Communicating Climate Change: Probabilistic Expressions and Concrete Events

Abstract

Despite near unanimous agreement among climate scientists about global warming, a substantial proportion of Americans remain skeptical or unconcerned. The two experiments reported here tested communication strategies designed to increase trust in and concern about climate change. They also measured attitudes toward climate scientists. Climate predictions were systematically manipulated to include either probabilistic (90% predictive interval) or deterministic (mean value) projections that described either concrete (i.e., heat waves and floods) or abstract events (i.e., temperature and precipitation). The results revealed that projections that included the 90% predictive interval were considered more trustworthy than deterministic projections. In addition, in a nationally representative sample, Republicans who were informed of concrete events with predictive intervals reported greater concern and more favorable attitudes toward climate scientists than when deterministic projections were used. Overall, these findings suggest that while climate change beliefs may be rooted in partisan identity, they remain malleable, especially when targeted communication strategies are used.

Pro-Environmental Sustainability and Political Affiliation: An Examination of USA College Sport Sustainability Efforts

“…Republicans significantly differed and had the lowest perceptions of climate change and understanding of the importance of sustainable behaviors compared to Independents and Democrats. These findings are consistent with prior research that found that Republicans had a more difficult time explaining climate change than their Democrat counterparts and were less motivated to make behavioral modifications [ 78 ].Similarly, RQ2 explored how political party affiliation related to environmental sustainability behavioral norms—particularly, ascription of responsibility and perception of behavioral control. Our results found significant differences among all three political affiliations specific to the ascription of responsibility.…”

The effects of communicating uncertainty around statistics on public trust: an international study

“…In no case did we find that expressions of uncertainty increase trust in numbers or their source. This is noteworthy as some previous research has found provision of uncertainty to increase credibility in some cases, for example in earthquake and climate projections (Joslyn & Demnitz, 2019;Joslyn & LeClerc, 2016;Nakayachi et al, 2018). However other studies have found no effect of uncertainty on credibility in other domains (e.g.…”

Improving the Use of Calibrated Language in U.S. Climate Assessments

“…Should these new models for climate assessments include calibrated language, use of alternative formats of likelihood (e.g., probabilities expressed verbally, numerically, graphically, or metaphorically) may address many of the issues noted in this study and better frame probabilistic risk for different audiences. Multiple studies have shown that combining verbal and numerical expressions of certainty, particularly numerical ranges of certainty, can be more effective than only using verbal terms (Budescu et al, 2009, 2012; Howe et al, 2019; Joslyn & Demnitz, 2019) and that understanding can be further improved by use of graphics (Lewis et al, 2019; Spiegelhalter et al, 2011).…”

“…A balanced means for communicating risk is needed, as presenting overly vague statements (being unduly comprehensive) or including caveats that capture inevitable uncertainty (being unduly conservative) further undermines trust in the messenger (Ho & Budescu, 2019; Lewandowsky et al, 2015; Somerville & Hassol, 2011). Climate change projections that acknowledge and express uncertainty, particularly as a range of probabilistic but concrete outcomes, can enhance scientific credibility (Ho & Budescu, 2019; Howe et al, 2019, and references therein; Joslyn & Demnitz, 2019).…”