Research Paper on the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication
Abstract
Americans hold various opinions on a plethora of topics, including climate change. Although there is a scientific consensus that global warming is happening because of anthropogenic causes, many do not believe in the changes to the climate. This paper explores the diverse attitudes, values, and understandings that support and contribute to people's opinions on climate change. Using survey questions from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication and an administered open-ended survey, data is collected and analyzed to research further what factors contribute to individuals' opinions. As a result of this research, survey administration, and interview questions, it was discovered by the interviewee of choice that exposure to climate change in the community or educational settings can impact the beliefs held regarding climate change.
Keywords: Six Americas, climate change, global warming, survey
Experiential Perspective Interview for Climate Change (EPICC)
The Experiential Perspective Interview for Climate Change (EPICC) project explored the diverse attitudes, values, and understandings regarding climate change across the United States through an interview and data analysis. Using questions developed by the Yale Climate Change Maps and the Global Warming’s Six Americas report, I built a base knowledge of the diverse range of American positions regarding climate change. Using the information I collected, the analysis of the interview with Mia Peru, and further research, I made connections between the data to determine what current research says about factors contributing to an individual’s opinions on climate change.
Literature Review
Climate Change and Varying Attitudes Across the United States
The United States is populated by an array of diverse people with an infinite mixture of demographic backgrounds that shape the opinions formed by all of its citizens. The differences in opinion range on a spectrum depending on the topic. However, in some instances, differences in opinion that shape beliefs do not seem to be justified. Climate change is, and has been, a “hot topic” over the decades that has divided Americans. It is said in Global Warming’s Six Americas (Maibach et al., 2009, p.2) that the United States produces about 25 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions while only being home to five percent of the world's population. Scientist’s research in the past decades has grown to include a plethora of arenas where climate change is leaving lasting impacts, further supporting the narrative that our climate is changing due to anthropogenic reasons. Still, many fail to acknowledge that what we are all experiencing, especially the more-than-human, is unnatural and largely a result of the human legacy of polluting and exploiting to the extent that we alter the planet's natural order.
The differences commonly seen across people of the United States reside in their beliefs on global warming and climate change, expected outcomes from national action to reduce global warming, policy and national response preferences, personal actions and intentions, demographics, social characteristics and values, and media use for information seeking. With the information gathered, I listed the common groupings of the United States' attitudes toward climate change and explained their core beliefs.
Varying Attitudes Grouped
The Yale Program on Climate Change Communication (YPCCC) has identified six groups differentiating the core beliefs held regarding climate change within the Global Warming’s Six Americas (Maibach et al., 2009) report. The groups range from people who are very concerned about climate change to people who do not give much thought to climate change. The names for the groups identified are Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, and Dismissive. I further explored the groups and their ideologies toward climate change below.
The YPCCC identified the group with the most attention and concern about climate change, which is the Alarmed. Based on the Global Warming’s Six Americas, Fall 2023 (Leiserowitz et al., 2023) report, 28% of the 1,033 U.S. adults surveyed fall into this grouping. Members of Alarmed hold a high level of knowledge about climate change and believe there is a scientific consensus that global warming is happening mainly because of anthropogenic causes. The Alarmed see this issue as highly important, are more likely to view these changes as a current threat to people in the U.S., and are most likely taking measures to encourage mass support.
Up one percent of the respondents from Alarmed are the Concerned group, with 29% (Leiserowitz et al., 2023) of survey participants feeling that the scientific consensus on global warming is occurring primarily because of human activities. Those Concerned are not as sure about climate change and, therefore, find the issue less critical, but they are still likely to be informed on the issues, cases, and solutions. The Concerned do not see the threat to themselves or future generations but believe that changes can begin harming people of the U.S. in the next ten years.
The shift from those in Concerned to Cautious is relatively significant. At 15% (Leiserowitz et al., 2023), the Cautious is the group where there is a contextual difference in the beliefs held by people. Although there is a belief that climate change is occurring, the belief is weak; many in this group “could change their minds” (Maibach et al., 2009, p.5). Characteristics of this group are that they are less informed and worried about climate change, less believe in the scientific consensus that the leading causes are anthropogenic, and do not view climate change as a threat to people in the U.S. until about 35 years.
The smallest group, or the Disengaged, consists of 6% (Leiserowitz et al., 2023) of the population surveyed and “are the group most likely to say they could easily change their minds” (Maibach et al., 2009, p.6) on their stance regarding climate change occurring. It is common in this group to have ill-informed individuals on this issue. Therefore, they do not know if they should agree with what scientists are stating. Additionally, Disengaged members are unsure of threats to themselves or future generations and guess that harm would not be seen for 30 years.
The Doubtful and Dismissive comprise 11% (Leiserowitz et al., 2023) of the population surveyed in the YPCCC Fall 2023 report. The Doubtful and Dismissive do not find the issue meaningful. However, the Doubtful are uncertain if global warming is happening, while the Dismissive “are sure” (Maibach et al., 2009, p.6) that no changes are occurring. Interestingly, Doubtful and Dismissive members agree with the disagreement among scientists, believe that the causes are naturally occurring, and are unlikely to change their opinions on climate change. The differences are that people who identify as Doubtful are slightly informed on the topic and believe threats will occur slightly or not at all, and if harm occurs, it will be at least 100 years from now; meanwhile, those who identify as Dismissive believe they are well informed on the topic, and believe that no changes will ever harm people in the U.S.
Although there is a mighty divide among people, there are opportunities to unite. Although different, the Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, and Disengaged hold similar enough positive views about the possibility of humans reducing global warming, even with a slight sense of doubt. On the other hand, the Doubtful and Dismissive think that climate change is not occurring, and if it is, they believe humans cannot reduce its effects.
Factors Leading People to Shift Their Opinion on Climate Change
Opinions differ among individuals regardless of the topic in discussion. It is a phenomenon that knows no boundaries and is witnessed in discussions about climate change. Political party choice is often an area where a great divide occurs, especially regarding climate change. In What Causes People to Change Their Opinion About Climate Change (2017), it is said that “political parties in the United States are sharply divided on climate change and its anthropogenic causes. Democratic party views climate change as an urgent problem, the Republican party tends to deny or downplay its significance” (Feng et al., 2017, p.5). While not a new concept, it is valuable to understand that opinions may often be driven to fit into the majority opinion. Critically evaluating responses to climate-related questions and understanding an individual’s background can help deepen the understanding of what motivates opinion.
Various media forms and influential individuals have played critical roles throughout history in sharing information and helping the population form opinions. Internet media forms are becoming widely used as quick and mainstream options for sharing opinions and details. It is expected that media such as blogs, articles, Facebook, TikTok, X, Instagram, etc., will be used to publish information to sway the population's opinions. For instance, in Science by Social Media: Attitudes Towards Climate Change are Mediated by Perceived Social Consensus (2019), it is said that “if a participant receives information about the predominant attitudes among his or her peers, then the person’s own attitude tends to shift in the direction of the purported consensus” (Lewandowsky, 2019, p.2). Larger media channels or posts will naturally have higher views, which may lead new users to access shared information. Within the article How Climate Change Science Is Reflected in People’s Minds. In a Cross-Country Study on People’s Perceptions of Climate Change, Petrescu-Mag, et al. (2022) state that "the public draws most of its knowledge about climate science from the media, considered a primary source of information” (p.2). The trust that people have in the media has immense power to shape opinions in any direction, so as it pertains to climate change, understanding where others gather information is important to consider.
Opinions may also be altered depending on the lived experiences of individuals. People who live in an area unaffected by climate change are likely to dismiss claims regarding climate change and its effects on local populations; however, when people are amid injustice as an effect of climate change, they are likely to alter to opinions agreeing with climate change occurring. In Chapter 1: A Crisis of Being, The Identity of “They” of Climate — A New Story, Eisenstein (2022) wrote “he became an environmentalist in the same way that I did, and, I am willing to guess, the same way you did. He became an environmentalist through experiences of beauty and loss” (para.7). Although the term used is “environmentalist,” this could be understood across different contexts, even about climate change. Einstein's quote is further supported in Changing Minds about Global Warming: Vicarious Experience Predicts Self-reported Opinion Change in the USA (2022). It is said by Ballew et al. (2022) that “self-reported perceived personal experience with global warming correlates with greater acceptance that global warming is happening” (p.3) and that “the beliefs and actions of other people can have a powerful influence on people’s own beliefs and actions and can be especially influential when people are uncertain about what to believe and how to act” (p.4). In a tangible world it is understandable that the idea of climate change may be absurd and “unreal” to those who have never seen any effects of it. It could be predicted that opinions regarding climate change will continue to change in individuals as more people experience effects that they can feel or see themselves.
Research Design
To explore current research and factors contributing to an individual’s opinions on climate change, this research utilized a qualitative approach. Qualitative data was collected by administering open-ended questions that supplemented the YPCCC survey questions. Both data sets, in conjunction with one another, balance the story to be told through the data collection. Without the qualitative aspect to provide insight into the numbers, the entire story cannot be detailed, proving a narrow or limited view of the findings that do not provide a personal connection. Using the methods provided, the interviewee could accurately be placed into a group to determine where they may fit in their attitudes, values, and understandings regarding climate change.
The Participant
A change in life events for the original participant, Jimmy Hargis, has left them unable to conduct the interview. Another candidate, Mia Peru, was selected for the interview to explore factors contributing to an individual’s opinions on climate change. Mia Peru signed the Informed Consent Form and allowed herself to be recorded during the interview so that the researcher could listen back to her answers and provide accurate information.
The interview participant, Mia Peru, is a 22-year-old college graduate. She has lived in Fullerton, Orange County, California, located in Southern California, for 17 years, and over the last five years of her life has lived in Hayward, Alameda County, California, in Northern California. Mia has witnessed the stark changes in living conditions and how people and the environment operate in both locations. Mia was an active member of her community while living in Fullerton and is currently an active member of her community in Hayward. Due to her dedication to supporting herself, she does not always think about climate change or research the subject. However, she has a basic understanding of climate change through her studies during her undergraduate degree and through the community she is involved with in Hayward. She admitted that although she is not an active advocate, she practices consciousness in her impact on the planet through transportation because of the options available in her city and the neighboring cities. She has seen changes in the environment, understands some of the inequities challenging communities, and feels that climate change is impacting her and others across the United States, but she claims to feel unsure of what she could do to fight for change.
Mia was selected as a participant because she is open to the subject of climate change, willing to know more, and available to conduct the interview in the required timeframe for the research to be completed. Mia Peru's questioning and receptive personality were believed to allow for an engaging interview that could provide valuable insights into the minds of others in her location and across the United States on climate change and the factors that contribute to beliefs held.
Data Collection
The interview was completed over a video call on Microsoft Teams, recorded on Wednesday, February 21, 2024, and began at 6:00 PM. The interviewee signed an Informed Consent Form detailing the interview and procedure that would be followed before the interview. During the interview, the questions were shared on the screen so that the interviewee could follow along with the researcher and understand what was being asked of them. Other than the barrier in personal contact with the interviewee, no barriers will impact the researcher’s ability to collect data. The researcher is confident in the interviewee’s ability to provide accurate information that will not place them at risk of having inaccurate information.
Using the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication’s 30 survey questions (Marlon et al., 2024) and four open-ended questions selected by the researcher, data was gathered to understand better Mia's stance on climate change. Quantitative data was collected using the predetermined survey questions to determine where Mia resides regarding her beliefs, risk perceptions, policy support, and behaviors. When administered nationally, the survey responses were derived from public responses and broken into smaller response categories to represent States, Congressional Districts, Metro Areas, and Counties (Marlon et al., 2024).
Following the quantitative data, the researcher asked open-ended questions over a recorded Microsoft Teams video call to ensure accuracy in future notes the researcher may need to take. The data collected from the interviewee provided context behind certain aspects of the survey questions, which helped the researcher understand the interviewees' opinions. A transcription was collected through Microsoft Teams and edited to resemble a conversation by the researcher.
The interview lasted roughly 40 minutes, giving the interviewee and researcher adequate time to discuss all talking points. By beginning with the Yale survey questions, the interviewee had time to prepare for the content discussed in the interview's second half. Having recently discussed her opinions, the interviewee appeared confident in her answers to the open-ended questions and felt comfortable enough to ask for additional information as needed.
Results
Interview Questions
Based on the answers collected from the interviewee during the qualitative section of the interview, the researcher believed that the interview would fall into the Concerned group of the Global Warmings Six Americas (Leiserowitz et al., 2009). The interviewee appeared to believe in the scientific consensus on global warming, that humans play a significant role, and that they understand a few aspects of global warming. However, she is not highly informed on the topic and believes that people in the United States are experiencing complications because of global warming.
The researcher is used to referring to global issues about climate as “climate change,” but will use the term “global warming to be consistent with the Yale survey questions terminology. The questions used were inspired by the Yale survey questions to supplement the data collected. Below are the questions asked in the qualitative part of the interview, with the rationale for including each question.
Question 1 - Have you personally witnessed or experienced any impacts of climate change? If so, how has it affected you and your community?
Question one aims to expand on the interviewee's answer to the Belief section, allowing them to explain what has been witnessed, where it was witnessed, and how they perceive global warming to be affecting themselves and other community members, including the more-than-human.
Question 2 - Some argue that individual actions to combat climate change are insignificant compared to large-scale solutions. Do you agree? Why or why not?
Policy Support inspires the second question. The researcher is interested in learning more about what led the interviewer to answer how they did regarding the different levels of government and their need to address global warming.
Question 3 - What role do you think individuals, businesses, and the government should play in addressing climate change?
Question three is inspired by Policy Support, Sub-section Who Should Act. The researcher desired to understand beyond one- or two-word answers and receive context behind the experiences that led the interviewer to answer how they did.
Question 4 - Do you think the benefits of taking action on climate change outweigh the costs? Why or why not?
Question four expands on the Behaviors section of the survey and allows the reader to elaborate on their responses. The frequency with which the interviewee intakes or discusses information regarding climate change could be seen as more valuable than a personal statement that allows the reader to state how they feel about acting on global warming. The researcher also takes time to listen to any frustration from the interviewee regarding the lack of discussion and media concerning global warming.
Interpretation Guidelines
The Yale survey responses from Mia Peru are compared with the Yale results for Alameda County, where she resides, and the National answers. The purpose of comparing Mia’s results to the National and County results is to view where she stands compared to larger-than-herself results and to accurately place her into one of the Global Warming Six America’s categorizations. Reviewing the answers provided, Mia was placed into a category based on the information provided by Maibach et al. (2009) in Global Warming’s Six Americas.
The open-ended interview was transcribed by Microsoft Teams and further revised to match the natural flow of a conversation. Using the transcription, categories were chosen to separate notes from the interviewee's responses. The categories are Personal Beliefs, Personal Risk Perceptions, Personal Climate Policy Opinions, and Personal Behavior regarding Climate Advocacy. Examining the categories of the responses, it will be fascinating to evaluate how the inclusion of personal responses into the data collection process may influence and solidify Mia's position in Global Warming’s Six Americas categories.
Results
Yale Survey Results
Below, the answers to the survey questions are gathered and organized based on the answers provided and the categories in which they reside.
Beliefs. Mia answered with “yes” to the fact that global warming is happening and believes that global warming is caused “mostly by human activities.” She thinks there is “lots of disagreement” among scientists that global warming is happening and “strongly agrees that global warming affects the weather and her personally.
Risk Perceptions. Mia is “somewhat worried” about global warming and says plants and animals, future generations, and people in developing countries are armed by global warming “a great deal.” It is harmful to people in the US and to herself. She rated it at “a moderate amount” and says global warming is harming people in the US “now.”
Policy Support. Mia chose “strongly support” for funding research, regulating CO2, and providing tax rebates and carbon taxes. Meanwhile, she “ strongly opposes” drilling for oil and offshore drilling expansion. She also selected “strongly agree” with generating renewable energy on public land and that schools should teach kids about global warming. She believes “more” should be done to address global warming by corporations, Congress, local officials, and citizens while saying “much more” should be done by the president and governor. Mia also detailed that global warming is a higher priority for the next president and Congress, and developing clean energy should be a high priority.
Behaviors. Mia was honest and said that she only occasionally discusses global warming and sees content on social media about once a month.
Overall, the Yale Climate Survey results are believed to place Mia in the Concerned group of the Global Warmings Six Americas belief groups. She aligns with the core sets of beliefs held by that group. She believes global warming is occurring but does not know enough information to say whether it is a significant issue affecting most people. She is slightly informed and believes scientists have a consensus, but there is still debate. There is the belief that many life forms, including herself, are currently being affected in the US, but does not know if more harm will occur sooner or later or if we will promptly lessen the impacts of global warming. She states that groups of all levels should at least be doing more to address global warming and was transparent about the lack of media on global warming across her social media.
Interview Results
The transcript of the open-ended interview section was viewed and coded for the project. The codes used were Personal Beliefs, Personal Risk Perceptions, Personal Climate Policy Opinions, and Personal Behavior regarding Climate Advocacy. The purpose of the selected groups is to align with the categories within the Survey and determine how they may align with a category of Global Warming’s Six Americas. Responses were separated into codes with the potential for overlap in multiple codes. Using the codes to organize data, the researcher found relevant data that could inform the analysis and its relevance when discussing climate change and what factors influence opinion. The interview results with Mia Peru helped inform the data collected from the quantitative survey questions, allowing the researcher to understand what motivates Mia to hold her opinions regarding climate change.
Analysis
Participant Characterization
Mia’s answers to all of the questions within the Beliefs section of the Yale survey aligned with the majority response from Alameda County and the United States, except for the question, “Most scientists think global warming is happening” (Table 1). When considering the other questions, it is thought that Mia may be in the Alarmed or Concerned group. However, when factoring in the one question where she is in the minority group, she may be grouped with the Cautious because she is convinced global warming is happening but believes there is much disagreement among scientists over global warming (Maibach et al., 2009). Allowing her to continue through the survey allowed for the interpretation that because of the minimal discussion and media coverage in her social media feed, she did not have adequate information to make an informed answer.
Table 1: Global warming beliefs based on Yale Climate Opinion Maps 2023 survey results
For the Survey section Risk Perceptions, Mia aligned with the majority vote for people in her county and nationally (Table 2). She has a relatively high perception of risk regarding global warming and its impacts on various factors. She explained further in the interview that the U.S. is no different. Species are harmed across the states, and people are getting sicker faster and easier, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic (Table 5). The results from this action lean toward that of a member of the Concerned group because Mia sees that harm is being done, has a base knowledge of the issues, and has an idea of solutions that can help inform members of her community about the issue.
Table 2: Global warming beliefs based on Yale Climate Opinion Maps 2023 survey results
The rating for Mia's responses to Risk Perceptions (Table 3) would place her in the Alarmed or Concerned groups of Global Warming’s Six Americas. She is strongly in support of carbon-reducing policies and believes that “more” and “much more” should be done by government, industry, and citizens to address global warming (Maibach et al., 2009). Compared to her County, she has the majority for all the answers. However, when looking at the national scores, she is in the majority in all except for the question regarding the expansion of offshore drilling. She added during the interview that although individual action is great and changes can happen, larger-scale changes must be made. The issue she identified is that those may be difficult to implement because more people need to support the change to be successful (Table 5).
Table 3: Global warming beliefs based on Yale Climate Opinion Maps 2023 survey results
The Behaviors section of the survey has two questions, and Mia was in the majority for both questions (Table 4). Mia had selected that she discussed global warming with friends and family occasionally, and that, in her eyes, was about once a month when she provided context after answering that question. She aligned with her County once again on these two questions, but compared to the national scores, she is in the minority regarding the discussion of climate change. Looking at her answers, she may be grouped with the Concerned due to the lack of frequent discussion and exposure to topics related to global warming.
Table 4: Global warming beliefs based on Yale Climate Opinion Maps 2023 survey results
Table 5: Open-ended survey responses.
Participant Connection
Considering the prior relationship established between the researcher and the interviewee, a natural connection allowed for comfort and honesty in a conversation often viewed as polarizing and sensitive to touch. At the start of the interview, Mis explained her living situation and how it is unique compared to most cities nationwide. She explained that living fairly close to San Francisco, she is lucky to have access to a significant amount of public transportation and views many more people “living” within the city compared to Orange County. People appreciate the outdoors differently and enjoy using public transportation, especially when they may need to catch up on school or work or are tired and want to rest on the way to their next destination. She does not see that in her home city, Fullerton, California. She explained that although Orange County is highly populated and many people are outdoors, they are all in their cars, not interacting, and not utilizing public transportation in the same way because of the lack of options.
Considering the interviewee's experience, living her adult life in Hayward, part of Alameda County, California, it is understandable why she answered the way she did. Although she did not explicitly state that the environment and people helped shape her worldview on this topic, I could read through the lines and understand that. Alameda County had higher percentages of people agreeing with global warming and opposed things that would negatively impact global warming compared to the national percentages. With that in mind, it is reasonable to think that her presence in a community that holds higher priority on addressing global warming could alter her opinion, even if there is minimal discussion at home or with friends.
An aspect that Mia had discussed that supports this is her education. She attended California State University, East Bay, earning her bachelor’s degree in Kinesiology. Although it is not in a field of sustainability, she explained her experience on campus and how it was common to have courses incorporate a small amount of discussion related to global warming effects on the planet and people, in addition to the occasional flyer around campus or email related to events where the climate would be discussed with students.
Combining all results from the survey, interview, and additional dialogue, it is reasonable to place Mia in the Concerned group of Global Warming’s Six Americas. She has a basic understanding of global warming, wants to learn more, and believes people and other lives are being harmed. Some of her responses allow for the toggle between Concerned and Cautious. However, considering she could only be educated more on the topic rather than less, it is thought that she could become a particular member of the Concerned group and eventually become Alarmed if she desires to do so.
Conclusion
Discussions regarding climate change are valuable in educating people on the topic and aiding them to form accurate opinions. Everybody can be placed in a different category based on their knowledge and opinions. However, a full image of an argument is not seen without considering the qualitative aspects of a discussion or quantitative aspects. The interview with Mia Peru was valuable in informing the research that was done to determine what factors contribute to the formation of opinions among people. Many factors, such as political party choice, social media, and personal experiences with change, are common factors associated with opinion formation on global warming and climate change. However, a factor discovered during the interview research process is that geographic location can be a significant factor. Although it can be connected to experiences with climate change, it will remain separate because an individual who lives in a climate-conscious county can have just as much influence on their opinions from the way of life and the values held by others as experiences with climate change could.
References
Ballew, M., Marlon, J., Goldberg, M., Maibach, E., Rosenthal, S., Aiken, E., & Leiserowitz, A. (2021, June 29). Changing minds about global warming: vicarious experience predicts self reported opinion change in the USA. Changing minds about global warming: Vicarious experience predicts self-reported opinion change in the USA. https://link.springer.com/epdf/10.1007/s10584-022-03397-w?sharing_token=IbaWYSEPEut3WCW3uRO5ffe4RwlQNchNByi7wbcMAY75yQTGRgAjCqFWO_nH-gOcspTSv8REOlksp0NNxOb1ffj57YY8bnN_SKXtSEtd2TRN0PN4ueRGTQh-SsiNoB_we9pkFV1tFWaY86vODtMPi24YZKzqiHqW5exTCNo5BeM=
Eisenstein, C. (2022, March 17). Bridge to a living world: Books. Books | Charles Eisenstein. https://charleseisenstein.org/books/climate-a-new-story/eng/bridge-to-a-living-world/
Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., Rosenthal, S., Kotcher, J., Goddard, E., Carman, J., Verner, M., Ballew, M., Marlon, J., Lee, S., Myers, T., Goldberg, M., Badullovich, N., & Thier, K. (2023, December 14). Global warming’s six Americas, fall 2023. Yale Program on Climate Change Communication. https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/global-warmings-six-americas-fall-2023/
Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Fay, N., & Gignac, G. E. (2019, August 1). Science by social media: Attitudes towards climate change are mediated by perceived social consensus - memory & cognition. SpringerLink. https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13421-019-00948-y
Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C., & Leiserowitz, A. (2009). Global warming’s six Americas 2009: An audience segmentation analysis. George Mason University, Center for Climate Change Communication.
Palm, R., Lewis, G. B., & Feng, B. (2017, March). What causes people to change their opinion about climate ... ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1022&context=geosciences_facpub
Petrescu-Mag, R. M., Burny, P., Banatean-Dunea, I., & Petrescu, D. C. (2022, April 2). How Climate Change Science Is Reflected in People’s Minds. A Cross-Country Study on People’s Perceptions of Climate Change. National Library of Medicine. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8998260/#:~:text=Recently%2C%20Lynas%20et%20al.%20[46]%20examined%203000,the%20peer%2Dreviewed%20papers%20pointed%20to%20this%20conclusion).
Petrescu-Mag, R. M., Petruscu, D. C., Ivan, A., & Tenter, A. (2023, March 13). An intergenerational reading of climate change-health concern nexus: a qualitative study of the Millennials’ and Gen Z participants’ perceptions. National Library of Medicine. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10010654/
