On this green St. Paddy’s day, finally, something that explains some of the operators of, and commenters on, some other blogs. Now, if I can just find some fair trade carbon credits to offset my corned beef and cabbage…
From the Guardian:
How going green may make you mean
Ethical consumers less likely to be kind and more likely to steal, study finds
When Al Gore was caught running up huge energy bills at home at the same time as lecturing on the need to save electricity, it turns out that he was only reverting to “green” type.
According to a study, when people feel they have been morally virtuous by saving the planet through their purchases of organic baby food, for example, it leads to the “licensing [of] selfish and morally questionable behaviour”, otherwise known as “moral balancing” or “compensatory ethics”.
Do Green Products Make Us Better People is published in the latest edition of the journal Psychological Science. Its authors, Canadian psychologists Nina Mazar and Chen-Bo Zhong, argue that people who wear what they call the “halo of green consumerism” are less likely to be kind to others, and more likely to cheat and steal. “Virtuous acts can license subsequent asocial and unethical behaviours,” they write.
The pair found that those in their study who bought green products appeared less willing to share with others a set amount of money than those who bought conventional products. When the green consumers were given the chance to boost their money by cheating on a computer game and then given the opportunity to lie about it – in other words, steal – they did, while the conventional consumers did not. Later, in an honour system in which participants were asked to take money from an envelope to pay themselves their spoils, the greens were six times more likely to steal than the conventionals.
Mazar and Zhong said their study showed that just as exposure to pictures of exclusive restaurants can improve table manners but may not lead to an overall improvement in behaviour, “green products do not necessarily make for better people”. They added that one motivation for carrying out the study was that, despite the “stream of research focusing on identifying the ‘green consumer'”, there was a lack of understanding into “how green consumption fits into people’s global sense of responsibility and morality and [how it] affects behaviours outside the consumption domain”.
…
Complete article at the Guardian
…
Here is the original press release from the University of Toronto and link to the study:
Buying green can be license for bad behavior, study finds
Those lyin’, cheatin’ green consumers.
Just being around green products can make us behave more altruistically, a new study to be published in a forthcoming issue of Psychological Science has found.
But buying those same products can have the opposite effect. Researchers found that buying green can lead people into less altruistic behaviour, and even make them more likely to steal and lie than after buying conventional products. Buying products that claim to be made with low environmental impact can set up “moral credentials” in people’s minds that give license to selfish or questionable behavior.
“This was not done to point the finger at consumers who buy green products. The message is bigger,” says Nina Mazar, a marketing professor at University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management and a self-admitted green consumer. “At the end of the day, if we do one moral thing, IT doesn’t necessarily mean we will be morally better in other things as well.”
Mazar, along with her co-author Chen-Bo Zhong, an assistant professor of organizational behaviour at the Rotman School, conducted three experiments. The first found that people perceived green consumers to be more cooperative, altruistic and ethical than those who purchased conventional products. The second experiment showed that participants merely exposed to products from a green store shared more money in a subsequent experimental game, but those who actually made purchases in that store shared less. The final experiment revealed that participants who bought items in the green store showed evidence of lying and stealing money in a subsequent lab game.
But are people conscious of this moral green washing going on when they buy green products and, more importantly, the license they might feel to break ethical standards? Professors Mazar and Zhong don’t know – and look forward to exploring that in further research.
The complete study is available at: http://www.rotman.utoronto.ca/newthinking/greenproducts.pdf .
People give lip service to being green. Who wants to be accused of hating the planet and wanting to destroy every living thing.
Our school children are indoctrinated about environmentalism. The are conditioned to respond with green platitudes, even if they don’t believe them. Our children are also taught that nearly every great American in our past achieved success by lying, cheating, stealing, destroying the environment and exploiting the weak, the poor and minorities.
It’s no wonder many people lie, cheat and steal these days. They have learned this is the only way to get ahead.
The anti-American enviro lobby, which owns Congress, puts offshore drilling off-limits. This harms Americans, while greatly benefitting Russia and China, which fill the vacuum: click
@Stacey,
We are not tarring anybody with any brushes. According to the article, the research has been done. It has been published and peer reviewed here.
The science is settled. smug is a serious problem.
In a related story.
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2695102
There are plenty of goony birds on Midway.
Like “Critical Mass” traffic obstructions.
Kwik & Jerome
Albatrosses can cross the equator. But they are too damn smart (or scared) to try.
The albatross cannot get airborne again if it lands on flat calm water, because it is too heavy to overcome the drag. It needs big waves so that it can break free at a wave-crest and gain enough airspeed as it flies down into the trough to be able to soar above the next wave. The doldrums on or about the equator produce flat calm water, so the albatross won’t fly over it.
When I was a wee young lad, growing up in Southern California, I used to go camping in the mountains east of San Diego and L.A. and in the Sierra’s in the summers. I used to see the California Conservation Core battling brush fires started by lightening or maybe a stray campfire. Generally, these fires were brought under control pretty quickly or at least contained. The CCC used to spend summers clearing away the dead undergrowth that fed these fires. Then we had to save the spotted owls and field mice, etc, (due to the greenies) and the CCC were forced to stop clearing the dead kindling. Now, every summer, we see ginourmous forest fires that burn down people’s houses and kill people. Me thinks the greenies rejoice.
hmmm….
“Nuts in May” was referenced in the Telegraph article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/7458105/Liars-cheats-thieves-the-terrible-truth-about-the-mean-greens.html
For anyone who wants to watch “Nuts in May”. It’s classic british humor and merciless towards the health nut/environmentalist crowd. See links:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x55y5q_nuts-in-may-part-1-of-5_shortfilms
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x55y63_nuts-in-may-part-2-of-5_shortfilms
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x56xgw_nuts-in-may-part-3-of-5_fun
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x55ysb_nuts-in-may-part-4-of-5_shortfilms
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x55ydf_nuts-in-may-part-5-of-5_shortfilms
Gary Turner (21:02:37) :
I’ve long sensed that the most evil is done by people who do it in the name of whichever deity they worship. Whether a conventional god or one fabricated for the purposes of do-gooderism such as being green, vegan, or fighting wrong-headed people, they seem to think their noble end justifies whatever means necessary………….
————————————————————
And where would Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler, Jack-the-Ripper, ad neaseum fit in with your incoherrence?
May I have another turn, please, to smash watermelons in the road?
I believe people who want (demand) others to act their beliefs about AGW etc are genuinely misanthropic, because they don’t (or couldn’t) care about the repercussions that others will be forced to accept – all because of unfounded paranoia.
In general, those forced to accept the consequences of “elite” beliefs aren’t noted for their voice to speak up for themselves, nor have the money or political wherewithal to induce politicians to act in response to their delusions.
People who buy into the green goop aren’t nice people, I have found. They couldn’t care less if their delusions might force some people to starve or freeze to death.
On behalf of such people, I am committed with all I have in me to smash watermelon dreams and desires
Do we have to assume the authors of the study controlled for other factors such as age, socio-economic group, income, etc?
And who coined the term “ethical consumer?” Is this a term the green shoppers used to describe themselves?
“Daniel H (21:49:18) :
I noticed that the green “carbon offset” kiosk machine went completely unused the entire time I was there. People just passed it by.”
I bet Dr Who will soon be travelling the multiverse in a green TARDIS, maybe that was it.
Well, whatever you do, DON’T call the Green Police! They are worse than the green consumers!
I don’t know of any tenets of mainstream Christianity, Judaism or Buddhism* that allows for lying, cheating and stealing. I know of plenty of people who twist religion to suit there purposes and thereby justify their behavior.
The greatest evil is done by people who believe they are doing the right thing. The greatest mass murderers all thought they were doing good and were all subscribers to some form of socialism (Mao, Stalin, Hitler). What deity did those men worship? Was Soviet Communism a deity? How about National Socialism?
* Buddhists do not worship a deity, btw.
@Mike Haseler (05:49:30) :
[somethingawfull mode]
At this point in the thread i should remind people that the Dutch ride their bicycles without a helmet and that even an old granny still rides a bike with with 2 heavy shopping bags and a crying grandchild in the childseat up front 🙂
[/somethingawfull mode]
Its all about the numbers participating on the road and you would not dare to hit a a cyclist on a road somewhere in the Netherlands.
Japan is even worse, they drive on the sidewalk there in a manner that even the Dutch consider insane (and i know because i have been there quite often now)
*ding* *ding*
However much fun the conclusion of this study is, it should be noted that the study is poorly designed. First, the effect sizes are marginal and the distibution of the effects is not reported as I recall. Second the assignment of individuals to treatment groups should have ensured that similar attitudes to “green” and “non green” products were equal. Randomly assigning folks is not sufficient to ensure a valid result (Matt Briggs is actually discussing this today at http://www.wmbriggs.com ). Thirdly, no effort was made to ask the experimental subjects to explain what they did – the experimental treatment was essentially a game and subjects may have varied significantly in their response to the game aspects of the experiment.
Alternative hypotheses for the observed behavior are not explored.
@Jimbo: your suicide pact example is what is known as a straw man argument. My guess is that, if they hadn’t had a suicide pact over global warming, they’d have picked another suitably crazy reason to kill themselves.
I’m a medical research scientist who knew nothing about climate science. When I first took an interest in global warming, I found a few pro-AGW web sites to ask some ignorant but sincere questions. What I discovered was a mean spirited, self righteous, and abusive group of people who i just couldn’t identify with. That led me to sites like WUWT where I can now get factually grounded answers in a community of much kinder, better informed folks with a diversity of experience and a willingness to share what they know. For me, WUWT is a site were I can expand my understanding without being turned off by all the ad hom, disparaging, and self edification found at the pro-AGW sites.
This reminds me of one of my favorite quotes:
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” – C. S. Lewis
I’m certain there will be people who refuse to believe this study. And there will be those surprised by it. But for anyone who follows climate issues they will be no more surprised then the were with climategate. It’s always been obvious. Just look at how the AGW crowd lives. Besides Al Gore’s $1200/mo elec. bill mansion (that sports a heated swimming pool) he owns other properties including a 100′ houseboat. Of course he claims it burns biodiesel. But there’s reportedly no facilities for that on the lake. And, of course, there’s a jet ski parked on the back deck. And I’ve been told that John Travolta attended the Copenhagen conference; flying there on one of his 5 private jets. (Was it the 707?). How about Robert Redford for whom relinquishing his Porsche is not negotiable. The list is endless. And these people will not suffer the deprivations they’ll impose on us. Or how about where these climate conferences are held? Rio de Janeiro with it’s tropical white sand beaches populated by thong bikinis? Or Kyoto, itself: historic provincial capital and premier Japanese tourist destination. Or, Bali? Or Marrakech, Morrocco; immortalized in a rock and roll song and sporting 3 golf courses and a casino. I’ve heard this year it’ll be Mexico City but are we confusing Mexico City with Mexico because I’ve heard another report that it’ll be Cancun. I know where I’d place my bets.
Perhaps even more ironical than all of the above is the one coauthor of the cap & trade legislation in the Senate: John Kerry who co-owns 5 (or is it 6?) mansions worth an estimated total of 32 mil, and flies exclusively on private jets.
We need a study to tell us that green is mean?
Americans getting tired of eco-preachers; economic growth and jobs more important: click
Jeff (08:04:36)
Thanks for the link to ‘Nuts in May’. I haven’t seen it since it came out in the ’70s.
I just watched the first segment. If anything, Keith and Candice-Marie are even worse than I remember!
I recollect my friend and I watching it and laughing our heads off. I don’t think we’ll laugh quite so freely now…………….
@ur momisugly Hank Hancock (10:49:22) :
I had the same experience.
I guess I offended someone with my last question, so I’ll rephrase it, but it’s based on the overwhelming number of anti-green comments in this thread. In all seriousness, are any of you willing to say that, because I drive a hybrid, use a push reel mower, turn off lights when I leave a room, use lower-power appliances, recycle my aluminum cans, recycle my cardboard and paper, reuse rather than buy new, all in an effort to save money and be an intelligent factor in the free market, I’m a bad person? Silly me, I thought I was saving money. :->
The best I’ve heard about being green was what Sarah Palin declared when asked something like this “what to do with endangered species, and she responded: “In Alaska we serve them with mashed potatoes” LOL.