 |
| Sculptures by Isaac Cordal (http://cementeclipses.com/Works/) |
After
working as a psychologist/therapist for almost 10 years, I started as a PhD
candidate in Environmental Psychology at NTNU in October 2014. I am
particularly interested in what drives people; what makes people stand up for
what is right and matters now. As we all need oxygen to breathe, one would
think that everyone agrees that the environment matters. Climate change
matters. Keeping the world free from pollution matters. But even though most
people have already made some changes like recycling, there is still a
worldwide atmosphere of apathy around taking more bold and significant actions.
So what
can get people to take action when things seem to go wrong on a worldwide
scale? What wakes them up, without first having to experience the devastating
effects themselves? Since I started my PhD, I have been gathering a lot of
research and other information on this topic, but perhaps my most useful
findings so far have come from studying interactions between people on Facebook
pages and Youtube. Here is what I found (backed by research).
1.
People
may get defensive when you tell them directly to act responsibly
When a
message is clearly stating that something has to be done, many people (probably
the very ones who are targeted by the message) get quite defensive. They are
not used to being held responsible for the consequences of some of their
actions (especially when what they are doing is legal and considered normal,
‘everyone’ is doing it and ‘no one’ seems to do anything about it). They talk
about freedom of choice, minding one’s own business and not caring about the
issue. There is an immediate breakdown in communication and a clinging to the
status quo, to doing things the way we have always done them and to the
luxuries, material possessions and securities that modern society offers. They
may even start denying the problem altogether. Sounds familiar?
Several
major experiments in social psychology have shown that people can do and say
the most irrational things just to conform (Asch 1951), to obey an authority
figure (Milgram 1963) or because of a role we take on (Haney, Banks et al.
1973) and when a collective habit has formed for long enough, this will get
more difficult to change as people tend to stick with the status quo (Samuelson
and Zeckhauser 1988, Fernandez and Rodrik 1991, Kahneman, Knetsch et al. 1991).
This status-quo bias can also make people defensive when changes to the system
are suggested, which is a topic that is further discussed in system
justification theory (Jost, Banaji et al. 2004). That doesn't sound like 'freedom of choice', does it? It sounds more like doing what is expected of us, because this is what we were taught to do, without questioning whether it is right or wrong. And when someone does question it, this is perceived as a threat.
It is
likely that our defensive nature starts in childhood and stems from the way we
are used to communicating with each other. Most children are taught guilt and
shame through blaming, which often results in them learning to pass the blame
onto others (because that is easier), instead of learning natural consequences
and taking personal responsibility through authentic communication. In fact, we are so used to being blamed, that most of us are on the defensive most of the time. This is not just an exhausting way to live, but also not at all conducive to constructive communication and open-hearted exchange.
The alternative is authentic communication, or communicating from a place of compassion. This is known as
non-violent communication (NVC). Imagine you see someone you care about eating
meat, but you are a strong proponent of veganism, so it really triggers strong
emotions within you. Instead of saying: “people like you make me sad/angry; you
are a murderer; what you are doing is destroying the environment”, you could
also say: “When I see you eating meat, I
feel sad, because I recently learned about the link between meat consumption
and health and the impact it has on the environment. And because I care about
you and the world we live in, it would mean a lot to me if you would allow me
to tell you more about what I learned at some time. Would you be open to that?”
Of course it is important to communicate from a compassionate and authentic
place, without any manipulative intent and without any force. That means that
if the person still does not want to listen, then you accept it. They may not
be ready to hear you (see Rosenberg 1999).
The best
news about NVC is that to practice this compassionate, authentic way of
communicating, you don’t need the other person to do anything differently or to
learn anything. There is no teacher and student in the interaction; the relationship is equal. There is only an exchange of experiences and perspectives. A person's response to this type of communication will automatically be different, because it is made very clear that no one is being blamed.
Therefore it changes how people listen to you. Because they are not being
targeted, they don’t need to defend themselves. And this allows them to open up
to your message and to share their own view more openly as well. It is safe for them to just listen to what you have to say. This allows for real freedom, not just for the other person but also for yourself, as the process of discovery that it stimulates within you will lead to a more free and independent way of thinking.
Having
said that, sometimes it can also help to use social pressure by demonstrating that
someone’s opinion is not supported, especially on a medium like Facebook, where
people can support comments with likes. This way we can create new societal
standards and hold people accountable when they are trying to make excuses for
themselves. But even then, doing this in a way that is not blaming will likely be much more effective.
2. People
may expect others to clean up after them and focus their entire attention on other
people in their quest for change
The
blaming habit can take even bigger forms where we collectively start to blame
corporations, the government, the economy or other countries for the problems
in our world. The underlying guilt can then be washed off by further denial, or
trying to get others to change first. Research has shown that the larger the
group of people, the longer it takes before people take action (Darley and
Latane 1968). In social psychology, this phenomenon of inaction is called the
bystander effect (Latane and Darley 1968). Some of the ways people then try to
rationalize this lack of action in an attempt to relieve the cognitive
dissonance that it creates (Festinger 1962), is by taking small and rather
insignificant actions (e.g. recycling), or by signing petitions, especially
ones that state that other people (e.g. the government) should do something
about the issue. It is a way of lying to yourself; pretending you are doing
things the right way when in fact there is a lot more that can and needs to be
done. Not by others, but by you.
Signing
a petition is of course a great way to make a public statement about what you
believe in and what matters to you, but if you do not back it up with actions
yourself, it is meaningless. For example, if you sign a petition to save the
rainforests, but continue to consume meat, knowing that the meat industry is an
important contributor to deforestation, then your signature is meaningless and
no significant change will be possible.
Until
you realize that you are not just an important part, but rather the most
important part of the solution, then there is no hope for humanity. So let
me tell you this: You ARE important. The human race depends on you to make
changes and take responsibility. To make a statement not just through the
signing of petitions, or doing research, or recycling, or studying a topic, but also and
especially through your actions. Recycling is like treating the symptoms of a structural problem, but moving towards a zero-waste lifestyle is a more sustainable solution.
3.
Leading
by example and being an inspiration to others are the best ways to get people
on board
So are
we doomed? If the research ‘proves’ that people fail to act in important
situations, does that mean there is no point in trying? On the contrary. Being
aware of our weak spots can help us to avoid them. Awareness is the key here.
For example, one study shows that meditation (and being more mindful) can increase compassionate
responses and thereby help us overcome the bystander effect (Condon, Desbordes
et al. 2013), and possibly other irrational behaviors and biases as well. It
can shield you from manipulation and help you to overcome apathy in all areas
of your life. Awareness can be developed through Mindfulness, meditation and
other related practices (‘The Power of Now’ by Eckhart Tolle would be a great
place to start if you want to develop this quality of ‘being present’ further).
Taking
all of the above into account, what would seem to be the best way forward? How
can we start a revolution to save the environment and to save the earth we
inhabit?
Again, it all starts with you! You can be the change by standing up for what you believe in.
You can lead by example and share with the world how you solved the problems
you encountered while attempting to live a lifestyle that is better for the
earth. You can experience and share with others how your new lifestyle benefits
you. How it benefits not just your physical well-being, but also your
emotional, mental and spiritual well-being. You can share your story on
Facebook, in a blog, on Twitter and of course in real life; with your friends,
family members and colleagues. You can be a pioneer. You can find your own new
way of doing things. You can be a leader. And you can impact the world in a
positive way. This can be the legacy you leave behind.
When you
are sharing your personal story, you don’t have to tell others what to do. You
only show them how. You are there to provide guidance to whoever needs it. And
you also help to create a new societal standard of behavior, one step at a
time. This takes care of the issues mentioned under concern number 1. And by
taking responsibility yourself, you also naturally take care of concern number
2.
When you
share your experiences in a positive and uplifting way, this will be contagious
to others. But you will also notice that your own life will become brighter and
happier. When you share your personal story, your milestones and personal
achievements towards living more sustainably, it will empower you to keep going and at the same time it empowers others to start doing
the same. It shows them that change is possible, that it can be fun and that
there are many alternatives to life as most of us know it and live it. And
perhaps the most important thing is that it shows people that they can make a
difference.
For
examples of personal blogs with tips about living a happier life whilst living
more sustainably, see robgreenfield.tv or liselotteroosen.blogspot.com.
(This article was also published in NTNU's Psychological Journal)
References:
Asch,
S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of
judgments. Groups, leadership and men; research in human relations.
Oxford, England, Carnegie Press: 177-190.
Condon,
P., et al. (2013). "Meditation Increases Compassionate Responses to
Suffering." Psychological Science 24(10): 2125-2127.
Darley,
J. M. and B. Latane (1968). "Bystander intervention in emergencies:
diffusion of responsibility." Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 8(4p1): 377.
Fernandez,
R. and D. Rodrik (1991). "Resistance to reform: Status quo bias in the
presence of individual-specific uncertainty." The American Economic
Review: 1146-1155.
Festinger,
L. (1962). A theory of cognitive dissonance, Stanford university press.
Haney,
C., et al. (1973). "Study of prisoners and guards in a simulated
prison." Naval Research Reviews 9(1-17).
Jost,
J. T., et al. (2004). "A decade of system justification theory:
Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status
quo." Political Psychology: 881-919.
Kahneman,
D., et al. (1991). "Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and
status quo bias." The journal of economic perspectives: 193-206.
Latane,
B. and J. M. Darley (1968). "Group inhibition of bystander intervention in
emergencies." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 10(3):
215.
Milgram,
S. (1963). "Behavioral study of obedience." The Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology 67(4): 371.
Rosenberg,
M. B. (1999). Nonviolent communication: A language of compassion,
PuddleDancer Press Encinitas, CA.
Samuelson,
W. and R. Zeckhauser (1988). "Status quo bias in decision making." Journal
of risk and uncertainty 1(1): 7-59.
