IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v164y2021i1d10.1007_s10584-021-02975-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Climate of hope or doom and gloom? Testing the climate change hope vs. fear communications debate through online videos

Author

Listed:
  • Joshua Ettinger

    (University of Oxford)

  • Peter Walton

    (University of Oxford)

  • James Painter

    (University of Oxford)

  • Thomas DiBlasi

    (St. Joseph’s College)

Abstract

A growing body of research has explored whether evoking hope or fear about climate change is more effective at catalyzing attitude and behavior change among the public. Prior studies on this topic have primarily tested responses to text and/or still image manipulations, finding mixed results. Amid the rapidly growing creation and consumption of climate change video content online, it is important that researchers also consider how the public may engage with hope and fear narratives presented in videos. This study aims to help fill this gap by examining how Americans respond to hope and doom and gloom climate change frames portrayed in short online videos. Participants who watched the hope and doom videos reported experiencing the respective emotions the videos sought to elicit (hope and fear). Participants with different political affiliations and with contrasting climate change attitudes across the Six Americas of Global Warming reported significantly different levels of fear, but only participants across the Six Americas reported significantly different levels of hope. However, despite these emotional responses, neither video was associated with significant differences in climate change risk perceptions, likelihood of behavior change, or likelihood of climate activism. These null results suggest that the impacts of a single hope or fear appeal can be overstated and caution against claims that either hopeful or fear-driven climate change communication strategies are necessarily optimal. Open-ended survey responses to the videos also suggest that ideological views about climate change may be associated with how individuals respond to specific video production elements, including music, editing, pacing, and visuals.

Suggested Citation

  • Joshua Ettinger & Peter Walton & James Painter & Thomas DiBlasi, 2021. "Climate of hope or doom and gloom? Testing the climate change hope vs. fear communications debate through online videos," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 1-19, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:164:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s10584-021-02975-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-021-02975-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-021-02975-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-021-02975-8?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Bernauer & Liam F. McGrath, 2016. "Simple reframing unlikely to boost public support for climate policy," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(7), pages 680-683, July.
    2. Hulme,Mike, 2009. "Why We Disagree about Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521898690, October.
    3. Teresa Myers & Matthew Nisbet & Edward Maibach & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2012. "A public health frame arouses hopeful emotions about climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 113(3), pages 1105-1112, August.
    4. Daniel A. Chapman & Brian Lickel & Ezra M. Markowitz, 2017. "Reassessing emotion in climate change communication," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 7(12), pages 850-852, December.
    5. Anneloes L. Meijnders & Cees J. H. Midden & Henk A. M. Wilke, 2001. "Role of Negative Emotion in Communication about CO2 Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(5), pages 955-955, October.
    6. Adam Corner & Ezra Markowitz & Nick Pidgeon, 2014. "Public engagement with climate change: the role of human values," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3), pages 411-422, May.
    7. Hulme,Mike, 2009. "Why We Disagree about Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521727327, October.
    8. Dan M. Kahan & Hank Jenkins-Smith & Donald Braman, 2011. "Cultural cognition of scientific consensus," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 147-174, February.
    9. Wen Xue & Donald W. Hine & Anthony D. G. Marks & Wendy J. Phillips & Patrick Nunn & Shouying Zhao, 2016. "Combining threat and efficacy messaging to increase public engagement with climate change in Beijing, China," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 43-55, July.
    10. M. Carmen Erviti & Mónica Codina & Bienvenido León, 2020. "Pro-Science, Anti-Science and Neutral Science in Online Videos on Climate Change, Vaccines and Nanotechnology," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 329-338.
    11. Lauren Feldman & P. Sol Hart, 2018. "Is There Any Hope? How Climate Change News Imagery and Text Influence Audience Emotions and Support for Climate Mitigation Policies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(3), pages 585-602, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Binbin Ni & Fuzhong Wu & Qing Huang, 2023. "When Artificial Intelligence Voices Human Concerns: The Paradoxical Effects of AI Voice on Climate Risk Perception and Pro-Environmental Behavioral Intention," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-20, February.
    2. Jessica R. Murfree, 2023. "Exploring Major League Baseball Fans’ Climate Change Risk Perceptions and Adaptation Willingness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-17, May.
    3. Unay-Gailhard, İlkay & Lawson, Kati & Brennan, Mark A., 2023. "An examination of digital empathy: When farmers speak for the climate through TikTok," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 102, pages 1-1.
    4. Chris Skurka & Jessica Gall Myrick & Yin Yang, 2023. "Fanning the flames or burning out? Testing competing hypotheses about repeated exposure to threatening climate change messages," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(5), pages 1-22, May.
    5. Lisette Beek & Manjana Milkoreit & Linda Prokopy & Jason B. Reed & Joost Vervoort & Arjan Wardekker & Roberta Weiner, 2022. "The effects of serious gaming on risk perceptions of climate tipping points," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 170(3), pages 1-23, February.
    6. Allison Worsdale & Jiaying Liu, 2023. "Narrative Messages and the Use of Emotional Appeals on Endometriosis Screening Intention: The Mediating Role of Positive Affect," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(13), pages 1-16, June.
    7. Emily J. Kothe & Mathew Ling & Barbara A. Mullan & Joshua J. Rhee & Anna Klas, 2023. "Increasing intention to reduce fossil fuel use: a protection motivation theory-based experimental study," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(3), pages 1-20, March.

    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. Thomas Homer-Dixon & Manjana Milkoreit & Steven J. Mock & Tobias Schröder & Paul Thagard, 2014. "The Conceptual Structure of Social Disputes," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(1), pages 21582440145, March.
    2. Sabine Roeser, 2012. "Risk Communication, Public Engagement, and Climate Change: A Role for Emotions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(6), pages 1033-1040, June.
    3. Markus Dressel, 2022. "Models of science and society: transcending the antagonism," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Stuart Bryce Capstick, 2013. "Public Understanding of Climate Change as a Social Dilemma," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(8), pages 1-18, August.
    5. Rebecca Romsdahl & Gwendolyn Blue & Andrei Kirilenko, 2018. "Action on climate change requires deliberative framing at local governance level," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 277-287, August.
    6. Jochen Hinkel & Diana Mangalagiu & Alexander Bisaro & J. David Tàbara, 2020. "Transformative narratives for climate action," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 160(4), pages 495-506, June.
    7. Amelia Sharman, 2013. "Mapping the climate sceptical blogosphere," GRI Working Papers 124, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    8. Chloe Lucas & Russell Warman, 2018. "Disrupting polarized discourses: Can we get out of the ruts of environmental conflicts?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(6), pages 987-1005, September.
    9. Ruxandra Malina Petrescu-Mag & Philippe Burny & Ioan Banatean-Dunea & Dacinia Crina Petrescu, 2022. "How Climate Change Science Is Reflected in People’s Minds. A Cross-Country Study on People’s Perceptions of Climate Change," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-25, April.
    10. Andreas Bjurström & Merritt Polk, 2011. "Climate change and interdisciplinarity: a co-citation analysis of IPCC Third Assessment Report," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 525-550, June.
    11. Janet Judy McIntyre‐Mills, 2013. "Anthropocentrism and Well‐being: A Way Out of the Lobster Pot?," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 136-155, March.
    12. Hall, C. Michael & Amelung, Bas & Cohen, Scott & Eijgelaar, Eke & Gössling, Stefan & Higham, James & Leemans, Rik & Peeters, Paul & Ram, Yael & Scott, Daniel & Aall, Carlo & Abegg, Bruno & Araña, Jorg, 2015. "No time for smokescreen skepticism: A rejoinder to Shani and Arad," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 341-347.
    13. Nancy Menning, 2018. "Narrating climate change as a rite of passage," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 343-353, March.
    14. Mercedes Bleda & Elisabeth Krull & Jonatan Pinkse & Eleni Christodoulou, 2023. "Organizational heuristics and firms' sensemaking for climate change adaptation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(8), pages 6124-6137, December.
    15. Chhetri, Netra & Ghimire, Rajiv & Wagner, Melissa & Wang, Meng, 2020. "Global citizen deliberation: Case of world-wide views on climate and energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    16. Hochachka, Gail, 2021. "Integrating the four faces of climate change adaptation: Towards transformative change in Guatemalan coffee communities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    17. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2015. "An Evaluation of the Treatment of Risk and Uncertainties in the IPCC Reports on Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 701-712, April.
    18. George Ferns & Kenneth Amaeshi & Aliette Lambert, 2019. "Drilling their Own Graves: How the European Oil and Gas Supermajors Avoid Sustainability Tensions Through Mythmaking," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 201-231, August.
    19. Shaw, Christopher & Nerlich, Brigitte, 2015. "Metaphor as a mechanism of global climate change governance: A study of international policies, 1992–2012," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 34-40.
    20. Kattirtzi, Michael & Winskel, Mark, 2020. "When experts disagree: Using the Policy Delphi method to analyse divergent expert expectations and preferences on UK energy futures," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).

    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:spr:climat:v:164:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s10584-021-02975-8. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.