Polarized frames on "climate change" and "global warming" across countries and states: Evidence from Twitter big data

Global Environmental Change

Volumn 32, Issue , 2015, Pages 11-17

  Jang, S Mo ^a   Hart, P Sol ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Big data; Climate change; Comparative analysis; Framing; Global warming; Twitter

Indexed keywords

CLIMATE CHANGE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DATA SET; GLOBAL WARMING; POLARIZATION; RESEARCH WORK;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 84929146921     PISSN: 09593780     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.02.010     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Antilla L. Self-censorship and science: a geographical review of media coverage of climate tipping points. Public Underst. Sci. 2010, 19:240-256. 10.1177/0963662508094099.
2. Ausserhofer J., Maireder A. National politics on twitter: structures and topics of a networked public sphere. Inform., Commun. Soc. 2013, 16:291-314. 10.1080/1369118X. 2012.756050.
3. Bertot J.C., Jaeger P.T., Grimes J.M. Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Govern. Inform. Q. 2010, 27(3):264-271. 10.1016/j.giq.2010.03.001.
4. Besley J.C., Kramer V.L., Yao Q., Toumey C. Interpersonal discussion following citizen engagement about nanotechnology what, if anything, do they say?. Sci. Commun. 2008, 30:209-235. 10.1177/1075547008324670.
5. Bord R.J., O'Connor R.E., Fisher A. In what sense does the public need to understand global climate change?. Public Underst. Sci. 2000, 9:205-218. 10.1088/0963-6625/9/3/301.
6. Boykoff M.T. Flogging a dead norm? Newspaper coverage of anthropogenic climate change in the United States and United Kingdom from 2003 to 2006. Area 2007, 39:470-481. 10.1111/j.1475-4762.2007.00769.x.
7. Boykoff M.T., Boyokff J.M. Balance as bias: global warming and the US prestige press. Global Environ. Change 2004, 14:125-136. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2003.10.001.
8. Brossard D., Scheufele D.A. Science, new media, and the public. Science 2013, 339(6115):40-41. 10.1126/science.1232329.
9. Brossard D., Shanahan J., McComas K. Are issue-cycles culturally constructed? A comparison of French and American coverage of global climate change. Mass Commun. Soc. 2004, 7:359-377. 0.1207/s15327825mcs0703_6.
10. Brulle R.J., Carmichael J., Jenkins J.C. Shifting public opinion on climate change: an empirical assessment of factors influencing concern over climate change in the US. 2002-2010. Climat. Change 2012, 114:169-188. 10.1007/s10584-012-0403-y.
11. Colleoni E., Rozza A., Arvidsson A. Echo chamber or public sphere? Predicting political orientation and measuring political homophily in Twitter using big data. J. Commun. 2014, 64:317-332. 10.1111/jcom.12084.
12. Corbett J.B., Durfee J.L. Testing public (un)certainty of science: media representations of global warming. Sci. Commun. 2004, 26:129-151. 10.1177/1075547004270234.
13. Druckman J.N., Nelson K.R. Framing and deliberation: how citizens' conversations limit elite influence. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 2003, 47:728-744. 10.1111/1540-5907.00051.
14. Dunlap R.E., McCright A.M. A widen Republican and Democratic. Environment 2008, 50:26-35. 10.3200/ENVT.50.5.26-35.
15. Entman R.M. Projections of power: framing news, public opinion and US foreign policy 2004, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
16. Eveland W.P., Hively M.H. Political discussion frequency, network size, and "heterogeneity" of discussion as predictors of political knowledge and participation. J. Commun. 2009, 59:205-224. 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01412.x.
17. Fielding K.S., Head B.W., Laffan W., Western M., Hoegh-Guldberg O. Australian politicians' beliefs about climate change: political partisanship and political ideology. Environ. Politics 2012, 21:712-733. 10.1080/09644016.2012.698887.
18. Feldman L., Maibach E.W., Roser-Renouf C., Leiserowitz A. Climate on cable: the nature and impact of global warming coverage on Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC. Int. J. Press/Politics 2012, 17:3-31. 10.1177/1940161211425410.
19. Feldman L., Myers T.A., Hmielowski J.D., Leiserowitz A. The mutual reinforcement of media selectivity and effects: testing the reinforcing spirals framework in the context of global warming. J. Commun. 2014, 64:590-611. 10.1111/jcom.12108.
20. Good J.E. The framing of climate change in Canadian, American, and international newspapers: a media propaganda model analysis. Can. J. Commun. 2008, 33:233.
21. Grundmann R., Scott M. Disputed climate science in the media: do countries matter?. Public Underst. Sci. 2014, 23:220-235. 10.1177/0963662512467732.
22. Guggenheim L., Jang S.M., Bae S.Y., Neuman W.R. The dynamics of issue frame competition in traditional and social media. ANNALS AAPSS 2015, (in press). 10.1177/0002716215570549.
23. Hart P.S., Feldman L. Threat without efficacy? Climate change on U.S. network news. Sci. Commun. 2014, 36:325-351. 10.1177/1075547013520239.
24. Hart P.S., Nisbet E.C. Boomerang effects in science communication: how motivated reasoning and identity cues amplify opinion polarization about climate mitigation policies. Commun. Res. 2012, 39:701-723. 10.1177/0093650211416646.
25. Hermida A. Journalism: reconfiguring journalism research about twitter, one tweet at a time. Digit. J. 2013, 1:295-313. 10.1080/21670811.2013.808456.
26. Hmielowski J.D., Feldman L., Myers T.A., Leiserowitz A., Maibach E. An attack on science? Media use, trust in scientists, and perceptions of global warming. Public Underst. Sci. 2014, 23:866-883. 10.1177/0963662513480091.
27. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2007) Climate change 2007. Synthesis report. Retrieved August 5, 2014, from 〈http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_fourth_assessment_report_synthesis_report.htm〉.
28. Jang S.M. Framing responsibility in climate change discourse: ethnocentric attribution, perceived causes, and policy attitudes. J. Environ. Psychol. 2013, 36:27-36. 10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.07.003.
29. Jang S.M. Seeking congruency or incongruency online? Examining selective exposure to four controversial science issues. Sci. Commun. 2014, 36:143-167. 10.1177/1075547013502733.
30. Johnson D., Levin S. The tragedy of cognition: psychological biases and environmental inaction. Curr. Sci. 2009, 97:1593-1603.
31. Kirilenko A.P., Stepchenkova S.O. Public microblogging on climate change: one year of Twitter worldwide. Global Environ. Change 2014, 26:171-182. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.02.008.
32. Krosnick J.A., Holbrook A.L., Lowe L., Visser P.S. The origins and consequences of democratic citizens' policy agendas: a study of popular concern about global warming. Climat. Change 2006, 77:7-43. 10.1007/s10584-006-9068-8.
33. Kwak, H., Lee, C., Park, H., Moon, S. (2010) What is twitter, a social network or a news media? Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World Wide Web.
34. Larsson A.O., Moe H. Studying political microblogging: twitter users in the 2010 Swedish election campaign. New Media Soc. 2012, 14:729-747. 10.1177/1461444811422894.
35. Lee H., Kwak N., Campbell S.W. Hearing the other side revisited: the joint workings of cross-cutting discussion and strong tie homogeneity in facilitating deliberative and participatory democracy. Commun. Res. 2015, (in press). 10.1177/0093650213483824.
36. McCright A.M., Dunlap R.E. The politicization of climate change and polarization in the american public's views of global warming, 2001-2010. Sociol. Q. 2011, 52:155-194. 10.1111/j.1533-8525.2011.01198.x.
37. Meraz S. Is there an elite hold? Traditional media to social media agenda setting influence in blog networks. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 2009, 14:682-707. 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01458.x.
38. Murthy D. Twitter: Social communication in the Twitter age 2013, Polity, Cambridge.
39. Nerlich B., Forsyth R., Clarke D. Climate in the news: how differences in media discourse between the US and UK reflect national priorities. Environ. Commun.: J. Nat. Cult. 2012, 6:44-63. 10.1080/17524032.2011.644633.
40. Neuman W.R., Guggenheim L., Jang S.M., Bae S.Y. Theorizing the dynamics of public attention: agenda setting theory meets big data. J. Commun. 2014, 64:193-214. 10.1111/jcom.12088.
41. Nisbet E.C., Hart P., Myers T., Ellithorpe M. Attitude change in competitive framing environments? Open-/closed-mindedness, framing effects, and climate change. J. Commun. 2013, 63:766-785. 10.1111/jcom.12040.
42. Nisbet M.C. Communicating climate change: why frames matter for public engagement. Environ.: Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev. 2009, 51:12-23. 10.3200/ENVT.51.2.12-23.
43. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (2013) Public priorities: deficit rising, terrorism slipping. Retrieved from 〈http://www.people-press.org/2013/01/24/deficit-reduction-rises-on-publics-agenda-for-obamas-second-term/〉.
44. Rickard L.N., Yang Z.J., Seo M., Harrison T.M. The "I" in climate: the role of individual responsibility in systematic processing of climate change information. Global Environ. Change 2014, 26:39-52. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.03.010.
45. Schafer M.S., Ivanova A., Schmidt A. What drives media attention for climate change? Explaining issue attention in Australian, German and Indian print media from 1996 to 2010. Int. Commun. Gaz. 2014, 76:152-176. 10.1177/1748048513504169.
46. Scheufele D.A. Framing as a theory of media effects. J. Commun. 1999, 49:103-122. 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02784.x.
47. Schmidt A., Ivanova A., Schafer M.S. Media attention for climate change around the world: a comparative analysis of newspaper coverage in 27 countries. Global Environ. Change 2013, 23:1233-1248. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.07.020.
48. Schuldt J.P., Konrath S.H., Schwarz N. Global warming" or "climate change"? Whether the planet is warming depends on question wording. Public Opin. Q. 2011, 75:115-124. 10.1093/poq/nfq073.
49. Schuldt J.P., Roh S. Media frames and cognitive accessibility: what do "global warming" and "climate change" evoke in partisan minds?. Environ. Commun. 2014, 8:529-548.
50. Schuldt J.P., Roh S. Of accessibility and applicability: How heat-related cues affect belief in "global warming" versus "climate change". Soc. Cognit. 2014, 32:217-238. 10.1521/soco.2014.32.3.217.
51. Shehata A., Hopmann D.N. Framing climate change: a study of US and Swedish press coverage of global warming. J. Stud. 2012, 13:175-192. 10.1080/1461670X. 2011.646396.
52. Shih T.-J., Wijaya R., Brossard D. Media coverage of public health epidemics: linking framing and issue attention cycle toward an integrated theory of print news coverage of epidemics. Mass Commun. Soc. 2008, 11:141-160. 10.1080/15205430701668121.
53. Stroud N.J. Niche News: The politics of News Choice 2011, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
54. Stryker J.E., Wray R.J., Hornik R.C., Yanovitzky I. Validation of database search terms for content analysis: the case of cancer news coverage. J. Mass Commun. Q. 2006, 83:413-430.
55. Veltri G.A. Microblogging and nanotweets: nanotechnology on twitter. Public Underst. Sci. 2013, 22:832-849. 10.1177/0963662512463510.
56. Villar A., Krosnick J.A. Global warming vs. climate change, taxes vs. prices: does word choice matter?. Climat. Change 2011, 105:1-12. 10.1007/s10584-010-9882-x.
57. Weber E.U., Stern P.C. Public understanding of climate change in the United States. Am. Psychol. 2011, 66:315. 10.1037/a0023253.
58. 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. 10.1177/0963662506073088.