Search

We propose two contrasting types of student decision-making based on social and cognitive psychology models of separate mental processes for problem solving. Informal decision-making uses intuitive reasoning and is subject to cognitive biases, whereas formal decision-making uses effortful, logical reasoning. We explored indicators of students' formal decision-making in a socioscientific issue-focused general science post-secondary course that used a seven-step decision-making framework based in decision-science models. We found that students' value orientations predicted students' stance towards biofuels at the beginning but not at the end of the course, indicating some students' post-survey opinions were less rooted in affective value-judgments. Themes in student personal reasoning about biofuels were primarily focused on environmental and economic dimensions of the issue and revealed a greater awareness of alternative options and potential consequences of biofuel use at the end of the course. We observed a decrease in students' emotive arguments and an increase in students' justificatory arguments about biofuel use. A formal decision-making framework may be a useful tool in supporting students' formal, reasoned approach to deciding what we should do about complex socioscientific issues.

Encouraging sustainable water use is a critical endeavor in addressing issues associated with short- and long-term droughts. Toilets account for up to 26.7% of indoor household water use. Therefore substantial opportunity exists to conserve water via reduced flushing after urination at home. Here, we use an online survey ( N = 1008) to identify barriers to reduced flushing. The majority of participants reported they always flush (63%) and believed that others should always flush. Social norms surrounding cleanliness are the most prevalent reasons for flushing. Results suggest four main barriers to reducing flushing: disgust sensitivity, habitual nature of flushing, norms regarding cleanliness, and lack of pro-environmental motivations. Participants who always flush are less likely to sacrifice for the environment than occasional flushers. Participants tended to underestimate average American water use and their own water use. Targeted interventions to decrease urine-related disgust and increase pro-environmental motivations may help achieve water conservation goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Decision-making about large carnivores is complex and controversial, and processes vary from deliberation and expert analysis to ballot boxes and courtrooms. Decision-makers range from neighboring landowners to the United Nations. Efficacy, longevity and legitimacy of policies may often depend as much on process as the policy itself. Overcoming controversy requires greater understanding of preferences for decision-makers and processes as well as deeper beliefs about human-carnivore interactions. Although academic debates are rich with recommendations for governance, practitioners' perceptions regarding decision-making processes have been rarely examined. Doing so can facilitate constructive discourses on managing and conserving carnivores across highly-variable social-ecological landscapes. To gain insight into different viewpoints on governance regarding large carnivore conservation, we asked a global community of conservation professionals (n = 505) about their preferences for governance alternatives for carnivore conservation through an online survey. Respondents agreed that government biologists should make decisions while legislators and commissions received low agreement and less consensus. Findings also indicated a general rejection of turning decision processes completely over to the general public, to courts, or to politicians who are perceived as lacking both technical knowledge and local insights. We found evidence for consensus on best management processes using a combination of science, local knowledge and participatory decision-making. According to our sample, sustainable coexistence strategies may require significant shifts in processes that remove mistrusted political influences vis-à-vis ballot boxes, courtrooms, commissions and legislative chambers. Our sample believed governance structures that combine technical expertise with local perspectives in a co-management framework may best withstand tests of time and controversy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]