ArticleiScience2026
Consensus and dissent between climate activists and oil and gas employees in the United Kingdom.
Article in iScience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With global temperatures breaching 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, the energy system must undergo rapid, radical transformation to avoid irreversible ecosystem damage. This complex challenge is exacerbated by polarized views between activists advocating for a rapid end to fossil fuels and oil and gas (O&G) companies profiting from their continued use. This study examines these contrasting perspectives through ten semi-structured interviews with members of two prominent climate activist groups and employees of two international oil companies. This initial exploration identifies that activists and O&G employees agreed on the urgency of climate change, the need to reduce energy demand, the central role of government and policy, and the continued use of existing O&G projects. However, they disagreed on the scale and pace of change achievable, and the role of the O&G industry within the energy transition. The identified agreement areas suggest common ground between these groups, offering potential routes to reducing polarization.
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.