Public priorities and expectation of climate change impacts in the United Kingdom

Irrespective of the success of climate mitigation efforts, societies worldwide face the challenge of adapting to a changing climate. In this paper, we examine UK residents’ expectations of future threats and opportunities associated with climate change impacts, along with willingness to prioritise different climate change impacts for investment. Using a national survey (n = 2007), we report on three main findings. First, UK residents tend to expect threats related to flooding and wet weather to be more likely and concerning than heat extremes or opportunities. Second, UK residents’ expectations of climate change impacts do not align with expert assessments, especially showing lower estimates of heat-related threats as compared to experts. Third, willingness to allocate resources to potential climate change impacts tends to be more strongly associated with anticipated concern should they occur than climate change belief or the expected likelihood of them occurring. We discuss the implications of our findings for policies and communications about climate change adaptation in the UK and elsewhere

Visualizations of Projected Rainfall Change in the United Kingdom: An Interview Study about User Perceptions

Stakeholders from public, private, and third sectors need to adapt to a changing climate. Communications about climate may be challenging, especially for audiences with limited climate expertise. Here, we study how such audience members perceive visualizations about projected future rainfall. In semi-structured interviews, we presented 24 participants from climate-conscious organizations across the UK with three prototypical visualizations about projected future rainfall, adopted from the probabilistic United Kingdom Climate Projections: (1) Maps displaying a central estimate and confidence intervals, (2) a line graph and boxplots displaying change over time and associated confidence intervals, and (3) a probability density function for distributions of rainfall change. We analyzed participants’ responses using “Thematic Analysis”. In our analysis, we identified features that facilitated understanding—such as colors, simple captions, and comparisons between different emission scenarios—and barriers that hindered understanding, such as unfamiliar acronyms and terminology, confusing usage of probabilistic estimates, and expressions of relative change in percentages. We integrate these findings with the interdisciplinary risk communication literature and suggest content-related and editorial strategies for effectively designing visualizations about uncertain climate projections for audiences with limited climate expertise. These strategies will help organizations such as National Met Services to effectively communicate about a changing climate

Public perceptions of how to reduce carbon footprints of consumer food choices

Carbon footprints – the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with consumer food choices –substantially contribute to climate change. Life cycle analyses from climate and environmental sciences have identified effective rules for reducing these food-related carbon footprints, including eating seasonal produce and replacing dairy and red meat with plant-based products. In a national UK survey, we studied how many and which rules our participants generated for reducing GHG emissions of produce, dairy, and protein-rich products. We also asked participants to estimate GHG emission reductions associated with pre-selected rules, expressed in either grams or percentages. We found that participants generated few and relatively less effective rules, including ambiguous ones like 'Buy local'. Furthermore, participants' numerical estimates of pre-selected rules were less accurate when they assessed GHG emission reductions in grams rather than in percentages. Findings suggest a need for communicating fewer rules in percentages, for informing consumers about reducing food-related GHG emissions

Decision-Making Competence and Attempted Suicide

Objective: The propensity of people vulnerable to suicide to make poor life decisions is increasingly well documented. Do they display an extreme degree of decision biases? The present study used a behavioral decision approach to examine the susceptibility of low-lethality and high-lethality suicide attempters to common decision biases, which may ultimately obscure alternative solutions and deterrents to suicide in a crisis. Method: We assessed older and middle-aged individuals who made high-lethality (medically serious; N=31) and low-lethality suicide attempts (N=29). Comparison groups included suicide ideators (N=30), non-suicidal depressed (N=53), and psychiatrically healthy participants (N=28). Attempters, ideators, and non-suicidal depressed participants had unipolar non-psychotic major depression. Decision biases included sunk cost (inability to abort an action for which costs are irrecoverable), framing (responding to superficial features of how a problem is presented), under/overconfidence (appropriateness of confidence in knowledge), and inconsistent risk perception. Data were collected between June of 2010 and February of 2014. Results: Both high- and low-lethality attempters were more susceptible to framing effects, as compared to the other groups included in this study (p< 0.05, ηp2 =.06). In contrast, low-lethality attempters were more susceptible to sunk costs than both the comparison groups and high-lethality attempters (p< 0.01, ηp2 =.09). These group differences remained after accounting for age, global cognitive performance, and impulsive traits. Premorbid IQ partially explained group differences in framing effects. Conclusion: Suicide attempters’ failure to resist framing may reflect their inability to consider a decision from an objective standpoint in a crisis. Low-lethality attempters’ failure to resist sunk cost may reflect their tendency to confuse past and future costs of their behavior, lowering their threshold for acting on suicidal thoughts

Choosing to be happy? Age differences in 'maximizing' decision strategies and experienced emotional well-being

Maximizing is a decision strategy that seeks the very best option, which is more elaborate and potentially more regret-inducing than choosing an option that is ‘good enough.’ In surveys with a large national sample, we find that older adults are less likely than younger adults to self-report maximizing, which is associated with their better experienced well-being reported two years later. This pattern holds after controlling for demographic characteristics and negative life events. Our findings suggest that older adults could possibly be opting for decision strategies that make them happier. We discuss implications for interventions that aim to improve decision making

What Adaptation Stories are UK Newspapers Telling? A Narrative Analysis

Media coverage of climate change impacts and adaptation will likely influence how citizens think society can and should adapt. Here, we undertook the first analysis of UK newspaper adaptation coverage. We identified five prominent adaptation narratives: (1) the government should build more flood defences, (2) home owners should buy flood insurance, (3) individuals should become more informed, (4) the farming industry should innovate, (5) and the natural environment should fight for its survival. We find that only some of the more immediate climate change impacts likely to affect the UK are presented as necessitating a response. The government is considered primarily responsible while UK citizens are given few and narrow responsibilities. The range of adaptive actions under consideration is limited and unchallenging to the status quo. In summary, newspaper coverage presents a restricted view as to when the UK should adapt and how it could adapt

Confidence levels and likelihood terms in IPCC reports : a survey of experts from different scientific disciplines

Scientific assessments, such as those by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), inform policymakers and the public about the state of scientific evidence and related uncertainties. We studied how experts from different scientific disciplines who were authors of IPCC reports, interpret the uncertainty language recommended in the Guidance Note for Lead Authors of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report on Consistent Treatment of Uncertainties. This IPCC guidance note discusses how to use confidence levels to describe the quality of evidence and scientific agreement, as well likelihood terms to describe the probability intervals associated with climate variables. We find that (1) physical science experts were more familiar with the IPCC guidance note than other experts, and they followed it more often; (2) experts' confidence levels increased more with perceptions of evidence than with agreement; (3) experts' estimated probability intervals for climate variables were wider when likelihood terms were presented with "medium confidence" rather than with "high confidence" and when seen in context of IPCC sentences rather than out of context, and were only partly in agreement with the IPCC guidance note. Our findings inform recommendations for communications about scientific evidence, assessments, and related uncertainties.Peer reviewe

Health Product Risk Communication: Is the message getting through?

Risk communication is an important component of improving the health and safety of Canadians. For numerous departments and agencies at all levels of government, as well as public and private organizations, effective risk communication can protect Canadians from preventable hazards. The Minister of Health, on behalf of Health Canada (the Sponsor), asked the Council of Canadian Academies (the Council) to provide an evidence-based and authoritative assessment of the state of knowledge on measurement and evaluation of health risk communication. This assessment focuses on identifying tools, evaluation methods, gaps in the literature, and barriers and facilitators to carrying out successful communication and evaluation activities. Specifically, this assessment examines the following questions: How can the effectiveness of health risk communications be measured and evaluated? • What types of instruments/tools are currently available for health risk communication? • What methodological best practices can be used to evaluate the reach, use and benefit of health risk communication? • What research could be done to inform the measurement of the effectiveness of risk communications? • What are the existing barriers to effective risk communications and what best practices exist to address these challenges? To address the charge, the Council assembled a multi-disciplinary panel of 11 experts (the Panel) from Canada and abroad. The Panel’s composition reflected a balance of expertise, experience, and demonstrated leadership in academic, clinical, and regulatory fields. Each member served as an informed individual, rather than as a representative of a particular discipline, patron, organization, or region

First Is Best

We experience the world serially rather than simultaneously. A century of research on human and nonhuman animals has suggested that the first experience in a series of two or more is cognitively privileged. We report three experiments designed to test the effect of first position on implicit preference and choice using targets that range from individual humans and social groups to consumer goods. Experiment 1 demonstrated an implicit preference to buy goods from the first salesperson encountered and to join teams encountered first, even when the difference in encounter is mere seconds. In Experiment 2 the first of two consumer items presented in quick succession was more likely to be chosen. In Experiment 3 an alternative hypothesis that first position merely accentuates the valence of options was ruled out by demonstrating that first position enhances preference for the first even when it is evaluatively negative in meaning (a criminal). Together, these experiments demonstrate a “first is best” effect and we offer possible interpretations based on evolutionary mechanisms of this “bound” on rational behavior and suggest that automaticity of judgment may be a helpful principle in clarifying previous inconsistencies in the empirical record on the effects of order on preference and choice

Sequential Effects in Judgements of Attractiveness: The Influences of Face Race and Sex

In perceptual decision-making, a person’s response on a given trial is influenced by their response on the immediately preceding trial. This sequential effect was initially demonstrated in psychophysical tasks, but has now been found in more complex, real-world judgements. The similarity of the current and previous stimuli determines the nature of the effect, with more similar items producing assimilation in judgements, while less similarity can cause a contrast effect. Previous research found assimilation in ratings of facial attractiveness, and here, we investigated whether this effect is influenced by the social categories of the faces presented. Over three experiments, participants rated the attractiveness of own- (White) and other-race (Chinese) faces of both sexes that appeared successively. Through blocking trials by race (Experiment 1), sex (Experiment 2), or both dimensions (Experiment 3), we could examine how sequential judgements were altered by the salience of different social categories in face sequences. For sequences that varied in sex alone, own-race faces showed significantly less opposite-sex assimilation (male and female faces perceived as dissimilar), while other-race faces showed equal assimilation for opposite- and same-sex sequences (male and female faces were not differentiated). For sequences that varied in race alone, categorisation by race resulted in no opposite-race assimilation for either sex of face (White and Chinese faces perceived as dissimilar). For sequences that varied in both race and sex, same-category assimilation was significantly greater than opposite-category. Our results suggest that the race of a face represents a superordinate category relative to sex. These findings demonstrate the importance of social categories when considering sequential judgements of faces, and also highlight a novel approach for investigating how multiple social dimensions interact during decision-making