‘I can do more.’ : investigating frequent flyers’ responses to flight shaming and encouragement interventions for reducing air travel and their effects on perceived self-efficacy
(2020) In Master Thesis Series in Environmental Studies and Sustainability Science MESM02 20201LUCSUS (Lund University Centre for Sustainability Studies)
- Abstract
- While carbon emissions hit an all-time high in 2019 and are expected to grow, it is important to explore strategies for reducing emissions and mitigating climate change. A potential focus for curbing emissions is the flying sector, since air travel is one of the most carbon-intensive activities an individual can engage in. Among air travelers, frequent flyers yield the highest potential for saving CO₂. Recently, there has been a growing debate around flight shaming to convince frequent flyers to fly less. The study explores the effects of flight shaming and the contrasting approach of encouragement on frequent flyers. It investigates how frequent flyers respond to these persuasive strategies, and if it affects their perceived... (More)
- While carbon emissions hit an all-time high in 2019 and are expected to grow, it is important to explore strategies for reducing emissions and mitigating climate change. A potential focus for curbing emissions is the flying sector, since air travel is one of the most carbon-intensive activities an individual can engage in. Among air travelers, frequent flyers yield the highest potential for saving CO₂. Recently, there has been a growing debate around flight shaming to convince frequent flyers to fly less. The study explores the effects of flight shaming and the contrasting approach of encouragement on frequent flyers. It investigates how frequent flyers respond to these persuasive strategies, and if it affects their perceived self-efficacy, which is an integral element in many theories explaining pro-environmental behavior. For this purpose, an online questionnaire was completed by n=95 frequent flyers. Respondents were randomly assigned into one out of three conditions: control, encouragement, or shaming. Individuals in the encouragement or shaming condition were confronted with a text that applied a shaming or encouraging framing of the issue of flight reductions.
The research revealed that respondents in the encouragement condition more consistently felt a personal responsibility for climate mitigation and a willingness to reduce air travel. Respondents in the shaming condition had more doubts about the feasibility of personal changes, although many also formed the intention to fly less. Respondents from both conditions emphasized the need for structural changes, for example in terms of availability of infrastructure or prices. A quantitative SPSS analysis showed that flight shaming and encouragement had no statistically significant effect on Perceived Self-Efficacy Scores. However, the observed effect size suggests that there is a minor trend that values from the control condtion were lower than values in the encouragement condition, which in turn were higher than the ones in the shaming condition. While the research could not resolve the wicked problem of air travel emissions, it suggests that both encouragement and flight shaming interventions can cause frequent flyers to perceive a responsibility for climate change mitigation by flying less. However, encouragement seems to be more reliable in doing so without potentially infringing on the health of frequent flyers. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9013926
- author
- Jochimsen, Luise Marie LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- MESM02 20201
- year
- 2020
- type
- H2 - Master's Degree (Two Years)
- subject
- keywords
- Climate Change Mitigation, Air Travel, Pro-Environmental Behavior, Framings, Flight Shaming, Encouragement
- publication/series
- Master Thesis Series in Environmental Studies and Sustainability Science
- report number
- 2020:043
- language
- English
- id
- 9013926
- date added to LUP
- 2020-06-08 17:07:05
- date last changed
- 2020-06-08 17:07:05
@misc{9013926,
abstract = {{While carbon emissions hit an all-time high in 2019 and are expected to grow, it is important to explore strategies for reducing emissions and mitigating climate change. A potential focus for curbing emissions is the flying sector, since air travel is one of the most carbon-intensive activities an individual can engage in. Among air travelers, frequent flyers yield the highest potential for saving CO₂. Recently, there has been a growing debate around flight shaming to convince frequent flyers to fly less. The study explores the effects of flight shaming and the contrasting approach of encouragement on frequent flyers. It investigates how frequent flyers respond to these persuasive strategies, and if it affects their perceived self-efficacy, which is an integral element in many theories explaining pro-environmental behavior. For this purpose, an online questionnaire was completed by n=95 frequent flyers. Respondents were randomly assigned into one out of three conditions: control, encouragement, or shaming. Individuals in the encouragement or shaming condition were confronted with a text that applied a shaming or encouraging framing of the issue of flight reductions.
The research revealed that respondents in the encouragement condition more consistently felt a personal responsibility for climate mitigation and a willingness to reduce air travel. Respondents in the shaming condition had more doubts about the feasibility of personal changes, although many also formed the intention to fly less. Respondents from both conditions emphasized the need for structural changes, for example in terms of availability of infrastructure or prices. A quantitative SPSS analysis showed that flight shaming and encouragement had no statistically significant effect on Perceived Self-Efficacy Scores. However, the observed effect size suggests that there is a minor trend that values from the control condtion were lower than values in the encouragement condition, which in turn were higher than the ones in the shaming condition. While the research could not resolve the wicked problem of air travel emissions, it suggests that both encouragement and flight shaming interventions can cause frequent flyers to perceive a responsibility for climate change mitigation by flying less. However, encouragement seems to be more reliable in doing so without potentially infringing on the health of frequent flyers.}},
author = {{Jochimsen, Luise Marie}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
series = {{Master Thesis Series in Environmental Studies and Sustainability Science}},
title = {{‘I can do more.’ : investigating frequent flyers’ responses to flight shaming and encouragement interventions for reducing air travel and their effects on perceived self-efficacy}},
year = {{2020}},
}