Botzen, W., Duijndam, S. & van Beukering, P. Lessons for climate policy from behavioral biases towards COVID-19 and climate change risks. World Dev. 137, 105214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105214 (2021).
Herrero, M. & Thornton, P. What can COVID-19 teach us about responding to climate change? Lancet Planet. Health 4(5), E174. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(20)30085-1 (2020).
Klenert, D., Funke, F., Mattauch, L. & O’Callaghan, B. Five lessons from COVID-19 for advancing climate change mitigation. Environ. Resour. Econ. 76, 751–778. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-020-00453-w (2020).
Depoux, A. & Gemenne, F. A few points that communication on climate change could learn from the COVID-19 crisis. In Research Handbook on Communicating Climate Change (eds Holmes, D. C. & Richardson, L. M.) 272–278 (Edward Elgar, 2020).
Hulme, M., Lidskog, R., White, J. M. & Standring, A. Social scientific knowledge in times of crisis: What climate change can learn from coronavirus (and vice versa). WIREs Clim. Change. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.656 (2020).
Stuart, D., Petersen, B. & Gunderson, R. Shared pretenses for collective inaction: The economic growth imperative, COVID-19, and climate change. Globalizations. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2021.1943897 (2021).
Atkinson, P. et al. Challenges to evidence-informed decision-making in the context of pandemics: The case of COVID-19. Lancet. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3971551 (2021).
Poot, C. C. et al. From research to evidence-informed decision making: A systematic approach. J. Public Health 40(supplement 1), i3–i12. https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdx153 (2018).
Stöckigt, G., Schiebener, J. & Brand, M. Providing sustainability information in shopping situations contributes to sustainable decision making: An empirical study with choice-based conjoint analyses. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 43, 188–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.03.018 (2018).
Cook, J. Understanding and countering misinformation about climate change. In Handbook of Research on Deception, Fake News, and Misinformation Online (eds Chiluwa, I. & Samoilenko, S.) 281–306 (IGI Global, 2019).
Lancaster, K., Rhodes, T. & Rosengarten, M. Making evidence and policy in public health emergencies: Lessons from COVID-19 for adaptive evidence-making and intervention. Evid. Policy 16(3), 477–490. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426420X15913559981103 (2020).
Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H. & Cook, J. Beyond misinformation: Understanding and coping with the “post-truth” era. J. Appl. Res. Mem. Cogn. 6(4), 353–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.07.008 (2017).
Dunlap, R. E. & McCright, A. M. Organized climate change denial. In The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society (eds Dryzek, J. S. et al.) 144–160 (Oxford University Press, 2011).
Roozenbeek, J. et al. Susceptibility to misinformation about COVID-19 around the world. R. Soc. Open Sci. 7(10), 201199. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.201199 (2020).
Amazeen, M. A., Krishna, A. & Eschmann, R. Cutting the bunk: Comparing the solo and aggregate effects of prebunking and debunking COVID-19 vaccine misinformation. Sci. Commun. 44, 387. https://doi.org/10.1177/10755470221111558 (2022).
Cook, J., Lewandowsky, S. & Ecker, U. K. H. Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: Exposing misleading argumentation techniques reduces their influence. PLoS ONE 12(5), e0175799. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175799 (2017).
Nadelson, L. et al. I just don’t trust them: The development and validation of an assessment instrument to measure trust in science and scientists. Sch. Sci. Math. 114(2), 76–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12051(2014) (2014).
Rutjens, B. T. et al. Science skepticism across 24 countries. Soc. Psychol. Pers. Sci. 13(1), 102–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506211001329 (2021).
Janda, L. H., England, K., Lovejoy, D. & Drury, K. Attitudes toward psychology relative to other disciplines. Prof. Psychol. Res. Pr. 29(2), 140–143. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.29.2.140 (1998).
Geiger, N. & Swim, J. K. Climate of silence: Pluralistic ignorance as a barrier to climate change discussion. J. Environ. Psychol. 47, 79–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.05.002 (2016).
Rosenthal, S. & Cummings, C. L. Influence of rapid COVID-19 vaccine development on vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine 39(52), 7625–7632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.11.014 (2021).
Klinger, K., Metag, J., Schäfer, M. S., Füchslin, T. & Mede, N. Are science communication audiences becoming more critical? Reconstructing migration between audience segments based on Swiss panel data. Public Underst. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625211057379 (2022).
Marques, M. D., Ling, M., Williams, M. N., Kerr, J. R. & McLennan, J. Australasian public awareness and belief in conspiracy theories: Motivational correlates. Polit. Psychol. 43(1), 177–198. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12746 (2021).
World Health Organization. Ten Threats to Global Health in 2019. https://www.who.int/news-room/spotlight/ten-threats-to-global-health-in-2019 (2020).
Wu, X., Lu, Y., Zhou, S., Chen, L. & Xu, B. Impact of climate change on human infectious diseases: Empirical evidence and human adaptation. Environ. Int. 86, 14–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2015.09.007 (2016).
Morens, D. M. et al. The origin of COVID-19 and why it matters. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 103(3), 955–959. https://doi.org/10.4269/ajtmh.20-0849 (2020).
Poushter, J., & Huang, C. Despite Pandemic, Many Europeans Still See Climate Change as Greatest Threat to Their Countries. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/09/09/despite-pandemic-many-europeans-still-see-climate-change-as-greatest-threat-to-their-countries/ (Pew Research Center, 2020).
Gavin, N. T. Media definitely do matter: Brexit, immigration, climate change and beyond. Brit. J. Polit. Int. Rel. 20(4), 827–845. https://doi.org/10.1177/13691481187992 (2018).
Rosenthal, S. Information sources, perceived personal experience, and climate change beliefs. J. Environ. Psychol. 81, 101796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2022.101796 (2022).
Rasmussen, C. Emission Reductions from Pandemic Had Unexpected Effects on Atmosphere. https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/emission-reductions-from-pandemic-had-unexpected-effects-on-atmosphere (NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 2021).
Drummond, C. & Fischhoff, B. Individuals with greater science literacy and education have more polarized beliefs on controversial science topics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 114(36), 9587–9592. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1704882114 (2017).
Hamilton, L. C., Hartter, J. & Saito, K. Trust in scientists on climate change and vaccines. SAGE Open 5(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015602752 (2015).
Rutjens, B. T., Sutton, R. M. & van der Lee, R. Not all skepticism is equal: Exploring the ideological antecedents of science acceptance and rejection. Pers. Soc. Psychol. B 44(3), 384–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217741314 (2017).
Scheitle, C. P. & Corcoran, K. E. COVID-19 skepticism in relation to other forms of science skepticism. Socius Sociol. Res. Dyn. World 7, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/23780231211049841 (2021).
Kahan, D. et al. The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 732–735. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1547 (2012).
Hamilton, L. C. Education, politics and opinions about climate change evidence for interaction effects. Clim. Change 104(2), 231–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-010-9957-8 (2011).
McCright, A. M. The effects of gender on climate change knowledge and concern in the American public. Popul. Environ. 32(1), 66–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-010-0113-1 (2010).
Simon, R. M. Gender differences in knowledge and attitude towards biotechnology. Public Underst. Sci. 19(6), 642–653. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662509335449 (2010).
Pearson, A. R., Ballew, M. T., Naiman, S. & Schuldt, J. P. Race, class, gender and climate change communication. Oxford Res. Encycl. Clim. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.412 (2017).
McCright, A. M. & Dunlap, R. E. The politicization of climate change and polarization in the American public’s views of global warming, 2001–2010. Sociol. Q. 52(2), 155–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2011.01198.x (2011).
Arnold-Forster, A. Polarisation, incivility, and scientific debate during covid-19—An essay. BMJ 374, n1888. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1888 (2021).
Peters, H. P. Scientists as public experts: Expectations and responsibilities. In Routledge Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology 3rd edn (eds Bucchi, M. & Trench, B.) 114–128 (Taylor & Francis, 2021).
Bayes, R. & Druckman, J. N. Motivated reasoning and climate change. Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci. 42, 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.02.009 (2021).
Tranter, B. The great divide: Political candidate and voter polarisation over global warming in Australia. Aust. J. Polit. Hist. 59(3), 397–413. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajph.12023 (2013).
Czarnek, G., Kossowska, M. & Szwed, P. Right-wing ideology reduces the effects of education on climate change beliefs in more developed countries. Nat. Clim. Change 11, 9–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-00930-6 (2021).
May, T. Anti-vaxxers, politicization of science, and the need for trust in pandemic response. J. Health Commun. 25(10), 761–763. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2020.1864519 (2020).
Savelkaeva, A., Polyakova, V. & Fursov, K. S. Structure of social attitudes to science and technology: National and individual determinants. Higher School of Economics Research Paper, No. WP BRP 52/STI/2015. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2698107 (2015).
Hornsey, M. J., Harris, E. A., Bain, P. G. & Fielding, K. S. Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 622–626. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2943 (2016).
Poon, P. K. M. COVID-19 vaccination intention in the Western Pacific Region—Insights from Japan. Lancet Reg. Health West. Pac. 14, 100245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanwpc.2021.100245 (2021).
Schwarzinger, M., Watson, V., Arwidson, P., Alla, F. & Luchini, S. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in a representative working-age population in France: A survey experiment based on vaccine characteristics. Lancet Public Health 6(4), e210–e221. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-2667(21)00012-8 (2021).
Edwards, B., Biddle, N., Gray, M. & Sollis, K. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance: Correlates in a nationally representative longitudinal survey of the Australian population. PLoS ONE 16(3), e0248892. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248892 (2021).
Nery, N. et al. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and associated factors according to sex: A population-based survey in Salvador, Brazil. PLoS ONE 17(1), e0262649. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0262649(2022) (2022).
Liu, R. & Li, G. M. Hesitancy in the time of coronavirus: Temporal, spatial, and sociodemographic variations in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. SSM Popul. Health 15, 100896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2021.100896 (2021).
Hornsey, M. J., Edwards, M., Lobera, J., Díaz-Catalán, C. & Barlow, F. K. Resolving the small-pockets problem helps clarify the role of education and political ideology in shaping vaccine sceptics. Br. J. Psychol. 112(4), 992–1011. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12500 (2021).
McCright, A. M., Dunlap, R. E. & Marquart-Pyatt, S. T. Political ideology and views about climate change in the European Union. Environ. Polit. 25(2), 338–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2015.1090371 (2016).
Roozenbeek, J. et al. Susceptibility to misinformation about COVID-19 around the world. R. Soc. Open Sci. 7(10), 33204475. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.201199 (2020).
Nyhan, B., Porter, E. & Wood, T. J. Time and skeptical opinion content erode the effects of science coverage on climate beliefs and attitudes. PNAS 119(26), e2122069119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2122069119 (2022).
Hine, D. W. et al. Audience segmentation and climate change communication: Conceptual and methodological considerations. WIREs Clim. Change 5(4), 441–459. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.279 (2014).
Slater, M. D. Theory and method in health audience segmentation. J. Health Commun. 1(3), 267–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/108107396128059 (1996).
Leiserowitz, A. et al. Global Warming’s Six Americas, September 2021 (Yale University and George Mason University, 2022).
Silk, K. J., Smith, T. L., Salmon, C. T., Thomas, B. D. H. & Poorisat, T. Public health communication campaigns. In The Routledge Handbook of Health Communication (eds Thompson, T. L. & Harrington, G. N.) 335–352 (Taylor & Francis Group, 2021).
Hulme, M. Why We Disagree About Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity (Cambridge University Press, 2009).
Milosh, M., Painter, M., Sonin, K., Van Dijcke, D. & Wright, A. L. Unmasking partisanship: Polarization undermines public response to collective risk. J. Public Econ. 204, 104538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2021.104538 (2021).
Ball, P. Science is political, and we must deal with it. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 12(27), 6336–6340. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpclett.1c02017 (2021).
Spence, A., Poortinga, W. & Pidgeon, N. The psychological distance of climate change. Risk Anal. 32(6), 957–972. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01695.x (2012).
Zheng, L., Miao, M. & Gan, Y. Perceived control buffers the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on general health and life satisfaction: The mediating role of psychological distance. Appl. Psychol. Health Well-Being 12(4), 1095–1114. https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12232 (2020).
Singh, A. S., Zwickle, A., Bruskotter, J. T. & Wilson, R. The perceived psychological distance of climate change impacts and its influence on support for adaptation policy. Environ. Sci. Policy 73, 93–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.04.011 (2017).
Detenber, B. & Rosenthal, S. Climate change audience segmentation: An international review. In Research Handbook on Communicating Climate Change (eds Holmes, D. C. & Richardson, L. M.) 214–229 (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2020).
Chryst, B. et al. Six Americas Super Short Survey (SASSY!) https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/visualizations-data/sassy/ (Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, 2021).
Morrison, M., Parton, K. & Hine, D. W. Increasing belief but issue fatigue: Changes in Australian household climate change segments between 2011 and 2016. PLoS ONE 13(6), e0197988. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197988 (2018).
Agley, J. & Xiao, Y. Misinformation about COVID-19: Evidence for differential latent profiles and a strong association with trust in science. BMC Publ. Health 21(1), 89. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-10103-x (2021).
Smith, D., Attwell, K. & Evers, U. Support for a COVID-19 vaccine mandate in the face of safety concerns and political affiliations: An Australian study. Politics 42(3), 480–491. https://doi.org/10.1177/02633957211009066 (2021).
Kleitman, S. et al. To comply or not comply? A latent profile analysis of behaviours and attitudes during the COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0255268 (2021).
Chen, Y.-L., Lin, Y.-J., Chang, Y.-P., Chou, W.-J. & Yen, C.-F. Differences in the Protection Motivation Theory constructs between people with various latent classes of motivation for vaccination and preventive behaviors against COVID-19 in Taiwan. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18(13), 7042. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18137042 (2021).
Thaker, J. Audience Segmentation of COVID-19 Vaccination Intentions in Aotearoa-New Zealand [Report] (Massey University, 2021).
Thaker, J., Richardson, L. M., & Holmes, D. C. Audience segmentation analysis of public intentions to get a COVID-19 vaccine in Australia. Public Underst. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625221138494 (2022).
Lewis, G. B., Palm, R. & Feng, B. Cross-national variation in determinants of climate change concern. Environ. Polit. 28(5), 793–821. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2018.1512261 (2018).
Kassam, N. & Leser, H. Climate Poll 2021. https://www.lowyinstitute.org/publications/climatepoll-2021 (Lowy Institute, 2021).
Quicke, A. Climate of the Nation 2021. https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/climate-of-the-nation-2021/ (The Australia Institute, 2021).
Neumann, C., Stanley, S. K., Leviston, Z. & Walker, I. The six Australias: Concern about climate change (and global warming) is rising. Environ. Commun. 16(4), 433–444. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2022.2048407 (2022).
Chryst, B. et al. Global warming’s “six Americas short survey”: Audience segmentation of climate change views using a four question instrument. Environ. Commun. 12(8), 1109–1122. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2018.1508047 (2018).
Maibach, E. W., Leiserowitz, A., Roser-Renouf, C., Mertz, C. K. & Akerlof, K. Global Warming’s Six Americas Screening Tools: Survey Instruments, Instructions for Coding and Data Treatment, and Statistical Program Scripts. Yale Project on Climate Change Communication (Yale University and George Mason University, 2011).
Department of Health. COVID-19 Vaccination—Vaccination Data—1 February 2022. https://www.health.gov.au/resources/publications/covid-19-vaccination-vaccination-data-1-february-2022 (Australian Government, 2022).
Rutjens, B. T., van der Linden, S. & van der Lee, R. Science skepticism in times of COVID-19. Group Process. Integr. 24(2), 276–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220981415 (2021).
Kingstone, H. Generational identities: Historical and literary perspectives. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 15(10), e12641. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12641 (2021).
Swim, J. K., Aviste, R., Lengieza, M. L. & Fasano, C. J. OK Boomer: A decade of generational differences in feelings about climate change. Glob. Environ. Change 73, 102479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102479 (2022).
Duell, N. et al. Age patterns in risk taking across the world. J. Youth Adoles. 47, 1052–1072. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-017-0752-y (2018).
Weber, E. U., Blais, A.-R. & Betz, N. E. A domain-specific risk-attitude scale: Measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors. J. Behav. Decis. Mak. 15(4), 263–290. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.414 (2002).
Rhodes, A., Hoq, M., Measey, M.-A. & Danchin, M. Intention to vaccinate against COVID-19 in Australia. Lancet Infect. Dis. 21(5), e110. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30724-6 (2021).
Knight, K. W. & Givens, J. E. Gender and climate change views in context: A cross-national multilevel analysis. Soc. Sci. J. https://doi.org/10.1080/03623319.2021.1913041 (2021).
Sjöberg, L. The different dynamics of personal and general risk. Risk Manag. 5, 19–34. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.rm.8240154 (2003).
Morgan, T. Solving the wickedest problem: Reconciling differing worldviews. J. Future Stud. 24(4), 83–94. https://doi.org/10.6531/JFS.202006_24(4).0008 (2020).
Skorini, H. I. Science as a political battlefield: How cultural values shape people’s attitudes to science. In Political Identity and Democratic Citizenship in Turbulent Times (ed. Kristensen, N. N.) 29–53 (IGI Global, 2020).
Qualtrics Panel. Online Panels. https://www.qualtrics.com/au/research-services/online-sample/ (Qualtrics XM, 2022).
Australian Bureau of Statistics. 3235.0—Regional Population by Age and Sex, Australia. https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Explanatory%20Notes/3235.0 (2020).
Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2016 Census QuickStats. https://quickstats.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2016/quickstat/036 (2017).
Australian Bureau of Statistics. Census 2016, Total Personal Income (Weekly) by Age by Sex (SA2+). https://stat.data.abs.gov.au/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=ABS_C16_T13_SA (2017).
Australian Bureau of Statistics. National, State and Territory Population. https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/national-state-and-territory-population/latest-release#states-and-territories (2021).
Myers, T. A. Goodbye, listwise deletion: Presenting hot deck imputation as an easy and effective tool for handling missing data. Commun. Methods Meas. 5(4), 297–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2011.624490 (2011).
Ajzen, I. From intentions to action: A theory of planned behavior. In Action Control: From Cognition to Behavior (eds Kuhl, J. & Beckmann, J.) 11–39 (Springer, 1985).