A new study suggests that the gains of science reporting on climate change are fragile.
When people are exposed to coverage skeptical of climate change, they can lose their accurate beliefs.
Thomas Wood is an associate professor of political science at The Ohio State University.
The frame of reference for science reporting is quickly disappearing.
The study will be published in June of 2022. The study was conducted by Wood with two other people
Republicans and people who initially rejected climate change had their opinions changed by reading accurate articles, according to results.
The study involved more than two thousand online participants who took part in four waves of the experiment.
They all read articles in the popular media that reflected the scientific consensus on climate change.
They read another scientific article, an opinion article that was skeptical of climate science, or an article on an unrelated topic in the second and third waves of the experiment.
The participants were asked their beliefs about the science of climate change and their attitudes.
After each wave, the researchers asked participants if they believed that climate change was caused by humans. Researchers asked participants if they preferred government action on climate change and if they preferred renewable energy.
Wood said it was important that accurate reporting had positive effects on all groups.
He stated that science reporting changed people's factual understanding and moved their political preferences.
It made them believe that the government should do more to address climate change.
The positive effects on people's beliefs were short lived. The effects were mostly gone in the later waves.
The accuracy gains from science coverage were reversed by opinion stories that were skeptical of the scientific consensus.
There was no measurable effect on people's beliefs and attitudes from the articles.
The results show that the media plays a key role in Americans' attitudes about science.
The subjects in our study were very receptive to what we wrote about climate change. What they learned faded very quickly.
The media has an obligation to only report on what is new.
People need to hear the same accurate messages about climate change, that's what we found. Wood said that if they only hear it once, it will go away quickly.
The news media is not designed to do that.
More information: Time and skeptical opinion content erode the effects of science coverage on climate beliefs and attitudes, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2022). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2122069119. Journal information: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
All Rights Reserved © 2024
