Considering attitudinal uncertainty in the climate change skepticism continuum

Haltinner, Kristin; Sarathchandra, Dilshani

doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102243

Cited by 26 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Given the current epoch in which information about climate change is widely available and awareness of the issue is at an all-time high, we argue that uncertainty (stating one is unsure about climate change) is a passive act of resistance to climate science (Haltinner and Sarathchandra 2021a). In 2013, Riley Dunlap argued that climate skepticism is best thought of as a continuum from those skeptical about climate change but willing to engage with information to those who outright deny climate change and are unwilling to participate in open discussion on the matter.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Debates continue regarding the best terminology to use, with some using the term denier (Dunlap and McCright 2010), and others preferring skeptic (Rahmstorf 2004), or doubter (Capstick and Pidgeon 2014). When considering climate scientists specifically, McCright (2007) makes a compelling case for the term “contrarian.” Competing ideas also circulate regarding whether or not to include people “unsure” about climate change under the skeptic umbrella wherein some scholars argue they are not actively skeptical and therefore a different group, while others suggest a consideration of uncertainty to be central to understanding doubt around climate science (Haltinner and Sarathchandra 2021a; Poortinga et al 2011).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This work deviates from prior survey-based studies of climate skepticism that have typically compared skeptics with non-skeptics (e.g., McCright and Dunlap 2011a; Rahmstorf 2004). Instead, by zooming in on a unique sub-population of self-declared climate skeptics, we shed light on the environmental perspectives of both those who deny climate change and those who express attitudinal uncertainty about the phenomenon (Haltinner and Sarathchandra 2021a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Predictors of Pro-environmental Beliefs, Behaviors, and Policy Support among Climate Change Skeptics

Haltinner

Sarathchandra

2021

Social Currents

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research suggests that climate skeptics may hold a series of environmental concerns and support for environmental policy that, if engaged with, could serve to (in part) mitigate climate change. Using a unique data set from an online survey of 1,000 adults in the U.S. Pacific Northwest who are uncertain or skeptical of anthropogenic climate change, we explore the diversity of environmental concerns, environmental behaviors, and support for pro-environmental policy within and among those who do not accept climate science. Our results reveal statistically significant and consistent positive effects of (negative) environmental experiences on climate change skeptics’ environmental concerns, behaviors, and policy support. We also find that, among climate skeptics, religious ideation, conspiracy ideation, science distrust, political ideology (conservative), and gender (men) are negatively associated with certain pro-environmental attitudes, behaviors, and support for pro-environmental policy initiatives. We discuss the implications of these findings for climate change and science communication, environmental campaigns, and policy development.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Predictors of Pro-environmental Beliefs, Behaviors, and Policy Support among Climate Change Skeptics

Haltinner

Sarathchandra

2021

Social Currents

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Instead, conspiracy theories are made up of various argument lines, articulated more or less explicitly by different individuals and groups. The individuals and groups may be in conflict one with the other and may vary in the degree of doubt they cast on the official story, from moderate scepticism all the way to denialism (Capstick & Pidgeon, 2014;Dunlap, 2013;Grimes, 2021;Haltinner & Sarathchandra, 2021;Pierre, 2020). Nevertheless, the diverse contributions converge into a discourse that defends a conspiracy explanation of a certain significant event.…”

Section: Conspiracy Theories and The Argumentative Potential Of Doubtmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Argumentative Potential of Doubt: From Legitimate Concerns to Conspiracy Theories About COVID-19 Vaccines

Mohammed

Rossi

2022

Argumentation Library

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Doubt is a double-edge sword. On the one hand, uncertainty is essential for epistemic progress, and yet, doubt can also make us vulnerable to deception, confused to the point of no longer knowing what is true. What distinguishes a doubt that is epistemologically beneficial from one which is deceptive, or even manufactured in the context of a conspiracy theory? In this chapter, we explore doubt, its role, and the way it is being handled in the context of the public controversy about the COVID-19 vaccine. We approach conspiracy theories as argumentative discourses and reconstruct the generic structure of a conspiracy theory macro argument. Through the structure, we look into the discourse of the twelve prominent anti-vaxxers known as the “Disinformation Dozen”, focusing on the argumentative potential that doubt can have in the public controversy about the COVID-19 vaccine. We suggest to distinguish ambivalence from scepticism and denialism as three argumentative potentials that a motivated doubt can have. We argue that ambivalent doubt ought to be acknowledged, addressed and incorporated into the public health narrative, in order to avoid that an unnecessarily broad interpretation of conspiracy theory dominates the public debate and leaves an uncertain public a prey to it.

show abstract

“…Another aspect of the belief dimension that has been examined by a number of authors is certainty of belief. Previous studies have found that a number of people express uncertainty or doubt when asked about their climate beliefs (Hagen et al, 2016;Haltinner & Sarathchandra, 2021;Poortinga et al, 2011;Whitmarsh, 2011). For example, when asked if climate change is happening, many people will respond "I don't know".…”

Section: The Dimensions In Detail 221 Beliefmentioning

confidence: 99%

The dimensions of public opinion on climate change: belief, issue salience and support for government action

Crawley¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change is a problem that requires urgent attention. In most countries, large sections of the population accept that climate change is happening and that it is a serious problem. Despite this, the political response in many developed nations has so far been inadequate, and emissions continue to climb globally. Some authors have used this apparent lack of policy responsiveness to public preferences as evidence that vested interests have excessive influence over climate change policy. But this perspective does not fully account for the complexity of climate change opinion. For instance, many people who are highly concerned about climate change rank it as a low priority issue compared with issues such as the economy, healthcare and education. Moreover, some people who believe that climate change is happening and is a serious problem do not support government action to address it. I therefore investigate public opinion on climate change in terms of three dimensions: belief, issue salience and support for government action. Focussing on developed countries, I rely on survey data from Eurobarometer, the New Zealand Election Study and data collected as part of this research project. I investigate the nature of opinions with respect to these three dimensions and examine how opinions vary between individuals and across countries. Furthermore, I investigate the forces that shape climate opinion on these three dimensions, including external influence (such as messages from interest groups), individual characteristics (such as social and political attitudes) and country-level factors (such as country wealth). I find that belief is high in most developed countries, as is support for government action. However, salience is low in most countries, particularly in the less wealthy developed countries. Political orientation and other social attitudes relate positively to belief, issue salience and support for government action, although the relationships tend to be stronger for salience. By investigating the factors that shape climate opinion in different dimensions, this study contributes to knowledge of why people hold particular climate views. Moreover, my examination of the complexity of public opinion on climate change in terms of belief, issue salience and support for government action sheds light on why the political response to climate change has been ineffective in many countries.

show abstract

Considering attitudinal uncertainty in the climate change skepticism continuum

Cited by 26 publications

References 34 publications

Predictors of Pro-environmental Beliefs, Behaviors, and Policy Support among Climate Change Skeptics

Predictors of Pro-environmental Beliefs, Behaviors, and Policy Support among Climate Change Skeptics

The Argumentative Potential of Doubt: From Legitimate Concerns to Conspiracy Theories About COVID-19 Vaccines

The dimensions of public opinion on climate change: belief, issue salience and support for government action

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About