Divergence between predicted and actual perception of climate information.

Despite strong scientific consensus on the severe risks posed by climate change, a substantial segment of the population remains unconvinced, limiting progress on effective climate action. Persuading climate skeptics is essential for building broader support for stronger climate policies and accelerating efforts to mitigate climate change. However, outreach efforts often depend on perceptions of skeptics' openness to climate communication: when persuasion is seen as unlikely, communication efforts tend to diminish. In this paper, we investigate the predicted versus actual impact of climate change information on skeptics. Using a series of surveys with US respondents, we first gather predictions about the effectiveness of authentic news articles in changing skeptics' views. Our findings reveal a widespread pessimism: climate advocates expect no change in attitudes, while skeptics anticipate a backfire effect that reinforces their skepticism. Contrary to these predictions, our preregistered survey experiment finds that exposure to climate change articles significantly increases concern among skeptics. However, their responses vary in terms of willingness to adopt climate-friendly behaviors and support climate policies. These results reveal a significant disconnect between people's expectations and actual effects of climate communication on skeptics, emphasizing the need for sustained and strategic investments in climate communication to foster greater public engagement and support for climate action.