Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change

Nature Climate Change volume 6, pages 622–626 (2016)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Recent growth in the number of studies examining belief in climate change is a positive development, but presents an ironic challenge in that it can be difficult for academics, practitioners and policy makers to keep pace. As a response to this challenge, we report on a meta-analysis of the correlates of belief in climate change. Twenty-seven variables were examined by synthesizing 25 polls and 171 academic studies across 56 nations. Two broad conclusions emerged. First, many intuitively appealing variables (such as education, sex, subjective knowledge, and experience of extreme weather events) were overshadowed in predictive power by values, ideologies, worldviews and political orientation. Second, climate change beliefs have only a small to moderate effect on the extent to which people are willing to act in climate-friendly ways. Implications for converting sceptics to the climate change cause—and for converting believers’ intentions into action—are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Correlations between climate change belief and demographic variables.
Figure 2: Correlations between antecedent variables and climate change belief.
Figure 3: Correlations between climate change belief and outcome variables.

References

  1. Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C. & Hmielowski, J. Global Warming’s Six Americas, March 2012 and November 2011 (Yale Project on Climate Change, Yale Univ. and George Mason Univ., 2012); http://environment.yale.edu/climate/files/Six-Americas-March-2012.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  2. Leviston, Z., Leitch, A., Greenhill, M., Leonard, R. & Walker, I. Australians’ Views of Climate Change (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Pidgeon, N. Public understanding of, and attitudes to, climate change: UK and international perspectives and policy. Clim. Policy 12, S85–S106 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Scruggs, L. & Benegal, S. Declining public concern about climate change: can we blame the great recession? Glob. Environ. Change 22, 505–515 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Antonio, R. J. & Brulle, R. J. The unbearable lightness of politics: climate change denial and political polarization. Sociol. Q. 52, 195–202 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hoffman, A. J. The growing climate divide. Nature Clim. Change 1, 195–196 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. McCright, A. M. & Dunlap, R. E. The politicization of climate change and polarization in the American public’s views of global warming. Sociol. Q. 52, 155–194 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. McCright, A. M., Dunlap, R. E. & Xiao, C. Increasing influence of party identification on perceived scientific agreement and support for government action on climate change in the USA, 2006–2012. Weath. Clim. Soc. 6, 194–201 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Dunlap, R. E. & McCright, A. M. Cool dudes: the denial of climate change among conservative white males in the United States. Glob. Environ. Change 21, 1163–1172 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kellstedt, P. M., Zahran, S. & Vedlitz, A. Personal efficacy, the information environment, and attitudes toward global warming and climate change in the United States. Risk Anal. 28, 113–126 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Malka, A., Krosnick, J. A. & Langer, G. The association of knowledge with concern about global warming: trusted information sources shape public thinking. Risk Anal. 29, 633–647 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Guy, S., Kashima, Y., Walker, I. & O’Neill, S. Investigating the effects of knowledge and ideology on climate change beliefs. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 44, 421–429 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hamilton, L. C. Education, politics, and opinions about climate change: evidence for interaction effects. Climatic Change 104, 231–242 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hamilton, L. C. Did the Arctic ice recover? Demographics of true and false climate facts. Weath. Clim. Soc. 4, 236–249 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hart, P. S., Nisbet, E. C. & Myers, T. A. Public attention to science and political news and support for climate change mitigation. Nature Clim. Change 5, 541–545 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kahan, D. M. et al. The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nature Clim. Change 2, 732–735 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Whitmarsh, L. Scepticism and uncertainty about climate change: dimensions, determinants and change over time. Glob. Environ. Change 21, 690–700 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ding, D., Maibach, E. W., Zhao, X., Roser-Renouf, C. & Leiserowitz, A. Support for climate policy and societal action are linked to perceptions about scientific agreement. Nature Clim. Change 1, 462–466 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lewandowsky, S., Gignac, G. & Vaughan, S. The pivotal role of perceived scientific consensus in acceptance of science. Nature Clim. Change 3, 399–404 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. McCright, A. M., Dunlap, R. E. & Xiao, C. Perceived scientific agreement and support for government action on climate change in the USA. Climatic Change 119, 511–518 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G. & Jones, R. E. Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP scale. J. Soc. Issues 56, 425–442 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Schwartz, S. H. Are there universal aspects in the content and structure of values? J. Soc. Issues 50, 19–45 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Kalof, L. & Guagnano, G. A. Values, beliefs, and proenvironmental action: attitude formation toward emergent attitude objects. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 25, 1611–1636 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Douglas, M. & Wildavsky, A. Risk and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers (Univ. California Press, 1982).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kahan, D. M., Jenkins-Smith, H. & Braman, D. Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. J. Risk Res. 14, 147–174 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Heath, Y. & Gifford, R. Free-market ideology and environmental degradation: the case of belief in global climate change. Environ. Behav. 38, 48–71 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lewandowsky, S., Oberauer, K. & Gignac, G. NASA faked the Moon landing—Therefore (climate) science is a hoax: an anatomy of the motivated rejection of science. Psychol. Sci. 24, 622–633 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Spence, A., Poortinga, W., Butler, C. & Pidgeon, N. F. Perceptions of climate change and willingness to save energy related to flood experience. Nature Clim. Change 1, 46–49 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Stern, P. C. Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behaviour. J. Soc. Issues 56, 407–424 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hsu, A. et al. The 2014 Environmental Performance Index (Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, 2014).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Feygina, I., Jost, J. T. & Goldsmith, R. E. System justification, the denial of global warming, and the possibility of system-sanctioned change. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 36, 326–338 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Bain, P. G., Hornsey, M. J., Bongiorno, R. & Jeffries, C. Promoting pro-environmental action in climate change deniers. Nature Clim. Change 2, 600–603 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Bain, P. G. et al. Co-benefits of addressing climate change can motivate action around the world. Nature Clim. Change 6, 154–157 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Hornsey, M. J. et al. Evidence for motivated control: understanding the paradoxical link between threat and efficacy beliefs about climate change. J. Environ. Psychol. 42, 57–65 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Reser, J. P. & Swim, J. K. Adapting to and coping with the threat and impacts of climate change. Am. Psychol. 66, 277–289 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T. & Rothstein, H. R. Introduction to Meta-Analysis (Wiley, 2009).

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank J. Henry and J. Higgins for their helpful advice on a previous version of this paper. We also thank Essential Research for providing access to their polling data. Finally, we thank the dozens of authors of papers included in the meta-analyses who provided data and helped clarify their analyses.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia

    Matthew J. Hornsey, Emily A. Harris & Kelly S. Fielding

  2. School of Psychology and Counselling and Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland 4059, Australia

    Paul G. Bain

Authors
  1. Matthew J. Hornsey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emily A. Harris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul G. Bain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kelly S. Fielding
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

M.J.H. conceived and designed the meta-analyses, and led the writing. E.A.H. gathered and analysed the data, and co-wrote the paper. P.G.B. and K.S.F. contributed expertise in terms of materials and analysis tools, contributed to the design of the meta-analysis, and co-wrote the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew J. Hornsey.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information (PDF 1707 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hornsey, M., Harris, E., Bain, P. et al. Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change. Nature Clim Change 6, 622–626 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2943

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2943

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing