TY - JOUR

T1 - Communications about uncertainty in scientific climate-related findings

T2 - a qualitative systematic review

AU - Kause, Astrid

AU - Bruine de Bruin, Wändi

AU - Domingos, Samuel

AU - Mittal, Neha

AU - Lowe, Jason

AU - Fung, Fai

PY - 2021/5/1

Y1 - 2021/5/1

N2 - We undertake a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature to arrive at recommendations for shaping communications about uncertainty in scientific climate-related findings. Climate communications often report on scientific findings that contain different sources of uncertainty. Potential users of these communications are members of the general public, as well as decision makers and climate advisors from government, business and non-governmental institutions worldwide. Many of these users may lack formal training in climate science or related disciplines. We systematically review the English-language peer-reviewed empirical literature from cognitive and behavioral sciences and related fields, which examines how users perceive communications about uncertainty in scientific climate-related findings. We aim to summarize how users' responses to communications about uncertainty in scientific climate-related findings are associated with characteristics of the decision context, including climate change consequences and types of uncertainty as well as user characteristics, such as climate change beliefs, environmental worldviews, political ideology, numerical skills, and others. We also aimed to identify what general recommendations for communications about uncertainty in scientific climate-related findings can be delineated. We find that studies of communications about uncertainty in scientific climate-related findings substantially varied in how they operationalized uncertainty, as well as how they measured responses. Studies mostly focused on uncertainty stemming from conflicting information, such as diverging model estimates or experts, or from expressions of imprecision such as ranges. Among other things, users' understanding was improved when climate communications about uncertainty in scientific climate-related findings were presented with explanations about why climate information was uncertain, and when ranges were presented with lower and upper numerical bounds. Users' understanding also improved if they expressed stronger beliefs about climate change, or had better numerical skills. Based on these findings, we provide emerging recommendations on how to best present communications about uncertainty in scientific climate-related findings; and we identify research gaps.

AB - We undertake a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature to arrive at recommendations for shaping communications about uncertainty in scientific climate-related findings. Climate communications often report on scientific findings that contain different sources of uncertainty. Potential users of these communications are members of the general public, as well as decision makers and climate advisors from government, business and non-governmental institutions worldwide. Many of these users may lack formal training in climate science or related disciplines. We systematically review the English-language peer-reviewed empirical literature from cognitive and behavioral sciences and related fields, which examines how users perceive communications about uncertainty in scientific climate-related findings. We aim to summarize how users' responses to communications about uncertainty in scientific climate-related findings are associated with characteristics of the decision context, including climate change consequences and types of uncertainty as well as user characteristics, such as climate change beliefs, environmental worldviews, political ideology, numerical skills, and others. We also aimed to identify what general recommendations for communications about uncertainty in scientific climate-related findings can be delineated. We find that studies of communications about uncertainty in scientific climate-related findings substantially varied in how they operationalized uncertainty, as well as how they measured responses. Studies mostly focused on uncertainty stemming from conflicting information, such as diverging model estimates or experts, or from expressions of imprecision such as ranges. Among other things, users' understanding was improved when climate communications about uncertainty in scientific climate-related findings were presented with explanations about why climate information was uncertain, and when ranges were presented with lower and upper numerical bounds. Users' understanding also improved if they expressed stronger beliefs about climate change, or had better numerical skills. Based on these findings, we provide emerging recommendations on how to best present communications about uncertainty in scientific climate-related findings; and we identify research gaps.

KW - climate communication

KW - decision

KW - design

KW - perception

KW - review

KW - uncertainty

KW - Sustainability sciences, Communication

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85105702074&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/8731573e-eb2f-320f-85c9-962fa208b70b/

U2 - 10.1088/1748-9326/abb265

DO - 10.1088/1748-9326/abb265

M3 - Scientific review articles

AN - SCOPUS:85105702074

VL - 16

JO - Environmental Research Letters

JF - Environmental Research Letters

SN - 1748-9318

IS - 5

M1 - 053005

ER -