Despite overwhelming scientific consensus about climate change, many Americans are not very worried about it. This may be due in part to distrust of climate scientists and in part to insufficient understanding of the urgency and seriousness of the problem. For instance, few people realize the length of the delay between the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and the end of global warming, which is on the order of hundreds of years. Not understanding the delay may, in turn, reduce perceived urgency. These problems may be compounded by the fact that the scientific community is often reluctant to provide complex scientific information to members of the public for fear that the information will add to the confusion.
An experiment reported in an article recently published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Appliedopens in new window suggests that these fears may be unwarranted. Providing participants with a description of the long delay between the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and the end of global warming in simple, straightforward language improved their understanding of the delay and reduced their agreement with a “wait-and-see” approach to global warming, compared with a no-information control group. This information was especially effective among conservatives.
The experiment also demonstrated that participants’ trust increased when uncertainty was acknowledged. Climate predictions that included numeric uncertainty estimates, such as a 90% chance that the increase in global average temperature will be between 4 ºF and 11 ºF, were rated as significantly more trustworthy than a single value estimate, such as 7 ºF. Acknowledging uncertainty also increased participants’ ratings of climate scientists’ expertise and understanding. The positive effects of acknowledging uncertainty were far-reaching, increasing both participants’ concern about climate change and, surprisingly, their perception of scientific consensus. These effects were seen across political ideology groups.
Taken together, these results suggest that providing scientific information to members of the public can increase their understanding of complex issues and promote better informed policy support decisions. In addition, providing complete information on such issues, including the uncertainty involved, can improve trust in the information itself as well as the scientists who provide the information. The only caveat is that communication techniques should take into account the manner in which the target audience understands and processes the relevant information.
This article is in the Basic/Experimental Psychology topic area. View more articles in the Basic/Experimental Psychology topic area.