Support for environmental protection: an integration of ideological-consistency and information-deficit models

Ehret, Phillip J.; Sparks, Aaron C.; Sherman, David K.

doi:10.1080/09644016.2016.1256960

Cited by 50 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Early studies of climate change perceptions presumed the problem was a lack of factual information, which could be supplied. Research finds only partial support for this simple information deficit hypothesis, however (Hamilton 2008, Hart and Nisbet 2011, Kahan et al 2012, Hamilton et al 2012, Zhou 2016, Ehret et al 2017. Although education and scientific literacy have detectable effects, compatible with information deficit, political indicators exhibit stronger and more consistent effects.…”

Section: Political Polarity Of Climate Changementioning

confidence: 93%

“…Moreover, to avoid disconfirming information, individuals also prefer information sources that reinforce their predispositions (Slater 2007, Zhao 2009, McCright 2011, Hamilton 2014, Feldman et al 2014, Jasny et al 2015, or keep them informed of party and leadership positions (Darmofal 2005, Brulle et al 2012)-patterns of selective exposure. Education can aid these processes by mediating media use (Zhao 2009, Zhao et al 2011, Ehret et al 2017, and interacting with political identity to further polarization on politicized issues (Hamilton 2008, Hamilton and Keim 2009, Hamilton et al 2015b, McCright and Dunlap 2011. Whether selecting or evaluating information, media sources play a critical role in maintaining the division over anthropogenic climate change (Jasny et al 2015.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The News You Choose: news media preferences amplify views on climate change

Bolin

Hamilton

2018

Environmental Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How do choices among information sources reinforce political differences on topics such as climate change? Environmental sociologists have observed large-scale and long-term impacts from news media and think-tank reports, while experimental science-communication studies detect more immediate effects from variations in supplied information. Applying generalized structural equation modeling (GSEM) to recent survey data, previous work is extended to show that political ideology, education, and their interaction predict news media information choices in much the same way they predict opinions about climate change itself. Consequently, media information sources serve as intervening variables that can reinforce and, through their own independent effects, amplify existing beliefs about climate change. Results provide empirical support for selective exposure and biased assimilation as mechanisms widening political divisions on climate change in the United States. The findings fit with the reinforcing spirals framework suggesting partisan media strengthens climate change beliefs which then influences subsequent use of media.

show abstract

Section: Political Polarity Of Climate Changementioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The News You Choose: news media preferences amplify views on climate change

Bolin

Hamilton

2018

Environmental Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…How can local communities become empowered to drive project development and meaningfully engage in the low-carbon energy transition? Until recently, citizens' experience of the energy domain has been framed in terms of information gaps or information deficits [26,27]. This has seen policies often driven by misplaced assumptions that by simply providing appropriate amounts of information, citizens will respond accordingly, switching away from negative behaviours and engaging in more ecologically sustainable practices (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community acceptability and the energy transition: a citizens’ perspective

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Every energy transition has had its winners and its losers, both economically and in terms of social justice and community cohesion. The current transition is no different given the complex, intersecting matrices of power and experience that influence the key stakeholders and actors involved. Local oppositions to the deployment of renewable energy technologies have been significantly higher than expected. In numerous instances, these oppositions have been in reaction to the disempowerment of local rights and entitlements associated with specific developments. Consequently, there is a clear need for governance structures and organisational formats that are participatory, inclusive and mindful of the lived experiences of local people. Despite the knowledge gaps and financial constraints that continue to persist, how can local communities become empowered to drive project development and meaningfully engage in the low-carbon energy transition? Methods: This paper presents a methodology for investigating citizen perceptions of the energy transition and the kinds of roles they see themselves having in its implementation. Working with six communities across five European countries (France, Ireland, Italy, Spain, and the UK), we conducted a series of iterative cross-sectional community engagements using a mixed methods approach. In addition, a number of innovative participatory action research tools were incorporated to engage citizens in co-designing their own energy transition pathways. Results: Participants expressed having restricted agency as citizens participating in the energy system. They also felt locked in to a limiting set of false choices as 'energy consumers' that do not translate into real or meaningful power, despite popular narratives to the contrary. The research also resulted in a co-designed characterisation tool to help local communities assess the energy democracy and citizen participation potential of a number of participatory business models. Conclusions: Citizens remain locked out of the decision-making processes of the energy transition. We outline a more integrated approach, using co-design and participatory action research, to incorporate citizen perspectives into the planning and implementation of more appropriate business configurations. This paper presents demonstrable examples of how extended stakeholder perspectives can improve procedural justice outcomes and ensure the rollout of more equitable energy configurations into the future.

show abstract

“…positively correlates-or even negatively correlates-with belief among those who identify on the political right (Bolin & Hamilton, 2018;Drummond & Fischhoff, 2017b;Ehret et al, 2017;Hamilton, 2011Hamilton, , 2016McCright & Dunlap, 2011;van der Linden et al, 2018). Consequently, the strongest partisan disagreement tends to be observed between the most educated citizens, those who would seem best equipped to parse the relevant evidence and approach bipartisan consensus on the facts of the issue.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking the link between cognitive sophistication and politically motivated reasoning

Tappin¹,

Pennycook²,

Rand³

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Partisan disagreement is a salient feature of contemporary American politics. A surprising but robust aspect of this disagreement is that it is often the greatest among individuals who are the most cognitively sophisticated. A popular hypothesis for this phenomenon is that cognitive sophistication magnifies “politically motivated reasoning”—reasoning driven by the motivation to reach conclusions congenial to one’s political group identity. However, in the designs of studies supporting this hypothesis, the effect of political group identity is typically conflated with the effect of specific prior beliefs about the issue under study; and reasoning can be affected by such beliefs in the absence of any political group motivation. The diagnosticity of existing evidence is thus ambiguous. To shed new light on this issue, we conducted three experiments in which we statistically controlled for people’s specific prior beliefs—isolating the direct effect of political group identity—when estimating the association between their cognitive sophistication, political group identity, and reasoning in the paradigmatic design used in the literature. Despite observing a robust direct effect of political group identity (per se) on reasoning, we found no evidence that cognitive sophistication magnifies this effect. In contrast, we found fairly consistent evidence that cognitive sophistication magnifies a direct effect of specific prior beliefs on reasoning. We conclude that there is currently a lack of compelling empirical evidence that cognitive sophistication magnifies politically motivated reasoning as commonly understood.

show abstract

Support for environmental protection: an integration of ideological-consistency and information-deficit models

Cited by 50 publications

References 43 publications

The News You Choose: news media preferences amplify views on climate change

The News You Choose: news media preferences amplify views on climate change

Community acceptability and the energy transition: a citizens’ perspective

Rethinking the link between cognitive sophistication and politically motivated reasoning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About