Download Document

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts

Climate change mitigation wikipedia , lookup

Climate resilience wikipedia , lookup

Myron Ebell wikipedia , lookup

Michael E. Mann wikipedia , lookup

ExxonMobil climate change controversy wikipedia , lookup

Heaven and Earth (book) wikipedia , lookup

Climatic Research Unit email controversy wikipedia , lookup

Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup

Climate change adaptation wikipedia , lookup

Soon and Baliunas controversy wikipedia , lookup

Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup

Effects of global warming on human health wikipedia , lookup

Climate engineering wikipedia , lookup

Climate change in Tuvalu wikipedia , lookup

Climate governance wikipedia , lookup

Climate change denial wikipedia , lookup

Climate sensitivity wikipedia , lookup

Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup

General circulation model wikipedia , lookup

Mitigation of global warming in Australia wikipedia , lookup

Climatic Research Unit documents wikipedia , lookup

Effects of global warming wikipedia , lookup

Global warming controversy wikipedia , lookup

Fred Singer wikipedia , lookup

Physical impacts of climate change wikipedia , lookup

Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia , lookup

Media coverage of global warming wikipedia , lookup

Climate change in the United States wikipedia , lookup

Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup

Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment wikipedia , lookup

Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup

Instrumental temperature record wikipedia , lookup

Global warming hiatus wikipedia , lookup

Global warming wikipedia , lookup

Attribution of recent climate change wikipedia , lookup

Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup

Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup

Effects of global warming on Australia wikipedia , lookup

Politics of global warming wikipedia , lookup

Business action on climate change wikipedia , lookup

Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup

Climate change feedback wikipedia , lookup

Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup

IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup

Transcript
Polarizing Messages Change Nothing: A Realistic
Look at Messaging Effects on Environmental Attitudes
John F. Weaver (CSU), Lindsey C. Harkabus (TU), & Steve Miller (CSU)
Method
Purpose
This study examined how polarizing messages that emphasize
different consequences of global warming (e.g., provide messages
about environmental threats using fear appeals versus mild
information) may differentially effect individual’s attitudes toward
the environment, global warming, and climate knowledge.
Participants
Results
Experiment 1
N=365; 228 females; 95% aged 18-22; 78% Caucasian; 64% freshman; 30%
Democrat, 36% Republican; 30% Independent/Other
Procedure/Measures
3 Conditions + survey of global warming attitudes (GWAT), brief inventory
of values (BIV), new environmental paradigm (NEP), belief in just world
(BJW), and climate knowledge questions
FEAR APPEAL
INFORMATIONAL
M1: Some scientists believe that dangerous global
warming is taking place right now, that it is being driven
almost entirely by excessive human activity (day-to-day
driving, long distance travel, heating/cooling of homes
and businesses, manufacturing, etc.), and that if left
unchecked, it could lead to irreparable environmental
damage within relatively short time. This group strongly
believes that; 1) the country must curtail a significant
portion of its power usage (including day-to-day driving,
long distance travel, heating/cooling of homes and
businesses, etc),as well as much of its manufacturing, at
least until alternative, green energy sources are fully
developed, 2) the government should pass strict
regulations to assure compliance, including heavy fines
for non-compliance, and 3) gasoline should be taxed so
that prices double, or even triple, in order to force
people, economically, to reduce their driving.
Introduction
Concerns over the consequences of climate change have been
expressed publically in a variety of media by a variety of outlets.
Despite the numerous and varied appeals it is apparent that both
uncertainty and confusion regarding climate change remain (e.g.,
Bostrom, Morgan, Fischhoff, & Read,1994; Read, Bostrom,
Morgan, Fischhoff, Smuts, & Reynolds, 1994; Reynolds et al.,
2010). Unfortunately, this confusion may be a result of ineffective
messaging content and technique.
Messages that use informational techniques and messages that
accentuate harmful consequences (fear appeals) often illicit mixed
results (Hass, Bagley, & Rogers 1975; Higbee, 1969; Rogers,
1975). Using messages highlighting information sometimes results
in immediate behavioral changes, however long-term effects are
mixed, whereas using fear-appeal messages often produces
unwanted results, including reactance (Brehm, 1966; DeJong,
2002). The present study utilizes a survey designed to test the idea
that polarizing warning messages on the topic of climate change
may help facilitate reactance and decrease actual climate
knowledge.
Two studies were run to examine the following questions:
Experiment 1: Does environmental
messaging affect attitude immediately?
Experiment 2: Does message
manipulation affect attitude over time?
Participants
M2: A certain percentage of scientists realize
that the global mean temperature has risen roughly
one degree Celsius over the past 160years and
believe that some portion of this warming is due to
human activity. These scientists suggest that the
environment may be affected if this trend
continues over the next several decades. They
suggest that the human contribution could be
reduced through simple conservation measures
such as traveling a little less and conserving
energy whenever possible. They reason that most
people feel that conservation is not a bad thing,
anyway.
Experiment 1 Political party group means, standard deviations & multivariate effects
CONTROL
M3: Scientists know that the earth is the third
planet from the sun, that it revolves around the sun
in 365 days and that it is positioned between Venus
and Mars. Seventy-one percent of the surface is
water, the rest is land. The next several questions
are designed to test participants’ beliefs and
attitudes on the topic of global warming.
Experiment 2
T1 = 196; T2 = 148; T3 = 129; female (58%); caucasian (71%); 95%
aged 18-22; 32% Democrat, 34% Republican, and 34% Independent/Other
Procedure
T1 = baseline for global warming GWA), brief inventory of values (BIV), new
environmental paradigm (NEP), climate knowledge, and general self-esteem.
T2 = message manipulation & fillers. T3 = final scores on all measures
inventoried during Time 1.
FEAR APPEAL
M1: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (www.ipcc.ch)
concludes in its 4th Assessment Report that global warming has been occurring for
some time (at least since the early 1800’s), and has very likely been being driven
by human activities. The report suggests that increased production of gases such as
carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide by human activity effectively trap
Earth’s heat in a way similar to the function of a greenhouse. In fact, many
scientists believe that the global mean temperature is increasing at an alarming
rate. The impacts of human-induced warming are not limited to temperature.
Climate modelers suggest that human activities have likely contributed to glacial
melting and sea level rise during the latter half of the 20th century, changed wind
patterns that affect storm tracks, increased frequency of heat waves and cold
snaps, and increased risk of both flooding events and droughts. They contend that,
if our actions are left unmitigated, they could lead to serious and potentially
irreparable damage to the biosphere, upon whose resources we rely. This could
happen within a relatively short period of time. More troubling still is the
possibility of reaching a climatological ‘tipping point’ where the climate system is
forced in a runaway greenhouse effect, similar to the current state of the planet
Venus. The IPCC recommendation is for immediate and significant mitigation
efforts (in terms of globally enforced policies on greenhouse gas emission
reductions) to slow down the human-induced climate change processes which are
already very much underway.
Experiment 1 different message conditions did not create differences in
participant attitudes toward global warming or other variables measured.
Experiment 1 differences in GWAT, NEP, BIV, and BJW are found when
examining differences among political parties Wilk’s Lambda 3.68, p<.001.
Differences in all variables exist between Republicans and both Democrats and
Independents, however Democrats and Independents only exhibit differences
in BIV and GWAT (although both score more favorably than Republicans).
INFORMATIONAL
M2: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (www.ipcc.ch)
concludes in its 4th Assessment Report that global warming has been occurring
since the early 1800’s. They point to climatological records that show the global
mean temperature has risen between 1 and 1.5 degrees C. Most scientists agree on
this estimate, though many point out that early thermometers were much less
accurate than those of the past 50 years and also that the global coverage of
thermometers was much less in the past. A number of climate researchers attribute
global warming predominately to human activities. They point to an increase of
gases such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide produced by human
activity. These gases can trap Earth’s heat in a way similar to the function of a
greenhouse. They caution that carbon dioxide cannot be removed by the effects of
weather and that it can reside in the atmosphere upwards of a decade. However,
other scientists (e.g., www.petitionproject.org) point to the fact that CO2
constitutes only about 0.04% of the atmosphere and the increase in temperature due
to adding CO2 decreases exponentially the more that is added. Also, methane is a
trace gas -- with a concentration of only about 0.0002%. This group of scientists
points to longer-term temperature records (derived over the past 3,000 years from
ice and sediment cores) which show large variations in temperature, including
warmer periods than the present, which had absolutely nothing to do with human
activity, but instead relate to natural fluctuations within the complex climate
system. While not discounting human influence, these scientists question
predictions of dire consequences. They challenge the current ability of climate
prediction models to accurately represent the complex and interactive climate
system , much less to give credible guidance on what might happen next. At
present, climate modeling does have some serious shortcomings in dealing with
critical processes involving global cloudiness and the biosphere. Also, ocean and
atmosphere processes and their interactions – which govern the abundance of
atmospheric water vapor—are entirely parameterized. Water vapor is a much
stronger greenhouse gas than any of the other gases that reside in the atmosphere.
Such shortcomings have forced modelers to introduce energy balance ‘corrections’
that are significantly larger than the greenhouse gas influences themselves to
describe our current climate state. Thus, while viewing the global warming issue
with increasing scientific interest, some feel it premature to regard the forecast of
dire consequences as pre-mature and urge caution in supporting excessive adaptive
strategies at the present time.
Brief Inventory of Values
New Environmental Paradigm
Just World Belief
Global Warming Attitudes
Republican
M
(SD)
2.66
(.54)
2.97
(.43)
3.09
(.62)
2.99
(.53)
Democrat
M
(SD)
2.33
(.47)
2.66
(.39)
2.92
(.66)
3.47
(.51)
Independent
M
(SD)
2.52
(.42)
2.68
(.47)
2.84
(.57)
3.23
(.40)
F
P
8.82
.00
12.96
.00
3.29
.02
18.62
.00
Experiment 2 messages provided did not create differences in participant
attitudes, however results reveal message information may affect climate
knowledge and those differences in climate knowledge appear to last over time
(differences in climate knowledge based off condition exist at both T2 and T3).
The content of the mild message may provide explanation for the differences
in climate knowledge; what is interesting is that the participants did not just
learn the climate information, they retained it.
Experiment 2 political party differences matched those produced in
Experiment 1.
Conclusions
• Strong, fear-based messaging on global warming did not affect
environmental attitude either immediately, or over time.
• Participants who received the mild/informational global warming
messaging, containing some atmospheric climate information, seem to have
learned and retained this information.
•Mild-informational messages may impact actual learning of climate
information – Future question on whether this information can impact
attitudes over time as well?!
• In agreement with previous studies, political affiliation seems to be a
factor in environmental attitudes and beliefs, with Republicans being the
most skeptical.
•Democrats and Independents have very similar scores on most variables
measured, however both Democrats and Independent produced more
favorable attitudes toward the issue of global warming, attitudes toward the
environment in general, and valuing the environment when compared to
Republicans.
To receive a copy please email Lindsey Harkabus at [email protected]