How climate change education scholarship frames the crisis: sentiment and certainty across disciplines and climate vulnerability contexts

Abstract Climate change education in universities is often presented as a key response to the climate crisis, yet less attention has been paid to how this field is communicated in scholarly texts and to the tonal and rhetorical patterns through which climate change education is framed. We analyse 777 English-language journal article abstracts on climate change and sustainability education in higher education, published between 2015 and 2024. Using DistilBERT polarity scores, TextBlob subjectivity scores, hedging and certainty markers, and a communication-style typology, we examine abstract-level rhetorical stance as a feature of scholarly communication about climate change education. We use these indicators to assess how rhetorical features vary across disciplines and national vulnerability tiers identified through a Composite Vulnerability Score based on the INFORM Risk Index and the WorldRiskIndex. Overall, abstracts are mildly positive and relatively cautious, suggesting a relatively stable rhetorical baseline. However, this pattern is uneven. Publications associated with more climate-vulnerable countries tend to adopt more factual, certain and problem-focused framings, whereas those from less vulnerable contexts more often combine positive sentiment with evaluative or prescriptive language about pedagogy and institutional change. We situate these patterns within an information landscape shaped by climate change mis- and disinformation, highlighting that abstract-level tone and rhetorical stance can influence how climate change education scholarship is interpreted, trusted and circulated across disciplines and vulnerability contexts.