Climate Scientist Katharine Hayhoe Discusses the Six Psychological Responses to Climate Change
New York — As the climate crisis intensifies, discussions on the topic tend to bifurcate into two distinct categories: climate believers and climate deniers. However, the discussion is far more nuanced, involving a spectrum of beliefs that are neither strictly binary nor overly simplistic.
According to a new release by World Economic Forum, climate scientist and author Katharine Hayhoe argues that labeling people strictly as climate “believers” or “deniers” falls short in capturing the complexity of individual perspectives on climate change. Hayhoe favors a six-category classification system developed by the Yale Program on Climate Communication to identify various psychological responses to the issue.
Six Psychological Categories on Climate Change
The six categories are:
Alarmed: Individuals who believe in human-caused climate change and advocate for immediate action.
Concerned: Those who believe in human-caused climate change but prioritize it lower because they think consequences are distant.
Cautious: Individuals who are still forming an opinion and may have questions about climate change.
Disengaged: Those who lack sufficient information about climate change, generally due to media inattention.
Doubtful: Individuals who question the existence or severity of climate change, often driven by ideological considerations.
Dismissive: Those who regard global warming as a hoax and are resistant to changing their opinion.
Effective Communication Strategies
Hayhoe contends that understanding where individuals fall on this spectrum enables more effective communication. For example, conversations with the “cautious” group can start by addressing their doubts with well-supported scientific answers. Hayhoe points out that the most challenging group to engage with is the “dismissive,” who constitute about 10% of the U.S. population and are nearly impossible to sway.
Focused on Evidence
Hayhoe, an atmospheric scientist, advocates for emphasizing scientific evidence in any discussion about climate change. She cites the term “global weirding” to describe the increased frequency of extreme weather events as a consequence of climate change.
Data from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) supports this observation, showing a significant reduction in the gap between billion-dollar extreme weather events in the United States. While the average gap was 75 days in the 1980s, it has now shrunk to 18 days in the 2020s.
Hayhoe stresses the importance of individual advocacy, stating that one’s voice can be a potent force for change.