2025/02/01 by Riley Loria, Jessica Pugel, Matthew H. Goldberg +5 · 1 voice · 1 citation
Environmental Science · Social Sciences · #Climate Change Communication and Perception #Environmental Education and Sustainability #Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
paper · doi:10.1038/s43247-025-02055-0
openalex publication_date 2025/02/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/01
One of the most challenging aspects of climate change mitigation today is not identifying solutions but reaching political leaders with climate scientists’ existing solutions. Although there is substantial research on climate change communication, research rarely focuses on one of the most impactful groups: policymakers. It is essential to test theoretically sound methods to increase lawmakers’ attention to research evidence. In a series of four rapid-cycle randomized controlled email trials (N = 6642–7620 per trial), we test three common and theoretically derived advocacy tactics to increase U.S. policymaker engagement with a climate change fact sheet sent via email (i.e., a norms manipulation, a number focused manipulation, and emotional language manipulation). In all four trials, the control message increased engagement more than messages using advocacy tactics, measured by fact sheet clicks. This demonstrates the importance of testing communication methods within the appropriate populations, especially a population with considerable influence over climate policy. None of the advocacy techniques, such as norms, number-focused manipulations, and emotional language, were effective in increasing US policymakers’ engagement with a climate change factsheet, according to an analysis that used email message trials and statistical analysis.