Climate Change Doom Communication From a Fear Appeal Perspective

In the context of climate change communication through mass media, doom framings emphasising negative consequences have become prevalent. While these framings hold the potential to influence both adaptive (such as sustainable intentions) and maladaptive responses (such as resistance), their specific effects in the context of climate change remain unclear. In two experimental studies (N = 154; N = 368), we examined the impact of high-threat communication compared to low-threat communication on a wide range of responses aimed at addressing climate change. No differences were found between high-threat and low-threat communication on adaptive responses (i.e., intentions, acceptance of policies, and motivation) or maladaptive responses (i.e., climate change scepticism, reactance, avoidance, rationalisation, or denial of guilt). The prolonged exposure to and frequency of climate change (doom) messages might be an explanation for why threat did not influence responses.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of Health Communication
Published
2024-09-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.47368/ejhc.2024.402
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Public Relations and Crisis Communication
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.74
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Climate Change Doom Communication From a Fear Appeal Perspective

F. Marijn Stok, John B. F. de Wit, Michèlle Bal, Janna A. de Graaf
6 citations
European Journal of Health Communication
Public Relations and Crisis Communication
5.74
article

Climate Change Doom Communication From a Fear Appeal Perspective

F. Marijn Stok, John B. F. de Wit, Michèlle Bal, Janna A. de Graaf
article en
6 citations

Abstract

In the context of climate change communication through mass media, doom framings emphasising negative consequences have become prevalent. While these framings hold the potential to influence both adaptive (such as sustainable intentions) and maladaptive responses (such as resistance), their specific effects in the context of climate change remain unclear. In two experimental studies (N = 154; N = 368), we examined the impact of high-threat communication compared to low-threat communication on a wide range of responses aimed at addressing climate change. No differences were found between high-threat and low-threat communication on adaptive responses (i.e., intentions, acceptance of policies, and motivation) or maladaptive responses (i.e., climate change scepticism, reactance, avoidance, rationalisation, or denial of guilt). The prolonged exposure to and frequency of climate change (doom) messages might be an explanation for why threat did not influence responses.

European Journal of Health CommunicationVol. 5(4)
Utrecht University (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Public Relations and Crisis Communication
5.74
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.