Observers,victims or part of the problem? Exploring affective images of climate change obtained by word associations / ¿Observadores,víctimas o parte del problema? Explorando las imágenes afectivas del cambio climático obtenidas mediante asociaciones de palabras
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online October, 2018
Observers,victims or part of the problem? Exploring affective images of climate change obtained by word associations / ¿Observadores,víctimas o parte del problema? Explorando las imágenes afectivas del cambio climático obtenidas mediante asociaciones de palabras
How do Spaniards frame climate change? Is it something negative and depressing? Is it an environmental question or a human issue? What is their perceived role? Are they mere observers, victims or part of the problem? To explore these issues, in a series of opinion polls prepared in Spain in 2008, 2010 and 2012, the interviewed persons were asked, ‘Which is the first thought or image that comes to your mind whenever you hear talk of climate change?’ A large majority of the registered associations mention adverse effects or contain negative appraisals. The preponderance of the associations related to the effects of climate change over those that refer to its causes or solutions indicate that the respondents see themselves more as affected by the consequences than as causal agents or actors capable of providing proper answers. Clear similarities between this social framing and the media framing have been found.
CarvalhoA. (2010). Media(ted) discourses and climate change: A focus on political subjectivity and (dis)engagement. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1, 172–179.
3.
DoveJ. (1996). Student teacher understanding of the greenhouse effect, ozone layer depletion and acid rain. Environmental Education Research, 2, 89–100.
4.
Fernández-ReyesR.Piñuel-RaigadaJ. J.Vicente-MariñoM. (2015). La cobertura periodística del cambio climático y del calentamiento global en El País, El Mundo y La Vanguardia. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, 69, 122–140.
5.
FortnerR. W.LeeJ. Y.CorneyJ. R.RomanelloS.BonnellJ.LuthyB.NtsikoN. (2000). Public understanding of climate change: Certainty and willingness to act. Environmental Education Research, 6, 127–141.
HargreavesI.LewisJ.SpeersT. (2004). Towards a better map: Science, the public and the media. Swindon, UK: Economic and Research Council. doi:10.1038/nclimate1059
8.
LakoffG. (2010). We are the polar bears: What’s wrong with the way that the environment is understood. In RowleyS.PhillipsR. (Eds.), From hot air to happy endings. How to inspire public support for a low carbon society (pp. 12–15). London, UK: Green Alliance.
9.
LeiserowitzA. (2003). Global warming in the American mind: the roles of affect, imagery, and worldviews in risk perception, policy preferences and behavior (Doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon).
10.
LeónB.ErvitiM. C. (2015). Science in pictures: Visual representation of climate change in Spain’s television news. Public Understanding of Science, 24, 183–199.
LorenzoniI.LeiserowitzA.DoriaM. (2006). Crossnational comparisons of image associations with ‛global warming” and “climate change’ among laypeople in the United States of America and Great Britain. Journal of Risk Research, 9, 265–281.
14.
McCrightA. M.DunlapR. E. (2000). Challenging global warming as a social problem: An analysis of the conservative movement’s counter-claims. Social Problems, 47, 499–522.
15.
MeiraP. A.ArtoM.HerasF.IglesiasL.LorenzoJ. J.MonteroP. (2013). La sociedad ante el cambio climático. Conocimientos, valoraciones y comportamientos en la población española (Society considering climate change. Knowledge, app raisals and behaviour in Spanish population). Madrid: Fundación Mapfre.
16.
MoloneyG.LevistonZ.LynamT. (2014). Using social representations theory to make sense of climate change: What scientists and nonscientists in Australia think. Ecology and Society, 19(3), 19.
17.
MoscoviciS. (1976). La psychanalyse: Son image et son public[Psychoanalysis: Its image and its public]. Oxford: University of France Press.
18.
MoserS. C. (2007). More Bad news: The risk of neglecting emotional responses to climate change information. In MoserS. C.DillingL. (Eds.), Creating a climate for change. Communicating climate change and facilitating social change (pp. 64–80). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
19.
NorgaardK. M. (2006). ‛People want to protect themselves a little bit’. Emotions, denial, and social movement nonparticipation. Sociological Inquiry, 76, 372–396.
20.
OsgoodC.SuciG.TannenbaumP. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
SegnitN.EreautG. (2007). Warm Words II: How the climate story is evolving and the lessons we can learn for encouraging public action. London: Energy Saving Trust.
23.
SlovicP.FinucaneM. L.PetersE.McGregorD. G. (2004). Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect, reason, risk and rationality. Risk Analysis, 24, 311–322.
24.
SlovicP.LaymanM.FlynnJ. H. (1990). What comes to your mind when you hear ‛nuclear waste repository’? A study of 10,000 images. Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects & Yucca Mountain Socioeconomic Project. Retrieved fromhttp://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1589823
25.
SmithN.JoffeH. (2012). How the public engages with global warming: A social representations approach. Public Understanding of Science, 22, 16–32.
26.
SmithN.LeiserowitzA. (2012). The rise of global warming skepticism: Exploring affective image associations in the United States over time. Risk Analysis, 32, 1021–1032.
