A Laughing matter? Confronting climate change through humor

Laughing With Science: The Influence of Audience Approval on Engagement

“…In our particular case study, we found that seeing a scientist explain scientific concepts in the form of stand-up comedy can be even more impactful when those consuming the routine are helped along by audience laughter. While previous research has established that science and, in particular, scientists can be funny (Boykoff & Osnes, 2018), audience approval can serve to heighten such effects.…”

Using humor to engage the public on climate change: the effect of exposure to one-sided vs. two-sided satire on message discounting, elaboration and counterarguing

“…At the same time, our study suggests that two-sided humor present in mediated content popular across social media outlets is not a panacea for reaching various audiences on such a divided topic. It may be that a face-to-face setting for such humor (e.g., stand-up comedy, a theatrical presentation) is better suited to such engagement, while viral video content is simply associated with the often vitriolic nature of online discussions surrounding the climate change debate [Bore and Reid, 2014;Boykoff and Osnes, 2019].…”

“…While research on the effects of exposure to satirical content about climate change ultimately suggests that these comedic messages might be a helpful tool in engendering greater awareness, activism, and a more civil public discourse [Boykoff and Osnes, 2019;Feldman, 2017], research has yet to explore how these satirical messages are processed by viewers and whether viewers engage differently with humorous content that offers a one-sided perspective on the issue of climate change (as has traditionally been privileged on TDS, TCR, and LWT) vs. a two-sided perspective, which is more similar to traditional news coverage of the climate change issue. In an effort to enhance our understanding of the net impact of comedic messages about climate change on issue engagement, the present investigation takes a step back to first consider how one-sided vs. two-sided satirical messages about climate change are processed, focusing on three related, yet distinct message processing variables including: (1) message discounting, (2) elaboration, and (3) counterarguing [Nabi, Moyer-Gusé and Byrne, 2007].…”

The Evolving Field of Risk Communication

“…Although many risk communication researchers historically recommended against the use of humor (e.g. due to concerns about trivializing risk issues; Ferrante, 2010), the topic received noteworthy attention over the last decade, especially in health, environmental, and precrisis risk domains (Blanc and Brigaud, 2014;Boykoff & Osnes, 2019;Moyer-Gusé, Mahood, & Brookes, 2011;Skurka, Niederdeppe, Romero-Canyas, & Acup, 2018). Some found that humor can, indeed, have negative effects such as by distracting audiences from the central risk message (Hansmann, Loukopoulos, & Scholz, 2009), or damaging intentions to uptake recommended behavior (Skurka et al, 2018).…”

“…Humor, however, can be highly beneficial when executed effectively in the right contexts. In reviewing the literature on humor and climate change, Kaltenbacher and Drews (2020) found that humor can raise awareness such as through cartoons, and memes (Ross & Rivers, 2019); help audiences psychologically cope and deal with negative emotions (Murthy & Gross, 2017); foster greater involvement (Anderson & Becker, 2018); influence perceptions and beliefs (Brewer & McKnight, 2017); help audiences overcome awkward or taboo risk issues (Browne, 2016); function as a learning vehicle (Boykoff & Osnes, 2019); and influence positive behavior changes (Skurka et al, 2018). While research seeking to capitalize on the risk-as-feelings literature continues to show promise, empirically tested risk communication applications remain in the nascent stages of development.…”