IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v11y2024i1d10.1057_s41599-024-03268-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analyzing single-action bias in dynamic climate change environments: insights from feedback and probability

Author

Listed:
  • Gitanshu Choudhary

    (Indian Institute of Technology Mandi)

  • Varun Dutt

    (Indian Institute of Technology Mandi)

Abstract

“Single action bias” (SAB) characterizes individuals’ inclination to undertake only one preventive measure against climate change, disregarding potentially more effective alternatives. This bias poses a significant obstacle to comprehensive responses to climate change. While dynamic climate simulators have been developed to raise awareness of climate change and encourage pro-environmental behaviors, the prevalence of SAB within these tools remains unexplored. This study introduces the “Single Action Bias-Interactive Climate Change Simulator” (SAB-ICCS) to investigate SAB’s manifestation in dynamic scenarios. Utilizing the framework of the Interactive Climate Change Simulator (ICCS), known for its efficacy in fostering pro-environmental actions, the SAB-ICCS explores how feedback, probability, and their interplay influence SAB prevalence during climate mitigation and adaptation decision-making. A total of 160 participants were randomly assigned to four conditions in the SAB-ICCS, varying feedback presence and climate change probability. Participants engaged in climate mitigation and adaptation actions, simulating the repercussions of climate change through investment choices in climate mitigation and adaptation (consisting of three insurance plans). The study’s dependent variables were the participants’ actions towards climate mitigation and adaptation. Results revealed a substantial prevalence of single action proportion (42%) compared to other action proportions. Furthermore, the total monetary investment was significantly higher when taking optimal actions than when exhibiting SAB. Moreover, a higher probability of climate change resulted in a higher prevalence of SAB (49%) than a lower probability (35%). Interestingly, feedback availability did not significantly impact SAB prevalence. Though both feedback and the probability of climate change influenced how participants exhibited SAB, and the absolute monetary investment was also significantly affected. This research enhances our comprehension of SAB within educational climate simulations, which is vital for informing climate education and policymaking. It offers insights for policymakers and educators to develop interventions addressing SAB, enhancing climate action strategies by understanding probability and feedback influences.

Suggested Citation

  • Gitanshu Choudhary & Varun Dutt, 2024. "Analyzing single-action bias in dynamic climate change environments: insights from feedback and probability," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03268-y
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-024-03268-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-024-03268-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-024-03268-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patt, Anthony & Zeckhauser, Richard, 2000. "Action Bias and Environmental Decisions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 45-72, July.
    2. Kaitlin T. Raimi, 2017. "Negative spillover to policy," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 7(7), pages 473-474, July.
    3. Hasson, Reviva & Löfgren, Åsa & Visser, Martine, 2010. "Climate change in a public goods game: Investment decision in mitigation versus adaptation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 331-338, December.
    4. Anne M. van Valkengoed & Linda Steg, 2019. "Meta-analyses of factors motivating climate change adaptation behaviour," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(2), pages 158-163, February.
    5. Seth H. Werfel, 2017. "Household behaviour crowds out support for climate change policy when sufficient progress is perceived," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 7(7), pages 512-515, July.
    6. John Sterman, 2011. "Communicating climate change risks in a skeptical world," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 108(4), pages 811-826, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tim Krieger, 2011. "9/11's Legacy: How Abstract Fear and Collective Memory Lead to Real Economic Costs," Working Papers CIE 45, Paderborn University, CIE Center for International Economics.
    2. Violeta Mihaela Dincă & Mihail Busu & Zoltan Nagy-Bege, 2022. "Determinants with Impact on Romanian Consumers’ Energy-Saving Habits," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-18, June.
    3. Marina Baroni & Giulia Valdrighi & Andrea Guazzini & Mirko Duradoni, 2025. "Eco-Sensitive Minds: Clustering Readiness to Change and Environmental Sensitivity for Sustainable Engagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-29, June.
    4. Felix J. Formanski & Marcel M. Pein & David D. Loschelder & John-Oliver Engler & Onno Husen & Johann M. Majer, 2022. "Tipping points ahead? How laypeople respond to linear versus nonlinear climate change predictions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 1-20, November.
    5. Kristian S. Nielsen & Kimberly A. Nicholas & Felix Creutzig & Thomas Dietz & Paul C. Stern, 2021. "The role of high-socioeconomic-status people in locking in or rapidly reducing energy-driven greenhouse gas emissions," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 6(11), pages 1011-1016, November.
    6. Marijn H. C. Meijers & Christin Scholz & Ragnheiður “Heather” Torfadóttir & Anke Wonneberger & Marko Markov, 2022. "Learning from the COVID-19 pandemic to combat climate change: comparing drivers of individual action in global crises," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 12(2), pages 272-282, June.
    7. Hilary Byerly Flint & Paul Cada & Patricia A. Champ & Jamie Gomez & Danny Margoles & James R. Meldrum & Hannah Brenkert-Smith, 2022. "You vs. us: framing adaptation behavior in terms of private or social benefits," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 174(1), pages 1-17, September.
    8. Gernot Wagner & Richard Zeckhauser, 2012. "Climate policy: hard problem, soft thinking," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 110(3), pages 507-521, February.
    9. Phu Nguyen-Van & Anne Stenger & Tuyen Tiet, 2021. "Social incentive factors in interventions promoting sustainable behaviors: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-27, December.
    10. David J. Cooper & Matthias Sutter, 2011. "Role selection and team performance," Working Papers 2011-14, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    11. Heidi E Brown & Erika Austhof & Paula M Luz & Daniel B Ferguson, 2023. "Economics, health, or environment: What motivates individual climate action?," PLOS Climate, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(8), pages 1-16, August.
    12. Krieger, Tim & Meierrieks, Daniel, 2014. "How to deal with international terrorism," Discussion Paper Series 2014-03, University of Freiburg, Wilfried Guth Endowed Chair for Constitutional Political Economy and Competition Policy.
    13. Susana Ferreira, 2024. "Extreme Weather Events and Climate Change: Economic Impacts and Adaptation Policies," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 16(1), pages 207-231, October.
    14. Alfred Olfert & Gérard Hutter, 2025. "Strategic Communication and Evaluation to Improve the Capacities of Local Administration for Climate Change Adaptation: A Case Study on Dresden, Germany," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 61-79, March.
    15. O'Dell, Dallas & Contu, Davide & Shreedhar, Ganga, 2025. "Public support for degrowth policies and sufficiency behaviours in the United States: a discrete choice experiment," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 126084, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Marina Baroni & Giulia Valdrighi & Andrea Guazzini & Mirko Duradoni, 2025. "“More than a Feeling”: How Eco-Anxiety Shapes Pro-Environmental Behaviors and the Role of Readiness to Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-34, July.
    17. Radtke, Jörg, 2025. "E-participation in energy transitions: What does it mean? Chances and challenges within Germany's Energiewende," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    18. Doruk İriş & Jungmin Lee & Alessandro Tavoni, 2015. "Delegation and public pressure in a threshold public goods game: theory and experimental evidence," GRI Working Papers 186, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    19. Gregor Schwerhoff, 2013. "Leadership and International Climate Cooperation," Working Papers 2013.97, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    20. Farman Ullah & Martina Valente & Ives Hubloue & Muhammad Sannan Akbar & Luca Ragazzoni & Francesco Barone-Adesi, 2024. "Determinants of adaptive behaviors during heatwaves in Pakistan: a study based on personal heatwave experiences and hypothetical scenarios," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 29(5), pages 1-19, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03268-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.