September 5, 2010
It’s Not Green That Makes People Mean, It’s Level 2
Last month, a story came out that sparked great interest and debate, particularly among advocates and skeptics of “green” consumerism. It concerned a University of Toronto research study that posed the question, “Do Green Products Make Us Better People?” The study’s controversial answer was no, they do not make us better. In fact, the researchers claimed that “people act less altruistically and are more likely to cheat and steal after purchasing green products as opposed to conventional products.”
The media and blogosphere response broke down along the usual fault lines. Environmental skeptics had a field day with the study (“Greenies Are Meanies”). Environmental groups and websites dismissed it as “pop psychology,” and insisted that the artificial circumstances of the study (see box) had no relevance to the behavior of green consumers in the real world.
However, as the authors made clear, the real focus of the study was not the virtues or vices of eco-minded shoppers. It was a much broader psychological phenomenon called licensing. This occurs when 1) you engage in an altruistic act, 2) the act enhances your moral self-esteem, and 3) your enhanced self-esteem makes subsequent moral infractions seem inconsequential.
It was ever so nice of me to buy 10 boxes of Girl Scout cookies I didn’t want. At least I got some of my money back when the cashier at Starbucks gave me too much change.
Study Overview“Do Green Products Make Us Better People?” was coauthored by Nina Mazar and Chen-Bo Zhong of the University of Toronto. It is scheduled for publication in Psychological Science. In the study, 156 students were randomly assigned to shop at an online store that sold mostly green products or one that sold mostly conventional products. They were also told that 1 in 25 participants would be allowed to keep what they purchased in the experiment.After the purchasing exercise, they were given additional activities to complete. In those follow-up activities, the participants who had purchased green products were …Less generous. In a money-sharing game, they offered their partners an average of $1.76 out of $6, while participants who bought conventional products offered an average of $2.18.More prone to cheat. In a game where one of two answers paid five cents and the other answer paid nothing, they gave the obviously wrong but rewarding answer 11.4% of the time on average, versus an average of 2.5% in the conventional product group.More prone to steal. Participants were allowed to pay themselves the money owed them from the game by taking cash from an envelope. Participants who had earlier purchased green products stole an average of $0.48 extra from the envelope (beyond what they cheated to obtain), versus an extra $0.08 taken by participants in the conventional product group.The authors concluded that “purchasing green products may produce the counterintuitive effect of licensing asocial and unethical behaviors by establishing moral credentials.” The study had some other subcomponents related to a phenomenon called “priming,” which are not mentioned here for reasons of space. The full study can be found at this link. |
Licensing has been demonstrated by earlier research looking at non-green behaviors. The authors point to two studies, which showed that “gender-egalitarian acts licensed gender-discriminatory behaviors” and that “reminders of humanitarian traits reduced charitable donations.” The green products used in the University of Toronto study were simply a tool to coax licensing behavior into the open.
Most observers of human nature don't need a study to persuade them this outlook is real. We are never more prone to pardon our own misdeeds than when our halo is freshly polished.
The really interesting question is, What makes people feel that good behavior in one arena licenses bad behavior in others? I believe the answer lies in the Four Levels, and the different perspective that Level 2 people and Level 3 people bring to virtue and ethics.
Internal Desire Vs. External Constraints
A Level 2 dominant person reserves his enthusiasm for Level 2 satisfactions. Consciously or not, he is always asking, “What’s in it for me?” If the answer is “not much,” he turns his interest to better options. He is not averse to Level 3 contributions altogether, but he views them more as duties than as opportunities for self-fulfillment.
When virtue becomes a duty imposed from without and not a desire that flows from within, it’s easy to look at virtue the way an accountant looks at a bank statement. Have I shown enough virtue of late to maintain an overall positive balance in my account? Have I made sufficient deposits to entitle myself to a small withdrawal or two?
In Healing the Culture, Fr. Robert Spitzer discussed these differing viewpoints as they pertained to moral norms – don’t lie, don’t cheat, don’t steal, don’t harm, don’t oppress.
People living on the third level [of happiness] are interiorly motivated to pursue the five norms for the sake of love, whereas people living on the first two levels are exteriorly motivated to hold these values for the sake of order. Notice how different these two perspectives feel. People living in Level 1 and 2 have to pursue them, whereas people living in Levels 3 and 4 want to pursue them. The first group could view the norms as constraining, while the second group could well view them as liberating.
These distinctions have much to do with when and how often you feel the temptation to violate norms.
One might think that it doesn’t really matter what one’s motives are for living according to the norms (that is, because one loves the norm or because one fears the penalty). So long as the norm is carried out, the interior reason for doing so seems irrelevant. But this is surely not the case. For if one reacts only to an external threat or constraint, what would happen if that constraint were not evident? What would happen if the threat were not severe? Wouldn’t one be inclined to “take a chance”? … When Level 3 people act contrary to the norms of right conduct, they feel self-alienated. People living in Levels 1 and 2, however, may not experience such feelings of alienation.
In fact, if they have recently labored to earn some moral brownie points, they might feel all but entitled to give their conscience a well-deserved rest.
John Keenan, Editor
Return to the Home
Last changed: Apr 21 2010 at 1:08 PM