Scholarlink

<p>Large language models (LLMs) can support climate literacy by offering accessible, multilingual and personalized climate information. However, the effectiveness of these new communication tools remains unexplored. Here we conducted two studies to examine whether dialogues with LLMs can effectively reduce climate scepticism. In study 1 (<i>n</i> = 949), climate sceptics who engaged in short conversations with ChatGPT showed small but significant increases in pro-environmental action intentions and decreased confidence in their initial sceptical views. In study 2 (<i>n</i> = 333), similar effects were observed and extended to modest reductions in climate scepticism and policy support. It is noteworthy that the effects on reducing scepticism among sceptics are inconsistent across two studies and susceptible to decay over time. Increasing the conversation length from three to six rounds yielded no additional benefit. These mixed findings underscore the need for cautious, evidence-based integration of LLMs into climate communication strategies.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The promise and limitations of using GenAI to reduce climate scepticism

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月19日

查看全文
  • Matthew J. Hornsey,
  • Samuel Pearson,
  • Christian Bretter,
  • Sarah MacInnes,
  • Jarren L. Nylund,
  • Saphira Rekker

摘要

Large language models (LLMs) can support climate literacy by offering accessible, multilingual and personalized climate information. However, the effectiveness of these new communication tools remains unexplored. Here we conducted two studies to examine whether dialogues with LLMs can effectively reduce climate scepticism. In study 1 (n = 949), climate sceptics who engaged in short conversations with ChatGPT showed small but significant increases in pro-environmental action intentions and decreased confidence in their initial sceptical views. In study 2 (n = 333), similar effects were observed and extended to modest reductions in climate scepticism and policy support. It is noteworthy that the effects on reducing scepticism among sceptics are inconsistent across two studies and susceptible to decay over time. Increasing the conversation length from three to six rounds yielded no additional benefit. These mixed findings underscore the need for cautious, evidence-based integration of LLMs into climate communication strategies.