Reading Water and Minds 15

in the river bottoms' sandy, wind-blown soils. Year after year the seedlings
died in those Dust-Bowl years, but the Leopold family kept replanting. Finally,
some pines survived and grew, but here and there some were shaded by
birches. One autumn day, a dozen years after planting the first pines, Leopold
2
stepped outside his shack, ax in hand, to tend his pines. He began puzzling
about his behavior, trying to read his own mind. Why cut birch to save pine?
Reading Water and Minds In A Sand County Almanac, he describes his attitude, thinking-as most of us
do-that his attitude causes his behavior. He wrote:

IN MY DEPARTMENT at the University ofWisconsin-Madison, we used to I find it disconcerting to analyze, ex post facto, the reasons behind my
organize a canoe trip every spring for our environmental graduate students. own axe in hand decisions. I find, first of all, that not all trees are cre-
Rich, who knew how to read water, was paired with Jordan, who-like most ated free and equal. Where a white pine and a red birch are crowding
students-had little experience in a canoe. As they headed into a small rapids, each other, I have an a priori bias; UHways cut the birch to favor the
Rich shouted, "Watch out for that rock dead ahead." A sarcastic, "Rich, I see pine. Whyn
it," came back. Well, first of all, Itplanted the pine with my shovel, whereas the
Soon after, CRUNCH! And soon after that, a sheepish, "Oh, that rock." birch crawled in under the fence and planted itself. MyiJtasds thus to
Jordan thought Rich was warning him about the obvious midriver boulder 50 some extent paternal .... 2
yards downstream. Rich, however, was shouting about the rock just below the
surface a canoe-length ahead. You could not see this dangerous rock. You had At the ~ase of Leopold's attitule-what he terms a "biaS,::-we locate a \fA
to infer it from a smooth boil as water slid over it. You had to read the water. value. Values have inspired considerable study by social psychologists. Milton
Much like spotting underwater rocks from their observable traces, social Rokeach identified 36 basic values held worldwide. 3 The first value Leopold
psychologists pinpoint attitudes by reading minds. Unlike psychics, who read mentions is paternalism. What Leopold called "a paternal bias," Rokeach
minds through magic, we follow careful scientific procedures. We ask people would label "family security," or tb"king care of one's family, broadly defined.
to tell us what they think and how they feel. We read their minds by putting Leopold takes some paternal responsibility for the pine because he planted
them in experimental situations and measuring their reactions. Even so, this and cared for it. Values are the basis for many attitudes and play a major role
sort of mind reading is tough. People often don't quite know what they think in discussing pro-environmental behavior, as they should. Leopold was about
or how they feel. Sometimes they struggle telling us, and sometimes we to do something that affects the environment, cutting the birch, so it is fitting
struggle figuring out what should be obvious. That's because attitudes are in- he told us how this fit his values. We must realize that fM" Leopold-like the
visible. They must be inferred like that submerged rock rather than directly rest of us-paternalism might be the source of his attitudes toward many
th~gs, from his five children to his scientific articles. We know it's at the base
observed. It takes time, systematic data collection, a body of theoretical princi-
ples, and a good bit of statistical analysis to be a decent mind reader. of his attitude toward pine trees because he tells us so. The ~portant differ-
ence between an attitude and a value is that the value has no particular object,
whereas the attitude does. f1ttitudes always have objtcts, something the atti-
"I Am in Love with Pines" tude is about, and the object is important. In Leopold's case, the object is pine
trees, or perhaps just the particular white pine he is admiring.
As a start in science-assisted mind-reading, let's ask Aldo Leopold to tell us
Sitting on top of the value is a component of attitude that social psycholol:)C::
about his attitude. 1 In the 1930s Leopold bought a worn-out piece ofland in
gists call b~liefs~ Beliefs also tie to the objedt. Lfiopold says he planted tfe pine,
the Wisconsin River bottoms, converted an old chicken coop for weekend
a~d the birch planted itself. These are specific beliefs. We call them the qogni-
visits (he called it "the shack"), and started practicing restoration ecology. Leo-
#ve component of attitudes. O~e person might love pines and another person
pold and his family planted white pines, about the only trees that would grow
might hate them. But both can believe 'Leopold planted the pineajand the
16 NAVIGATING ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDES Reading Water and Minds 17

birches planted themselves. The person who hates pines might think Leopold This man does not just think trees are important. He loves all of them, but
planted way too many, and the person who loves them might think he planted even more, he is in love with pines. This is different than saying, "I like pine
~ay too few, but they can both agree he planted them. These cognitions are trees." He is revealing a deep emotion tied to his attitude toward pines. In fact,
sometimes called knowledge, but they are not knowledge in the sense we usu- less than sflc months af:l:~J-}eopold wrote this essay, he died fighting a fire that
ally think of knowledge. A, belief need not be correct. It can be inconsistent threatened these very pines.
with scientific knowledg~ or the knowledge of an authority, but if people So now we have beliefs, evaluative beliefs, affect, values, and vertical struc-
believe it, then it is true for them. What makes it a belief is the absence of ture. However, there is more. Leopold runs down a set of beliefs and pegs the
emotion. values underlying them. Altitudes are seldom based on single beliefs or single
When you tie the belief to a valutt, you get a belief that says or implies valuesr He wrote:
something is better than somethipg else. 4 This is called an tvaluative belitf
Leopold, sparing in his use of words, does not outline the structure of his The birch is an abundant tree in my township and becoming more so,
values, beliefs, and attitude as I try to do here, but his prose implies the struc- whereas pine is scarce and becoming scarcer; perhaps my bias is for
ture. The attitude sits on top of a vaJ.te. two beliefs, and an evaluative belief the underdo&-
that trees planted by themselve~ (or by natural processes) are better than tr~es The plbe will live for a century, the birch for half that; do I fear that
planted by humans. (~ee Figure 2.1.) Daryl Bern, a well-known social psychol- my signature will fade?/ My n'ighbors have planted no pines but all
ogist, labeled this veqical stn~-CtUre. 5 Leopold's vertical structure in this ex- have many birc.Qes; am JWtobbish abou~ng a woodlot of distinc-
ample is consistent: value, belief, evaluative belief, and attitude, all logically tion?, The pine stays green all winter, the 'birch punches the clockfin
following from one another. October; do I favor the tree that, like myself, braves the winter wind?
The ~al driving force of attitudes is emoti4n, or as social psychologists call The pine will shelter a groqse but the birch will feed him; do I consider
it, qffect. This is the .~rrational part-the part not subject to reason-and the bed more important than board?, The pine will ultimately bring ten
part that makes attitudes difficult for those trying to deal with them. Affect is dollars a thousaqd, the birch two dollars; J.ave I an eye on the bank? 7
what we see at public meetings over wolf restoration or when people discover
their house sits on a toxic-waste site. This side of attitudes sends managers Leopold believes several things: (a) "the birch crawled in under the fence
scurrying to social psychologists saying, "We seem to have a problem with and planted itself'; (b) "birch is an abundant tree in my township"; (c) "the
attitudes." Affect or emotion engages the body as well as the mind. When you pine will live a century, the birch half that"; and several others. None of these
meet someone or something you hate, love, or fear, your heart pounds, your beliefs is emotional. They <Jll are beliefs flat pine lovers and pine haters 1=ould
stomach ties itself in knots, your face gets red, and a clammy sweat covers share..Bach belief, however, becomes evaluative when tied to value:51• At least
your body. Attitudes differ from knowledge because they are driven by the flve more Rokeach values are presenl'in Leopold's cognitive-affect framework:
love-hate, good-bad aspect of emotion. The stfmmary statement of Leopold's equality (underdog bias:), social recognition (woodlot of distinctiop), il com-
attitude toward pines is full of affecti"The only conclusion I have ever rea<;hed fo~ble life (eye on the bank), a sense of accomplishment (fear fading signa-
is that I love all trees, but I am in love with pines." 6 ture), and courage (braves the winter win,t).
LeOpold's belief system is based on more than one set of beliefs •nd more
'
than one value. Social psychologists call this hdrizontal structurf. Leopold's at-
'~l
Attitude l am in love with pines. titude, ':I am in love with pines," is supported by seven separate belief syst,ms,
Evaluative Trees planted oneself are
Vertical e~·,based on an articulated value (see Figure 2.21). Think of the <ttltude being
Belief better.
I planted The birch Structure lilfe a lintel'~ the part atop a door held up by the door sill, with beliefs being
Beliefs the pine planted itself. tl\bse supports. Each belief system holds up the attitude, "I am in love with
myself.
Family security pines." Ifyou were to try changing Leopold's attitule, perhaps you could con-
Value
(paternalism) vince him birch is worth more than pine. Maybe the market changed. Would
FIGURE 2.1 Vertical Structure Diagram of Leopold's Attitude toward Pines he change his attitude toward pines? Not likely, because the attitude is held up
 Reading Water and Minds 19

or bolstered by many other belief structures. We can say Leopold's attitude has
" . t. . ..s; ..........ti
"d
~ g_ ~ .~ ~
'-<
~ ~
~ .E d
~
5
.so..s=
§
·sc::
Ec=
~ .g a high degree of horizontal structure. This diagram shows the cognitive parts
~;;~.Ex
"'- iS~ "' iS
a~
:t K. ~
. 2! tl ~ '<h :1
<'II ('II
.g, of the attitude, but the affective dimension is less apparent. It lies in evaluative
< ~ .!<) ~ "'.., ~ ;;- E "
~1~ .!!§~rl~'Sl.§
[ ~ ~ .s ._, beliefs and values themselves. How long a pine lives is a matter of fact, but
~ ~~
--~ t:l u ·~ .~.:0 ":: G'o 8 :? ~----'"'! people fight over values that ground an attitude.
.~ ~ ~ !l "B a ~ :a g ·~~ ~ ·- ~
~ .B .,g ] _g ·3 -B 1i "" ;§" ~ ~ :sa ;:;. ~..,
~ ::>
There is more to it than that. Lqppold's analysis of his own attitude shows
;e E .~ ~ ;
..5~~ -£
i ~ -§
.:E .Sc8~ L~ ~other feature: centrality# Not all the belief structures underlying his attitude (.,.1
<
art eq~. Some are more important to him or are more central to his attitude
.., 0
~~tt:""'~
u =a ·s: . . . ..!: 0 ::1 B bc;kause they are linked to his self-concept or identity. Leopold wonders which
B~ ~
.s !l e ·~ Jj "" ~ " 'ii ~
c

-5~~ "-=a.~ i?f._-g beliefs are most important. After reflecting, he observes:
·~
Bv v
g~ I -------~ g~ ·~
""' e :E t3 ,c .5 ti u !:
e-t e .su ::au ae: c~ .s""' ! 411 of these possible reasons for my bias seem to carry some weight,
~ ~ 0.. ~~~6b~
but none of them carries very much.!
-5 ~ So I try again, and here perhaps is something; under this gjne will
JJJ ultimately grow a trailing arbutfis, an Indian pipe, a pyrola, or a twin
flower, whereas under the birch a bottle gentiin is about the best to be
hoped for. In this pine a pileated woodpecket will ultimately chisel out
~ a nest; in the birch a hairy will have to suffice. In this pine the wind will
~ .....
c;~1i
~ E -5 g ~
=-9
"
~ sing for me in April at which time the birch is only rattling naked twigs.
1'z-=~ :.6 :~ .:a·~ These possible reasons for my bias carry weight, but why? n•es the
Vl
']
0
pine stimulate my imagination and my hopes more deeply than the
_g g .,;
ib""
·u ~ .s
~'0
-;; 0
]'§
·! ~J
:t
birth does? If so, is the difference in the trees, or in me? 8

z-= "'- ~
IfLeopold and I were sitting around the fireplace at his shack as he mused,
"E I might respond: "They carry weight, Professor, because they tie to two impor-
~~. I,_,~ ...~
1:: •
rJ ~ tallt values: imagination and a world ofbeautyfrhese values are more impor-
~~ 1-5 ~ _§~
Jl~ 1L~~
E 4.1
~
8 :E" ] tant to you than the other values; '#bur whole life has been one of trying to be
o-: 1i ~ '5,
t: ~
~ §
;;;;
~ "'
.
;:;. < 0
~~
·- ~ ctose to nature, to explore and innovate, and see things in new ways ..The
.:a;::
~ 0
.E & ~ ~
difference is not in the trees; if is, sir, in yolt. But there is more. You are a
"'- 1l
'a professional forester whose life has been tied to trees and reforestation. What
_e.~
·~ ~ I ~ ~ tree fits this better than the white pine? Iiis fundamental to your identity as a
" "
--;~~
~t ~"'
-g"'
I;;:~~!
c "' ·-
"'
'":I
forester, professor, and landowner. tour attitude about white pines is most
"'~
jil~
.:a
-B-g &t
>.tl.., 1 central to who you are." ;
~~ ~~ 1 ! For most of us, our attitude toward pines is less central, has less affect, and
0 is less well developed. Our attitude toward pines has limited horizontal struc-
~ g ~;:;.~ ~ turEt and I long, spindly, vertical structure, at best. We neither love nor hate
" '] lL.., '§ ~
-a~
::> "
~til
IF l: 11
:0 -a,.:: ~1 t'l
t'l
pines, but rather we like them a little or are mostly indifferent.
~11
~ 3 --! ..s .g_u
] u 1g
~~
101
~
~
Ld>pold's description ofhis attitude toward pines is a textbook case because
~ \!) of its consistency and clarity with respect to attitude theory. It would be nice if
.....
~ all attitudes came so nicely packaged. To gain more perspective on real-world
 20 N A VI GAT I N G EN VI R 0 N M ENTAL AT TIT U D E S Reading Water and Minds 21

attitudes, let's look at some less iconic individuals: three students in my grad- When scientists say they want to "educate the public," they usually mean they (5-c
uate seminar. want the general public to know more about their own favorite attitude object, t-1f
be it phytoplankton, the plumb curculio, or phosphorus in the water column.
This fdeus on knowledge misses the key driver of attitufe, which dominated
Snout Beetles and Singing the Blues the next two presentations.
I asked my students to introduce themselves by giving a five-minute presenta- l:Joe:was an environmental historian who usually wore a coat and tie to
tion on any topic important to them. The idea was to go beyond the usual class. Most of us pegged him as a guy who never left the library. We were
name, rank, and department, and set the stage for challenging discussions wrong. Joe also described an attitude object that was new to us, but he filled
throughout the semester. The students could not keep their stories to five his presentation with emotion. You might know ofKoko Taylor if you listen to
minutes, and so these "introductions" took nearly two hours. At first I worried blue&. I had not. Just as the plumb curculio was news to me, so was Koko, but
about the loss of instructional time, but soon I realized I could have scarcely Koko was no plumb curculio. She was Queen of the Bllles. Not only did Joe
found a better way to demonstrate the attitude concept. know Koko's every recording and concert venue, qe radiated such joy and ex-
One student, ltrargard-a slender young woman with wire-rimmed citement in her work that we could almost hear her raspy voice belting out
glasses-s,poke about the plumb curculio (Conotrachelus nenuphar), a snout songs. Beneath that quiet, collected exterior, Jpe was a blues junkie. His enthu-
beetle. What do you know about the plumb curculio? If you are like the rest of siasm was infectious. I wouldn't have been surprised if some of his class-
us in the seminar, nothing. Nevertheless, tHe plumb curculio was an excep- mates went out and bought Koko Taylor music after class.
tionally well-developed attitude object for Marg~ret. SHe had studied snout Compared to Margaret's pitch about the plumb curculio, J~e delivered
beetles and had written a scientific paper about them. The plumb curculio equal measures oflove, awe, and information. Although we didn't learn much
leaves marks on apples. The marks don't really hurt the apples, but because about Koko's life, w~ embraced her and her music. Joe's beliefs about Koko
they make apples unattractive, apple-growers use poisons to kill the bugs. were mostly evaluative, whereas tvtargaret's beliefs about the plumb curculio
Margaret had worked several years trying to reduce poison applications, and were mostly emotion-free fact$
she thought we should put up with some marked-up but edible apples rather
than kill the plumb curculio.
Cleaning Up Oil: The Exxon Valdez
Margaret's attitude could be classified as "environmental"i because the
plumb curculio is wildlife, albeit of the small kind, and was associated with The last student to talk was I!Iowcird, a tall guy from Alaska who was among
poison in the environment. Her attitude was well developed, based on many the thousands of workers Exxon employed to clean up a huge oil spill after one
beliefs, and tied to her identity and values. What about the rest of us? Marga- ofits tankers, the E¥:1«>n Valtft:z, ran aground on Bligh Reef in Prince William
ret's talk could be viewed as an attempt to use information to create an attitude Sound in March 1~89. This oil spill was the worst in U.S. history until it was
toward a new attitude object. Site gave all sorts of facti about the plumb cur- eclipsed by the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico 21 years later. The class hung
culio, including its size, shape, and dispersion, and a little about what it does. on Howard's every word. This was a key environmental disasftr only a few
}.'(( Despite all this new information, a day later I doubt anyone could remember years before, and Howard had been there. However, from a teacher's point of
~\)ei> the name, "plumb curculio," let alone the details Margaret shared. view, the kindest thing to say was that his presentation rambled. What was the
't>--.,~0_, Because it was a new attitude object, our attitudes toward the plumb cur- attitude object? Exxon? The ship? The cleanup? Or, according to Howard, the
~...<-. culio were not stable. Our attitudes were so poorly developed they could easily lack thereof? Joe and Margaret gave us nice, clear, textbook attitude objects.
~'I be changed by bits of information. However, that wasn't going to happen Howard, tJ.owever, delivered a real be*t, comprised of altnost pure emotjon,
because we did not care about the little critter nor would we likely seek, find, b~ and powe,tful, rampaging through his mind. Listeners could not detect
or analyze information about this attitude object. any organization to Howard's system of values and beliefs (assuming they
l see many environmental attitudes like Margare\'s, in which attitude were organized enough to be called a system) underlying whatever attitude he
objects are sources of well-developed belief systems for small, specialized was trying to share. Mahy ofhis beliefs were so negalive and improbable~they
groups. People who have such attitudes are often scientists or managers. s~emed outrageou~. even for a pro-environmental audiente. Negative affect
22 NAVIGATING ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDES Reading Water and Minds 23

overwhelmed Howard's attitude. To say Howard disliked Exxon was like man: one by car, two by gunshot, and one by a trapper. 11 Fifteen years later,
saying Abel troubled Cain. with wolves forcing the issue by migrating into Michigan, wildlife managers
It was clear Howard's attitude toward Exxon would never change. When- decided they must learn something about public attitudes if this natural colo-
ever a classmate said anything that could be construed as good about Exxon, nization were to succeed.
Howard told more stories of damage or ineptitude. Furthermore, he argued The ~fie attitude object in the Michigan study was not wolves, but
from authority-he had direct experience. From his perspective, no one could reestablishing wolves in the Upper Peninsttla. Our survey showed 57% of
have information he did not possess, so he could ignore whatever anyone said the public supported restoration, 9% opposed it, and 34% were neutral. The
to the contrary. Even if one wished to try changing Howard's attitudes, one vtst majority believed that wolves (a) "have a right to exist,"/(b) "are impor-
could never figure out his key beliefs. His attitude was so emotionally driven tant members of the ecological community," 'and (c) should be preserved "so
that causality went backwar~l. Rather than being built up by beliefs stacked on that future generations can enjoy them." If we had been running the wolffor
values, 1-loward's immense hatred for Exxon allowed him to fit belilfs, even governor, those would be great numbers. Similar surveys produced similar
behaviors, to his attjtude. This overwhelmingly emotional characteristic of results. In Colorado, in 1996, €i6% of the population said they would vote
some attitudes makes them resistant to change, even scary. yes on a referendum to restore wolves. 12 In Idaho, 72% of residents favored
reintroducing wolves, as did 52% of Montana residents, and 44% of Wyo-
ming residents. 13 Surveys in Minnesota and Wisconsin also showed strong
Lessons from Wolves
support for wolves. 14 My students and I analyzed all studies between 1972
In ~q. Yale psychologist ~ephen Kellert and I conducted a survey about and 2ooo, and found an average of Go% of respondents supported wolf
public attitudes toward wplfrestoration in Michigan's Upper Peninsul~. 9 After restoration. 15
answering 150 questions about wolves, 35% of respondents wrote comments Kellert and I included knowledge questions to measure the cognitive com-
at the end of the questionnaire. One man even wrote a long letter in Polish. I ponent of attitudes. How big is a wolf pack? Vfe asked: "True or False-Wolf
wasn't surprised. A proposal to reintroduce wolves into Yellowstone National packs generally average around 50 wolves~f Of the respondents, 44% said they
Park spawned more than 8,500 letters from the public. 10 Biologists some- didn't know, 4% said, "True." Imagine packs of 50 ravenous wolves roaming
times call wolves "charismatic megafauna," incorporating a sociological di- the Upper Peninsu$. No wonder my correspondent was worried about kids
mension into a biological classification because mllny people have ~trong waiting for school bu~s. In actuality, wolf packs average 4-6 wolves. We also
emotions-positive and negative-about wolves. These deep feelings help included open-ended questions like, "How many wolves do you think ar~ in
separate "wolf' from millions of other attitude obj~ts. Wolves generate not Michigan's Upper Peninsula~" The average response by people in the Lower
only passionate commentary, but also scientific studies. One oflongest-lasting Peninsula (Michigan's mainland, south of the U.P.) was more than Soo
wildlife population studies (running over a half a century) in the world is on wolves. Upper Peninsula folks estimated about 8o woM$. The best scientific
wolves, not the dull, blunt-nosed leopard lizard or the now well-known (at estimate at the time? No more than 20.
least to this book's readers) plumb curculio. When the public gets such questions "wrong," natural scientists tend to
After getting the Polish gentleman's letter translated, we read terrible dismiss their attitudes.iWhy, they wonder, should we bother asking the public
stories about wolves based on his experience in Russian POW camps. He had its opinions about wolf restoration when its judgments are based on erro-
heard of wolves eating children, and he was afraid if wolves were introduced neous beliefs? Scientists must realize members of the public do not think they
into Michigan, children would be attacked while waiting for school buses. His are wrong,lmy more than scientists think their data are wrot).g. It's a mistake
feelings were deep and strong. to neglect "wrong" beliefs even if they differ from today's best scientific esti-
The Upper Peninsula, Michigan's northernmost region, features vast for- mates. To understand why people support or oppose wolf restoration, you
ests and few people, about the same population density as Idaho, and less must know their beliefs about wolves. If someone thought a thousand wolves
than half the density of Finland. This seemed an ideal place to restore wolves, were running around in so-wolf packs, and so,ooo wolves lived nearby in
so in Spring 1974, David Mech, a leading wolf scientist, released four wolves Minnesota, we might better understand why people were not big fans of re-
into the Upper Peninsula. By November, all four were dead at the hands of storing wolves in Michigan.
24 NAVIGATING ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDES
Reading Water and Minds 25
Three Principles: Consistency, Direct Experience, Perhaps they thought wolves would attack only people the supporters didn't
and Identity like, not them. Attitudes simply have too many parts for them all to be consis-
tent. However, we can say the more negative beliefs you hold about wolves, the
To read water in rapids, rather than just staring at waves and trembling at the lower the probability you will support wolf restoration.
roar, we must understand how water, rocks, and chutes work. Likewise with Even Leopold, whose attitude toward pines seems to be the paragon of
attitudes, rather than wallowing in data, we need principles to guide our consistency, had inconsistency in his attitude. Indeed, that inconsistency
thinking. In my experience, tpr~e principles help me understand attitu;des: made him think about his values and articulate the wide horizontal structure
(Figure 2.2). H~ initially argues to himself that he must love the pine ;more
- Attitudes tiii toward consistenty, but they are not always consistent; because he planted it(patemal bias), but then wonders, "but this cannot be
assuming consistency in attitudes without data can be misleading. the whole story, for if the pine were a natural seedling like the birch, I would
- Attitudes bMII:l on direct experience have more beliefl and greater value it even more. So I must dig deeper for the logic, if any, behind my bias."
stability; direct experience can change attittJdes. The birch, after all, planted itself and he cut it down, so this seems inconsis-
- Attitudes~c-tb our identitjes tend to be more emotional and difficult to tenv.Therefore, paternalism cannot be driving the attitude, This sends Leop-
change; they c;an, however, change as our identities and roles chang~. old on his way, looking for other beliefs and values more central to his attitude
and behavior.
That's it. Three things to monitor as you head toward the rapids. This inconsistency in Leopold's well-organized attitude is good evidence
Most of us assume the parts of an attitude are consistent with each other. that almost all attitudes, particularly the more complex ones, ·are inconsistent.
For instance, if you support wolf restoration, you should have positive evalua- His effort to explain or account suggests a general drive toward consistency.
tive beliefs about wolves. Our Michigan survey showed that. f.mong those I1ssonance between attitude parts or between beliefs and behavior is uncom-
w4o thought wolves symbolized nature's beauty, 9 out of 10 supported wolf fortable and has a motivational power. This idea was made famous by Leon ; :
restoration. Among those who didn't, support dropped to 3 in 10,,Those fa- F¢stinger with his "Theory of Cognitive Dissonance." 16 This theory is often
voring restoration generally did not think wolves were dangerous, cruel, or cited, even outside of social psychology, because it's a wonderful post hoc
frightening. Those who opposed restoration were more likely to believe wolves explanation for attitude or behavioral change. Indeed, one can always point to
were naturally cruel, a danger to people, and might attack people in the forest. dissonant cognitions, as Leopold did in his own attitude. Even so, people often
This principle does not assert that all components of an attitude are con- have inconsistencies in their attitudes that inspire no effort to change atti-
sistent. Co~ency is probabilistic, not deterministic. Holding one belief is tudes or behavior. Many smokers, for instance, believe cigarettes are bad for
usually neither a necessary nor sufficient condition of holding another, or of their health. Dissonance effects have been shown in laboratory experiments,
having a positive attitude toward the object in question. One can have negative but this is when student subjects are put in situations in which they cannot
beliefs about wolves and still support restoration. Negative beliefs reduce the avoid dissonant cognitions. However, in 1the real world, we can often avoid
probability a person will support restoration, but not to zero. If one belief ihconsistencJs between our attitudes and behavior, and live with lots of disso-
changes, that does not mean the rest will align like cogs in a gear assembly. nance.~ These kinds of explanations, as we will see, are often too simple.
Attitudes obey a psycho logic rather than a formal logic. Human behavior and attitudes are considerably complex.
Although people in our sample were generally consistent41 in 10 who sup- The consistency principle has a couple of more traps. Absent data, it is
ported wolf recovery believed wolves were naturally cruef but supported res- easy to assume consistencies that don't exist. Jconomists were shocked vyhen
toration anywa,y. Another 1 of 10 supporters <(not necessarily the same people) my colleagues and I showed in another study that people who liked wolves
did not consider wolves the symbol of beauty or nature. A third of those who nwst would pay less money to restore soo wolv. and more to restore 200
supported restoration thought a wolf might attack them if they saw one in the wolves. That seems inconsistent. In an economic world, $500 is always better
forest. You can hold negative beliefs about wolves and still support wolf recov- than $2oo, so for wolflovers-like money lovers-sao wolves should always
ery. Attitude structures simply tend toward consistency. Perhaps the sup- be better than 200. In-depth interviews with respondents showed wolflovers
porters who expected a wolf attack never planned to see one in the forest. didn't believe they were inconsistent. Th~ worried that too many wolves
26 NAVIGATING E NVI RON MENTAL ATTITUDES Reading Water and Minds 27

could create problems for wolf restoration, which could lead to wolf poaching farming than economics. People refer to farming as a "way oflife" or a set of
and harassment, so they supported fewer, not more, wolvf!sY Likewise, it social behaviors, personal relationships, work patterns, attitudes, and even
seemed inconsistent that Michigan hunters were among those with the most values. These forces, along with direct experience, drive farmers' and ranchers'
positive attitudes toward wolf restoration. If you think of hunters as only com- attitudes toward wolves. por them, the wolf was more than just another forest
petitive with wolves, this might seem inconsistent, but if you think ofhunters animal. For many, it challenged their special way of life. 4t was a symbol of
as people who spend lots of time in nature, and who are concerned about wildness, and part of a farmer's job is taming wildness.
wildlife and support it, you might not be so surprised. 18 You cannot assume Farmers, we found, were afraid wolf restoratifn would be used as an
consistency based on guesses. Assumptions must be tested with data. excuse to stop developm¢nt, establish wilderness areas, and restrict timber
The cognitive fix takes the "wheels and gears" approach to attitudes. If you harvests and farming practices. For many farmers, the wolf was a symbol of
believe attitudes are consistent, all you have to do is add cognitions (also urban society's dominance. It e~'dalien values about the use of animals \.Jti
known as facts), and these will act as drivers to change attitudes in predictable and natural resourc~. Fltrners hold strong utilitarian attitudes toward ani- ex\\\~
ways. The cognitive fix usually assumes the greater the knowledge, the more mals, in general. 21 They supported the wolf only if they thought it useful for
positive the attitudes. However, I<fllert and I found no relationship betWeen providing fur. They were the most likely of any group to say, "If wolves had
knowledge and support for wolf restoration in Michigan. Those with the most more practical value, I could get more interested in reestablishing them in
accurate knowledge of wolves did not support or oppose restoration any more Michigan."
than those with less accurate knowledge. So, educating the public about When an attitude is part of who you are-your identity-it has many
wolves would not be expected to increase support. Even worse, lh Sweden, beliefs, considerable stability, substantial horizontal structure, and a strong
Goran Ericsson and I found an inverse relationship. 19 Those groups who emotional basis. Leopold was first a forester, so his identity in this role would
knew the least were most supportive of wolves. Would this mean we should be associated with his attitude about trees. He had become a "restoration ecol-
"de-educate" the Swedish public to increase support for wolves? ogist'' long before the term was coined, and he told us about his efforts in this
Knowledge comes from experience, and an important characteristic of an role. Likewise, my students' assignment was to tell something about them-
attitude is where we get it in the first place. Fcimers in the Upper Peninsula selves. It was no surprise they described things they wanted others to use to
were the most likely people to have seen wOlves, had animals killed by wolves, identify them as a researcher, a fan, or an Alaskan.
known people who had animals killed by wolves, and killed wolves them- These three characteristics-cO(lsistency, direct experience, and links to (
selves. Many had heard wolves howl. Their attitudes toward wolves were based OW' identiti~a;re components of what social psychologists often call attitude~
on direct experience. In contrast, most Lower Peninsula residents had never strength. 22 One way social psychologists measure attitude strength is to ask ")\~
seen, heard, or lived near wolves. Attitudes based on direct experience are people M.r certain they are of their attitud~s. We should-and do-feel more
better developed.l They have more beliefs, they're more stable, and they have certain about things that inspire strong feelings.
stronger affect.~ 0 When people "have been there and done that," their attitude However, etten strong attitudes have uncertainty. Leopold wonders: "But
is more horizontally structured. what would I do if my farm were further north, where pine is abundant and
Attitudes Leopold took many words to describe in A Sand County Almanac red birch is scarce? I confess I do not know. My farm is here." 23 Leopold is
were based on direct experience planting and watering trees on his land. JQlat- admitting uncertainty in his attitude. Uncertainty, like inconsistency, is part of
garet's attitudes were based on years ofwork;.and research on the plumb cur- all attitudes, whether we recognize it or not. Social psychologists call this am-
culio, and trying to get farmers to apply less poison. And Howard? Well, pe bivalence. This is often our problem when, as scientists, we try to pin down
had worked on the scene of Alaska's huge oil cleanup, and knew everything. attitudes. Our surveys and questionnaires, as well as our managers and the
However, frrmers' negative attitudes tqward wolves are caused by some- public, sometimes demand certainty when it does not exist.
thing more than direct experience. Even though they had personal experience Now let's practice these principles and try to navigate tae Ozone-Hple
with wolves, 95% of them had never lost an animal to a wdlf, and only 1% had Rapids, a class II rapids of moderate difficulty with clear passages; and further
lost more than one animal. Losses to disease, weather, and even cars are downstream, <!hnate-Change Falls, a class V rapi~ of extreme difficulty with
clearly more serious to farmers than wolf damage, but there is more to violent currents and rock-strewn passages. Because they both deal with Earth's
28 NAVIGATING ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDES Reading Water and Minds 29

atmosphere, you might think they're the same. Beware! Assumptions like that were easy targets for a structural fix, much like zoning floodplains or elimi-
will send you swimming. nating plastic-foam cups. You could identify basic sources and change the con-
text to change their behavior. The public didn't have to be educated to change
their attitudes or consumer choices. When they bought deodorant in subse-
Ozone Holes and Climate Change quent years, it no longer sprayed on. It rolled on. Problem solved.
Research that led to the ozone hole's discovery began in 19,S as part of the However, because this attitude is not based on direct experience, it is not
International Geophysical Year, when scientists began measuring ozone high a strong attitude. It has simple parts and is loosely tied to other objects
above Antarctica. In the 1970s, three scientists who went on to win the Nobel people feel strongly about. For most of us, the ozone hole is not tied to our
Prize documented the chemistry and role that chlorofluorocarbonated (CFC) identity. Only the most active environmentalists wear an ozone hole on their
gases play in atmospheric changes. In 1985, other scientists identified a dra- T-shirts. We have few beliefs about ozone, so new information can rapidly
matic ozone depletion above Antarctica. This declaration of an "ozone hole" in change our attitudes. Our attitude toward the intangible object, the ozone
the upper atmosphere 24 led to international treaties and CFC bans. hole, is not stable, partly because of its simplicity and lack of horizontal
Have you ever seen an ozone hole? How about a ghost? Then why are you structure. If we could knock out one belief, the whole thing would likely
afraid of them? An ozone hole is an attitude object no one experiences directly, tumble. The attitude has an emotional component, but it is not strong. After
yet people have beliefs, feelings, and ideas about how to deal with it. How did all, lots of stuff causes cancer, and ultraviolet light is way down the list. It
this happen? also lacks the stability and emotion we find in, say, farmers' attitudes toward
0'ijl" beliefs, knowledge, and affect toward this object were created by news wolves.
media, based on information from scientists. This transfer of secondary infor- ~one-hole debates raged in the 1970s and 198os. When I ask students
mation created an attitude about an ozone hole. Attitudes toward ozone holes today about ozone holes, I get only vague responses. When I tell them we used
are based on faith in science and what scientists say. In this case, the public has to spray on deodorant, they roll their eyes, but ask them about climate change.
no direct experience to dispute the natural scientists who made the discoveries. Bingo! Up comes a well-developed attitude with many beliefs and lots of af-
So why believe in ozone holes, even though we've never seen one? People fect. This attitude object needs plenty of scouting and careful navigation.
might not know what an ozone hole is, but it's easy to say and sounds a little qpe,reason attitudes toward. climate change are so dangerous is that most
exotic. The concept is simple. O:lQne hooks to something directly understand- of us have direct experience, not just scientific reports. Climate change affects
able, a hole; and we find holes in socks, roads, and arguments. Generally, our lives. Why do I live in Sweden? One reason is that Vcan no longer be-sure
holes are not goo<L An ozone hole lets ultraviolet light pass through Earth's of skiing in Lodi, Wisconsin. In the good ol' days, it snowed all winter, and on
protective atmosphere, making sunburns more likely. We all recognize sun- weekends you could ski. When it snows in southern Wisconsin now, you
light, and many of us have direct experience with sunburn. This is where the better get out there and ski because the snow might be gone by the weekend.
affect comel in. We• associate too much sunlight and sunburn with cancer. A limnologist friend, John Magnuson, has studied Wlsconsin's Lake Mendota
And now these damned ozone holes, which we never even knew about, are for years, and his trend data confirm my personal experience. The lake is now
creating still another cancer risk. Oz<l;rie holes are a perfect attitude object for ice-covered fewer days than it was decades ago. Everybody who has lived a
scientists who want to influence society, lMcause we have nearly unchallenged long time in Madison noticed the change, t~. However, John can tie years
authority over what the public believes about an object they cannot see, touch, with the fewest days of ice to El Nino, so he has a theory, or at least a correla-
or experience. tion. He worked with other scholars to document declines in the number of
As complicated as the science might be, an ozone hole seems simple. days lakes worldwide are ice covered. 25 Frozen lakes pass the famous "interoc-
What causes the ozone hole? Stuff we put into the air somehow eats ozone. ular traumatic test." That is, they hit you right between the eyes. There's no
Some of it came from spray-can propellants for deodorants. How do you save fancy or complicated data here. Everyone understands ice and days as units of
the environment and reduce cancer? Quit spraying your underarms. Most measure. Based on the direct experience principle, we should expect attitudes
ozone-eating chemicals come from industrial processes, so it was easy to iden- toward global climate change to be stronger and less likely to change than at-
tifY the responsible industries and work with them. Chlorofluorocarbonates titudes toward ozone holes.
JO NAVIGATING ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDES Reading Water and Minds Jl

Global warming is also based on strong visuals like pictures of receding We in the polling business all know it makes a difference where you
glaciers, as well as complicated scientific evidence. Like ozone holes, it's the place a question in a survey. We get one answer if a question is early in
stuff of Nobel Prizes. However, it was the Peace prize that Al Gore shared-in the survey and another answer ifit is later. And these questions were in
part because of his movie, An Inconvenient Truth-that publicized the prob- different places on the two surveys.
lem worldwide. In contrast, the Chemistry prize for ozone was only for its
science, not the hype. The film stirred strong emotions. Global warming is I smiled and shook my head. As a scientist, I would have thought it a "dirty
more like Howard's rant about Exxon, whereas the ozone hole is more like little secret" or outright lie if the pollster had said question order made no
Margaret's report about the plumb curculio. difference. The pllysicist Werner Heisenberg identified this problem in theQ$
Beliefs about global warming are closely tied to basic valttes. Dealing with 1920s, and won the Nobel Prizj for it a few years later at age thirty-one. He o<t-
this problem will require large-scale collective actions, which threaten CO:t'e observed that we cannot determine the location and speed of an electron at the ~'
U.S. values like free4om. However, not taking action threatens health and wel- same time. ro measure speed, one ntust bounce photons off the electron, and
fare, not just of people but of the planet. How countries make such decisions even though photons are small, they change the location of the even-smaller
and keep their word challenges our basic ideas about governance and au- e~ctronl In physical sciences, this is called the Heisenberg Uncertainty Prin-
tonomy. Many see efforts to address global warming as fundamental challenges qiple. In polling, we call the same thing "a dirty little secret," ~~mt it's simply the
to capitalism. The fight has moved to science as an institution, and scientists observer's impact on the observed object. >
have had their e-mails stolen. Moreover, it is tied to growing identities, like We must estimate the "speed and location" of attitudes by bouncing crude
"environmentalists." Worse, gl&bal warming cannot be reversed by simply ap- questions off these ghosts. When attitudes have little cognitive structure, our
plying structural or technological fixes, as we did with ozone ho~s. Carbon survey questions influence attitudes like photons blowing away electrons.
emission depends on how we live, work (jobs), play (relax and vacation), travel Vfeak attitudes can change quickly with new information in the survey. I call f;Jt\~
(cars, air planes), and heat our homes. Making such changes based on direct th~se opinions, not attitudes. Most of us have only opinifi'ns, not attitudes,
experience, ties to basic values and beliefs, strong affect, and ties to our iden- to~rd pine tref's, the plumb curculio, and Koko Taylor. However, Leopold's,
tities makes global warming a huge challenge. That is, it's a class V rapids, Margaret's, Joe's, and Howard's were well-developed attitudek and unlikely to
worthy of this definition from the International Scale of River Difficulty: "Ex- change with new information found in questions. Most definitions of attitudes
ceedingly difficult, long and violent rapids following each other almost without describe attitudes as being "relatively enduring." They stay with us, but many
interruption; riverbed extremely obstructed; big drops; violent current; very of our opinions vanish in an instant, and thus do not fit these definitions.
steep gradient; close study essential but often difficult. Requires best person, The lll!'oblem with most polls is that they ask only one question to measure
boat, and outfit suited to the situation. All possible precautions must be taken." ~e like-dislike, favor-oppose dimensions that opinions share with attitudes.
When we get an answer to one question, i1is much like a nibble on a fishing
line. We don't know if we have an opinion (not worth taking home for dinner),
Dirty Little Secrets a fairly specific attitude (a dinner-size fish), or a well-developed attitude, like
We will come back to these kinds of attitude objects in later chapters. First, Leopold's toward pines (something that might break your line). To determine
though, I must clear up another point. On my commute to Madison one day I what's nibbling our bait, and determine the attitude's size and heft, we must
heard a distinguished pollster tell a radio reporter, "I have to reveal one of poll- "set the hook'' with many questions.
ing's dirty little secrets." I turned up my radio. Who, after all, can resist dirty fu our Michigan survey about wolves, we measured the emotional compo-
secrets? Was someone taking bribes? Did computers make mistakes? Did one nent of attitudes with five questions. When a person definitely agrees that
firm have sloppy procedures? The "secret" was about a question asked on two wolf calls are nature's most frightening sound, wolves can be dangerous to
different surveys that produced a 7-point difference in the percent responding people, wolves are naturally cruel, and wolves would attac\<; and the same
"yes." The reporter had noticed the difference and could not let it go unex- person definitely disagrees that wolves symbolize nature's beauty and won~er,
plained. It was too large to be due to random error. Why such a difference in we, have someone with a strong negative attitude toward wolve$. At the other
two polls? Now pushed into a comer, the pollster said: end of the scale is the person who strongly disagrees with the first four beliefs
32 NAVIGATING ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDES Reading Water and Minds 33
and strongly agrees with the last. Responses to questions using words like • Attitudes have cognitive (belief) and affective (emotion) components.
fear, beauty, cruel, and auack are clearly measures of affect-the emotional di- • Att+tudes have a direction-positive or negative.
mension of attitudes. The person at one end of the scale might be labeled a • Attitudes are relatively enduring.
wolf hater, and the person at the other end a wolf-lover. Being at the far ends • Attitudes are related to but differ from values and opinions.
of this scale registers a strong attitude toward wolves, whereas those in the
middle have only an opinion or possibly an ambivalent attitude toward wolves. Rather than debate elements of definitions, I tried in this chapter to dis-
This is why we must ask so many questions in attitude studies, and why the cuss the attitude concept as a whole. You might not know everything about
single-opinion question in a survey reveals so little. It takes lots of stout gear attitudes, but you now know enough to explore assumptions of the cognitive
to haul in a real attitude. fix. In the next chapter we will examine how attitudes change, starting with
Aldo Leopold, who went from wolf-hater to wolf-lover.
Conclusion
Attitudes, as I understand them, are based on values and built on beliefs,
some of which are knowledge and some of which contain an emotional com-
popent called evaluative beliefs. A•dEIS have a horizontal structure, dep¢nd-
ing on the number of beliefs and values on which they are bas'ed. They have
varying degrees of consistency and rationality. Strong attitudes resist change
because they are based on direct experience, identities, and many beliefs and
values. Some attitudes, like Howard's, are driven by affect, and every new fact
is quickly tainted with a negative or positive slant.
Attitudes tend toward consistency, but the parts are not hooked together
like a set of gears. Adding new information does not necessarily change them,
but irrational attitudes cannot be ignored simply because they are "irrational."
Indeed, the "irrational" part requires us to take them into account and care-
fully measure them to understand their dimensions as part of any environ-
mental project.
Attitudes we see jutting from the water ahead are often only the peaks of
large boulders. The boulders' great bulk is why, after years of endless effort,
the river has not moved them. We, too, will fail to move them. Instead, we
must navigate them, which requires understanding. Remember, beneath Leo-
pold's observable behavior-cutting birches so his pines could grow better-
was a huge structure of values, beliefs, and evaluative beliefs.
Those looking for a simple, clear definition of attitude might be frustrated.
Indeed, social psychologists have defined it operationally in many different
26
ways. Along with the terms I noted, diagrams I drew, and principles I out-
lined, most conceptual definitions include these seven points:

• We cannot see attitudes; they must be inferred from something.