Module 8: Climate Change Communication Flashcards
1
Q
how stable are people’s opinions (2)
A
- they are not very stable
- heavily influenced by minor changes on how information is presented to them
2
Q
message framing
A
- variations in presentation of an issue can produce changes in opinions
3
Q
message framing: beef example (2)
A
- 75% lean beef rated as more tasty, less greasy, and more positive
- 25% fat beef rated as less tasty, greasier, and more negative
4
Q
equivalence framing (2)
A
- when both messages are statistically the same, but different statistics/framing is used
- frames SHOULD elicit same reaction, but different frames can change view
5
Q
equivalence framing: medical procedure examples (2)
A
- 90% survival rate rated as more positive
- 10% mortality rate rated as more negative
6
Q
equivalence framing: carbon tax example (2)
A
- support for carbon OFFSET was rated positively by democrats, independents, and republicans
- support for carbon TAX was rated positive by democrats, but negative by independents and republicans
7
Q
issue framing
A
- selection of certain aspects of an issue and makes them more prominent in order to elicit certain interpretations and evaluations of the issue
8
Q
issue framing: should a hate group be allowed to organize a political rally (2)
A
- given important of free speech elicited more support
- given the risk of violence elicited less support
9
Q
issue framing: sustainability (2)
A
- environment frame is used too much
- need new frames to elicit positive responses from different groups, such as social issues or environmental justice
10
Q
different issue frames for climate change (3)
A
- health
- negative and positive frames
- national security
11
Q
issue framing: negative framing
A
- effective at bringing attention to issues
12
Q
issue framing: positive framing
A
- effective on actual climate change action/mitigation
13
Q
Global Warming Six Americas (2)
A
- groups the audience we are communicating with about climate change into 6 distinct groups
- based on their thoughts on climate change
14
Q
Global Warming Six Americas
- types listed in order from highest to lowest belief (6)
A
- alarmed
- concerned
- cautious
- disengaged
- doubtful
- dismissive
15
Q
Global Warming Six Americas: Alarmed (3)
A
- highest belief
- most concerned
- most motivated
16
Q
Global Warming Six Americas: Dismissive (3)
A
- lowest belief
- least concerned
- least motivated
17
Q
Global Warming Six Americas: order of cohorts in America (6)
A
- alarmed
- concerned
- cautious
- doubtful
- dismissive
- disengaged
18
Q
how has the proportion of the Global Warming Six Americas changed over time (2)
A
- portion of deniers is decreasing
- concerned and cautious people are beginning to become alarmed
19
Q
in general, rank the framings that incite the most hope from highest to lowest (3)
A
- public health frame
- environment frame
- national security frame
20
Q
in general, rank the framings that incite the most anger from highest to lowest (3)
A
- national security frame
- environment frame
- health frame
21
Q
why must we be aware of the audience we are targeting when considering frames to employ (example) (2)
A
- national security frame makes deny-ers incredibly angry
- useful to know that this frame should specifically NOT be employed when communicating with them about climate change
22
Q
framing to the alarmed and concerned (2)
A
- focus on SOLUTIONS to avoid greater feelings of fear and helplessness
- move BEYOND INDIVIDUAL ACTION and towards collective/group action
23
Q
framing to deniers (2)
A
- avoid talking about climate change directly and use related topics instead (green economy)
- focus on how mitigation efforts can promote a better society, rather than focusing on reality of climate change
24
Q
deniers had greater behavioral intention when they believed mitigation would: (3)
A
- increase societal well-being
- increase economic and technological development
- suggest solutions consistent with individualistic values
25
which messages increase motivation for climate change adaptation most in dismissive audience (2)
- no mention of climate change
- emphasize local impacts
26
which messages increase motivation for climate change adaptation for all audiences (2)
- strong negative emotive content
- provide specific advice
27
what are some advantages of using fear in communicating climate change (4)
- attract audience attention
- increase concern and importance of topic
- influence attitudes and behavioral intention (temporarily)
- works better with people that have high self-efficacy (goal-motivated)
28
what are some downsides of using fear in communicating climate change (4)
- ineffective for generating real long-term engagement and action
- can paralyze or desensitize people (emotional numbness)
- some may use denial strategies to suppress anxiety
- does not work for the concerned/alarmed
29
what is the consensus about using fear for communicating climate change (3)
- may be good in early stages to attract attention
- not the most effective for long-term engagement
- do not overuse it
30
what are some advantages of using hope in communicating climate change (3)
- powerful tool for change
- move beyond 'doom and gloom'
- encourage sense of agency and reduce feelings of despair
31
what is the disadvantages of using hope in communicating climate change
- too much can reduce concern
32
what is the consensus regarding using hope in climate change communication
- must balance between highlighting threat, but avoiding despair
33
how is hope used to communicate climate change (4)
- promote more active hope
- realistic goals
- imaginable paths
- meaningful role for the individual in a collective response
34
key points of the module (2)
- message framing can influence public opinion
- effects vary depending on the frame and the audience (eg. Six Americas)
35
tips for developing more effective climate change messages (8)
- local and relevant to the individual’s community
- focus on the present
- simple and easy-to-understand messages with less cognitive effort
- highlight effective actions others are taking
- emphasize the power of collective action
- emphasize co-benefits of mitigation (e.g. health, safety) rather than sacrifice
- appeal to people’s values (e.g. well-being of others)
- avoid overusing emotional appeals
