Repeated exposure and its associated fatigue are key obstacles to engagement that remain insufficiently addressed for climate change communication. To explore this issue, this study randomly assigned U.S. adults (N = 933) to one of five experimental conditions (number of polar bear news headlines: 0 vs. 1 vs. 3 vs. 7 vs. 10), in which they were exposed to a total of 20 news headlines in a brief amount of time. Overall, this study did not find evidence supporting the inverted-U shaped model concerning repeated exposure. In addition, chronic message fatigue played a moderating role such that for those with high chronic message fatigue, even one brief exposure resulted in stronger acute message fatigue, which was associated with lower compassion and weaker willingness to help polar bears and support climate change mitigation. Discussions on these exploratory results and implications for audience segmentation are provided.
BatsonC. D.SagerK.GarstE.KangM.RubchinskyK.DawsonK. (1997). Is empathy-induced helping due to self–other merging?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 495–509. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.3.495
2.
BornsteinR. F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968–1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106(2), 265–289. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.265
3.
CapstickS.WhitmarshL.PoortingaW.PidgeonN.UphamP. (2015). International trends in public perceptions of climate change over the past quarter century. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 6(1), 35–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.321
4.
ChapmanD. A.CornerA.WebsterR.MarkowitzE. M. (2016). Climate visuals: A mixed methods investigation of public perceptions of climate images in three countries. Global Environmental Change, 41, 172–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.10.003
5.
DetenberB. H.RosenthalS. (2020). Climate change audience segmentation: An international review. In HolmesD. C.RichardsonL. M. (Eds.), Research handbook on communicating climate change (pp. 214–229). Edward Elgar Publishing.
6.
DunlapR. E.McCrightA. M.YaroshJ. H. (2016). The political divide on climate change: Partisan polarization widens in the US. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 58(5), 4–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139157.2016.1208995
7.
HayesA. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.
8.
HunsakerS.ChenH. C.MaughanD.HeastonS. (2015). Factors that influence the development of compassion fatigue, burnout, and compassion satisfaction in emergency department nurses. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 47(2), 186–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12122
9.
KimS.SoJ. (2018). How message fatigue toward health messages leads to ineffective persuasive outcomes: Examining the mediating roles of reactance and inattention. Journal of Health Communication, 23(1), 109–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2017.1414900
10.
KinnickK. N.KrugmanD. M.CameronG. T. (1996). Compassion fatigue: Communication and burnout toward social problems. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 73(3), 687–707. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769909607300314
11.
LuH.SchuldtJ. P. (2016). Compassion for climate change victims and support for mitigation policy. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 45, 192–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.01.007
12.
LuH.YuanS. (2021). What motivates information sharing about disaster victims on social media? Exploring the role of compassion, sadness, expectancy violation, and enjoyment. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 63, Article 102431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102431
13.
LuX.XieX.LiuL. (2015). Inverted U-shaped model: How frequent repetition affects perceived risk. Judgment and Decision Making, 10(3), 219–224.
MontoyaR. M.HortonR. S.VeveaJ. L.CitkowiczM.LauberE. A. (2017). A re-examination of the mere exposure effect: The influence of repeated exposure on recognition, familiarity, and liking. Psychological Bulletin, 143(5), 459–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000085
17.
MoserS. C. (2016). Reflections on climate change communication research and practice in the second decade of the 21st century: What more is there to say?Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 7(3), 345–369. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.403
18.
MyersT.NisbetM. C.MaibachE. W.LeiserowitzA. A. (2012). A public health frame arouses hopeful emotions about climate change. Climatic Change, 113(3–4), 1105–1112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-012-0513-6
19.
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. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547008329201
20.
PalanS.SchitterC. (2018). Prolific.ac—A subject pool for online experiments. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 17, 22–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbef.2017.12.004
21.
PeetzJ.HowardA. L. (2021). Balancing prosocial effort across social categories: Mental accounting heuristics in helping decisions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 47(9), 1414–1429. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167220976683
22.
ReinhardM.-A.SchindlerS.RaabeV.StahlbergD.MessnerM. (2014). Less is sometimes more: How repetition of an antismoking advertisement affects attitudes toward smoking and source credibility. Social Influence, 9(2), 116–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2013.790839
23.
SoJ.AlamN. (2019). Predictors and effects of anti-obesity message fatigue: A thought-listing analysis. Health Communication, 34(7), 755–763. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2018.1434736
24.
SoJ.KimS.CohenH. (2017). Message fatigue: Conceptual definition, operationalization, and correlates. Communication Monographs, 84(1), 5–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2016.1250429
25.
SwimJ.BloodhartB. (2014). Portraying the perils to polar bears: The role of empathic and objective perspective-taking toward animals in climate change communication. Environmental Communication, 9, 446–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2014.987304
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.
