Psychologists try to explain climate change skepticism

[^_^ 5,021]

Feinberg and his colleague Robb Willer, also at Berkeley, asked 45 online participants spread across 15 cities in the United States to engage in what was ostensibly a sentence-unscrambling activity.

Half of the volunteers were asked to unscramble sentences such as "Somehow justice will always prevail", whereas the others were given sentences such as "Often, justice will not prevail". This activity primed them to have either a strong or weak belief in a just world. The participants then completed a survey that measured their scepticism over climate change, asking questions such as "How solid is the evidence that the earth is warming?" and requiring participants to rate their answers on a six-point scale, in which six was not at all solid and one very solid.

Next, participants watched two short global-warming warning videos created by the Environmental Defense Fund, a charity based in New York that campaigns on green issues. The first showed a train speeding towards a small girl as a metaphor for the impending catastrophe that awaits the world's children. The second showed anxious children verbally simulating a clock ticking while describing the climate devastation that is coming. After watching, participants again had their degree of scepticism over climate change measured. They were also asked to rate how willing they were to take action to reduce their carbon footprints.

Feinberg and Willer found that participants primed to have a stronger belief in a just world reported levels of scepticism that were 29% higher, and a willingness to reduce their carbon footprint that was 21% lower, than those primed to see the world as an unjust place. Their findings are reported in Psychological Science1.

"This research ... identifies the just-world belief system as a key matter for climate-change communicators to attend to," says psychologist Janet Swim at Pennsylvania State University in University Park.

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110104/full/news.2011.701.html

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Accepting science should never be an emotional undertaking.

[^_^ 5,021]

Accepting science should never be an emotional undertaking.

The general public are not androids capable of making perfectly rational decisions all the time. If they all were, we wouldn't need people trained in the art of effective messaging.

[Ban Hammer 13,407]

yeah, life is unjust.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Feinberg and his colleague Robb Willer, also at Berkeley, asked 45 online participants spread across 15 cities in the United States to engage in what was ostensibly a sentence-unscrambling activity.

Half of the volunteers were asked to unscramble sentences such as "Somehow justice will always prevail", whereas the others were given sentences such as "Often, justice will not prevail". This activity primed them to have either a strong or weak belief in a just world. The participants then completed a survey that measured their scepticism over climate change, asking questions such as "How solid is the evidence that the earth is warming?" and requiring participants to rate their answers on a six-point scale, in which six was not at all solid and one very solid.

Next, participants watched two short global-warming warning videos created by the Environmental Defense Fund, a charity based in New York that campaigns on green issues. The first showed a train speeding towards a small girl as a metaphor for the impending catastrophe that awaits the world's children. The second showed anxious children verbally simulating a clock ticking while describing the climate devastation that is coming. After watching, participants again had their degree of scepticism over climate change measured. They were also asked to rate how willing they were to take action to reduce their carbon footprints.

Feinberg and Willer found that participants primed to have a stronger belief in a just world reported levels of scepticism that were 29% higher, and a willingness to reduce their carbon footprint that was 21% lower, than those primed to see the world as an unjust place. Their findings are reported in Psychological Science1.

"This research ... identifies the just-world belief system as a key matter for climate-change communicators to attend to," says psychologist Janet Swim at Pennsylvania State University in University Park.

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110104/full/news.2011.701.html

Where did they dig these quacks up? Seriously?

You need a psychologist to tell you to play on people's emotions about how they 'feel?'

Accepting science should never be an emotional undertaking.

A "warming earth" is also a lot different of an idea that "we" are causing it.

One is science. The other is science-fiction.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

A "warming earth" is also a lot different of an idea that "we" are causing it.

One is science. The other is science-fiction.

It's scientists who are the ones who have made that claim (actually, what they have stated is that CO2 emissions are having a significant impact on earth's temperature rising). To deny that as science requires a suspension of logic and rationale, hence the psychology behind such denialism.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

It's scientists who are the ones who have made that claim (actually, what they have stated is that CO2 emissions are having a significant impact on earth's temperature rising). To deny that as science requires a suspension of logic and rationale, hence the psychology behind such denialism.

Tell that to every 'scientist' who has disproven another 'scientist.'

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Tell that to every 'scientist' who has disproven another 'scientist.'

Anyone who understands the scientific process, would know that theories don't happen that way. The modern scientific process is much different than it was 200 or even 100 years ago. Take a science class.

[mawilson 2,133]

To deny that as science requires a suspension of logic and rationale, hence the psychology behind such denialism.

Global warming is a mystery.

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Baiting post and Inappropriate response have been removed. You can discuss the differences of opinion without becoming personal.

[alienlovechild 75]

Feinberg and Willer found that participants primed to have a stronger belief in a just world reported levels of scepticism that were 29% higher, and a willingness to reduce their carbon footprint that was 21% lower, than those primed to see the world as an unjust place. Their findings are reported in Psychological Science1.

So the belief is that somehow justice will be fulfilled whether not global warming takes place.

A more likely answer is the planet is complex environment and an individual can only see a part of it in relatively short lifespan.