Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Combining threat and efficacy messaging to increase public engagement with climate change in Beijing, China

  • Published:
Climatic Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study we employed the Extended Parallel Process Model of risk communication to investigate the effectiveness of combining threat and efficacy messages to increase public engagement with climate change. A total of 515 Mandarin-speaking residents of Beijing, China were randomly assigned to view one of two climate change messages sourced from an online environmental website. The first message (high threat – low efficacy) described the negative impacts of climate change for China, but provided no information about what actions could be taken by citizens to reduce the threat. The second message (high threat – high efficacy) provided the same threat information, but also provided practical information on how to reduce the threat. Mediation analyses revealed that the high threat – high efficacy message elicited higher levels of perceived efficacy in viewers, which in turn predicted higher levels of danger control processing (intention to seek our more information and take action) and lower levels of fear control processing (message rejection and denial of threat). Moderation analyses revealed that the high efficacy messages were less effective for viewers with moderate to strong anthropocentric worldviews and very high ecocentric worldviews.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Copies of the videos have been archived here.

    High Threat – High Efficacy: http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTM2NDc1ODAwOA==.html?qq-pf-to=pcqq.c2c

    High Threat – Low Efficacy: http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTM2NDg0NTQ0NA==.html?qq-pf-to=pcqq.c2c

  2. Examination of efficacy scores revealed only a marginal ceiling effect for the high ecocentrism group (M = 5.50, SD = .95, sk = −.72). The low ecocentrism group exhibited a lower mean on efficacy, only slightly higher variability and no skewness (M = 4.91, SD = 1.02 sk = −.02).

References

  • Aiken LS, West SG (1991) Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interaction. Sage, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Barr S (2007) Factors influencing environmental attitudes and behaviors a UK case study of household waste management. Environ Behav 39(4):435–473. doi:10.1177/0013916505283421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanco G, Gerlagh R, Suh S, Barrett J, de Coninck HC, Diaz Morejon CF, Zhou P (2014) Drivers, trends and mitigation. In: Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y, Farahani E, Kadner S, Seyboth K, Adler A, Baum I, Brunner S, Eickemeier P, Kriemann B, Savolainen J, Schlömer S, von Stechow C, Zwickel T, Minx JC (eds) Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 351–411

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanford GJ, Rose SK, Tavoni M (2012) Baseline projections of energy and emissions in Asia. Energy Econ 34:S284–S292. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2012.08.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casey PJ, Scott K (2006) Environemtental concern and behaviour in an Australian sample within an ecocentric- anthropocentric framework. Aust J Psychol 58(2):57–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castro P (2006) Applying social psychology to the study of environmental concern and environmental worldviews: contributions from the social representations approach. J Community Appl Soc Psychol 16(4):247–266. doi:10.1002/casp.864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Copsey T, Hoijtink L, Shi X, & Whitehead S (2013) How the people of China live with climate change and what communication can do. In S. Whitehead & D. Wilson (Eds.), (pp. 1–61). Broadcasting House, Portland Place, London W1A 1AA, United Kingdom: UK Department for International Development (DFID)

  • Dunlap RE, Van Liere KD (1978) The new ecological paradigm. J Environ Educ 9(4):10–19. doi:10.1080/00958964.1978.10801875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlap RE, Van Liere KD, Mertig AG, Jones RE (2000) Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP scale. J Soc Issues 56(3):425–442. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harkness JA, Schoua-glusberg A (1998) Questionnaires in translation. ZUMA Nachrichten Spezial 3:87–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawcroft LJ, Milfont TL (2010) The use (and abuse) of the new environmental paradigm scale over the past 30 years: a meta-analysis. J Environ Psychol 30:143–158. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.10.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes AF (2013) Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. The Guilford Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hijioka, Y., Lin, E., Pereira, J. J., Corlett, R. T., Cui, X., Insarov, G. E.,…Surjan, A. (2014). Asia. In V. R. Barros, C. B. Field, D. J. Dokken, M. D. Mastrandrea, K. J. Mach, T. E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K. L. Ebi, Y. O. Estrada, R. C. Genova, B. Girma, E. S. Kissel, A. N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P. R. Mastrandrea & L. L. White (Eds.), Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part B: regional aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on climate change (pp. 1327–1370). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

  • Hine DW, Gifford R (1991) Fear appeals, individual differences and environmental concern. J Environ Educ 23:36–41. doi:10.1080/00958964.1991.9943068

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hine DW, Phillips WJ, Reser JP, Cooksey RW, Marks ADG, Nunn PD, Ellul M (2013) Enhancing climate change communication: strategies for profiling and targeting Australian interpretive communities. National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility, Gold Coast, QLD, p 95

    Google Scholar 

  • Hine DW, Phillips WJ, Cooksey RW, Reser JP, Nunn PD, Marks ADG, Loi N, Watt SE (2016) Preaching to different choirs: how to motivate audiences dismissive, uncommitted, and alarmed audiences to adapt to climate change? Glob Environ Chang 36:1–11. doi:10.1016/jgloenvcha.2015.11.002

  • Janis IL, Feshbach S (1953) Effects of fear-arousing communications. J Abnorm Soc Psychol 48:78–92. doi:10.1037/h0060732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellstedt PM, Zahran S, Vedlitz A (2008) Personal efficacy, the information environment, and attitudes toward global warming and climate change in the United States. Risk Anal 28(1):113–126. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01010.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim S, Jeong SH, Hwang Y (2013) Predictors of pro-environmental behaviors of american and korean students: the application of the theory of reasoned action and protection motivation theory. Sci Commun 35(2):168–188. doi:10.1177/1075547012441692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline RB (2005) Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, 2nd edn. Guilford Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Leventhal H (1970) Findings and theory in the study of fear communicaitons. In: Berkowitz L (ed) Advances in experimental social psychology, vol 5. Academic, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Maloney EK, Lapinski MK, Witte K (2011) Fear appeals and persuasion: a review and update of the extended parallel process model. Soc Personal Psychol Compass 5(4):206–219. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00341.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMahan S, Witte K, Meyer J (1998) The perception of risk messages regarding electromagnetic fields: extending the extended parallel process model to an unknown risk. Health Commun 10(3):247–259. doi:10.1207/s15327027hc1003_4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olli E, Grendstad G, Wollebaek D (2001) Correlates of environmental behaviors bringing back social context. Environ Behav 33(2):181–208. doi:10.1177/0013916501332002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pachauri RK, Allen MR, VR, Broome J, Cramer W, Christ R, & Van Vuuren D (2014) Climate change 2014: synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on climate change

  • Phillips WJ, Hine DW, & Marks ADG (2015) Exploring the effects of cultural cognition on responses to climate change messages

  • Poumadère M, Mays C, Pfeifle G, Vafeidis AT (2008) Worst case scenario as stakeholder decision support: a 5- to 6-m sea level rise in the rhone delta. Fr Clim Chang 91(1–2):123–143. doi:10.1007/s10584-008-9446-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers RW (1983) Cognitver and physiological processes in fear appeals and attitude change: a revised theory of protection motivation. In: Cacciopo J, Petty R (eds) Social psychophysiology. Guilford Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Smalec JL, Klingle RS (2000) Bulimia interventions via interpersonal influence: the role of threat and efficacy in persuading bulimics to seek help. J Behav Med 23(1):37–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vining J, Ebreo A (1992) Predicting recycling behavior from global and specific environmental attitudes and changes in recycling opportunities. J Appl Soc Psychol 22(20):1580–1607. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb01758.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang B, & LiY (2012) Public climate change awareness and climate change communication in China.URL:http://environment.yale.edu/climate-communication/files/2sided-highlights-China-e.pdf

  • Whitmarsh L (2011) Scepticism and uncertainty about climate change: dimensions, determinants and change over time. Glob Environ Chang 21(2):690–700

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witte K (1992) Putting the fear back into fear appeals: the extended parallel process model. Commun Monogr 59:329–349. doi:10.1080/03637759209376276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witte K (1994) Fear control and danger control: a test of the extended parallel process model (EPPM). Commun Monogr 61(2):113–134. doi:10.1080/03637759409376328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witte K, Allen M (2000) A meta-analysis of fear appeals: implications for effective public health campaigns. Health Educ Behav 27(5):591–615. doi:10.1177/109019810002700506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witte K, Meyer A, Martell A (2001) Effective health risk messages. Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Xue W, Zhao S (2015) The environmental worldviews and climate change mitigation behaviors: testing the new ecological scale in the smallest space analysis for Chinese samples. Int J Environ Sci Dev 6(7):547–550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xue W, Hine DW, Loi NM, Thorsteinsson EB, Phillips WJ (2014) Cultural worldviews and environmental risk perceptions: a meta-analysis. J Environ Psychol 40:249–258. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.07.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xue W, Marks ADG, Phillips WJ, Hine DW, Zhao S (2016) The new ecological paradigm and responses to global warming in China. J Risk Res (in press)

  • Yu X (2011) Beijing statistical yearbook. China Statistics Press, Beijing

    Google Scholar 

  • Zheng B, Wang B (2013) Zhongguo qihou chuanbo yanjiu de fazhan mailuo jiyu yu tiaozhan. Dong Yue Tribune(ch) 34(10):5–14

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Donald W. Hine.

Appendix A

Appendix A

Table 2 Chinese translation of the message assessment items

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xue, W., Hine, D.W., Marks, A.D.G. et al. Combining threat and efficacy messaging to increase public engagement with climate change in Beijing, China. Climatic Change 137, 43–55 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1678-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1678-1

Keywords

Navigation