Research in Progress: Working to limit the persuasiveness of greenwashing efforts

By Courtney Boman and Matthew VanDyke, University of Alabama

Have you encountered an online ad, or has something caught your eye at a store promoting sustainable or eco-friendly elements? Did you question if it was actually true or believe what the brand was stating? Environmental responsibility and sustainability are key components of any company’s corporate social responsibility efforts.

The prevalence of companies’ strategic messaging related to the environment – often showcasing how their organization, products, and/or services are environmentally responsible – is unsurprising. However, such messaging can become problematic when it (inadvertently) misleads consumers.

Recently, there has been increased attention to (dis/mis)information within public relations research and practice. Companies’ environmental communication efforts can become (dis/mis)information, as demonstrated by greenwashing strategies used by corporations.

Greenwashing is the act of purposely misleading consumers by promoting the perception that a company and its products or services are environmentally safe. The persuasive effects of greenwashing can undermine consumers' confidence and make them feel more confused about who or what to trust regarding sustainability.

Adding to this issue, the way scientific research is shared has shifted from being primarily publicized through traditional mass media formats (e.g., television and newspapers) to new media (e.g., blogs and social media). A conceptual lens that has been used to examine this phenomenon is social amplification to gauge the potential for proactive prebunking messages to perpetuate through social media ecosystems.

The nature of social media engagement is significant as it expands Facebook posts’ reach exponentially, including content such as prebunking posts, which can work to warn social media users about greenwashing.

In response to this issue, we will look at how prebunking communication strategies, which can forewarn individuals of greenwashing efforts and provide counterarguing points to said messages, can thwart the adverse effects of greenwashing on environmental legitimacy when published on social media.

Our project addresses the sustainability initiative set forth by the Page Center by examining how preemptive strategic messaging can effectively and ethically obstruct the persuasive effects of greenwashing campaigns.

Specifically, we are excited to expand upon published literature by evaluating whether the amplification of social media posts and/or autonomy support respectively moderate prebunkings effects on outcomes. Two specific study aims have been developed to guide this endeavor:

• Phase 1: A survey will help us better understand perceptions of greenwashing and sustainability communication. We will use an audience segmentation approach to determine how various publics (i.e., active, aware, and latent publics) view greenwashing.
• Phase 2: Through an online experiment, we aim to create a communication toolbox for professionals tasked with countering greenwashing through an online experiment guided by segmentation information captured in phase 1.

Through these two phases, our project seeks to guide industry practices, build upon theoretical frameworks, and propel future studies examining greenwashing and prebunking strategies. By merging the well-documented success of autonomy support, social amplification, and inoculation theory, we hope results from this project will provide holistic prebunking strategies for communication professionals and researchers to deploy to strengthen an individual’s ability to thwart unwanted persuasive attempts from greenwashing.

For further information on this study, please email Boman at boman@apr.ua.edu or VanDyke at vandyke@apr.ua.edu. Results from the study will be available next year. This project is supported by a 2022 Page/Johnson Legacy Scholar Grant from the Arthur W. Page Center.