IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natcli/v9y2019i11d10.1038_s41558-019-0587-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Acknowledging uncertainty impacts public acceptance of climate scientists’ predictions

Author

Listed:
  • Lauren C. Howe

    (University of Zurich)

  • Bo MacInnis

    (Stanford University)

  • Jon A. Krosnick

    (Stanford University
    Stanford University)

  • Ezra M. Markowitz

    (University of Massachusetts, Amherst)

  • Robert Socolow

    (Princeton University)

Abstract

Predictions about the effects of climate change cannot be made with complete certainty, so acknowledging uncertainty may increase trust in scientists and public acceptance of their messages. Here we show that this is true regarding expressions of uncertainty, unless they are also accompanied by acknowledgements of irreducible uncertainty. A representative national sample of Americans read predictions about effects of global warming on sea level that included either a worst-case scenario (high partially bounded uncertainty) or the best and worst cases (fully bounded uncertainty). Compared to a control condition, expressing fully bounded but not high partially bounded uncertainty increased trust in scientists and message acceptance. However, these effects were eliminated when fully bounded uncertainty was accompanied by an acknowledgement that the full effects of sea-level rise cannot be quantified because of unpredictable storm surges. Thus, expressions of fully bounded uncertainty alone may enhance confidence in scientists and their assertions but not when the full extent of inevitable uncertainty is acknowledged.

Suggested Citation

  • Lauren C. Howe & Bo MacInnis & Jon A. Krosnick & Ezra M. Markowitz & Robert Socolow, 2019. "Acknowledging uncertainty impacts public acceptance of climate scientists’ predictions," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(11), pages 863-867, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:natcli:v:9:y:2019:i:11:d:10.1038_s41558-019-0587-5
    DOI: 10.1038/s41558-019-0587-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-019-0587-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41558-019-0587-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Minal Pathak & Joyashree Roy & Shaurya Patel & Shreya Some & Purvi Vyas & Nandini Das & Priyadarshi Shukla, 2021. "Communicating climate change findings from IPCC reports: insights from outreach events in India," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 1-14, October.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:4:p:849-882 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Zeynep Clulow & David Reiner, 2022. "How to distinguish climate sceptics, antivaxxers, and persistent sceptics: Evidence from a multi-country survey of public attitudes," Working Papers EPRG2205, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    4. A. Kause & W. Bruine de Bruin & J. Persson & H. Thorén & L. Olsson & A. Wallin & S. Dessai & N. Vareman, 2022. "Confidence levels and likelihood terms in IPCC reports: a survey of experts from different scientific disciplines," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 173(1), pages 1-18, July.
    5. Aljoscha Minnich & Hauke Roggenkamp & Andreas Lange, 2023. "Ambiguity Attitudes and Surprises: Experimental Evidence on Communicating New Information within a Large Population Sample," CESifo Working Paper Series 10783, CESifo.
    6. repec:jdm:journl:v:17:y:2022:i:4:p:849-882 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:nat:natcli:v:9:y:2019:i:11:d:10.1038_s41558-019-0587-5. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.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.