One model fits all? - On the moderating role of emotional engagement and confusion in the elicitation of preferences for climate change adaptation policies

A Fischer, K Glenk

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Environmental economic and psychological studies often implicitly assume homogeneity of respondents' decision strategies in questionnaire-based surveys. However, social psychology and behavioural research suggest that there is a wide variety of approaches that individuals use to make such choices. We explore this heterogeneity against the backdrop of so-called ‘dual process models’, analysing participants' responses in a survey of public beliefs about and preferences for climate change adaptation policies. We find that the postulate of two different types of decision-making, the systematic–analytical and the heuristic–holistic, does indeed help us to understand patterns in respondent behaviour that are, in turn, underpinned by respondents' motivation and ability to process information. Participants who were motivated and able to process the information provided were more likely to express preferences in line with their beliefs about adaptation policies, whereas those less motivated and more confused were more likely to use generalised rules-of-thumb that were not specific to the policy issue at hand. Depending on the theoretical framework of a study, such heterogeneity in response consistency and use of generic rules-of-thumb might have implications for the usefulness of survey outcomes. We discuss the implications of our findings, and draw conclusions for survey-based environmental research.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1178 - 1188
Number of pages11
JournalEcological Economics
Volume70
Publication statusFirst published - 2011

Fingerprint

climate change
environmental research
behavioral research
information process
social psychology
decision making
questionnaire
ability
economics

Bibliographical note

1023338

Keywords

  • Adaptation to climate change
  • Dual process models
  • Flooding
  • Governance
  • Heuristics
  • Information processing

Cite this

@article{e69e0ca9b8014511a52830c8606cce6e,
title = "One model fits all? - On the moderating role of emotional engagement and confusion in the elicitation of preferences for climate change adaptation policies",
abstract = "Environmental economic and psychological studies often implicitly assume homogeneity of respondents' decision strategies in questionnaire-based surveys. However, social psychology and behavioural research suggest that there is a wide variety of approaches that individuals use to make such choices. We explore this heterogeneity against the backdrop of so-called ‘dual process models’, analysing participants' responses in a survey of public beliefs about and preferences for climate change adaptation policies. We find that the postulate of two different types of decision-making, the systematic–analytical and the heuristic–holistic, does indeed help us to understand patterns in respondent behaviour that are, in turn, underpinned by respondents' motivation and ability to process information. Participants who were motivated and able to process the information provided were more likely to express preferences in line with their beliefs about adaptation policies, whereas those less motivated and more confused were more likely to use generalised rules-of-thumb that were not specific to the policy issue at hand. Depending on the theoretical framework of a study, such heterogeneity in response consistency and use of generic rules-of-thumb might have implications for the usefulness of survey outcomes. We discuss the implications of our findings, and draw conclusions for survey-based environmental research.",
keywords = "Adaptation to climate change, Dual process models, Flooding, Governance, Heuristics, Information processing",
author = "A Fischer and K Glenk",
note = "1023338",
year = "2011",
language = "English",
volume = "70",
pages = "1178 -- 1188",
journal = "Ecological Economics",
issn = "0921-8009",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

One model fits all? - On the moderating role of emotional engagement and confusion in the elicitation of preferences for climate change adaptation policies. / Fischer, A; Glenk, K.

In: Ecological Economics, Vol. 70, 2011, p. 1178 - 1188.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - One model fits all? - On the moderating role of emotional engagement and confusion in the elicitation of preferences for climate change adaptation policies

AU - Fischer, A

AU - Glenk, K

N1 - 1023338

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - Environmental economic and psychological studies often implicitly assume homogeneity of respondents' decision strategies in questionnaire-based surveys. However, social psychology and behavioural research suggest that there is a wide variety of approaches that individuals use to make such choices. We explore this heterogeneity against the backdrop of so-called ‘dual process models’, analysing participants' responses in a survey of public beliefs about and preferences for climate change adaptation policies. We find that the postulate of two different types of decision-making, the systematic–analytical and the heuristic–holistic, does indeed help us to understand patterns in respondent behaviour that are, in turn, underpinned by respondents' motivation and ability to process information. Participants who were motivated and able to process the information provided were more likely to express preferences in line with their beliefs about adaptation policies, whereas those less motivated and more confused were more likely to use generalised rules-of-thumb that were not specific to the policy issue at hand. Depending on the theoretical framework of a study, such heterogeneity in response consistency and use of generic rules-of-thumb might have implications for the usefulness of survey outcomes. We discuss the implications of our findings, and draw conclusions for survey-based environmental research.

AB - Environmental economic and psychological studies often implicitly assume homogeneity of respondents' decision strategies in questionnaire-based surveys. However, social psychology and behavioural research suggest that there is a wide variety of approaches that individuals use to make such choices. We explore this heterogeneity against the backdrop of so-called ‘dual process models’, analysing participants' responses in a survey of public beliefs about and preferences for climate change adaptation policies. We find that the postulate of two different types of decision-making, the systematic–analytical and the heuristic–holistic, does indeed help us to understand patterns in respondent behaviour that are, in turn, underpinned by respondents' motivation and ability to process information. Participants who were motivated and able to process the information provided were more likely to express preferences in line with their beliefs about adaptation policies, whereas those less motivated and more confused were more likely to use generalised rules-of-thumb that were not specific to the policy issue at hand. Depending on the theoretical framework of a study, such heterogeneity in response consistency and use of generic rules-of-thumb might have implications for the usefulness of survey outcomes. We discuss the implications of our findings, and draw conclusions for survey-based environmental research.

KW - Adaptation to climate change

KW - Dual process models

KW - Flooding

KW - Governance

KW - Heuristics

KW - Information processing

M3 - Article

VL - 70

SP - 1178

EP - 1188

JO - Ecological Economics

JF - Ecological Economics

SN - 0921-8009

ER -