AUTHORS: Kristin F. Hurst, Southern Illinois University; Zachary M. Hurst, Playa Lakes Joint Venture
ABSTRACT: Addressing complex conservation challenges frequently requires collaboration between stakeholders who hold disparate and sometimes incompatible views. To advance solutions, stakeholders need a common understanding of the scope of the problem and other stakeholder’s positions related to it. This requires that they be receptive to information that may not align with their pre-existing positions. We experimentally tested a strategy to foster such receptivity by evaluating the effect of a behavioral intervention on perspective-taking and empathy. Participants (N = 223) who previously expressed opposition to a transition to renewable energy were randomly assigned to write a short, morally grounded essay either in favor of (intervention) or in opposition to (control) a shift to renewable energy. We expected that writing a morally grounded essay in favor of one’s opposing stance would increase perspective-taking, empathy, and support of the energy transition. We found a main effect on support and empathy but not perspective-taking. We also hypothesized that empathy would mediate the relationship between essay writing and support. We tested a serial mediation model where writing a counter-attitudinal essay would result in increased empathy and support, which then results in an intention to act. While we found a significant indirect effect of essay writing on behavioral intention, mediated by support, there was no evidence that empathy helped to explain this relationship. Given the relatively simple intervention and its potential to be easily incorporated into group settings, we suggest that its use may help lay the foundation for a more productive discussion. Future research can help understand the mechanism by which this occurs and its impact on the likelihood of reaching agreements.
