IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0234036.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Explaining public understanding of the concepts of climate change, nutrition, poverty and effective medical drugs: An international experimental survey

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Krauss
  • Matteo Colombo

Abstract

Climate change, nutrition, poverty and medical drugs are widely discussed and pressing issues in science, policy and society. Despite these issues being of great importance for the quality of our lives it remains unclear how well people understand them. Specifically, do particular demographic and socioeconomic factors explain variation in public understanding of these four concepts? To what extent are people’s changes in understanding associated with changes in their behaviour? Do people judge scientific practices relying on the more descriptive concepts of climate change and effective medical drugs to be more objective (less controversial) than practices relying on the more value-laden concepts of poverty and healthy nutrition? To address these questions, an experimental survey and regression analyses are conducted using data collected from about one thousand participants across different continents. The study finds that public understanding of science is generally low. A smaller proportion of people were able to correctly identify the common explanation accepted internationally among the scientific community for climate change and effectiveness of medical drugs (42% and 43% of participants in the study, respectively) than for poverty and healthy nutrition (61% and 65% of participants, respectively). Older age and political non-conservativeness were the strongest predictors of correctly understanding these four concepts. Greater levels of education and political non-conservativeness were in turn the strongest predictors of people’s reported changes in their behaviour based on their improved understanding of these concepts. Because climate change is among the least understood scientific concepts but is arguably the greatest challenge of our time, better efforts are needed to improve how media, awareness campaigns and education systems mediate information on the topic in order to tackle the large knowledge deficits that constrain behavioural change.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Krauss & Matteo Colombo, 2020. "Explaining public understanding of the concepts of climate change, nutrition, poverty and effective medical drugs: An international experimental survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-21, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0234036
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234036
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0234036
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0234036&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0234036?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert Brulle & Jason Carmichael & J. Jenkins, 2012. "Shifting public opinion on climate change: an empirical assessment of factors influencing concern over climate change in the U.S., 2002–2010," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 114(2), pages 169-188, September.
    2. Chong Ju Choi & Carla C. J. M. Millar & Caroline Y. L. Wong, 2005. "Knowledge and the State," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Knowledge Entanglements, chapter 0, pages 19-38, Palgrave Macmillan.
    3. Matthew J. Hornsey & Emily A. Harris & Paul G. Bain & Kelly S. Fielding, 2016. "Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(6), pages 622-626, June.
    4. Kevin E. Levay & Jeremy Freese & James N. Druckman, 2016. "The Demographic and Political Composition of Mechanical Turk Samples," SAGE Open, , vol. 6(1), pages 21582440166, March.
    5. Susan Clayton & Patrick Devine-Wright & Paul C. Stern & Lorraine Whitmarsh & Amanda Carrico & Linda Steg & Janet Swim & Mirilia Bonnes, 2015. "Psychological research and global climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(7), pages 640-646, July.
    6. Adam Corner & Ezra Markowitz & Nick Pidgeon, 2014. "Public engagement with climate change: the role of human values," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3), pages 411-422, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. D. Liliana González-Hernández & Raúl A. Aguirre-Gamboa & Erik W. Meijles, 2023. "The role of climate change perceptions and sociodemographics on reported mitigation efforts and performance among households in northeastern Mexico," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 1853-1875, February.
    2. E. Keith Smith & Lynn M. Hempel, 2022. "Alignment of values and political orientations amplifies climate change attitudes and behaviors," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 172(1), pages 1-28, May.
    3. Shelley Boulianne & Mireille Lalancette & David Ilkiw, 2020. "“School Strike 4 Climate”: Social Media and the International Youth Protest on Climate Change," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 208-218.
    4. Carley M. Eschliman & Emma Kuster & Joseph Ripberger & Adrienne M. Wootten, 2020. "Preparing to adapt: are public expectations in line with climate projections?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(2), pages 851-871, November.
    5. Booth, Pamela & Walsh, Patrick J. & Stahlmann-Brown, Pike, 2020. "Drought Intensity, Future Expectations, and the Resilience of Climate Beliefs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    6. Rosalind Pidcock & Kate Heath & Lydia Messling & Susie Wang & Anna Pirani & Sarah Connors & Adam Corner & Christopher Shaw & Melissa Gomis, 2021. "Evaluating effective public engagement: local stories from a global network of IPCC scientists," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 1-22, October.
    7. Brown, Pike & Walsh, Patrick & Booth, Pam, 2020. "Environmental signalling & expectations of future drought: Evidence from panel data," 2020 Conference (64th), February 12-14, 2020, Perth, Western Australia 305239, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    8. Llewelyn Hughes & David M. Konisky & Sandra Potter, 2020. "Extreme weather and climate opinion: evidence from Australia," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(2), pages 723-743, November.
    9. Ulf J. J. Hahnel & Christian Mumenthaler & Tobia Spampatti & Tobias Brosch, 2020. "Ideology as Filter: Motivated Information Processing and Decision-Making in the Energy Domain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-19, October.
    10. Jing Shi & Vivianne H. M. Visschers & Michael Siegrist, 2015. "Public Perception of Climate Change: The Importance of Knowledge and Cultural Worldviews," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(12), pages 2183-2201, December.
    11. Amanda Kennard, 2021. "My Brother’s Keeper: Other-regarding preferences and concern for global climate change," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 345-376, April.
    12. Aaron Drummond & Lauren C. Hall & James D. Sauer & Matthew A. Palmer, 2018. "Is public awareness and perceived threat of climate change associated with governmental mitigation targets?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 149(2), pages 159-171, July.
    13. Olaya Álvarez-García & Jaume Sureda-Negre & Rubén Comas-Forgas & Miquel F. Oliver-Trobat, 2023. "The Spanish population’s interest in climate change based on Internet searches," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-9, December.
    14. Olson, Erik L., 2022. "Advocacy bias in the green marketing literature: Where seldom is heard a discouraging word," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 805-820.
    15. Matthew T. Ballew & Jennifer R. Marlon & Matthew H. Goldberg & Edward W. Maibach & Seth A. Rosenthal & Emily Aiken & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2022. "Changing minds about global warming: vicarious experience predicts self-reported opinion change in the USA," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 173(3), pages 1-25, August.
    16. Oluwabunmi Oluwaseun Popoola & Shehu Folaranmi Gbolahan Yusuf & Nomakhaya Monde, 2020. "Information Sources and Constraints to Climate Change Adaptation amongst Smallholder Farmers in Amathole District Municipality, Eastern Cape Province, South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-23, July.
    17. P. Stahlmann-Brown & P. Walsh, 2022. "Soil moisture and expectations regarding future climate: evidence from panel data," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(1), pages 1-20, March.
    18. Stephanie J. Zawadzki & Thijs Bouman & Linda Steg & Vladimir Bojarskich & Perri B. Druen, 2020. "Translating climate beliefs into action in a changing political landscape," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 161(1), pages 21-42, July.
    19. Emőke Kiss & Dániel Balla & András Donát Kovács, 2022. "Characteristics of Climate Concern—Attitudes and Personal Actions—A Case Study of Hungarian Settlements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-22, April.
    20. Ulf J. J. Hahnel & Christian Mumenthaler & Tobias Brosch, 2020. "Emotional foundations of the public climate change divide," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 161(1), pages 9-19, July.

    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:plo:pone00:0234036. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.