1. Watch in slide show mode to observe (modest) animation. comments questions: dan.kahan@yale.edudan.kahan@yale.edu papers, etc: www.culturalcognition.netwww.culturalcognition.net

2. Dan M. Kahan Yale University & many x 10 3 others www.culturalcognition.net What’s Wrong with “Consensus Messaging”

3. What’s Wrong with “Consensus Messaging”?

6. N = 1,885. Annenberg Public Policy Center & Cultural Cognition Project. Nationally representative sample, June 2014 (YouGov). CIs are 0.95 confidence intervals for estimated general population means. Subjects classified in relation to “Left_Right,” a continuous political outlook scale formed by aggregating responses to 7-point party identification item and 5-point “liberal-conservative” ideology item (α = 0.78).

7. What’s Wrong with “Consensus Messaging”?

8. 1.It misunderstands the problem. 2.It diverts resources from the solution. 3.It predictably reinforces a toxic political discourse. What’s Wrong with “Consensus Messaging”?

9. 1.It misunderstands the problem. 2.It diverts resources from the solution. 3.It predictably reinforces a toxic political discourse.

10. Perceptions of positions of “climate scientists” Kahan, D.M. Climate-Science Communication and the Measurement Problem. Advances in Political Psychology 36, 1-43 (2015).

11. N = 1,885. Annenberg Public Policy Center & Cultural Cognition Project. Nationally representative sample, June 2014 (YouGov). CIs are 0.95 confidence intervals for estimated general population means. Subjects classified in relation to “Left_Right,” a continuous political outlook scale formed by aggregating responses to 7-point party identification item and 5-point “liberal-conservative” ideology item (α = 0.78).

12. Perceptions of positions of “climate scientists” Kahan, D.M. Climate-Science Communication and the Measurement Problem. Advances in Political Psychology 36, 1-43 (2015).

13. Perceptions of positions of “climate scientists” Kahan, D.M. Climate-Science Communication and the Measurement Problem. Advances in Political Psychology 36, 1-43 (2015).

14. Perceptions of positions of “climate scientists” Kahan, D.M. Climate-Science Communication and the Measurement Problem. Advances in Political Psychology 36, 1-43 (2015).

15. What’s Wrong with “Consensus Messaging”? N = 1,885. Annenberg Public Policy Center & Cultural Cognition Project. Nationally representative sample, June 2014 (YouGov). CIs are 0.95 confidence intervals for estimated general population means. Subjects classified in relation to “Left_Right,” a continuous political outlook scale formed by aggregating responses to 7-point party identification item and 5-point “liberal-conservative” ideology item (α = 0.78).

16. Perceptions of positions of “climate scientists” Kahan, D.M. Climate-Science Communication and the Measurement Problem. Advances in Political Psychology 36, 1-43 (2015).

17. Kahan, D.M. Climate-Science Communication and the Measurement Problem. Advances in Political Psychology 36, 1-43 (2015). Colored bars denote 0.95 level of confidence.

18. Okay, so Republicans must distrust climate scientists...

21. “Skeptical farmers” who want climate science, please!

22. Rep. Frank Lucas (R. Okla.)

24. > avg Left_Right < avg Left_Right Not about what you know... N = 1,737. Annenberg Public Policy Center & Cultural Cognition Project. Nationally representative sample, April/May 2014. CIs are 0.95 confidence intervals for estimated general population means. Subjects classified in relation to “Left_Right,” a continuous political outlook scale formed by aggregating responses to 7-point party identification item and 5-point “liberal-conservative” ideology item (α = 0.78). < avg Left_Right > avg Left_Right

25. N = 1,885. Annenberg Public Policy Center & Cultural Cognition Project. Nationally representative sample, June 2014 (YouGov). Subjects classified in relation to “Left_Right,” a continuous political outlook scale formed by aggregating responses to 7-point party identification item and 5-point “liberal-conservative” ideology item (α = 0.78).

26. > avg Left_Right < avg Left_Right N = 1,885. Annenberg Public Policy Center & Cultural Cognition Project. Nationally representative sample, June 2014 (YouGov). CIs are 0.95 confidence intervals for estimated general population means. Subjects classified in relation to “Left_Right,” a continuous political outlook scale formed by aggregating responses to 7-point party identification item and 5-point “liberal-conservative” ideology item (α = 0.78). Not about what you know but who you are

29. Climate-change resistant chicken!

30. What we know

31. What we know vs. who we are

33. What’s Wrong with “Consensus Messaging”? 1.It misunderstands the problem. 2.It diverts resources from the solution. 3.It predictably reinforces a toxic political discourse.

34. What’s Wrong with “Consensus Messaging”? 1.It misunderstands the problem. 2.It diverts resources from the solution. 3.It predictably reinforces a toxic political discourse.

35. Southeast Florida (Fall 2013) N = 1800. Representative sample Broward, Miami-Dade, Monroe & West Palm Beach. CCP EBSCI Rep. No. 1. Southeast Florida Climate Change Political Science

37. Soute Cultural Cognition Project SE Fla. evidence-based science communication initiative

39. Southeast Florida Climate Change Political Science Detoxify the science communication environment:

40. Southeast Florida Climate Change Political Science Detoxify the science communication environment:

41. Southeast Florida Climate Change Political Science Detoxify the science communication environment: Disentangle...

42. Southeast Florida Climate Change Political Science Detoxify the science communication environment: Disentangle “what do we know” from...

43. Southeast Florida Climate Change Political Science Detoxify the science communication environment: Disentangle “what do we know” from “whose team are you on?”

44. Southeast Florida Climate Change Political Science Detoxify the science communication environment: Disentangle “what do we know” from “whose team are you on?” One frigggin’ week ago

46. 2008

47. 2011

48. Dec. 2004 Jan. 2007 April 12, 2012June 22, 2010 Apr. 2008 Jan. 21, 2009 N ≈ 8,000 media references to “scientific consensus” on “climate change”/“global warming” between Jan. 2005 and Jan. 2013 (Thomson/Reuters “Newsroom” search) Sept. 2006 May 13, 2013

50. 2015...

51. 2015... are you serious?!

52. What’s Wrong with “Consensus Messaging”? 1.It misunderstands the problem. 2.It diverts resources from the solution. 3.It predictably reinforces a toxic political discourse.

53. What’s Wrong with “Consensus Messaging”? 1.It misunderstands the problem. 2.It diverts resources from the solution. 3.It predictably reinforces a toxic political discourse.

54. Our team theirs! vs.

55. Your team is stupid! Ours is smart!

56. Not about what you know but who you are

57. Your team is stupid! Ours is smart!

59. Yay team!

60. What’s Wrong with “Consensus Messaging”? 1.It misunderstands the problem. 2.It diverts resources from the solution. 3.It predictably reinforces a toxic political discourse.

61. What’s Wrong with “Consensus Messaging”? It’s time to update the climate-science communication model. 1.It misunderstands the problem. 2.It diverts resources from the solution. 3.It predictably reinforces a toxic political discourse.