Echo chambers of denial: Explaining user comments on climate change
Open accessAbstract
Although there is a broad consensus among scientists and journalists about the existence of anthropogenic climate change as a global problem, some segments of the population remain doubtful about the human impact on it. The internet provides citizens with opportunities to publicly voice their doubts and user comment sections of online media are a popular form of user-generated content. This study identifies factors that foster comments that are sceptical or supportive of basic assumptions of anthropogenic climate change, drawing on online news in the US, the UK, Germany, India, and Switzerland. The results show that users adapt to the dominant opinion within the respective media outlet: user comment sections serve as echo chambers rather than as corrective mechanisms. Climate change denial is more visible in user comment sections in countries where the climate change debate reflects the scientific consensus on climate change and user comments create niches of denial.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Digital networks sometimes feature intensive intergroup contact.
“and sometimes even feature intensive intergroup contact (van Eck et al., 2021;Walter et al., 2017;Yarchi et al., 2020).”
From When debates break apart: discursive polarization as a multi-dimensional divergence emerging in and through communication (2023) · cites this paper as Walter et al., 2017
Cites
The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You
Allen, J. (2012) · doi:10.4079/pp.v19i0.10431 · Cited by 4,014 · cited 2×
“These psychological mechanisms, combined with algorithms designed to match content with people’s pre-existing opinions and preferences (Pariser, 2011), have led people into a web of “echo chambers”, which refer to a common frame of reference and positive feedback mechanisms that reinforce existing opinions rather than…”
BackgroundThe “false consensus effect”: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes
Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/0022-1031(77)90049-x · Cited by 3,139 · see citing works
Red Media, Blue Media: Evidence of Ideological Selectivity in Media Use
Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. (2009) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01402.x · Cited by 1,940 · see citing works
Communicating climate change: history, challenges, process and future directions
Moser, S. C. (2009) · Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change · doi:10.1002/wcc.11 · Cited by 1,240 · cited 2× · see citing works
“…moved beyond the question of whether it is happening and whether it is caused by humans (for an overview of the climate debate, see Moser, 2010; Schäfer, 2015), “doubt and skepticism linger in various sectors of society” (Moser, 2010, p. 32) and are more prevalent in some countries than in others.”
BackgroundThe Law of Group PolarizationPreprint
Sunstein, C. (2002) · How Change Happens · doi:10.2139/ssrn.199668 · Cited by 1,050 · cited 1× · see citing works
“This reinforcement and support can produce more extreme opinions and increase polarization in societies (Sunstein, 2003).”
BackgroundScepticism and uncertainty about climate change: Dimensions, determinants and change over time
Whitmarsh, L. (2011) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.01.016 · Cited by 890 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Overall, there is a broad scientific consensus that anthropogenic climate change exists (Anderegg, Prall, Harold, Schneider, 2010; Cook et al., 2013; Whitmarsh, 2011), which is also articulated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is responsible for assessing the…”
BackgroundExpert credibility in climate change
Anderegg, W. R. L., Prall, J. W., Harold, J., & Schneider, S. H. (2010) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1003187107 · Cited by 807 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Overall, there is a broad scientific consensus that anthropogenic climate change exists (Anderegg et al., 2010; Cook et al., 2013; Whitmarsh, 2011), which is also articulated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), that is responsible for assessing the scientific information relevant to understanding…”
BackgroundSchmidt, A., Ivanova, A., & Schäfer, M. S. (2013) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.07.020 · Cited by 753 · see citing works
Dechezleprêtre, A., Glachant, M., Haščič, I., Johnstone, N., & Ménière, Y. (2010) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1414227 · Cited by 747
McCright, A., & Dunlap, R. (2000) · Social Problems · doi:10.2307/3097132 · Cited by 717 · see citing works
The Nasty Effect: Online Incivility and Risk Perceptions of Emerging Technologies
Anderson, A. A., Brossard, D., Scheufele, D., Xenos, M., & Ladwig, P. J. (2014) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/jcc4.12009 · Cited by 716 · see citing works
Domingo, D., Quandt, T., Heinonen, A., Paulussen, S., Singer, J. B., & Vujnovic, M. (2008) · Journalism Practice · doi:10.1080/17512780802281065 · Cited by 705 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Even though their participatory potential has not yet been fully exhausted (Domingo et al., 2008), user comment sections provide ordinary users with a public space for debate.”
BackgroundFixing the communications failure
Kahan, D. (2010) · Nature · doi:10.1038/463296a · Cited by 602 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The psychological need to confirm their views and reduce cognitive dissonance (Donsbach, 2009) leads to a confirmation bias when interpreting information (Kahan, 2010).”
BackgroundBoykoff, M. (2007) · Area · doi:10.1111/j.1475-4762.2007.00769.x · Cited by 468 · see citing works
Public Sphere 2.0? The Democratic Qualities of Citizen Debates in Online Newspapers
Ruiz, C., Domingo, D., Micó, J., Díaz-Noci, J., Meso, K., & Masip, P. (2011) · The International Journal of Press/Politics · doi:10.1177/1940161211415849 · Cited by 359 · cited 1× · see citing works
“There are however concerns that anonymity, especially in the context of user comments sections, leads to incivility (Coe, Kenski, Rains, 2014; Freelon, 2015) and is affecting the quality of debates (Ksiazek, 2016; Ruiz et al., 2011).”
BackgroundCivility 2.0: a comparative analysis of incivility in online political discussion
Rowe, I. (2014) · Information Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2014.940365 · Cited by 338 · see citing works
Towards quality discourse in online news comments
Diakopoulos, N. A., & Naaman, M. (2011) · ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) · doi:10.1145/1958824.1958844 · Cited by 319 · see citing works
A Media Sociology for the Networked Public Sphere: The Hierarchy of Influences Model
Reese, S. D., & Shoemaker, P. (2016) · Mass Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/15205436.2016.1174268 · Cited by 314 · see citing works
Weber, P. (2014) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444813495165 · Cited by 302 · cited 2× · see citing works
“However, the number of participants varies depending on the news story and is positively influenced by the news values – such as proximity, impact, and continuity – included in the story (Weber, 2014).”
BackgroundBeyond false balance: How interpretive journalism shapes media coverage of climate change
Brüggemann, M., & Engesser, S. (2016) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.11.004 · Cited by 299 · see citing works
Self-citationOnline communication on climate change and climate politics: a literature review
Schäfer, M. S. (2012) · Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change · doi:10.1002/wcc.191 · Cited by 289 · cited 2× · see citing works
“The news media coverage – and especially online news – is often more divided, which provides a forum for climate-skeptical voices that challenge these assumptions (Schäfer, 2012).”
BackgroundLee, E.-J., & Jang, Y. (2010) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650210376189 · Cited by 284 · see citing works
Painter, J., & Ashe, T. (2012) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/044005 · Cited by 264 · cited 1× · see citing works
“For example, a comparative study by Painter and Ashe (2012) revealed stark differences between conservative and left-leaning newspapers in leaving skeptical voices uncontested.”
BackgroundDividing climate change: global warming in the Indian mass media
Billett, S. (2009) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-009-9605-3 · Cited by 242 · cited 3× · see citing works
“India is included as an emerging economy where citizens are particularly concerned about climate change (Pew Research Center, 2015), and the climate change debate is more focused on the “risk–responsibility divide” between the early-industrialized Western countries and the rest of the world (Billett, 2010; Thaker Leis…”
BackgroundInfluentialMetag, J., Füchslin, T., & Schäfer, M. S. (2017) · Public Understanding of Science · doi:10.1177/0963662515592558 · Cited by 203
User comments: motives and inhibitors to write and read
Springer, N., Engelmann, I., & Pfaffinger, C. (2015) · Information Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2014.997268 · Cited by 203 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The proportion of online news readers that engages in discussions is relatively small compared to those who read online news (Diakopoulos & Naaman, 2011; Springer et al., 2015).”
BackgroundBoyce, T., & Lewis, J. (2009) · doi:10.3726/b14826 · Cited by 197 · cited 3×
“Yet, some segments of the population remain skeptical of, or unsure about, the causes and risks associated with climate change (Leiserowitz, Maibach, Roser-Renouf, Feinberg, Rosenthal, 2016; Metag, Fuchslin, Schäfer, 2015; Pew Research Center, 2015).”
BackgroundInfluentialYour opinion on climate change might not be as common as you think
Leviston, Z., Walker, I., & Morwinski, S. (2013) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/nclimate1743 · Cited by 195 · cited 1× · see citing works
“This dynamic might be further enhanced by the psychological mechanism that people tend to overestimate the number of people who share their views on climate change (Leviston et al., 2012), which may lead to a false consensus effect (Ross, Greene, & House, 1977).”
BackgroundDiscourse architecture, ideology, and democratic norms in online political discussion
Freelon, D. (2013) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444813513259 · Cited by 195 · cited 2× · see citing works
“There are however concerns that anonymity, especially in the context of user comments sections, leads to incivility (Coe, Kenski, Rains, 2014; Freelon, 2015) and is affecting the quality of debates (Ksiazek, 2016; Ruiz et al.”
BackgroundZiegele, M., Breiner, T., & Quiring, O. (2014) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/jcom.12123 · Cited by 194 · see citing works
Public Spheres in Interaction: Comment Sections of News Websites as Counterpublic Spaces
Toepfl, F., & Piwoni, E. (2015) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/jcom.12156 · Cited by 186 · see citing works
Selective Posting: Willingness to post a message online
Yun, G. W., & Park, S. (2011) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2010.01533.x · Cited by 178 · see citing works
Leading Voices in the Denier Choir
Elsasser, S. W., & Dunlap, R. E. (2012) · American Behavioral Scientist · doi:10.1177/0002764212469800 · Cited by 177 · see citing works
Disputed climate science in the media: Do countries matter?
Grundmann, R., & Scott, M. (2012) · Public Understanding of Science · doi:10.1177/0963662512467732 · Cited by 167 · see citing works
‘Ye Olde Hot Aire’: reporting on human contributions to climate change in the UK tabloid press
Boykoff, M., & Mansfield, M. (2008) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/3/2/024002 · Cited by 161 · see citing works
Boczkowski, P., & Mitchelstein, E. (2012) · Human Communication Research · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2011.01418.x · Cited by 159 · see citing works
How Culture Shapes the Climate Change Debate
Hoffman, A. (2020) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.191059 · Cited by 125 · cited 2× · see citing works
“In the US, the climate change issue has become part of a wider “cultural schism” (Hoffman, 2015); it has joined gun control, abortion, and other issues that people refrain from talking about with strangers.”
BackgroundClimate change and ‘climategate’ in online reader comments: a mixed methods study
Koteyko, N., Jaspal, R., & Nerlich, B. (2013) · doi:10.1111/j.1475-4959.2012.00479.x · Cited by 120 · cited 2×
“User comments are not necessarily representative of public opinion; they reflect only the views of a small proportion of online news readers (Springer, Engelmann, Pfaffinger, 2015) who have a strong interest in climate change (Koteyko et al., 2013).”
BackgroundResultMcCluskey, M., & Hmielowski, J. D. (2012) · Journalism · doi:10.1177/1464884911421696 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
YouTube, Social Norms and Perceived Salience of Climate Change in the American Mind
Spartz, J. T., Su, L. Y.-F., Griffin, R. J., Brossard, D., & Dunwoody, S. (2015) · Environmental Communication · doi:10.1080/17524032.2015.1047887 · Cited by 116 · see citing works
Schulz, A. M., & Roessler, P. (2012) · International Journal of Public Opinion Research · doi:10.1093/ijpor/eds022 · Cited by 102 · see citing works
Collins, L. C., & Nerlich, B. (2015) · Climate Change Communication and the Internet · doi:10.1080/17524032.2014.981560 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Richardson, J., & Stanyer, J. (2011) · doi:10.1177/1464884911415974 · Cited by 89 · cited 1×
“Richardson and Stanyer (2011) have shown that in the UK, the average number of comments that a news story receives varies between media types.”
BackgroundBeneficial yet crappy: Journalists and audiences on obstacles and opportunities in reader comments
Bergström, A., & Wadbring, I. (2015) · doi:10.1177/0267323114559378 · Cited by 86
Shifting discourses of climate change in India
Thaker, J., & Leiserowitz, A. (2014) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-014-1059-6 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Porten-Cheé, P., & Eilders, C. (2015) · Studies in Communication Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.scoms.2015.03.002 · Cited by 82 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Porten-Cheé and Eilders (2015) used the theory of the spiral of silence to analyze the effects of user-generated content in the climate change debate in Germany.”
BackgroundKsiazek, T. B. (2016) · Journalism Studies · doi:10.1080/1461670x.2016.1209977 · Cited by 68 · cited 1× · see citing works
“There are however concerns that anonymity, especially in the context of user comments sections, leads to incivility (Coe, Kenski, Rains, 2014; Freelon, 2015) and is affecting the quality of debates (Ksiazek, 2016; Ruiz et al., 2011).”
BackgroundNewspaper Journalists Support Online Comments
Nielsen, C. (2012) · doi:10.1177/073953291203300107 · Cited by 51 · cited 3×
“Nevertheless, journalists overall believe that readers should have the ability to comment on online news (Nielsen, 2012).”
BackgroundInfluentialDonsbach, W. (2009) · doi:10.4324/9780203938652-15 · Cited by 45 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The psychological need to confirm their views and reduce cognitive dissonance (Donsbach, 2009) leads to a confirmation bias when interpreting information (Kahan, 2010).”
BackgroundInternet public opinion on climate change: a world views analysis of online reader comments
de Kraker, J., Kuijs, S., Cörvers, R., & Offermans, A. (2014) · doi:10.1108/ijccsm-09-2013-0109 · Cited by 31 · cited 1×
“A study by de Kraker et al. (2014) examined opinions on climate change that are expressed in the user comment sections of Dutch newspapers.”
BackgroundOnline Reader Comments as Indicator for Perceived Public Opinion
Friemel, T. N., & Dötsch, M. (2015) · Social Science Open Access Repository (GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences) · doi:10.17174/dcr.v1.8 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Echo chambers and false certainty
Farrell, J. (2015) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/nclimate2732 · Cited by 18 · cited 3× · see citing works
“…opinions and preferences (Pariser, 2011), have led people into a web of “echo chambers”, which refer to a common frame of reference and positive feedback mechanisms that reinforce existing opinions rather than foster dialogue and critical reasoning (Farrell, 2015; Jamieson Cappella, 2008).”
BackgroundThe Spiral of Silence Revisited
Eilders, C., & Porten-Cheé, P. (2015) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315707495-7 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment
(2009) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.47-0104 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
11 of the 66 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Reconceptualizing nature‐of‐science education in the age of social media
Höttecke, D., & Allchin, D. (2020) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.21575 · Cited by 303 · see citing works
The Circulation of Climate Change Denial Online: Rhetorical and Networking Strategies on Facebook
Bloomfield, E., & Tillery, D. (2018) · Environmental Communication · doi:10.1080/17524032.2018.1527378 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Fake News in Social Media: Bad Algorithms or Biased Users?
Zimmer, F., Scheibe, K., Stock, M., & Stock, W. G. (2019) · DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · doi:10.1633/jistap.2019.7.2.4 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
“Similar to our approach, Walter, Brüggemann, and Engesser (2018) studied user comments in echo chambers concerning the topic of climate change.”
ResultThe Routledge Companion to Media Disinformation and Populism
Waisbord, S., Armitage, R., & Vaccari, C. (2021) · doi:10.4324/9781003004431 · Cited by 84
Creative (Climate) Communications
Boykoff, M. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108164047 · Cited by 102 · see citing works
Discussion of Climate Change on Reddit: Polarized Discourse or Deliberative Debate?
Treen, K. M. D., Williams, H. T. P., O’Neill, S. J., & Coan, T. (2022) · Environmental Communication · doi:10.1080/17524032.2022.2050776 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
“, 2020), echo chambers (Walter et al., 2018), and misinformation, often linked with climate skepticism, denial, or alarmism (Treen et al.”
BackgroundHostile Emotions in News Comments: A Cross-National Analysis of Facebook Discussions
Humprecht, E., Hellmueller, L., & Lischka, J. A. (2020) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/2056305120912481 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
“However, patterns of discussion among readers vary depending on the country they live in (Walter et al., 2018).”
BackgroundBrüggemann, M., & Meyer, H. (2023) · Communication Theory · doi:10.1093/ct/qtad012 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Self-citationFinding the place of argumentation in science education: Epistemics and Whole Science
Allchin, D., & Zemplén, G. Á. (2020) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.21589 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Online climate change polarization: Interactional framing analysis of climate change blog comments
van Eck, C. W., Mulder, B. C., & Dewulf, A. (2020) · Science Communication · doi:10.1177/1075547020942228 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
“, 2012; Graham & Wright, 2015; Uldam & Askanius, 2007), and on the other pointing to concerns about echo chamber effects creating niches of denial and demonstrations of incivility (Collins & Nerlich, 2015; Walter et al., 2018).”
BackgroundInfluentialSocial media and perceived climate change efficacy: A European comparison
Tuitjer, L., & Dirksmeier, P. (2021) · Digital Geography and Society · doi:10.1016/j.diggeo.2021.100018 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Leong, A. D., & Ho, S. S. (2020) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444820931054 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Holder, F., Mirza, S., Namson-Ngo-Lee, Carbone, J., & McKie, R. (2023) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-023-03494-4 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Upham, P., & Johansen, K. (2020) · Energy Research & Social Science · doi:10.1016/j.erss.2020.101489 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Obstruction, delay, and transnationalism: Examining the online climate change counter-movement.
McKie, R. (2021) · Energy Research & Social Science · doi:10.1016/j.erss.2021.102217 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
“This example illustrates connections between a CCCM organisation and the CCCM echo chamber [59], and the direction of ties between the echo chamber and traditional CCCM organisations shows how these traditional CCCM organisations can retrieve information from blogs.”
BackgroundHitting a Nerve: Populist News Articles Lead to More Frequent and More Populist Reader Comments
Blassnig, S., Engesser, S., Ernst, N., & Esser, F. (2019) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2019.1637980 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
“Only a small share of online news readers actually use the comment function; hence, reader comments are not representative of public opinion (Springer et al., 2015; Walter et al., 2016).”
BackgroundSelf-citationKalch, A., Bilandzić, H., Sappler, A., & Stellinger, S. (2021) · Journal of Environmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101711 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Understanding news-related user comments and their effects: a systematic review
Kubin, E., Merz, P., Wahba, M., Davis, C., Gray, K., & von Sikorski, C. (2024) · Frontiers in Communication · doi:10.3389/fcomm.2024.1447457 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
“Examples include climate change (e.g., Walter et al., 2018), gun policy (Stroud et al., 2015; Gearhart et al., 2020), and immigration (e.g., Blassnig et al., 2019).”
Promoting engagement with quality communication in social media
Cinelli, M., Peruzzi, A., Schmidt, A. L., Villa, R., Costa, E., Quattrociocchi, W., & Zollo, F. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0275534 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Li, M. (2022) · Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly · doi:10.1177/10776990221108644 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Esparcia, A. C., & Gómez, S. L. (2021) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su13073926 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Oswald, L., & Bright, J. (2022) · Environmental Communication · doi:10.1080/17524032.2022.2071314 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Scapegoat Ecology: Blame, Exoneration, and an Emergent Genre in Environmentalist Discourse
Schmitt, C. R. (2018) · Environmental Communication · doi:10.1080/17524032.2018.1500386 · Cited by 20
“Participants in such discourse tend to develop mutually reinforcing group identities, assenting to and applauding and rallying around group-approved positions (Shapiro & Park, 2014, 2018) and ultimately posting largely homogenous comments in echo chambers (Collins & Nerlich, 2015; Elgesem et al., 2015; Spartz, Su, Gri…”
BackgroundConsequences of group-based misperceptions of climate concern for efficacy and action
Leviston, Z., Nangrani, T., Stanley, S. K., & Walker, I. (2024) · Current Research in Ecological and Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cresp.2024.100189 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Cognitio populi – Vox populi: Implications of science-related populism for communication behavior
Mede, N. G., Schäfer, M. S., & Metag, J. (2023) · Communications · doi:10.1515/commun-2022-0059 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
van Eck, C. (2024) · WIREs Climate Change · doi:10.1002/wcc.906 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
“Some investigated discursive interactions between users in comment sections, which are generally relatively short periods (see, e.g., Oswald & Bright, 2022; van Eck, Mulder, & Dewulf, 2020; Walter et al., 2018).”
Bailey-Winiata, A. P., Gallop, S. L., White, I., Wotherspoon, L. M., Fa’aui, T., Dickson, M. E., & Ellis, J. I. (2024) · Regional Environmental Change · doi:10.1007/s10113-024-02240-5 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
“Similar to research on climate change perceptions by Hayes and O’Neill (2021) and Walter et al. (2018), we utilised the Google site search, using the “site” query in the Google search engine with Māori maps as the site, then searched the website for keywords (Google Devel-opers 2022).”
Islam, T., & Goldwasser, D. (2024) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.05401 · Cited by 13
“…media advertising allows for the customization of messages to resonate with specific audiences, thereby enhancing the effectiveness of communication strategies aimed at fostering climate awareness and behavioral change (Bloomfield and Tillery, 2019; Walter et al., 2018; Stoddart et al., 2016).”
Friedrich, J., Zscheischler, J., & Faust, H. (2022) · Sustainability Science · doi:10.1007/s11625-022-01161-8 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Geographies of climate change opinion
Tuitjer, L., Dirksmeier, P., & Mewes, L. (2022) · Geography Compass · doi:10.1111/gec3.12619 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Cyber-echoes of climate crisis: Unraveling anthropogenic climate change narratives on social media
Elroy, O., Komendantova, N., & Yosipof, A. (2024) · Current Research in Environmental Sustainability · doi:10.1016/j.crsust.2024.100256 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
“Climate change denial is more visible in user comment sections in countries where the climate change debate reflects the scientific consensus on climate change and user comments create niches of denial (Walter et al., 2018).”
BackgroundInfluentialNature conservation in a digitalized world: echo chambers and filter bubbles
Miller, A. L., Arndt, S., Engel, L., & Boot, N. (2021) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-12549-260311 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“An additional proposal for action is the publication of nature conservation science in tabloid and conservatively oriented media to avoid communicational obstacles caused by echo chambers and filter bubbles (Walter et al. 2018).”
BackgroundInfluentialNicolaisen, P. B. (2024) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-024-03697-3 · Cited by 10
“This finding contests a prevailing notion in contemporary research that suggests a decline in the role of climate journalists as gatekeepers (Brüggemann 2017, p. 6; Pearce et al. 2019, p. 1).”
Hinnant, A., Hu, S.-S., Hong, Y., & Young, R. (2023) · Science communication · doi:10.1177/10755470221150503 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Lee, J., Wang, N. O., & Britt, R. K. (2024) · Online Information Review · doi:10.1108/oir-03-2024-0155 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Analysis of Climate Campaigns on Social Media using Bayesian Model Averaging
Islam, T., Zhang, R., & Goldwasser, D. (2023) · Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society · doi:10.1145/3600211.3604665 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“Recent studies have shown climate change activism in social media and news media [4, 52, 53].”
BackgroundDixon, A., & Robertson, K. (2019) · Creative (Climate) Communications · doi:10.1016/s0262-4079(06)61339-0 · Cited by 7
Sponsored messaging about climate change on Facebook: Actors, content, frames
Weaver, I., Westwood, N., Coan, T. G., O'Neill, S., & Williams, H. T. P. (2022) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2211.13965 · Cited by 6
“…et al., 2015), similar methods were applied to show polarisation affecting online climate discourse, with both environmentalist and climate denial perspectives being put forward in largely isolated echo chambers (Elgesem et al., 2015, Williams et al., 2015, Walter et al., 2018, Cann et al., 2021).”
MethodThorson, E., Coleman, R., Tham, S. M., Chen, W.-Y., & Glenn, A. (2025) · Journalism · doi:10.1177/14648849251320800 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Characteristics of two polarized groups in online social networks’ controversial discourse
Mahmoudi, A., Jemielniak, D., & Ciechanowski, L. (2024) · Journal of Computational Social Science · doi:10.1007/s42001-024-00350-y · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“Climate change, a phenomenon that has garnered significant attention in recent years, has been the subject of extensive research [9, 10].”
Environmental philosophy in Asia: Between eco-orientalism and ecological nationalisms
Droz, L., Frické, M., Heroor, N. R., Jannel, R., Komatsubara, O., Lagasca-Hiloma, C. M., Matangcas, P. M. J. J., & Sihombing, H. H. (2024) · Environmental Values · doi:10.1177/09632719241276999 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“An ecological nationalist and eco-orientalist rhetoric fl ourishes within echo chambers or ‘ epistemic bubbles ’ (Nguyen, 2020) similar to how climate change denial discourses spread in echo chambers in online media (Walter et al., 2017) and social media (Williams et al., 2015).”
Momsen, K., & Ohndorf, M. (2022) · Public Choice · doi:10.1007/s11127-022-01016-x · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Perception of United Nations Climate Change Conference in Social Networks
Das, S., & Chakraborty, S. (2022) · IEEE India Conference · doi:10.1109/indicon56171.2022.10039781 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“Social media analysis on discussions regarding climate change and echo chambers created from these online discourse has been performed [11] [12].”
BackgroundClimate Change and Culture: Apocalypse and Catharsis
Smith, C. (2022) · Ethics and the Environment · doi:10.2979/ethicsenviro.27.2.01 · Cited by 5
“Denial, doubts, false beliefs, inaccurate information, is spread, echoed, reinforced, and not corrected (Brüggeman et al 2018, 204).”
BackgroundA matter of time? Sustainability and digital media use
Görland, S. O., & Kannengießer, S. (2021) · Digital Policy Regulation and Governance · doi:10.1108/dprg-11-2020-0160 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Nachhaltigkeit und das „gute Leben“
Kannengießer, S. (2020) · doi:10.1007/s11616-019-00536-9 · Cited by 5
Guilt and innocence – Emotional discourses in online discussions on climate change and housing
Salmela, E., Koskela, M., Syrjälä, H., & Kääntä, L. (2025) · Discourse Context & Media · doi:10.1016/j.dcm.2025.100887 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Energy transitions under anti-environmentalism via Markov chain modeling
Marsiglio, S., Perevalova, T., & Tolotti, M. (2025) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2025.06.009 · Cited by 4
Areni, C. S. (2024) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.4167 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Xu, Z., & Atkin, D. J. (2022) · Electronic News · doi:10.1177/19312431221087247 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
“Digital media clearly alter how individuals communicate about climate change, notably how the rise in climate change skepticism has been enabled by online spaces (Bloomfield & Tillery, 2019; Walter et al., 2018).”
BackgroundConspiracy Theories Dissemination on SNS Vkontakte: COVID-19 Case
Platonov, K., & Svetlov, K. V. (2020) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-67238-6_23 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Xia, Y., Yang, Z., & Cheng, X. (2025) · Asian Journal of Communication · doi:10.1080/01292986.2025.2543782 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“Scepticism about climate change or the associated scienti fi c research (Walter et al., 2018; Williams et al., 2015).”
InfluentialTörnberg, A., & Vallström, V. (2025) · Socius Sociological Research for a Dynamic World · doi:10.1177/23780231251360822 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“However, contrary to the common depiction of the CCCM as a self-contained echo chamber (Kaiser and Puschmann 2017; Walter, Brüggemann, and Engesser 2018), our findings suggest a more complex structure.”
Vu, H., Nguyen, N., Izhar, N., & Diwanji, V. (2025) · Environmental Communication · doi:10.1080/17524032.2025.2477260 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“It also differs from recent studies (Askay, 2015; Chun & Lee, 2022; Walter et al., 2018) that explored the spiral of silence effects in the online media context, where social media platforms allow for easier access to cues about the dominant perceptions of an issue.”
Exploring Climate Change Discourse: Measurements and Analysis of Reddit Data
Janaswamy, S., & Blackburn, J. (2024) · arXiv.org · doi:10.36190/2024.53 · Cited by 3
Ramos, N. M., & Castro, P. (2024) · Public Understanding of Science · doi:10.1177/09636625241254505 · Cited by 3
Oswald, L., & Bright, J. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2102.06516 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Wolfgang, D., & Bhandari, M. (2020) · Southwestern Mass Communication Journal · doi:10.58997/smc.v36i1.81 · Cited by 3
Kannengießer, S. (2021) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-31883-3_18 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Spyridou, P.-L., & Avraamidou, M. (2023) · Journalism Practice · doi:10.1080/17512786.2023.2254269 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“…of antimigrant views and discourses -often associated with attacks to the media can be considered as a strategy to discourage critical media reporting (see also Walter et al., 2017; Hameleers, van der Meer, and Vliegenthart 2021) while activating long-running media criticism narratives.”
Yuan, S.-P., & Lu, H. (2023) · Environmental Communication · doi:10.1080/17524032.2023.2165524 · Cited by 2
Green Criminology and Rhetoric of Public Opinion: Online Commenting on Gas Rigs Near Israel's Coast
Levy, I., & Berenson, A. (2022) · Environmental Communication · doi:10.1080/17524032.2022.2026799 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“The comment sections in online media allow citizens to express their opinions and doubts (Walter et al., 2018).”
BackgroundInfluentialZhu, Y. E., & Scherr, S. (2025) · Information Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2025.2539299 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“This is crucial because online news engagement can reinforce echo chambers or further shape opinion climates (Walter et al., 2018).”
Paid Voices vs. Public Feeds: Interpretable Cross-Platform Theme-Based Analysis of Climate Discourse
Sudhoff, S., Perumal, P., Wu, Z.-Q., & Islam, T. (2026) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.13317 · Cited by 1
“Holder et al., 2023; Treen et al., 2020; Lejano and Nero, 2020; Walter et al., 2018; Gupta et al., 2018), making climate discourse a central object of study for computational social science (CSS) and natural language processing (NLP).”
Jones, C. R., Lee, R. P., & Kaklamanou, D. (2025) · Technology and Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2025.102891 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Disinformation Dynamics Unveiling the Impact of Echo Chambers in Shaping Online Public Opinion
Stoica, S. E. (2024) · Bulletin of "Carol I" National Defence University · doi:10.53477/2284-9378-24-09 · Cited by 1
Wright, D. R., Batista, M., & Wrightson, T. (2024) · Applied Health Economics and Health Policy · doi:10.1007/s40258-023-00863-z · Cited by 1 · see citing works
“Pitfalls may include the circulation of selectively chosen research findings that are aligned with a group’s beliefs within echo chambers [62], the role social media algorithms play in selectively showing certain content to maximize engagement, rather than learning [63], and in the misperception of…”
Rafique, N., Iqbal, S., & Malik, A. (2023) · Journal of Business and Social Review in Emerging Economies · doi:10.26710/jbsee.v9i3.2779 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
“According to Walter et al. (2018), this behavioral adaptation can take the form of publicly agreeing with the majority perspective or choosing to remain silent, giving the impression of agreement while secretly rebelling.”
BackgroundHussain, M., Saleem, N., Hanan, M. A., & Lodhi, R. N. (2022) · Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication · doi:10.1108/gkmc-09-2022-0227 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Boykoff, M. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108164047.004
Bruns, H. (2018) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3131825
“This process can create ”echo chambers”, referring to a framework of positive feedback mechanisms that mutually re-enforce existing opinions, especially in the context of climate change (Walter et al., 2018).”
BackgroundPeters, J., Ziegele, M., & Weinmann, C. (2026) · Journal of Language and Social Psychology · doi:10.1177/0261927x261500682
Xu, W.-T. (2026) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2610.07634
“Analyses of denial and climate-science controversy examine arguments and communicative context rather than treating every related word as an endorsed position (Walter et al. 2018; Jaspal et al. 2013; Tillery and Bloomfield 2022).”
Elad-Strenger, J., Thiel, A. M., & Kessler, T. (2025) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.70050
Framing Disinformasi Iklim dan LGBT di Suarajakarta.id: Analisis Social Shaping Technology
Gunawijaya, S., Aji, G. N., Hardianto, A., Hisna, S. A., & Corinna, S. E. (2025) · JURNAL MANAJEMEN PENDIDIKAN DAN ILMU SOSIAL · doi:10.38035/jmpis.v7i1.6780
“Fitur teknologis seperti kolom komentar dan algoritma distribusi konten berkontribusi pada terbentuknya "echo chambers", tempat narasi ekstrem menemukan ruang, sebagaimana disoroti oleh Walter et al. (2018).”
InfluentialEditorial: Rethinking the role of (scientific) knowledge in climate communication
Hoppe, I., Reif, A., Taddicken, M., & Neverla, I. (2024) · Frontiers in Communication · doi:10.17169/refubium-44630
Chilly Reception: A Content Analysis of Comments on a Reformed Climate Skeptic’s Confession
Strydhorst, N. A. (2024) · Science communication · doi:10.1177/10755470241265909
“Others have analyzed the contents of public responses to these communications (some are explored below, for example, Collins & Nerlich, 2015; Walter et al., 2018), but a relatively unexplored area is public responses to communications detailing former climate skeptics’ conversions to climate…”
InfluentialCompeting Climate Cultures in Germany
Kessler, S. (2024) · Soziologie der Nachhaltigkeit · doi:10.14361/9783839471432
Groff, S. P. (2022) · Journal of Environmental Media · doi:10.1386/jem_00088_1 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Climate Change Denial & Skepticism: A Review of the Literature
Weddig, C. (2022) · doi:10.35650/mw.3043.d.2022 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Spies, S. (2019) · doi:10.35650/md.2003.d.2019
Academic Climate Advocacy and Activism
Boykoff, M. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108164047.007
It’s Not You, It’s Me … Well It’s Actually Us
Boykoff, M. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108164047.006
Boykoff, M. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108164047.008
Boykoff, M. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108164047.009
Boykoff, M. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108164047.002
Preface: Creativity, Collaboration, Confrontation
Boykoff, M. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108164047.001
Ways of Learning, Ways of Knowing
Boykoff, M. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108164047.005
Les dynamiques de politisation dans les communautés climatosceptiques sur Facebook
Hounnou, C., & Idrissi, N. (2026) · Questions de communication · doi:10.4000/16edu
Diskurse im Rahmen politischer Partizipation
Eilders, C., & Niederelz, C. (2021) · Politische Partizipation · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-33985-2_20
Boykoff, M. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108164047.010
- Authors
- Walter, S., Brüggemann, M., & Engesser, S.
- Affiliations
- Universität Hamburg (DE)
- University of Zurich (CH)
- Corresponding author
- Walter, Stefanie
- Venue
- Environmental Communication
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2017-12-21
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 204-217
- ISSN
- 1752-4032 (ISSN-L)
- 1752-4040
- OpenAlex
- W2753034901
- Cited by
- 158
- References
- 66
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 71 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 21.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- figshare.com
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Environmental Communication (publishedVersion)
- Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Climate Change Communication and Perception
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Communication › Public Relations and Crisis Communication
- Keywords
- climate change denial, echo chambers, online comments, anthropogenic climate change, public scepticism, online news, user-generated content, scientific consensus
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
