The origins and consequences of democratic citizens' policy agendas: A study of popular concern about global warming

被引:261
作者
Krosnick, Jon A.
Holbrook, Allyson L.
Lowe, Laura
Visser, Penny S.
机构
[1] Stanford Univ, Dept Commun, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[2] Stanford Univ, Dept Polit Sci, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[3] Stanford Univ, Dept Psychol, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[4] Univ Illinois, Dept Publ Adm, Survey Res Lab, Chicago, IL 60607 USA
[5] Univ Illinois, Dept Psychol, Survey Res Lab, Chicago, IL 60607 USA
[6] NFO AD Impact, San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
[7] Univ Chicago, Dept Psychol, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1007/s10584-006-9068-8
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
This article proposes and tests a model of the causes and consequences of Americans' judgments of the national seriousness of global warming. The model proposes that seriousness judgments about global warming are a function of beliefs about the existence of global warming, attitudes toward it, the certainty with which these beliefs and attitudes are held, and beliefs about human responsibility for causing global warming and people's ability to remedy it. The model also proposes that beliefs about whether global warming is a problem are a function of relevant personal experiences (with the weather) and messages from informants (in this case, scientists), that attitudes toward global warming are a function of particular perceived consequences of global warming, and that certainty about these attitudes and beliefs is a function of knowledge and prior thought. Data from two representative sample surveys offer support for all of these propositions, document effects of national seriousness judgments on support for ameliorative efforts generally and specific ameliorative policies, and thereby point to psychological mechanisms that may be responsible for institutional and elite impact on the public's assessments of national problem importance and on public policy preferences.
引用
收藏
页码:7 / 43
页数:37
相关论文
共 104 条
[81]   IN SEARCH OF THE ISSUE-ATTENTION CYCLE [J].
PETERS, BG ;
HOGWOOD, BW .
JOURNAL OF POLITICS, 1985, 47 (01) :238-253
[82]  
Petty R., 1986, The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion, V19, P124, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-1-4612-4964-1_1
[83]   Exploring the dimensionality of trust in risk regulation [J].
Poortinga, W ;
Pidgeon, NF .
RISK ANALYSIS, 2003, 23 (05) :961-972
[84]  
PUTNAM R, 1993, BOWLING ALONE
[85]   WHAT DO PEOPLE KNOW ABOUT GLOBAL CLIMATE-CHANGE .2. SURVEY STUDIES OF EDUCATED LAYPEOPLE [J].
READ, D ;
BOSTROM, A ;
MORGAN, MG ;
FISCHHOFF, B ;
SMUTS, T .
RISK ANALYSIS, 1994, 14 (06) :971-982
[86]  
Rogers E.M., 1991, JOURNALISM MONOGRAPH, V126
[87]   THE NEXT-BIRTHDAY METHOD OF RESPONDENT SELECTION [J].
SALMON, CT ;
NICHOLS, JS .
PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, 1983, 47 (02) :270-276
[88]   THE PERCEIVED THREAT OF NUCLEAR-WAR, SALIENCE, AND OPEN QUESTIONS [J].
SCHUMAN, H ;
LUDWIG, J ;
KROSNICK, JA .
PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, 1986, 50 (04) :519-536
[89]  
SEARS DO, ADV EXPT SOCIAL PSYC, V24, P2
[90]   AGENDA-SETTING AND POLICY RESULTS - LESSONS FROM 3 DRUG POLICY EPISODES [J].
SHARP, EB .
POLICY STUDIES JOURNAL, 1992, 20 (04) :538-551