Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

User comments on climate stories: impacts of anecdotal vs. scientific evidence

  • Published:
Climatic Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Stories about climate change garner passionate comments from readers, ranging from acclaim to invective. This research is the first to investigate the effects of the rhetorical strategies of deploying anecdotal versus scientific evidence in comments. A between-subjects experiment with a U.S. adult sample (N = 363) tested whether user comments that support or contradict a climate news story, using either anecdotal or scientific evidence, have an effect on message reception. Individual difference variables in audience members have been shown to moderate the effects of comments in previous research. Findings show that political ideology is an important moderator of effects, particularly on the perception of climate change risk and story credibility. And when looking at the reactions of people who have low need for cognition and are highly conservative, climate uncertainty was diminished when anecdotal evidence appeared in comments. Taken together, these findings indicate that, in the context of climate change communication, comments from users can influence whether a climate story is perceived as credible by certain readers and can also disrupt a story’s intended message, particularly if comments attempt to invoke scientific proof for their claims.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen M, Preiss RW, Gayle BM (2006) Meta-Analytic Examination of the Base-Rate Fallacy Communication Research Reports 23:45–51. doi:10.1080/17464090500535863

    Google Scholar 

  • Amdur D, Rabe BG, Borick CP (2014) Public views on a carbon tax depend on the proposed use of revenue Issues in Energy and Environmental Policy:13

  • Anderson AA, Brossard D, Scheufele DA, Xenos MA, Ladwig P (2014) The “Nasty Effect:” online incivility and risk perceptions of emerging technologies. J Comput-Mediat Commun 19:373–387. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12009

  • Behrend TS, Sharek DJ, Meade AW, Wiebe EN (2011) The viability of crowdsourcing for survey research Behavior research methods 43:800-813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernauer T, McGrath LF (2016) Simple reframing unlikely to boost public support for climate policy Nat Clim Chang advance online publication doi:10.1038/nclimate2948. http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/nclimate2948.html - supplementary-information

  • Block B (2010) Covering climate change World Watch: 23. Available via: http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6373. Accessed 28 Jul 2016

  • Boykoff MT (2007a) Flogging a dead norm? Newspaper coverage of anthropogenic climate change in the United States and United Kingdom from 2003 to 2006 Area 39:470–481. doi:10.1111/j.1475-4762.2007.00769.x

  • Boykoff MT (2007b) From convergence to contention: United States mass media representations of anthropogenic climate change science Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 32:477–489. doi:10.1111/j.1475-5661.2007.00270.x

  • Boykoff MT, Boykoff JM (2004) Balance as bias: global warming and the US prestige press. Glob Environ Chang 14:125–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boykoff M, Goodman M, Curtis I (2009) Cultural politics of climate change: interactions in the spaces of the everyday, environment, politics and development. Working Paper Series. Department of Geography, King’s College London

    Google Scholar 

  • Braverman J (2008) Testimonials versus informational persuasive messages: The moderating effect of delivery mode and personal involvement Communication Research

  • Cacioppo JT, Petty RE (1982) The need for cognition. J Pers Soc Psychol 42:116

  • Cacioppo JT, Petty RE, Kao CF, Rodriguez R (1986) Central and peripheral routes to persuasion: An individual difference perspective. J Pers Soc Psychol 51:1032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clifford S, Jewell RM, Waggoner PD (2015) Are samples drawn from Mechanical Turk valid for research on political ideology? Res Policy 2

  • Collins L, Nerlich B (2015) Examining User Comments for Deliberative Democracy: A Corpus-driven. Analysis of the Climate Change Debate Online Environmental Communication 9:189–207. doi:10.1080/17524032.2014.981560

    Google Scholar 

  • Corner A, Whitmarsh L, Xenias D (2012) Uncertainty, scepticism and attitudes towards climate change: biased assimilation and attitude polarisation. Clim Chang 114:463–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlstrom MF (2014) Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111:13614–13620

  • Dahlstrom MF, Ho SS (2012) Ethical Considerations of Using Narrative to Communicate Science Science Communication. doi:10.1177/1075547012454597

  • Dahlstrom M, Ritland R (2012) The problem of communicating beyond human scale Between Scientists and Citizens:121–130

  • Ding D, Maibach EW, Zhao X, Roser-Renouf C, Leiserowitz A (2011) Support for climate policy and societal action are linked to perceptions about scientific agreement Nature Clim Change 1:462–466

  • Downs JS (2014) Prescriptive scientific narratives for communicating usable science Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 111:13627–13633. doi:10.1073/pnas.1317502111

  • Doyle J (2011) Mediating climate change. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.

  • EPA (2011) Our nation’s air: status and trends through 2010. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,. Research Triangle Park, NC

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman L, Maibach EW, Roser-Renouf C, Leiserowitz A (2011) Climate on Cable: The Nature and Impact of Global Warming Coverage on Fox News. CNN, and MSNBC The International Journal of Press/Politics. doi:10.1177/1940161211425410

    Google Scholar 

  • Fico F, Freedman E (2004) Bureau, wire reporters write more balanced stories. Newsp Res J 25:-44

  • Gelbspan R (2005) Disinformation, financial pressures, and misplaced balance. Nieman Reports 59:77

  • Gillis J (2013) Climate Panel Cites Near Certainty on Warming. New York City

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene K, Campo S, Banerjee SC (2010) Comparing Normative. Anecdotal, and Statistical Risk Evidence to Discourage Tanning Bed Use Communication Quarterly 58:111–132. doi:10.1080/01463371003773366

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes AF (2013) PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. 2012 Acesso em 2

  • Hermida A, Thurman N (2008) A clash of cultures: The integration of user-generated content within professional journalistic frameworks at British newspaper websites. Journal Pract 2:343–356

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiles SS, Hinnant A (2014) Climate Change in the Newsroom: Journalists’ Evolving Standards of Objectivity When Covering Global Warming Science Communication 36:428–453. doi:10.1177/1075547014534077

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinnant A (2009) The cancer on your coffee table: A discourse analysis of the health content in mass-circulated women’s magazines. Feminist Media Studies 9:317–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinnant A, Len-Ríos ME, Young R (2012) Journalistic use of exemplars to humanize health news. Journal Stud 14:539–554. doi:10.1080/1461670X.2012.721633

  • Hornikx J (2005) A review of experimental research on the relative persuasiveness of anecdotal, statistical, causal, and expert evidence. Studies in Communication Sciences 5:205–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones MD (2014) Communicating Climate Change: Are Stories Better than “Just the Facts”? Policy Studies Journal 42:644–673. doi:10.1111/psj.12072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kareklas I, Muehling DD, Weber TJ (2015) Reexamining Health Messages in the Digital Age: A Fresh Look at Source Credibility Effects Journal of Advertising 44:88-104. doi:10.1080/00913367.2015.1018461

    Google Scholar 

  • Kata A (2012) Anti-vaccine activists, Web 2.0, and the postmodern paradigm-An overview of tactics and tropes used online by the anti-vaccination movement Vaccine 30:3778–3789

  • Kelly RP, Cooley SR, Klinger T (2014) Narratives can motivate environmental action: The Whiskey Creek ocean acidification story. Ambio 43:592–599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim E-M, Sun Y-H (2006) The effect of replies in Internet news on the audience Korean. Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies 50:33–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim S-Y et al. (2012) Testing an additive model for the effectiveness of evidence on the persuasiveness of a message. Soc Influ 7:65–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knobloch-Westerwick S, Johnson BK, Silver NA, Westerwick A (2015) Science Exemplars in the Eye of the Beholder: How Exposure to Online Science Information Affects Attitudes Science Communication 37:575–601. doi:10.1177/1075547015596367

    Google Scholar 

  • Koteyko N, Jaspal R, Nerlich B (2013) Climate change and ‘climategate’ in online reader comments: a mixed methods study. Geogr J 179:74–86. doi:10.1111/j.1475-4959.2012.00479.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreuter M, Melanie G, Joseph C, Michael S, Meg W, Doug S, Eddie C (2007) Ann Behav Med 33:221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krupnikov Y, Levine AS (2014) Cross-Sample Comparisons and External Validity. Journal of Experimental Political Science 1:59–80. doi:10.1017/xps.2014.7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee JS, Sung M (2007) The effects of reading replies on the perception of online news articles: Focusing on the PR perspective. Korean Journal of Advertising and Public Relations 9:7–45

  • Lee E-J, Jang YJ (2010) What do others’ reactions to news on internet portal sites tell us? Effects of presentation format and readers’ need for cognition on reality perception Communication Research 37:825–846

    Google Scholar 

  • Leiserowitz A (2006) Climate Change Risk Perception and Policy Preferences: The Role of Affect. Imagery, and Values Climatic Change 77:45–72. doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9059-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leiserowitz A, Maibach EW, Roser-Renouf C, Feinberg G, Howe P (2013) Climate Change in the American Mind: Americans’ Global Warming Beliefs and Attitudes in April 2013 Available at SSRN 2298705

  • Maibach EW, Nisbet M, Baldwin P, Akerlof K, Diao G (2010) Reframing climate change as a public health issue: an exploratory study of public reactions. BMC Public Health 10:299. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-10-299

  • Marx SM, Weber EU, Orlove BS, Leiserowitz A, Krantz DH, Roncoli C, Phillips J (2007) Communication and mental processes: Experiential and analytic processing of uncertain climate information. Glob Environ Chang 17:47–58. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.10.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayo J, Leshner G (2000) Assessing the credibility of computer-assisted reporting. Newsp Res J 21:68–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer P (1988) Defining and measuring credibility of newspapers: Developing an index. J Mass Commun Q 65:567–574

    Google Scholar 

  • Morton TA, Rabinovich A, Marshall D, Bretschneider P (2011) The future that may (or may not) come: How framing changes responses to uncertainty in climate change communications. Glob Environ Chang 21:103–109. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.09.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moser SC, Dilling L (2011) Communicating climate change: closing the science-action gap The oxford handbook of climate change and society. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 161–174

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers TA, Nisbet MC, Maibach EW, Leiserowitz AA (2012) A public health frame arouses hopeful emotions about climate change. Clim Chang 113:1105–1112. doi:10.1007/s10584-012-0513-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman C (2007) Reader letters to women’s health magazines. Feminist Media Studies 7:155–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nisbet MC (2009) Communicating Climate Change: Why Frames Matter for Public Engagement Environment. Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 51:12–23. doi:10.3200/envt.51.2.12-23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor RE, Bard RJ, Fisher A (1999) Risk Perceptions. General Environmental Beliefs, and Willingness to Address Climate Change Risk Analysis 19:461–471. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1999.tb00421.x

    Google Scholar 

  • Olausson U (2009) Global warming—global responsibility? Media frames of collective action and scientific certainty Public Understanding of Science 18:421–436. doi:10.1177/0963662507081242

    Google Scholar 

  • Painter J (2013) Climate change in the media: Reporting risk and uncertainty. IB Tauris,

    Google Scholar 

  • Painter J (2015) Taking a bet on risk Nature. Climate Change 5:286–288. doi:10.1038/nclimate2542

    Google Scholar 

  • Paolacci G, Chandler J, Ipeirotis P (2010) Running experiments on Amazon mechanical turk. Judgm Decis Mak 5:411–419

  • Peter C, Rossmann C, Keyling T (2014) Exemplification 2.0: Roles of direct and indirect social information in conveying health messages through social network sites Journal of Media Psychology: Theories. Meteorol Appl 26:19–28. doi:10.1027/1864-1105/a000103

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrovic N, Madrigano J, Zaval L (2014) Motivating mitigation: when health matters more than climate change. Climatic Change 126:245–254. doi:10.1007/s10584-014-1192-2

  • Petty RE, Cacioppo JT, Goldman R (1981) Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. J Pers Soc Psychol 41:847

  • Rand DG (2012) The promise of Mechanical Turk: How online labor markets can help theorists run behavioral experiments. J Theor Biol 299:172–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reader B (2012) Free press vs. free speech? The rhetoric of “civility” in regard to anonymous online comments. J Mass Commun Q 89:495–513

  • Retzbach A, Maier M (2015) Communicating Scientific Uncertainty: Media Effects on Public Engagement With Science Communication Research 42:429–456. doi:10.1177/0093650214534967

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose N (2001) The politics of life itself Theory. Cult Sociol 18:1–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saad L (2014) A steady 57 % in U.S. Blame Humans for Global Warming. Gallup Politics,

  • Santana AD (2014) Virtuous or vitriolic: The effect of anonymity on civility in online newspaper reader comment boards. Journal Pract 8:18–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Scannell L, Gifford R (2013) Personally Relevant Climate Change: The Role of Place Attachment and Local Versus Global Message Framing in Engagement. Environ Behav 45:60–85. doi:10.1177/0013916511421196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Secko DM, Tlalka S, Dunlop M, Kingdon A, Amend E (2011) The unfinished science story: Journalist-audience interactions from the Globe and Mail’s online health and science sections. Journalism 12:814–831

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith N, Leiserowitz A (2012) The Rise of Global Warming Skepticism: Exploring Affective Image Associations in the United States Over Time Risk Analysis 32:1021–1032. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01801.x

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence A, Pidgeon N (2010) Framing and communicating climate change: The effects of distance and outcome frame manipulations. Glob Environ Chang 20:656–667. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.07.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence A, Poortinga W, Pidgeon N (2012) The psychological distance of climate change. Risk Anal 32:957–972

  • Straubhaar J, LaRose R, Davenport L (2013) Media now: Understanding media, culture, and technology. Cengage Learning,

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson S (2012) The micro-ethics of everyday life: ethics, ideology and anti-consumerism. Cult Stud 26:895–921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uldam J, Askanius T (2013) Online Civic Cultures? Debating Climate Change Activism on YouTube International Journal of Communication 7:1185–1204

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber EU (2010) What shapes perceptions of climate change? Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Chang 1:332–342. doi:10.1002/wcc.41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webster M (2003) Communicating Climate Change Uncertainty to Policy-Makers and the Public Climatic Change 61:1–8. doi:10.1023/a:1026351131038

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitmarsh L (2011) Scepticism and uncertainty about climate change: dimensions, determinants and change over time. Glob Environ Chang 21:690–700

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiest SL, Raymond L, Clawson RA (2015) Framing, partisan predispositions, and public opinion on climate change. Glob Environ Chang 31:187–198. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.12.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winter S, Brückner C, Krämer NC (2015) They came, they liked, they commented: Social influence on Facebook news channels Cyberpsychology. Behavior, and Social Networking 18:431–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zebregs S, van den Putte B, Neijens P, de Graaf A (2014) The Differential Impact of Statistical and Narrative Evidence on Beliefs, Attitude, and Intention. A Meta-Analysis Health Commun:1–8. doi:10.1080/10410236.2013.842528

  • Zehr SC (2000) Public representations of scientific uncertainty about global climate change. Public Underst Sci 9:85–103. doi:10.1088/0963-6625/9/2/301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zillmann D (1999) Exemplification theory: Judging the whole by some of its parts. Z Med Psychol 1:69–94. doi:10.1207/s1532785xmep0101_5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zillmann D (2002) Exemplification theory of media influence. In: Bryant J, Zillmann D, Oliver MB (eds) Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed.). LEA’s communication series. Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, pp 19–41

  • Zillmann D, Brosius HB (2012) Exemplification in communication: The influence of case reports on the perception of issues. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Zillmann D, Gibson R, Sundar SS, Perkins JW (1996) Effects of exemplification in news reports on the perception of social issues Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 73:427–444

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Missouri Columbia, Columbia, MO, USA

    Amanda Hinnant & Roma Subramanian

  2. University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA

    Rachel Young

Authors
  1. Amanda Hinnant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roma Subramanian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rachel Young
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amanda Hinnant.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 9514 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hinnant, A., Subramanian, R. & Young, R. User comments on climate stories: impacts of anecdotal vs. scientific evidence. Climatic Change 138, 411–424 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1759-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1759-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation