Low public concern about anthropogenic climate change (ACC)—due in part to distrust in the scientific community—may decrease demand for policies aimed at mitigating its deleterious effects. Encouragingly, though, recent research finds that experiences with the COVID-19 pandemic has elevated trust in scientific expertise worldwide. We explore the possibility that positive attitudes toward the medical community are “spilling over” to increase ACC acceptance via globally representative survey data from 107 countries (N = 119,088) conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. We show that trust in medical experts’ handling of the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with increased ACC acceptance, worldwide. Problematically, though, we also show that the effects of trust in medical professionals is strongest in countries experiencing the most positive change in attitudes toward the scientific community, which tend to be disproportionately wealthy, and less likely to bear the unequal effects of climate change.
AlbertsonBGadarianSK (2015) Anxious Politics: Democratic Citizenship in a Threatening World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2.
AlganYCohenDDavoineEFoucaultMStantchevaS (2021) Trust in scientists in times of pandemic: Panel evidence from 12 countries. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences118(40): e2108576118.
3.
AlmerCLaurent-LucchettiJOechslinM (2017) Water scarcity and rioting: Disaggregated evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management86: 193–209.
4.
BélandDRoccoPSegattoCIWaddanA (2021) Trump, Bolsonaro, and the Framing of the COVID-19 crisis: How Political institutions shaped presidential strategies. World Affairs184(4): 413–440.
5.
BenegalSD (2018) The spillover of race and racial attitudes into public opinion about climate change. Environmental Politics27(4): 733–756.
6.
BhopalSNielsenM (2021) Vaccine hesitancy in low-and middle-income countries: Potential implications for the COVID-19 response. Archives of Disease in Childhood106(2): 113–114.
7.
BrewerNTChapmanGBRothmanAJLeaskJKempeA (2017) Increasing vaccination: Putting psychological science into action. Psychological Science in the Public Interest18(3): 149–207.
8.
CallaghanTMoghtaderiALueckJAHotezPStrychUDorA, et al. (2021) Correlates and disparities of intention to vaccinate against COVID-19. Social Science & Medicine (1982)272: 113638.
9.
CapstickSBPidgeonNF (2014) What is climate change scepticism? Examination of the concept using a mixed methods study of the UK public. Global Environmental Change24: 389–401.
ChinnSLaneDSHartPS (2018) In consensus we trust? Persuasive effects of scientific consensus communication. Public Understanding of Science27(7): 807–823.
12.
ChoiEPHHuiBPHWanEYF (2020) Depression and anxiety in Hong Kong during COVID-19. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health17(10): 3740.
ColognaVSiegristM (2020) The role of trust for climate change mitigation and adaptation behaviour: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology69: 101428.
15.
ColquittJARodellJB (2011) Justice, trust, and trustworthiness: A longitudinal analysis integrating three theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Journal54(6): 1183–1206.
16.
CookJLewandowskySEckerUK (2017) Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: Exposing misleading argumentation techniques reduces their influence. PLoS ONE12(5): e0175799.
GadarianSKGoodmanSWPepinskyTB (2021) Partisanship, health behavior, and policy attitudes in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS ONE16(4): e0249596.
24.
GauchatG (2012) Politicization of science in the public sphere: A study of public trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010. American Sociological Review77(2): 167–187.
25.
GoldfinchSTaplinRGauldR (2021) Trust in government increased during the Covid-19 pandemic in Australia and New Zealand. Australian Journal of Public Administration80(1): 3–11.
26.
GreenJEdgertonJNaftelDShoubKCranmerSJ (2020) Elusive consensus: Polarization in elite communication on the COVID-19 pandemic. Science Advances6(28): eabc2717.
27.
HainmuellerJMummoloJXuY (2019) How much should we trust estimates from multiplicative interaction models? Simple tools to improve empirical practice. Political Analysis27(2): 163–192.
28.
HartPSChinnSSorokaS (2020) Politicization and polarization in COVID-19 news coverage. Science Communication42(5): 679–697.
29.
HetheringtonMJ (1998) The political relevance of political trust. American Political Science Review92(4): 791–808.
30.
HmielowskiJDFeldmanLMyersTALeiserowitzAMaibachE (2014) An attack on science? Media use, trust in scientists, and perceptions of global warming. Public Understanding of Science23(7): 866–883.
31.
HornseyMJHarrisEABainPGFieldingKS (2016) Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change. Nature Climate Change6(6): 622–626.
32.
KahanDMPetersEWittlinMSlovicPOuelletteLLBramanD, et al. (2012) The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nature Climate Change2(10): 732–735.
33.
KarolD (2019) Red, Green, and Blue: The Partisan Divide on Environmental Issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34.
KashwanPBiermannFGuptaAOkerekeC (2020) Planetary justice: Prioritizing the poor in earth system governance. Earth System Governance6: 100075.
35.
LaceyJHowdenMCvitanovicCColvinRM (2018) Understanding and managing trust at the climate science–policy interface. Nature Climate Change8(1): 22–28.
36.
LeiserowitzAAMaibachEWRoser-RenoufCSmithNDawsonE (2013) Climategate, public opinion, and the loss of trust. American Behavioral Scientist57(6): 818–837.
37.
Lunz-TrujilloKGreenJSafarpourALazerDLinJMottaM (2022) Covid-19 spillover effects onto general vaccine attitudes. Available at: https://osf.io/w7mq5
38.
LupiaAMcCubbinsMD (2000) The institutional foundations of political competence: How citizens learn what they need to know. In: LupiaAMcCubbinsMDPopkinSL (eds) Elements of Reason: Cognition, Choice, and the Bounds of Rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 47.
39.
LuttigMD (2017) Obama, race, and the Republican landslide in 2010. Politics, Groups, and Identities5(2): 197–219.
40.
LuttigMDMottaM (2017) President Obama on the ballot: Referendum voting and racial spillover in the 2014 midterm elections. Electoral Studies50: 80–90.
McCrightAMDunlapREMarquart-PyattST (2016) Political ideology and views about climate change in the European Union. Environmental Politics25(2): 338–358.
43.
MalkaAKrosnickJALangerG (2009) The association of knowledge with concern about global warming: Trusted information sources shape public thinking. Risk Analysis: An International Journal29(5): 633–647.
MayerRCDavisJHSchoormanFD (1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review20(3): 709–734.
46.
MerkleyE (2020) Anti-intellectualism, populism, and motivated resistance to expert consensus. Public Opinion Quarterly84(1): 24–48.
47.
MerkleyELoewenPJ (2021) Anti-intellectualism and the mass public’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Nature Human Behaviour5(6): 706–715.
48.
MillerJMSaundersKLFarhartCE (2016) Conspiracy endorsement as motivated reasoning: The moderating roles of political knowledge and trust. American Journal of Political Science60(4): 824–844.
49.
MottaM (2018) The dynamics and political implications of anti-intellectualism in the United States. American Politics Research46(3): 465–498.
50.
MottaM (2023) Is partisan conflict over COVID-19 vaccination eroding support for childhood vaccine mandates?. npj Vaccines8(1): 5.
51.
MottaMGorenP (2021) Basic human values & compliance with government-recommended prosocial health behavior. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties31(suppl. 1): 206–217.
52.
MyersTAKotcherJStenhouseNAndersonAAMaibachEBeallL, et al. (2017) Predictors of trust in the general science and climate science research of US federal agencies. Public Understanding of Science26(7): 843–860.
53.
NCA (2018) Impacts, risks, and adaptation in the United States: Fourth national climate assessment, volume II. In: ReidmillerDRAveryCWEasterlingDRKunkelKELewisKLMMaycockTK, et al. (eds.) U.S. Global Change Research Program. Washington, DC: NCA, p. 1515.
54.
NisbetMCMyersT (2007) The polls—trends: Twenty years of public opinion about global warming. Public Opinion Quarterly71(3): 444–470.
55.
NunnallySC (2012) Trust in Black America. New York, NY: New York University Press.
56.
OreskesN (2004) The scientific consensus on climate change. Science306(5702): 1686–1686.
57.
OreskesN (2021) Why Trust Science?Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
58.
ÖzdinSBayrak ÖzdinŞ (2020) Levels and predictors of anxiety, depression and health anxiety during COVID-19 pandemic in Turkish society: The importance of gender. International Journal of Social Psychiatry66(5): 504–511.
59.
ReyerCPAdamsSAlbrechtTBaarschFBoitATrujilloNC, et al. (2017) Climate change impacts in Latin America and the Caribbean and their implications for development. Regional Environmental Change17(6): 1601–1621.
60.
RobinsonSA (2020) Climate change adaptation in SIDS: A systematic review of the literature pre and post the IPCC fifth assessment report. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change11(4): e653.
61.
RoyDTripathySKarSKSharmaNVermaSKKaushalV (2020) Study of knowledge, attitude, anxiety & perceived mental healthcare need in Indian population during COVID-19 pandemic. Asian Journal of Psychiatry51: 102083.
62.
RutjensBTSenguptaNDer LeeRVVan KoningsbruggenGMMartensJPRabeloA, et al. (2022) Science skepticism across 24 countries. Social Psychological and Personality Science13(1): 102–117.
63.
SidesJTeslerMVavreckL (2016) The electoral landscape of 2016. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science667(1): 50–71.
64.
SultanaF (2021) Critical climate justice. The Geographical Journal188: 118–124.
65.
TeslerM (2012) The spillover of racialization into health care: How President Obama polarized public opinion by racial attitudes and race. American Journal of Political Science56(3): 690–704.
66.
TeslerM (2016) Post-Racial or Most-Racial?Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
67.
ThakerJMaibachELeiserowitzAZhaoXHoweP (2016) The role of collective efficacy in climate change adaptation in India. Weather, Climate, and Society8(1): 21–34.
68.
ThomasABaptisteAMartyr-KollerRPringlePRhineyK (2020) Climate change and small island developing states. Annual Review of Environment and Resources45: 1–27.
69.
TranterB (2020) Does public knowledge of climate change really matter in Australia?. Environmental Communication14(4): 537–554.
70.
ValentinoNAHutchingsVLBanksAJDavisAK (2008) Is a worried citizen a good citizen? Emotions, political information seeking, and learning via the internet. Political Psychology29(2): 247–273.
71.
Van der LindenSLeiserowitzAMaibachE (2019) The gateway belief model: A large-scale replication. Journal of Environmental Psychology62: 49–58.
72.
Von UexkullNBuhaugH (2021) Security implications of climate change: A decade of scientific progress. Journal of Peace Research58(1): 3–17.
73.
Von UexkullNCroicuMFjeldeHBuhaugH (2016) Civil conflict sensitivity to growing-season drought. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences113(44): 12391–12396.
74.
ZechmeisterEJCorralM (2013) Individual and contextual constraints on ideological labels in Latin America. Comparative Political Studies46(6): 675–701.
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.
