THE VERDICT ON THIS ASSUMPTION: False
The belief in fear as a powerful motivator for action is one of the most pervasive assumptions in climate change campaign work and communications. While the media often uses fear to attract attention to an issue, social science research indicates the effectiveness of using fear to engage the public is limited, and that such strategies can often backfire 1 .
The effectiveness of fear-based campaigns depends on at least three essential components: a threat, a sense of impending danger, and the perceived ability for individuals to respond effectively (‘self-efficacy’).
Frames Associated with This Assumption:
Even when these components exist, however, a variety of factors impact the effectiveness of fear-based campaigns including:
-
These campaigns often do not result in a long-term impact. Although exposure to fear-inducing messages may generate higher levels of concern in the short-term, the concern is not long-lasting 1 .
-
Since most people have not experienced the impacts of climate change personally, and view its impacts as ‘not so severe’ or ‘distant,' fear-based messages lose their ability to evoke an emotional response over time 2 .
-
Individuals are prone to unrealistic optimism that they will personally be able to avoid climate risks when others may not 3 .
-
Individuals have a ‘finite pool of worry,’ and concerns about other issues may desensitize them to fear-based climate messages 4 .
-
Repeated use of fear-based messages may damage trust in the communicating organization if those threats are not realized in the short-term 5 .
-
If individuals do not feel empowered to improve the situation, fear-based campaigns may simply push people to control their feelings of fear and helplessness through denial and apathy 6 .
One study found that ‘apocalyptic’ messages about climate change impacted different people in different ways 7 . The researchers suggested that for some individuals, the messages were ignored, and even used as evidence that climate change was not occurring. There is research in the public health field that suggests a neuroscientific basis for defensive reactions to threatening health information 8 , and health promoters are encouraged to no longer use fear or threatening messaging to change behaviors 9 .
- While fear-based approaches may grab people’s attention, such approaches should be used with great care or not at all.
- If used, fear-based approaches should be combined with other approaches that enable a sense of connection with the local causes and consequences of climate change to communicate the local relevance and elicit positive responses.
- Fear-base approaches should only be used if the audience has access to adequate coping responses including the sense that the problem is resolvable and that they have the capacity to act in a way that makes a difference 7 .
- When introducing fearful aspects of climate change, consider creating 'safe contexts' or spaces for people to process their responses. This is becoming evident as a powerful tool in engagement and mobilization.
