2004
Volume 52, Issue 4
  • ISSN: 1384-6930
  • E-ISSN: 1875-7286

Abstract

Samenvatting

Klimaatwetenschappers zijn bezorgd of emotioneel taalgebruik hun geloofwaardigheid en objectiviteit aantast. Ons digitale experiment toont aan dat een klimaatwetenschapper een beroep kan doen op angstige emoties zonder haar geloofwaardigheid te schaden, zolang angstig taalgebruik wordt gecombineerd met een concrete gedragsaanbeveling (‘fear-hope appeal’). Alleen dan vertoonden respondenten hogere gevoelens van ‘self-efficacy’, wat op zijn beurt de intentie tot milieuvriendelijk handelen versterkte.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/TCW2024.4.003.COMB
2024-12-01
2025-02-09
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/13846930/52/4/TCW2024.4.003.COMB.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5117/TCW2024.4.003.COMB&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Armbruster, S. T., Manchanda, R. V., & Vo, N. (2022). When are loss frames more effective in climate change communication? An application of fear appeal theory. Sustainability, 14(12).
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Beall, L., Myers, T. A., Kotcher, J. E., Vraga, E. K., & Maibach, E. W. (2017). Controversy matters: Impacts of topic and solution controversy on the perceived credibility of a scientist who advocates. PloS One, 12(11).
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Benjamin, D., Por, H. H., & Budescu, D. (2017). Climate change versus global warming: who is susceptible to the framing of climate change?Environment and Behavior, 49(7), 745–770.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Besley, J., & Dudo, A. (2017). Scientists’ views about public engagement and science communication in the context of climate change. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.380
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Boykoff, M., & Oonk, D. (2020). Evaluating the perils and promises of academic climate advocacy. Climatic Change, 163(1), 27–41.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Broomell, S. B., Budescu, D. V., & Por, H. H. (2015). Personal experience with climate change predicts intentions to act. Global Environmental Change, 32, 67–73.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Brüggemann, M., Lörcher, I., & Walter, S. (2020). Post-normal science communication: exploring the blurring boundaries of science and journalism. Journal of Science Communication, 19(3).
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Budescu, D. V., & Broomell, S. B. (2012). Effective communication of uncertainty in the IPCC reports. Climatic Change, 113(2), 181–200.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Chan, E. Y., & Faria, A. A. (2022). Political ideology and climate change-mitigating behaviors: Insights from fixed world beliefs. Global Environmental Change, 72.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Christensen, J. (2017). Climate gloom and doom? Bring it on. But we need stories about taking action, too. The Conversation. Retrieved April16, 2023, from https://theconversation.com/climate-gloom-and-doom-bring-it-on-but-we-need-stories-about-taking-action-too-79464
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Cologna, V., Baumberger, C., Knutti, R., Oreskes, N., & Berthold, A. (2022a). The communication of value judgements and its effects on climate scientists’ perceived trustworthiness. Environmental Communication, 16(8), 1–14.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Cologna, V., Berthold, A., & Siegrist, M. (2022b). Knowledge, perceived potential and trust as determinants of low-and high-impact pro-environmental behaviours. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 79.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Corner, A., Lewandowsky, S., Phillips, M. and Roberts, O. (2015) The uncertainty handbook. University of Bristol. https://reefresilience.org/wp-content/uploads/Corner-et-al.-2015-The-Uncertainty-Handbook1.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Czarnek, G., Kossowska, M., & Szwed, P. (2021). Right-wing ideology reduces the effects of education on climate change beliefs in more developed countries. Nature Climate Change, 11(1), 9–13.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. De Boer, J., De Witt, A., & Aiking, H. (2016). Help the climate, change your diet: A cross-sectional study on how to involve consumers in a transition to a lowcarbon society. Appetite, 98, 19–27.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. De Haas, M., & Hamersma, M. (2020, November3). Cycling facts: new insights. KiM Netherlands Institute for Transport Policy Analysis. Retrieved May1, 2023, from https://english.kimnet.nl/publications/publications/2020/11/03/cycling-facts-new-insights
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Diamond, E., & Urbanski, K. (2022). The impact of message valence on climate change attitudes: A longitudinal experiment. Environmental Communication, 16(8), 1–13.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Donner, S. D. (2014). Finding your place on the science–advocacy continuum: an editorial essay. Climatic Change, 124, 1–8.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Dreijerink, L., Handgraaf, M., & Antonides, G. (2022). The impact of personal motivation on perceived effort and performance of pro-environmental behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology, 13.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Duan, R., Takahashi, B., & Zwickle, A. (2021). How effective are concrete and abstract climate change images? The moderating role of construal level in climate change visual communication. Science Communication, 43(3), 358–387.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Entradas, M., Marcelino, J., Bauer, M. W., & Lewenstein, B. (2019). Public communication by climate scientists: what, with whom and why?Climatic Change, 154, 69–85.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Ettinger, J., Walton, P., Painter, J., & DiBlasi, T. (2021). Climate of hope or doom and gloom? Testing the climate change hope vs. fear communications debate through online videos. Climatic Change, 164(1–2), 19.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Feinberg, M., & Willer, R. (2010). Apocalypse soon? Dire messages reduce belief in global warming by contradicting just-world beliefs. Psychological Science, 22(1), 34–38.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Feldman, L., & Hart, P. S. (2018). Is there any hope? How climate change news imagery and text influence audience emotions and support for climate mitigation policies. Risk Analysis, 38(3), 585–602.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Feldman, L., Hart, P. S., & Milosevic, T. (2017). Polarizing news? Representations of threat and efficacy in leading US newspapers’ coverage of climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 26(4), 481–497.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Fennis, B. M., Adriaanse, M. A., Stroebe, W., & Pol, B. (2011). Bridging the intention-behavior gap: Inducing implementation intentions through persuasive appeals. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21, 302–311.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Fiske, S. T., & Dupree, C. (2014). Gaining trust as well as respect in communicating to motivated audiences about science topics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(4), 13593–13597.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Geiger, N., & Swim, J. K. (2016). Climate of silence: Pluralistic ignorance as a barrier to climate change discussion. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 47, 79–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions. American Psychologist, 54(7), 493–503.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Hart, P. S., & Feldman, L. (2016). The impact of climate change–related imagery and text on public opinion and behavior change. Science Communication, 38(4), 415–441.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Hastings, G., Stead, M., & Webb, J. (2004). Fear appeals in social marketing: Strategic and ethical reasons for concern. Psychology & Marketing, 21(11), 961–986.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Hayes, A. F. (2015). An index and test of linear moderated mediation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 50(1), 1–22.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Hine, D. W., Phillips, W. J., Cooksey, R., Reser, J. P., Nunn, P., Marks, A. D., … & Watt, S. E. (2016). Preaching to different choirs: How to motivate dismissive, uncommitted, and alarmed audiences to adapt to climate change?Global Environmental Change, 36, 1–11.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Holland, R. W., Aarts, H., & Langendam, D. (2006). Breaking and creating habits on the working floor: A field-experiment on the power of implementation intentions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 776–783.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Hornsey, M. J., Fielding, K. S., McStay, R., Reser, J. P., Bradley, G. L., & Greenaway, K. H. (2015). Evidence for motivated control: Understanding the paradoxical link between threat and efficacy beliefs about climate change. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 42, 57–65.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Hornsey, M. J., & Fielding, K. S. (2019). Understanding (and reducing) inaction on climate change. Social Issues and Policy Review, 14(1), 3–35.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Hornsey, M. J., Chapman, C. M., & Oelrichs, D. M. (2022). Why it is so hard to teach people they can make a difference: Climate change efficacy as a non-analytic form of reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 28(3), 327–345.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Ivanova, D., Barrett, J., Wiedenhofer, D., Macura, B., Callaghan, M., & Creutzig, F. (2020). Quantifying the potential for climate change mitigation of consumption options. Environmental Research Letters, 15(9).
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Joffe, H. (1999). Risk and “the other.”Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Kahan, D. (2012). Why we are poles apart on climate change. Nature, 488(7411), 255–255.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Kaiser, F. G., Byrka, K., & Hartig, T. (2010). Reviving Campbell’s paradigm for attitude research. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(4), 351–367.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Kalmus, P. [@ClimateHuman]. (2022, April22). I’m grateful we tried. Man, oh, man, did we try. [Post].X. https://x.com/ClimateHuman/status/1513564975524024323?s=20
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Kearns, F. (2015). Scientists have feelings too. Hippo Reads. Retrieved March20, 2023, from http://read.hipporeads.com/scientists-have-feelings-too/
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Kotcher, J. E., Myers, T. A., Vraga, E. K., Stenhouse, N., & Maibach, E. W. (2017). Does engagement in advocacy hurt the credibility of scientists? Results from a randomized national survey experiment. Environmental Communication, 11(3), 415–429.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Kothe, E. J., Ling, M., North, M., Klas, A., Mullan, B. A., & Novoradovskaya, L. (2019). Protection motivation theory and pro-environmental behaviour: A systematic mapping review. Australian Journal of Psychology, 71(4), 411–432.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Krauss, W., Schäfer, M. S., & Von Storch, H. (2012). Post-normal climate science. Nature and Culture, 7(2), 121–132.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Lackey, R. T. (2007). Science, scientists, and policy advocacy. Conservation Biology, 21(1), 12–17.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Lakens, D. (2022). Improving your statistical inferences. Github. https://lakens.github.io/statistical_inferences/
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Levin, K., Cashore, B., Bernstein, S., & Auld, G. (2012). Overcoming the tragedy of super wicked problems: constraining our future selves to ameliorate global climate change. Policy Sciences, 45, 123–152.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Loll, L., Schmatz, N., Von Lonski, L., Cremer, L. D., & Richter, M. H. (2023). The influence of climate crisis-related media reporting on the eco-anxiety of individuals. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 19(2).
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Maiella, R., La Malva, P., Marchetti, D., Pomarico, E., Di Crosta, A., Palumbo, R., . . . & Verrocchio, M. C. (2020). The psychological distance and climate change: A systematic review on the mitigation and adaptation behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.568899
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Mann, M. E. (2020). From climate scientist to climate communicator: a process of evolution. In Standing up for a Sustainable World (pp. 433–437). Edward Elgar Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Mann, M. E., Hassol, S. J., & Toles, T. (2017, July12). Doomsday scenarios are as harmful as climate change denial. Washington Post. https://www.washington-post.com/opinions/doomsday-scenarios-are-as-harmful-as-climate-change-denial/2017/07/12/880ed002-6714-11e7-a1d7-9a32c91c6f40_story.html
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Marshall, G. (2014). Don’t even think about it: Why our brains are wired to ignore climate change. Bloomsbury Publishing USA.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. McDonald, R. I., Chai, H. Y., & Newell, B. R. (2015). Personal experience and the ‘psychological distance’ of climate change: An integrative review. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 44, 109–118.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Messling, L. (2020). How can climate scientists engage in policy advocacy and preserve their scientific credibility and independence? [Doctoral dissertation, University of Reading]. https://doi.org/10.48683/1926.00096012
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Metcalfe, J. (2022). Comparing science communication theory with participatory practice: Case study of the Australian Climate Champion Program. Journal of Science Communication, 21(2).
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Montenegro, L. (2022, January28). In 2022, Video is where we all need to be. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesagencycouncil/2022/01/28/in-2022-video-is-where-we-all-need-to-be/?sh=1e8f37457e5a
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Moser, S. C. (2016). Reflections on climate change communication research and practice in the second decade of the 21st century: what more is there to say?Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 7(3), 345–369.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Nabi, R. L., Gustafson, A., & Jensen, R. (2018). Framing climate change: Exploring the role of emotion in generating advocacy behavior. Science Communication, 40(4), 442–468.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Nicolaisen, P. B. (2022a). A state of emergency or business as usual in climate science communication? A three-dimensional perspective on the role perceptions of climate scientists, climate journalists, and citizens. Science Communication, 44(6).
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Nicolaisen, P. B. (2022b). Role perceptions in climate science communication. Environmental Communication, 16(8), 1010–1026.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Nielsen, L. A. (2001). Science and advocacy are different-and we need to keep them that way. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 6(1), 39–47.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. O’Neill, S., & Nicholson-Cole, S. (2009). “Fear won’t do it” promoting positive engagement with climate change through visual and iconic representations. Science Communication, 30(3), 355–379.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Oreskes, N. (2018, February18). The scientist as sentinel. Limn. https://limn.it/articles/the-scientist-as-sentinel/
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Pidcock, R., Heath, K., Messling, L., Wang, S., Pirani, A., Connors, S., . . . & Gomis, M. (2021). Evaluating effective public engagement: local stories from a global network of IPCC scientists. Climatic Change, 168, 1–22.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Popova, L. (2012). The extended parallel process model: Illuminating the gaps in research. Health Education & Behavior, 39(4), 455–473.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Poushter, J., Fagan, M., Gubbala, S., & Atske, S. (2022, August31). Climate change remains top global threat across 19-country aurvey. Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2022/08/31/climate-change-remains-top-global-threat-across-19-country-survey/
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Reeder, G. D. (2013). Attribution as a gateway to social cognition. In D. E.Carlston (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of social cognition (pp. 95–117). Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Rees, J. H., Bamberg, S., Jäger, A., Victor, L., Bergmeyer, M., & Friese, M. (2018). Breaking the habit: on the highly habitualized nature of meat consumption and implementation intentions as one effective way of reducing it. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 40(3), 136–147.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Roeser, S. (2012). Risk communication, public engagement, and climate change: A role for emotions. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 32(6), 1033–1040.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Roser-Renouf, C., & Nisbet, M. C. (2008). The measurement of key behavioral science constructs in climate change research. International Journal of Sustainability Communication, 3, 37–95.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Ruiter, R. A., Kessels, L. T., Peters, G. J. Y., & Kok, G. (2014). Sixty years of fear appeal research: Current state of the evidence. International Journal of Psychology, 49(2), 63–70.
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Salama, S., & Aboukoura, K. (2018). Role of emotions in climate change communication. Handbook of Climate Change Communication: Vol. 1: Theory of Climate Change Communication, 137–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69838-0_9
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Sarrina Li, S. C., & Huang, L. M. S. (2020). Fear appeals, information processing, and behavioral intentions toward climate change. Asian Journal of Communication, 30(3-4), 242–260.
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Schmidt, G. A. (2015). What should climate scientists advocate for?Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 71(1), 70–74.
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Shuckburgh, E., Robinson, R., Pidgeon, N. (2012) Climate science, the public and the news media. Living With Environmental Change. https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/500544
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Starke, A. D., Willemsen, M. C., & Snijders, C. C. (2020). Beyond “one-size-fits-all” platforms: Applying Campbell’s paradigm to test personalized energy advice in the Netherlands. Energy Research & Social Science, 59.
    [Google Scholar]
  81. SurveyCircle. (n.d.). SurveyCircle – De grootste community voor online onderzoek. SurveyCircle. https://www.surveycircle.com/nl/faq/
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Tannenbaum, M. B., Hepler, J., Zimmerman, R. S., Saul, L., Jacobs, S., Wilson, K., & Albarracín, D. (2015). Appealing to fear: A meta-analysis of fear appeal effectiveness and theories. Psychological Bulletin, 141(6).
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Taylor, A. L., Dessai, S., & De Bruin, W. B. (2014). Public perception of climate risk and adaptation in the UK: A review of the literature. Climate Risk Management, 4, 1–16.
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Tobler, C., Visschers, V. H., & Siegrist, M. (2012). Addressing climate change: Determinants of consumers’ willingness to act and to support policy measures. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32(3), 197–207.
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Truelove, H. B., & Parks, C. (2012). Perceptions of behaviors that cause and mitigate global warming and intentions to perform these behaviors. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32(3), 246–259.
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Tucker, I. (2022, May25). Peter Kalmus: ‘As a species, we’re on autopilot, not making the right decisions.’The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/may/21/peter-kalmus-nasa-scientist-climate-protest-interview
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Van Lange, P. A., & Huckelba, A. L. (2021). Psychological distance: How to make climate change less abstract and closer to the self. Current Opinion in Psychology, 42, 49–53.
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Van Zomeren, M., Spears, R., & Leach, C. W. (2010). Experimental evidence for a dual pathway model analysis of coping with the climate crisis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(4), 339–346.
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Vlasceanu, M., Doell, K. C., Bak-Coleman, J. B., Todorova, B., Berkebile-Weinberg, M. M., Grayson, S. J., . . . & Lutz, A. E. (2024). Addressing climate change with behavioral science: A global intervention tournament in 63 countries. Science Advances, 10(6). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adj5778
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Witte, K. (1992). Putting the fear back into fear appeals: The extended parallel process model. Communications Monographs, 59(4), 329–349.
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Witte, K., & Allen, M. (2000). A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective public health campaigns. Health Education & Behavior, 27(5), 591–615.
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Yuan, K. H., & Maxwell, S. (2005). On the post hoc power in testing mean differences. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 30(2), 141–167.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.5117/TCW2024.4.003.COMB
Loading
/content/journals/10.5117/TCW2024.4.003.COMB
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error