Social Representations Theory
contributions for the study of the
environmental ideas of the public
Paula Castro
Social Psychology Department
ISCTE
Lisbon
18th IAPS Conference
Vienna, 7-10 July 2004
Late ‘70s:
emergence of a field of studies
• Analysing - “environmental concern”, “environmental ideas of the public”,
“environmental beliefs and attitudes”, "environmental cognition", now also a
part of the “environmental psychology of sustainable development” (Bonnes
& Bonaito, 2002).
• literature - “two major streams (Dietz, Stern & Guagnano, 1999, pg. 451):
• studies focused on sociodemographic factors
• studies of values, beliefs and other social psychological constructs”.
• a multidisciplinary field - sociology, anthropology, political science,
• and of course psychology and social psychology.
• a field where research largely relies upon concepts such as beliefs, attitudes,
representations, values, norms, worldviews or rationalities
BUT social Psychology could be more visible
Objectives of the presentation
1 To Identify some lacunae in the field
2 To defend that social psychology - namely through Social Representations
Theory - can help researchers deal with the lacunae identified.
(1) Incipient Conceptual Integration, due to:
– poor theoretical integration among frameworks (HEP-NEP Model,
Cultural theory, postmaterialist values)
– conceptual and methodological confusion, with incipient reflection about
what the different concepts mean and how they should be measured
(2) a need for new paths:
– new research questions allowing us to move beyond an analysis of the
socio demographic correlates of beliefs.
– New methods , besides the very insistent survey/questionnaire design
Social Representations Theory
• dynamics of the circulation of beliefs
through conversation and
communication and of their articulation
in representations
• dynamics of the formation and change
of representations,
• the dialectics between new and old ideas
(Moscovici, 1984; Castro, 2002a).
• to devise analytical tools for
understanding beliefs and
representations on the making, as their
circulation puts them at the disposal of
individuals and groups
SRT can help:
• by helping clarify
conceptual confusion
• by opening up the
field to new
questions and new
methods
• by advancing interframework dialogue
Lack of conceptual integration
1. contrasting definitions for the same concepts
NEP scale, probably the most widely used instrument in the field,
developed by Dunlap & van Liere, 1978 (see Dunlap et al 2000), is seen
differently by different authors:
• Blake, 2001; Pierce et al., 2000 - see it as as measuring values
• Schultz & Stone, 1994 - defend that the scale assesses the environmental
concern (“it is a reliable and face valid measure of environmental
concern", pg. 32);
• Christianson & Arcury (1992), Parker & McDonough (1999) and
Rauwald & Moore (2002) - the scale is in instrument for measuring
environmental attitudes;
• Hodgkinson & Innes (2000) - the NEP scale taps into acceptance of an
ecological worldview
• Schultz & Zelezny (1998) - it is a way of assessing the "awareness of the
consequences" of environmental problems.
Lack of conceptual integration
How can SRT Help?
social representations since the beginning conceptualised as comprising both
actions, beliefs and attitudes,
Attitudes - defined as global evaluations towards an object (Moscovici,
1961/1976, ps. 66 and 69).
SRT has motivated a number of reflections about the status of these concepts,
and an heritage of reflections has accumulated (see Jaspars & Fraser, 1984;
Doise, 1989; Billig, 1993; Gaskell, 2001; Jodelet, 2002).
These converge in 3 main ideas:
1- social representations as a concept more inclusive then attitudes or beliefs.
2- SR conceived as capable of responding to the context and the positioning of
the person speaking,
3- and thus of accommodating the work of the individuals and groups when
these, by passing SR along in conversations and interactions, actively
transform and enrich (or impoverish) them.
Lack of conceptual integration
implications from SRT
• to avoid treating attitudes and beliefs as equivalent concepts,
• to go beyond the study of beliefs and attitudes - the structure of their
organisation in a constellation that we can call a social representation
also has to be examined (Doise, Clemence & Cioldi, 1993).
• with the theory, the human capacity for conciliating seemingly
contradictory beliefs in a Representation has to be considered
• ex: Moscovici, 1961, Gervais & Jovchelovitch 1998, Wagner et al, 2002
• Castro & Lima (2001) - used the NEP scale in Portugal, but instead of
assuming – with the HEP-NEP Model - that each individual had to
answer either in the ecological or in the anthropocentric direction,
considering these as mutually exclusive, assumed that all four
combinations were possible.
Lack of conceptual integration
implications from SRT
• although the general mean showed a clear advantage for the ecological
ideas (mean=3,91, SD=0.46, 5 point Likert scale), as compared to the
anthropocentric ones (mean=2.91, SD=0.56), the four groups were
found,
• those in simultaneous agreement with the ecological and the
anthropocentric ideas were rather numerous.
• instead of assuming a smooth substitution of old ideas for new ecological
ones, based on SRT it seems more relevant to assume the following:
• old and new ideas tend to co-exist and to interact.
• Their interaction assumes different formats, opening up different
possibilities for thinking and arguing.
• How the interaction of old and new ideas is enacted in discourse
should be examined
Need for new research questions:
communication and language
How to go beyond the mere study of objective insertions, or sociodemographic correlates of representations
How to further advance in the study of communication and language
“My Hypothesis in La Psychanalyse was that there are different
systems of communication and conversation at the
interpersonal levels, just as there is diffusion, propagation
and propaganda at the 'mass level'; and that their rules or
logic shape these social representations in specific ways"
(Moscovici & Markova, 2000, pg. 402, my emphasis).
Focus groups with transcripts analysed through the communicative modalities
characteristics
Need for new research questions:
communication and language
Characteristics
Propaganda
Concrete vs abstract messages concrete
Dichotomized messages
Yes
Repetition
Yes
Rejection of previous ideas
Yes
Production of general norm
Yes
Moderation advised
No
Main focus behaviour
Source: Moscovici, 1976
Propagation
abstract
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
attitude
Diffusion
intermediate
No
No
No
No
Yes
belief
New research questions:
different discursive forms for talking about nature
(Castro, 2002)
• The Conciliation discourse - Propagation - incitements to moderation, focus
mainly on attitude change, aiming at producing a norm by the conciliation
of old and new ideas, depicting the protection of nature as both a desirable
end to be achieved and as an end already partially achieved.
• The Action discourse - Propaganda - focus on behaviour and behaviour
modification and vigilance, aiming at the production of new behaviour,
through the depiction of a dichotomised reality, rejecting anthropocentric
ideas and considering the protection of nature as a desirable end not yet
achieved.
• The Diffusion discourses - allowing different ideas and preoccupations –
both ecological and anthropocentric – to emerge, and offering no
articulated proposal for accepting, rejecting or conciliating them, just the
awareness of their existence as unsolved, perhaps even unsolvable, matters.
New research questions:
Linking Cultural Theory with SRT
Propaganda - focus on behaviour
and behaviour modification
environmental problems can only be
controlled by enforcing radical
changes in human behaviour
Rationality: Egalitarian
Rationality: Fatalist
We do not know whether
environmental problems will
aggravate or not
The environmental problems are not
running out of control, but the
government should present clear
rules about what is and is not allowed
rationality: Bureaucratic
Rationality: Individualist
We do not need to worry about
environmental problems because they
will be solved by science
Questions from Steg & Sievers, 2000
New research questions:
Linking Cultural Theory with SRT
• Propaganda - focus on behaviour and behaviour
modification
• linked to POLEMIC representations with identity
value (Moscovici, 1988; Castro, 2003)
Hyp.:
• those subscribing to the “behavioural Solution” will
estimate ecological beliefs and behaviours as lower in
the population, as compared to those subscribing all
other solutions
New research questions:
Linking Cultural Theory with SRT
42,5
45
41,7
40
34,3
35
30
25
23,2
20
15
10
5
0
percentage of portugues e population that sepates
plas tic waste
1
percentage of portugues e population pres enting
ecologic al concern
2
environmental problems can only be controlled by enforcing radical changes in human behaviour
government should dictate clear rules, environmental problems will be solved by science
1. t(76)=-4.4, p<.000
2. t(212)=-2.2, p<.03
Data from 2001
questionnaire study
Discussion
• Theory with priority over method - NEP scale but no HEP-NEP
assumptions
• Social representations - different from attitudes and beliefs
• Social representations - look at the various ways people have for
articulating seemingly contradictory beliefs
• Focus groups discourses - good potential dialogue with Cultural theory
and Dake’s Myths of Nature
• Going beyond objective inclusion - more attention to language and
communication
• going beyond objective inclusion - more attention to the consequences
of representations - consensus projection for the population