Audience Reactions to Climate Change and Science in Disaster Cli-fi Films: A Qualitative Analysis

Lauren N Griffin


Little scholarly attention has been paid to how audiences interpret pop culture messages about climate. This paper addresses this issue by taking up the case of disaster cli-fi films and exploring how audiences react to film representations of climate change. It draws on data from focus groups to evaluate audience responses to disaster cli-fi films. Analysis reveals that by only briefly discussing climate change in their plotlines, the films weaken their environmental message. The paper concludes with a discussion of the effects of disaster cli-fi films on environmental attitudes and suggestions for further research.


climate change; narratives; mass media; public understanding of science; focus groups

Full Text:



Barriga, C. A., Shapiro, M. A., & Fernandez, M. L. (2010). Science information in fictional movies: Effects of context and gender. Science Communication, 32(1), 3–24. doi:10.1177/1075547009340338

Beattie, G., Sale, L., & McGuire, L. (2011). An inconvenient truth? Can a film really affect psychological mood and our explicit attitudes towards climate change? Semiotica, 187(1–4), 105–125. doi:10.1515/semi.2011.066

Bloom, D. (2017). The Cli-Fi Report. Retrieved from

Boykoff, J. M., & Boykoff, M. T. (2007). Climate change and journalistic norms: A case-study of US mass-media coverage. Geoforum, 38(6), 1190–1204. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.01.008

Boykoff, M. T., & Rajan, S. R. (2007). Signals and noise. Mass-media coverage of climate change in the USA and the UK. EMBO Reports, 8(3), 207–211. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400924

Braddock, K., & Dillard, J. P. (2016). Meta-analytic evidence for the persuasive effect of narratives on beliefs, attitudes, intentions, and behaviors. Communication Monographs, 83(4), 446–467. doi:10.1080/03637751.2015.1128555

Braddock, K., & Horgan, J. (2016). Towards a guide for constructing and disseminating counternarratives to reduce support for terrorism. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 39(5), 381–404. doi:10.1080/1057610X.2015.1116277

Brulle, R. J., Carmichael, J., & Jenkins, J. C. (2012). Shifting public opinion on climate change: An empirical assessment of factors influencing concern over climate change in the U.S., 2002-2010. Climatic Change, 114(1), 169. doi:10.1007/s10584-012-0403-y

Busselle, R., & Bilandzic, H. (2008). Fictionality and perceived realism in experiencing stories: A model of narrative comprehension and engagement. Communication Theory, 18(2), 255–280. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.00322.x

Busselle, R. W., & Bilandzic, H. (2009). Measuring narrative engagement. Media Psychology, 12(4), 321–347. doi:10.1080/15213260903287259

Butler, A. C., Zaromb, F. M., Lyle, K. B., & Roediger, H. L. (2009). Using popular films to enhance classroom learning: The good, the bad, and the interesting. Psychological Science, 20(9), 1161–1168. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02410.x

Caputo, N. M., & Rouner, D. (2011). Narrative processing of entertainment media and mental illness stigma. Health Communication, 26(7), 595–604. doi:10.1080/10410236.2011.560787

Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Charmaz, K. (2008). Grounded theory as an emergent method. In S. N. Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy (Eds.), Handbook of emergent methods. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Corbett, J., & Durfee, J. (2004). Testing public (un)certainty of science: Media representations of global warming. Science Communication, 26(2), 129–151. doi:10.1177/1075547004270234

Dahlstrom, M. F. (2010). The role of causality in information acceptance in narratives: An example from science communication. Communication Research, 37(6), 857–875. doi:10.1177/0093650210362683

Davison, W. P. (1983). The third-person effect in communication. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 47(1), 1–15. doi:10.1086/268763

Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(5), 701–721. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.701

Hall, A. (2003). Reading realism: Audiences’ evaluations of the reality of media texts. Journal of Communication, 53(4), 624–641. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2003.tb02914.x

Hart, P. S., & Leiserowitz, A. (2009). Finding the teachable moment: An analysis of information-seeking behavior on global warming related websites during the release of The Day After Tomorrow. Environmental Communication - A Journal of Nature and Culture, 3(3), 355–366. doi:10.1080/17524030903265823

Howell, R. A. (2011). Lights, camera...action? Altered attitudes and behaviour in response to the climate change film The Age of Stupid. Global Environmental Change, 21(1), 177–187.


Kahan, D. (2012). Why we are poles apart on climate change: The problem isn’t the public’s reasoning capacity; it’s the polluted science-communication environment that drives people apart. Nature, 488(7411), 255. doi:10.1038/488255a

Kahan, D., Jenkins-Smith, H., & Braman, D. (2011). Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. Journal of Risk Research, 14(2), 147–174. doi:10.1080/13669877.2010.511246

Kaplan, E. A. (2015). Climate trauma: Foreseeing the future in dystopian film and fiction. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Kirby, D. A. (2003a). Science consultants, fictional films, and scientific practice. Social Studies of Science, 33(2), 231–268. doi:10.1177/03063127030332015

Kirby, D. A. (2003b). Scientists on the set: Science consultants and the communication of science in visual fiction. Public Understanding of Science, 12(3), 261–278.


Konijn, E. A., van der Molen, J. H. W., & van Nes, S. (2009). Emotions bias perceptions of realism in audiovisual media: Why we may take fiction for real. Discourse Processes, 46(4), 309–340. doi:10.1080/01638530902728546

Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

Leiserowitz, A. (2004). Before and after the day after tomorrow: A US study of climate change risk perception. Environment, 46(9), 22–37.

Lowe, T., Brown, K., Dessai, S., de Franca Doria, M., Haynes, K., & Vincent, K. (2006). Does tomorrow ever come? Disaster narrative and public perceptions of climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 15(4), 435–457. doi:10.1177/0963662506063796

Marsh, E. J., Butler, A. C., & Umanath, S. (2012). Using fictional sources in the classroom: Applications from cognitive psychology. Educational Psychology Review, 24(3), 449–469. doi:10.1007/s10648-012-9204-0

Marsh, E. J., Meade, M. L., & Roediger III, H. L. (2003). Learning facts from fiction. Journal of Memory and Language, 49(4), 519–536. doi:10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00092-5

Merchant, B. (2013). Behold the Rise of Dystopian “Cli-Fi.” Retrieved from

Morgan, D. L. (1993). Successful focus groups: Advancing the state of the art. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Morgan, D. L. (1996). Focus groups. Annual Review of Sociology, 22(1), 129–152. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.22.1.129

Moyer-Guse, E. (2008). Toward a theory of entertainment persuasion: Explaining the persuasive effects of entertainment-education messages. Communication Theory, 18(3), 407–425. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.00328.x

Mulligan, K., & Habel, P. (2011). An experimental test of the effects of fictional framing on attitudes. Social Science Quarterly, 92(1), 79–99. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00758.x

Mulligan, K., & Habel, P. (2013). The implications of fictional media for political beliefs. American Politics Research, 41(1), 122–146. doi:10.1177/1532673X12453758

Murphy, P. (2014). Directing the weather, producing the climate. In Alex, R.S., Deborah, S.S., & Sachindev, P.S. (Eds.), Culture and media: Ecocritical explorations. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Murray, R. L., & Heumann, J. K. (2009). Ecology and popular film: Cinema on the edge. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Ohlheiser, A. (2017, September 11). Analysis | A running list of viral hoaxes about Irma — including one shared by the White House. The Washington Post Retrieved from

Parker, T. (2006). ManBearPig. Comedy Central. Retrieved from

Paul, B., Salwen, M. B., & Dupagne, M. (2000). The third-person effect: A meta-analysis of the perceptual hypothesis. Mass Communication and Society, 3(1), 57–85. doi:10.1207/S15327825MCS0301_04

Porter, T. (2017, September 9). Here’s some of the fake news and false rumors about Hurricane Irma. Retrieved from

Rooney, B., Benson, C., & Hennessy, E. (2012). The apparent reality of movies and emotional arousal: A study using physiological and self-report measures. Poetics, 40, 405–422. doi:10.1016/j.poetic.2012.07.004

Salwen, M. B., & Dupagne, M. (1999). The third-person effect. Communication Research, 26(5), 523. doi:10.1177/009365099026005001

Shen, F., Ahern, L., & Baker, M. (2014). Stories that count: Influence of news narratives on issue attitudes. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 91(1), 98–117. doi:10.1177/1077699013514414

Smith, N., & Leiserowitz, A. (2012). The rise of global warming skepticism: Exploring affective image associations in the United States over time. Risk Analysis, 32(6), 1021–1032. doi:10.1605/01.301-0019863810.2012

Smith, N., & Leiserowitz, A. (2014). The role of emotion in global warming policy support and opposition. Risk Analysis, 34(5), 937–948. doi:10.1111/risa.12140

Svoboda, M. (2014). The Long Melt: The Lingering Influence of The Day After Tomorrow. Retrieved from

Svoboda, M. (2016). Cli-fi on the screen(s): Patterns in the representations of climate change in fictional films. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 7(1), 43–64.


Tan, E. S. H. (2008). Entertainment is emotion: The functional architecture of the entertainment experience. Media Psychology, 11(1), 28–51. doi:10.1080/15213260701853161


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2017 Lauren N Griffin

License URL: