IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i14p8900-d867447.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Online Engagement with Memes and Comments about Climate Change

Author

Listed:
  • Aleksandra Kovacheva

    (Department of Marketing, School of Business, University at Albany, State University of New York (SUNY), Albany, NY 12222, USA)

  • Hillary J. D. Wiener

    (Department of Marketing, School of Business, University at Albany, State University of New York (SUNY), Albany, NY 12222, USA)

  • Ioannis Kareklas

    (Department of Marketing, School of Business, University at Albany, State University of New York (SUNY), Albany, NY 12222, USA)

  • Darrel Muehling

    (Department of Marketing and International Business, Carson College of Business, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164, USA)

Abstract

Social media posts, and memes in particular, offer important opportunities for social media users and organizations to disseminate information about climate change. However, as this topic remains controversial, memes often elicit comments that may oppose (rather than support) the existence of climate change. In three studies, we find that the position of the comments influences users’ engagement with the main post: when the user’s and the meme’s positions on climate change align, comments opposing the claim of the meme decrease users’ readiness to “like” the meme. We also examine social media users’ attitudes toward different comment moderating options, including disabling, deleting, hiding, or responding to comments.

Suggested Citation

  • Aleksandra Kovacheva & Hillary J. D. Wiener & Ioannis Kareklas & Darrel Muehling, 2022. "Online Engagement with Memes and Comments about Climate Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-19, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8900-:d:867447
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8900/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8900/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hulme,Mike, 2009. "Why We Disagree about Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521898690.
    2. Matthew T. Ballew & Allen M. Omoto & Patricia L. Winter, 2015. "Using Web 2.0 and Social Media Technologies to Foster Proenvironmental Action," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-29, August.
    3. Hulme,Mike, 2009. "Why We Disagree about Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521727327.
    4. Huang, Jinsong & Su, Song & Zhou, Liuning & Liu, Xi, 2013. "Attitude Toward the Viral Ad: Expanding Traditional Advertising Models to Interactive Advertising," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 36-46.
    5. Gordon Pennycook & Ziv Epstein & Mohsen Mosleh & Antonio A. Arechar & Dean Eckles & David G. Rand, 2021. "Shifting attention to accuracy can reduce misinformation online," Nature, Nature, vol. 592(7855), pages 590-595, April.
    6. Maria del García-de los Salmones & Angel Herrero & Patricia Martínez, 2021. "Determinants of Electronic Word-of-Mouth on Social Networking Sites About Negative News on CSR," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 583-597, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Unay-Gailhard, İlkay & Lawson, Kati & Brennan, Mark A., 2023. "An examination of digital empathy: When farmers speak for the climate through TikTok," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 102, pages 1-1.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andreas Bjurström & Merritt Polk, 2011. "Climate change and interdisciplinarity: a co-citation analysis of IPCC Third Assessment Report," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 525-550, June.
    2. Janet Judy McIntyre‐Mills, 2013. "Anthropocentrism and Well‐being: A Way Out of the Lobster Pot?," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 136-155, March.
    3. Hall, C. Michael & Amelung, Bas & Cohen, Scott & Eijgelaar, Eke & Gössling, Stefan & Higham, James & Leemans, Rik & Peeters, Paul & Ram, Yael & Scott, Daniel & Aall, Carlo & Abegg, Bruno & Araña, Jorg, 2015. "No time for smokescreen skepticism: A rejoinder to Shani and Arad," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 341-347.
    4. Nancy Menning, 2018. "Narrating climate change as a rite of passage," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 343-353, March.
    5. Mercedes Bleda & Elisabeth Krull & Jonatan Pinkse & Eleni Christodoulou, 2023. "Organizational heuristics and firms' sensemaking for climate change adaptation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(8), pages 6124-6137, December.
    6. Chhetri, Netra & Ghimire, Rajiv & Wagner, Melissa & Wang, Meng, 2020. "Global citizen deliberation: Case of world-wide views on climate and energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    7. Hochachka, Gail, 2021. "Integrating the four faces of climate change adaptation: Towards transformative change in Guatemalan coffee communities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    8. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2015. "An Evaluation of the Treatment of Risk and Uncertainties in the IPCC Reports on Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 701-712, April.
    9. George Ferns & Kenneth Amaeshi & Aliette Lambert, 2019. "Drilling their Own Graves: How the European Oil and Gas Supermajors Avoid Sustainability Tensions Through Mythmaking," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 201-231, August.
    10. Shaw, Christopher & Nerlich, Brigitte, 2015. "Metaphor as a mechanism of global climate change governance: A study of international policies, 1992–2012," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 34-40.
    11. Kattirtzi, Michael & Winskel, Mark, 2020. "When experts disagree: Using the Policy Delphi method to analyse divergent expert expectations and preferences on UK energy futures," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    12. Nena Vukelić & Nena Rončević & Sven Toljan, 2022. "Student Teachers’ Willingness to Act in the Climate Change Context," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, January.
    13. Zeigermann, Ulrike & Böcher, Michael, 2020. "Challenges for bridging the gap between knowledge and governance in sustainability policy – The case of OECD ‘Focal Points’ for Policy Coherence for Development," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    14. Elisabeth Eide & Risto Kunelius, 2021. "Voices of a generation the communicative power of youth activism," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 1-20, November.
    15. Martin Bohle & Cornelia E. Nauen & Eduardo Marone, 2019. "Ethics to Intersect Civic Participation and Formal Guidance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, February.
    16. Kevin Raaphorst & Gerben Koers & Gerald Jan Ellen & Amy Oen & Bjørn Kalsnes & Lisa van Well & Jana Koerth & Rutger van der Brugge, 2020. "Mind the Gap: Towards a Typology of Climate Service Usability Gaps," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-21, February.
    17. Joshua Ettinger & Peter Walton & James Painter & Thomas DiBlasi, 2021. "Climate of hope or doom and gloom? Testing the climate change hope vs. fear communications debate through online videos," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 1-19, January.
    18. de Chazal, Jacqueline, 2010. "A systems approach to liveability and sustainability: Defining terms and mapping relationships to link desires with ecological opportunities and constraints," Research Reports 95056, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    19. Sanjay Chaturvedi, 2013. "China and India in the ‘Receding’ Arctic," Jadavpur Journal of International Relations, , vol. 17(1), pages 41-68, June.
    20. Tol, Richard S.J., 2017. "The structure of the climate debate," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 431-438.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8900-:d:867447. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.