Search Climate Insights Directory

The study assesses an 'edutainment' high school assembly program using a random sample of 49 schools and 1,241 students. Results indicate that the program positively influenced youth knowledge and behavior, shifting students into audience segments more engaged with climate change and inspiring further personal, political, and consumer advocacy.

The study finds that conservative media use is negatively related to global warming belief certainty and policy support, while nonconservative media use is positively associated with them. It further demonstrates a reinforcing cycle where initial media consumption shapes beliefs, which in turn increases the likelihood of continuing to consume the same type of media, subsequently strengthening those beliefs.

The research identifies key psychological and social drivers of climate activism in the U.S., finding that activists are more likely to view global warming as a serious but solvable threat and believe in the efficacy of collective action. The authors recommend that climate messaging combine threat warnings with actionable steps and support for social opinion leaders to overcome widespread public skepticism regarding the effectiveness of political activism.

The document highlights a significant disconnect between the scientific community and the American public regarding the consensus on human-caused climate change. While nearly all climate scientists agree that human-caused climate change is occurring, approximately half of Americans are either unaware of or do not believe in this consensus. The author asserts that this lack of understanding is critical and calls for climate science societies and individual scientists to take action to correct the record.

The report finds that 'global warming' and 'climate change' are not synonymous for many Americans, with 'global warming' generally being more engaging and evoking stronger negative emotions, a greater sense of urgency, and higher levels of personal and familial threat. While the terms are largely synonymous for Republicans, the use of 'climate change' appears to reduce engagement among Democrats, Independents, liberals, and moderates.

The report finds that while a majority of Americans believe global warming is occurring and are increasingly certain of it, there is a significant gap between public perception and scientific consensus regarding human causality. Only 15% of Americans are 'very worried' about global warming, with many viewing it as a distant threat that will not personally harm them, their families, or their communities. Additionally, only one in three Americans occasionally discusses the topic with friends and family, often due to perceived disagreements.

The April 2014 survey 'Climate Change in the American Mind' reveals that while a majority of Americans (64%) believe global warming is happening and are increasingly certain of it, there is a significant gap between public perception and scientific consensus. Only 44% of Americans believe global warming is both happening and human-caused, and only 12% are aware that 90% or more of climate scientists agree on this. Despite these beliefs, few Americans are 'very worried' (15%), often perceiving it as a distant threat that will harm future generations more than themselves. Additionally, the topic is rarely discussed in social circles, with two-thirds of respondents saying they 'rarely' or 'never' discuss it with family and friends.

The report segments Marylanders into six climate change audiences: Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, and Dismissive. In spring 2013, 62% of residents fell into the Alarmed (23%) and Concerned (39%) categories. The study finds high polarization regarding local environmental changes and health risks, while identifying broad support for renewable energy and the protection of public water supplies. It details the demographic and behavioral profiles of each segment to inform state climate and energy policy communication.

The 2014 Maryland statewide survey reveals that while a majority of residents support state action to protect coastal areas from sea level rise and general climate harms, there is significant uncertainty regarding whether sea level rise is currently occurring and what causes it. Preferred adaptation strategies include changes to zoning regulations and long-range planning. Residents identify hotter weather and severe storms as the most likely local climate impacts, with agriculture, public health, and coastlines viewed as the most at-risk resources.

The report finds that a large majority of Marylanders favor increasing the use of renewable energy, particularly solar and wind, while expressing a desire to reduce the use of coal and petroleum. While there is strong support for state mandates requiring renewable energy percentages and for financial rebates on energy-efficient appliances, there is low interest and participation in home energy audits due to cost and awareness barriers. Additionally, the survey reveals a significant gap in support for natural gas depending on whether it is extracted via hydraulic fracturing within the state.

The 2014 survey of Maryland residents indicates a strong public perception that climate change harms human health, particularly through respiratory issues and heat stroke. While medical professionals are highly trusted sources of information, residents perceive fossil fuels and nuclear power as health hazards, contrasting with a view of solar and wind energy as non-harmful. The report also notes an increase in concern regarding chemical exposure and pollution, and identifies health care access and environmental health as top state policy priorities.

A 2014 statewide survey of Maryland residents reveals that 77% believe climate change is happening, with 55% viewing a particularly cold winter as evidence of this trend. While there is strong support for state-level energy efficiency and renewable energy policies, there is significant division regarding whether human activities are the primary cause of climate change. Trust in climate information is highest among university scientists, public health experts, and specific state agencies, while trust is lowest for the Governor's office and utility companies. Awareness of specific state climate policies has declined since 2013.

The report finds that while global warming is not a top national priority for most Americans, there is broad support for specific clean energy policies, such as renewable energy research and tax rebates for energy-efficient vehicles. However, confidence in government's ability to address the issue remains low, and significant polarization exists between political parties and different psychological segments of the population.

A March 2013 survey of 2,000 Virginia adults who watch local TV news found that a large majority (85%) believe climate change is happening, though only about half are very or extremely sure. Many residents perceive an increase in extremely hot days and intense storms, often attributing this to climate change. Significant disparities in perception and trust exist across demographic lines, with Democrats, women, and urban residents generally more likely to view climate change as a human-caused problem and a personal risk, while Republicans and older adults are more likely to see weather changes as unrelated to climate change.

The report argues that traditional conservation policies relying on regulation and financial incentives are often insufficient because they ignore the psychological and social drivers of human behavior. It proposes a 'soft policy' approach using 'nudges'—small changes in the decision-making context—to encourage voluntary pro-environmental actions. The authors identify five primary 'areas of influence' for behavior change: attitudes, personal agency, emotions, social norms, and the environmental/decision context. To improve conservation outcomes, the report recommends that practitioners explicitly use social science evidence, track social indicators alongside ecological ones, and employ experimental or quasi-experimental designs to identify causal relationships between interventions and behavioral changes.

The report finds that a majority of Americans perceive U.S. weather as having worsened in recent years, with 58% believing global warming affects U.S. weather. A high percentage of the population (85%) reported experiencing extreme weather in the past year, most commonly high winds and extreme heat. The document details regional variations in weather experiences and identifies public priorities for government protection of infrastructure, such as water supplies and transportation, against extreme weather over the next decade.

The report finds that while many Americans adopt energy-efficient products and consider environmental impacts in purchasing, direct civic engagement with government officials remains low. There is a notable trend of decreasing confidence in the ability of individual energy-saving actions to substantially reduce global warming.

The April 2013 survey indicates that while a majority of Americans (63%) believe global warming is happening, there was a 7-point decline in this belief since Fall 2012, potentially due to a cold winter and March. About half of Americans believe global warming is human-caused and express worry about the issue. However, global warming is primarily perceived as a distant threat affecting future generations, other species, and people in developing countries more than individuals personally. There is also a trend of Americans feeling they have sufficient information to form opinions on the subject.

The April 2013 report 'Extreme Weather and Climate Change in the American Mind' reveals that 58% of Americans believe global warming is affecting U.S. weather. A significant majority (85%) reported experiencing extreme weather in the past year, with 37% stating they suffered moderate or great harm. While over half of Americans believe a natural disaster in their community is likely in the coming year, only 31% have a family emergency plan and 36% have a supply kit. Communication about these events remains primarily face-to-face or via phone, despite some use of social media.

The report finds that most Americans rarely discuss global warming, preferring face-to-face or phone communication over social media, especially after extreme weather events. It highlights that family and friends are the most influential in convincing individuals to take action. The 'Alarmed' segment is the most active in public and political communication, while the 'Dismissive' and 'Disengaged' are the least.