Ask any question about EPFL courses, lectures, exercises, research, news, etc. or try the example questions below.
DISCLAIMER: The Graph Chatbot is not programmed to provide explicit or categorical answers to your questions. Rather, it transforms your questions into API requests that are distributed across the various IT services officially administered by EPFL. Its purpose is solely to collect and recommend relevant references to content that you can explore to help you answer your questions.
This article examines how men and women respond to social change proposed by radical pro-environmental sources of influence. Recent literature reports recurring lower pro-environmentalism in men, potentially due to the systemic changes it implies. Moreover, radical pro-environmental social change is perceived as a threat, more so by men than women. Theories describing opposition to such change predict that individuals outright oppose threatening stimuli to resist radical change. Therefore, in responding to radical pro-environmental policies proposed by a radical source, we hypothesise that men are more likely than women to oppose these policies to cope with perceived threat. Study 1 ( N = 235) tested whether men's higher opposition to such policies is associated with their heightened threat perception; Study 2 ( N = 536) extended this by examining whether men's lower pro-environmental attitudes and intentions are associated to anticipating radical pro-environmental change as a threat. Results from both studies show that the gender gap in both specific and general operationalisations of pro-environmental attitudes is associated with men’s (rather than women’s) higher perception of radical pro-environmental social change as a threat. The implications of considering threat as a cog in psychosocial underpinnings of pro-environmental gender differences are discussed considering status quo maintenance theories.