To assess the effectiveness of climate change communications, it is important to examine their long-term impacts on individuals’ attitudes and behavior. This article offers an example study and a discussion of the challenges of conducting long-term investigations of behavioral change related to climate change communications (a vital and underresearched area). The research reported is a longitudinal panel study of the impacts on UK viewers of the climate change movie The Age of Stupid. The heightened levels of concern, motivation to act, and sense of agency about action that were initially generated by the movie did not measurably persist over the long term. The results also show that behavioral intentions do not necessarily translate into action. Data analysis raised issues concerning the reliability of participants’ causal attributions of their behavior. This and other methodological challenges are discussed, and some ways of avoiding or lessening problems are suggested.
AbrahamseW.StegL.VlekC.RothengatterJ. A. (2005). A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25, 273-291.
2.
AjzenI. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 170-211.
3.
AnableJ.LaneB.KelayT. (2006). An evidence base review of public attitudes to climate change and transport behaviour. London, England: Department for Transport.
AronsonE.MillsJ. (1959). The effect of severity of initiation on liking for a group. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59, 177-181.
6.
AuldsmithJ. (2009). Are we switching on? Challenges and opportunities for climate change education in Scotland. Edinburgh, UK: Scottish Education and Action for Development.
7.
BalmfordA.ManicaA.AireyL.BirkinL.OliverA.SchleicherJ. (2004). Hollywood, climate change, and the public. Science, 305, 1713.
8.
BambergS. (2000). The promotion of new behavior by forming an implementation intention: Results of a field experiment in the domain of travel mode choice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 1903-1922.
9.
BambergS.MöserG. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27, 14-25.
10.
BanduraA. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
11.
BarrS. (2006). Environmental action in the home: Investigating the “value-action” gap. Geography, 91, 43-54.
12.
BeattieG.SaleL.McGuireL. (2011). An inconvenient truth? Can a film really affect psychological mood and our explicit attitudes towards climate change?Semiotica, 187, 105-125.
13.
BlakeJ. (1999). Overcoming the “value-action gap” in environmental policy: Tensions between national policy and local experience. Local Environment, 4, 257-278.
14.
BoykoffM. T. (2008). The cultural politics of climate change discourse in UK tabloids. Political Geography, 27, 549-569.
15.
CarifioJ.PerlaR. J. (2007). Ten common misunderstandings, misconceptions, persistent myths and urban legends about Likert scales and Likert response formats and their antidotes. Journal of Social Science, 3, 106-116.
16.
ChaoY.LamS. (2011). Measuring responsible environmental behavior: Self-reported and other-reported measures and their differences in testing a behavioral model. Environment & Behavior, 43, 53-71.
CobernM. K.PorterB. E.LeemingF. C.DwyerW. O. (1995). The effect of commitment on adoption and diffusion of grass cycling. Environment & Behavior, 27, 213-232.
19.
Corral-VerdugoV. (1997). Dual “realities” of conservation behavior: Self-reports vs. observations of reuse and recycling behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17, 135-145.
20.
Corral-VerdugoV.ZaragozaF.GuillenA. (1999). The effect of quantification on the accuracy of proenvironmental behavior self-reports. Journal of Environmental Systems, 27, 101-112.
21.
Defra. (2007). 2007 Survey of public attitudes and behaviours toward the environment. London, England: Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
22.
Defra. (2008). A framework for pro-environmental behaviours. London, England: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
23.
Defra. (2009). 2009 Survey of public attitudes and behaviours towards the environment. London, England: Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
24.
de WinterJ. C. F.DodouD. (2010). Five-point Likert items: T test versus Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 15, 1-7.
25.
DijksterhuisA.PrestonJ.WegnerD. M.AartsH. (2008). Effects of subliminal priming of self and God on self-attribution of authorship for events. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 2-9.
26.
DoultonH.BrownK. (2009). Ten years to prevent catastrophe? Discourses of climate change and international development in the UK press. Global Environmental Change, 19, 191-202.
27.
DowningP.BallantyneJ. (2007). Tipping point or turning point? Social marketing and climate change. London, England: Ipsos MORI.
28.
EreautG.SegnitN. (2006). Warm words: How are we telling the climate story and can we tell it better?London, England: Institute for Public Policy Research.
29.
Futerra. (2005). The rules of the game: Principles of climate change communication. London, England: Futerra.
30.
GardnerD. G.CummingsL. L.DunhamR. B.PierceJ. L. (1998). Single-item versus multiple-item measurement scales: An empirical comparison. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58, 898-915.
31.
GaterslebenB.VlekC. (1998). Household consumption, quality of life, and environmental impacts: A psychological perspective and empirical study. In NoormanK. J.UiterkampT. S. (Eds.), Green households? Domestic consumers, environment and sustainability (pp. 141-183). London, England: Earthscan.
32.
GrothmannT.PattA. (2005). Adaptive capacity and human cognition: The process of individual adaptation to climate change. Global Environmental Change, 15, 199-213.
33.
GuagnanoG. A.SternP. C.DietzT. (1995). Influences on attitude-behavior relationships: A natural experiment with curbside recycling. Environment & Behavior, 27, 699-718.
34.
HandM.ShoveE.SouthertonD. (2005). Explaining showering: A discussion of the material, conventional, and temporal dimensions of practice. Sociological Research Online, 10. Retrieved from http://www.socresonline.org.uk/10/2/hand.html
35.
HastingsG.SteadM.WebbJ. (2004). Fear appeals in social marketing: Strategic and Ethical reasons for concern. Psychology & Marketing, 21, 961-986.
36.
HinchcliffeS. (1996). Helping the earth begins at home: The social construction of socio-environmental responsibilities. Global Environmental Change, 6, 53-62.
37.
HineD. W.GiffordR. (1991). Fear appeals, individual differences, and environmental concern. Journal of Environmental Education, 23, 36-41.
38.
HolmS. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 6, 65-70.
39.
HowellR. A. (2011). Lights, camera . . . action? Altered attitudes and behaviour in response to the climate change filmThe Age of Stupid. Global Environmental Change, 21, 177-187.
40.
HowellR. A. (in press). How might climate change films encourage individual behavioural change? An analysis using the stages of change model. International Journal of Sustainable Development.
41.
HulmeM. (2008). The conquering of climate: Discourses of fear and their dissolution. Geographical Journal, 174, 5-16.
42.
JonesE. E.HarrisV. A. (1967). The attribution of attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 3, 1-24.
43.
KellstedtP. M.ZahranS.VedlitzA. (2008). Personal efficacy, the information environment, and attitudes toward global warming and climate change in the United States. Risk Analysis, 28, 113-126.
44.
KloecknerC. A. (2011). Towards a psychology of climate change. In FilhoW. L. (Ed.), The economic, social and political elements of climate change (pp.153-173). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
45.
KnappT. R. (1990). Treating ordinal scales as interval scales: An attempt to resolve the controversy. Nursing Research, 39, 121-123.
46.
KurzonW. M.UrbancheckM. G.McCabeS. (1996). The seven deadly sins of statistical analysis. Annals of Plastic Surgery, 37, 265-272.
47.
LeiserowitzA. (2004). Before and after the day after tomorrow: A U.S. study of climate change risk perception. Environment, 46, 22-37.
48.
LeventhalH.SingerR.JonesS. (1965). Effects of fear and specificity of recommendation upon attitude and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 20-29.
49.
LewisI. M.WatsonB.WhiteK. M. (2010). Response efficacy: The key to minimizing rejection and maximising acceptance of emotion-based anti-speeding messages. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 42, 459-467.
50.
LorenzoniI.PidgeonN. F. (2006). Public views on climate change: European and USA perspectives. Climatic Change, 77, 73-95.
51.
LoweT.BrownK.DessaiS.de Franca DoriaM.HaynesK.VincentK. (2006). Does tomorrow ever come? Disaster narrative and public perceptions of climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 15, 435-457.
52.
ManfredoM. J.ShelbyB. (1988). The effect of using self-report measures in tests of attitude-behavior relationships. Journal of Social Psychology, 128, 731-743.
53.
MeijndersA.MiddenC. J. H.WilkeH. A. M. (2001a). Communications about environmental risks and risk-reducing behavior: The impact of fear on information processing. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 754-777.
54.
MeijndersA.MiddenC. J. H.WilkeH. A. M. (2001b). Role of negative emotion in communication about CO2 risks. Risk Analysis, 21, 955-966.
55.
MoisanderJ. (2007). Motivational complexity of green consumerism. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31, 404-409.
56.
MortonT. A.RabinovichA.MarshallD.BretschneiderP. (2011). The future that may (or may not) come: How framing changes responses to uncertainty in climate change communications. Global Environmental Change, 21, 103-109.
57.
MoserS. C. (2007). More bad news: The risk of neglecting emotional response 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.
58.
NisbettR. E. (1973). Behavior as seen by the actor and as seen by the observer. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 154-164.
59.
NolanJ. M. (2010). “An inconvenient truth” increases knowledge, concern, and willingness to reduce greenhouse gases. Environment & Behavior, 42, 643-658.
60.
NolanJ. M.SchultzP. W.CialdiniR. B.GoldsteinN. J.GriskeviciusV. (2008). Normative social influence is underdetected. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 913-923.
61.
NortonA.LeamanJ. (2004). The day after tomorrow: Public opinion on climate change. London, England: MORI Social Research Institute.
62.
OckwellD.WhitmarshL.O’NeillS. (2009). Reorienting climate change communication for effective mitigation: Forcing people to be green or fostering grass-roots engagement?Science Communication, 30, 305-327.
63.
O’NeillS. J.HulmeM. (2009). An iconic approach for representing climate change. Global Environmental Change, 19, 402-410.
64.
O’NeillS. J.Nicholson-ColeS. (2009). “Fear won’t do it”: Promoting positive engagement with climate change through visual and iconic representations. Science Communication, 30, 355-379.
65.
PeattieK.PeattieS. (2009). Social marketing: A pathway to consumption reduction?Journal of Business Research, 62, 260-268.
66.
PooleyJ. A.O’ConnorM. (2000). Environmental education and attitudes: Emotions and beliefs are what is needed. Environment & Behavior, 32, 711-723.
67.
ReusswigF.SchwarzkopfJ.PohlenzP. (2004). Double impact: The climate blockbuster the Day After Tomorrow and its impact on the German cinema public (Research Report No. 92). Potsdam, Germany: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact.
68.
RogersR. W. (1975). A Protection Motivation Theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Psychology, 91, 93.
69.
RoserC.ThompsonM. (1995). Fear appeals and the formation of active publics. Journal of Communication, 45, 103-121.
70.
SchultzP. W.NolanJ. M.CialdiniR. B.GoldsteinN. J.GriskeviciusV. (2007). The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychological Science, 18, 429-434.
71.
SchwartzS. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology Vol. 10 (pp. 221-279). New York, NY: Academic Press.
72.
ShanahanM. (2007). Talking about a revolution: Climate change and the media. London, England: International Institute for Environment and Development.
73.
ShererM.RogersR. W. (1984). The role of vivid information in fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Research in Personality, 18, 321-334.
74.
ShoveE. (2010). Beyond the ABC: Climate change policy and theories of social change. Environment and Planning A, 42, 1273-1285.
75.
SiegelS.CastellanN. J. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences, second edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
76.
SpenceA.PidgeonN. F. (2010). Framing and communicating climate change: The effects of distance and outcome frame manipulations. Global Environmental Change, 20, 656-667.
77.
StaatsH.HarlandP.WilkeH. A. M. (2004). Effecting durable change: A team approach to improve environmental behavior in the household. Environment & Behavior, 36, 341-367.
78.
StegL.VlekC. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 309-317.
79.
SternP. C. (2000). Toward a Coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 403-424.
80.
StormsM. D. (1973). Videotape and the attribution process: Reversing actors’ and observers’ points of view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 165-175.
81.
TrumboC. W.ShanahanJ. (2000). Social research on climate change: Where we have been, where we are, and where we might go. Public Understanding of Science, 9, 199-204.
82.
TukkerA.HuppesG.GuinéeJ.HeijungsR.de KoningA.van OersL.. . .NielsenP. (2006). Environmental impact of products (EIPRO): Analysis of the life cycle environmental impacts related to the total final consumption of the EU25. Brussels, Belgium: IPTS/ESTO Project, European Commission Joint Research Centre.
83.
VakratsasD.AmblerT. (1999). How advertising works: What do we really know?Journal of Marketing, 63, 26-43.
84.
VickersA. J. (1999). Comparison of an ordinal and a continuous outcome measure of muscle soreness. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 15, 709-716.
85.
WeingartP.EngelsA.PansegrauP. (2000). Risks of communication: Discourses on climate change in science, politics, and the mass media. Public Understanding of Science, 9, 261-283.
86.
WhitmarshL. (2009a). Behavioural responses to climate change: Asymmetry of intentions and impacts. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 13-23.
87.
WhitmarshL. (2009b). What’s in a name? Commonalities and differences in public understanding of “climate change” and “global warming.”Public Understanding of Science, 18, 401-420.
88.
WitteK.AllenM. (2000). A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective public health campaigns. Health Education & Behavior, 27, 591-615.
89.
ZielskeH. A. (1959). The remembering and forgetting of advertising. Journal of Marketing, 23, 239-243.
