TY - JOUR
T1 - Using the COVID-19 Economic Crisis to Frame Climate Change as a Secondary Issue Reduces Mitigation Support
AU - Echer, Ullrich
AU - Butler, Lucy
AU - Cook, John
AU - Kurz, Tim
AU - Lewandowsky, Stephen
PY - 2020/8/31
Y1 - 2020/8/31
N2 - The COVID-19 pandemic has understandably dominated public discourse, crowding out other important issues such as climate change. Currently, if climate change enters the arena of public debate, it primarily does so in direct relation to the pandemic. In two experiments, we investigated (1) whether portraying the response to the COVID-19 threat as a “trial run” for future climate action would increase climate-change concern and mitigation support, and (2) whether portraying climate change as a concern that needs to take a “back seat” while focus lies on economic recovery would decrease climate-change concern and mitigation support. We found no support for the effectiveness of a trial-run frame in either experiment. In Experiment 1, we found that a back-seat frame reduced participants’ support for mitigative action. In Experiment 2, the back-seat framing reduced both climate change concern and mitigation support; a combined inoculation and refutation was able to offset the drop in climate concern but not the reduction in mitigation support.
AB - The COVID-19 pandemic has understandably dominated public discourse, crowding out other important issues such as climate change. Currently, if climate change enters the arena of public debate, it primarily does so in direct relation to the pandemic. In two experiments, we investigated (1) whether portraying the response to the COVID-19 threat as a “trial run” for future climate action would increase climate-change concern and mitigation support, and (2) whether portraying climate change as a concern that needs to take a “back seat” while focus lies on economic recovery would decrease climate-change concern and mitigation support. We found no support for the effectiveness of a trial-run frame in either experiment. In Experiment 1, we found that a back-seat frame reduced participants’ support for mitigative action. In Experiment 2, the back-seat framing reduced both climate change concern and mitigation support; a combined inoculation and refutation was able to offset the drop in climate concern but not the reduction in mitigation support.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85088997574&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101464
DO - 10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101464
M3 - Article
SN - 0272-4944
VL - 70
JO - Journal of Environmental Psychology
JF - Journal of Environmental Psychology
M1 - 101464
ER -