ArticleClimatic change2021
Controversy around climate change reports: a case study of Twitter responses to the 2019 IPCC report on land.
Article in Climatic change, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multifaceted polarization and information reliability in climate change discussions on social media platforms.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Relative engagement with sources of climate misinformation is growing across social media platforms.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Ruminant livestock and climate change: critical discourse moments in mainstream and farming sector news media.Agriculture and human values · 2025Article
- Citizens and conspiratorial anti-science beliefs: Opposition versus support in 38 countries across Europe.Public understanding of science (Bristol, England) · 2024Article
- Misinformation About Climate Change and Related Environmental Events on Social Media: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- The 2024 Europe report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: unprecedented warming demands unprecedented action.The Lancet. Public health · 2024Review
- 'They Talk about the Weather, but No One Does Anything about It': A Mixed-Methods Study of Everyday Climate Change Conversations.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Social media analysis reveals environmental injustices in Philadelphia urban parks.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- When you wish upon a (GWP) star: Environmental governance and the reflexive performativity of global warming metrics.Social studies of science · 2023Article
- What do Consumers Read About Meat? An Analysis of Media Representations of the Meat-environment Relationship Found in Popular Online News Sites in the UK.Environmental communication · 2023Article
- Veganuary and the vegan sausage (t)rolls: conflict and commercial engagement in online climate-diet discourse.Humanities & social sciences communications · 2022Article
- Emotional framing in online environmental activism: Pairing a Twitter study with an offline experiment.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Exploring climate change on Twitter using seven aspects: Stance, sentiment, aggressiveness, temperature, gender, topics, and disasters.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In August 2019, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) published its Special Report on Climate Change and Land (SRCCL), which generated extensive societal debate and interest in mainstream and social media. Using computational and conceptual text analysis, we examined more than 6,000 English-language posts on Twitter to establish the relative presence of different topics. Then, we assessed their levels of toxicity and sentiment polarity as an indication of contention and controversy. We find first that meat consumption and dietary options became one of the most discussed issues on Twitter in response to the IPCC report, even though it was a relatively minor element of the report; second, this new issue of controversy (meat and diet) had similar, high levels of toxicity to strongly contentious issues in previous IPCC reports (skepticism about climate science and the credibility of the IPCC). We suggest that this is in part a reflection of increasingly polarized narratives about meat and diet found in other areas of public discussion and of a movement away from criticism of climate science towards criticism of climate solutions. Finally, we discuss the possible implications of these findings for the work of the IPCC in anticipating responses to its reports and responding to them effectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10584-021-03182-1.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.