Climate change knowledge and action: Less connection than we would expect?

Political scientists at Texas A&M recently published an article arguing that public campaigns to educate the public about the dangers of global warming may make people less, not more, worried about climate change.*

People generally believe that when you have more information about a risk, you act to avoid or control that risk, and that there's some positive correlation between how much information you have, and how hard you try to fix a problem. This is the knowledge-deficit model.

As people are exposed to more information about what scientists know about how human activities like CO2 emissions are related to increasing global temperatures, then one should expect two things. First, one should expect to see higher amounts of information to be related to higher degrees of personal efficacy and responsibility for global warming and climate change. Second, one should expect to see higher amounts of information to be related to heightened perceptions about the risks of global warming and climate change. Together, these hypotheses are straightforward applications of the knowledge-deficit model to the issue of global warming.

That's not the case. In fact, they report two slightly counterintuitive, but disturbing, patterns. First,

more informed respondents both feel less personally responsible for global warming, and also show less concern for global warming. We also find that confidence in scientists has unexpected effects: respondents with high confidence in scientists feel less responsible for global warming, and also show less concern for global warming.... [C]ertainly contrary to the assumptions underlying the knowledge-deficit model, as well as the marketing of movies like Ice Age and An Inconvenient Truth, the effects of information on both concern for global warming and responsibility for it are exactly the opposite of what were expected. Directly, the more information a person has about global warming, the less responsible he or she feel for it; and indirectly, the more information a person has about global warming, the less concerned he or she is for it.

The authors themselves add the caveat that "The effects here are statistically significant, but they are modest in magnitude." Further, several people have argued that since the study is based on a survey taken in 2004, just before the release of An Inconvenient Truth, it doesn't capture how the terms of public debate around climate change, or the ways people respond to information about climate, changed after the movie.

* Paul M. Kellstedt, Sammy Zahran, Arnold Vedlitz (2008) "Personal Efficacy, the Information Environment, and Attitudes Toward Global Warming and Climate Change in the United States," Risk Analysis 28 (1), 113–126.

Technorati Tags: climate, decision-making, risk

Comments

[Alec Roberta]

Scientists in the U.K. have reported evidence that further refutes one theory of global climate change.

In the heated debate over global warming, there is an opposing idea, called the cosmic ray theory, which contends that climate change is simply caused by cosmic rays coming from the sun.

[fchristie]

The topics of global warming and climate change have fueled a controversy in the academic and political communities. While it is not entirely clear where all the information will take us, we can be sure, if this article’s contention is correct, that we will not awaken to a solution anytime soon.
Men are looking to other men to solve humanity’s problems. We look to scientists, politicians and technology. Whether global warming falls into that category completely or not does not change the basic question that arises from this issue. Why is mankind suffering? Who or what do we turn to?
I began asking myself these questions years ago and found all sorts of explanations. I came across the science of Kabbalah and the teachings of Rav Michael Laitman PhD. He presents a unique perspective on the solution to the problems of the world, including global warming.
He states, “A recent survey of almost eleven hundred Americans, conducted by scientists from the Texas A&M University, shows that “the more informed respondents both feel less personally responsible for global warming, and also show less concern for global warming” (Risk Analysis, Vol.28, Issue 1, Feb 08). Oddly enough, the more actively the media publicizes the problem, the less concerned people become. It looks like our society is asking professionals to solve this global-scale problem, and not disturb regular people with cries of imminent disaster.
Also, other than achieving personal comfort, what else can you expect from your regular Joe? If there truly are disasters coming our way, then it’s not like anyone’s offering any solutions for them. Such conditions create a need for Kabbalah, which is capable of preventing nature’s blows. Therefore, it is essential to spread this method throughout the world, no matter how desperate the conditions may become.
You know, the people of Israel didn’t really want to flee Egypt (egoism), and this is precisely what Nature is pushing us toward. Moses was practically all alone in this endeavor. Prior to his arrival from Itro, his father in law, and until he started agitating Pharaoh, which is egoism, nobody was even thinking of escaping from such egoism. Everything that Torah speaks of will also happen to us, and in exactly the same way.”
Of particular interest to me is how the science of Kabbalah can educate me about the cause of ‘Nature’s blows’ and what we can do about it.
Going behind the physical and finding the root cause of pain and suffering is a challenge to our normal way of processing what we call reality. To get some of these answers while learning about the right questions, visit Rav Laitman on his blog at www.laitman.com . I found it very helpful.