Downloads & Free Reading Options - Results

Communicating for a Change Part 1 Mouth Off

Communicating for a Change Part 1 Mouth Off

Discusses public confusion about the science related to climate change and public apathy towards related issues. This confusion can be related to a combination of factors, including ineffective communication. (Contains 39 references.) (DDR)

Discusses public confusion about the science related to climate change and public apathy towards related issues. This confusion can be related to a combination of factors, including ineffective communication. (Contains 39 references.) (DDR)

Discusses public confusion about the science related to climate change and public apathy towards related issues. This confusion can be related to a combination of factors, including ineffective communication. (Contains 39 references.) (DDR)

Discusses public confusion about the science related to climate change and public apathy towards related issues. This confusion can be related to a combination of factors, including ineffective communication. (Contains 39 references.) (DDR)

In Communicating for a Change, Andy Stanley and Lane Jones offer a unique strategy for communicators seeking to deliver captivating and practical messages. In this highly creative presentation, the authors unpack seven concepts that will empower you to engage and impact your audience in a way that leaves them wanting more. www.insummarypodcast.com IG: @insummarypodcastSupport the show (https://www.patreon.com/insummarypodcast)

Despite the time-sensitivity associated with mitigating climate change, efforts at mitigation have been slow and largely unsuccessful. In order to understand resistance toward climate change messages, we will run a study following a 2x2 between-subjects design to compare the effect of persuasive messages that appeal to policy versus individual efforts to mitigate climate change using either high or low controlling language. We expect the content and the language of these messages to have an influence on participants perceived threat to freedom, counterarguing and their support for the recommended course of action. Results of this study will support the development of climate change communication messages that resonate and promote engagement with the topic among citizens.

In Communicating for a Change, Andy Stanley and Lane Jones offer a unique strategy for communicators seeking to deliver captivating and practical messages. In this highly creative presentation, the authors unpack seven concepts that will empower you to engage and impact your audience in a way that leaves them wanting more. www.insummarypodcast.com IG: @insummarypodcastSupport the show (https://www.patreon.com/insummarypodcast)

This study builds upon previous research and introduces a control condition to enhance our understanding of how individuals perceive climate change messaging within a tipping point framework.

Our main objective is to investigate how the inclusion of positive or negative elements in communication influences individuals' political participation and action intentions. Previous studies in the environmental context have shown that participants in the tipping point conditions show increased motivation to act as well as increased activated emotions. By extending our research to the political context, we aim to examine the use of tipping points in political campaigns and their effect on what is perceived to be the most widespread and accessible collective action available to people in democratic countries. The study seeks to gain insights on the unique impacts of communication strategies, especially the framing of information as tipping points, on people's perceptions and actions regarding polarized political issues.

Dr. Helmuth discusses how climate change is experienced by different species on very local level. Organisms such as mussels and fish in the same environment can be impacted by local ocean temperature and acidity very differently. Understanding these differences in this time of rapid climate changes can help us understand the variability of different species to adapt –or not. Dr. Helmuth also describes some of the innovative and international projects from his lab that engage young people in addressing the climate change challenge.

Communicating for a Change Part 2 A Matter of Life or Death

This study expands on our earlier research by incorporating additional measures of action intentions and action efficacy. The goal is to enhance our comprehension of how the perception of climate change tipping points influences individual behavior. Moreover, this study aims to contribute to our understanding of the impact of perceived efficacy on behavioral intentions in this particular context.

Social scientists are increasingly asked to engage in social and political outreach. That is, we are asked to communicate the results of our research to a wider public and to inform policy; after all tax money pays for that research. However, does such outreach work change public opinion and policy preferences? Research on motivated reasoning (Kunda, 1990) would suggest that the effect of outreach is rather limited especially for people with strong or crystallized attitudes. The reason for this are two cognitive processes (Taber & Lodge, 2006). According to the prior attitude effect, strong prior attitudes make us more likely to regard confirming evidence as compelling and convincing. Yet, if we are presented with evidence that runs counter our prior held beliefs, we spent extra effort to counterargue that evidence. Moreover, politically more sophisticated people are more likely to spend particularly strong effort to counter argue, because their sophistication equips them with a lot of knowledge to do so. In this study, we test these ideas by randomly exposing German respondents with native-born parents to one of overall three news articles. Two news articles report about recent social science research on ethnic discrimination and penalties on the German labor market. The third article serves as control condition and reports about new photos that astrophysicists shot of the planet Venus. We analyze the effect of the above experiment on support for anti-discrimination policies at the workplace. A second goal of our study is to study the cognitive process of motivated reasoning more carefully by also investigating how participants rate the credibility of the research findings and whether they support or critique of the role of science in society. In particular, we want to study if exposure to a news article on social science research leads them to support/question the credibility of that particular research and thereby to support or question the importance of science in society more generally. Importantly we will stratify the sample by respondents’ self-placement on the left-right scale, empathy, non-ethnicity related discrimination experiences in everyday life, and their political sophistication.

Social scientists are increasingly asked to engage in social and political outreach. That is, we are asked to communicate the results of our research to a wider public and to inform policy; after all tax money pays for that research. However, does such outreach work change public opinion and policy preferences? Research on motivated reasoning (Kunda, 1990) would suggest that the effect of outreach is rather limited especially for people with strong or crystallized attitudes. The reason for this are two cognitive processes (Taber & Lodge, 2006). According to the prior attitude effect, strong prior attitudes make us more likely to regard confirming evidence as compelling and convincing. Yet, if we are presented with evidence that runs counter our prior held beliefs, we spent extra effort to counterargue that evidence. Moreover, politically more sophisticated people are more likely to spend particularly strong effort to counter argue, because their sophistication equips them with a lot of knowledge to do so. In this study, we test these ideas by randomly exposing German respondents with native-born parents to one of overall three news articles. Two news articles report about recent social science research on ethnic discrimination and penalties on the German labor market. The third article serves as control condition and reports about new photos that astrophysicists shot of the planet Venus. We analyze the effect of the above experiment on support for anti-discrimination policies at the workplace. A second goal of our study is to study the cognitive process of motivated reasoning more carefully by also investigating how participants rate the credibility of the research findings and whether they support or critique of the role of science in society. In particular, we want to study if exposure to a news article on social science research leads them to support/question the credibility of that particular research and thereby to support or question the importance of science in society more generally. Importantly we will stratify the sample by respondents’ self-placement on the left-right scale, empathy, non-ethnicity related discrimination experiences in everyday life, and their political sophistication.

Social scientists are increasingly asked to engage in social and political outreach. That is, we are asked to communicate the results of our research to a wider public and to inform policy; after all tax money pays for that research. However, does such outreach work change public opinion and policy preferences? Research on motivated reasoning (Kunda, 1990) would suggest that the effect of outreach is rather limited especially for people with strong or crystallized attitudes. The reason for this are two cognitive processes (Taber & Lodge, 2006). According to the prior attitude effect, strong prior attitudes make us more likely to regard confirming evidence as compelling and convincing. Yet, if we are presented with evidence that runs counter our prior held beliefs, we spent extra effort to counterargue that evidence. Moreover, politically more sophisticated people are more likely to spend particularly strong effort to counter argue, because their sophistication equips them with a lot of knowledge to do so. In this study, we test these ideas by randomly exposing German respondents with native-born parents to one of overall three news articles. Two news articles report about recent social science research on ethnic discrimination and penalties on the German labor market. The third article serves as control condition and reports about new photos that astrophysicists shot of the planet Venus. We analyze the effect of the above experiment on support for anti-discrimination policies at the workplace. A second goal of our study is to study the cognitive process of motivated reasoning more carefully by also investigating how participants rate the credibility of the research findings and whether they support or critique of the role of science in society. In particular, we want to study if exposure to a news article on social science research leads them to support/question the credibility of that particular research and thereby to support or question the importance of science in society more generally. Importantly we will stratify the sample by respondents’ self-placement on the left-right scale, empathy, non-ethnicity related discrimination experiences in everyday life, and their political sophistication.

Social scientists are increasingly asked to engage in social and political outreach. That is, we are asked to communicate the results of our research to a wider public and to inform policy; after all tax money pays for that research. However, does such outreach work change public opinion and policy preferences? Research on motivated reasoning (Kunda, 1990) would suggest that the effect of outreach is rather limited especially for people with strong or crystallized attitudes. The reason for this are two cognitive processes (Taber & Lodge, 2006). According to the prior attitude effect, strong prior attitudes make us more likely to regard confirming evidence as compelling and convincing. Yet, if we are presented with evidence that runs counter our prior held beliefs, we spent extra effort to counterargue that evidence. Moreover, politically more sophisticated people are more likely to spend particularly strong effort to counter argue, because their sophistication equips them with a lot of knowledge to do so. In this study, we test these ideas by randomly exposing German respondents with native-born parents to one of overall three news articles. Two news articles report about recent social science research on ethnic discrimination and penalties on the German labor market. The third article serves as control condition and reports about new photos that astrophysicists shot of the planet Venus. We analyze the effect of the above experiment on support for anti-discrimination policies at the workplace. A second goal of our study is to study the cognitive process of motivated reasoning more carefully by also investigating how participants rate the credibility of the research findings and whether they support or critique of the role of science in society. In particular, we want to study if exposure to a news article on social science research leads them to support/question the credibility of that particular research and thereby to support or question the importance of science in society more generally. Importantly we will stratify the sample by respondents’ self-placement on the left-right scale, empathy, non-ethnicity related discrimination experiences in everyday life, and their political sophistication.

Social scientists are increasingly asked to engage in social and political outreach. That is, we are asked to communicate the results of our research to a wider public and to inform policy; after all tax money pays for that research. However, does such outreach work change public opinion and policy preferences? Research on motivated reasoning (Kunda, 1990) would suggest that the effect of outreach is rather limited especially for people with strong or crystallized attitudes. The reason for this are two cognitive processes (Taber & Lodge, 2006). According to the prior attitude effect, strong prior attitudes make us more likely to regard confirming evidence as compelling and convincing. Yet, if we are presented with evidence that runs counter our prior held beliefs, we spent extra effort to counterargue that evidence. Moreover, politically more sophisticated people are more likely to spend particularly strong effort to counter argue, because their sophistication equips them with a lot of knowledge to do so. In this study, we test these ideas by randomly exposing German respondents with native-born parents to one of overall three news articles. Two news articles report about recent social science research on ethnic discrimination and penalties on the German labor market. The third article serves as control condition and reports about new photos that astrophysicists shot of the planet Venus. We analyze the effect of the above experiment on support for anti-discrimination policies at the workplace. A second goal of our study is to study the cognitive process of motivated reasoning more carefully by also investigating how participants rate the credibility of the research findings and whether they support or critique of the role of science in society. In particular, we want to study if exposure to a news article on social science research leads them to support/question the credibility of that particular research and thereby to support or question the importance of science in society more generally. Importantly we will stratify the sample by respondents’ self-placement on the left-right scale, empathy, non-ethnicity related discrimination experiences in everyday life, and their political sophistication.

Environmental educators face a formidable challenge when they approach climate change due to the complexity of the science and of the political and cultural contexts in which people live. There is a clear consensus among climate scientists that climate change is already occurring as a result of human activities, but high levels of climate change awareness and growing levels of concern have not translated into meaningful action. Communicating Climate Change provides environmental educators with an understanding of how their audiences engage with climate change information as well as with concrete, empirically tested communication tools they can use to enhance their climate change program. Starting with the basics of climate science and climate change public opinion, Armstrong, Krasny, and Schuldt synthesize research from environmental psychology and climate change communication, weaving in examples of environmental education applications throughout this practical book. Each chapter covers a separate topic, from how environmental psychology explains the complex ways in which people interact with climate change information to communication strategies with a focus on framing, metaphors, and messengers. This broad set of topics will aid educators in formulating program language for their classrooms at all levels. Communicating Climate Change uses fictional vignettes of climate change education programs and true stories from climate change educators working in the field to illustrate the possibilities of applying research to practice. Armstrong et al, ably demonstrate that environmental education is an important player in fostering positive climate change dialogue and subsequent climate change action. Thanks to generous funding from Cornell University, the ebook editions of this book are available as Open Access from Cornell Open (cornellpress.cornell.edu/cornell-open) and other Open Access repositories.

Professional communicators are often called upon to announce changes at places of business and to implement them in a timely fashion. One approach that works (and minimizes confusion) is to plan carefully to achieve three key objectives: Understanding, Support, and Action (USA). To promote understanding, those who have decided on the change should be willing to share the information that needs to be communicated with those who are to communicate the change. To enlist support, people's concerns about how the change will affect them should be addressed. To motivate action, clear explanations of what is to be done and how the task is to be accomplished, along with reasons for the change, should be offered. To successfully communicate change, the implications for all concerned should be addressed. (NKA)