What Does it Take to Love a Bug? Knowledge, Emotional Valence, and Politics in Attitudes Toward Insect Conservation.

IF 2.9 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Topics in Cognitive Science Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1111/tops.12676
Barbara C Malt, Jessecae K Marsh
{"title":"What Does it Take to Love a Bug? Knowledge, Emotional Valence, and Politics in Attitudes Toward Insect Conservation.","authors":"Barbara C Malt,&nbsp;Jessecae K Marsh","doi":"10.1111/tops.12676","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Domain knowledge is often considered a minor contributor to environmental attitudes, with social and motivational factors dominating. Yet, domains may differ. Declining insect populations are a critical conservation concern but are not prominent in public discourse, potentially reducing the impact of social and motivational variables. We present data on the relations of insect knowledge (both propositional and causal), associated emotional valences, and political orientation to concern for insect conservation, for samples of American college students and U.S. and U.K. Prolific workers. We asked whether concern for insect conservation is more associated with knowledge than emotional valence or political orientation, and whether this is especially so for U.K. residents, who have a reputation for a love of nature that is not linked to political identity. We found that U.K. participants did show greater overall concern, consistent with the national reputation. Causal knowledge mattered, but political orientation was the strongest predictor of concern for insect conservation for both U.S. and U.K. participants. Valence contributed for U.S. participants but not for U.K. participants. Our results suggest that politicized public discourse penetrates attitudes toward insects even when it does not explicitly concern insects, and knowledge variation has less impact. However, the emotional reaction has a reduced influence where relevant discourse is less polarized. Insects may often evoke negative emotions and motivations, but it is not impossible to love a bug.</p>","PeriodicalId":47822,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Cognitive Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Topics in Cognitive Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12676","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Domain knowledge is often considered a minor contributor to environmental attitudes, with social and motivational factors dominating. Yet, domains may differ. Declining insect populations are a critical conservation concern but are not prominent in public discourse, potentially reducing the impact of social and motivational variables. We present data on the relations of insect knowledge (both propositional and causal), associated emotional valences, and political orientation to concern for insect conservation, for samples of American college students and U.S. and U.K. Prolific workers. We asked whether concern for insect conservation is more associated with knowledge than emotional valence or political orientation, and whether this is especially so for U.K. residents, who have a reputation for a love of nature that is not linked to political identity. We found that U.K. participants did show greater overall concern, consistent with the national reputation. Causal knowledge mattered, but political orientation was the strongest predictor of concern for insect conservation for both U.S. and U.K. participants. Valence contributed for U.S. participants but not for U.K. participants. Our results suggest that politicized public discourse penetrates attitudes toward insects even when it does not explicitly concern insects, and knowledge variation has less impact. However, the emotional reaction has a reduced influence where relevant discourse is less polarized. Insects may often evoke negative emotions and motivations, but it is not impossible to love a bug.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
怎样才能爱上一只虫子?对昆虫保护态度的知识、情感价态与政治。
领域知识通常被认为是环境态度的次要因素,社会和动机因素占主导地位。然而,领域可能有所不同。昆虫数量的减少是一个重要的保护问题,但在公共话语中并不突出,可能会降低社会和动机变量的影响。我们以美国大学生和英美多产工作者为样本,提供了昆虫知识(命题性和因果性)、相关情感效价和关注昆虫保护的政治倾向之间关系的数据。我们询问对昆虫保护的关注是否与知识而不是情感价值或政治取向有关,以及对于英国居民来说是否尤其如此,他们以热爱自然而闻名,而这与政治身份无关。我们发现,英国的参与者确实表现出更大的整体担忧,这与英国的声誉是一致的。因果知识很重要,但政治取向是美国和英国参与者关注昆虫保护的最强预测因素。Valence对美国参与者有贡献,但对英国参与者没有贡献。我们的研究结果表明,政治化的公共话语渗透了对昆虫的态度,即使它并不明确涉及昆虫,知识变化的影响较小。然而,当相关话语不那么两极分化时,情绪反应的影响就会降低。昆虫可能经常唤起消极的情绪和动机,但爱上一只虫子并非不可能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Topics in Cognitive Science
Topics in Cognitive Science PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: Topics in Cognitive Science (topiCS) is an innovative new journal that covers all areas of cognitive science including cognitive modeling, cognitive neuroscience, cognitive anthropology, and cognitive science and philosophy. topiCS aims to provide a forum for: -New communities of researchers- New controversies in established areas- Debates and commentaries- Reflections and integration The publication features multiple scholarly papers dedicated to a single topic. Some of these topics will appear together in one issue, but others may appear across several issues or develop into a regular feature. Controversies or debates started in one issue may be followed up by commentaries in a later issue, etc. However, the format and origin of the topics will vary greatly.
期刊最新文献
Team Cognition Research Is Transforming Cognitive Science. Predictive Processing, Rational Constructivism, and Bayesian Models of Development: Commentary. A Matter of Memory? Age-Invariant Relative Clause Disambiguation and Memory Interference in Older Adults. Personalized Model-Driven Interventions for Decisions From Experience. Social Rationality and Human Reasoning: Logical Expressivism and the Flat Mind.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1