Americans experience a false social reality by underestimating popular climate policy support by nearly half

Collective action on climate change requires individuals to recognize the threat and engage in coordinated actions. However, this is hampered by pluralistic ignorance—a shared misperception of others' beliefs and behaviors. This study investigates the extent of pluralistic ignorance regarding climate change policy support in the US. Previous research hinted at this phenomenon, showing overestimation of climate change denial and underestimation of concern among specific groups. However, a large-scale, representative study examining a range of climate policies was lacking. This study aims to address this gap by investigating the prevalence, magnitude, and potential sources of pluralistic ignorance regarding climate policy support across various demographics and geographical locations within the US. Understanding the extent of this misperception is critical because it can hinder discussions about climate change and lead to inaction due to perceived lack of public support.

Prior research suggests pluralistic ignorance regarding climate change exists. Studies have demonstrated that people overestimate the percentage of others who reject human-caused climate change and underestimate the level of concern among their peers. This underestimation has been observed across various countries and in student samples. Some studies also found evidence of underestimating support for specific climate policies, like regulating CO2 as a pollutant or expanding offshore wind. However, these studies were either limited in sample size or representation, making it necessary for a comprehensive examination using a nationally representative sample.

This study utilized a large, stratified sample of 6119 US adults from the Ipsos eNation Omnibus nationally representative panel. The sample was weighted to ensure representativeness. Participants were asked to estimate the percentage of Americans who are concerned about climate change and support various climate policies (carbon tax, 100% renewable energy mandate, siting renewables on public lands, and the Green New Deal). They were also asked to provide similar estimates for their home states. Actual support levels were obtained from nationally representative public opinion data. The study used one-sample t-tests to compare perceived and actual support levels and explored potential sources of misperception using regression analyses. Factors examined included political affiliation, exposure to local norms (proxied by Biden's 2020 election margin and climate protest counts per capita), and news media consumption.

The study revealed a widespread and significant underestimation of public support for climate change policies and concern. Between 79% and 88% of the sample underestimated public concern or policy support for each item. While actual support for these policies ranged from 66% to 80%, the average estimate was between 37% and 43%. This represents a substantial misperception, inverting the reality of public opinion. The misperception was consistent across all states and demographic groups. Republicans consistently underestimated support more than Democrats or Independents. Exploratory analyses suggested that several factors contribute to this misperception: 1. **False Consensus Effect:** Individuals less likely to support climate policies (conservatives) underestimated support more. 2. **Availability Heuristic:** Local norms (political ideology of the state and number of climate protests) influenced estimates. States with higher Biden vote margins and more protests showed lower levels of misperception. 3. **Media Consumption:** Consumption of conservative news outlets correlated with greater misperception. While consumers of all media outlets underestimated support, the magnitude was larger for conservative outlets. Public broadcasting and mainstream news outlets showed less of an effect.

The findings demonstrate a pervasive "false social reality" regarding climate change policy support in the US. This widespread misperception could significantly hinder collective action by discouraging discussions about climate change and creating a false impression of limited public support. The results are consistent with theories of false consensus, availability heuristics, and the influence of media bias. The strong influence of political ideology underscores the importance of considering political polarization in addressing climate change. The study's findings highlight the urgent need for interventions to correct these misperceptions and foster more accurate understanding of public opinion on climate change.

This study reveals a significant and widespread underestimation of public support for climate change policies in the US, creating a "false social reality." This misperception is linked to factors like political affiliation, local norms, and media consumption. Addressing this gap in accurate perception is crucial for effective collective action on climate change. Future research should explore interventions to correct these misperceptions and examine the causal relationships between the identified factors and pluralistic ignorance.

The study relies on self-reported data, which can be subject to biases. The correlational nature of the analysis limits the ability to establish causal relationships between the examined factors and misperceptions. The study did not control for all potential confounding variables, and the limited scope of media outlets considered should also be acknowledged. Further research that employs experimental designs is needed to confirm the causal relationships.