1) The document discusses how message framing can influence public support for climate change policies by highlighting different actors, outcomes, and regulatory concerns. 2) Two studies found that framing messages to match individuals' regulatory focus (promotion vs. prevention) increased agreement with climate policies. Focusing on growth or safety concerns also impacted support. 3) A survey showed that identifying more with national or supranational actors influenced whether individuals attributed responsibility for policies to those actors and affected policy support. Framing messages and identities consistently maximized agreement.

1. The Agreement with
Climate Change Policies
The Effects of Message Framing, Regulatory Focus,
and National versus Supra-national Identity
Mauro Bertolotti
Patrizia Catellani
May 8-11, 2015
The 2nd Vilm Conference on Identity in a Globalized World
Social Psychological Barriers and Catalysts for Action Addressing Global Climate Change

2. Bertolotti & Catellani
Climate change as a global
collective concern
 Climate change is an emerging global issue
threatening our future as individuals, members of a
community and human beings.
 In addition to individual commitment, collective
effort is needed in the form of governmental and
international policies.
 What are the psychosocial factors hindering or
promoting public support for these policies?

3. Bertolotti & Catellani
From: Scientific American, March 18th, 2014

4. Bertolotti & Catellani
Communication factors hindering
support for climate change action
1. Communication about climate change policies is often
very complex.
2. Communication often focuses on the threats of climate
change (global warming, natural disasters etc...), and
less often on the opportunities deriving from policy
adoption (technological advancements etc...).
3. Communication rarely defines the actors responsible for
climate change policies (the international community,
nations, individual citizens...)

5. Bertolotti & Catellani
Promoting support for climate change
action with message framing
1. Message framing can be used to select and organise
information, providing it a meaningful
interpretation (Entman, 1993; Scheufele, 1999).
2. Message framing can highlight both positive and
negative aspects of policy adoption (or non-
adoption) (Cesario et al., 2013).
3. Message framing can imply a focus on given actors
with whom recipients are identified (Masson & Fritsche,
2014; Schuck & De Vreese, 2006).

6. Bertolotti & Catellani
Promoting support for climate
change action with message framing
Levels of
Message framing
Actors responsible
for the policy
Identification
Support for climate
change policies
Regulatory focus

7. Bertolotti & Catellani
Message framing and regulatory fit
 Message framing can be designed to reflect recipients'
self-regulatory processes (Cesario et al., 2013;Higgins, 1997).
 There are different levels of self-regulatory framing:
 Goal-pursuit strategy
 Regulatory concern
 Outcome sensitivity
 Hedonic consequences
 Regulatory fit derives from the interaction among
multiple levels of framing and recipients' regulatory
focus (Cesario et al., 2004; Higgins et al., 2002).

8. Bertolotti & Catellani
Framing climate change policies
at different levels
Goal-pursuit strategy
How do we act against global warming and climate change?
Eager approach Vigilant avoidance
Investing in clean energy sources Reducing reliance on fossil fuels

9. Bertolotti & Catellani
Framing climate change policies
at different levels
Regulatory concern
What basic need will the policy affect?
Growth concern Safety concern
Goal-pursuit strategy
How do we act against global warming and climate change?
Eager approach Vigilant avoidance
Foster economic growth
Technological advancement
Safety of human activities
Coping with extreme climatic
conditions

10. Bertolotti & Catellani
Framing climate change policies
at different levels
Outcome sensitivity
What is the desired outcome of the policy?
Attaining positive outcomes Avoiding negative outcomes
Regulatory concern
What basic need will the policy affect?
Growth concern Safety concern
Goal-pursuit strategy
How do we act against global warming and climate change?
Eager approach Vigilant avoidance
More affordable energy
Obtain better climatic conditions
Less expensive energy
Avoid worse climatic conditions

11. Bertolotti & Catellani
Method
Two online studies (N = 95; N = 66) with student
participants (77.5 % females, age M = 24.5).
Independent variables:
 Goal-pursuit strategy
 Regulatory concern
 Outcome sensitivity
Measured variables:
 Initial attitudes towards the policy
 Agreement with the policy message
 Voting intention
 Individual regulatory focus scale (Lockwood et al., 2002)
(Bertolotti & Catellani, EJSP, 2014)

12. Bertolotti & Catellani
Stimuli
Outcome Sensitivity
Regulatory
Concern
Achievement of Positive
Outcomes
Avoidance of Negative
Outcomes
Growth Concern
“…we will obtain a positive
return on the economic
development.”
“…we will avoid a negative
impact on the economic
development.”
Safety Concern
“…we will obtain a reduction of
energy costs.”
“…we will avoid an increase of
energy costs.”
Eager Approach Strategy:
“If we invest in renewable energy sources like solar and wind power…”
• To what extent do you agree with the statement you have just read?
• Would you vote for a politician making this statement?
(Bertolotti & Catellani, EJSP, 2014)

13. Bertolotti & Catellani
Stimuli
Outcome Sensitivity
Regulatory
Concern
Achievement of Positive
Outcomes
Avoidance of Negative
Outcomes
Growth Concern
“…we will obtain better climatic
conditions.”
“…we will avoid worse climatic
conditions.”
Safety Concern
“…we will obtain a reduction of
the negative effects of natural
disasters.”
“…we will avoid an increase of
the negative effects of natural
disasters.”
Vigilant Avoidance Strategy:
“If we intervene on the emissions of greenhouse gases responsible of global
warming…”
• To what extent do you agree with the statement you have just read?
• Would you vote for a politician making this statement?
(Bertolotti & Catellani, EJSP, 2014)

14. Agreement as a function of outcome
sensitivity and regulatory concern
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
Attainment of
Positive Outcomes
Avoidance of
Negative Outcomes
Renewable Energy Policy
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
Attainment of
Positive Outcomes
Avoidance of
Negative Outcomes
GH Gas Emissions Policy
(Bertolotti & Catellani, EJSP, 2014)
Growth Concern Safety Concern

15. Voting intention as a function of
message framing
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
Attainment of
Positive Outcomes
Avoidance of
Negative Outcomes
Renewable Energy Policy
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
Attainment of
Positive Outcomes
Avoidance of
Negative Outcomes
GH Gas Emissions Policy
(Bertolotti & Catellani, EJSP, 2014)
Growth Concern Safety Concern

16. Agreement as a function of outcome
sensitivity and regulatory focus
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
Attainment of
Positive Outcomes
Avoidance of
Negative Outcomes
Renewable Energy Policy
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
Attainment of
Positive Outcomes
Avoidance of
Negative Outcomes
GH Gas Emissions Policy
(Bertolotti & Catellani, EJSP, 2014)
Promotion Focus Prevention Focus

17. Bertolotti & Catellani
Promoting support for climate
change action with message framing
Levels of
Message framing
Actors responsible
for the policy
Identification
Support for climate
change policies
Regulatory focus

18. Bertolotti & Catellani
Identification with the actors
responsible for climate change policies
 Climate change policy are currently designed and
implemented at a national or supra-national level.
 People can identify with different groups at once
(Castano et al., 2004; Turner et al., 1987).
 These groups range from local communities, to nations,
to supra-national organisations, to humanity as a whole
(Reese et al., 2012; Reysen et al., 2013).
 When communication focuses on the role of national or
supra-national institutions, recipients identified with
them more likely accept and support a policy.

19. Bertolotti & Catellani
Method
ITANES panel survey (N = 3244) on a representative
sample of Italian voters.
Independent variables:
 Political actor responsible of policy implementation
 Hedonic consequence of the message
 Regulatory concern of the message
Measured variables:
 Agreement with the policy message
 National/supra-national identification ("I see my self as: Only
Italian / More Italian than European/Both Italian and
European/More European than Italian/Only European")
(Bertolotti & Catellani, under revision, 2015)

20. Bertolotti & Catellani
Stimuli
Hedonic Consequence
Regulatory
Concern
Positive Outcome Negative Outcome
Growth Concern
“…there will be positive returns
in terms of economic
development.”
“…there will be negative returns
in terms of economic
development.”
Safety Concern
“…the cost of energy will be
reduced.”
“…the cost of energy will
increase.”
“If Italy/Europe invests (doesn't invest) in renewable energy sources such
as solar and wind power…”
To what extent do you agree with the statement you have just read?
(Bertolotti & Catellani, under revision, 2015)

21. Bertolotti & Catellani
Agreement with the policy message as
a function of hedonic consequence
and regulatory concern
7.0
7.2
7.4
7.6
7.8
8.0
8.2
8.4
Growth Safety
Agreement
Positive
Consequence
Negative
Consequence
(Bertolotti & Catellani, under revision, 2015)
Regulatory Concern

22. Bertolotti & Catellani
Attribution of the policy to different
actors as a function of identification
0 20 40 60 80 100
Predominantly
National
National/Supra-
national
Predominantly
Supra-national
%
Europe Italy Enterprises Citizens Everybody None
(Bertolotti & Catellani, under revision, 2015)

23. Agreement as a function of message
framing and identification
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
Congruently-framed Message
Identification
National Supra-national
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
Incongruently-framed Message
Identification
National Supra-national
(Bertolotti & Catellani, under revision, 2015)
Italy Europe

24. Bertolotti & Catellani
Conclusions
 Support for climate change policies can be increased
by coherent framing of policy messages.
 Regulatory fit with receivers' individual focus
increases the persuasiveness of messages.
 Communication focusing on the actor responsible for
a climate change policy can increase support,
depending on receivers' identification.

25. Bertolotti & Catellani
Future directions
Four levels of self-
regulatory framing
Political actors
responsible for the
policy
Identification
Support for
climate change
policies
Regulatory focus
"Feeling right"
Collective
efficacy
Values