A new brain study shows a better way to engage voters on the climate crisis
The phrase “climate crisis” engages voters emotionally better than either “climate change” or “global warming.”
That’s the new finding from the brain science startup SPARK Neuro, which used an electroencephalogram (EEG) and other bio-measurements to examine how 120 Democrats, Republicans, and independents responded to different terms for the growing threat we face from rising levels of carbon pollution.
According to the study, “climate crisis” got a 60% higher emotional response from Democrats than “climate change.” It triggered triple the response from Republicans.
It’s no surprise that different words have different emotional impacts in the climate debate. Way back in 2002, Republican messaging expert Frank Luntz wrote an infamous 2002 memo to conservatives and the George W. Bush White House with a variety of tested scripts — messages Republicans still use today in an effort to convey they care about the climate.
Luntz urged Republicans to use the phrase “climate change,” arguing that it is “less frightening” than “global warming.” He quoted one focus group participant saying climate change “sounds like you’re going from Pittsburgh to Fort Lauderdale.”
But nearly three decades later, the state-of-the-art tools for measuring the emotional impact of different words has gone far beyond focus groups and polls. [Continue reading…]