CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 580Climate Change Communication and PerceptionRisk Perception and ManagementClimate Change Policy and Economics

The role of emotion in global warming policy support and opposition

Open access
Smith, Nicholas, Leiserowitz, Anthony·2014·Risk Analysis
DOI 10.1111/risa.12140PMC PMC4298023
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Prior research has found that affect and affective imagery strongly influence public support for global warming. This article extends this literature by exploring the separate influence of discrete emotions. Utilizing a nationally representative survey in the United States, this study found that discrete emotions were stronger predictors of global warming policy support than cultural worldviews, negative affect, image associations, or sociodemographic variables. In particular, worry, interest, and hope were strongly associated with increased policy support. The results contribute to experiential theories of risk information processing and suggest that discrete emotions play a significant role in public support for climate change policy. Implications for climate change communication are also discussed.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/risa.12140

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 42

  1. [1]Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Climate Change 2007: The Scientific Basis 2007 Cambridge Cambridge University Press
  2. [3]Nisbet MC Myers T The polls—trends—twenty years of public opinion about global warming Public Opinion Quarterly 2007 71 3 444 470
  3. [4]Pew Research Center for People & the Press Fewer Americans See Solid Evidence of Global Warming 2009 Washington, DC Pew Research Center for People & the Press
  4. [15]Pew Research Center for the People & the Press Press Public Priorities: Deficit Rising, Terrorism Slipping 2012 Washington, DC Pew Research Center for the People & the Press
  5. [17]Slovic P Perception of risk Science 1987 236 280 285 3563507
  6. [19]Stedman RC Risk and climate change: Perceptions of key policy actors in Canada Risk Analysis 2004 24 5 1395 1406 15563303
  7. [20]Loewenstein GF Weber EU Hsee CK Welch N Risk as feelings Psychological Bulletin 2001 127 2 267 286 11316014
  8. [22]Finucane ML Emotion, affect, and risk communication with older adults: Challenges and opportunities Journal of Risk Research 2008 11 8 983 997 19169420 PMC2630168
  9. [23]Smith N Leiserowitz A The rise of global warming scepticism: Exploring affective image associations in the United States over time Risk Analysis 2012 32 1021 1032 22486296
  10. [25]Siegrist M Keller C Cousin ME Implicit attitudes toward nuclear power and mobile phone base stations: Support for the affect heuristic Risk Analysis 2006 26 4 1021 1029 16948694
  11. [26]Finucane ML Alhakami A Slovic P Johnson SM The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 2000 13 1 1 17
  12. [27]Slovic P Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: Surveying the risk-assessment battlefield Risk Analysis 1999 19 4 689 701 10765431
  13. [29]Meijnders AL Midden CJH Wilke HAM Role of negative emotion in communication about CO2 risks Risk Analysis 2001 21 5 955 966 11798129
  14. [30]Forgas JP Zanna MP Affect in social judgments and decisions: A multiprocess model Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 1992 25 San Diego, CA Academic Press 227 275
  15. [31]Slovic P Finucane ML Peters E MacGregor DG Gilovich T Griffin D Kahneman D The affect heuristic Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment 2002 New York Cambridge University Press 397 420
  16. [32]Lerner JS Gonzalez RM Small DA Fischhoff B Effects of fear and anger on perceived risks of terrorism: A national field experiment Psychological Science 2003 14 2 144 150 12661676
  17. [34]Peters EM Burraston B Mertz CK An emotion-based model of risk perception and stigma susceptibility: Cognitive appraisals of emotion, affective reactivity, worldviews, and risk perceptions in the generation of technological stigma Risk Analysis 2004 24 5 1349 1367 15563300
  18. [35]Nauta MJ Fischer ARH van Asselt ED Food safety in the domestic environment: The effect of consumer risk information on human disease risks Risk Analysis 2008 28 1 179 192 18304115
  19. [38]Chaiken S Heuristic versus systematic information-processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1980 39 5 752 766
  20. [39]Hoijer B Emotional anchoring and objectification in the media reporting on climate change Public Understanding of Science 2010 19 6 717 731 21560545
  21. [45]Peters E Slovic P The role of affect and worldviews as orienting dispositions in the perception and acceptance of nuclear power Journal of Applied Social Psychology 1996 26 16 1427 1453
  22. [46]Leiserowitz A American risk perceptions: Is climate change dangerous? Risk Analysis 2005 25 6 1433 1442 16506973
  23. [47]Dake K Orienting dispositions in the perception of risk—An analysis of contemporary worldviews and cultural biases Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 1991 22 1 61 82
  24. [48]Dake K Myths of nature—Culture and the social construction of risk Journal of Social Issues 1992 48 4 21 37
  25. [49]Rippl S Cultural theory and risk perception: A proposal for a better measurement Journal of Risk Research 2002 5 147 165
  26. [50]Plutchik R Plutchik R Kellerman H A general psychoevolutionary theory of emotion Emotion: Theory, Research, and Experience, Vol. 1: Theories of Emotion 1980 New York Academic Press 3 31
  27. [52]Lorenzoni I Leiserowitz A Doria MD Cross-national comparisons of image associations with “global warming’’ and “climate change’’ among laypeople in the United States of America and Great Britain Journal of Risk Research 2006 9 3 265 281
  28. [53]Hulme M The conquering of climate: Discourses of fear and their dissolution Geographical Journal 2008 174 5 16
  29. [54]Feinberg M Willer R Apocalypse soon? Dire messages reduce belief in global warming by contradicting just-world beliefs Psychological Science 2011 22 1 34 38 21148457
  30. [56]Lazarus RS Folkman S Stress, Appraisal, and Coping 1984 New York Springer Publishing
  31. [58]Moser SC Moser SC Dilling L More bad news: The risk of neglecting emotional responses to climate change information Creating a Climate for Change: Communicating Climate Change and Facilitating Social Change 2007 Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press 64 80
  32. [60]Öhman A Lewis M Haviland-Jones JM Fear and anxiety: Evolutionary, cognitive, and clinical perspectives Handbook of Emotions 2000 New York Guilford Press 573 593
  33. [61]Goleman D Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ 1996 London Bloomsbury
  34. [62]National Research Council Informing an Effective Response to Climate Change 2010 Washington, DC National Academies Press
  35. [63]Kasperson RE Kasperson JX Mayo DC Hollander R Hidden hazards Acceptable Evidence: Science and Values in Hazard Management 1991 Oxford Oxford University Press 9 28
  36. [66]Maibach EW Leiserowitz A Roser-Renouf C Mertz CK Identifying like-minded audiences for global warming public engagement campaigns: An audience segmentation analysis and tool development PLoS One 2011 6 3 e17571 21423743 PMC3053362
  37. [67]Beckjord EB Rutten LJF Arora NK Information processing and negative affect: Evidence from the 2003 health information national trends survey Health Psychology 2008 27 2 249 257 18377144
  38. [68]Cameron LD Reeve J Risk perceptions, worry, and attitudes about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility Psychology and Health 2006 21 2 211 230 21985118
  39. [73]Simons J Zimmer R Vierboom C The slings and arrows of communication on nanotechnology Journal of Nanoparticle Research 2009 11 7 1555 1571 21170119 PMC2988200
  40. [74]Diaz Meneses G Refuting fear in heuristics and in recycling promotion Journal of Business Research 2010 63 2 104 110
  41. [75]Roeser S Risk communication, public engagement, and climate change: A role for emotions Risk Analysis 2012 32 6 1033 1040 22519693
  42. [77]Magaletta PR Oliver JM The hope construct, will, and ways: Their relations with self-efficacy, optimism, and general well-being Journal of Clinical Psychology 1999 55 5 539 551 10392785

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Smith, N., & Leiserowitz, A.
Affiliations
  • University College London (GB)
  • Yale University (US)
Corresponding author
Smith, Nicholas
ORCID
Venue
Risk Analysis
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-11-12
Volume
34
Issue
5
Pages
937-948
ISSN
  • 0272-4332 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-6924
DOI
10.1111/risa.12140
PMC
PMC4298023
OpenAlex
W1572890926
Cited by
580
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 66 · 2025: 68 · 2024: 68 · 2023: 53 · 2022: 60 · 2021: 74 · 2020: 50 · 2019: 54 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 1
FWCI
36.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Risk Analysis (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • WestminsterResearch (University of Westminster) (acceptedVersion)
  • WestminsterResearch (University of Westminster) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Surdna Foundation
  • Research Councils UK
  • Grantham Foundation
  • Pacific Foundation
  • The 11th Hour Project
  • V.K. Rasmussen Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Climate Change Communication and Perception
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Climate Change Policy and Economics
Keywords
climate policy, climate policy support, discrete emotions, worry, hope, interest, affective imagery, cultural worldview, negative affect, climate change communication, public opinion, risk information processing
MeSH terms
Emotions, Humans, Public Policy, Global Warming

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