Does driving a high-mileage hybrid encourage motorists to develop "compensatory ethics"?
Ask any California motorist and they’ll tell you about the folks in the Prius hybrids. For several years, the high-mileage vehicles qualified for special stickers that let them drive in the car pool lanes on local highways, even with just one person onboard.
“And you’d seem to find most of them driving well below the speed limit,” grumps Bill Tabor, an Orange County mid-level manager, who had to squeeze several colleagues into his low-mileage Honda Accord to get the same access. “It was as if they suddenly were the authority, setting the speed that everyone else would have to drive.”
Frustrating, no question. But according to a new study, it’s also no surprise.
People who wear the “halo of green consumerism” may like to be seen as saving the planet, but they’re less likely to be kind to others and surprisingly likely to cheat and steal, according to a study by the Canadian psychologists Nina Mazar and Chen-Bo Zhong, who published their findings in the journal Psychological Science, under the title, “Do Green Products Make Us Better People?”
Apparently, the answer is not also a resounding no.
“Virtuous acts can license subsequent asocial and unethical behaviors,” Mazar and Zhong contend.
They back that finding up with the results of a series of tests. In one, green consumers were more likely than other, less environmentally-focused consumers to cheat in a computer game to get more money – and then lie about it. In fact, in another test in which participants were put on the honor system and asked to take money from an envelope to pay themselves for purchases, the study team found greenies were six times more likely to steal.
“Green products do not necessarily make for better people,” the report in Psychological Science declares.
The degree to which the environmentally-minded consumers proved to have otherwise low scruples surprised the pair.
“Given that green products are manifestations of high ethical standards and humanitarian considerations,” the authors wrote, it would otherwise seem that this would “activate norms of social responsibility and ethical conduct.” But, instead, their findings seem to suggest that greenies just might see themselves as above the typical norms of behavior.
The authors call that “compensatory ethics,” or “moral balancing.”
Perhaps that explains why some of the most visible environmental proponents often find themselves caught in compromising situations, like Al Gore, the former Vice President and activist for preventing global warming, whose own home has turned out to use more energy than some small villages.
This study is ridiculous and certainly not conclusive, and I wonder who funded it.
What “should” be studied is the people who have problems with Prius owners, for it is they who have “the problem” and need help.
I read an article recently where the author devoted column inches calling Prius owners everything imaginable. This and snide remarks in other articles highlighted how serious and wide spread this is.
Are these people envious, jealous, paid by big oil, SUV owners, mentally sick? What drives someone to “slag off” owners of a car thats polluting less and getting better fuel economy?
These cars are owned for any number of reasons and putting everyone into a preconceived category just shows ignorance and/or mental deficiencies on the part of the accuser.
I happen to be a car nut and like new technology especially if it has other benefits such as efficiency. I like the drive system and see it as a stepping point toward full electric, My running costs are low and it pollutes less but being green is only part of the equation.
My car stable has included Bentley, Ferrari, Maserati, Cadillac, Lincoln,and about one hundred and sixty others but my Prius is without doubt the most advanced and significant car I have ever owned. This automobile alone is changing our future personal transport. If anyone is in doubt just check out how many hybrids and EVs are on the horizon, developed to meet lower emission requirements and improved fuel economy.
Its taken ten years since the intro of the gen one Prius for the world to wake up to the problems the car was designed to address. I find it amazing that at least two manufacturers, Toyota and Honda had the foresight to design and the tenacity to persevere with hybrids before their time in history arrived.
Maybe all this name calling is a reaction to our unknown future,(a future of oil wars, peak oil, pollution, global warming etc.etc) and the Prius is “the material object” best associated with this uncertainty.
What ever the reason if people will only look to the bigger picture its plain to see things are changing and as the BORG said, resistance is futile! 🙂
DGate: You are being a little tough on my partner, I think. – KZ, editor.
This research was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. And will be subject to ongoing academic debate.
See
http://www.rotman.utoronto.ca/facbios/viewfac.asp?facultyid=chenbo.zhong
http://www.rotman.utoronto.ca/facbios/viewFac.asp?facultyID=nina.mazar
For a start.
Oh, here are the, non-trivial, citations:
Aarts, H., & Dijksterhuis, A. (2003). The Silence of the Library: Environmental Control Over Social Behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(1), 18-28.
Anderson, W. T., & Cunningham, W. H. (1972). The Socially Conscious Consumer. The Journal of Marketing, 36(3), 23-31.
Bargh, J. A. (2006). What Have We Been Priming All These Years? On the Development, Mechanisms, and Ecology of Nonconscious Social Behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 147-168.
Caruana, R. (2007). A Sociological Perspective of Consumption Morality. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 6(5), 287-304.
Chen, C. (2001). Design for the Environment: A Quality-Based Model for Green Product Development. Management Science, 47(2), 250-263.
Crane, A. (2001). Unpacking the Ethical Product. Journal of Business Ethics, 30(4), 361-373.
Fitzsimons, G. M., Chartrand, T. L., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2008). Automatic Effects of Brand Exposure on Motivated Behavior: How Apple Makes You “Think Different”. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(1), 21-35.
Hertel , G., & Kerr, N. L. (2001). Priming In-Group Favoritism: The Impact of Normative Scripts in the Minimal Group Paradigm. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37(4), 316-324.
Hunt, N., & Dorfman, B. (2009, 28 January). How Green is My Wallet? Organic Food Growth Slows. Reuters. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com.
Irwin, J. R., & Baron, J. (2001). Response Mode Effects and Moral Values. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 84(2), 177-197.
Green Products and Ethical Behavior 13
Kinnear, T. C., Taylor, J. R., & Ahmed, S. A. (1974). Ecologically Concerned Consumers: Who Are They? Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 20-24.
Mazar, N., & Ariely, D. (2009). “What the Hell”: Continuous Temptations and Escalation of Dishonesty. Unpublished Working Paper. University of Toronto.
Monin, B., & Miller, D. T. (2001). Moral Credentials and the Expression of Prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 33-43.
Monroe, K. B. (1976). The Influence of Price Differences and Brand Familiarity on Brand Preferences. Journal of Consumer Research, 3(1), 42-49.
Sachdeva, S., Iliev, R., & Medin, D. L. (2009). Sinning Saints and Saintly Sinners: The Paradox of Moral Self-Regulation. Psychological Science, 20(4), 523-528.
Schlegelmilch, B. B., Bohlen, G. M., & Diamantopoulos, A. (1996). The Link Between Green Purchasing Decisions and Measures of Environmental Consciousness. European Journal of Marketing, 30(5), 35-55.
Shrum, L. J., McCarty, J. A., & Lowrey, T. M. (1995). Buyer Characteristics of the Green Consumer and Their Implications for Advertising. Journal of Advertising, 24(2), 71-82.
Torjusen, H., Lieblein, G., Wandel, M., & Francis, C. A. (2001). Food System Orientiation and Quality Perception Among Consumers and Producers of Organic Food in Hedmark County, Norway. Food Quality and Preference, 12, 207-216.
Zhong, C.-B., Liljenquist, K. A., & Cain, D. M. (2009). Moral Self-Regulation: Licensing & Compensation. In D. De Cremer (Ed.), Psychological Perspectives on Ethical Behavior and Decision Making (pp. 75-89). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Freudian theory covers all this and is not new, However the “green” term is flavour of the century so becomes the current “whipping boy”.
I concede this should be considered but would also like the flip side previously mentioned to be investigated to complete the equation.
What drives a perfect stranger to compartmentalise and make derogatory remarks to another perfect stranger for the type car they choose? Especially in the context of one that is more environmentally friendly and uses less of a finite resource.
Hi, D,
As someone who grew up in the “socially conscious” ’70s, I can provide plenty of examples of folks who felt they were taking the ethically superior path but, beyond the specific flag they wanted to wave, were great examples of questionable morality. And I can point to folks left, right and center on the political spectrum who are good examples. So, let me stress, this is a problem that isn’t limited to issues of the environmentally-minded. But the research raises some interesting questions and, ironically, your most recent note underscores this, though in a way that is quite different from what I believe you may have intended. I know a significant number of folks who “wear” their Priuses and other green cars as badges of honor and who are quite quick to condemn other choices that might not meet up to their personal standards. And I chose my story’s lede very carefully, as virtually everyone I knew in California — including several Prius owners — can point out the “Pious” drivers who decide they are the law unto themselves when it comes to the speed being traveled in the HOV lanes.
Again, I do not want to suggest that this story is my personal view. I happen to take environmental issues quite seriously, to the point where I have adjusted numerous aspects of my own life accordingly. Do I fit the character type described? I’ll leave that to any friends who might want to post on that question. LOL!
Paul A. Eisenstein
Publisher, TheDetroitBureau.com
Paul did it ever occur the reason some or most hybrids are being driven sedately is because the owners are trying for economy. This is one of the main advantages of the car with owners trying to better their own previous records. The on board display aids in this quest and I am guilty of it at times.
Yes there are some elitest who probably deserve the “Pious” title but they have always existed boasting their Cadillac is better than Lincoln,or their choice of a TV brand is better than another, this is not new.
Your article is another attempt to stigmatize Prius owners by aligning them with questionable traits found throughout society and not just unique to Prius owners. I’ve come to the conclusion Americans must have a label for everything right or wrong, its more sensational,or degrading,or just cool.
Hi, D,
A double irony here. Okay, first, the laws vary by locale, but operating below the speed limit, especially in an HOV lane where the driver is doing so intentionally and with obvious disregard for traffic flow is generally considered an offense. Now, if the driver is doing “just” 70 and the limit is 70, well, speed demons like myself might just have to get over it. But, more than once I have been on the I-405 in LA behind (in this case, a) Pious owner determined to go 55, even as the nearest car ahead speeds off into the sunset.
Secondly, the reality of the matter is that the idea of allowing a hybrid to drive with one aboard in the HOV lanes is in itself an arguable example of a misguided government program. Do I want to see more high-mileage vehicles? Absolutely. But I also want them to be driven in a manner that they are designed for. And, as you well know, hybrids don’t do well in steady-state highway driving; they are designed to recoup and reuse energy normally lost in urban driving conditions and, thus, they SHOULD be banned from operating in other than stop-and-go conditions. Or, if a green-minded motorist really is ethical, (per my original story), shouldn’t they consciously choose not to opt for ill-conceived rewards and instead make the moral choice to operate in conditions for which they were designed and where they best serve society’s needs?
Ah, those gray areas add a dingy luster to going green…LOL!
Paul A. Eisenstein
Publisher, TheDetroitBureau.com
Paul the operating efficiency varies with the hybrid design. The original Insight and I assume the civic and new Insight are more fuel efficient at cruise than around town, The Prius is the opposite. Having said this any car will benefit in mpg by reducing cruise speed especially the Prius because of a smaller engine and good aerodynamics. The idea of a hybrid is not purely city driving as you say its for efficiency in all situations over its non hybrid gasoline powered cousins, the figures prove it. I do take your point of slow drivers assuming either the arrogant posture or being unaware of their surroundings. What everyone is trying to propose though is if those same drivers are in a Prius it takes on a new meaning and we must label it and study it and oh yes the negative connotations must flow.
If arguments between hybrid and non-hybrid owner choices and driving habits are the issues that upset people surely its down to two things. The hybrid purchase is freedom of choice which we all enjoy and no one else should infringe on or even be interested. The second issue of hybrid driving habits should be dealt with on an individual basis, if the law says a minimum speed ,use the law to solve the problem. Any other sedate driving if within the law is merely a case of I want to go slower, you want to go faster, we have equal rights stalemate or pass. This does not need a label as its as old as motoring itself.
Its one of the many frustrations in a crowded world such as standing in line at the supermarket checkout.
If a green minded owner was really ethical they wouldn’t own a car at all! So its really a case of balance.
D,
No matter what, hybrids do not get their maximum return unless the battery system is being exercised, and in freeway conditions, but for the occasional moment of coasting, then accelerating enough to get the motor to kick in you are not using the hybrid system.
As to your point about a driver choosing to go slow, I’m afraid the laws are generally quite specific, all the more so in California, where a motorist is required to get out of the way when holding back traffic. Whether that is the case with people wanting to exceed the speed limit is questionable but if there is traffic behind trying to pass, you are required to either speed up or get out of the way.
And thank you, as you just confirmed what the authors were suggesting, conditional ethics: I choose to drive slow and everyone else, you less high-minded, non-green motorists, can kiss my bumper because I have a hybrid and am going to do whatever speed I want in the HOV/express lane even if I am 1) below the speed limit and 2) breaking the law regarding passing and overtaking.
Paul E.
I am not going to leave a long argument. But I agree with Paul. And anyway, isn’t it obvious that a study would have only been conducted if it seemed there was a large percentage of issues with those specific drivers? YES. That is why almost all studies in any issues are done, because something is noticed to be done or practiced more often than usual.
What I observe here in the San Francisco Bay area, specifically the South Bay where I live, is the opposite of what some here are stating. At least regarding the Prius, which is by far the most common hybrid. What I’ve noticed over the last few years is that these folks whether male or female, EXCEED the speed limit all the time. Freeway or surface street. Also when accelerating from a stop light/sign these folks seem to be “drag racing”. My wife drives an ’07 Civic (non-hybrid), and agrees with me and notices the same. She and I think there is a real arrogance associated with most Prius drivers. This is not imagined stuff portrayed only on “South Park”.
DKC wrote “its obvious that a study would have only been conducted if it seemed there was a large percentage of issues with those specific drivers”.
Yes I would agree but its also obvious for a complete analysis the study should include the observers making the accusations.
There are two sides to every story!