The impact of mortality salience on environmental concerns and diet intentions: the moderating role of political orientation and RWA

Although climate change poses a pressing threat, skepticism persists. Previous research aims to raise awareness and foster\r\npro-environmental behaviors, but the effectiveness of threatening messages remains uncertain. It is crucial to understand\r\nhow different subgroups react in relation to the nature of these threats. In this study, the impact of COVID-19 mortal-\r\nity salience on climate change attitudes and behaviors was examined, considering political orientation and Right-Wing\r\nAuthoritarianism (RWA) as moderators. Participants (N\r\n=\r\n187, NFemale = 134, NMale = 52, NOther = 1; Mage\r\n= 28.06, SDage\r\n= 9.73) after being randomly assigned to personal threat, collective threat, or control conditions, reported their concern\r\nfor climate change and their intention to engage in sustainable behaviors (i.e., consume less high-polluting food, consume\r\nmore vegetables than meat and engage in a sustainable diet). In contrast with previous literature, findings revealed that\r\nconservatives and individuals with higher RWA levels showed increased concern for climate change after being exposed\r\nto both personal and collective mortality threats, while liberals and low-RWA individuals always exhibited high concern\r\nfor climate change and were not influenced by mortality salience. However, there were no notable effects on intentions\r\nto adopt an eco-sustainable dietary behavior. These findings highlight the role of mortality salience in shaping right-wing\r\nparticipants’ attitudes, but not behaviors, toward climate change. The discrepancy between pro-environmental attitudes\r\nand behaviors underscores the attitude-behavior gap, with concerns about the environment not necessarily translating into\r\nconcrete actions.