Talk:Psychology of climate change denial

Great start
I've been hoping for a long time that someone would write the article! The sources used look really sound to me. What this article needs is mostly stylistic adjustments to talk about how the conclusions were reached, and to explicitly attribute quotations and opinions. Clayoquot (talk &#124; contribs) 01:31, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Climate change denial which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 11:18, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Come up with a better structure?
I don't like that this article has just one main level heading (Psychological barriers), which is similar to the article title, and then everything else is as sub-heading Level 1. Maybe those sub-headings could be grouped together somehow. I can't think of a better structure off-hand but hope that someone else might. EMsmile (talk) 22:06, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Need better image for the lead
I think we need a better image for the lead. Or at least a better caption. The current image and caption says nothing about the psychology of climate change denial but just shows a climate change denier in American politics. I think it might be a good photo for the lead of climate change denial. EMsmile (talk) 21:21, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Deleted the section "cultural theory"
I've deleted the section on "cultural theory" because this is written more like an essay or academic publication. I've copied it below in case something should be rescued. This white male thing seems a bit simplistic to me (U.S. centric?). In any case, the white male thing is explained a bit at climate change denial and at public opinion on climate change; that's sufficient.

Cultural theory
Conservative white males are much more likely than other Americans to deny the existence of climate change according to public opinion data from Gallup surveys, and the statistical significance remains even whilst controlling for each of the direct effects of race, gender, political ideology, and other control variables. In the initial Flynn et al. study in 1994, this white male effect was due to a smaller subgroup of white males in the sample who self-reported high risk acceptance. People often cognitively process their perceptions regarding risk through their world views and as shared by their in-groups. If information that contradicts these beliefs and risks is presented by perceived out-groups, individuals tend to strongly resist any change to these aforementioned beliefs they have otherwise psychologically invested in—in this case, evidence of climate change is the information they resist.

This phenomenon has been coined as identity-protective cognition. This way of thinking allows people to preserve the self-perception benefits they retain through this perceived group membership, and thus they continue to appraise incoming information through a lens that supports beliefs associated with belonging in these groups. Kahan et al. offered strong support for this identity-protective cognition hypothesis through their multivariate analysis, noting that white males are thus likely to dismiss any reported risks of climate change and perceive reported risks of climate change as an out-group challenge to the existing hierarchy socially, politically, or economically. McCright & Dunlap also found a positive relationship between self-reported understanding of global warming and intensity of endorsement of climate change denial beliefs, which underscores the identity-protective cognition hypothesis, in that it further illustrates the system-justifying tendency present in confident, conservative white men. EMsmile (talk) 21:15, 31 January 2024 (UTC) EMsmile (talk) 21:15, 31 January 2024 (UTC)