Framing

Attitude on Climate Change

Attitude on Climate Change

Climate change is one of the most challenging environmental problems of the 21st century. This paper investigates how framing of climate change messages can influence public awareness and attitudes about climate change as well as willingness to lobby and advocate for climate policies while reducing one’s own carbon footprint. As part of our survey experiment, participants were assigned to view one of the three differently framed videos: personal framing, global framing, and facts-only. Using a pretest-posttest experimental design, we were able to measure cause-effect relationship of attitude change toward climate change. Consistent with the literature, our study supported the theory that personalizing climate change messages have an influence on public awareness and attitudes about global warming. Graduate Student Researchers: Zeynep Altinay, Paige Brown, Francis Piccoli Faculty Supervisor: Meghan Sanders For a complete report, see: Altinay, Z., Brown, P., Piccoli, F. (2012, March). Responses to Environmental Issues: The Effects of Framing on Public Attitudes on Climate Change. In Joe Foote (Chair), Mass Communication & Society Division. AEJMC Midwinter Conference, Oklahoma.   Theoretical Framework Elaboration Likelihood Model & Framing   Hypotheses & Research Questions H1: A personal framing of the climate change issue (relating impacts on the individual) will improve participants’ (a) attitude towards climate change and (b) intentions to act, to a greater degree than will a global framing or facts only. RQ1: How does a facts-only vs. a globally or a personally framed depiction of the climate change issue affect participants’ recall of information presented during an instructional video on climate change? Graph of Intentions to Act (Behavioral Component of Attitude) Change vs. Video Frame Type (condition). There was a significant main effect for intentions to act (Wilks’ λ = .741, F(1, 51) = 17.861, p<0.01, partial η2 = .259) but a non-significant interaction effect for intentions*condition (Wilks’ λ = .930, F(2, 51) = 1.919,  p>0.05 (p=.157), partial η2 = .070). Asterisks indicate a significant difference in index from pretest to posttest for all individuals according to type of video viewed (p-values are noted).   Method Using the MEL participant pool, we recurited 55 respondents for our experiment. All participants completed a pretest that measured their their general awareness about environmental issues and demographic information. At least a week later, participants were exposed to a stimulus–three videos with three different framing scenarios. The treatment group received an intervention in the form of an instructional video on climate change: either a “global frame” or a “personal frame”...

Read More