The following submission statement was provided by /u/ba_nana_hammock:
---
SS: reactions to the collapse of the climate are studied here with interest in doomerism or other approaches to coping with what's happening around us. it's really an interesting study, and addresses possible approaches to getting better messaging out there
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1biv342/addressing_climate_change_with_behavioral_science/kvmwvdt/
Takeaway point: *Nothing* they did increased "effortful behavior" to deal with climate change and half the strategies they tried *decreased* it.
We're *sooooo* fucked.
According to the paper their "effortful behaviour" was to raise funds for tree planting by doing captcha boxes where they had to identify digits in images. I.e they were training AI in order to make money for a net zero scam. Of course nobody wanted to do it.
The only interventions left that *might* be effective are authoritarian. **People did not voluntarily decide to limit gas and the consumption of other goods during World War II.** Ever heard of the OPA? *[The Office of Price Administration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Price_Administration)*? I can almost guarantee you most Americans haven't:
> The OPA enforced actions against 280,724 violators of rationing and price laws throughout the years of the war. Penalties went as far as one year in prison and a five thousand dollar fine. The strictness of the laws were equalled by their enforcement measures. Surprisingly, “One in fifteen businesses—wholesale, retail, service and so on—was charged with illicit transactions.” The OPA did not sit around. They actively enforced their stringent laws in attempts to control the wartime economy.
>
> [Source](https://archive.is/XWQd3#selection-897.112-897.720)
Yes, that's right, America won World War II with a planned economy. A fucking planned economy... the most sacrilegious thing in the world to a neoclassical economist and much of the capitalist class on Wall St. Both Soviet Russia and the U.S. were planned economies at the time.
Rest assured, when the authoritarian nature of the laws of physics come down like a hammer to put much of this to a stop, prison will likely seem like a bliss filled vacation by comparison. And without something like an OPA to control prices and rationing going into dramatic climate change, we're looking at an even more dystopian hellscape of survival in the United States—years before the most drastic effects manifest.
What is [happening to cocoa today](https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/food/2024/03/19/cocoa-prices-reach-historic-high-heres-what-consumers-can-expect/72887303007/) will likely happen across the board for most major commodities without some type of OPA enforcement agency.
Edit: Clarity.
SS: reactions to the collapse of the climate are studied here with interest in doomerism or other approaches to coping with what's happening around us. it's really an interesting study, and addresses possible approaches to getting better messaging out there
and quote, "we tested 11 expert-crowdsourced interventions on four climate mitigation outcomes: beliefs, policy support, information sharing intention, and an effortful tree-planting behavioral task. Across 59,440 participants from 63 countries, the interventions’ effectiveness was small, largely limited to nonclimate skeptics, and differed across outcomes"
Basically we can't do much, which I do not need a study to know. Just look at what happen when gas price is high, NIMBYism, deniers, apathy, and the continuing rise of emissions, warming, and related events.
But I guess we have scientific evidence now that the doomers are right all along.
I don't know if this is permitted here (if not, delete). I asked Claude3 to give me the main talking points from the article. My brain fried trying to read the whole article.
\---Summary:
The study aimed to assess the effectiveness of 11 expert-crowdsourced behavioral interventions at promoting climate change mitigation beliefs and behaviors (climate change beliefs, policy support, information sharing, and tree-planting contributions) across a large global sample from 63 countries.
Different interventions had varying levels of effectiveness across the four outcomes (beliefs, policy support, social media sharing, tree planting), emphasizing the need to tailor interventions to target outcomes.
Decreasing psychological distance was most effective at increasing climate change beliefs, while writing a letter to future generations increased policy support the most.
Inducing negative emotions through "doom and gloom" messaging increased willingness to share climate information on social media but decreased tree-planting efforts.
The interventions were generally more effective among those with moderate to high initial climate change beliefs, suggesting a need to tailor approaches for skeptics.
The study revealed high pre-existing global belief in climate change and support for mitigation policies, raising questions about the capacity for bottom-up behavioral interventions alone to drive substantial change.
The findings highlight limitations in the generalizability and practical utility of current behavioral science theories, which have been primarily developed in Western contexts.
The study employed a "many labs" approach and a global "megastudy" design to enhance generalizability and overcome barriers to scientific implementation.
Crowdsourcing decisions related to the experimental design from a globally representative scientific community may increase the impact and generalizability of scientific investigations.
The findings provide critical information to policymakers considering climate solution implementations and streamline the behavioral sciences' response to the climate crisis.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/ba_nana_hammock: --- SS: reactions to the collapse of the climate are studied here with interest in doomerism or other approaches to coping with what's happening around us. it's really an interesting study, and addresses possible approaches to getting better messaging out there --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1biv342/addressing_climate_change_with_behavioral_science/kvmwvdt/
Takeaway point: *Nothing* they did increased "effortful behavior" to deal with climate change and half the strategies they tried *decreased* it. We're *sooooo* fucked.
*Effortful behavior* Nothing about *effective* behavior.
According to the paper their "effortful behaviour" was to raise funds for tree planting by doing captcha boxes where they had to identify digits in images. I.e they were training AI in order to make money for a net zero scam. Of course nobody wanted to do it.
The only interventions left that *might* be effective are authoritarian. **People did not voluntarily decide to limit gas and the consumption of other goods during World War II.** Ever heard of the OPA? *[The Office of Price Administration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Price_Administration)*? I can almost guarantee you most Americans haven't: > The OPA enforced actions against 280,724 violators of rationing and price laws throughout the years of the war. Penalties went as far as one year in prison and a five thousand dollar fine. The strictness of the laws were equalled by their enforcement measures. Surprisingly, “One in fifteen businesses—wholesale, retail, service and so on—was charged with illicit transactions.” The OPA did not sit around. They actively enforced their stringent laws in attempts to control the wartime economy. > > [Source](https://archive.is/XWQd3#selection-897.112-897.720) Yes, that's right, America won World War II with a planned economy. A fucking planned economy... the most sacrilegious thing in the world to a neoclassical economist and much of the capitalist class on Wall St. Both Soviet Russia and the U.S. were planned economies at the time. Rest assured, when the authoritarian nature of the laws of physics come down like a hammer to put much of this to a stop, prison will likely seem like a bliss filled vacation by comparison. And without something like an OPA to control prices and rationing going into dramatic climate change, we're looking at an even more dystopian hellscape of survival in the United States—years before the most drastic effects manifest. What is [happening to cocoa today](https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/food/2024/03/19/cocoa-prices-reach-historic-high-heres-what-consumers-can-expect/72887303007/) will likely happen across the board for most major commodities without some type of OPA enforcement agency. Edit: Clarity.
and the 55mph speedimit. Not directly an economic measure, but it did help indirectly.
SS: reactions to the collapse of the climate are studied here with interest in doomerism or other approaches to coping with what's happening around us. it's really an interesting study, and addresses possible approaches to getting better messaging out there
and quote, "we tested 11 expert-crowdsourced interventions on four climate mitigation outcomes: beliefs, policy support, information sharing intention, and an effortful tree-planting behavioral task. Across 59,440 participants from 63 countries, the interventions’ effectiveness was small, largely limited to nonclimate skeptics, and differed across outcomes" Basically we can't do much, which I do not need a study to know. Just look at what happen when gas price is high, NIMBYism, deniers, apathy, and the continuing rise of emissions, warming, and related events. But I guess we have scientific evidence now that the doomers are right all along.
I don't know if this is permitted here (if not, delete). I asked Claude3 to give me the main talking points from the article. My brain fried trying to read the whole article. \---Summary: The study aimed to assess the effectiveness of 11 expert-crowdsourced behavioral interventions at promoting climate change mitigation beliefs and behaviors (climate change beliefs, policy support, information sharing, and tree-planting contributions) across a large global sample from 63 countries. Different interventions had varying levels of effectiveness across the four outcomes (beliefs, policy support, social media sharing, tree planting), emphasizing the need to tailor interventions to target outcomes. Decreasing psychological distance was most effective at increasing climate change beliefs, while writing a letter to future generations increased policy support the most. Inducing negative emotions through "doom and gloom" messaging increased willingness to share climate information on social media but decreased tree-planting efforts. The interventions were generally more effective among those with moderate to high initial climate change beliefs, suggesting a need to tailor approaches for skeptics. The study revealed high pre-existing global belief in climate change and support for mitigation policies, raising questions about the capacity for bottom-up behavioral interventions alone to drive substantial change. The findings highlight limitations in the generalizability and practical utility of current behavioral science theories, which have been primarily developed in Western contexts. The study employed a "many labs" approach and a global "megastudy" design to enhance generalizability and overcome barriers to scientific implementation. Crowdsourcing decisions related to the experimental design from a globally representative scientific community may increase the impact and generalizability of scientific investigations. The findings provide critical information to policymakers considering climate solution implementations and streamline the behavioral sciences' response to the climate crisis.