• Energy Research

AbstractCommunicating the scientific consensus that human-caused climate change is real increases climate change beliefs, worry and support for public action in the United States. In this preregistered experiment, we tested two scientific consensus messages, a classic message on the reality of human-caused climate change and an updated message additionally emphasizing scientific agreement that climate change is a crisis. Across online convenience samples from 27 countries (n = 10,527), the classic message substantially reduces misperceptions (d = 0.47, 95% CI (0.41, 0.52)) and slightly increases climate change beliefs (from d = 0.06, 95% CI (0.01, 0.11) to d = 0.10, 95% CI (0.04, 0.15)) and worry (d = 0.05, 95% CI (−0.01, 0.10)) but not support for public action directly. The updated message is equally effective but provides no added value. Both messages are more effective for audiences with lower message familiarity and higher misperceptions, including those with lower trust in climate scientists and right-leaning ideologies. Overall, scientific consensus messaging is an effective, non-polarizing tool for changing misperceptions, beliefs and worry across different audiences.

Abstract Science is integral to society because it can inform individual, government, corporate, and civil society decision-making on issues such as public health, new technologies or climate change. Yet, public distrust and populist sentiment challenge the relationship between science and society. To help researchers analyse the science-society nexus across different geographical and cultural contexts, we undertook a cross-sectional population survey resulting in a dataset of 71,922 participants in 68 countries. The data were collected between November 2022 and August 2023 as part of the global Many Labs study “Trust in Science and Science-Related Populism” (TISP). The questionnaire contained comprehensive measures for individuals’ trust in scientists, science-related populist attitudes, perceptions of the role of science in society, science media use and communication behaviour, attitudes to climate change and support for environmental policies, personality traits, political and religious views and demographic characteristics. Here, we describe the dataset, survey materials and psychometric properties of key variables. We encourage researchers to use this unique dataset for global comparative analyses on public perceptions of science and its role in society and policy-making.

Recent research in the US shows the potential of providing information about minority norms that are increasing on positively influencing interest and engagement in desired behaviours. Although these are promising findings, there is little published research replicating or testing this effect outside the US. The study reported here is a direct replication of Sparkman and Walton’s (2017) research. We explored the effects of different kinds of normative information, particularly information about increasing (referred to as ‘dynamic’ or ‘trending’) minority norms, on interest in reducing meat consumption, attitudes toward reducing meat consumption, intentions to reduce meat consumption, and expectations to do so. Following pilot work (n = 197), we used a double-blind online study with three conditions: dynamic norm (n = 276), static norm (n = 284), and no norm (n = 286). The sample consisted of British people, with ages ranging from 18 to 79 (Mage = 37.21, SDage = 13.58; 56.38% female). There was no effect of dynamic norm information on any outcomes, including predictions about future meat consumption norms. Exploratory analyses suggest that political position and gender were associated with meat consumption outcomes. The findings are discussed in relation to conditions under which dynamic normative information may be successful in influencing motivation to engage in desired behaviours, and to possible improvements in research design.

While decreasing their meat consumption is one of the most impactful behaviours an individual may carry out to reduce their carbon emissions, it is still a minority behaviour in many parts of the world. Research suggests that communicating information about changing ‘dynamic’ norms may be a useful tool for changing attitudes and behaviours in the direction of those currently held by the minority. This study utilizes a 2 x 2 mixed design (Norm Type [dynamic/static] x Visual Cue [present/absent], and a no-task control), and a follow-up assessment after one week to investigate the effect of making dynamic norms salient on various meat consumption outcomes: attitudes towards meat consumption, interest in reducing one’s own meat consumption, intentions to reduce one’s own meat consumption, and self-reported meat consumption. We used an online sample of British participants (N = 1294), ranging in ages 18–77 (Mage = 39.97, SDage = 13.71; 55.8% female). We hypothesized that: (a) dynamic norms will positively influence meat consumption outcomes, (b) visual cues will accentuate the difference between norm conditions, (c) using a visual cue will enhance the effect of dynamic norms, and (d) any effects of dynamic norms will endure over a period of one week. We found no positive effect of dynamic norms (vs. static norms) on any outcome at time 1, and no positive effect on changes in outcomes from time 1 to time 2. However, we found a positive interaction of norm type and visual cue at time 1 (although not from time 1 to time 2): the addition of a visual cue to dynamic norm messages enhanced the positive effect of the message at time 1 (but did not enhance the changes occurring from time 1 to time 2). Analyses for changes in self-reported meat consumption did not reach our evidential threshold. We discuss the practical and theoretical implications of these findings.