The impacts of political cues and practical information on climate change decisions

Abstract

Adapting to climate change will require people to make measured decisions, informed by the science relevant to those choices. Communicating that science is complicated by the politicization of the topic. In two studies, we ask how political cues, designed to evoke individuals’ sense of identity as believers or nonbelievers in global warming, affect a hypothetical decision: buying a home vulnerable to coastal flooding exacerbated by global warming using the Zillow® real estate website. In both studies, we manipulate participants’ frame of reference by focusing them on risks due to ‘elevation’, ‘global warming’, or both, or mentioning neither. We also examine how immersion in practical details affects the power of these cues by manipulating whether participants have access to Risk Finder (http://sealevel.climatecentral.org), an interactive decision aid. Study 1 asks about global warming beliefs after their decision; Study 2 asks beforehand. Both find that immersion in practical information, using Risk Finder, overrode political identity cues. When framed in terms of both elevation and global warming and without explicit expression of global warming beliefs (Study 1), participants’ responses reflected their beliefs. The results suggest that communications should acknowledge political differences and then focus on practical decisions and the science that can inform them.