How Do Climate Change Skeptics Engage with Opposing Views Online? Evidence from a Major Climate Change Skeptic Forum on Reddit

IF 3 3区社会学 Q1 COMMUNICATION

Environmental Communication-A Journal of Nature and Culture Pub Date : 2022-05-26 DOI:10.1080/17524032.2022.2071314

Lisa Oswald, Jonathan Bright

引用次数: 2

Abstract

ABSTRACT Does exposure to opposing views contribute to breaking down science skepticism? In this study, we contribute to the debate by examining reactions to opposing views within a major climate change skeptic online community on “Reddit.” A large sample of posts (N = 3000) was manually coded according to whether they were opposed to climate skepticism or not, which allowed the automated classification of the full dataset of more than 50,000 posts, with codes inferred from linked websites. We find that confrontation with opposing views triggered activity in the forum, particularly among users who are highly engaged with the community. Those engaging with such views were also more likely to comment again. In other words, light engagement with opposition reinforced the community we study, rather than undermining it. Considering our findings, defensive or preventive policies appear more promising than strategies to actively counter systematic and persistent skepticism of scientific issues.

查看原文本刊更多论文

气候变化怀疑论者如何在网上与反对意见接触?来自Reddit上一个主要气候变化怀疑论者论坛的证据

接触相反的观点是否有助于打破科学怀疑主义?在这项研究中，我们通过研究“Reddit”上一个主要的气候变化怀疑论者在线社区对反对观点的反应，为辩论做出了贡献。根据是否反对气候怀疑主义，对大量帖子样本(N = 3000)进行了手动编码，这允许对超过50,000个帖子的完整数据集进行自动分类，并从链接网站推断出代码。我们发现，与对立观点的对抗会引发论坛上的活动，尤其是在与社区高度互动的用户中。那些持这种观点的人也更有可能再次发表评论。换句话说，与反对派的轻微接触加强了我们研究的社区，而不是破坏它。考虑到我们的发现，防御性或预防性政策似乎比积极对抗对科学问题的系统性和持久性怀疑的策略更有希望。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Environmental Communication-A Journal of Nature and Culture Multiple-

CiteScore

6.30

自引率

7.40%

发文量

期刊介绍： Environmental Communication is an international, peer-reviewed forum for multidisciplinary research and analysis assessing the many intersections among communication, media, society, and environmental issues. These include but are not limited to debates over climate change, natural resources, sustainability, conservation, wildlife, ecosystems, water, environmental health, food and agriculture, energy, and emerging technologies. Submissions should contribute to our understanding of scientific controversies, political developments, policy solutions, institutional change, cultural trends, media portrayals, public opinion and participation, and/or professional decisions. Articles often seek to bridge gaps between theory and practice, and are written in a style that is broadly accessible and engaging.