Climate change belief systems across political groups in the United States

structurally embedded within people’s broader system of climate-related beliefs remains lim- ited. A prior study conducted in 22 European countries has shed some light on this question, revealing that worry about climate change stands as a central component strongly connected with its adjacent psychological elements within these systems [4]. However, whether these findings are applicable to the U.S. context, where climate change is highly politicized, remains unclear. The U.S. is a major emitter of carbon dioxide [5], underscoring the importance of examin- ing the structure and organization of public belief systems regarding climate change. Given the strong political polarization of the issue in the U.S., an analysis of how these belief systems vary among different political groups, is also important. Further, it is particularly pertinent to study the evolution of these belief systems over the past decade, a period during which there has been a notable positive change in climate change perceptions in the U.S [6]. By examining these changes from a structural perspective, we can gain insights into the effectiveness of com- munication efforts. Such an analysis can also reveal whether these collective efforts have helped to shape a more cohesive and coherent belief system regarding climate change in the American context. In the current study, a climate change belief system is defined as a network of interrelated beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors relevant to climate change [7, 8]. Within this framework,

nodes symbolize beliefs (and/or attitudes and behaviors) and edges depict the relationships between them. A belief system is empirically constructed by interlinking these individual ele- ments based on their associations. Although behavior is not typically classified as an integral component of belief systems in a direct sense, it is certainly associated with beliefs, attitudes, and perceptions. As belief systems guide behaviors and, reciprocally, behaviors can affirm or contradict beliefs, we argue that this action-reflection cycle forms a key part of belief systems. Hence, we integrate both psychological and behavioral elements into our investigation of cli- mate change belief systems. Recent advances in network analysis have helped researchers estimate the structural proper- ties of a complex psychological system where an array of psychological elements are intercon- nected. This study examines two key structural dimensions: centrality and density. Centrality, based on a structural position of a psychological element within the belief system, enables the identification of particularly influential elements [7, 9]. Mapping a belief system allows for the estimation of the structural position of each psychological element, such as whether a particu- lar belief is central or peripheral within a network. Elements centrally located in a belief system typically carry more weight than peripheral ones, due to their potentially stronger influence on other beliefs within the system [10]. For example, if worry about climate change is the central

node in a network, changes in the level of worry would subsequently be expected to have a larger cascading impact on the rest of the network than a similar level of influence on a less- central element. Network analysis can help develop more effective climate change communica- tion strategies by identifying which psychological elements are likely to be the most influential within a belief system. Density, representing the overall strength of the connections among elements [11], also provides valuable insights for climate change communication. A dense belief system denotes high correlations among its constituent elements. Individuals with a dense belief system exhibit less randomness and disorder in their opinions, and exhibit more consistency and sta- bility in their psychological processes [8, 9, 12, 13]. However, given that elements within a dense belief system are tightly interwoven, influencing the beliefs and attitudes of individuals with such a system can be more difficult [12]. Conversely, individuals with a less dense net- work are more likely to exhibit randomness and disorder in their opinions [13], with less coherent views on subjects such as climate change. Nevertheless, strategic communication can PLOS ONE Climate change belief system PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0300048 March 20, 2024 2 / 16 Funding: The author(s) received no specific funding for this work. Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.