ArticleNature communications2024
The differential impact of climate interventions along the political divide in 60 countries.
Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sampling and processing of climate change information and disinformation across three diverse countries.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2026Article
- Blueprint of a smokescreen: Introducing the validated climate disinformation corpus for behavioural research on combating climate disinformation.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2026Article
- Ideological and political education behavior recognition by artificial intelligence transformers.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Affective Climate and Political Polarization: Identity, Ideology, and Support for Climate Policy.Canadian review of sociology = Revue canadienne de sociologie · 2026Article
- Negative partisanship, positive partisanship, and variation in climate policy attitudes on the political right.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- A megastudy of behavioral interventions to catalyze public, political, and financial climate advocacy.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Ideological polarization on anthropogenic climate change is stronger among politicians than among citizens across eight countries.Communications sustainability · 2026Article
- Fear motivates and dread stalls: the role of emotions in climate support.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Tracking business opportunities for climate solutions using AI in regulated accounting reports.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Virtual reality reduces climate indifference by making distant locations feel psychologically close.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Optimistic bias in updating beliefs about climate change longitudinally predicts low pro-environmental behaviour.The British journal of social psychology · 2025Article
- Gender and ideological orientation moderate the influence of climate misinformation on pro-environmental behavioural intentions.The British journal of social psychology · 2025Article
- Climate action literacy interventions increase commitments to more effective mitigation behaviors.PNAS nexus · 2025Article
- A thematic analysis of what Australians state would change their minds on climate change.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Out of the labs and into the streets: Effects of climate protests by environmental scientists.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Can science-based interventions tamp down polarization?Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Machine learning identifies key individual and nation-level factors predicting climate-relevant beliefs and behaviors.npj climate action · 2025Article
- Responsibility to future generations: A strategy for combatting climate change across political divides.The British journal of social psychology · 2025Article
- Learning from and about scientists: Consensus messaging shapes perceptions of climate change and climate scientists.PNAS nexus · 2024Article
- The International Climate Psychology Collaboration: Climate change-related data collected from 63 countries.Scientific data · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A major barrier to climate change mitigation is the political polarization of climate change beliefs. In a global experiment conducted in 60 countries (N = 51,224), we assess the differential impact of eleven climate interventions across the ideological divide. At baseline, we find political polarization of climate change beliefs and policy support globally, with people who reported being liberal believing and supporting climate policy more than those who reported being conservative (Cohen's d = 0.35 and 0.27, respectively). However, we find no evidence for a statistically significant difference between these groups in their engagement in a behavioral tree planting task. This conceptual-behavioral polarization incongruence results from self-identified conservatives acting despite not believing, rather than self-identified liberals not acting on their beliefs. We also find three interventions (emphasizing effective collective actions, writing a letter to a future generation member, and writing a letter from the future self) boost climate beliefs and policy support across the ideological spectrum, and one intervention (emphasizing scientific consensus) stimulates the climate action of people identifying as liberal. None of the interventions tested show evidence for a statistically significant boost in climate action for self-identified conservatives. We discuss implications for practitioners deploying targeted climate interventions.
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.