Optimizing climate change communication: Context Comparison Model method

Viviane Seyranian; Doug Lombardi; Gale M Sinatra; William D Crano

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.897460

Optimizing climate change communication: Context Comparison Model method

Front Psychol. 2022 Aug 3:13:897460. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.897460. eCollection 2022.

Authors

Viviane Seyranian¹, Doug Lombardi², Gale M Sinatra³, William D Crano⁴

Affiliations

¹ Psychology Department, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, Pomona, CA, United States.
² Department of Human Development and Quantitative Methodology, University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, MD, United States.
³ Rossier School of Education and Psychology Department, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
⁴ Psychology Department, Division of Behavioral and Organizational Sciences, Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA, United States.

Abstract

The Context Comparison Model (CCM) provides a promising avenue to guide persuasive communication development by highlighting the features of the communication context that require consideration, including source, target, and task variables. The model was tested in a study of global climate change. American participants read a text outlining scientific evidence for global climate change and a policy proposal to mitigate future climate change. Prior to reading the text, participants' completed measures of their political affiliation (Republican, Democrats, Independent or Other) to render their group memberships salient. They were randomly assigned to one of four source conditions: (a) ingroup minority; (b) ingroup majority; (c) outgroup minority; or (d) outgroup minority. Participants completed pre- and post-measures of attitudes and the plausibility of climate change. Pretest scores revealed that global climate change attitudes were held less strongly by Republicans than Democrats. In line with expectations, participants' subjective attitudes were more influenced by ingroup sources, and larger persuasive effects were obtained for ingroup minorities. For the plausibility of climate change, participants were more persuaded by an outgroup source, and larger effects were evident for outgroup majorities. Results were precisely predicted by the CCM. Their implications for science communication were discussed.

Keywords: attitude change; climate change; context comparison model; minority influence; political party; science communication; social identity.