IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0171130.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Promise and Limitations of Using Analogies to Improve Decision-Relevant Understanding of Climate Change

Author

Listed:
  • Kaitlin T Raimi
  • Paul C Stern
  • Alexander Maki

Abstract

To make informed choices about how to address climate change, members of the public must develop ways to consider established facts of climate science and the uncertainties about its future trajectories, in addition to the risks attendant to various responses, including non-response, to climate change. One method suggested for educating the public about these issues is the use of simple mental models, or analogies comparing climate change to familiar domains such as medical decision making, disaster preparedness, or courtroom trials. Two studies were conducted using online participants in the U.S.A. to test the use of analogies to highlight seven key decision-relevant elements of climate change, including uncertainties about when and where serious damage may occur, its unprecedented and progressive nature, and tradeoffs in limiting climate change. An internal meta-analysis was then conducted to estimate overall effect sizes across the two studies. Analogies were not found to inform knowledge about climate literacy facts. However, results suggested that people found the medical analogy helpful and that it led people—especially political conservatives—to better recognize several decision-relevant attributes of climate change. These effects were weak, perhaps reflecting a well-documented and overwhelming effect of political ideology on climate change communication and education efforts in the U.S.A. The potential of analogies and similar education tools to improve understanding and communication in a polarized political environment are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaitlin T Raimi & Paul C Stern & Alexander Maki, 2017. "The Promise and Limitations of Using Analogies to Improve Decision-Relevant Understanding of Climate Change," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0171130
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0171130
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0171130
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0171130&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0171130?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sander Linden & Anthony Leiserowitz & Geoffrey Feinberg & Edward Maibach, 2014. "How to communicate the scientific consensus on climate change: plain facts, pie charts or metaphors?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 255-262, September.
    2. Matthew J. Hornsey & Emily A. Harris & Paul G. Bain & Kelly S. Fielding, 2016. "Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(6), pages 622-626, June.
    3. Teresa A. Myers & Edward W. Maibach & Connie Roser-Renouf & Karen Akerlof & Anthony A. Leiserowitz, 2013. "The relationship between personal experience and belief in the reality of global warming," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(4), pages 343-347, April.
    4. Lisa Zaval & Elizabeth A. Keenan & Eric J. Johnson & Elke U. Weber, 2014. "How warm days increase belief in global warming," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(2), pages 143-147, February.
    5. Sander L van der Linden & Anthony A Leiserowitz & Geoffrey D Feinberg & Edward W Maibach, 2015. "The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change as a Gateway Belief: Experimental Evidence," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(2), pages 1-8, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrew G. Meyer, 2022. "Do economic conditions affect climate change beliefs and support for climate action? Evidence from the US in the wake of the Great Recession," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(1), pages 64-86, January.
    2. P. Stahlmann-Brown & P. Walsh, 2022. "Soil moisture and expectations regarding future climate: evidence from panel data," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(1), pages 1-20, March.
    3. Mason, Charles F. & Wilmot, Neil A., 2024. "On climate fat tails and politics," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    4. Charles Adedayo Ogunbode & Yue Liu & Nicole Tausch, 2017. "The moderating role of political affiliation in the link between flooding experience and preparedness to reduce energy use," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 145(3), pages 445-458, December.
    5. Karine Lacroix & Robert Gifford & Jonathan Rush, 2020. "Climate change beliefs shape the interpretation of forest fire events," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 103-120, March.
    6. Guglielmo Zappalà, 2023. "Drought Exposure and Accuracy: Motivated Reasoning in Climate Change Beliefs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 85(3), pages 649-672, August.
    7. Rosalind Pidcock & Kate Heath & Lydia Messling & Susie Wang & Anna Pirani & Sarah Connors & Adam Corner & Christopher Shaw & Melissa Gomis, 2021. "Evaluating effective public engagement: local stories from a global network of IPCC scientists," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 1-22, October.
    8. Lawrence C. Hamilton, 2016. "Public Awareness of the Scientific Consensus on Climate," SAGE Open, , vol. 6(4), pages 21582440166, November.
    9. Carisa Bergner & Bruce A. Desmarais & John Hird, 2019. "Speaking truth in power: Scientific evidence as motivation for policy activism," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 2(1).
    10. Knollenborg, Leonard & Sommer, Stephan, 2021. "Diverging beliefs on climate change and climate policy in Germany: The role of political orientations," Ruhr Economic Papers 909, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    11. Adrienne R. Brown & Lawrence C. Hamilton, 2024. "Belief-neutral Versus Belief-linked Knowledge as Predictors of Climate-change Opinions," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(2), pages 21582440241, June.
    12. Matthew T. Ballew & Jennifer R. Marlon & Matthew H. Goldberg & Edward W. Maibach & Seth A. Rosenthal & Emily Aiken & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2022. "Changing minds about global warming: vicarious experience predicts self-reported opinion change in the USA," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 173(3), pages 1-25, August.
    13. Nauges, Céline & Wheeler, Sarah Ann, 2017. "The Complex Relationship Between Households' Climate Change Concerns and Their Water and Energy Mitigation Behaviour," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 87-94.
    14. Shreedhar, Ganga & Mourato, Susana, 2019. "Experimental Evidence on the Impact of Biodiversity Conservation Videos on Charitable Donations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 180-193.
    15. A. M. Valkengoed & G. Perlaviciute & L. Steg, 2022. "Relationships between climate change perceptions and climate adaptation actions: policy support, information seeking, and behaviour," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(1), pages 1-20, March.
    16. Duan, Tinghua & Li, Frank Weikai, 2024. "Climate change concerns and mortgage lending," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    17. Simon Legault & Daniel Houle & Antoine Plouffe & Aitor Ameztegui & Diane Kuehn & Lisa Chase & Anne Blondlot & Timothy D Perkins, 2019. "Perceptions of U.S. and Canadian maple syrup producers toward climate change, its impacts, and potential adaptation measures," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-27, April.
    18. Davide Benedetti & Enrico Biffis & Fotis Chatzimichalakis & Luciano Lilloy Fedele & Ian Simm, 2021. "Climate change investment risk: optimal portfolio construction ahead of the transition to a lower-carbon economy," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 299(1), pages 847-871, April.
    19. Bojana Većkalov & Sandra J. Geiger & František Bartoš & Mathew P. White & Bastiaan T. Rutjens & Frenk Harreveld & Federica Stablum & Berkan Akın & Alaa Aldoh & Jinhao Bai & Frida Berglund & Aleša Brat, 2024. "A 27-country test of communicating the scientific consensus on climate change," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 8(10), pages 1892-1905, October.
    20. Garel, Alexandre & Petit-Romec, Arthur, 2022. "CEO exposure to abnormally hot temperature and corporate carbon emissions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0171130. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.