The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Climate and environmental science denial: A review of the scientific literature published in 1990–2015
Open accessAbstract
Denial of scientific findings is neither a new nor an unexplored phenomenon. In the area of environmental science and policy though, the research on denial has not been systematically summarized and analyzed. This article reviews 161 scientific articles on environmental and climate science denial published in peer reviewed international journals in the last 25 years and aims to both identify research gaps and enable learning on the phenomenon. Such knowledge is needed for the increasingly important task to provide effective response to science denial, in order to put an end to its influence on environmental policy making. The review, which is based on articles found in the databases Web of Science , Scopus and Philosopher's Index , shows that denial by far is most studied in relation to climate change, with a focus on Anglo-American countries, where this form of denial is most common. Other environmental issues and other geographical areas have received much less scientific attention. While the actors behind climate science denial, their various motives and the characteristics of their operations have been thoroughly described, more comparative research between issues and countries is needed in order to draw reliable conclusions about the factors explaining the peculiarities of denial. This may in turn lay the ground for developing and actually testing the effectiveness and efficiency of strategies to counter environmental science denial. Irrespective of the ambitions of environmental goals, science-based policies are always preferable. The scientific community therefore needs to increase its efforts to dismantle false claims and to disclose the schemes of denialists.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cool dudes: The denial of climate change among conservative white males in the United States
McCright, A. M., & Dunlap, R. E. (2011) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.06.003 · Cited by 1,217
The Political Divide on Climate Change: Partisan Polarization Widens in the U.S.
Dunlap, R. E., McCright, A. M., & Yarosh, J. H. (2016) · Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development · doi:10.1080/00139157.2016.1208995 · Cited by 786
Lewandowsky, S., Oberauer, K., & Gignac, G. E. (2013) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797612457686 · Cited by 638
Climate of scepticism: US newspaper coverage of the science of climate change
Antilla, L. (2005) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2005.08.003 · Cited by 511
Public division about climate change rooted in conflicting socio-political identities
Bliuc, A.-M., McGarty, C., Thomas, E. F., Lala, G., Berndsen, M., & Misajon, R. (2015) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/nclimate2507 · Cited by 284
Perceptions of scientific dissent undermine public support for environmental policy
Aklin, M., & Urpelainen, J. (2014) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2013.10.006 · Cited by 111
Cited by
Online misinformation about climate change
Treen, K. M. D., Williams, H. T. P., & O'Neill, S. J. (2020) · WIREs Climate Change · doi:10.1002/wcc.665 · Cited by 441
Effective strategies for rebutting science denialism in public discussions
Schmid, P., & Betsch, C. (2019) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-019-0632-4 · Cited by 264
The 2020 presidential election and beliefs about fraud: Continuity or change?
Enders, A. M., Uscinski, J. E., Klofstad, C. A., Premaratne, K., Seelig, M. I., Wuchty, S., Murthi, M. N., & Funchion, J. R. (2021) · Electoral Studies · doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2021.102366 · Cited by 64
Metadata
- Authors
- Björnberg, K. E., Karlsson, M., Gilek, M., & Hansson, S. O.
- Venue
- Journal of Cleaner Production
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-11
- Volume
- 167
- Pages
- 229-241
- ISSN
- 0959-6526 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2743599835
- Cited by
- 205
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 32.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Climate and environmental science denial: A review of the scientific literature published in 1990–2015. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.066
- The paper
- Björnberg, K. E., Karlsson, M., Gilek, M., & Hansson, S. O. (2017). Climate and environmental science denial: A review of the scientific literature published in 1990–2015. Journal of Cleaner Production. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.066
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.