No abstract

Prior research on the influence of various ways of framing anthropogenic climate change (ACC) do not account for the organized ACC denial in the U.S. media and popular culture, and thus may overestimate these frames' influence in the general public. We conducted an experiment to examine how Americans' ACC views are influenced by four promising frames for urging action on ACC (economic opportunity, national security, Christian stewardship, and public health)-when these frames appear with an ACC denial counter-frame. This is the first direct test of how exposure to an ACC denial message influences Americans' ACC views. Overall, these four positive frames have little to no effect on ACC beliefs. But exposure to an ACC denial counter-frame does significantly reduce respondents' belief in the reality of ACC, belief about the veracity of climate science, awareness of the consequences of ACC, and support for aggressively attempting to reduce our nation's GHG emissions in the near future. Furthermore, as expected by the Anti-Reflexivity Thesis, exposure to the ACC denial counter-frame has a disproportionate influence on the ACC views of conservatives (than on those of moderates and liberals), effectively activating conservatives' underlying propensity for anti-reflexivity.

The purpose of this analysis is to explore how U.S. grower perceptions of the future potential of different weed management approaches is conditioned by faith in technological fixes and how the latter is influenced by the rate and persistence of herbicide resistant weeds (HRW). We ground our analysis in rural studies literature on location and environmental sociological evaluations of techno-optimism. Using a coding typology of techno-optimism,-skepticism, anddissonance, focus group data show that farmers in Southern states responded with more skepticism and dissonance to the potential of chemical herbicides as a solution to HRW while farmers in Northern states, where there have historically been fewer HRW, have greater optimism in the potential of chemicals to solve the problem. We conclude that (1) the presence of HRWs provides an important context for farmer ideology and (2) those working with farmers in areas with high HRW rates may be able to tap into the skepticism and dissonance farmers feel toward the future potential of chemical herbicide solutions by providing integrated weed management alternatives.

No abstract

No abstract