The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming
Open accessAbstract
The consensus that humans are causing recent global warming is shared by 90%–100% of publishing climate scientists according to six independent studies by co-authors of this paper. Those results are consistent with the 97% consensus reported by Cook et al ( Environ. Res. Lett . 8 024024 ) based on 11 944 abstracts of research papers, of which 4014 took a position on the cause of recent global warming. A survey of authors of those papers ( N = 2412 papers) also supported a 97% consensus. Tol (2016 Environ. Res. Lett. 11 048001 ) comes to a different conclusion using results from surveys of non-experts such as economic geologists and a self-selected group of those who reject the consensus. We demonstrate that this outcome is not unexpected because the level of consensus correlates with expertise in climate science. At one point, Tol also reduces the apparent consensus by assuming that abstracts that do not explicitly state the cause of global warming ('no position') represent non-endorsement, an approach that if applied elsewhere would reject consensus on well-established theories such as plate tectonics. We examine the available studies and conclude that the finding of 97% consensus in published climate research is robust and consistent with other surveys of climate scientists and peer-reviewed studies.
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
(2013) · Cited by 6,752
(2011) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.48-6243 · Cited by 3,579
The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change
Oreskes, N. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1103618 · Cited by 1,814
Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature
Cook, J., Nuccitelli, D., Green, S. A., Richardson, M., Winkler, B., Painting, R., Way, R., Jacobs, P., & Skuce, A. (2013) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024 · Cited by 1,360
Self-citationInoculating the Public against Misinformation about Climate Change
van der Linden, S., Leiserowitz, A., Rosenthal, S., & Maibach, E. (2017) · Global Challenges · doi:10.1002/gch2.201600008 · Cited by 1,058
Self-citationExpert 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 813
Self-citationThe scientific consensus on climate change as a gateway belief: experimental evidence
van der Linden, S. L., Leiserowitz, A. A., Feinberg, G. D., & Maibach, E. W. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0118489 · Cited by 661
Self-citationExamining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change
Doran, P. T., & Zimmerman, M. K. (2009) · Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union · doi:10.1029/2009eo030002 · Cited by 528
Self-citationThe pivotal role of perceived scientific consensus in acceptance of science
Lewandowsky, S., Gignac, G. E., & Vaughan, S. (2013) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/nclimate1720 · Cited by 527
Self-citationSupport for climate policy and societal action are linked to perceptions about scientific agreement
Ding, D., Maibach, E. W., Zhao, X., Roser-Renouf, C., & Leiserowitz, A. (2011) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/nclimate1295 · Cited by 441
Cited by
Beyond misinformation: Understanding and coping with the “post-truth” era.
Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., & Cook, J. (2017) · Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.07.008 · Cited by 1,985
Self-citationChoi, D., Gao, Z., & Jiang, W. (2020) · The Review of Financial Studies · doi:10.1093/rfs/hhz086 · Cited by 1,117
Inoculating the Public against Misinformation about Climate Change
van der Linden, S., Leiserowitz, A., Rosenthal, S., & Maibach, E. (2017) · Global Challenges · doi:10.1002/gch2.201600008 · Cited by 1,058
Self-citationCook, J., Lewandowsky, S., & Ecker, U. K. H. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0175799 · Cited by 971
Self-citationThompson, R., Hornigold, R., Page, L., & Waite, T. (2018) · Public Health · doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2018.06.008 · Cited by 515
Metadata
- Authors
- Cook, J., Oreskes, N., Doran, P. T., Anderegg, W. R. L., Verheggen, B., Maibach, E. W., Carlton, J. S., Lewandowsky, S., Skuce, A. G., Green, S. A., Nuccitelli, D., Jacobs, P., Richardson, M., Winkler, B., Painting, R., & Rice, K.
- Venue
- Environmental Research Letters
- Publisher
- IOP Publishing
- Published
- 2016-04-01
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 048002
- ISSN
- 1748-9326 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2310489833
- Cited by
- 1,441
- References
- 32
- FWCI
- 395.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- Licence
- iopscience.iop.org/info/page/text-and-data-mining (tdm, 12 d)
- creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ (vor, 12 d)
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: Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002
- The paper
- Cook, J., Oreskes, N., Doran, P. T., Anderegg, W. R. L., Verheggen, B., Maibach, E. W., Carlton, J. S., Lewandowsky, S., Skuce, A. G., Green, S. A., Nuccitelli, D., Jacobs, P., Richardson, M., Winkler, B., Painting, R., & Rice, K. (2016). Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming. Environmental Research Letters. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002
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.
