On the defensive: reactance and trustworthiness in processing written information about climate change

Communicating concrete solutions can help mitigate climate change. However, such messaging may trigger psychological reactance if recipients perceive their autonomy threatened. This might impact trustworthiness perceptions of different information sources. Using a 2 × 2 experimental design, we examined how information source (climate scientist vs. activist) and type of appeal (individual vs. policy) affect reactance and trustworthiness perceptions in a written text on sustainability in the transport sector. Dependent measures were individuals’ psychological reactance and evaluation of epistemic trustworthiness. Findings indicate that climate scientists were perceived as more competent but not as having more integrity or being more benevolent. Communicating individual-level solutions led to higher perceived freedom threat and higher psychological reactance. Exploratory evidence indicates that perceived freedom threat and psychological reactance serially mediate the relationship between type of appeal and epistemic trustworthiness. Theoretical and practical implications for processing written climate change information in science communication and education are discussed.