scholarly journals Complex influences of mechanistic knowledge, worldview, and quantitative reasoning on climate change discourse: Evidence for ideologically motivated reasoning among youth

2020 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-127
Author(s):  
Lynne Zummo ◽  
Brian Donovan ◽  
K. C. Busch
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
Quantitative Reasoning

scholarly journals The impact of elite frames and motivated reasoning on beliefs in a global warming conspiracy: The promise and limits of trust

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 205316801771760 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyle L Saunders
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
Anthropogenic Global Warming ◽  
The Face ◽  
Conspiracy Beliefs ◽  
Original Question ◽  
Behavioral Impact ◽  
The Impact

Given the potential attitudinal and behavioral impact of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) conspiracy beliefs, it is important to understand their causes and moderators. Here, two explanations for the variation in these beliefs are engaged: the first is the choice among elites to frame AGW using the phrase ‘global warming’ (GW) as opposed to ‘climate change’ (CC); the second is partisan motivated reasoning. A theory is then developed about the role of trust in moderating the impact of the two frames on AGW conspiracy beliefs. In the case of CC, which is perceived as less severe than GW (and is therefore less identity threatening among Republicans), it is hypothesized that trust will moderate hoax beliefs among Republicans. In the case of GW, where the implications of existence beliefs have policy consequences that are more unpleasant, motivated reasoning will ‘win out’, and trust will not moderate conspiracy endorsement among Republicans. The results from an original question framing experiment are consistent with the author’s hypotheses. Whilst trust is a welcome commodity to those looking to persuade citizens to support AGW-ameliorating policies, it is not a cure-all, especially in the face of elite partisan cues that edify pre-existing attitudes/identities and arouse a strong desire to engage in motivated reasoning.

scholarly journals Motivated reasoning and climate change

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
pp. 27-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Bayes ◽  
James N Druckman
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Motivated Reasoning

Defeating Merchants of Doubt: Subjective certainty and self-affirmation ameliorate attitude polarization via partisan motivated reasoning

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (7) ◽  
pp. 729-744
Author(s):  
Jiyoung Han ◽  
Yungwook Kim
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Social Identity ◽  
Identity Theory ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
National Sample ◽  
Online Experiment ◽  
South Korean ◽  
Attitude Polarization ◽  
Algae Blooms

Informed by uncertainty–identity theory, this study tested the polarizing effect of partisan-led politicization of science and ways to combat it. Using a national sample of South Koreans ( N = 840), our online experiment found that when partisan elites, as opposed to scientists (or civic activists), spearheaded politicization, attitude polarization emerged via partisan motivated reasoning. Such polarizing effects of party cues did not persist when subjective certainty and self-affirmation enhanced the level of certainty partisans felt about their surroundings and themselves. These patterns proved consistent across multiple scientific issues, including climate change, genetically modified foods, and algae blooms. The implications of the findings are discussed in light of how to attenuate the polarizing effect of partisan-led politicization through the lens of social identity approaches. Given that this study provides one of the first pieces of evidence on the topic outside the Western context, the advantages of using a South Korean sample are noted.

scholarly journals Selective Exposure to Balanced Content and Evidence Type: The Case of Issue and Non-Issue Publics About Climate Change and Health Care

2016 ◽  
Vol 94 (3) ◽  
pp. 833-861 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Brenes Peralta ◽  
Magdalena Wojcieszak ◽  
Yphtach Lelkes ◽  
Claes de Vreese
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
Selective Exposure ◽  
Information Selection ◽  
Numerical Evidence ◽  
Issue Publics ◽  
Evidence Type ◽  
Issue Public ◽  
Climate Change And Health

We examine three under-studied factors in selective exposure research. Linking issue publics and motivated reasoning literatures, we argue that selectivity patterns depend on (a) whether an individual is an issue public member; (b) the availability of balanced, pro-, and counter-attitudinal content; and (c) the evidence for a message claim (numerical vs. narrative). Using an online experiment ( N = 560), we track information selection about climate change and health care. Most notably, on both issues, issue publics selected more balanced content with numerical evidence, compared with non-issue publics. We discuss the implications of our findings for the selective exposure literature.

scholarly journals Party Elites or Manufactured Doubt? The Informational Context of Climate Change Polarization

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Merkley ◽  
Dominik Stecula
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
Cable News ◽  
News Stories ◽  
Party Elites ◽  
Scant Attention

Americans polarized on climate change despite decreasing uncertainty in climate science. Explanations focused on organized climate skeptics and ideologically driven motivated reasoning are likely insufficient. Instead, Americans may have formed their attitudes by using party elite cues. We conduct analyses on over 8,000 print, broadcast, and cable news stories. We find that coverage became increasingly partisan as climate change rose in salience, but climate skeptics received scant attention. Democratic messages were more voluminous and consistently pro–climate science, while Republican messages have been scarcer and ambiguous until recently. This suggests Republican voters took cues from Democratic elites to reject climate science.

scholarly journals Shifting public engagement: How media coverage of climate change conferences affects climate change audience segments

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 176-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anke Wonneberger ◽  
Marijn H. C. Meijers ◽  
Andreas R. T. Schuck
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Media Effects ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
Panel Survey ◽  
Audience Engagement ◽  
Online Panel ◽  
International Climate ◽  
Change Beliefs

While it is often assumed that media attention for events, such as international climate change conferences, can influence public opinion, research studying changes in public opinion concerning climate change is scarce. Research on climate change audience segments and the theory of motivated reasoning suggest that media effects depend on the level of audience engagement with climate change. We analyze how exposure to media coverage of the COP21 affected public opinion in the Netherlands. Based on a two-wave online panel survey ( N = 876), we identified five audience segments that varied in their degree of climate change beliefs, involvement, policy preferences, and behavioral intentions. Different media effects across segments were found indicating (dis)confirmation bias, specifically, for medium levels of positive and negative engagement. The findings indicate that important events may cause limited changes in public opinion and emphasize the importance of studying segment-specific and content-specific media effects.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document