Replication Data for: The Impact of Elite Frames and Motivated Reasoning on Beliefs in a Global Warming Conspiracy: The Promise and Limits of Trust

Given the potential attitudinal and behavioral impact of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) conspiracy beliefs, it is important to understand their causes and moderators. Here, I engage two explanations for the variation in these beliefs: the first is the choice among elites to frame AGW using the phrase \"global warming\" (GW) as opposed to \"climate change\" (CC); the second is partisan motivated reasoning. I then develop a theory about the role of trust in moderating the impact of the two frames on AGW conspiracy beliefs. In the case of CC, which is perceived as less severe than GW (and is therefore less identity threatening among Republicans), I hypothesize that trust will moderate hoax beliefs among Republicans. In the case of GW, where the implications of existence beliefs have more unpleasant policy consequences, motivated reasoning will \"win out,\" and trust will not moderate conspiracy endorsement among Republicans. Results from an original question framing experiment are consistent with my hypotheses. Whereas trust is a welcome commodity to those looking to persuade citizens to support AGW-ameliorating policies, it is not a cure-all, especially in the face of elite partisan cues that edify pre-existing attitudes/identities and arouse a strong desire to engage in motivated reasoning.鉴于人为全球变暖（Anthropogenic Global Warming, AGW）阴谋论信念可能对个体态度与行为产生潜在影响，厘清其成因与调节变量具有重要意义。本文针对此类信念的差异提出两种解释：其一为精英群体的框架选择——即使用“全球变暖（Global Warming, GW）”而非“气候变化（Climate Change, CC）”来表述人为全球变暖；其二为党派动机性推理（partisan motivated reasoning）。随后，本文构建了一项关于信任在两类框架对AGW阴谋论信念的影响中所发挥的调节作用的理论。相较于GW，CC被认为危害程度更低，因此在共和党群体中对其身份认同的威胁性也更小——据此本文提出假设：在CC框架下，信任会对共和党群体的AGW骗局信念产生调节作用。而在GW框架下，由于认同人为全球变暖的存在会带来更不受欢迎的政策后果，动机性推理将占据主导地位，此时信任不会对共和党群体的阴谋论认同度产生调节作用。原创性问题框架实验的结果与本文提出的假设相符。尽管对于试图说服民众支持AGW减缓政策的群体而言，信任是一项颇具价值的助力，但它绝非万能灵药——尤其是当精英群体释放党派线索（elite partisan cues），强化民众既有的态度与身份认同，并激发其强烈的动机性推理意愿时，信任的作用便会大打折扣。