Despite the overwhelming global concern for environmental degradation, a paradox persists: only a relatively small proportion of individuals who express worry about climate change actively participate in climate activism. This intriguing phenomenon has prompted a comprehensive investigation into the psychological underpinnings that differentiate committed climate activists from passive supporters. Recent research spearheaded by Dr. Susilo Wibisono, a Lecturer at Murdoch University’s School of Psychology, delves into these dynamics by scrutinizing the diverse motivational and personality profiles that characterize climate action supporters.
Traditional discourse often homogenizes climate activists into a monolithic category, frequently painting radical environmentalists with a broad brush of zealotry or uniform idealism. However, this new inquiry challenges that simplistic notion by employing nuanced person-centered methodologies to dissect the heterogeneous nature of climate supporters. Dr. Wibisono underscores that there is a critical need to decode the intricate psychological architecture that motivates different individuals to engage in climate activism. Such distinctions could illuminate why some participants gravitate toward organized action while others falter despite sharing environmental concerns.
The collaborative study, pooling expertise from institutions including Murdoch University, the University of Queensland, Flinders University, Georgetown University, and Université du Québec à Montréal, deployed methodologically rigorous online surveys focused on approximately 500 U.S.-based climate supporters. Participants completed standardized psychological instruments designed to measure personality traits, social group identity, attitudes toward hierarchical power structures, and their propensity for participating in various climate-related actions. This approach allowed researchers to leverage psychometric data to model activist engagement patterns accurately.
Notably, the research delineated three discrete psychological profiles among climate supporters, each exhibiting unique behavioral tendencies and ideological leanings. The first profile, colloquially described as the “classic activist,” comprises individuals who exhibit high levels of conscientiousness, cooperation, and genuine investment in environmental issues. These individuals are typically involved in conventional climate actions, including petition signing, group membership, and public advocacy. Their engagement is often structured and sustained by a robust identification with the climate movement as a social collective.
In stark contrast, the second identified group embodies a more ambivalent disposition characterized by anxiety and low self-efficacy. These participants, while motivated by genuine concern, reveal hesitancy or an inability to translate concern into tangible activism. Their lower affiliation with climate groups leaves them psychologically unanchored and socially isolated from collective efforts. This nuanced category challenges the assumption that environmental concern straightforwardly predicts action and spotlights the emotional complexities that can immobilize potential supporters.
The most unexpected and analytically provocative discovery lies within the third cluster, which defies conventional expectations of climate activism. This group is typified by individuals who endorse hierarchical power structures, often believing in the legitimacy of unequal power distributions across social groups—an orientation that psychologists term “hierarchy enhancement.” Intriguingly, these hierarchy enhancers manifest a disproportionate proclivity toward radical and disruptive activism tactics that diverge from orthodox environmentalist approaches.
Dr. Wibisono hypothesizes that the radical activism exhibited by the third group may not stem from a profound commitment to ecological or social justice but rather from a competitive expression of dominant personality traits. This perspective reframes radicalism not merely as environmental zeal but as an outlet for enforcing social dominance, potentially instrumentalizing climate action as a platform for asserting power. The implication here is profound, suggesting that the motivational architecture underlying radical activism can be multifaceted and, at times, counterintuitive.
Such findings carry significant implications for climate movements and policy communicators. Recognizing that climate supporters are psychologically heterogeneous challenges the efficacy of monolithic calls to action and highlights the necessity of tailoring outreach strategies. Dr. Wibisono advocates for leveraging detailed psychological profiling to segment audiences, thereby crafting engagement approaches that resonate with the distinct motivational and emotional realities within the climate movement. This personalized approach promises to heighten efficacy in mobilizing a diverse supporter base.
Moreover, the study’s methodological innovation, utilizing person-centered statistical techniques, provides a replicable framework for dissecting complex social phenomena where categorical labels fail to capture nuanced individual differences. The integration of measures assessing power attitudes and group identity adds explanatory depth, situating climate activism within broader socio-psychological landscapes concerning authority and collective behavior. These methodological insights contribute valuably to the interdisciplinary field of environmental psychology.
Importantly, this research disrupts oversimplified narratives about the dichotomy of “good” versus “bad” activists by revealing a spectrum that includes individuals whose participation may be driven by psychological needs unrelated to climate justice per se. This reframing urges a reconsideration of how environmental movements engage with radical tactics and points toward the need for critical reflection on the internal dynamics of activist coalitions. The findings invite debate about the alignment between activism methods and movement values.
From a societal perspective, the study highlights the paradox that those most likely to partake in highly visible, disruptive actions may do so for reasons that complicate straightforward interpretations of climate activism. Understanding this diverse motivational architecture is crucial for policymakers, activists, and scholars seeking to navigate the ethics, efficacy, and public perception of climate protests. It raises questions about how movements negotiate internal diversity while maintaining coherent goals and harnessing genuine commitment.
Finally, the research advocates for a layered approach to public engagement with climate issues, one that transcends simplistic binary categorizations and embraces complexity in human behavior. As environmental challenges become increasingly urgent, activating a broad spectrum of societal actors remains a priority. Tailoring communication and intervention strategies to cater to the distinct psychological profiles uncovered in this study could play a strategic role in galvanizing comprehensive, sustainable climate action.
In conclusion, Dr. Susilo Wibisono’s study offers a penetrating exploration into the psychology of climate activism, revealing the heterogeneity that underpins public engagement in environmental issues. By uncovering distinct psychological types—from committed activists to anxious supporters and hierarchy-enhancing radicals—the research not only enriches theoretical understanding but also carries strategic implications for designing inclusive, effective climate movements. This nuanced perspective is instrumental for both advancing academic discourse and informing practical approaches to one of the defining challenges of our time.
Subject of Research: People
Article Title: Using person-centred analyses to predict engagement in collective action for the climate
News Publication Date: 12-Mar-2026
Web References: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666622726000079?via%3Dihub
References: Wibisono, S., et al. (2026). Using person-centred analyses to predict engagement in collective action for the climate. Current Research in Ecological and Social Psychology. DOI: 10.1016/j.cresp.2026.100268
Keywords: Environmental issues, Social psychology, Climate activism, Collective action, Hierarchy enhancement, Personality traits, Social identity, Radical activism, Psychological motivation
