Climate Communication: The Case against Over-Emphasizing Worst Case Scenarios

• In Event: Climate Change Technology, Public Opinion, and Misinformation

Abstract

A substantial literature exists investigating the promulgation of misinformation about climate change (eg: Elessar and Dunlap, 2013), how that has contributed to polarized attitudes towards climate change (Horsney et al, 2018), and how those factors together has made climate policy more difficult to pass in the US (Ehret et al, 2018). This literature primarily focuses on misinformation coming from climate denialists. To be sure, misinformation that denies or downplays the existence of anthropogenic climate change is a much larger issue than misinformation that exaggerates climate threat. However, much less work exists looking at how climate messages that are incorrectly pessimistic also serve to exacerbate polarization and dampen motivation to act. Take for example, Congresswoman (D-NY) Ocasio-Cortez’s claim, that, “the world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change” (Cummings, 2019). While scientists have warned that we have a short time-frame to mitigate climate change, Ocasio-Cortez’s statement is false and has been debunked (Hausfater, 2019). However, misinformation can be inoculated against (van der Linden et al, 2017), but it remains unclear how long the inoculation can be effective in the real world (Nyhan, 2021). Messages containing dire warnings (known as dire warnings theory) about climate change have been investigated by psychologists, finding that these messages are often counter-productive because they cause fear, anxiety, and apathy (eg: O’Neill & Leiserowitz, 2009; Pietras, 2022). However, the extant literature pays little attention to the role of dire misinformation coming from climate advocates. Thus, the purpose of this research is to bridge the literature on climate misinformation and dire warnings theory. This research will advance in three phases. Phase one of this research program seeks to catalog and describe the prevalence of misinformation from the climate left. First, I will perform a qualitative analysis of climate communication on the left. This work will seek to describe sources of misinformation within the climate movement. While climate advocates have good intentions, wishing to spur the public to action, these messages can be counterproductive. Accordingly, in phase two, I will analyze the persistence of beliefs based on misinformation in the public using publicly available data sources. Finally, in phase three, I will conduct a conjoint experiment examining ways to correct misinformation and how this can influence beliefs and behaviors.

Author

• Aaron C Sparks, Elon University