Sentences with phrase «scientific consensus message»

To better understand how people think, process and respond to the scientific consensus message, this study investigates a «gateway belief model» (GBM) of public responses to climate change.

Not exact matches

The British university has contended that the messages were illegally obtained by a hacker, who posted them on Web sites of groups critical of the current scientific consensus that human activity has caused dangerous changes to the global climate.

What gets my goat is when otherwise sensible people write stuff supportive of it like: «There had already been six previous studies finding an overwhelming scientific consensus», and strongly objecting to messaging on the basis that it was not effective, while apparently not caring that it was not true!

Overstatement of confidence, active efforts to suppress publication of differing technical analyses, insistence on consensus, over-egged frightening scenarios, and admonitions from one climate scientists to others to «stay on message», are ALWAYS going to be detrimental to scientific progress.

When so much of the AGW message is based on «trust us, we're the consensus of scientific opinion», governments and the general public need to know that there's a small core of untrustworthy non-scientists who are doing all they can to hide their results from scientific scrutiny.

Or rather, the message should be in three parts: basic physics leads us to have a strong expectation that the carbon dioxide we've pumped into the atmosphere should cause global warming; the measurements that have been made bear this out; the scientific consensus about the previous two statements is overwhelming.

«This counter-movement produced messages aimed, at the very least, at creating ideological polarization through politicized tactics, and at the very most, at overtly refuting current scientific consensus with scientific findings of their own.»

We conclude that the scientific consensus on climate change is most effectively communicated as a short, simple message that is easy to comprehend and remember.

In particular, it is sometimes argued that (a) despite past public communication efforts, public understanding of the scientific consensus has not changed much in the last decade and hence the approach must not be very effective (i.e., «the stasis argument»)[13] and (b) because people are predisposed to engage in protective motivated reasoning (i.e., people process information consistent with their ideological worldviews), consensus - messaging is likely to be unsuccessful or could even backfire [12, 14].

Using pre and post measures from a national message test experiment, we found that all stated hypotheses were confirmed; increasing public perceptions of the scientific consensus causes a significant increase in the belief that climate change is (a) happening, (b) human - caused and (c) a worrisome problem.

Particularly, repeated exposure to simple messages that correctly state the actual scientific consensus on human - caused climate change is a strategy likely to help counter the concerted efforts to misinform the public.

Yet, we find that consensus - messaging does not increase political polarization on the issue (perhaps partly due to the neutral scientific character of the message) and shifts the opinions of both Democrats and Republicans in directions consistent with the conclusions of climate science.

A concerted campaign to inform the public about the scientific consensus would ideally involve numerous exposures to the key message, conveyed by a variety of trusted messengers [6, 20].

All the consensus messages tested led to significant gains in public understanding of the scientific consensus compared to the control group.

Using national data (N = 1104) from a consensus - message experiment, we find that increasing public perceptions of the scientific consensus is significantly and causally associated with an increase in the belief that climate change is happening, human - caused and a worrisome threat.

Last summer, climate communication researchers at George Mason University and Yale University published a commentary urging the science community to reiterate the scientific consensus on climate change — that 97 percent of scientists support the conclusion that climate change is real, and humans are causing it — citing studies showing that exposing individuals to this message can increase their estimates of the scientific consensus by 10 to 20 percent.

Their latest study in Climatic Change tested the effect of three different ways to communicate the scientific consensus: a simple text message, a pie - chart and metaphors (e.g., likening the 97 % consensus on climate change to a 97 % consensus among doctors).

This study shows that messages about scientific consensus have a greater influence in more conservative US states.

Research now shows that climate messages can influence public beliefs about the scientific consensus on climate change, particularly in the places that are initially more skeptical.

Public mtg on climate action in SE FlaThe Compact effectively informed its citizens of the appropriateness of using the best available science for these ends but not through a «messaging» campaign focused on «scientific consensus» or anything else.

«This countermovement produced messages aimed, at the very least, at creating ideological polarization through politicized tactics, and at the very most, at overtly refuting current scientific consensus with scientific findings of their own,» Dr. Farrell, the author of the study said.