Effective climate policies and emission reductions are crucial for achieving carbon neutrality and meeting the Paris Agreement goals. However, implementing such transformative policies requires broad public support and acceptance, which hinges on public perception of risks, needs, and policy fairness. Climate change risk perception significantly influences climate policy attitudes and support levels. Many people perceive climate change impacts as psychologically distant, affecting their perceived urgency for emission reductions. Greater perceived distance correlates with less public engagement and policy support. A lack of knowledge about the varied consequences of different strategies leads to tunnel vision, distorting opinions on policy fairness. Psychological distance (PD) refers to how proximal or distant a phenomenon is perceived. PD has four dimensions: physical, temporal, social, and hypothetical. A psychologically distant event impacts distant places, occurs far in the future, affects dissimilar people, and is uncertain or abstract. While climate change impacts are increasingly evident globally, many still view it as psychologically distant, especially in countries with less direct exposure. Studies on the link between PD and climate change support have yielded inconsistent results, prompting research on reducing PD through improved, localized, and personally relevant information. Various communication techniques aim to reduce PD, including focusing on local impacts, emphasizing global identity, communicating concrete consequences and solutions, highlighting disastrous impacts alongside feasible actions, and using immersive media. However, some research suggests that reducing PD may not automatically translate into increased climate action. For example, personalized risk messaging can sometimes reduce climate change concerns, while other studies found no correlation between reduced psychological distance and increased policy support. There's a need for more nuanced research focusing on specific contexts within climate change (e.g., impact perception, policy support, sustainable behavior). Finland's Climate Act (423/2022), with its 2035 carbon neutrality target, demonstrates progressive climate policy. While Finland and the Nordics are considered climate policy pioneers, challenges remain in successful implementation. Public opinion surveys reveal considerable support for climate action in Finland, but also highlight a need for more proactive government action. There's a research gap regarding the relationship between climate communication techniques, PD, and climate policy support in Finland. This study addresses this gap by investigating the connection between climate impact information, PD, and perceptions of climate policy paths among the Finnish public.

Existing literature highlights the importance of perceived psychological distance (PD) in shaping public attitudes towards climate change and support for related policies. Studies have explored the relationship between different dimensions of PD (spatial, temporal, social, and hypothetical) and levels of engagement with climate change issues. However, findings regarding the effectiveness of reducing PD to promote climate action have been inconsistent. Some studies suggest that personalized risk messaging or localizing climate change information can reduce concerns or increase engagement, while others show no such effect or even a negative impact, highlighting the complexity of the relationship between information and action. The literature also reveals diverse communication strategies aimed at reducing PD and fostering public support for climate policies. These include using local impacts, global identity, concrete consequences, and immersive media to make climate change more relatable and less abstract. The effectiveness of these strategies, however, remains a subject of ongoing investigation, with calls for more focused research examining the specific contexts where PD plays a crucial role in shaping attitudes and behaviors.

This study employed a mixed-methods approach using downscaled climate models to generate high-resolution climate scenarios, an interactive visualization tool to communicate tailored climate information, and a national survey to investigate the impact of this information on public knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of psychological distance. **Climate Models:** Downscaled global climate model data from the Climate Impact Lab Global Downscaled Projections for Climate Impacts Research (CIL GDPCIR) project were used. Data on precipitation and daily air temperature from two scenarios (SSP1-2.6: decreasing emissions; SSP2-4.5: increasing emissions) were obtained. An ensemble of CMIP6 models was employed, and ensemble means were calculated for each variable. The ECHAM-HAMMOZ model was used for projected air quality (PM2.5). **Metrics:** The interactive tool depicted changes between 2020 and 2040 in five metrics: heat wave days, heavy rain days, winter duration, PM2.5 attributable diseases, and household electricity consumption for heating. These metrics were derived from climate and air quality model outputs. Vulnerability was assessed based on location factors (artificial surfaces, flood risk) and personal attributes (age, income, education, medical conditions, social isolation), aggregated using a geometric mean. **Interactive Tool:** An interactive web tool (https://www.climateguide.fi/articles/how-could-climate-change-affect-you/) was developed to communicate scenario information and vulnerability levels. Users input their location and personal attributes to receive personalized climate projections and vulnerability estimates. The tool displays a radar chart showing projected changes in the five metrics and a vulnerability level indicator. **Survey:** A nationally representative survey (1017 respondents) was conducted in Finland between June 29th and July 18th, 2023. The survey included: (1) basic respondent information; (2) claims about climate change and climate policies (measured using a Likert scale); (3) a knowledge test assessing respondents' understanding of climate change impacts; (4) use of the interactive tool; (5) repeated claims about climate change and climate policies; and (6) open-ended questions exploring changes in thinking and information needs. Psychological distance was measured using three claims related to spatial, social, and temporal dimensions. The knowledge test assessed understanding of projected changes in the five metrics under increasing and decreasing emissions scenarios. Open responses were analyzed using data-driven thematic analysis.

The study revealed several key findings regarding knowledge, attitudes, psychological distance, and the impact of tailored climate information: **Knowledge:** Respondents initially perceived their knowledge of local climate impacts as good (72.5% partly or fully agreed), but the knowledge test showed a lower actual knowledge level (average score 6.4/20). Higher perceived knowledge combined with negative attitudes towards climate science and policy predicted poor knowledge test results. The interactive tool significantly increased perceived knowledge (80.6% partly or fully agreed after tool use), with a notable increase in "fully agree" responses. **Attitudes:** Before using the tool, most respondents agreed that climate action was justified and that climate policies could alleviate environmental changes. The “fully agree” responses increased after using the tool on most claims. Age and income significantly influenced attitudes, with older and higher-income respondents generally holding more positive attitudes. Tailored information reinforced existing attitudes but had a more complex impact on the younger generation and those with high income. **Psychological Distance:** Spatially, climate change impacts were largely perceived as proximal. Temporally and socially, however, there was more variation, with a significant portion perceiving impacts as fairly or very distant. Obtaining tailored information led to a marginal increase in perceived temporal and social distance, especially among low-vulnerability individuals. Those with high income or an urban domicile tended to perceive climate change as more distant after seeing their low vulnerability. **Impact of Tailored Information:** The tailored information affected knowledge and attitudes differently depending on demographic factors and personal vulnerability. For high-vulnerability individuals (e.g., older, low-income, with pre-existing conditions, rural domicile), the information seemed to increase the perceived relevance and proximity of climate change impacts. For low-vulnerability individuals, the effect was reversed: It increased the perceived psychological distance. Open responses indicated that many were surprised by the scale of impacts (either small or large) and their own vulnerability level. **Information Needs:** Open responses revealed strong interest in global perspectives (comparing Finland's impacts and contributions with other countries), a desire for objective information, details about specific climate policies, and more information about the impacts on nature. This aligns with previous studies indicating a need for broader contexts and economic and global comparisons in climate change communication.

This study demonstrates that providing personalized climate information, while potentially beneficial in raising awareness, has a complex and nuanced effect on public attitudes and perception of psychological distance. The impact of tailored information is not uniform across all demographic groups. For vulnerable individuals, tailored information increased perceived proximity and strengthened support for climate policies. Conversely, for less vulnerable individuals, the same information created a sense of greater distance, potentially leading to decreased support. This supports findings from other studies that personalized risk messaging doesn't automatically translate to increased climate action. The unexpected increase in perceived social distance among younger respondents, typically considered more climate-conscious, suggests that framing and presentation of information are critical. The findings underscore the importance of considering demographic factors and individual vulnerability when designing and implementing climate communication strategies. A one-size-fits-all approach may not be effective, and a more nuanced approach that balances personalized information with a broader global context might be needed to maximize public engagement and support for climate policies.

This study highlights the complex relationship between personalized climate information, psychological distance, and attitudes towards climate policies. While tailored information increased knowledge and reinforced existing positive attitudes for some, it also increased perceived distance for others, particularly those with low vulnerability. Future research should explore the optimal balance between personalized and global information, and investigate effective ways to communicate the global implications of climate change even to low-vulnerability individuals. Further research employing a control group and a broader range of metrics could provide more detailed insights.

The study has some limitations, most notably the lack of a control group that received general (non-tailored) climate change information. This prevents a direct comparison of the impact of tailored versus general information. The chosen metrics for the interactive tool, while deemed relevant, might have influenced responses. For instance, some respondents requested information on biodiversity impacts. Future studies could address these limitations by incorporating a control group, testing a wider range of metrics, and investigating the impact of different communication approaches in more detail.