MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036943524 · doi:10.1175/bams-d-12-00129.1

Cross-Cultural Insights into Climate Change Skepticism

2013· article· en· W2036943524 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Rudiak‐Gould

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of the American Meteorological Society · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change Communication and Perception
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkepticismClimate changeEnvironmental ethicsScientific consensusIdeologySociologyFaithEthnographyEpistemologyPoliticsPolitical scienceGlobal warmingLawAnthropologyEcologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With an eye toward developing more effective climate change education, social scientists have attempted to diagnose the reasons for lingering public skepticism of anthropogenic climate change. But rarely is the question addressed with the benefit of cross-cultural research. Geographer Simon Donner has demonstrated the utility of such an approach: drawing on a vast ethnographic and historical record, it is possible to surmise to what extent anthropogenic climate change skepticism stems from panhuman cognitive habits versus culturally and historically specific circumstances, with deep consequences back at home for climate education and citizen–climatologist dialogue. While building from this method, this article departs from Donner's reading of the ethnographic record as demonstrating a cross-culturally pervasive human intuition that the weather is beyond human influence, arguing instead for the role of culturally specific commitments such as the distinction between nature and society, “just world” belief, faith in progress, and system justification. Various climate change communication strategies based upon these alternate reasons for skepticism are suggested, and ultimately it is argued that the ideologically fraught nature of these beliefs takes the matter beyond the realm of “science education” into the arena of democratic dialogue.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.202
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of the American Meteorological SocietySame topicClimate Change Communication and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207