Inoculating the Public against Misinformation about Climate Change.

Sander Van Der Linden,Anthony Leiserowitz,Seth Rosenthal,Edward Maibach

doi:10.1002/gch2.201600008

Sander Van Der Linden, Anthony Leiserowitz + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1002/gch2.201600008

Copy DOI

Abstract

Effectively addressing climate change requires significant changes in individual and collective human behavior and decision‐making. Yet, in light of the increasing politicization of (climate) science, and the attempts of vested‐interest groups to undermine the scientific consensus on climate change through organized “disinformation campaigns,” identifying ways to effectively engage with the public about the issue across the political spectrum has proven difficult. A growing body of research suggests that one promising way to counteract the politicization of science is to convey the high level of normative agreement (“consensus”) among experts about the reality of human‐caused climate change. Yet, much prior research examining public opinion dynamics in the context of climate change has done so under conditions with limited external validity. Moreover, no research to date has examined how to protect the public from the spread of influential misinformation about climate change. The current research bridges this divide by exploring how people evaluate and process consensus cues in a polarized information environment. Furthermore, evidence is provided that it is possible to pre‐emptively protect (“inoculate”) public attitudes about climate change against real‐world misinformation.

Highlights

Addressing climate change requires significant changes in individual and collective human behavior and decision-making
This study finds that public attitudes about climate change can be effectively “inoculated” against influential misinformation
This research further extends these findings by presenting information about the consensus in a politically “contested” information environment, that is, countered by a real petition claiming that there is no scientific consensus on human-caused climate change

Summary

Introduction

Addressing climate change requires significant changes in individual and collective human behavior and decision-making. Numerous independent assessments have found that the scientific community has reached a near-unanimous consensus on the reality of human-caused climate change,[1,2,3,4] the general public has become increasingly polarized on the issue, in the United States.[5,6] This is problematic because has found that “perceived scientific agreement” is a key determinant of the public’s opinion on climate change.[16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23] In a complex and uncertain world, people often look to experts for guidance.[24] research has found that in the absence of motivation to cognitively elaborate on a message, people addressing global climate change will require large-scale changes in human behavior and decision-making.[7]

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion