Emotions play a significant role in motivating climate action, but the nature and the direction of the relationship between emotions and attitudes toward climate policy are relatively understudied. We conducted a survey experiment (United Kingdom, n = 1,330) in which we experimentally manipulated incidental emotions to consider the effects of fear, anger, and sadness on support for different climate policies. In terms of informative policies, the results show that inducing sadness significantly increases support for early warning systems for disaster predictions but has no notable effect on providing health risk information concerning climate change. Regarding protective policies, inducing fear positively and significantly influences support for banning petrol cars, while an immediate ban on coal plants shows no statistically significant effect. Interestingly, contrary to the expectations and findings in the literature, we found the negative effect of anger treatment on the support for punitive measures oriented toward high-electricity-consuming households and no effect on punitive measures against businesses and frequent flyers. Our findings highlight the potent influence of emotions in motivating support for specific climate policies, revealing their intricate nature. At times, certain emotions such as anger can even cause reduced support for climate policies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlexanderD. (2002). From civil defence to civil protection – and back again. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, 11(3), 209–213. 10.1108/09653560210435803
2.
ArikanG., MelekG., & GunayD. (2022). Emotions in climate change communication: An experimental investigation. Communications, 47(2), 307–317. doi: 10.1515/commun-2020-0036
3.
AytaçS. E., SchiumeriniL., & StokesS. (2018). Why do people join backlash protests? Lessons from Turkey. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 62(6), 1205–1228. 10.1177/0022002716686828
4.
BaekT. H., YoonS. (2017). Guilt and shame: Environmental message framing effects. Journal of Advertising, 46(3), 440–453. 10.1080/00913367.2017.1321069
5.
BaergL., & BruchmannK. (2022). COVID-19 information overload: Intolerance of uncertainty moderates the relationship between frequency of internet searching and fear of COVID-19. Acta Psychologica, 224, 103534. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103534
6.
BechtelM. M., ScheveK. F., & van LieshoutE. (2020). Constant carbon pricing increases support for climate action compared to ramping up costs over time. Nature Climate Change, 10(11), 1004–1009. 10.1038/s41558-020-00914-6
7.
Beiser McGrathL. F., & BernauerT. (2017). How strong is public support for unilateral climate policy and what drives it? WIREs Climate Change, 8(6), e484. 10.1002/wcc.484
8.
BoumanT., VerschoorM., AlbersC. J., BöhmG., FisherS. D., et al. (2020). When worry about climate change leads to climate action: How values, worry and personal responsibility relate to various climate actions. Global Environmental Change, 62, 102061. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102061
9.
BraderT., & MarcusG. E. (2013). Emotion and political psychology. In HuddyL., SearsD. O. & LevyJ. S.. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political psychology (pp. 165–204). Oxford University Press.
10.
BroschT. (2021). Affect and emotions as drivers of climate change perception and action: A review. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 42, 15–21. 10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.02.001
11.
BrüggerA., MortonT. A., & DessaiS. (2015). Hand in hand: Public endorsement of climate change mitigation and adaptation. PloS One, 10(4), e0124843. 10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0124843
12.
ChapmanD., LickelB., & MarkowitzE. M. (2017). Reassessing emotion in climate change communication. Nature Climate Change, 7(12), 850–852. 10.1038/s41558-017-0021-9
13.
ChenW., WangJ., & YuG. (2022). Energy-efficient scheduling for an energy-intensive industry under punitive electricity price. Journal of Cleaner Production, 373, 133851. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133851
14.
ChopraS. (2009). Holding the state accountable for hunger. Economic and Political Weekly, 44(33), 8–12.
15.
ConleyM. I., DellarcoD. V., Rubien-ThomasE., CohenA. O., CerveraA.et al.(2018). The racially diverse affective expression (RADIATE) face stimulus set. Psychiatry Research, 270, 1059–1067. 10.1016/j.psychres.2018.04.066
16.
CrawleyS., CofféH., & ChapmanR. (2021). To what extent interest group messages shape the public’s climate change policy preferences. British Politics, 16(4), 436–455.
17.
CurnockM. I., MarshallN. A., ThiaultL., HeronS. F., HoeyJ.et al.(2019). Shifts in tourists’ sentiments and climate risk perceptions following mass coral bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef. Nature Climate Change, 9(7), 535–541. 10.1038/s41558-019-0504-y
18.
DavidovicD., & HarringN. (2020). Exploring the cross-national variation in public support for policies in Europe: The role of quality of government and trust. Energy Research & Social Science, 70, 101785. 10.1016/j.erss.2020.101785
EkmanP. (1992). An argument for basic emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 6(3-4), 169–200.
21.
FeldmanL., & HartP. S. (2016). Using political efficacy messages to increase climate activism: The mediating role of emotions. Science Communication, 38(1), 99–127. 10.1177/1075547015617941
22.
FeldmanL., & HartP. S. (2018). Is there any hope? How climate change news imagery and text influence audience emotions and support for climate mitigation policies. Risk Analysis: An Official Publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 38(3), 585–602. 10.1111/risa.12868
23.
FerrerR. A., & EllisE. M. (2021). Preliminary evidence for differential effects of integral and incidental emotions on risk perception and behavioral intentions: A meta‐analysis of eight experiments. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 34(2), 275–289. 10.1002/bdm.2209
24.
FischerA., PetersV., NeebeM., VavraJ., KrielA., et al. (2012). Climate change? No, wise resource use is the issue: Social representations of energy, climate change and the future. Environmental Policy and Governance, 22(3), 161–176.
25.
GargN., & LernerJ. S. (2013). Sadness and consumption. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(1), 106–113.
26.
GoldbergM. H., GustafsonA. B. E. L., BallewM. T., RosenthalS. A., & LeiserowitzA. (2020). Identifying the most important predictors of support for climate policy in the United States. Behavioural Public Policy, 5(4), 480–502.
27.
GraybillJ. K. (2013). Imagining resilience: Situating perceptions and emotions about climate change on Kamchatka, Russia. GeoJournal, 78(5), 817–832.
28.
GregersenT., AndersenG., & TvinnereimE. (2023). The strength and content of climate anger. Global Environmental Change, 82, 102738. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2023.102738
29.
HagenB., MiddelA., & PijawkaD. (2016). European climate change perceptions: Public support for mitigation and adaptation policies. Environmental Policy and Governance, 26(3), 170–183.
30.
HaradaT., AndrewsN., AntadzeN., HamiltonJ., MilkoreitM., et al. (2022). Editorial: Affective dimensions of climate risk. Frontiers in Climate, 4, 935122. 10.3389/fclim.2022.935122
31.
HarthN. S. (2021). Affect, (group-based) emotions, and climate change action. Current Opinion in Psychology, 42, 140–144.
32.
HarthN. S., LeachC., & KesslerT. (2013). Guilt, anger, and pride about in-group environmental behaviour: Different emotions predict distinct intentions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 18–26.
33.
HowlettM. (2009). Government Communication as a Policy Tool: A Framework for Analysis. Canadian Political Science Review, 3(2), 23–37. 10.24124/c677/2009134
34.
JovarauskaiteL., & BöhmG. (2020). The emotional engagement of climate experts is related to their climate change perceptions and coping strategies. Journal of Risk Research, 24, 1–17.
35.
KimH. J., & CameronG. T. (2011). Emotions matter in crisis: The role of anger and sadness in the publics’ response to crisis news framing and corporate crisis response. Communication Research, 38(6), 826–855.
36.
KleresJ., & WettergrenÅ. (2017). Fear, hope, anger, and guilt in climate activism. Social Movement Studies, 16(5), 507–519.
37.
KuhlthauC. C. (1991). Inside the search process: Information seeking from the user's perspective. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(5), 361–371. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199106)42:5<361::AID-ASI6>3.0.CO;2-#
38.
LandmannH., & RohmannA. (2020). Being moved by protest: Collective efficacy beliefs and injustice appraisals enhance collective action intentions for forest protection via positive and negative emotions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 71, 101491. 10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101491
39.
LazarusR. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. Oxford University Press.
40.
LeachC. W., IyerA., & PedersenA. (2006). Anger and guilt about ingroup advantage explain the willingness for political action. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(9), 1232–1245.
41.
LeiserowitzA. (2006). Climate change risk perception and policy preferences: The role of affect, imagery, and values. Climatic Change, 77(1-2), 45–72.
42.
LernerJ. S., GonzalezR. M., SmallD. A., FischhoffB. (2003). Effects of fear and anger on perceived risks of terrorism: a national field experiment. Psychological Science, 14(2), 144–150. 10.1111/1467-9280.01433
43.
LernerJ. S., & KeltnerD. (2000). Beyond valence: Toward a model of emotion-specific influences on judgement and choice. Cognition & Emotion, 14(4), 473–493.
44.
LernerJ. S., & KeltnerD. (2001). Fear, anger and risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 146–159.
45.
LernerJ. S., LiY., ValdesoloP., & KassamK. S. (2015). Emotion and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 799–823.
46.
LimN. (2016). Cultural differences in emotion: Differences in emotional arousal level between the East and the West. Integrative Medicine Research, 5(2), 105–109.
47.
LuH. (2020). Exploring the role of incidental and integral compassion and anger in health communication about pollution. Health Communication, 35(6), 675–684.
48.
LuH., & SchuldtJ. P. (2016). Compassion for climate change victims and support for mitigation policy. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 45, 192–200.
49.
LuH., & SchuldtJ. P. (2015). Exploring the role of incidental emotions in support for climate change policy. Climatic Change, 131(4), 719–726.
50.
MarcusG. E., NeumanW. R., & MacKuenM. (2000). Affective intelligence and political judgment. University of Chicago Press.
51.
MarlonJ. R., BloodhartB., BallewM. T., Rolfe-ReddingJ., Roser-RenoufC., et al. (2019). How hope and doubt affect climate change mobilization. Frontiers in Communication, 4, 20. 10.3389/fcomm.2019.00020
52.
MeijndersA. L., MiddenC., J.&, WilkeH., A. (2001). Communications About Environmental Risks and Risk‐Reducing Behavior: The Impact of Fear on Information Processing 1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31(4), 754–777. 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb01412.x
53.
MyersT. A., Roser-RenoufC., LeiserowitzA., & MaibachE. (2024). Emotional signatures of climate policy support. PLOS Climate, 3(3), e0000381. 10.1371/journal.pclm.0000381
54.
MyersT. A., Roser-RenoufC., & MaibachE. (2023). Emotional responses to climate change information and their effects on policy support. Frontiers in Climate, 5. 10.3389/fclim.2023.1135450
55.
NabiR. L. (2003). Exploring the framing effects of emotion: Do discrete emotions differentially influence information accessibility, information seeking, and policy preference? Communication Research, 30(2), 224–247.
56.
NabiR. L., GustafsonA., & JensenR. (2018). Framing climate change: Exploring the role of emotion in generating advocacy behavior. Science Communication, 40(4), 442–468.
57.
NovoselovA., & HayesK. (2022). Sparking emotions conducive to action is critical to solving the climate crisis. Sustainability and Climate Change, 15(6), 380–388.
58.
O’NeillS., & Nicholson-ColeS. (2009). “Fear won’t do it”: Promoting positive engagement with climate change through visual and iconic representations. Science Communication, 30(3), 355–379.
59.
OstromE. (2009). A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science (New York, N.Y.), 325(5939), 419–422.
60.
PetekA., BaketaN., KekezA., KovačićM., MuntaM., et al. (2021). Unboxing the vague notion of policy goals: Comparison of Croatian public policies. European Policy Analysis, 7(2), 451–469.
61.
PetersenM. B. (2010). Distinct emotions, distinct domains: Anger, anxiety and perceptions of intentionality. The Journal of Politics, 72(2), 357–365.
62.
PoortingaW., WhitmarshL., SteentjesK., GrayE., ThompsonS., & BrisleyR. (2023). Factors and framing effects in support for net zero policies in the United Kingdom. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1287188. 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1287188
63.
RoeserS. (2012). Risk communication, public engagement, and climate change: A role for emotions. Risk Analysis, 32(6), 1033–1040.
64.
RussellS. V., & AshkanasyN. M. (2021). Pulling on heartstrings: Three studies of the effectiveness of emotionally framed communication to encourage workplace pro-environmental behavior. Sustainability, 13(18), 10161. 10.3390/su131810161
65.
SalamaS., & AboukouraK. (2018). Role of emotions in climate change communication. In LealW., et al. (Eds.), Handbook of climate change communication (pp. 137–150). Springer.
66.
SchultzT., FieldingK., & NewtonF. (2018). Images that engage people with sustainable urban water management. Science Communication, 40(2), 199–227.
67.
SmallD. A., & LernerJ. S. (2008). Emotional policy: Personal sadness and anger shape judgments about a welfare case. Political Psychology, 29(2), 149–168.
68.
SmithC. A., & EllsworthP. C. (1985). Patterns of cognitive appraisal in emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(4), 813–838.
69.
SmithN., & LeiserowitzA. (2014). The role of emotion in global warming policy support and opposition. Risk Analysis: An Official Publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 34(5), 937–948.
70.
StanleyS. K., HoggT. L., LevistonZ., & WalkerI. (2021). From anger to action: Differential impacts of eco-anxiety, eco-depression, and eco-anger on climate action and wellbeing. The Journal of Climate Change and Health, 1, 100003. 10.1016/j.joclim.2021.100003
71.
TamJ., & McDanielsT. L. (2013). Understanding individual risk perceptions and preferences for climate change adaptations in biological conservation. Environmental Science & Policy, 27, 114–123.
72.
TaylorA., DessaiS., & De BruinW. B. (2014). Public perception of climate risk and adaptation in the UK: A review of the literature. Climate Risk Management, 4-5, 1–16.
73.
TvinnereimE., IvarsflatenE. (2016). Fossil fuels, employment, and support for climate policies. Energy Policy, 96, 364–371. 10.1016/j.enpol.2016.05.052
74.
ValentinoN. A., HutchingsV. L., BanksA. J., & DavisA. K. (2008). Is a worried citizen a good citizen? Emotions, political information seeking, and learning via the internet. Political Psychology, 29(2), 247–273.
75.
Van ValkengoedA. M., StegL. (2019). Meta-analyses of factors motivating climate change adaptation behaviour. Nature Climate Change, 9(2), 158–163. 10.1038/s41558-018-0371-y
76.
VasilopoulosP., MarcusG. E., ValentinoN. A., FoucaultM. (2019). Fear, Anger, and Voting for the Far Right: Evidence From the November 13, 2015 Paris Terror Attacks. Political Psychology, 40(4), 679–704. 10.1111/pops.12513
77.
Von MossnerA. W. (2012). Facing the day after tomorrow: filmed disaster, emotional engagement, and climate risk perception. In MauchC. & MayerS.. (Eds.), American environments: Climate–cultures–catastrophe (pp. 97–116). Universitätsverlag Winter.
78.
WangS., LevistonZ., HurlstoneM., LawrenceC., & WalkerI. (2018). Emotions predict policy support: Why it matters how people feel about climate change. Global Environmental Change, 50, 25–40.
79.
WangS., LiY., & JiaJ. (2022). How to promote sustainable adoption of residential distributed photovoltaic generation in China? An employment of incentive and punitive policies. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 27(2), 16.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
