The Gateway (mis)Belief Model: How Misinformation Impacts Perceptions of Scientific Consensus and Attitudes Towards Climate Change

Climate change is one of the greatest threats to humanity, necessitating immediate action to combat its consequences. While there is a nearly unanimous scientific consensus that climate change is human-caused, misinformation doubting its causes continues to circulate widely. In this study, we test a Gateway (mis)Belief Model (GmBM) which assumes that misinformation affects perceived scientific consensus negatively which then cascades down to lower support for public action to mitigate climate change via changes in key beliefs about climate change. We present a reanalysis of data from two online studies in which U.S. participants (N1 = 207, N2 = 755) were exposed to misinformation using a pre-post mixed design manipulating assessments of the scientific consensus on climate change. Results showed that misinformation indeed leads to lower estimations of scientific consensus, which cascade down to lower support for public action via corresponding beliefs. However, the pattern of significance of direct effects did not exactly replicate those in the original GBM, though misinformation still had negative direct (Experiments 1-2) and indirect effects (Experiment 2) on several downstream climate outcomes. These findings are further affirmed by an internal meta-analysis. Overall, this study highlights the negative impact of misinformation on climate attitudes and policy support.

Publication Details

Journal
Apollo (University of Cambridge)
Published
2025-08-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17863/cam.120930
Primary Topic
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Gateway (mis)Belief Model: How Misinformation Impacts Perceptions of Scientific Consensus and Attitudes Towards Climate Change

Apollo (University of Cambridge)
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
article

The Gateway (mis)Belief Model: How Misinformation Impacts Perceptions of Scientific Consensus and Attitudes Towards Climate Change

article en

Abstract

Climate change is one of the greatest threats to humanity, necessitating immediate action to combat its consequences. While there is a nearly unanimous scientific consensus that climate change is human-caused, misinformation doubting its causes continues to circulate widely. In this study, we test a Gateway (mis)Belief Model (GmBM) which assumes that misinformation affects perceived scientific consensus negatively which then cascades down to lower support for public action to mitigate climate change via changes in key beliefs about climate change. We present a reanalysis of data from two online studies in which U.S. participants (N1 = 207, N2 = 755) were exposed to misinformation using a pre-post mixed design manipulating assessments of the scientific consensus on climate change. Results showed that misinformation indeed leads to lower estimations of scientific consensus, which cascade down to lower support for public action via corresponding beliefs. However, the pattern of significance of direct effects did not exactly replicate those in the original GBM, though misinformation still had negative direct (Experiments 1-2) and indirect effects (Experiment 2) on several downstream climate outcomes. These findings are further affirmed by an internal meta-analysis. Overall, this study highlights the negative impact of misinformation on climate attitudes and policy support.

Apollo (University of Cambridge)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 62%
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
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.