Abstract
The United States wields disproportionate global influence in terms of carbon dioxide emissions and international climate policy. This makes it an especially important context in which to examine the interplay among social, psychological, and political factors in shaping attitudes and behaviors related to climate change. In this article, we review the emerging literature addressing the liberal-conservative divide in the U.S. with respect to thought, communication, and action concerning climate change. Because of its theoretical and practical significance, we focus on the motivational basis for skepticism and inaction on the part of some, including “top-down” institutional forces, such as corporate strategy, and “bottom-up” psychological factors, such as ego, group, and system justification. Although more research is needed to elucidate fully the social, cognitive, and motivational bases of environmental attitudes and behavior, a great deal has been learned in just a few years by focusing on specific ideological factors in addition to general psychological principles.
Highlights
The scientific community exhibits widespread agreement about anthropogenic climate change and the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (Anderegg et al, 2010)
1,024 Americans in 2012 revealed that 42% contend that climate change claims are “generally exaggerated” and that political conservatives are more skeptical of climate change than liberals (Saad, 2012)
We have reviewed recent work in sociology, psychology, and political science that illuminates both “top-down” and “bottomup” factors contributing to the ideological divide concerning climate change
Summary
The scientific community exhibits widespread agreement about anthropogenic climate change and the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (Anderegg et al, 2010). It seems especially pertinent that denial and skepticism are not uniformly distributed across the political landscape; conservatives express greater skepticism about climate change and more opposition to climate-related policies than liberals (e.g., Weber and Stern, 2011; Liu et al, 2014). In the APA report, Swim et al (2010) cited just two studies addressing the ideological divide over climate change policy (Dunlap and McCright, 2008; Hardisty et al, 2010). A literature has emerged to analyze liberal-conservative differences in climate-related attitudes and behaviors, including studies that have highlighted motivational factors that help to explain the ideological divide and its implications for political action (or inaction) when it comes to climate change.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
