The Effect of Climate Change Semantic Expressions on Perceptions and Attitudes Towards Decarbonisation

Hussein Akil (), Philippe Robert-Demontrond (), Julien Bouillé, Said Hussein and Leila Zein
Additional contact information
Hussein Akil: LU / ULB - الجامعة اللبنانية [بيروت] = Lebanese University [Beirut] = Université libanaise [Beyrouth]
Philippe Robert-Demontrond: CREM - Centre de recherche en économie et management - UNICAEN - Université de Caen Normandie - NU - Normandie Université - UR - Université de Rennes - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Julien Bouillé: CREM - Centre de recherche en économie et management - UNICAEN - Université de Caen Normandie - NU - Normandie Université - UR - Université de Rennes - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Said Hussein: LU / ULB - الجامعة اللبنانية [بيروت] = Lebanese University [Beirut] = Université libanaise [Beyrouth]
Leila Zein: LU / ULB - الجامعة اللبنانية [بيروت] = Lebanese University [Beirut] = Université libanaise [Beyrouth]

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: This paper is proposed to clarify the effectiveness of semantic expressions used to designate climate change in France context, i.e. "réchauffement climatique" ("global warming"); "changement climatique" ("climate change"); and "derangement climatique" ("climate imbalance"). An experimental study (sample size N = 126) based on 'linguistic semantics' approach is conducted in order to assess the effect of these expressions on concerns, perceptions risk and sensitivity regarding Climate Change (CC). Our results show that the expression "réchauffement climatique" ("global warming") is the most appropriate from a statistical standpoint. It increased the importance of the problem (salience of this issue) relative to other societal issues (e.g. unemployment, social justice, crime, etc.); it also enhanced participants' sensitivity (respondents' emotions associated with CC) more than the other expressions. We can still note however a strong difference in impact among the expressions if we were to calculate their impact on the basis of risk perception and communication objective. Results showed that when focusing our communication campaigns on nature, it would be preferable to use the term "changement" ("change"), when focusing our communication on social level, it would be preferable to use the term "réchauffement" ("warming"), whereas the term "dérèglement" ("imbalance") becomes the most suitable in seeking to build a communication campaign focusing on economic aspects. Semantics therefore should be selected depending on the communication objective. Full Text: # PDF

Keywords: climate change; communication; linguistic semantics; perception (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-02470301
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Published in International Business Research, 2018, 11 (5), pp.92. ⟨10.5539/ibr.v11n5p92⟩

Downloads: (external link)
https://hal.science/hal-02470301/document (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02470301

DOI: 10.5539/ibr.v11n5p92

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().