21 pages., via online journal., Scholars are divided over whether communicating to the public the existence
of scientific consensus on an issue influences public acceptance of the
conclusions represented by that consensus. Here, we examine the
influence of four messages on perception and acceptance of the scientific
consensus on the safety of genetically modified organisms (GMOs): two
messages supporting the idea that there is a consensus that GMOs are safe
for human consumption and two questioning that such a consensus exists.
We found that although participants concluded that the pro-consensus
messages made stronger arguments and were likely to be more
representative of the scientific community’s attitudes, those messages did
not abate participants’ concern about GMOs. In fact, people’s premanipulation attitudes toward GMOs were the strongest predictor of of our outcome variables (i.e. perceived argument strength, post-message GMO
concern, perception of what percent of scientists agree). Thus, the results
of this study do not support the hypothesis that consensus messaging
changes the public’s hearts and minds, and provide more support, instead,
for the strong role of motivated reasoning.
18 pages., via online journal., Drought is defined, experienced, and communicated about in multiple ways. This case study examines individual definitions of drought (timing, impacts, and severity) and attitudes about climate change. Household surveys (n = 120) were conducted in Cimarron County, Oklahoma and Union County, New Mexico using a stratified random sampling method to select farmers, ranchers, and town residents. Information about drought is primarily communicated between neighbors, friends, and family, as well as media and local governing agencies. Residents perceive the recent drought to be the worst drought on record, regardless of previous drought experiences. Residents reported widespread drought-related impacts on agriculture, environment, and society. Most residents see drought as cyclical and driven by natural causes, rather than human causes. We recommend adaptive drought communication engage more fully with identity, place, and history. Climate information should be presented in a relevant manner to diverse agricultural stakeholders with differing attitudes about climate change, management, and climate information.
