The credibility of environmental problems in Argentina and Spain/ La credibilidad de los problemas ambientales en Argentina y España

Abstract

Spanish

The purpose of this study is to analyse the credibility of the content of the message and that of news stories about environmental problems, comparing the cases of Argentina and Spain. Its novel contribution is that it also analyses credibility according to the generation to which the informant belongs. In Argentina, information was compiled by means of an online survey (N_Argentina = 450), whereas in Spain the same survey was conducted by interviewers (N_Spain = 493). Low levels of credibility were found for the contents of messages about environmental problems and also for the news stories and narratives generated around them. Significant differences were noted between Argentina and Spain in relation to the credibility of the content of the message (which is greater in Argentina) but not in the credibility of news stories about environmental problems. In contrast to expectations, no generational differences were found in the two countries with regard to either type of credibility. This paper discusses the implications of the lack of generational segmentation as well as the low levels of credibility detected.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alcaraz

L. G.

(2015). La construcción periodística del cambio climático: Tendencias en América Latina. Razón y Palabra, 19(3). Retrieved from http://revistarazonypalabra.org/index.php/ryp/article/view/90

Alsina

M. R.

(1993). La construcción de la noticia. Barcelona: Paidós Comunicación.

Amérigo

Aragonés

J. I.

García

J. A.

(2012). Exploring the dimensions of environmental concern: An integrative proposal. Psyecology, 3, 299–311.

Appelman

Sundar

S. S.

(2016). Measuring message credibility. Construction and validation of an exclusive scale. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 93, 59–79.

Ardèvol-Abreu

Gil de Zuniga

(2017). Effects of editorial media bias perception and media trust on the use of traditional, citizen, and social media news. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 94, 703–724.

Baigorri

Caballero

(2018). Negacionismo, políticas demoscópicas y currículum de fracasos. El caso del cambio climático en España. Aposta. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 77, 8–58.

Biggs

(2007). Thinking about generations: Conceptual positions and policy implications. Journal of Social Issues, 63, 695–711.

Carballo

(2018, December 24). Cambio climático y populismos: Política para qué y al servicio de quienes. Eldiario.es. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2AiZENV

Cash

D. W.

Clark

W. C.

Alcock

Dickson

N. M.

Eckley

Guston

D. H.

Mitchell

R. B.

(2003). Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100, 8086–8091.

10.

Castells

(2007). Communication power: Mass communication, mass self-communication, and the power relationships in the network society. In Curran

(Ed.), Media and society (pp. 3–18). London: Bloomsbury Academic.

11.

Centeno Orozco

R. D.

(2014). Discursos públicos y construcción de ciudadanía: ¿Poder de los medios de comunicación? Orbis. Revista Científica Ciencias Humanas, 10(28), 120–133.

12.

Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas . (2016). Barómetro de noviembre 2016. Madrid, España. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2ywBqOI

13.

Cockerill

(2002). Context is key: The Media role in shaping public perceptions about environmental issues. Environmental Practice, 4, 107–113.

14.

Debard

R. D.

(2004). Millennials coming to college. In Debard

R. D.

Coomes

M. D.

(Eds.), Serving the millennial generation: New directions for student services (pp. 33–45). San Francisco, CA: Jossey–Bass.

15.

Domínguez

Lafita

Mateu

(2017). Taking climate change seriously: An analysis of op–Ed articles in Spanish press. Public Understanding of Science, 26, 861–871.

16.

Feldman

Hart

P. S.

Milosevic

(2017). Polarizing news? Representations of threat and efficacy in leading US newspapers’ coverage of climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 26, 481–497.

17.

Fernández-Reyes

Piñuel-Raigada

J. L.

Vicente-Mariño

(2015). La cobertura periodística del cambio climático y del calentamiento global en El País, El Mundo y La Vanguardia. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, 70, 122–140.

18.

Flanagin

A. J.

Metzger

M. J.

(2000). Perceptions of Internet information credibility. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 515–540.

19.

Fundación Vida Silvestre Argentina . (2014, 03 June). La situación ambiental de la Argentina . Poliarquía Consultores. Retrieved from https://goo.gl/ttFUXD

20.

Gaziano

McGrath

(1986). Measuring the concept of credibility. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 63, 451–462.

21.

Ghiardo

(2004). Generaciones y juventud: Una relectura desde Mannheim y Ortega y Gasset. Última Década, 12(20), 11–46.

22.

Gitlin

(1980). The whole world is watching: Mass media in the making and unmaking of the new left. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

23.

González Alcaraz

(2015). La construcción periodística del cambio climático: Tendencias en América Latina. Razón y Palabra, 19(91). Retrieved from http://www.redalyc.org/html/1995/199541387011/

24.

Hair

J. F.

Black

W. C.

Babin

B. J.

Anderson

R. E.

Tatham

R. L.

(2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

25.

Hansen

(2011). Communication, media and environment: Towards reconnecting research on the production, content and social implications of environmental communication. International Communication Gazette, 73, 7–25.

26.

Hellmueller

Trilling

(2012, June). The credibility of credibility measures: A meta–Analysis in leading communication journals, 1951 to 2011 . WAPOR 65th Annual Conference, Hong Kong. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2NCBWQH

27.

Hidalgo-Villodres

M. C.

Casado-Castro

García-Leiva

(2014). Communicating climate change: Improving the effectiveness of public campaigns. Escritos de Psicología, 7(2), 28–35.

28.

Kantar . (2017). Trust in news. Kantar Group. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2I5XfJj.

29.

Kiousi

(2001). Public trust or mistrust? Perceptions of media credibility in the information age. Mass Communication & Society, 4, 381–403.

30.

Lee

T. M.

Markowitz

E. M.

Howe

P. D.

C. Y.

Leiserowitz

A. A.

(2015). Predictors of public climate change awareness and risk perception around the world. Nature Climate Change, 5, 1014–1020.

31.

León

de Lara

(2013). Ciencia y cambio climático. Estudio de la cobertura del cambio climático en la prensa española. In Fernández Reyes

(Dtor) Mancina-Chávez

(Coord.) (Eds.), Medios de comunicación y cambio climático (pp. 91–104). Sevilla: Fénix editora. http://bit.ly/2Axiq4G

32.

Lester

Hutchins

(2012). The power of the unseen: Environmental conflict, the media and invisibility. Media, Culture & Society, 34, 847–863.

33.

Lomborg

(2007). Cool it: The skeptical environmentalists' guide to global warming (3th ed.). London: Cyan Communications, Marshall Cavendish.

34.

Maeseele

Pepermans

(2017). Climate change communication, media and ideology. The Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Change Communication. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.578.

35.

Mateos

(2016, November 11). Cómo trabajan y qué quieren las 4 generaciones de hoy. Diario Expansion.com. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2fm9baL

36.

McCombs

(2006). Estableciendo la agenda. El impacto de los medios en la opinión pública y en el conocimiento. Barcelona: Paidós.

37.

Mehta

U. B.

(2011, May 14–17). Simulation credibility scale and credibility assessment scale . 5th Joint Army–Navy–NASA–Air Force (JANNAF) Modeling and Simulation Subcommittee Meeting, Denver. Johns Hopkins University & NASA–STD–7009. Retrieved from http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20120006603_2012004681.pdf

38.

Mercado

M. T.

(2013). De la reducción de emisiones al cambio de paradigma: La construcción social de las soluciones al cambio climático en la prensa argentina. Razón y Palabra, 18(84), 65–84.

39.

Metzger

M. J.

Flanagin

A. J.

Eyal

Lemus

D. R.

McCann

R. M.

(2003). Credibility for the 21st century: Integrating perspectives on source, message, and media credibility in the contemporary media environment. In Kalbfleisch

P. J.

(Ed.), Communication yearbook 27 (pp. 293–335). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

40.

Meyer

(1988). Defining and measuring credibility of newspapers: Developing an index. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 65, 567–574.

41.

Miller

J. D.

(2012). Climate change: Generation X attitudes, interest, and understanding. The Generation XReport, 1(4), 1–8. Retrieved from http://lsay.org/GenX_2012Iss4.pdf

42.

Moser

S. C.

(2016). Reflections on climate change communication research and practice in the second decade of the 21st century: What more is there to say? Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 7, 345–369.

43.

Muñoz

(2011). Concepto, expresión y dimensiones de la conciencia ambiental (Doctoral dissertation). Universidad de Oviedo, Oviedo, España. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2Jf5Rxx

44.

Newman

Fletcher

Kalogeropoulos

Levy

D. A.

Nielsen

R. K.

(2017). Reuters Institute digital news report 2017. Reuters Institute & University of Oxford. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2tSeHbL

45.

Nielsen

N. V.

(2015). Estilos de vida generacionales. Nielsen.com. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2aTzdky

46.

Nisbet

M. C.

Markowitz

(2016). Strategic science communication on environmental issues. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

47.

Reeves

T. C.

(2011). Generation differences and the integration of technology in learning, instruction, and performance. In Spector

J. M.

Merrill

M. D.

Elen

Bishop

M. J.

(Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 819–828). New York, NY: Springer.

48.

Oreskes

(2018). The scientific consensus on climate change: How do we know we’re not wrong? In Lloyd

Winsberg

(Eds.), Climate Modelling (pp. 31–64). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-65058-6_2

49.

Parment

(2013). Generation Y vs. Baby Boomers: Shopping behavior, buyer involvement and implications for retailing. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 20, 189–199.

50.

Peters

R. G.

Covello

V. T.

McCallum

D. B.

(1997). The determinants of trust and credibility in environmental risk communication: An empirical study. Risk Analysis, 17, 43–54.

51.

Pinheiro

J. Q.

Farias

A. C.

(2015). In search of a positive framework for communications about Global Climate Change. Positive communication about Global Climate Change. Psyecology, 6, 229–251.

52.

Poberezhskaya

(2015). Media coverage of climate change in Russia: Governmental bias and climate silence. Public Understanding of Science, 24, 96–111.

53.

Reeves

T. C.

E. J.

(2007). Generation differences and educational technology research. In Spector

Merrill

M. D.

van Merriënboer

J. J. G.

Driscoll

(Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 295–303). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

54.

Repoll

(2010). Politics and mass media in Argentina: Kirchner, Clarín and the law for audiovisual communication services. Andamios, 7(14), 35–67.

55.

Rieh

S. Y.

(2010). Credibility and cognitive authority of information. In Bates

Maack

M. N.

(Eds.), Encyclopedia of library and information sciences (3rd ed.) (pp. 1337–1344). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.

56.

Rieh

S. Y.

Hilligoss

(2008). College students’ credibility judgments in the information seeking process. In Metzger

M. J.

Flanagin

A. J.

(Eds.), Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 49–72). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

57.

Ruscio

(2008). A probability–Based measure of effect size: Robustness to base rates and other factors. Psychological Methods, 13, 19–30 .

58.

Ryan

(2017). Politics and climate change: Exploring the relationship between political parties and climate issues in Latin America. Ambiente & Sociedade, 20(3), 271–286.

59.

Statista . (2018). United States: How do you feel about global climate change? (by generation). Statista. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2RK3O8x

60.

Teruel-Rodríguez

(2016). The impact of political and economic crisis on the polarization of the Spanish media. Historia y Comunicación Social, 21, 203–220.

61.

Umeogu

(2012). Source credibility: A philosophical analysis. Open Journal of Philosophy, 2, 112–115.

62.

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change . (2007). Impacts, vulnerabilities and adaptation in developing countries. Bonn: Climate Change Secretariat (UNFCCC). Retrieved from https://bit.ly/1ZNlY6q

63.

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change . (2018). UN Climate Change annual report 2017. Bonn, Germany. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2r9YJLi.

64.

Victoria

R. M. G.

Ruiz

M. R. M. V.

Guevara

M. S. F.

(2017). Comunicación, discurso periodístico y deterioro ambiental: Noticias en la plataforma EFEverde. Ánfora, 24(43), 137–161.

65.

Vincent

(2017). El kirchnerismo y los medios: Entre el control y la polarización. Temas y Debates, 34, 101–124.

66.

Wathen

C. N.

Burkell

(2002). Believe it or not: Factors influencing credibility on the Web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53, 134–144.

67.

Wike

(2016). What the world thinks about climate change in 7 charts. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from https://goo.gl/HksFTd

68.

Wilson

E. J.

Sherrell

D. L.

(1993). Source effects in communication and persuasion research: A meta-analysis of effect size. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 21, 101–112.