JS
J.N. Slob
info
Please Note
<p>This page displays the records of the person named above and is not linked to a unique person identifier. This record may need to be merged to a profile.</p>
1 records found
1
Designing for Good Ancestry
Can good ancestry stimuli inspire pro-environmental attitudes?
This research examines whether Good Ancestry—understood as the conscious stewardship of what we value beyond our own lifetime—can motivate sustainable consumer behaviour. It asks whether making needs for legacy and long-term responsibility more salient can strengthen the perceived value of sufficiency over unsustainable consumption. The central question is whether Good Ancestry stimuli can inspire pro-environmental attitudes.
The first part establishes the theoretical foundation by linking ancestry, climate change, and consumer behaviour. Drawing on Krznaric’s six ways of thinking long-term together with Value–Belief–Norm theory and attitude formation (Krznaric, 2020; Stern et al., 1999; Blythe, 2013), it positions sufficiency as the behavioural target and identifies moral and temporal responsibility as key motivational levers. The second part translates this framework into practice through the Good Ancestry Stimuli Method and the design of ancestry-framed and non-ancestry video conditions. Abstract notions of deep time and legacy were rendered into concise, emotionally engaging narratives through iterative user testing, ensuring conceptual clarity and theoretical alignment. The third part evaluates the stimuli through three studies.
Study 1 shows that ancestry stimuli significantly strengthen the Good Ancestry mindset, particularly its normative components of long-term responsibility. Study 2 finds that Good Ancestry correlates with Concern for Future Consequences but not with environmental worldview or pro-environmental attitudes, while generally high GA scores suggest a latent readiness for legacy-oriented responsibility. Study 3 shows no attitudinal difference resulting from ancestry stimuli, indicating that moral activation does not directly translate into attitude shifts.
The research concludes that ancestry framing can activate intergenerational moral reflection but, in its current form, does not increase pro-environmental attitudes. It offers a theoretical and methodological foundation for future work linking good ancestry with sustainable behaviour. ...
The first part establishes the theoretical foundation by linking ancestry, climate change, and consumer behaviour. Drawing on Krznaric’s six ways of thinking long-term together with Value–Belief–Norm theory and attitude formation (Krznaric, 2020; Stern et al., 1999; Blythe, 2013), it positions sufficiency as the behavioural target and identifies moral and temporal responsibility as key motivational levers. The second part translates this framework into practice through the Good Ancestry Stimuli Method and the design of ancestry-framed and non-ancestry video conditions. Abstract notions of deep time and legacy were rendered into concise, emotionally engaging narratives through iterative user testing, ensuring conceptual clarity and theoretical alignment. The third part evaluates the stimuli through three studies.
Study 1 shows that ancestry stimuli significantly strengthen the Good Ancestry mindset, particularly its normative components of long-term responsibility. Study 2 finds that Good Ancestry correlates with Concern for Future Consequences but not with environmental worldview or pro-environmental attitudes, while generally high GA scores suggest a latent readiness for legacy-oriented responsibility. Study 3 shows no attitudinal difference resulting from ancestry stimuli, indicating that moral activation does not directly translate into attitude shifts.
The research concludes that ancestry framing can activate intergenerational moral reflection but, in its current form, does not increase pro-environmental attitudes. It offers a theoretical and methodological foundation for future work linking good ancestry with sustainable behaviour. ...
This research examines whether Good Ancestry—understood as the conscious stewardship of what we value beyond our own lifetime—can motivate sustainable consumer behaviour. It asks whether making needs for legacy and long-term responsibility more salient can strengthen the perceived value of sufficiency over unsustainable consumption. The central question is whether Good Ancestry stimuli can inspire pro-environmental attitudes.
The first part establishes the theoretical foundation by linking ancestry, climate change, and consumer behaviour. Drawing on Krznaric’s six ways of thinking long-term together with Value–Belief–Norm theory and attitude formation (Krznaric, 2020; Stern et al., 1999; Blythe, 2013), it positions sufficiency as the behavioural target and identifies moral and temporal responsibility as key motivational levers. The second part translates this framework into practice through the Good Ancestry Stimuli Method and the design of ancestry-framed and non-ancestry video conditions. Abstract notions of deep time and legacy were rendered into concise, emotionally engaging narratives through iterative user testing, ensuring conceptual clarity and theoretical alignment. The third part evaluates the stimuli through three studies.
Study 1 shows that ancestry stimuli significantly strengthen the Good Ancestry mindset, particularly its normative components of long-term responsibility. Study 2 finds that Good Ancestry correlates with Concern for Future Consequences but not with environmental worldview or pro-environmental attitudes, while generally high GA scores suggest a latent readiness for legacy-oriented responsibility. Study 3 shows no attitudinal difference resulting from ancestry stimuli, indicating that moral activation does not directly translate into attitude shifts.
The research concludes that ancestry framing can activate intergenerational moral reflection but, in its current form, does not increase pro-environmental attitudes. It offers a theoretical and methodological foundation for future work linking good ancestry with sustainable behaviour.
The first part establishes the theoretical foundation by linking ancestry, climate change, and consumer behaviour. Drawing on Krznaric’s six ways of thinking long-term together with Value–Belief–Norm theory and attitude formation (Krznaric, 2020; Stern et al., 1999; Blythe, 2013), it positions sufficiency as the behavioural target and identifies moral and temporal responsibility as key motivational levers. The second part translates this framework into practice through the Good Ancestry Stimuli Method and the design of ancestry-framed and non-ancestry video conditions. Abstract notions of deep time and legacy were rendered into concise, emotionally engaging narratives through iterative user testing, ensuring conceptual clarity and theoretical alignment. The third part evaluates the stimuli through three studies.
Study 1 shows that ancestry stimuli significantly strengthen the Good Ancestry mindset, particularly its normative components of long-term responsibility. Study 2 finds that Good Ancestry correlates with Concern for Future Consequences but not with environmental worldview or pro-environmental attitudes, while generally high GA scores suggest a latent readiness for legacy-oriented responsibility. Study 3 shows no attitudinal difference resulting from ancestry stimuli, indicating that moral activation does not directly translate into attitude shifts.
The research concludes that ancestry framing can activate intergenerational moral reflection but, in its current form, does not increase pro-environmental attitudes. It offers a theoretical and methodological foundation for future work linking good ancestry with sustainable behaviour.