How Forced Versus Selective Exposure Matters for the Influence of Emotional Appeals About Climate Change in a Sample of Americans

Researchers studying the influence of strategic science messages have overlooked the fact that people are selective in the content they consume. In this experiment, participants were “forced” to view one of three climate appeals (threat, humor, informational), reflecting the typical between-subjects experiment, or they were permitted to choose between one of these appeals (or topical alternatives), reflecting real-world media choice. Compared with forced exposure, choice exposure resulted in slightly less reactance and slightly greater enjoyment, appreciation, and persuasion outcomes—even after accounting for self-selection biases. These findings underscore the value of treating research participants as selective consumers of science content.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Science Communication
Published
2025-02-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10755470251316777
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Climate Change Communication and Perception
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.20
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How Forced Versus Selective Exposure Matters for the Influence of Emotional Appeals About Climate Change in a Sample of Americans

Helen H. Joo, Jeff Niederdeppe, Rainer Romero‐Canyas, Chris Skurka
1 citations
Science Communication
Climate Change Communication and Perception
4.20
article

How Forced Versus Selective Exposure Matters for the Influence of Emotional Appeals About Climate Change in a Sample of Americans

Helen H. Joo, Jeff Niederdeppe, Rainer Romero‐Canyas, Chris Skurka
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Researchers studying the influence of strategic science messages have overlooked the fact that people are selective in the content they consume. In this experiment, participants were “forced” to view one of three climate appeals (threat, humor, informational), reflecting the typical between-subjects experiment, or they were permitted to choose between one of these appeals (or topical alternatives), reflecting real-world media choice. Compared with forced exposure, choice exposure resulted in slightly less reactance and slightly greater enjoyment, appreciation, and persuasion outcomes—even after accounting for self-selection biases. These findings underscore the value of treating research participants as selective consumers of science content.

Science CommunicationVol. 48(1)
Environmental Defense Fund (US), Pennsylvania State University (US), Cornell University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Climate Change Communication and Perception
4.20
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.

How Forced Versus Selective Exposure Matters for the Influence of Emotional Appeals About Climate Change in a Sample of Americans — Helen H. Joo, Jeff Niederdeppe, et al. · Science Communication (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS