Emotional responses to climate change information and their effects on policy support

IF 3.3 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Frontiers in Climate Pub Date : 2023-08-23 DOI:10.3389/fclim.2023.1135450
Teresa A. Myers, C. Roser-Renouf, E. Maibach
{"title":"Emotional responses to climate change information and their effects on policy support","authors":"Teresa A. Myers, C. Roser-Renouf, E. Maibach","doi":"10.3389/fclim.2023.1135450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As emotions are strong predictors of climate policy support, we examined multiple discrete emotions that people experience in reaction to various types of information about climate change: its causes, the scientific consensus, its impacts, and solutions. Specifically, we assessed the relationships between four types of messages and five discrete emotions (guilt, anger, hope, fear, and sadness), testing whether these emotions mediate the impacts of information on support for climate policy.An online experiment exposed participants (N = 3,023) to one of four informational messages, assessing participants' emotional reactions to the message and their support for climate change mitigation policies as compared to a no-message control group.Each message, except the consensus message, enhanced the feeling of one or more emotions, and all of the emotions, except guilt, were positively associated with policy support. Two of the messages had positive indirect effects on policy support: the impacts message increased sadness, which in turn increased policy support, and the solutions message increased hope, which increased policy support. However, the solutions message also reduced every emotion except hope, while the impacts, causes, and consensus messages each suppressed hope.These findings indicate that climate information influences multiple emotions simultaneously and that the aroused emotions may conflict with one another in terms of fostering support for climate change mitigation policies. To avoid simultaneously arousing a positive motivator while depressing another, message designers should focus on developing content that engages audiences across multiple emotional fronts.","PeriodicalId":33632,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Climate","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Climate","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2023.1135450","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As emotions are strong predictors of climate policy support, we examined multiple discrete emotions that people experience in reaction to various types of information about climate change: its causes, the scientific consensus, its impacts, and solutions. Specifically, we assessed the relationships between four types of messages and five discrete emotions (guilt, anger, hope, fear, and sadness), testing whether these emotions mediate the impacts of information on support for climate policy.An online experiment exposed participants (N = 3,023) to one of four informational messages, assessing participants' emotional reactions to the message and their support for climate change mitigation policies as compared to a no-message control group.Each message, except the consensus message, enhanced the feeling of one or more emotions, and all of the emotions, except guilt, were positively associated with policy support. Two of the messages had positive indirect effects on policy support: the impacts message increased sadness, which in turn increased policy support, and the solutions message increased hope, which increased policy support. However, the solutions message also reduced every emotion except hope, while the impacts, causes, and consensus messages each suppressed hope.These findings indicate that climate information influences multiple emotions simultaneously and that the aroused emotions may conflict with one another in terms of fostering support for climate change mitigation policies. To avoid simultaneously arousing a positive motivator while depressing another, message designers should focus on developing content that engages audiences across multiple emotional fronts.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对气候变化信息的情绪反应及其对政策支持的影响
由于情绪是气候政策支持的有力预测因素,我们研究了人们对各种类型的气候变化信息的反应中所经历的多种离散情绪:其原因、科学共识、影响和解决方案。具体而言,我们评估了四种类型的信息和五种离散情绪(内疚、愤怒、希望、恐惧和悲伤)之间的关系,测试这些情绪是否会影响信息对气候政策的支持。一项在线实验让参与者(N=3023)接触四条信息信息中的一条,与无信息对照组相比,评估参与者对信息的情绪反应以及他们对气候变化缓解政策的支持。除共识信息外,每一条信息都会增强一种或多种情绪的感受,除内疚外,所有情绪都与政策支持呈正相关。其中两个信息对政策支持产生了积极的间接影响:影响信息增加了悲伤,这反过来又增加了政策支持;解决方案信息增加了希望,这增加了政策支撑。然而,解决方案信息也减少了除希望之外的所有情绪,而影响、原因和共识信息都抑制了希望。这些发现表明,气候信息同时影响多种情绪,在促进对气候变化缓解政策的支持方面,激发的情绪可能会相互冲突。为了避免在激发积极激励因素的同时抑制另一个积极激励因素,信息设计者应该专注于开发能够吸引观众多个情感方面的内容。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Climate
Frontiers in Climate Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
233
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Consumption-based emission inventories in Nordic municipalities—a quest to develop support for local climate action Transnational governance standards in ensuring sustainable development and operation of hydropower projects in transboundary basins Modeling the measurement of carbon dioxide removal: perspectives from the philosophy of measurement How well can we predict climate migration? A review of forecasting models Treatment of uncertainty in determining the UK's path to Net Zero
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1