Targeting and tailoring climate change communications

Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change

Volumn 4, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 447-455

  Bostrom, Ann ^a   Böhm, Gisela ^b   O'Connor, Robert E ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN   (Norway)

^c NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMMERCE; HEALTH; HEALTH RISKS; MARKETING;

ENVIRONMENTAL COMMUNICATION; ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS; FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES; META ANALYSIS; RISK COMMUNICATION; SELF EFFICACY; SOCIAL MARKETINGS; SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW;

CLIMATE CHANGE;

CLIMATE CHANGE; COMMUNICATION; ENVIRONMENTAL RISK; HEALTH RISK; META-ANALYSIS; SEGMENTATION;

EID: 84882250736     PISSN: 17577780     EISSN: 17577799     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/wcc.234     Document Type: Article

References (85)

1. Pelletier LG, Sharp E. Persuasive communication and pro-environmental behaviours: how message tailoring and message framing can improve the integration of behaviours through self-determined motivation. Can Psychol 2008, 49:210-217. doi: 10.1037/a0012755.
2. National Research Council (NRC). Informing Decisions in a Changing Climate. Board on Environmental Change and Society. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2009.
3. RESOLVE. Resolve reports: climate science communications assessment. RESOLVE (contact Tim Sandusky), Washington, DC, February 2012. Available at: www.resolv.org. (Accessed January 2, 2013)
4. Luntz F. The environment: a cleaner, safer, healthier America (Environment section of a briefing book for Republican politicians), 2002. Available at: http://www.ewg.org/project/luntz-memo-environment. (Accessed January 5, 2013).
5. Oreskes N, Conway EM. Merchants of Doubt. New York: Bloomsbury Press; 2010.
6. Dunlap RE, McCright AM. Organized climate change denial. In: Dryzek J, Norgaard R, Schlosberg D, eds. Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society. Cambridge: Oxford University Press; 2011, 144-160.
7. Layzer J. Open for Business: Conservatives' Opposition to Environmental Regulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2012.
8. Bennett SE. An experimental study of opinion on climate change: labile causalities and stable realities. PSO Proceedings, New Series no. 6. Policy Stud J 2010, 38:182-197.
9. Corner A, Whitmarsh L, Xenias D. Uncertainty, scepticism and attitudes towards climate change: biased assimilation and attitude polarisation. Clim Change 2012, 114:463-478.
10. Freudenberg WR, Gramling R, Davidson DJ. Scientific certainty argumentation methods (SCAMs): science and the politics of doubt. Sociol Inq 2008, 78:2-38.
11. Kreuter MW, Skinner CS. Tailoring: what's in a name? Health Educ Res 2000, 15:1-4.
12. Noar SM, Benac CN, Harris MS. Does tailoring matter? Meta-analytic review of tailored print health behavior change interventions. Psychol Bull 2007, 133:673-93. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.673.
13. Latimer AE, Salovey P, Rothman AJ. The effectiveness of gain-framed messages for encouraging disease prevention behavior: is all hope lost? J Health Commun 2007, 12:645-649.
14. Frumkin H, McMichael A. Climate change and public health. Am J Prev Med 2008, 35:403-410. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2008.08.019.
15. Maibach EW, Nisbet M, Baldwin P, Akerlof K, Diao G. Reframing climate change as a public health issue: an exploratory study of public reactions. BMC Public Health 2010, 10:299. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-299.
16. Hulme M. Why We Disagree About Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2009.
17. Scannell L, Gifford R. Personally relevant climate change: the role of place attachment and local versus global message framing in engagement. Environ Behav 2013, 45:60-85.
18. Spence A, Pidgeon N. Framing and communicating climate change: the effects of distance and outcome frame manipulations. Glob Environ Chang 2010, 20:656-667.
19. Spence A, Poortinga W, Pidgeon N. The psychological distance of climate change. Risk Anal 2012, 32:957-972.
20. Gifford R, Comeau LA. Message framing influences perceived climate change competence, engagement, and behavioral intentions. Glob Environ Chang 2011, 21:1301-1307.
21. Schuldt JP, Konrath SH, Schwarz N. "Global warming" or "climate change"? Whether the planet is warming depends on question wording. Public Opin Q 2011, 75:115-124.
22. Whitmarsh L. What's in a name? Commonalities and differences in public understanding of "climate change" and "global warming". Public Underst Sci 2009, 18:401-420.
23. Nisbet MC. Communicating climate change: why frames matter for public engagement. Environment 2009, 51:12-23.
24. Nerlich B, Koteyko N, Brown B. Theory and language of climate change communication. WIREs Clim Change 2010, 1:97-110. doi: 10.1002/wcc.2.
25. Abrahamse W, Steg L, Vlek C, Rothengatter T. The effect of tailored information, goal setting, and tailored feedback on household energy use, energy-related behaviors, and behavioral antecedents. J Environ Psychol 2007, 27:265-276. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2007.08.002.
26. Midden CJH, Meter JF, Weenig MH, Zieverink HJA. Using feedback, reinforcement and information to reduce energy consumption in households: a field experiment. J Econ Psychol 1983, 3:65-86. doi: 10.1016/0167-4870(83)90058-2.
27. Staats H, van Leeuwen E, Wit A. A Longitudinal Study of Informational Interventions to Save Energy in An Office Building. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2000, 33:101-104.
28. Maibach EW, Roser-Renouf C, Leiserowitz A. Communication and marketing as climate change-intervention assets: a public health perspective. Am J Prev Med 2008, 35:488-500. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2008.08.016.
29. 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:e17571. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0017571.
30. Lowe D, Ebi KL, Forsberg B. Heatwave early warning systems and adaptation advice to reduce human health consequences of heatwaves. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2011, 8:4623-4648.
31. Ogden AE. Forest management in a changing climate: building the environmental information base for southwest Yukon. Forestry Chron 2007, 83:806-809.
32. Weiler S, Keller JK, Christina O. Personality type differences between Ph.D. climate researchers and the general public: implications for effective communication. Clim Change 2012, 112:233-242. doi: 10.1007/s10584-011-0205-7.
33. Campbell P. Understanding the receivers and the reception of science's uncertain messages. Philos Trans R Soc A 2011, 369:4891-4912. doi: 10.1098/rsta.2011.0068.
34. Pettit CJ, Raymond CM, Bryan BA, Lewis H. Identifying strengths and weaknesses of landscape visualisation for effective communication of future alternatives. Landsc Urban Plan 2011, 100:231-241. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.01.001.
35. Kim B, Neff R. Measurement and communication of greenhouse gas emissions from US food consumption via carbon calculators. Ecol Econ 2009, 69:186-196. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.08.017.
36. Groffman PM, Stylinski C, Nisbet MC, Duarte CM, Jordan R, Bergin A, Previtali MA, Coloso J. Restarting the conversation: challenges at the interface between ecology and society. Front Ecol Environ 2010, 8:284-291. doi: 10.1890/090160.
37. Kotler P. Marketing Management. 10th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice-Hall1st ed. 1967; 14th ed. 2011; 2000.
38. McKenzie-Mohr D, Lee NR, Schultz PW, Kotler P. Social Marketing to Protect the Environment: What Works. Irvine, CA: Sage Publications; 2012.
39. Corner A, Randall A. Selling climate change? The limitations of social marketing as a strategy for climate change public engagement. Global Environ Change 2011, 21:1005-1014. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.05.002.
40. National Social Marketing Centre. Effectively engaging people: interviews with social marketing experts, September 2008. Available at: http://www.thensmc.com/sites/default/files/effectively-engaging-people.pdf. (Accessed January 10, 2013)
41. Dietz T, Gardner G, Gilligan J, Stern P, Vandenbergh P. Household actions can provide a behavioral wedge to rapidly reduce US carbon emissions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2009, 106:18452-18456. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0908738106.
42. Böhm G, Pfister H-R. Mental representation of global environmental risks. Res Soc Probl Public Policy 2001, 9:1-30.
43. Jones NA, Ross H, Lynam T, Perez P, Leitch A. Mental models: an interdisciplinary synthesis of theory and methods. Ecol Soc 2011, 16:46.
44. Morgan MG, Fischhoff B, Bostrom A, Atman C. Risk Communication: A Mental Models Approach. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2002.
45. Wood MD, Bostrom A, Bridges T, Linkov I. Cognitive mapping tools: review and risk management needs. Risk Anal 2012, 32:1333-1348. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01767.x.
46. Wood MD, Bostrom A, Convertino M, Kovacs D, Linkov I. A moment of mental model clarity: response to Jones et al. 2011. Ecol Soc 2012, 17:7. doi: 10.5751/ES-05122-170407.
47. Kahan DM, Braman D, Slovic P, Gastil J, Cohen G. The second national risk and culture study: making sense of-and making progress in-the American culture war of fact. Cultural Cognition Project Report, Yale Law School, 2007. Available at: http://www.culturalcognition.net/projects/second-national-risk-culture-study.html (Accessed January 8, 2013)
48. Leiserowitz A, Maibach E, Roser-Renouf C, Hmielowski J. Global Warming's Six Americas. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication, Yale University and George Mason University; March 2012 and November 2011. Available at: http://environment.yale.edu/climate/files/Six-Americas-March-2012.pdf. (Accessed January 8, 2013).
49. National Research Council (NRC). Implications of audience research and segmentation for education strategies. In: Forrest S, Feder MA, eds. Climate Change Education: Goals, Audiences and Strategies: A Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2011, 35-50.
50. Myers TA, Nisbet MC, Maibach EW, Leiserowitz A. A public health frame arouses hopeful emotions about climate change. Clim Change 2012, 113(3-4):1105-1112. doi: 10.1007/s10584-012-0513-6 AUG 2012.
51. Hart PS, Nisbet E. Boomerang effects in science communication: how motivated reasoning and identity cues amplify opinion polarization about climate mitigation policies. Commun Res 2012, 39:701-723.
52. ICLEI. Outreach and communications guide, 2009. Available at: http://bit.ly/V58pkD. (Accessed January 2, 2013).
53. Futerra. Communicating Sustainability-How to Produce Effective Public Campaigns. Geneva: United Nations Environment Programme; 2005.
54. Futerra. The Rules of the Game - Principles of Climate Change Communications. London: Futerra Sustainability Communications Ltd; 2005. Available at: www.futerra.org (now www.futerra.co.uk). (Accessed January 9, 2013)
55. Collins J, Thomas G, Willis R, Wilsdon J. Carrots, Sticks and Sermons: Influencing Public Behaviour for Environmental Goals. London: Demos/Green Alliance; 2003.
56. Halpern D, Bates C. Personal Responsibility and Changing Behaviour: The State of Knowledge and Its Implications for Public Policy. London: Prime Minister's Strategy Unit; 2004.
57. Jackson T. Motivating Sustainable Consumption, a Review of Evidence on Consumer Behaviour and Behavioural Change. Guildford: University of Surrey; 2004.
58. Rose C, Dade P. International values outline campaign planner, 2009. Available at: http://bit.ly/vqxGK. (Accessed January 2, 2013).
59. Rose C, Dade P, Gallie N, Scott J. Climate change communications-dipping a toe into public motivation, 2005. Available at: http://bit.ly/mVKt0F. (Accessed January 2, 2013).
60. Pioneer, Settler and Prospector. General audience identification. Available at: http://bit.ly/WoYnqt. (Accessed January 2, 2013)
61. Maslow AH. A theory of human motivation. Psychol Rev 1943, 50:370-396. Available at: http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm. (Accessed January 2, 2013).
62. Maslow AH. Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper; 1954.
63. Tay L, Diener E. Needs and subjective well-being around the world. J Pers Soc Psychol 2011, 101:354-365.
64. Schwartz SH. Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In: Zanna M, ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 25. Orlando, FL: Academic Press; 1992, 1-65.
65. Schwartz SH, Bilsky W. Toward a universal psychological structure of human values. J Pers Soc Psychol 1987, 53:550-562.
66. Crompton T. Common Cause: The Case for Working with our Cultural Values. Godalming: CPRE, FOE, Oxfam, WWF-UK; 2010.
67. Holmes T, Blackmore E, Hawkins R, Wakeford T. The Common Cause Handbook. Machynlleth: PIRC; 2011. Available at: valuesandframes.org. (Accessed January 5, 2013).
68. Kasser T, Crompton T. Limitations of environmental campaigning based on values for money, image, and status: eight psychologists reflect on the disagreement between the value modes and common cause approaches. Common cause briefing, August 2011. Available at: valuesandframes.org. (Accessed April 16, 2013).
69. Sheldon KM, Nichols CP, Kasser T. Americans recommend smaller ecological footprints when reminded of intrinsic American values of self expression, family and generosity. Ecopsychology 2011, 3:97-104.
70. Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames. Climate change communication strategy. Available at: http://bit.ly/VOUE66. (Accessed January 2, 2013)
71. Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). A framework for pro-environmental behaviours, January 2008. Available at: http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/files/pb13574-behaviours-report-080110.pdf. (Accessed January 2, 2013)
72. Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). A framework for pro-environmental behaviours: annexes, January 2008. Available at: http://archive.defra.gov.uk/evidence/social/behaviour/documents/behaviours-jan08-annexes.pdf. (Accessed April 23, 2013).
73. Floyd DL, Prentice-Dunn S, Rogers RW. A meta-analysis of research on protection motivation theory. J Appl Soc Psychol 2000, 30:407-429.
74. Milne S, Sheeran P, Orbell S. Prediction and intervention in health-related behavior: a meta-analytic review of protection motivation theory. J Appl Soc Psychol 2000, 30:106-143.
75. Osbaldiston R, Schott JP. Environmental sustainability and behavioral science: meta-analysis of proenvironmental behavior experiments. Environ Behav 2012, 44:257-299.
76. Bull FC, Holt CL, Kreuter MW, Clark EM, Scharff D. Understanding the effects of printed health education materials: which features lead to which outcomes? J Health Commun 2011, 6:265-279.
77. Kreuter MW, Farrell D, Olevitch L, Brennan L. Tailoring Health Messages: Customizing Communication with Computer Technology. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2000.
78. Schriver K. Dynamics in Document Design. New York/London: John Wiley & Sons; 1997.
79. National Research Council (NRC). Informing an Effective Response to Climate Change. Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2010.
80. Noar SM. A 10-year retrospective of research in health mass media campaigns: where do we go from here? J Health Commun 2006, 11:21-42.
81. Steg L, Vlek C. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: an integrative review and research agenda. J Environ Psychol 2009, 29:309-317.
82. O'Connor RE, Bord RJ, Fisher A. The curious impact of knowledge about climate change on risk perceptions and willingness to sacrifice. Risk Decis Policy 1998, 3:145-155.
83. Bennett WL, Segerberg A. The logic of connective action. Inf Commun Soc 2012, 15:739-768. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661.
84. Bain PB, Hornsey MJ, Bongiorno R, Jeffries C. Promoting pro-environment action in climate change deniers. Nat Clim Change 2012, 2:600-603.
85. Rosen J. Who do online advertisers think you are? New York Times, November 30, 2012 (A version of this article appeared December 2, 2012, on page MM40 of the New York Times Sunday Magazine with the headline: Who Do They Think You Are?). Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/02/magazine/who-do-online-advertisers-think-you-are.html?pagewanted=all. (Accessed January 8, 2013)