Self-assessed understanding of climate change
Survey researchers often treat self-assessed understanding of climate change as a rough proxy for knowledge, which might affect what people believe about this topic. Self-assessments can be unrealistically high, however, and correlated with politics, so they deserve study in their own right. Turning the usual perspective around to view self-assessed understanding as dependent variable, problematically related to actual knowledge, casts self-assessments in a new light. Analysis of a 2016 US survey that carried a five-item test of very basic, belief-neutral but climate-relevant knowledge (such as knowing about the location of North and South Poles) finds that, at any given level of knowledge, people saying they “understand a great deal” about climate change are more likely to be older, college-educated, and male. Self-assessed understanding exhibits a U-shaped political pattern: highest among liberals and the most conservative, but lowest among moderate conservatives. Among liberal and middle-of-the-road respondents, self-assessed understanding of climate change is positively related to knowledge. Among the most conservative, however, understanding is unrelated or even negatively related to knowledge. For that group in particular, high self-assessed understanding reflects confidence in political views, rather than knowledge about the physical world.
Additional climate questions on the Granite State Poll have been supported by the Carsey School of Public Policy and the Sustainability Institute at the University of New Hampshire. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations in this paper are those of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views of the National Science Foundation or other supporting organizations.
The POLES survey and polar questions on the Granite State Poll were supported through the PoLAR Partnership grant from the National Science Foundation (DUE-1239783).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- AAPOR (2016). Standard definitions: Final disposition of case codes and outcome rates for surveys (2016 revision). T. W. Smith, Ed., American Association for Public Opinion ResearchGoogle Scholar
- Bronen R (2009) Forced migration of Alaskan indigenous communities due to climate change: creating a human rights response, pp. 68–73 in Oliver-Smith A, Shen X (eds.) Linking Environmental Change, Migration and Social Vulnerability. Bonn: UNU Institute for Environment and Human SecurityGoogle Scholar
- Cook J, Oreskes N, Doran PT, Anderegg WRL, Verheggen B, Maibach EW, Carlton JS, Lewandowsky S, Skuce AG, Green SA, Nuccitelli D, Jacobs P, Richardson M, Winkler B, Painting R, Rice K (2016) Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming. Environ Res Lett 11(4). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Guess A, Nyhan B, Reifler J (2018) Selective exposure to misinformation: evidence from the consumption of fake news during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign. Working paper available at: https://t.co/lUN71y3DhT
- Hamilton LC (2015b) Conservative and liberal views of science: does trust depend on topic? Durham, NH: Carsey School of Public Policy. http://scholars.unh.edu/carsey/252/
- Hamilton LC (2016b) Where is the North Pole? An election-year survey on global change. Durham, NH: Carsey School of Public Policy. http://scholars.unh.edu/carsey/285/
- Hamilton LC (2017) Public acceptance of human-caused climate change is gradually rising. Durham, NH: Carsey School of Public Policy. http://scholars.unh.edu/carsey/322/
- Leiserowitz A, Smith N, Marlon JR (2010) Americans’ Knowledge of Climate Change. (New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication). Available online at http://environment.yale.edu/climate/files/ClimateChangeKnowledge2010.pdf
- Leiserowitz A, Maibach E, Roser-Renouf C, Hmielowski JD (2011) Politics & global warming: Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and the Tea Party. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication. Available online at http://environment.yale.edu/climate/files/PoliticsGlobalWarming2011.pdf accessed 12/5/2014
- Marino E (2015) Fierce climate, sacred ground. University of Alaska Press, FairbanksGoogle Scholar
- National Science Board (2010) Science and engineering indicators 2010 (Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation). Available online at http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind10/pdf/seind10.pdf
- Saad L (2017) Global warming concern at three-decade high in U.S. Gallup News. http://news.gallup.com/poll/206030/global-warming-concern-three-decade-high.aspx
- Suldovsky B (2017) The information deficit model and climate change communication. Climate Change Communication. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.301 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- USACE (2009) Alaska Baseline Erosion Assessment: Study Findings and Technical Report. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. http://www.poa.usace.army.mil/Portals/34/docs/civilworks/BEA/ AlaskaBaselineErosionAssessmentBEAMainReport.pdf
- Washburn AN, Skitka LJ (2017) Science denial across the political divide: liberals and conservatives are similarly motivated to deny attitude-inconsistent science. Soc Psychol Personal Sci. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617731500