The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Influence of Climate Fiction
Open accessAbstract
Climate fiction—literature explicitly focused on climate change—has exploded over the last decade, and is often assumed to have a positive ecopolitical influence by enabling readers to imagine potential climate futures and persuading them of the gravity and urgency of climate change. Does it succeed? And whom does it reach? A qualitative survey of 161 American readers of 19 works of climate fiction finds that these readers are younger, more liberal, and more concerned about climate change than nonreaders of climate fiction. Drawing on concepts from ecocriticism, environmental psychology, and environmental communication, this article suggests that “cli-fi” reminds concerned readers of the severity of climate change while impelling them to imagine environmental futures and consider the impact of climate change on human and nonhuman life. However, the actions that resulted from readers’ heightened consciousness reveal that awareness is only as valuable as the cultural messages about efficacious action that are in circulation. Moreover, the affective responses of many readers suggest that most works of climate fiction are leading readers to associate climate change with intensely negative emotions, which could prove counterproductive to efforts at environmental engagement or persuasion. Based on one of the first studies to empirically examine the reception of environmental literature, this article demonstrates a novel interdisciplinary approach to environmental literature (empirical ecocriticism) and points the way to future research in this vein.
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
Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 · Cited by 9,984
Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1015 · Cited by 5,965
Evaluating Online Labor Markets for Experimental Research: Amazon.com's Mechanical Turk
Berinsky, A. J., Huber, G. A., & Lenz, G. S. (2012) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/pan/mpr057 · Cited by 4,008
Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of the Poor
Nixon, R. (2011) · doi:10.4159/harvard.9780674061194 · Cited by 3,933
Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy, and Popular Literature.
Davidson, C. N., & Radway, J. A. (1985) · American Literature · doi:10.2307/2925808 · Cited by 2,910
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1982) · Judgment under Uncertainty · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511809477.015 · Cited by 1,476
The Psychological Distance of Climate Change
Spence, A., Poortinga, W., & Pidgeon, N. (2012) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01695.x · Cited by 1,466
Sense of Place and Sense of Planet: The Environmental Imagination of the Global
Heise, U. K. (2008) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195335637.001.0001 · Cited by 1,409
Keen, S. (2007) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195175769.001.0001 · Cited by 1,085
Conducting Clinical Research Using Crowdsourced Convenience Samples
Chandler, J., & Shapiro, D. (2016) · Annual Review of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-021815-093623 · Cited by 1,072
Cited by
Managed Retreat in the United States
Siders, A. R. (2019) · One Earth · doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2019.09.008 · Cited by 159
Atmaja, P. W., & Sugiarto (2022) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-22298-6_20 · Cited by 9
Metadata
- Authors
- Schneider-Mayerson, M.
- Venue
- Environmental Humanities
- Publisher
- Duke University Press
- Published
- 2018-11-01
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 473-500
- ISSN
- 2201-1919 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2905061024
- Cited by
- 265
- References
- 51
- FWCI
- 192.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
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: The Influence of Climate Fiction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1215/22011919-7156848
- The paper
- Schneider-Mayerson, M. (2018). The Influence of Climate Fiction. Environmental Humanities. https://doi.org/10.1215/22011919-7156848
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.