Echo chambers in climate science

Abstract

To date, echo chambers in American climate politics have been found to focus on the climate-related policy instrument that is under review. In this paper, we explore how echo chambers change over time, integrating data collected on the federal climate policy network after the first 100 days of the Trump Administration had passed with data collected during two periods during the Obama Administration. We employ Exponential Random Graph (ERG) models to test for the similarity and differences over time in the top policy actors working on the issue during each time period. We then compare the newer findings from 2017 to previous work on data from 2010 and 2016. We find that echo chambers continue to play a significant role in the network of information exchange among policy elites and in the adoption of new information sources over time. In contrast to previous findings, however, where echo chambers centered on specific policy instruments—a binding international commitment to emission reductions or the Obama Administration’s Clean Power Plan—opinion regarding whether or not climate change is caused by humans (i.e. is anthropogenic) has become the central organizing force behind echo chambers in the US climate policy network. These results provide new empirical evidence that ideological polarization drives the selection of expert information in the debate around climate politics. Moreover, our results show how misinformation diffuses among political elites working on the issue of climate change.