Using effective psychological techniques to subvert a US sociopolitical context

Abstract

Chater & Loewenstein argue for a shift in focus from individual- to structural-level approaches to societal ills. This is valid and important but overlooks the barriers inherent in the current US partisan context. Psychology can be applied to help people of mixed allyship join together, to effectively and quickly force institutions and corporations to accept structural change.

Chater & Loewenstein argue that the most efficient way to address pernicious problems like climate change is through structural and policy solutions over individual-level behavior change. Institutions and corporations often emphasize the role of the individual to avert responsibility for their externalities and maximize profits. For example, in 1953 beverage manufacturers created the first “greenwashing” campaign, “Keep America Beautiful,” to shift responsibility for litter and pollution from single-use items onto consumers, while opposing legislation aimed at limiting such packaging (Corkery, 2019).

Policies are indeed efficient and effective, particularly when accompanied by mechanisms for compliance. However, top-down solutions are difficult to enact in strongly partisan nations like the United States, where corporations are people – people who can fund elections. For example, corporations donated seven times more to Republican than Democratic candidates in the 10 years following Citizens United ($282 versus $38 million; Lund & Strine, 2022), often to avoid regulations that protect human and environmental health.

Psychology as a field clearly favors individual-level solutions. There are over 17,000 articles in Google Scholar from the past 20 years that mention increasing individual recycling, many of which point to structural barriers that obscure how people are supposed to recycle (De Young, 1990; Roy, Berry, & Dempster, 2022). We can, however, employ psychology and its individual-level tactics to force institutions and corporations to make hard choices, for good. This is particularly true for corporations that are virtually agnostic as to their products, as long as they are lucrative. When people vote with their wallets, corporations follow. Public outrage, cancel culture, whistleblowing, and consumer trends abound in the United States and exemplify how quickly things can change when people demand it, particularly in a modern, media-rich environment.

Fast and large changes can also be enacted by passionate and informed individuals who come armed with compelling data and suggestions for policy (Amel, Manning, Scott, & Koger, 2017). For example, detailed and scientific descriptions of toxic pollutants in Rachel Carson's Silent Spring inspired many in the 1960s to fight for environmental protection; she is credited with the formation of the Environmental Protection Agency (Lewis, 1985). Ralph Nader published Unsafe at Any Speed in 1965, which led to congressional hearings, followed by automobile safety laws and the creation of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (Quazi, 1998). Such leaders are, in part, effective because of the collective action they inspire in larger grassroots movements (Amel et al., 2017).

Collective action is most effective when it becomes salient to the average person, through widespread media attention about well-known (and left leaning) companies, with accessible forms of participation (Banerjee, 2020; Bartley & Child, 2011; King & Soule, 2007; Leizerov, 2000; McDonnell, King, & Soule, 2015). For example, in 1999 Nike suffered one of the first outcries over sweatshop labor: protests at over 40 universities moved Nike to create a code of conduct for working conditions and audit compliance (McDonnell et al., 2015). Subsequently, a student organization posted information online, protested on campuses, and engaged administrators causing multiple strike leaders to be reinstated at Nike, which also had to disclose the location of factories making university apparel (Carty, 2002). In 1999, Intel was pressured by privacy advocates to remove personal serial numbers (PSNs) from their processor through internet activism, which included pre-written email signatures and letters to CEOs (Leizerov, 2000). More recently, Target was pressured by the LGBTQ+ community to cease campaign finance contributions to antigay candidates through online videos and a Facebook boycotting group (Friedman, 2010), with 55,000 members.

Costly action is often inspired by empathy for those in distress, including strangers, other species, and the natural environment (Bickel & Preston, 2023; Preston & de Waal, 2002; Preston & Gelman, 2020). For example, a confederate flag flew at the South Carolina statehouse for 77 years through decades of protest but was quickly removed after a large protest regarding the killing of nine Black churchgoers (Holpuch, 2015). In 2015, a marine biology PhD student Christine Figgener posted a video depicting the removal of a plastic straw from a sea turtle's nose, which has been viewed 200 million times. The video struck a chord with viewers who could feel the turtle's pain as they forcibly pulled the embedded straw out with pliers for minutes while the turtle bled and cried out. Subsequently, Seattle (and Starbucks) eliminated plastic straws, which is minor on the scale of ocean plastic but still amounts to a billion straws per year at Starbucks alone (Rosenbaum, 2018). In both cases, a situation that brewed for decades finally came to a head when people's empathic response was elicited by the suffering of salient others.

Empathy for vulnerable others is one of the most powerful motivators of costly action (Bickel & Preston, 2023). Altruism is often inspired by helpless or vulnerable others who need immediate aid, when observers predict a successful response; this is because of our inheritance as a species that protects slowly developing offspring for an extended period (Preston, 2013, 2022). Positive states also inspire action in social, group-living species like humans, including social affiliation, belonging, beauty, and awe (Hauser, Preston, & Stansfield, 2014; Preston et al., 2021; Shiota, Papies, Preston, & Sauter, 2021). These affective biases are adaptive because they compel us to help those closest to us, in situations that matter, while limiting risk. Conversely, pernicious situations like climate change fail to inspire action specifically because they vastly exceed the human scale.

We recognize the authors' argument that system-level change is necessary to address the problems that society faces. We hope to add to the conversation about how such change can be achieved, even in our current political climate. Psychology can be applied to help people compel institutions and corporations to enact systemic change. Multisensory imagery and narratives can induce elevating and prosocial states, which are most effective alongside tactics that lower the bar for participation, nudge desired responses, and excite people to join the fight. Solutions work best, like people, together.