts to implement more environmentally-sustainable behavior and energy policy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
It is important to note that “beliefs” and “expectations” were used interchangeably by the Hartsville Plant researchers, by Fishbein and Ajzen (1975), and in the current study.
The public’s view of nuclear energy appears to be shifting towards a primarily negative one, given the unfolding disaster at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant in Japan.
References
Ananth, C. V., & Kleinbaum, D. G. (1997). Regression models for ordinal responses: a review of methods and applications. International Journal of Epidemiology, 26, 1323–1333.
Ansolabehere, S. (2007). Public attitudes toward America’s energy options: Insights for nuclear energy (Tech. Rep. No. 8). Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Advanced Nuclear Energy Systems.
Ansolabehere, S., Deutch, J., Driscoll, M., Gray, P. E., Holdren, J. P., Joskow, P. L., et al. (2003). The future of nuclear power: An interdisciplinary study. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Bator, R., & Cialdini, R. (2000). The application of persuasion theory to the development of effective pro-environmental public service announcements. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 527–541.
Bennhold, K. (2004)Nuclear comeback fuels terror worry.” International Herald Tribune, October 18, 2004.
Benson, E. (2008). Society’s grand challenges: Insights from psychological science global climate change. American Psychological Association.
Civil Society Institute. (May, 2006). American views of alternative energy choices: Wind, solar and nuclear energy. Accessed August 2, 2008 from: http://www.civilsocietyinstitute.org/reports/R_CSI%20Alternative%20Energy%20524.pdf.
Clark, C. F., Kotchen, M. J., & Moore, M. R. (2003). Internal and external influences on pro-environmental behavior: participation in a green electricity program. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 237–246.
Clayton, S., & Brook, A. (2005). Can psychology help save the world? A model for conservation psychology. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 5, 87–102.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Culley, M. R., & Angelique, H. (2010). Nuclear Power: renaissance or relapse? Global climate change and long-term three mile island activists’ narratives. American Journal of Community Psychology, 45, 231–246.
Culley, M. R., & Angelique, H. (2011). Participation, power, and the role of community psychology in environmental disputes: a tale of two nuclear cities. American Journal of Community Psychology, 47, 410–426.
Curry, T. E., Relner, D. M., de Figueiredo, M. A. & Herzog, H. J. (2005). A survey of public attitudes towards energy and environment in Great Britain (Tech. Rep. No. LFEE 2005-001 WP). Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Laboratory for Energy and the Environment.
Drottz-Sjöberg, B., & Sjöberg, L. (1990). Risk perception and worries after the Chernobyl accident. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 10, Special issue: Psychological fallout from the Chernobyl nuclear accident, 135–149.
Dunlap, R. E., & Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The “new environmental paradigm”: a proposed measuring instrument and preliminary results. Journal of Environmental Education, 9, 10–19.
Dunlap, R. V., Liere, K. D., Mertig, A., & Emmet Jones, R. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425–442.
Eiser, J. R., Hannover, B., Mann, L. & Morin, M., & van der Pligt, J. (1990). Nuclear attitudes after Chernobyl: A cross-national study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 10, Special issue: Psychological fallout from the Chernobyl nuclear accident, 101–110.
Fishbein, M. (1963). An investigation of the relationship between beliefs about an object and the attitude towards that object. Human Relations, 16, 233–240.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
Heath, Y., & Gifford, R. (2006). Free-market ideology and environmental degradation: the case of belief in global climate change. Environment and Behavior, 38, 48–71.
Hughey, J. B., Lounsbury, J. W., Sundstrom, E., & Mattingly, T. J., II. (1983). Changing expectations: a longitudinal study of community attitudes toward a nuclear power plant. American Journal of Community Psychology, 11, 655–672.
Hughey, J. B., Sundstrom, E., & Lounsbury, J. W. (1985). Attitudes toward nuclear power: a longitudinal analysis of expectancy-value models. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 6, 75–91.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2007). Climate change 2007: Synthesis report. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kaplan, S. (2000). Human nature and environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 491–508.
Lounsbury, J. W., Sundstrom, E., & Shields, M. (1979). The relationship of avowed life satisfaction to public acceptance of and expectations about a nuclear power plant. Journal of Community Psychology, 7, 298–304.
Makhijani, A. (2007). Carbon-free and nuclear-free: A roadmap for U.S. energy policy. Washington, DC: IEER Press and RDR Books.
McKenzie-Mohr, D. (2000). Promoting sustainable behavior: an introduction to community-based social marketing. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 543–554.
Oreskes, N. (2004). The scientific consensus on climate change. Science, 306, 1686–1686.
Pedersen, E., & Larsman, P. (2008). The impact of visual factors on noise annoyance among people living in the vicinity of wind turbines. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28(4), 379–389.
Pedersen, E., Hallberg, L. R. M., & Waye, K. P. (2007). Living in the vicinity of wind turbines: a grounded theory study. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 4, 49–63.
Poortinga, W., Pidgeon, N. F., & Lorenzoni, I. (2006). Public perceptions of nuclear power, climate change and energy options in Britain: Summary findings of a survey conducted during October and November 2005. Technical Report (Understanding Risk Working Paper 06-02). Norwich: Centre for Environmental Risk.
Smith, B. (2006). Insurmountable risks: The dangers of using nuclear power to combat global climate change. Summary retrieved August 14, 2009, from http://www.ieer.org/reports/insurmountablerisks/summary.pdf.
Sundstrom, E., Lounsbury, J. W., Shuller, C. R., Fowler, J. R., & Mattingly, T. J., II. (1977). Community attitudes toward a proposed nuclear power generating facility as a function of expected outcomes. Journal of Community Psychology, 5, 199–208.
Sundstrom, E., Lounsbury, J. W., DeVault, R. C., & Peelle, E. (1981). Acceptance of a nuclear power plant: Applications of the expectancy-value model. In A. Baum & J. E. Singer (Eds.), Advances in environmental psychology, vol. 3 (pp. 171–189). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Swim, J., Clayton, S. Doherty, T. Gifford, R., Howard, G., Reser, J., Stern, P., & Weber, E. (2009). Psychology and global climate change: Addressing a multi-faceted phenomenon and set of challenges: A report by the American Psychological Association’s Task Force on the interface between psychology and global climate change.
van der Pligt, J. (1985). Public attitudes to nuclear energy: salience and anxiety. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 5, 87–97.
van der Pligt, J., & Midden, C. J. H. (1990). Chernobyl: Four years later: attitudes, risk management and communication. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 10, Special issue: Psychological fallout from the Chernobyl nuclear accident, 91–99.
Verplanken, B. (1989). Beliefs, attitudes, and intentions toward nuclear energy before and after Chernobyl in a longitudinal within-subjects design. Environment and Behavior, 21, 371–392.
Vlek, C. (2000). Essential psychology for environmental policy making. International Journal of Psychology, 35, 153–167.
Wald, M. L., & Bradsher, K. (2010, February 19). Steelworkers say reactors will create overseas jobs. The New York Times. Retrieved February 28, 2009 from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/20/business/20nukes.html?scp=9&sq=wald&st=cse.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Culley, M.R., Carton, A.D., Weaver, S.R. et al. Sun, Wind, Rock and Metal: Attitudes toward Renewable and Non-renewable Energy Sources in the Context of Climate Change and Current Energy Debates. Curr Psychol 30, 215–233 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-011-9110-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-011-9110-5