• External Shocks

• Shared responsibility and sustainable cooperation

Appealing to Moral Responsibility for Climate Action

In this study, we tested one of the moral appeals used in the first study along with a control condition in the lab, utilizing the same behavioral paradigm. This study aimed at examining how a moral appeal affects motivated performance and brain activation associated with reward-processing, which is seen as the main index of motivation. With neuroscientific methods, we aimed to measure motivation more directly, capture more implicit reactions to moral appeals, and gain insights into the underlying cognitive mechanisms of pro-environmental engagement. More specifically, we recorded participants’ brain activity while they performed the time estimation task, focusing on neural responses associated with reward processing. By combining behavioral and neuroimaging measures, we aimed to understand how moral appeals can enhance reward processing for pro-environmental gains, including the subtle, potentially unconscious processes that may not be captured through self-report alone. To this end, after reading a moral or a non-moral appeal on one’s responsibility to contribute to climate action, participants (N = 70) completed the time-estimation task. The results revealed that whereas there was no effect of trial type in the non-moral appeal condition, participants in the moral appeal condition performed significantly better in charity-gain than no-gain trials. Regarding ERPs, confirmatory analyses showed no significant effect of appeal type on the SPN and RewP associated with reward anticipation and immediate reward evaluation, respectively. However, exploratory linear mixed-effect models showed that in the moral appeal condition, Cue-P300 (linked to motivated attention toward cues) and Feedback-P300 (linked to motivated evaluation of feedback) were more positive in charity-gain than in self-gain and no-gain trials, while LPP (reflecting sustained reward processing) was more positive in charity-gain than in self-gain trials. In the non-moral appeal, Feedback-P300 and LPP were more positive in self-gain than in no-gain trials, with no differences in Cue-P300. These findings suggest that moral appeals enhance reward processing toward a morally relevant goal, whereas non-moral appeals boost performance for self-related rewards. This indicates that moral appeals can shape the reward value of pro-environmental gains, potentially promoting positive behavior change.

How do moral appeals affect motivated performance and reward-related brain activity in the context of climate action?

• Collected during project

• Experiment

-

• Structured

—

—