Very happy to share a new working paper with some great coauthors! 97% of climate scientists agree that human-caused climate change is occurring. But how do people interpret this consensus? Is it a testament to expertise or a signal of bias? psyarxiv.com/ezua5/ - ThreadSky

rorchinik.bsky.social • 520 days ago

Very happy to share a new working paper with some great coauthors!

97% of climate scientists agree that human-caused climate change is occurring. But how do people interpret this consensus? Is it a testament to expertise or a signal of bias?

https://psyarxiv.com/ezua5/

Comments

rorchinik.bsky.social•520 days ago

One of the most common climate communications is the consensus message, like this great example from Cook and Lewandowsky (2016), where people are told that 97% of climate scientists agree that human-caused climate change is happening.

rorchinik.bsky.social•520 days ago

But, consensus means different things to different people. Is there such high agreement because climate scientists are skilled experts? Or, are they biased to reach a foregone conclusion? The weight placed on each possibility can determine if one believes the consensus position.

rorchinik.bsky.social•520 days ago

Beliefs about climate scientists can meaningfully change the impact of consensus messaging. At the same time, consensus, in turn, shapes beliefs about scientists. This is suggestive of the occurrence of hierarchical inference, as predicted by influential theory.

rorchinik.bsky.social•520 days ago

We vary the level of scientific consensus in a large, nationally-representative sample to explore how individuals attribute consensus to climate change and the attributes of scientists.

First, we find that higher consensus increases belief in climate change across parties!

rorchinik.bsky.social•520 days ago

Across parties, there are marked differences in the perceived skill and bias of scientists. Democrats think that pro-consensus scientists (those who say climate change is occurring) are largely skilled and unbiased. Republicans, however, think the opposite.

rorchinik.bsky.social•520 days ago

However, we find that people attribute consensus to the skill or bias of scientists in similar ways.

All parties think that scientists are more skilled as consensus increases. But, perceived bias also increases.

These attributions are predictive of the effect on climate belief.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply