The climate battle in America

Abstract Metaphorical frames are commonly used in public discourse in the United States of America to communicate about climate change and promote climate action. Previous work found climate metaphors to resonate more so with Democrats than with Republicans. Democrats are also more likely to increase their support for climate action. The present study investigated if tailoring climate metaphors to conservatives’ affective domain and personality traits may trigger metaphor realisation. It experimentally tested, for the first time, if a war frame for climate change which better fits with conservatives’ worldview, can induce fear and anger, and if these emotions alongside personality trait aggressiveness predict increasing support for climate action in both liberal ( n = 63) and conservative ( n = 63) respondents. The findings showed that the war frame induced fear in both groups, especially among Republicans, but not anger, and that it directly impacted climate attitudes, primarily among Democrats. Trait aggressiveness predicted lower support for climate action at baseline but did not predict attitudinal changes. These novel findings show conservatives are not climate apathetic and encourage further research into how the fear triggered by climate metaphors can be channelled into attitudinal changes in climate inactive populations.