Marie-Claire Wilhelm , Grenoble IAE Graduate School of Management and Marie-Laure Gavard-Perret , Grenoble IAE Graduate School of Management
To spur action on climate change, what communication strategy should we adopt? Is fear an effective lever? Or does it, on the contrary, hinder action? These questions are important as we oscillate between eco-anxiety and cognitive dissonance in the face of the climate emergency.
On this subject, the discipline of social marketing provides interesting avenues for reflection. It studies, in fact, "the adaptation of commercial marketing techniques to programs designed to influence the voluntary behavior of target audiences in order to improve their personal well-being and that of the society to which they belong."
The application of marketing to social change, which is now based on solid research, remains largely unknown to the general public. The goal is not to improve the discipline's image but to put it at the service of social and societal causes – in this case, the consequences of climate change for individuals and the planet.
From this perspective, social marketing encourages the idea that leveraging moderate fear can be effective—in other words, fear sufficient to motivate action but not so intense that it becomes a deterrent. However, other conditions must be met for this approach to be successful.
The three conditions for an "effective" appeal to fear
Explanatory models of the persuasive power of appealing to fear in persuasive communication provide keys to understanding the mechanisms based on the use of the emotion of fear and help to anticipate certain reactions to communications that appeal to fear.
The three most useful models – or theories – in this perspective are: the health belief model , the model derived from the theory of motivation for protection, and the extended parallel processes model .
[More than 85,000 readers rely on The Conversation’s newsletters to better understand the world’s major issues. Subscribe today]
These three theoretical frameworks unanimously highlight certain conditions that must be met for a threat, and therefore an appeal to fear, to be effective. Similarly, other theoretical frameworks, such as the theory of levels of representation of psychological distance, usefully complement these initial conditions.
Vulnerability and perception of severity
It is particularly important to remember that if the threat is not perceived as serious enough by the target, or if the target does not feel sufficiently vulnerable to it, the individual will not develop the necessary motivation to protect themselves from the danger. The probability is then high that they will not accept the message and, consequently, will not develop the required adaptive behaviors.
In order for communication encouraging behavioral change to address risks to be truly persuasive and effective, it is necessary to ensure that climate change is perceived as a danger that everyone feels concerned about.
We need convincing solutions
If the threat is perceived as serious and threatening enough, it will generate fear. But that's not enough: the targeted individual must also perceive the effectiveness of the recommendations as well as their own personal effectiveness in implementing the behavior in question.
Otherwise, he will develop efforts aimed solely at controlling his fear, and not the danger itself. This protection against fear will then be based primarily on defensive motivations, and in particular on rejecting the threatening message.
In this sense, the idea of generating moderate fear proves more sensible than intense fear. But even in this case, the proposed solutions must appear effective and applicable to individuals.
The "boomerang" effect: controlling fear
Communication about climate change that manages to arouse significant fear without convincing people of the effectiveness of the recommendations proposed to resolve the threat will have a detrimental effect: to bring down the level of this negative emotion, individuals will tend to control their fear.
They may thus develop coping strategies that lead to communication breakdown, with the risk that anxiety-inducing communication will "lead to denial and disinterest." If they are in denial, which involves excluding certain information, they may, for example, choose to consume information from media outlets or political parties that deny climate change. They may also become disinterested in or minimize information by focusing on other tasks.
Another strategy is to avoid information and blame a target group such as politicians or industrialists . Finally, people can also resist by adopting behavior opposite to that requested.
In the case of communications on climate change, other particular difficulties arise.
Temporal and social psychological distancing
In the context of communication surrounding climate change, the perception of the seriousness of the threat is thus made more difficult by certain specificities, primarily due to a temporal distancing effect with regard to these climate changes. These changes are indeed perceived as still distant.
Similarly, populations affected by climate change may be perceived as distant from the target audience of communication due to social distancing. Thus, one in two French people do not yet feel directly affected by the effects of climate change.
It should also be noted that the latest IPCC report places more emphasis on the impact of climate change on human beings (and not just endangered species) and in particular those in Western countries (and not just developing countries).
A challenge perceived as collective
It can also prove complex to make the recommendation relevant (effectiveness of the measures requested) because not only is perceived self-efficacy often very low , but so is the perception of collective efficacy.
It is therefore particularly difficult to make people understand the importance of individual actions when the problem is seen as collective: "The French want public authorities to do more to combat climate change. However, the French consider that states and international bodies are the actors that are doing the least today (26% and 14% respectively), along with businesses (14%)."
This difficulty is once again explained by the question of temporality and perceived temporal distance. 72% of French people believe that "living conditions will become extremely difficult in about fifty years."
Finally, these measures are likely to create an idea of inequity and injustice, with the risk, for example, of penalizing low incomes more heavily.
In conclusion, appealing to fear can be effective if it is well designed in relation to the theories used in social marketing and if the message has been pre-tested .
Marie-Claire Wilhelm , Senior Lecturer at Université Grenoble Alpes , Grenoble INP, CERAG, co-director of the M2S Chair, Grenoble IAE Graduate School of Management , and Marie-Laure Gavard-Perret , Professor of Management, Grenoble IAE, CERAG laboratory, specialist in social marketing and persuasive and preventive communication, Grenoble IAE Graduate School of Management
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.