Dan M. Kahan|Maggie Wittlin|Ellen Peters|Paul Slovic|Lisa Larrimore Ouellette|Donald Braman|Gregory N. Mandel
The Tragedy of the Risk-Perception Commons: Culture Conflict, Rationality Conflict, and Climate Change
Yale University|Fordham University|The Ohio State University|Decision Research|Decision Research|University of Oregon|Stanford Medicine|George Washington University|Cambridge Cognition (United Kingdom)|Temple University
conventional explanation controversy climate change emphasizes impediments public understanding limited popular knowledge science inability ordinary citizens assess technical information resulting widespread use unreliable cognitive heuristics assess risk large survey us adults n 1540 found little support account whole scientifically literate numerate subjects slightly less likely see climate change serious threat least scientifically literate numerate ones importantly greater scientific literacy numeracy associated greater cultural polarization respondents predisposed values dismiss climate change evidence became dismissive predisposed values credit evidence concerned science literacy numeracy increased suggest evidence reflects conflict two levels rationality individual level characterized citizens effective use knowledge reasoning capacities form risk perceptions express cultural commitments collective level characterized citizens failure converge best available scientific evidence promote common welfare dispelling tragedy riskperception commons argue understood central aim science science communication