Knowledge and Beliefs about Climate
Change and the Role of the Amazonian
Forest among University and High
Downloaded by 179.182.97.134 from www.liebertpub.com at 08/15/18. For personal use only.
School Students
Maria Inês Gasparetto Higuchi,1 Damaris Teixeira Paz,1
Antonio Roazzi,2 and Bruno Campello de Souza2
1
National Institute for Amazonian Research, Manaus,
AM-Brazil.
2
Federal University of Pernambuco, Recife-PE-Brazil.
Abstract
Although acknowledgement of the role of forests in the reduction of
greenhouse gases that produce climate change (CC) is widespread
among scientists, society is far from adopting effective action to
protect forests or otherwise coping with the phenomenon. To help
explain this impasse, the present paper aimed to investigate the
underlying psychosocial structure of the relationships between
environmental knowledge, environmental beliefs, attitude toward
CC, and recognition of the role of the Amazonian forest. For that
purpose, 400 structured questionnaires were applied to high school
and university students in the state of Amazonas, Brazil. The re-
sulting database was analyzed through similarity structure analysis
and facet theory, with the results clearly showing that knowl-
edge about CC and recognition of the role of the forest played a
central modulating role regarding environmental beliefs, with dif-
ferent types of knowledge and belief corresponding to different types
of attitude. Key Words: Environmental beliefs—Environmental
attitudes—Environmental behavior—Climate change—Environmental
knowledge.
106 ECOPSYCHOLOGY ª MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC.  VOL. 10 NO. 2  JUNE 2018
Introduction
T
he Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) refers
to climate change (CC) as variations in climate over time that
are largely a consequence of human activities generating
increased emissions of greenhouse gases. The perceived
emergency and severity of CC has led scientists, environmentalists, and
managers worldwide to provide policies and directives for dealing with
the phenomenon at both continental and local scales (FBMC, 2008,
2010; IPCC, 2007; 2014; Weber, Stern, & Elke, 2011). Even though
significant legislative and economic initiatives have been oriented
toward minimizing or reversing CC, with the topic becoming very
evident in the media, public acknowledgement and concern for the
phenomenon have been declining (Pidgeon, 2012; Smith & Leiser-
owitz, 2012).
Because of the factual dimension and the intensity of CC, the topic
of how to reverse it has become the object of international debate in
many different sectors of society. In the social and human sciences,
this is noticeable in the form of directions and investigations toward
understanding human environmental behavior, including its un-
derlying rational and subjective determinants (American Psycholo-
gical Association, Task Force on the Interface Between Psychology
and Global Climate Change, 2009). Many such studies have produced
evidence that social and psychological factors influence significantly
the emergence of a greater or lesser degree of what is termed
‘‘proenvironmental behavior,’’ that is, behavior that is deemed as
contributing to attenuating or reversing CC (Corraliza & Berenguer,
DOI: 10.1089/eco.2017.0050
 KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEFS ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE-FOREST
2000; Gifford, 2011; Gifford & Chen, 2016; Kollmuss & Agyeman,
2002; Lorenzoni, Nicholson-Cole, & Whitmarsh, 2007; Uzzell, 2004).
There are indications that the relative low attachment and in many
ways a decline of public interest in proenvironmental behavior might
be due to inconsistent cognitive models that fail to distinguish between
CC and general pollution or even between ‘‘climate’’ and ‘‘weather’’
(Reynolds, Bostrom, Read, & Morgan, 2010). These understandings have
Downloaded by 179.182.97.134 from www.liebertpub.com at 08/15/18. For personal use only.
a direct bearing on the individual engagement in daily activities that are
considered to mitigate such global phenomenon (Gifford, 2005; Gifford
& Nilsson, 2014; Ojala, 2007; Weber et al., 2011). Indeed, it seems that a
relevant portion of the doubts and mistrust that persist in the general
population regarding the subject stems from the abstract nature of
climate, its multiple interdependent causes, and uncertainty as to the
extent to which changes are occurring (Capstick & Pidgeon, 2014).
This is of particular concern when students, both at secondary and
university levels, show difficulty in recognizing causes and conse-
quences that presume specific scientific knowledge (Barros & Pinheiro,
2017; Fisher, 1998; Freije, Hussain, & Salman, 2017; Liarakou, Atha-
nasiadis, & Gavrilakis, 2011; Maibach et al., 2015; O’Connell, Peppler,
& Craig, 1999; Wachholz, Artz, & Chene, 2014). All of this impacts the
recognition of the problem itself and the adoption of actions that may
be seen as unwittingly aggravating it (Stokols, Misra, Runnerstrom,
Hipp, & Katrina, 2009; Stoll-Kleemann, O’Riordan, & Jaeger, 2001;
Weber, 2010). Therefore, one’s knowledge of the ecosystem dynamics
and of the impacts of human behavior plays an important role in
determining how one behaves toward the environment.
Another venue to understanding proenvironmental behavior is the
investigation of human values, beliefs, and attitudes (Leung, Koh, &
Tam, 2015; Steg, Bolderdijk, Keizer, & Perlaviciute, 2014; Stern &
Dietz, 1994). However, little is known as to precisely how these interact
between each other and with knowledge and conduct in the context of
the Amazonian forest or of environmental issues in general.
The aim of the present study was to investigate the structure of the
relationships between knowledge of CC, beliefs about the role of the
Amazonian forest, and intentions toward proenvironmental behav-
ior, all within the context of high school and university students in
the city of Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil. It is hoped that an under-
standing of how such psychological elements interact will be of use
in the proposal and implementation of effective educational inter-
ventions and environmental policies.
Knowledge of Climate Change
and the Amazonian Forest
The role of the biosphere in the dynamics of the atmosphere has
been widely studied, and the Amazonian forest is commonly recog-
ª MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC.
nized as an important factor in many aspects of CC, one that can
contribute to either mitigate or increase the greenhouse effect
(Bernstein et al., 2007; Dai, 2013; Laurence et al., 2016). The 2007
report of the IPCC expressly states that keeping the forest intact can
significantly neutralize and mitigate greenhouse gases, particularly
CO2. This is why mature forests are considered to play a very im-
portant role in the capture of carbon, storing billions of tonnes an-
nually in the trunks, leaves, and root systems of trees (F. G. Higuchi
et al., 2012; N. Higuchi et al., 2016; Tribuzy, 2005).
Francisco Gasparetto Higuchi et al. (2012) estimate the amount of
carbon stored in the Brazilian Amazonian forest as being between
50.8 and 57.7 billion tonnes, corresponding to something between
171 and 369 million tonnes of carbon being held from the atmo-
sphere. It would seem, therefore, that the forest represents a large
carbon ‘‘sinkhole’’ that can absorb a significant portion of the carbon
emitted by humans across the planet. This suggests that maintaining
the cover of forests on the Earth’s surface is important to maintain the
global climate.
Despite some indication of a relative recent decline, deforestation
is still at a level that threatens natural reserves (INPE, 2014) and is
considered to be responsible for 15–20% of all CO2 emissions, and
much of it is seen as the direct result of human action (N. Higuchi
et al., 2009). If one accepts that deforestation leads to higher levels of
carbon in the atmosphere, leading to an increased greenhouse effect,
then it follows that the process generates modifications in the planet’s
climate system. Indeed, there are researchers that warn of the seri-
ous compromising of the Earth’s climatic stability as a consequence
of not recognizing the environmental services provided by the for-
ests and of taking them down indiscriminately (Clement & Higuchi,
2006; Fearnside, 2003, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2012; Nagy, Forsberg, &
Artaxo, 2016).
Knowledge of the interactions between biosphere and atmosphere
could be an important point to get the population to become more
involved in the protection of forests so as to help reduce greenhouse
gas emissions, but that seems quite removed from youths’ and adults’
actual engagement toward a more sustainable behavior (Ojala, 2012;
Riper, Kyle, & Sutton, 2010; Taber & Taylor, 2009; Weber, 1997).
Considering that CC is a complex phenomenon, with numerous
interdependent social and environmental causes, several incomplete
or questioned areas of scientific research, and many uncertain or
unknown consequences (Oreskes, 2004), it is not easy to help people
conceptualize the matter so as to consider it in their day-to-day
practices (Maibach et al., 2015; Pidgeon & Fischhoff, 2011). This is
particularly important in Brazil, where the highest concentration of
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere comes mainly from brush fires
 VOL. 10 NO. 2  JUNE 2018 ECOPSYCHOLOGY 107
 HIGUCHI ET AL.
and deforestation, as well as the use of fossil fuels (Governo do Estado
do Amazonas, 2008; N. Higuchi et al., 2009; MCTI, 2017).
Understanding CC requires considerable understanding of abstract
concepts pertaining to various theoretical constructs such as bio-
physical and chemical cycles, weather and climate, and greenhouse
effects, to list a few. Adequate logical knowledge and formal edu-
cation appear, therefore, to be critical factors for a genuine dis-
Downloaded by 179.182.97.134 from www.liebertpub.com at 08/15/18. For personal use only.
cernment of these related issues from preschool (Taber & Taylor,
2009) to higher education (Freije et al., 2017) to contribute to the
formation of proenvironmental behavior.
Explaining Proenvironmental Behavior:
Values, Beliefs, and Attitudes
Several authors have proposed that proper human values are par-
ticularly important for the emergence of proenvironmental behavior
(Dunlap, Van Liere, Mertig, & Jones, 2000) and that different value
orientations can explain environmental beliefs and intentions (De
Groot & Steg, 2008). Stern, Dietz, Abel, Guagnano, and Kalof (1999)
used the norm-activation moral theory from Schwartz (1977, 1992) to
explain an individual’s support for environmentalism. The rationale is
that, when a person feels that things important to one of her or his
values are under threat and believes that her or his actions can help
deter the threat, the person is motivated to act so as to restore or
preserve such values (Dietz & Stern, 1995), with such an influence
being either direct or indirect (Stern, Kalof, Dietz, & Guagnano, 1995).
Other authors maintain that, given the deeply abstract and internal
nature of human values, it is difficult to use them as explanations for
specific manifest interactions with the environment. According to
them, beliefs may better explain someone’s practices toward the
environment, as they are more specific and, therefore, closer to the
behavior (Corral-Verdugo, 2005; Pato, 2004; Pato & Tamayo, 2006;
Pato, Ros, & Tamayo 2005). Environmental beliefs are understood as
antecedents of specific ecological behaviors that can be used to ex-
plain human actions in relation to the environment (Dunlap & Van
Liere, 1978; Pato & Higuchi, 2018; Pato & Tamayo, 2007).
According to Rokeach (1972), rather than existing in isolation,
beliefs are structured in an organized psychological system, even if
such a system lacks a rational logic. His proposal is that the strength
of beliefs is variable and dependent on the way they are structured
mentally, whether centrally (primitive) or peripherally (secondary).
Primitive beliefs are originated from direct experience, being deeply
rooted, and, therefore, difficult to change. Secondary beliefs are built
up from indirect experiences, such as those derived from other beliefs
about an object, person, action, or from the observation of others;
hence, they are changed relatively easy, but that does not usually
108 ECOPSYCHOLOGY JUNE 2018
translate into major transformations in people’s behavior, as they
tend to be of little relevance.
For Fishbein and Ajzen (1975), behavior would be associated with
beliefs, attitudes, and intentions in such a way that a belief implies a
certain attitude, which triggers an intention that manifests as a
specific behavior. The behavior, in turn, can reinitiate a new cycle,
since it can lead to a re-elaboration of intentions, attitudes, and be-
liefs (Siqueira, 2002). Therefore, beliefs are considered dispositional
variables for an individual to behave in one way or another (Corral-
Verdugo, 2001). A system of beliefs is subject to the various cognitive
and motivational process of the person facing a given situation where
behavior might occur (Grube, Mayton, & Ball-Rokeach, 1994).
Attitudes have also been heavily investigated to understand people’s
behavior in relation to CC, but there are several controversies about
its definition. Pato and Higuchi (2018) point out that in the literature
there are two views of attitudinal definition: the one-dimensional
and the three-dimensional models. The one-dimensional model re-
stricts the term ‘‘attitudes’’ to the affective component, that is, to feeling
favorable or unfavorable toward the object of the attitude. Such def-
inition makes it clear that behavioral intentions and beliefs are con-
structs other than attitudes. The three-dimensional model, on the other
hand, defines ‘‘attitude’’ as a predisposition to respond in different ways
in certain situations. This predisposition may be affective (feelings of
enjoyment or boredom), cognitive (beliefs or thoughts), and/or related
to conduct (intentions or manifest actions). In this study, we follow the
theoretical model that considers environmental attitudes as a construct
that encompasses evaluative tendencies that relate to beliefs, affect,
and resulting ecological behavior as both cause and effect (Hawcroft &
Milfont, 2010; Hernández & Hidalgo, 2000; Milfont, Duckitt, &
Wagner, 2010; Schultz, Shriver, Tabanico, & Khazian, 2004).
Milfont (2007) proposes an integrated framework for the structure
of environmental attitudes where they are represented as comprising
a multidimensional construct organized in hierarchical fashion. In it,
there are first-order and second-order factors, corresponding to
horizontal and vertical structures, which organize the various types
of attitude into distinct categories. There are at least 12 primary
factors that make up the horizontal structure and 2 factors that form
the vertical structure of environmental attitudes, which is comprised
by first-order factors on a single second-order factor (i.e., General-
ized Environmental Attitudes) or, possibly, either one of two-
correlated-second-order factors (i.e., Preservation and Utilization), as
shown in Milfont and Duckitt (2010).
Discussions on environmental issues generally highlight the fac-
tors of Preservation and Utilization, respectively reflecting ecocentric
and anthropocentric positions (Milfont & Duckitt, 2006). These two
 KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEFS ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE-FOREST
types of attitudinal positions were proposed by Thompson and Barton
(1994) as expressing environmental concern and interest in pre-
serving nature and its resources; however, the reasons triggering
such concern and interest appear to be quite distinct (Coelho, Gou-
veia, & Milfont, 2006). From an ecocentric view, nature has an in-
trinsic value, and its preservation is obligatory, whereas the
anthropocentric view sees preservation of the environment as a way
Downloaded by 179.182.97.134 from www.liebertpub.com at 08/15/18. For personal use only.
of satisfying human needs (Corral-Verdugo, 2001). While in an-
thropocentrism there is an exchange where human beings preserve
nature to get enough of its benefits, in ecocentrism, human beings
and nature are connected in a ‘‘spiritual’’ way. Anthropocentric at-
titudes seek to understand what impacts environmental problems
cause to humans, while ecocentric attitudes are concerned with un-
derstanding the intrinsic value of nature (Schultz, 2002). Thus, the
literature suggests that knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes have a rel-
evant effect on how people relate to the environment and on their
predisposition to engage in proenvironmental actions.
Goals
The present study aimed to explore the relational structure of
beliefs, knowledge, and attitudes regarding the Amazonian forest and
CC to identify patterns that may suggest mechanisms and processes
through which they interact, thereby guiding the construction of a
possible psychological model of proenvironmental behavior.
Method
The investigation followed an exploratory methodological ori-
entation, and the survey was based on a closed-form questionnaire
with questions concerning sociodemographic profile, and a series of
15 items assessing knowledge and 8 assessing beliefs (the latter two
measured on a 1–5 Likert scale regarding the degree of concordance
with the statement). The items relating to technical-scientific knowl-
edge, some containing correct information and some containing
wrong information, were drafted by the authors under supervision
and final approval by experts in forestry and CC. The protocol was
submitted to a pilot test for validation prior to its use in the present
investigation.
For abbreviation, each of the items concerning knowledge of the
forest ecosystem, causes and consequences of human action in re-
lation to forests, and types of greenhouse gas emissions were re-
presented in the data analysis diagram through the letter K, followed
by the number of the item and a term that summarizes the content
involved. The 15 items were as follows:
K1/Carbon—The Amazon forest uses carbon from greenhouse
gases for its growth
ª MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC.
K2/Fire—Burning the forests makes a small contribution to the
climate change in Brazil
K3/Agriculture—Climate changes alter the world’s agricultural
production
K4/Population—The population explosion contributes to climate
changes
K5/Neutralization—The Amazon forest neutralizes the polluting
gases causing climate change
K6/Floods and Droughts—The floods and droughts in the Amazon
are caused by climate change
K7/Rain cycle—The Amazon forest controls the cycle of rain for
the whole planet
K8/Fertilizers—The use of chemical fertilizers prevents climate
change
K9/Weather—The variations and inconsistency of the world’s
weather are the result of climate change
K10/Consumption—The current model of production and con-
sumption is the principal reason for climate change
K11/Reforestation—Reforestation of the Amazon has the same
role as maintaining standing forest
K12/Climate Change (Global Warming)—Climate change makes
the entire planet hotter
K13/Mitigation effects—The standing forest is necessary to reduce
the effects of climate change
K14/Cars—The increase of numbers of cars in cities is responsible
for climate change
K15/Landslides—Landslides in cities are caused by climate
change
The 8 items related to beliefs that refer specifically to the use and
protection of the forest. The items relating to beliefs, some containing
adequate and some inadequate views, were prepared by the authors
with support by environmental education experts. For abbreviation,
these items were identified by the letter B, followed by the number of
the item and a term that summarizes the content involved. The items
were as follows:
B1/Production—The main use of the forest must be for the pro-
duction of things that are useful to people
B2/Improvement—Forest resources can be enhanced by technology
B3/Timber—The forest must be used principally for the extraction
of wood and for wood products
B4/Trees—We must cut more trees down to meet the needs of
more people
B5/Usefulness—The plants and the animals exist to be useful to
people
 VOL. 10 NO. 2  JUNE 2018 ECOPSYCHOLOGY 109
 HIGUCHI ET AL.

B6/Respect—People should have more love, respect, and admiration
for the forests
B7/Right—Forests must be maintained for their right of existence
independent of the needs of people
B8/Life—Animals, plants, and people have equal rights to live and
develop
Downloaded by 179.182.97.134 from www.liebertpub.com at 08/15/18. For personal use only.
fields of learning. Given the goal of the study regarding the inves-
tigation of associations between variables, representativeness of the
sample was not a requirement as much as a good range of variability.
The students responded individually to a survey that was carried
out in the classrooms of their various institutions in 2014, a process
that took approximately 15 min. This study complied with national
and international ethical guidelines and was approved by the ethics

The questionnaire was administered to 400 students from public

and private education institutions in Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil, 167
male and 233 female. There were 200 high school students, 95 male
and 105 female, with a mean age of 16.70 (SD = 1.13). The remaining
200 were university students, 72 male and 128 female, with a mean
age of 25.01 (SD = 8.07). All subjects were selected through a non-
probabilistic approach of convenience, and, in the case of the uni-
versity students, stratified quotas were assigned to cover the different
committee of the National Institute for Amazonian Research, and
written informed consent was obtained from the participants.
Data Analysis
The answers obtained from the items concerning knowledge and
beliefs, with the ‘‘wrong’’ or ‘‘inadequate’’ items having their scores re-
versed, were submitted to smallest space analysis (SSA) and interpreted

Fig. 1. Projection of knowledge and beliefs about CC and the role of the forest (Projection 2D, Distance = 1-Pearson r – Ward’s Amalga-
mation – Stress = .19).

110 ECOPSYCHOLOGY JUNE 2018

 KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEFS ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE-FOREST

according to facet theory (Guttman, 1968; Roazzi & Dias, 2001). It is a
robust form of nonmetric multivariate analysis based on multidimen-
sional scaling (Roazzi, 1995). The rationale underlying this approach
is that assessments of similarity or association between variables are
used to compute their positions and distances from one another within a
multivariate space, so that the stronger the relationship between them,
the closer they are considered to be. The results are plotted geometrically
Downloaded by 179.182.97.134 from www.liebertpub.com at 08/15/18. For personal use only.
sample is such that knowledge guides beliefs rather than the other
way around, given that it is knowledge that is found in the central
portion of the SSA diagram. There was also evidence that there are
three types of attitude toward environmental issues concerning CC
and the Amazonian Forest, with specific types of knowledge tending
to relate to specific types of beliefs. Figure 4 shows the corresponding
mapping sentence.

in a Cartesian graph where each dot corresponds to a variable and each The attitude of Preservation appears to be associated to a Belief in
axis is simply a dimension of space, with clusters of dots corresponding the need for Protection that arises from the Knowledge of the neg-
to clusters of variables, and continuous partitions of the space con- ative impacts caused by unsustainable ways of living and of how the
taining a set of variables being interpreted as latent dimensions (Gutt- forest is important in reducing those effects. Here, either environ-
man, 1968; Roazzi & Dias, 2001; Roazzi, Souza, & Bilsky, 2015). mental conservation is understood as a prime necessity in the face of
the threat posed by the actions of society, or conservation is not
Results considered necessary due to the perceived lack of a significant threat.
In the SSA diagram of the items regarding Knowledge and Beliefs, This entails the appraisal of evidence in ways that validate pre-
a complex spatial pattern was found. Those elements pertaining existing knowledge and beliefs, a phenomenon which has recently
to Knowledge occupied the central portion of the graph, with those been linked to cultural differences in environmental risk perception
concerning Beliefs being more peripheral,
this structure corresponding to a modular
facet. At the same time, one can identify
three regions that correspond to environ-
mental knowledge and beliefs regarding
Use, Preservation, and Improvement, a
structure that is consistent with a polar
facet. The combination of the two facets
yields what is called a Radex (Fig. 1).
The intersections between the modular
and polar facets of the Radex correspond to
having Use, Preservation, and Improve-
ment each subdivided into Knowledge and
Belief. Therefore, one has (i) preserva-
tion divided into Anthropic Impact (a
type of Knowledge) and Protection (a
type of Belief ), (ii) use divided into Re-
silience (a type of Knowledge) and Ex-
ploration (a type of Belief ), and (iii)
improvement divided into Geoclimatic
Dynamics (a type of Knowledge) and
Technology (a type of Belief ). This can
be seen in Figs. 2 and 3.

Discussion
The findings of the present study sug-
gest that the structure of attitudes toward Fig. 2. Radex organizational structure of knowledge and beliefs about CC and the role of the
the environment in the context of the forest.

ª MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC.  VOL. 10 NO. 2  JUNE 2018 ECOPSYCHOLOGY 111
 HIGUCHI ET AL.

(Steg & Sievers, 2000). Hence, it stands to

reason that those who acquire scientific
knowledge of the anthropic impact will
be prone to believe that the natural en-
vironment must be respected even in the
face of human needs, therefore being more
likely to engage in behavior that protects
Downloaded by 179.182.97.134 from www.liebertpub.com at 08/15/18. For personal use only.

forests. Such findings support theoretical

and empirical findings from other studies
(Coelho et al., 2006; Corral-Verdugo, 2001;
Milfont & Duckitt, 2006; Pato, 2004; Pato
& Tamayo, 2006; Schultz, 2002). This is
also in accordance with the findings from
Sundblad, Biel, and Gärling (2009) and
Mäkiniemi and Vainio (2013) that knowl-
edge about the negative consequences
has a positive effect on the intentions to
change behavior.
The attitude of Improvement seems
related to the Knowledge of Geoclimatic
Dynamics and of the importance of the
Fig. 3. Structure underlying the mental model that organizes the knowledge and beliefs in
favor of attitudes related to the CC phenomenon and the role of the forest in this phenomenon. forest in the balance of the ecosystem,
which fuel the belief that science and
technology can provide solutions for the

Fig. 4. Mapping sentence of the knowledge and beliefs about CC and the role of the forest.

112 ECOPSYCHOLOGY JUNE 2018

 KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEFS ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE-FOREST
development and better use of natural resources (Turner, Lambin, &
Reenberg, 2007). Management techniques for the sustainable use of
the forest would be an example of an advancement that allows for
both the conservation of the forest, along with its ecological prop-
erties, and the use of natural resources (N. Higuchi et al., 2009;
Malmsheimer et al., 2008). These findings agree with those found by
Wachholz et al. (2014), that the problems arising from CC are a
Downloaded by 179.182.97.134 from www.liebertpub.com at 08/15/18. For personal use only.
challenge that science and technology can help resolve.
The attitude of Use seems to stem from knowledge of the forest’s
capacity for resilience and regeneration, leading to the belief that it is
an inexhaustible source of environmental resources and services that
can be exploited for the well-being of humans without this causing
substantial risks or damage. In this line of thinking, Rosa, Roazzi, and
Higuchi (2015) found a type of profile of affinity with the forest that
was classified as ‘‘utilitarian,’’ in which people felt that forest re-
sources are preserved to the detriment of human needs.
This study shows that the knowledge that a person possesses seems
to guide her or his beliefs, which in turn predisposes to certain atti-
tudes toward mitigating or increasing the greenhouse effects. These
findings contribute to the idea that an adequate technical-scientific
knowledge favors the distancing of beliefs that imply a lesser com-
mitment to the environment. In this line of thought, studies have
proved that a worthwhile educational strategy can promote awareness
and useful sustainable practices when applied in higher education
(Álvarez-Suárez, Vega-Marcote, & Garcia-Mira, 2013; Domingo, Fer-
nández, & Goded, 2015).
Final Remarks
The present study approached the issue of proenvironmental at-
titudes with regard to the Amazonian forest and CC in an attempt to
draft a model of how knowledge and beliefs interact regarding these
topics. An empirical investigation within the context of Brazilian
students living in proximity to such an ecosystem found evidence
that scientific knowledge on the matter seems to drive the beliefs that
ultimately form attitudes and, eventually, behaviors. Furthermore,
three basic attitudes can be distinguished, each leading to different
types of action: Preservation (ecocentric), Use (anthropocentric), and
Improvement (technocentric).
These findings are of relevance not only for the understanding
of how knowledge and beliefs interact to form attitudes and behavior,
particularly with regard to environmental issues, but also for the
creation of initiatives oriented toward improving environmental
education. Specifically, depending on what attitudes are necessary
to foster or remedy, be it Preservation, Use, Improvement, or some
combination of them, different types of knowledge content must be
ª MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC.
emphasized. Indeed, one cannot help but wonder whether this type
of mechanism and processes might be valid for issues of another nature
or even if it could be a universal feature of human attitudes in general.
Despite the theoretically meaningful findings, some limitations
of the current study should be mentioned. Due to the lack of mea-
sures on knowledge and beliefs about CC and to the role of the forest
in this phenomenon, the authors created their own instruments,
though they were, nevertheless, developed from qualitative pilot
studies with young people and judged by experts in this field of
study. Like any scientific investigation, the findings may evoke
more questions than they answer; however, there are some very
practical implications to help educators develop effective strategies
to improve students’ attitudes toward environmental issues, par-
ticularly those students living in the largest rainforest, who must be
cognizant of the need to maintain it as a biome and as a crucial
reason to avoid future CC.
Although there is determination by the Brazilian educational au-
thorities, environmental education in university curricula has not yet
materialized. Strategic intervention is required to include in the high
school and university curricula ways to enhance the level of scientific
knowledge, in particular about CC, to have students’ active support
and engagement in this matter. Yet considerable research and edu-
cational work is still required to understand the nuances of respon-
sible environmental behavior.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by the National Council of Scientific and
Technological Development (CNPq) in the collection, analysis, and
interpretation of data. The FAPEAM (Amazonas State Research
Support Foundation) through PAPAC Edition No. 062.02281/2015
sponsored the writing of the paper and its respective translation for
publication.
Author Disclosure Statement
No competing financial interests exist.
REFERENCES
Álvarez-Suárez, P., Vega-Marcote, P., & Garcia-Mira, R. (2013). Sustainable consumption:
A teaching intervention in higher education. International Journal of Sustainability
in Higher Education, 15, 3–15.
American Psychological Association, Task Force on the Interface Between Psychology
and Global Climate Change. (2009). Psychology and global climate change:
Addressing a multi-faceted phenomenon and set of challenges. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/science/
about/publications/climate-change.aspx
 VOL. 10 NO. 2  JUNE 2018 ECOPSYCHOLOGY 113
 HIGUCHI ET AL.
Barros, H. C., & Pinheiro, J. Q. (2017). Mudanças climáticas globais e o cuidado
ambiental na percepção de adolescentes: uma aproximação possı́vel. [Global
climate change and environmental care in the perception of adolescents: A
possible analysis.] Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente, 40, 189–206.
Capstick, S. B., & Pidgeon, N. F. (2014). Public perception of cold weather events as
evidence for and against climate change. Climate Change, 122, 695–708.
Clement, C. R., & Higuchi, N. (2006). A floresta amazônica e o futuro do Brasil.
Ciência e Cultura, 58, 44–49.
Downloaded by 179.182.97.134 from www.liebertpub.com at 08/15/18. For personal use only.
Coelho, J. A. P. M., Gouveia, V. V., & Milfont, T. L. (2006). Valores humanos como
explicadores de atitudes ambientais e intenção de comportamento pró-
ambiental. Psicologia em Estudo, Maringá, 11, 199–207.
Corraliza, J. A., & Berenguer, J. (2000). Environmental values, beliefs, and actions: A
situational approach. Environment and Behavior, 32, 832–848.
Corral-Verdugo, V. (2001). Comportamiento proambiental: Una introducción al
estudio de las conductas protectoras del ambiente. Santa Cruz de Tenerife,
Espanha: Resma.
Corral-Verdugo, V. (2005). Psicologia ambiental: Objeto, ‘‘realidades’’ sócio-fı́sicas e
visões culturais de interações ambiente-comportamento. Psicologia USP, 16,
71–87.
Dai, A. G. (2013). Increasing drought under global warming in observations and
models. Nature Climate Change, 3, 52–58.
De Groot, J. I. M., & Steg, S. (2008). Value orientations to explain beliefs related to
environmental significant behavior: How to measure egoistic, altruistic, and
biospheric value orientations. Environment and Behavior, 40, 330–354.
Dietz, T., & Stern, P. C. (1995). Toward a theory of choice: Socially embedded
preference construction. Journal of Socio-Economics, 24, 261–279.
Domingo, J. M. C., Fernández, J. C., & Goded, P. A. (2015). Un instrumento para
analizar las actividades prácticas en la formación inicial del profesorado de
Secundaria de Ciencias y Matemáticas desde la perspectiva de la sostenibilidad.
Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 12, 109–129.
Dunlap, R. E., & Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The ‘‘new ecological paradigm’’: A proposed
measuring instrument and preliminary results. Journal of Environmental
Education, 9, 9–19.
Dunlap, R. E. V., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. (2000). Measuring
endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Social
Science Quarterly, 56, 425–442.
FBMC. (2008). Cartilha sobre clima e energia. Rio de Janeiro: Fórum Brasileiro de
Mudanças Climáticas.
FBMC. (2010). Curso de capacitação em mudança climática. Rio de Janeiro, Brasil:
Fórum Brasileiro de Mudanças Climáticas.
Fearnside, P. M. (2003). Homem e ambiente na Amazônia. In P. M. Fearnside (Ed.), A
floresta amazônica nas mudanças globais (pp. 1–15). Manaus, Brasil: Inpa.
Fearnside, P. M. (2004). A água de São Paulo e a floresta amazônica. Ciência Hoje,
34, 63–66.
Fearnside, P. M. (2006). Desmatamento na Amazônia: Dinâmica, impactos e
controle. Acta Amazonica, 36, 395–400.
Fearnside, P. M. (2008). As mudanças climáticas e a floresta amazônica. In M. S.
Buckeridge (Ed.), Biologia e mudanças climáticas no Brasil (pp. 131–150). São
Paulo, Brasil: Universidade de São Paulo.
Fearnside, P. M. (2012). Brazil’s Amazon Forest in mitigating global warming:
Unresolved controversies. Climate Policy, 12, 70–81.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An
introduction to theory and research. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
114 ECOPSYCHOLOGY JUNE 2018
Fisher, B. (1998). Australian students’ appreciation of the greenhouse effect and the
ozone hole. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 44, 46–55.
Freije, M. A., Hussain, T., & Salman, E. A. (2017). Global warming awareness among
the University of Bahrain science students. Journal of the Association of Arab
Universities for Basic and Applied Sciences, 22, 9–16.
Gifford, R., & Nilsson, A. (2014). Personal and social factors that influence pro-
environmental concern and behaviour: A review. International Journal of
Psychology, 49, 141–157.
Gifford, R. D. (2005). O papel da psicologia ambiental na formação polı́tica
ambiental e na construção do futuro. Revista Psicologia. USP, 16, 237–247.
Gifford, R. D. (2011). The dragons of inaction: Psychological barriers that limit climate
change mitigation and adaptation. American Psychologist, 66, 290–302.
Gifford, R. D., & Chen, A. K. S. (2016). Why aren’t we taking action? Psychological
barriers to climate-positive food choices. Climatic Change, 140, 165–178.
Governo do Estado do Amazonas. [Amazonas State Government.] (2008). Mudanças
climáticas: Uma preocupação de todos. Manaus, Brasil: SDS.
Grube, J. W., Mayton, D. M., & Ball-Rokeach, S. J. (1994). Inducing change in values,
attitudes, and behaviors: Belief system theory and the method of value self-
confrontation. Journal of Social Issues, 50, 153–173.
Guttman, L. (1968). A general nonmetric technique for finding the smallest
coordinate space for a configuration of points. Psychometrika, 33, 469–506.
Hawcroft, L. J., & Milfont, T. L. (2010). The use (and abuse) of the new environmental
paradigm scale over the last 30 years: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 30, 143–158.
Hernández, B., & Hidalgo, M. C. (2000). Actitudes y creencias hacia el medio
ambiente. In M. Aragonés, & J. I. Amérigo (Eds.), Psicologı´a ambiental (pp. 309–
330). Madrid, Espanha: Pirámide.
Higuchi, F. G., Carneiro Filho, A., Silva, R. P., Lima, A. J. N., Santos, J. dos, & Higuchi,
N. (2012). A floresta e mudanças climáticas. In M. I. G. Higuchi & N. Higuchi
(Eds.), A floresta amazônica e suas múltiplas dimensões: Uma proposta de
educação ambiental (2a, pp. 223–256). Manaus, Espanha: Ed. dos Autores.
Higuchi, N., Santos, H. P. dos, Santos, J. dos, Lima, A. J. N., Higuchi, F. G., Higuchi, M.
I. G., & Ayres, I. G. S. S. (2009). Governos locais amazônicos e as questões
climáticas globais. Manaus, Espanha: Ed. dos Autores.
Higuchi, N., Suwa, R., Higuchi, F. G., Lima, A. J. N., Santos, J. dos, Noguchi, H., .
Ishizuka, M. (2016). Overview of forest carbon stocks study in Amazonas State,
Brazil. In L. Nagy, B. R. Forsberg, & P. Artaxo (Eds.), Interactions between
biosphere, atmosphere and human land use in the Amazon (pp. 171–187).
Berlin, Germany: Basin Springer-Verlag.
INPE. [National Institute for Space Research.] (2014). Taxas anuais do desmatamento
1988–2014. Retrieved from http://www.obt.inpe.br/prodes/prodes_1988_
2015n.htm
IPCC. (2007). Climate change 2007: Synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups
I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change. Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC. Retrieved from http://ipcc.ch/report/
ar4/syr
IPCC. (2014). Climate change 2014: Synthesis report. Contribution of Working
Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change. Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC. Retrieved from http://
ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr
Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people behave
environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behaviour.
Environmental Education Research, 8, 239–260.
 KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEFS ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE-FOREST
Laurence, W. F., Camargo, J. C., Fearnside, P. M., Lovejoy, T., Williamson, B., Mesquita,
R., . Laurence, S. F. W. (2016). An Amazonian forest and its fragments as a
laboratory of global change. In L. Nagy, B. R. Forsberg, & P. Artaxo (Eds.),
Interactions between biosphere, atmosphere and human land use in the
Amazon Basin (pp. 407–440). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
Leung, A. K.-Y., Koh, K., & Tam, K.-P. (2015). Being environmentally responsible:
Cosmopolitan orientation predicts pro-environmental behaviors. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 43, 79–94.
Downloaded by 179.182.97.134 from www.liebertpub.com at 08/15/18. For personal use only.
Liarakou, G., Athanasiadis, I., & Gavrilakis, C. (2011). What Greek secondary school
students believe about climate change? International Journal of Environmental
and Science Education, 6, 79–98.
Lorenzoni, I., Nicholson-Cole, S., & Whitmarsh, L. (2007). Barriers perceived to
engaging with climate change among the UK public and their policy
implications. Global Environmental Change, 17, 445–459.
Maibach, E. W., Kreslake, J. M., Roser-Renouf, C., Rosenthal, S., Feinberg, G., &
Leiserowitz, A. A. (2015). Do Americans understand that global warming is
harmful to human health? Annals of Global Health, 81, 396–409.
Mäkiniemi, J.-P. & Vainio, A. (2013). Moral intensity and climate-friendly food
choices. Appetite, 65, 54–61.
Malmsheimer, W., Heffernan, P., Brink, E., Crandall, D., Deneke, F., Galik, C., .
Stewart, J. (2008). Forest management solutions for mitigating climate change
in the United States. Journal of Forestry, 106, 115–173.
MCTI. [Brazilian Ministy of Science, Technology and Information.] (2017). Trajetórias
de mitigação e instrumentos de polı́ticas públicas para alcance das metas
brasileiras no acordo de Paris / Régis Rathmann . [et al.] — Brası́lia: Ministério da
Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovações e Comunicações, ONU Meio Ambiente. Retrieved
from http://sirene.mcti.gov.br/documents/1686653/2098519/Trajetorias-
Ebook-b_final.pdf/29c11698-b71d-4009-850c-a162090e1108.
Milfont, T. L. (2007). Psychology of environmental attitudes: A cross-cultural study
of their content and structure (Doctoral thesis presented at The University
of Auckland). Retrieved from https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/handle/
2292/1712
Milfont, T. L., & Duckitt, J. (2006). Preservation and utilization: Understanding the
structure of environmental attitudes. Medio Ambiente Y Comportamiento
Humano, 7, 29–50.
Milfont, T. L., & Duckitt, J. (2010). The environmental attitudes inventory: A valid and
reliable measure to assess the structure of environmental attitudes. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 30, 80–94.
Milfont, T. L., Duckitt, J., & Wagner, C. (2010). The higher order structure of
environmental attitudes: A cross-cultural examination. Interamerican Journal
of Psychology, 44, 263–273.
Nagy, L., Forsberg, B. R., & Artaxo, P. (2016). Interactions between biosphere,
atmosphere and human land use in the Amazon Basin. Berlin, Germany:
Springer-Verlag.
O’Connell, P., Peppler, D., & Craig, W. (1999). Peer involvement in bullying: Issues
and chalenges for intervention. Journal of Adolescence, 22, 437–452.
Ojala, M. (2007). Confronting macrosocial worries: Worry about environmental
problems and proactive coping among a group of young volunteers. Futures,
39, 729–745.
Ojala, M. (2012). How do children cope with global climate change? Coping
strategies, engagement, and well-being. Journal of Environmental Psychology,
32, 225–233.
ª MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC.
Oreskes, N. (2004). The scientific consensus on climate change. Science, 306,
doi:10.1126/science.1103618
Pato, C. (2004) Comportamento ecológico: Relações com valores pessoais e crenças
ambientais (Tese de doutorado). Universidade de Brası́lia, Brası́lia, Brasil.
Pato, C., & Higuchi (2018). Crenças ambientais e atitudes ecológicas. In Elali, G. A.; &
Cavalcante, S. (Orgs.). Psicologia Ambiental: conceitos para a leitura da relação
pessoa-ambiente. (pp. 36–46). São Paulo: Editora Vozes.
Pato, C., Ros, M., & Tamayo, A. (2005). Creencias y comportamiento ecológico: Un
estudio empı́rico con estudiantes brasileños. Medio Ambiente y Comportamiento
Humano, 6, 5–22.
Pato, C., & Tamayo, A. (2006). Valores, creencias ambientales y comportamiento
ecológico de activismo. Medio Ambiente y Comportamiento Humano, 17, 51–66.
Pato, C., & Tamayo, A. (2007). Valores, creencias ambientales y comportamiento
ecológico de ahorro de agua y energı́a. Revista de Psicologı´a Social, 22, 245–253.
Pidgeon, N. F. (2012). Public understanding of, and attitudes to, climate change: UK
and international perspectives and policy. Climate Policy, 12, S85–S106.
Pidgeon, N. F., & Fischhoff, B. (2011). The role of social and decision sciences in
communicating uncertain climate risks. Nature Climate Change, 1, 35–41.
Reynolds, T. W., Bostrom, A., Read, D., & Morgan, M. G. (2010). Now what do people
know about global climate change? Survey studies of educated laypeople. Risk
Analysis, 30, 1520–1538.
Riper, C. J. Van, Kyle, G., & Sutton, S. G. (2010). Australian community members’
attitudes toward climate change impacts at the Great Barrier Reef. In
Proceedings of the 2010 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium
(pp. 239–246). College Station, TX: Texas A&M University.
Roazzi, A. (1995). Categorização, formação de conceitos e processos de construção
de mundo: Procedimento de classificações múltiplas para o estudo de sistemas
conceituais e sua forma de análise através de métodos de análise
multidimensionais. Cadernos de Psicologia, 1, 1–27.
Roazzi, A., & Dias, M. da G. B. B. (2001). Teoria das facetas e avaliação na pesquisa
social transcultural: Explorações no estudo do juı́zo moral. In Conselho Regional
de Psicologia–13a Região PB/RN (Ed.), A diversidade da avaliação psicológica:
Considerações teóricas e práticas (pp. 157–190). João Pessoa, Brasil: Idéia.
Roazzi, A., Souza, B. C., & Bilsky, W. (2015). Facet theory: Searching for structure in
complex social, cultural and psychological phenomena. Recife, Brasil: Editora
Universitária da UFPE.
Rokeach, M. (1972). Beliefs, attitudes and values. A theory of organization and
change. London, UK: Jossey-Bass.
Rosa, D. C. B., Roazzi, A., & Higuchi, M. I. G. (2015). PSICAMB—Perfil de afinidade
ecológica: Um estudo sobre os indicadores da postura perante a natureza.
Psico, Porto Alegre, PUCRS, 46, 139–149.
Schultz, P. W. (2002). Inclusion with nature: Understanding human-nature
interactions. In P. Schmuck & P. W. Schultz (Eds.), The psychology of
sustainable development (pp. 61–78). New York, NY: Kluwer.
Schultz, P. W., Shriver, C., Tabanico, J. J., & Khazian, A. M. (2004). Implicit
connections with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 31–42.
Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),
Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 221–279). New York,
NY: Academic Press.
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theory and
empirical tests in 20 countries In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental
social psychology. New York, NY: Academic Press.
 VOL. 10 NO. 2  JUNE 2018 ECOPSYCHOLOGY 115
 HIGUCHI ET AL.
Siqueira, M. M. M. (2002). Metodologia para análise de ações no trabalho. In A. F.
Siqueira, M. M. M. Júnior, & S. G. Oliveira (Eds.), Cidadania, justiça e cultura nas
organizações (pp. 53–66). São Bernardo do Campo, Brasil: UMESP.
Smith, N., & Leiserowitz, A. (2012) The rise of global warming skepticism: Exploring
affective image associations in the United States over time. Risk Analysis, 32,
1021–1032.
Steg, L., Bolderdijk, J. W., Keizer, K., & Perlaviciute, G. (2014). An integrated framework
for encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: The role of values, situational
Downloaded by 179.182.97.134 from www.liebertpub.com at 08/15/18. For personal use only.
factors and goals. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 38, 104–115.
Steg, L., & Sievers, I. (2000). Cultural theory of individual perceptions of
environmental risks. Environment and Behavior, 32, 248–267.
Stern, P. C., & Dietz, T. (1994). The value basis of environmental concern. Journal of
Social Issues, 50, 65–84.
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T. D., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L. (1999). A value-belief-
norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism.
Human Ecology Review, 6, 81–97.
Stern, P. C., Kalof, L., Dietz, T., & Guagnano, G. A. (1995). Values, beliefs, and
proenvironmental action: Attitude formation toward emergent attitude objects.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 1611–1636.
Stokols, D., Misra, S., Runnerstrom, M. G., Hipp, J. A., & Katrina, H. (2009).
Psychology in an age of ecological crisis: From personal angst to collective
action. The American Psychologist, 64, 181–193.
Stoll-Kleemann, S., O’Riordan, T., & Jaeger, C. C. (2001). The psychology of denial
concerning climate mitigation measures. Evidence from Swiss focus groups.
Global Environmental Change, 11, 107–117.
Sundblad, E., Biel, A., & Gärling, T. (2009). Knowledge and confidence in knowledge
about climate change among experts, journalists, politicians, and laypersons.
Environment and Behavior, 41, 281–302.
Taber, F., & Taylor, N. (2009). Climate of concern—A search for effective strategies
for teaching children about global warming. International Journal of
Environmental & Science Education, 4, 97–116.
Thompson, S. C. G., & Barton, M. A. (1994). Ecocentric and anthropocentric
attitudes toward the environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 14,
149–157.
116 ECOPSYCHOLOGY JUNE 2018
Tribuzy, E. S. (2005). Variações da temperatura foliar do dossel e o seu efeito na
taxa assimilatória de CO2 na Amazônia Central (Doutorado em Ecologia de
Agroecossistemas). Universidade de São Paulo, Piracicaba, Brasil.
Turner, B. L., Lambin, E. F., & Reenberg, A. (2007). The emergence of land change science
for global environmental change and sustainability. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 20666–20671.
Uzzell, D. (2004). A psicologia ambiental como uma chave para mudar atitudes e
ações para com a sustentabilidade. In E. T. O. Tassara, E. P. Rabinovich, & M. C.
Guedes (Eds.), Psicologia e ambiente (pp. 363–388). São Paulo, Brasil: EDUC.
Wachholz, S., Artz, N., & Chene, D. (2014). Warming to the idea: University students’
knowledge and attitudes about climate change. International Journal of
Sustainability in Higher Education, 15, 128–141.
Weber, E. U. (1997). Perception and expectation of climate change: Precondition
for economic and technological adaptation. In K. Bazerman, M. Messick, D.
Tenbrunsel, & A. Wade-Benzoni (Eds.), Psychological perspectives to environmen-
tal and ethical issues in management (pp. 314–341). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Weber, E. U. (2010). What shapes perceptions of climate change? American
Psychologist, 1, 332–342.
Weber, E. U., Stern, P. C., & Elke, U. (2011). Public understanding of climate change
in the United States. American Psychologist, 66, 315–328.
Address correspondence to:
Maria Inês Gasparetto Higuchi
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia
Av. André Araújo
2.936 Manaus AM 69060-001
Brazil
E-mail: higuchi.mig@gmail.com
Received: November 1, 2017
Accepted: March 5, 2018