Download Dynamics of Communicating Climate Change Information

 Dynamics of Communicating Climate Change Information
Communicating climate change information is a significant challenge because the information on which climate
change predictions are based is inevitably uncertain. Climate scientists are motivated to communicate these
uncertainties. Audiences, however, avoid messages that communicate uncertainty (Camerer & Weber, 1992)
and ambiguity in information can undermine responsible action (Kuhn, 1997, Einhorn & Hogarth, 1985). Thus
communicating uncertainty may inhibit audience responsiveness.
Against this backdrop, the broad aim of this PhD research is to examine the communication of climate change
information with particular attention to the role of the informer, information content, and audiences in this process.
These aims are being accomplished by using qualitative and quantitative research methodologies among various
actors relevant to the communication process - including climate scientists and climate science communicators
as transmitters of climate change information and the public as the recipients of climate change communications.
By triangulating the research to explore questions from different sides of the communication process and using a
mixed-methods approach, it is hoped that the research will provide a more complete understanding that connect
to the specific concerns of those actors involved in this process (i.e. audiences and communicators alike).
The qualitative work consists of fourteen in-depth interviews with climate scientists and climate change
communicators. The aim here was to explore how these experts conceptualise the process of climate change
communication; the various barriers and opportunities for communication they perceive; and how these barriers
influence their work. Indicative findings suggest that there are important differences between how climate
scientists and climate science communicators understand communication. Specifically, these actors tend to
follow different intuitive models of communication. Akin to the traditional ‘deficit model’, scientists work within an
‘informational’ framework; where further information provision is seen to be the solution for addressing
communication barriers. Professional communicators, in contrast, tend to work to a more ‘relational’ model of
communication; where understanding the audience, avoiding scientific language, using friendly language and a
warm ‘tone of voice’, are key to their communication style. Thus different actors emphasise the informational
versus relational aspects of communication and therefore focus on different solutions to communication failure.
Following on from this, quantitative studies have explored the interactive effects of informational and relational
forces on audience response to climate change messages. In one experimental study consisting of 152
participants, we varied the informational qualities of a climate change message (low versus high uncertainty) and
the relational style of the communicator (open versus corporate communication style). We then assessed
audience perceptions of the communicator, belief in climate change and willingness to act in response to climate
change. The results reveal significant interactions between informational and relational factors. Specifically, high
uncertainty typically undermines belief in climate change. Communications, however, that reflected an open
communication style buffered against these negative effects. In the context of an open communication style, high
uncertainty actually increased relevant intentions to action. Further analyses suggest that the effect of
communication style may be due to how it signals communicator trustworthiness. Together, these findings
suggest that while informational concerns are important to understanding the success or failure of climate change
communications, relational forces (e.g. how communicators are perceived) shape how these informational
concerns play out in terms of audience responses. Therefore addressing the barrier of uncertainty may not
always involve resolving uncertainty itself.
Researcher: Hebba Haddad
Email: [email protected]
Contact us:
Centre for Sport, Leisure & Tourism Research
University of Exeter Business School
Streatham Court
Rennes Drive
Exeter
EX4 4PU
[email protected]
www.exeter.ac.uk/slt
Research Partner: Met Office