If We Seek, Do We Learn? : Predicting Knowledge of Global Warming

We articulate a model that focuses on characteristics of individuals that might predispose them to seek and process information about health in different ways. Specifically, the model proposes that seven factors-(1) individual characteristics, (2) perceived hazard characteristics, (3) affective response to the risk, (4) felt social pressures to possess relevant information, (5) information sufficiency, (6) one's personal capacity to learn, (7) beliefs about the usefulness of information in various channels-will influence the extent to which a person will seek out this risk information in both routine and nonroutine channels and the extent to which he or she will spend time and effort analyzing the risk information critically. By adapting and synthesizing aspects of Eagly and Chaiken's Heuristic-Systematic Model and Ajzen's Theory of Planned Behavior, we also expect that people who engage in more effortful information seeking and processing are more likely to develop risk-related cognitions, attitudes, and behaviors that are more stable (i.e., less changeable or volatile) over time. Since most forms of health information campaigns attempt to get people to adopt habitual or lifestyle changes, factors leading to the stability or volatility of those behavioral changes are essential concerns. Copyright 1999 Academic Press.

Public risk perceptions can fundamentally compel or constrain political, economic, and social action to address particular risks. Public support or opposition to climate policies (e.g., treaties, regulations, taxes, subsidies) will be greatly influenced by public perceptions of the risks and dangers posed by global climate change. This article describes results from a national study (2003) that examined the risk perceptions and connotative meanings of global warming in the American mind and found that Americans perceived climate change as a moderate risk that will predominantly impact geographically and temporally distant people and places. This research also identified several distinct interpretive communities, including naysayers and alarmists, with widely divergent perceptions of climate change risks. Thus, "dangerous" climate change is a concept contested not only among scientists and policymakers, but among the American public as well.