Estereotipos y sanción social condicionada
Un análisis mediante redes neuronales del comportamiento ambiental en España
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65598/rps.6012Palabras clave:
Estereotipos, Comportamiento ambiental, Identidad del observador, Evaluación social, Redes neuronalesResumen
Aunque la sostenibilidad ambiental se ha consolidado como una norma social ampliamente compartida, la adopción de comportamientos ambientales cotidianos puede seguir implicando costes sociales. La investigación previa se ha centrado principalmente en la estigmatización del activismo ambiental radical, prestando menor atención a si estas sanciones sociales también afectan a personas que realizan prácticas ambientales convencionales. Para abordar este vacío, el presente estudio desplaza el foco analítico del actor ambiental al observador y analiza cómo los rasgos sociodemográficos y los entornos informativos influyen en la evaluación social del comportamiento ambiental cotidiano en España. Metodológicamente, el estudio se basa en una encuesta a 1,864 personas y combina análisis de regresión con redes neuronales interpretables. Los resultados muestran que, en general, los individuos verdes convencionales son evaluados socialmente de forma positiva; sin embargo, la validación social es condicionada. La atribución de estereotipos negativos varía según el perfil del observador incluyendo el género, la edad y la clase social. Los participantes de ingresos medios y de mayor edad presentaron una mayor normalización social de la sostenibilidad, aunque la exposición a información digital sobre sostenibilidad se asocia con menores diferencias generacionales. En conjunto, los hallazgos indican que la aceptación social de la sostenibilidad cotidiana varía en función de la identidad del observador y de su contexto informativo, poniendo de relieve cómo los procesos de evaluación social contribuyen a una normalización desigual de los estilos de vida sostenibles.
Descargas
Citas
Acuti, D., Pizzetti, M., & Dolnicar, S. (2022). When sustainability backfires: A review on the unintended negative side‐effects of product and service sustainability on consumer behavior. Psychology & Marketing, 39(10), 1933-1945. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21709
Allidina, S., & Cunningham, W. A. (2021). Avoidance begets avoidance: A computational account of negative stereotype persistence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 150(10), 2078 -2099. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001037
Alwuqaysi, B. (2025). A systematic review and meta-analysis of social media's influence on mental health, family functioning, and visual content. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 12, 101793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101793
Arendt, F. (2023). Media stereotypes, prejudice, and preference-based reinforcement: Toward the dynamic of self-reinforcing effects by integrating audience selectivity. Journal of Communication, 73(5), 463-475. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqad019
Arroyo-Barrigüete, J. L., Carabias-López, S., Borrás-Pala, F., & Martín-Antón, G. (2023). Gender differences in mathematics achievement: The case of a business school in Spain. SAGE Open, 13(2), 21582440231166922. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231166922
Barnhart, M., & Mish, J. (2017). Hippies, hummer owners, and people like me: stereotyping as a means of reconciling ethical consumption values with the DSP. Journal of Macromarketing, 37(1), 57-71. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276146715627493
Barron-San Blas, P., Goirizelaia, M., & Iturregui Mardaras, L. (2025). Entornos híbridos y nuevas identidades: La Generación Z en la era del metaverso. Revista Prisma Social, (49), 60–79. https://doi.org/10.65598/rps.5768
Bashir, N. Y., Lockwood, P., Chasteen, A. L., Nadolny, D., & Noyes, I. (2013). The ironic impact of activists: Negative stereotypes reduce social change influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43(7), 614-626. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1983
Besalú, R., Capdevila, A., & Moragas-Fernández, C. M. (2025). Ecological Transition in Spain: Political Polarization Through Institutions and Media. Land, 14(4), 866. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14040866
Bicchieri, C. (2016). Norms in the wild: How to diagnose, measure, and change social norms. Oxford University Press.
Blair, I. V. (2002). The malleability of automatic stereotypes and prejudice. Personality and social psychology review, 6(3), 242-261. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0603_8
Bolderdijk, J. W., & Cornelissen, G. (2022). “How do you know someone's vegan?” They won't always tell you. An empirical test of the do-gooder's dilemma. Appetite, 168, 105719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105719
Borau, S., Elgaaied‐Gambier, L., & Barbarossa, C. (2021). The green mate appeal: Men's pro‐environmental consumption is an honest signal of commitment to their partner. Psychology & Marketing, 38(2), 266-285. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21321
Bourdieu, P. (1984). A social critique of the judgement of taste. Cambridge, MA.
Brick, C., Sherman, D. K., & Kim, H. S. (2017). “Green to be seen” and “brown to keep down”: Visibility moderates the effect of identity on pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 51, 226-238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.04.004
Brock, A., Stephenson, C., Stephens-Griffin, N., & Wyatt, T. (2022). ‘Go Home, Get a Job, and Pay Some Taxes to Replace a Bit of What You’ve Wasted’: Stigma Power and Solidarity in Response to Anti-Open-Cast Mining Activism in the Coalfields of Rural County Durham, UK. Sociological Research Online, 28(2), 518-539. https://doi.org/10.1177/13607804211055486
Brough, A. R., Wilkie, J. E., Ma, J., Isaac, M. S., & Gal, D. (2016). Is eco-friendly unmanly? The green-feminine stereotype and its effect on sustainable consumption. Journal of consumer research, 43(4), 567-582. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucw044
Catena-Fernández, C., & Fernández, S. (2025). Moral perceptions about environmentalism across ideological groups: Negative moral stereotypes threaten rightists’ moral self and trigger polarization. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 28(7), 1321-1346. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302251330990
Cherry, E. (2019). “Not an Environmentalist”: Strategic Centrism, Cultural Stereotypes, and Disidentification. Sociological Perspectives, 62(5), 755-772. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731121419859297
Ciccia, C. (2025). Machine Learning and New Decision-Making Paradigms in Social Sciences: New Perspectives of Research. J AI & Mach Lear, 1(2), 1-9.
Cinelli, M., De Francisci Morales, G., Galeazzi, A., Quattrociocchi, W., & Starnini, M. (2021). The echo chamber effect on social media. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 118(9), https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2023301118
Cuddy, A. J., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2007). The BIAS map: behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes. Journal of personality and social psychology, 92(4), 631-648. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.4.631
Cuddy, A. J., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2008). Warmth and competence as universal dimensions of social perception: The stereotype content model and the BIAS map. Advances in experimental social psychology, 40, 61-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(07)00002-0
De Groeve, B., Hudders, L., & Bleys, B. (2021). Moral rebels and dietary deviants: How moral minority stereotypes predict the social attractiveness of veg* ns. Appetite, 164, 105284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105284
de Matos, C. A., Luppi, L., & Veiga, R. T. (2025). Assessing the intention-behavior gap in the pro-environmental behavior context: a longitudinal study about water conservation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 524, 146499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2025.146499
De Nardo, M., Brooks, J.S., Klinsky, S. et al. Social signals and sustainability: ambiguity about motivations can affect status perceptions of efficiency and curtailment behaviors. Environ Syst Decis 37, 184–197 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-017-9624-y
Elgaaied-Gambier, L., & Mandler, T. (2021). Me trying to talk about sustainability: Exploring the psychological and social implications of environmental threats through user-generated content. Ecological Economics, 187, 107089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107089
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Towards clarification of a fractured paradigm. McQuail's reader in mass communication theory, 390, 397.
European Union (2025) El coste de la vida y el medio ambiente son las principales preocupaciones de los jóvenes en la Unión Europea. https://barcelona.europarl.europa.eu/es/news/eurobarometer-youth-february-2025
Fad Juventud, F. (2024). El 95% de la juventud española ve complicado adoptar un estilo de vida sostenible, pese a su alta preocupación por el medioambiente. https://fad.es/noticias/el-95-de-la-juventud-espanola-ve-complicado-adoptar-un-estilo-de-vida-sostenible-pese-a-su-alta-preocupacion-por-el-medioambiente/
Farinha, C., & Rosa, M. (2022). Just chill! An experimental approach to stereotypical attributions regarding young activists. Social Sciences, 11(10), 427. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11100427
Fielding, K. S., & Hornsey, M. J. (2016). A social identity analysis of climate change and environmental attitudes and behaviors: Insights and opportunities. Frontiers in psychology, 7, 121. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00121
Fietkiewicz, K. J., Lins, E., Baran, K. S., & Stock, W. G. (2016, January). Inter-generational comparison of social media use: Investigating the online behavior of different generational cohorts. In 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (pp. 3829-3838). IEEE.
Fonseca, A., & Castro, P. (2022). Thunberg’s way in the climate debate: Making sense of climate action and actors, constructing environmental citizenship. Environmental Communication, 16(4), 535-549. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2022.2054842
Fox, J., & Weisberg, S. (2019). An R companion to applied regression. Sage publications.
Geiger, N., Pasek, M. H., Gruszczynski, M., Ratcliff, N. J., & Weaver, K. S. (2020). Political ingroup conformity and pro-environmental behavior: Evaluating the evidence from a survey and mousetracking experiments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 72, 101524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101524
Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., & Signorielli, N. (1986). Living with television: The dynamics of the cultivation process. Perspectives on media effects, 1986, 17-40.
Ghorbani, M., & Xuan, L. (2018). Challenging Ingrained Thoughts? The Joint Effect of Stereotypes and Awareness of Related Information on Pro-environmental Behavior in China. Sustainability, 10(6), 1986. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061986
Gifford, R. (2011). The dragons of inaction: psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. American psychologist, 66(4), 290–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023566.
Gkargkavouzi, A., Halkos, G., & Matsiori, S. (2019). Environmental behavior in a private-sphere context: Integrating theories of planned behavior and value belief norm, self-identity and habit. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 148, 145-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.01.039
Greenebaum, J. (2018). Vegans of color: Managing visible and invisible stigmas. Food, Culture & Society, 21(5), 680-697. https://doi.org/10.1080/15528014.2018.1512285
Grimmer, J., Roberts, M. E., & Stewart, B. M. (2021). Machine learning for social science: An agnostic approach. Annual Review of Political Science, 24(1), 395-419. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-053119-015921
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., & Van den Bergh, B. (2010). Going green to be seen: status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation. Journal of personality and social psychology, 98(3), 392–404. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017346.
Guijarro, R. D. (2022). El precio, principal barrera para un consumo sostenible. https://cincodias.elpais.com/cincodias/2022/11/08/companias/1667921133_505289.html
Gustafson, A., Goldberg, M. H., Bergquist, P., Lacroix, K., Rosenthal, S. A., & Leiserowitz, A. (2022). The durable, bipartisan effects of emphasizing the cost savings of renewable energy. Nature Energy, 7(11), 1023-1030. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-022-01099-2.
Hansen, A. (2018). Environment, media and communication. Routledge.
Hassija, V., Chamola, V., Mahapatra, A. et al. Interpreting Black-Box Models: A Review on Explainable Artificial Intelligence. Cogn Comput 16, 45–74 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-023-10179-8
Hilton, J. L., & Von Hippel, W. (1996). Stereotypes. Annual review of psychology, 47(1), 237-271. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.47.1.237
Hogg, M. A., & Reid, S. A. (2006). Social identity, self-categorization, and the communication of group norms. Communication theory, 16(1), 7-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2006.00003.x
Howard, L. (2023). Breaking climate justice ‘silence’ in everyday life: The environmentalist killjoy, negotiation and relationship risk. The Sociological Review, 71(5), 1135-1153. https://doi.org/10.1177/00380261231159524
IAB. (2024). XV Edición Estudio Redes Sociales 2024. https://iabspain.es/estudio/estudio-de-redes-sociales-2024/
INE (2024). Nivel de formación de la población adulta (de 25 a 64 años). https://www.ine.es/dyngs/Prensa/en/EAES2023
INE (2025). Annual Salary Structure Survey (EAES). Year 2023. Final Data. https://www.ine.es/dyngs/Prensa/en/EAES2023.htm
Johnstone, M. L., & Tan, L. P. (2015). Exploring the gap between consumers’ green rhetoric and purchasing behaviour. Journal of business ethics, 132(2), 311-328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2316-3
Kelley, H. H., & Michela, J. L. (1980). Attribution theory and research. Annual review of psychology, 31(1), 457-501.
Kennedy, E., S., & Johnston, J. (2018). Eating for taste and eating for change: Ethical consumption as a high-status practice. Social Forces, 98(1), 381-402 https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soy113
Kibele, K., Rosa, M., & Obaidi, M. (2023). How different types of environmentalists are perceived: changing perceptions by the feature. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1125617. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1125617
King, N., Burgess, M., & Harris, M. (2019). Electric vehicle drivers use better strategies to counter stereotype threat linked to pro-technology than to pro-environmental identities. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 60, 440-452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.10.031
Köhler, J. K., Geiger, S. J., Gellrich, A., Muensch, M., White, M. P., & Pahl, S. (2025). Reasonable or radical? First-order, second-order, and meta-stereotypes of different climate activists among the German public and climate activists. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 104, 102594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2025.102594
Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior?. Environmental education research, 8(3), 239-260. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401
Koo, J., & Loken, B. (2021). Don’t put all your green eggs in one basket: Examining environmentally friendly sub‐branding strategies. Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility, 31(1), 164-176. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12396
Lamont, M., & Molnár, V. (2002). The study of boundaries in the social sciences. Annual review of sociology, 28(1), 167-195. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.141107
Lausi, G. (2024). How cognitive processes shape implicit stereotypes: a literature review. Open Research Europe, 4, 263. https://doi.org/10.12688/openreseurope.18691.2
Li, L. M. W., Xia, W., & Ito, K. (2023). Stereotypes of pro-environmental people: Perception of competence and warmth. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 91, 102133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2023.102133
Lomas Martínez , S., Martín García, T., Marcos Ramos, M., & González de Garay Domínguez, B. (2025). La representación de la diversidad en las series de televisión contemporáneas: Percepciones sociales ante un contexto industrial en transformación. Revista Prisma Social, (49), 303–325. https://doi.org/10.65598/rps.5645
Mack, M., Jandura, O., & Maurer, M. (2025). The effects of constructive journalism: Towards a theoretical framework. Journalism, 14648849251395798.
https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849251395798
Madriaza, P., Hassan, G., Brouillette‐Alarie, S., Mounchingam, A. N., Durocher‐Corfa, L., Borokhovski, E., ... & Paillé, S. (2025). Exposure to hate in online and traditional media: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the impact of this exposure on individuals and communities. Campbell systematic reviews, 21(1), e70018. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70018
Miller, A., Ernst, E., Curry, M., & Valdez, A. (2025). In-Conceivable Futures: Climate Change and Reproductive Decision Making Among Childfree North Americans. Social Currents, 12(3), 231-250. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294965241300718 .
Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación. (2024). Análisis de caracterización de la producción ecológica en España. Microsoft Word - Caracterización de la producción ecológica en España_2023 - def.docx
Minson, J. A., & Monin, B. (2012). Do-gooder derogation: Disparaging morally motivated minorities to defuse anticipated reproach. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(2), 200-207. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550611415695
Molnar, C., Casalicchio, G., & Bischl, B. (2020). Interpretable machine learning–a brief history, state-of-the-art and challenges. In Joint European conference on machine learning and knowledge discovery in databases (pp. 417-431). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65965-3_28
Moreno, N. A., & Ruiz-Alba, N. (2021). ¿Periodismo o greenwashing? Patrocinadores de la COP25 Chile-Madrid en la prensa española. Universidad de Alicante Servicio de Publicaciones. https://doi.org/10.14198/MEDCOM.19089
Moss‐Racusin, C. A., Van der Toorn, J., Beneke, G., & Olson, K. R. (2024). Mothers of transgender youth experience stigma‐by‐association. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 54(4), 209-220. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.13024
Nascimento, J., & Loureiro, S. M. C. (2024). The PSICHE framework for sustainable consumption and future research directions. EuroMed Journal of Business, 19(3), 571-611. https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-12-2021-0199
Ortiz-Lozano, J. M., Aparicio-Chueca, P., Triadó-Ivern, X. M., & Arroyo-Barrigüete, J. L. (2024). Early dropout predictors in social sciences and management degree students. Studies in Higher Education, 49(8), 1303–1316. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2023.2264343
Otterbring, T. (2023). Stereotypes, same-sex struggles, and sustainable shopping: intrasexual competition mediates sex differences in green consumption values. Baltic Journal of Management, 18(4), 450-473. https://doi.org/10.1108/BJM-10-2022-0379
Pearson, A. R., & Schuldt, J. P. (2018). A diversity science approach to climate change. Psychology and climate change, 95-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813130-5.00005-9
Pinna, M. (2020). Do gender identities of femininity and masculinity affect the intention to buy ethical products?. Psychology & Marketing, 37(3), 384-397. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21298
Pizarroso, J., Portela, J., & Muñoz, A. (2022). NeuralSens: Sensitivity Analysis of Neural Networks. Journal of Statistical Software, 102(7), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v102.i07
Pryor, J. B., Reeder, G. D., & Monroe, A. E. (2012). The infection of bad company: Stigma by association. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(2), 224–241. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026270
PwC & Uncommon (2022). ¿Quién piensa, quién habla y quién actúa? Así son los consumidores sostenibles españoles. https://www.pwc.es/es/consultoria/assets/informe-cliente-sostenibile-pwc-uncommon.pdf
R Core Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/
Raynaud, S., Zanette, M. C., Valor Martínez, C., & Antonetti, P. (2024). “I want world peace… oh, and bigger boobs”: repetitions and stereotyping on Friends’ sustainable character Phoebe. Journal of Marketing Management, 40(15-16), 1384-1410. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2024.2380795
Reid, L., McKee, K., & Crawford, J. (2015). Exploring the stigmatization of energy efficiency in the UK: An emerging research agenda. Energy Research & Social Science, 10, 141-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.07.010
Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative science quarterly, 224-253. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392563
Seyfi, S., Hall, C. M., Saarinen, J., Zaman, M., & Vo-Thanh, T. (2025). Identifying constraints on Gen Z’s path toward ethical tourism consumption and practices. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 33(6), 1216-1234. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2024.2418967
Shapiro, J. R., & Neuberg, S. L. (2007). From stereotype threat to stereotype threats: Implications of a multi-threat framework for causes, moderators, mediators, consequences, and interventions. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11(2), 107-130. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868306294790
Sherif, R., & Simon, S. A. (2025). Impact, inspiration, or image: On the trade-offs in pro-environmental behaviors. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 134, 103214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2025.103214
Shrum, L. J. (2017). Cultivation theory: Effects and underlying processes. The international encyclopedia of media effects, 1(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783764.wbieme0040
Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behaviour. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407-424. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00175
Suldovsky, B., Landrum, A., & Stroud, N. J. (2019). Public perceptions of who counts as a scientist for controversial science. Public Understanding of Science, 28(7), 797-811. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662519856768
Swim, J. K., & Geiger, N. (2018). The gendered nature of stereotypes about climate change opinion groups. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21(3), 438-456. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430217747406
Swim, J. K., Gillis, A., & Hamaty, K. J. (2019). Gender bending and gender conformity: The social consequences of engaging in feminine and masculine pro-environmental behaviors. Sex Roles, 82(5), 363-385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01061-9
Tajfel, H. (Ed.). (2010). Social identity and intergroup relations (Vol. 7). Cambridge University Press.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In J. A. Williams & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Belmont, CA:Wadsworth.
Uren, H. V., Dzidic, P. L., Roberts, L. D., Leviston, Z., & Bishop, B. J. (2019). Green-tinted glasses: how do pro-environmental citizens conceptualize environmental sustainability?. Environmental Communication, 13(3), 395-411. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2017.1397042
Whitmarsh, L., Mitev, K., Nash, N., Hoolohan, C., Poortinga, W., Whittle, C., ... & Graham, H. (2025). “Moments of Change” and Low‐Carbon Behaviors: A Multidisciplinary, Systematic Review. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 16(4), e70014. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.70014
Wickham, H., Francxois, R., Henry, L., & Muller, K. (2022). dplyr: A grammar of data manipulation. R package version 1.0.8. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=dply
Wittenberg, I., Fleury-Bahi, G., & Navarro, O. (2023). Environmental attitudes in context: conceptualisations, measurements and related factors of environmental attitudes. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1219471. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1219471
Zane, D. M., Irwin, J. R., & Reczek, R. W. (2016). Do less ethical consumers denigrate more ethical consumers? The effect of willful ignorance on judgments of others. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26(3), 337-349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2015.10.002
Zíka, V., Olšová, P., & Jánská, M. (2025). The attitude–behavior gap is not one-sided: Some do more for the environment than they believe. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 102446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2025.102446
Żuk, P. (2023). “Eco-terrorists”: right-wing populist media about “ecologists” and the public opinion on the environmental movement in Poland. East European Politics, 39(1), 101-127. https://doi.org/10.1080/21599165.2022.2055551
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2026 Los autores/as conservan los derechos de autor y ceden a la revista el derecho de la primera publicación y el derecho de edición
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.
Los autores/as que publiquen en esta revista aceptan las siguientes condiciones:
- Los autores/as conservan los derechos de autor.
- Los autores/as ceden a la revista el derecho de la primera publicación. La revista también posee los derechos de edición.
- Todos los contenidos publicados se regulan mediante una Licencia Atribución/Reconocimiento-SinDerivados 4.0 Internacional. Acceda a la versión informativa y texto legal de la licencia. En virtud de ello, se permite a terceros utilizar lo publicado siempre que mencionen la autoría del trabajo y a la primera publicación en esta revista. Si transforma el material, no podrá distribuir el trabajo modificado.
- Los autores/as pueden realizar otros acuerdos contractuales independientes y adicionales para la distribución no exclusiva de la versión del artículo publicado en esta revista (p. ej., incluirlo en un repositorio institucional o publicarlo en un libro) siempre que indiquen claramente que el trabajo se publicó por primera vez en esta revista.
- Se permite y recomienda a los autores/as a publicar su trabajo en Internet (por ejemplo en páginas institucionales o personales), una vez publicado en la revista y citando a la misma ya que puede conducir a intercambios productivos y a una mayor y más rápida difusión del trabajo publicado (vea The Effect of Open Access).
