It is not surprising that the dominant cognitive frame through which most audiences view climate change is that of an environmental problem. However, this messaging…
It is not surprising that the dominant cognitive frame through which most audiences view climate change is that of an environmental problem. However, this messaging strategy has proven susceptible to counter-attacks, defensing processing, and other cognitive biases. As such, many environmental advocates are switching gears. From Barack Obama to Pope Francis, the environment-as-public-health-concern narrative is increasingly found in climate change messages. This strategy involves making the abstract issue of climate change more concrete by tying it to negative health impacts, like asthma, heat-related illness, and the spread of disease. Understanding why and for whom this strategy is persuasive, particularly in a social media context where users often encounter persuasive climate change messages, can help advance theory and practice.
The purpose of this chapter is two-fold: 1.) Test the effects of climate message frame (damage to nature or damage to public health), message source (liberal or conservative organization), and the use of visual human exemplars (present or absent) in social media messages; and, 2.) Assess the predictive utility of different conceptual frameworks (personification, construal level theory, and moral foundations theory) as explanatory mechanisms for persuasive social media climate message effects. The results of a nation-wide experiment reveal that the use of visual exemplars matters when climate change is framed as an environmental problem, but otherwise message frame, source, and visual exemplar use have little impact on policy attitudes. Further analyses demonstrated that multiple conceptual mechanisms related to the aforementioned theories help explain social media effects on climate change attitudes.
The purpose of this paper is to provide an examination of emotional experiences, particularly how they are situated in the readers’ advisory (RA) literature and the…
The purpose of this paper is to provide an examination of emotional experiences, particularly how they are situated in the readers’ advisory (RA) literature and the literatures from a variety of outside disciplines in order to create taxonomies of affect from this context.
The approach of this study is twofold. First, this work reviews the literature on affect in Library and Information Science (LIS) and ancillary disciplines in order to understand the definition of affect. Second, using extant taxonomies and resources noted from the literature review, taxonomies are created for three aspects of affect: emotions, tones, and associations.
This paper contextualises and defines affect for the LIS discipline. Further, a result of the work is the creation of three taxonomies through an RA lens by which affective experiences can be classified. The resulting three taxonomies focus on emotion, tone, and associations.
The taxonomies of emotion, tone, and associations can be applied to the practical work of bibliographic description, helping to expand access and organisation through an affective lens. These taxonomies of affect could be used by readers’ advisors to help readers describe their desired reading experiences. As the taxonomies have been constructed from an RA perspective, and can be applied to the RA literature, they could expand the understanding of RA theory, especially that of appeal.
This study furthers the exploration of affect in LIS and provides tangible taxonomies of affect for the LIS discipline in an RA context, which have not been previously produced.
The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, assess the effects of the peers’ recovery narratives on service users’ perceived mental health recovery; and second, explore…
The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, assess the effects of the peers’ recovery narratives on service users’ perceived mental health recovery; and second, explore various stakeholders’ perspectives on the program, specifically its facilitators and barriers.
The study used a convergent mixed-method design. First, a pre-test post-test design was used with service users to evaluate the peer recovery narrative program. They completed the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) and participated in qualitative interviews that explored perspectives on their mental health recovery before and after the program. Second, a cross-sectional design was used to explore stakeholder groups’ perspectives on the recovery narrative program immediately after listening to the narratives.
While findings show that there was no statistical difference between scores on the RAS before and after the peer narratives, thematic analysis revealed a change in service users’ understanding of recovery post-narratives. Other stakeholder groups confirmed this change. However, some healthcare professionals questioned the universal positive effects of the peer recovery narrative program on service users. Stakeholders agreed that beyond effects of the peer recovery narrative program on service users, there were also positive effects among the peers themselves.
To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first Canadian study, and one of the first studies to rely on mixed-methods and various stakeholder groups to evaluate the impact of peer recovery narratives on service users. The research, thus, fills a knowledge gap on peer recovery narratives.