See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/294259263

Climate of Opinion

Chapter · January 2014

DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_406

CITATIONS READS

0 931

1 author:

Sergiu Bălţătescu
University of Oradea
61 PUBLICATIONS   410 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Child well-being in Romania View project

Narcissism(s) and self-esteem(s) in cross-cultural context View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Sergiu Bălţătescu on 13 February 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Climate of Opinion
for Arctic communities, as well as for other
regions of the world most vulnerable to climate
change, such as the Himalaya, the Andes, and
South Pacific islands. Understanding the human
dimensions of current and future global climate
change, and thinking about appropriate adaptive
strategies, means understanding past climate
change, and how human societies have responded
to, coped with, and negotiated change (e.g.,
Henshaw, 2003).
How Arctic communities are to become resil-
ient to climate change and how they should
prepare to respond, cope with, adapt to, and
negotiate climate change and its impacts, risks,
and opportunities will require urgent and special
attention. The question of resilience (both social
and ecological) is of critical importance for pol-
icy discussion, as it is a crucial aspect of the
sustainability of local livelihoods and resource
utilization. There is still little known about
how societies build adaptive capacity in the
face of climate change. Moreover, researchers
and decision-makers need to be particularly
attentive to the reality that communities differ
in the ways they perceive risk, in the ways
they utilize strategies for mitigating negative
change, and in the effectiveness of local adap-
tive capacity. Policy responses need to be
informed by a greater understanding of how
potential impacts of climate change are distrib-
uted across different regions and populations in
the circumpolar north. Policy responses should
also recognize climate change impacts within
the broader context of rapid social and economic
change and in their implementation should
underscore the reality that climate change is
but one of several problems affecting people
and their livelihoods in the Arctic today (Nuttall
et al., 2008).
Cross-References
▶ Community Adaptation, Arctic
▶ Globalization, Arctic
▶ Human Development, Arctic
▶ Migration, Arctic
▶ Subsistence in the Arctic
953 C
References
ACIA. (2005). Arctic climate impact assessment. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crate, S. A. (2008). Gone the bull of winter: Grappling
with the cultural implications of and anthropology’s
role(s) in global climate change. Current Anthropol-
ogy, 49(4), 569–594. C
Ford, J., & Beaumier, M. (2011). Feeding the family
during times of stress. The Geographical Journal,
177(1), 44–61.
Ford, J., Smit, B., & Wandel, J. (2006). Vulnerability to
climate change in the Arctic: A case study from Arctic
Bay, Canada. Global Environmental Change, 16,
145–160.
Henshaw, A. (2003). Climate and culture in the north: The
interface of archaeology, paleoenvironmental science,
and oral history. In S. Strauss & B. Orlove (Eds.),
Weather, climate, culture (pp. 217–231). New York:
Berg.
IPCC. (2007). Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation
and vulnerability. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Krupnik, I., & Jolly, D. (2002). The earth is faster now:
Indigenous observations of Arctic environmental
change ARCUS, Fairbanks.
Lange, M. A. (2005). Climate change. In M. Nuttall (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of the arctic (pp. 365–373). New York/
London: Routledge.
Nuttall, M., Berkes, F., Forbes, B, Kofinas, G., Vlassova,
T. & Wenzel, G. (2005). Hunting, herding, fishing and
gathering: Indigenous peoples and renewable resource
use in the Arctic. In ACIA, Arctic Climate Impact
Assessment (Ed.), (pp. 649–690). Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Nuttall, M., Forest, P. A. & Mathiesen, S. D. (2008).
Adaptation to climate change in the Arctic.
A background paper prepared for the joint seminar of
UArctic Rectors’ Forum and the Standing Committee
of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region on February
28, 2008, at the Arctic Centre in Rovaniemi, Finland.
UArctic Secretariat, Rovaniemi, (p. 5).
Climate of Opinion
Sergiu Baltatescu
Department of Sociology and Social Work and
Philosophy, University of Oradea, Oradea,
Romania
Synonyms
Dominant Current of Opinion
C 954
Definition
Climate of opinion is the perceived majority of
opinions of a given social group at a given time.
Description
The Uses Within History of Ideas
The concept originates in the history of
ideas, seemingly coined by the seventeenth
century author Joseph Glanville and
rediscovered by Alfred Whitehead in his Lowell
lectures (1925) (Geiger, 1955). Among histo-
rians, it was popularized by Carl Becker,
(1932), being considered synonymous with
“instinctively held preconceptions,” “con-
ventional world-views,” “basic intellectual
viewpoint,” “spirit of an age” (Zeitgeist),
“Weltanshaunung”, “intellectual climate,”
“collective ‘state of mind,’” “the prevailing psy-
chological state,” and “national mood.” The
main idea behind the concept is that there is
a generality of opinions or at least of a certain
way of seeing that is specific to a certain histor-
ical era. Skotheim (1969) highlights that even
the historians are influenced by this climate of
opinion when they record and interpret the his-
torical facts.
As such, the concept reflects a modern
relativistic paradigm, but it is in itself subject
to critics, on the basis of its oversimplification
(by not taking into consideration the contradic-
tions within the same culture and era), elitism
(the characteristics of works of some preemi-
nent intellectuals are taken as common to
a whole era), and reification (considering ideas
independent of human agency). In the recent
intellectual history, it is replaced by the term
“discourse,” also subject to many critiques
(McDaniel, 2004).
As Ritter (1986, p. 459) observes, the notion
“suggests a loose relationship to the origins
of social psychology in the early twentieth
century” – a reference to mass psychology of
Gustave le Bon. Within the field of sociology of
communication, the concept will lose its elitist
and intellectualist characteristics.
Climate of Opinion
Spiral of Silence
The climate of opinion will be borrowed
and reshaped by the famous ▶ public opinion
specialist Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann (b. 1916,
d. 2010) to represent the majority of opinions of
a given social group at a given time. It constitutes
a central point of her theory of the
“spiral of silence” (1974). Modern individuals,
she claims, have a “quasi-statistical sense”
(Noelle-Neumann, 1987). They actively
scrutinize their “social environment” and make
assumptions about the “majority” of opinions.
In a static opinion context, driven by a fear of
social isolation, they will express their opinions
only if these are consonant with what they
perceive to be the same with the majority. The
estimation that her opinion is losing ground
will trigger a more reserved attitude toward
expressing this opinion, resulting even in the
reluctance to express it. This downward spiral,
leading to a suppression of minority views,
is called the “spiral of silence.”
Psychological Underpinnings
The effect of spiral of silence can be seen as
opposite to ▶ positivity bias: People underesti-
mate the social amplitude of their opinions and
overestimate the amplitude of an opposite idea.
Spiral of silence is also grounded on a theory
of “fear of isolation” that keeps people alert
to the social environment. Based on the
Asch (1955) experiments of social conformity,
“fear of isolation” drives people toward conform-
ism even when people “saw with their own
eyes that the majority view was not correct”
(Asch, 1955).
A refinement of the theory suggests that this is
driven more by positive attraction (Salmon &
Kline, 1983). Anticipative socialization (people
adopt behaviors and opinions of groups in
which they want to integrate) may also explain
such behaviors.
Role of Mass-media
Whatever the psychological mechanism
involved, the role of the media within the theory
is essential. Media not only affect public opinion
but also report the popular opinion, re-presenting
Climate of Opinion
the climate of opinion at a given moment. Indeed,
when the topic is clear (such in the case of an
election), people can have a more accurate
perception of public opinion. Mass-media
intervene more in other contexts when such
perception cannot be possible, and thus affect
the climate of opinion (Jeffres, 2008). They
create a picture of opinions that are shared by
most people and of opinions which are not
popular. Thus, media are “ubiquitous” (we are
always exposed to them) and “consonant”
(because of the similarity of news and other
information) (Salmon & Glynn, 1996).
Implications for Moral-social Life
While consensus is an indispensable condition
for the good functioning of society, conformity
may be dysfunctional because it eliminates
the independent contribution of every individual.
As Asch (1955, p. 5) puts it, unconditional
conformity makes “the social process [..] polluted
[. . .]. That we have found the tendency to confor-
mity in our society so strong that reasonably
intelligent and well-meaning young people are
willing to call white black is a matter of concern.”
Thus, the spiral of silence can limit the
expression of different point of views and
discourage open discussions that are conducive
to organizational and societal improvement.
A solution would be the development of crit-
ical thinking. As Asch’ experiments also showed,
if subjects with different views are supported by
at least one confederate, the rate of conformity
dropped to a fourth of the level registered under
conditions of unanimity.
Climate of Opinion as a Social Indicator
Noelle-Neumann defines climate of opinion
indicators as a special type of social indicator as
those who report “assumptions and observations
made by the individual about his environment, in
part directly and personally, and in part indirectly
perceived through reporting in the media”
(Noelle-Neumann, 1987).
As such, it can be categorized as an evaluative
subjective social indicator (see ▶ Social Indicators)
Measuring the climate of opinion is done by
asking people to evaluate a subject (attitudes,
955 C
Climate of Opinion, Table 1 Perceived QOL for self
and others (Source: Noelle-Neumann, 1987)
Own satisfaction
Most people % with life %
Satisfied with life 47 79
Not so satisfied 40 21
Undecided 13 0.5 C
level of stress, life satisfaction, etc.) and to
report their opinions on how others perceive the
same issue (Noelle-Neumann, 1987). In most of
cases, she found an obvious discrepancy between
the report of own satisfaction and the perception
of the satisfaction of others.
Example:
1. Do you have the impression that most people
in the Federal Republic are satisfied with their
lives generally speaking or they are not so
satisfied?
2. Would you say that you are satisfied with your
life generally speaking or are you not so
satisfied (Table 1)?
Climate of Opinion, Better-Than-Average
Effect, and Psychological Distance
These results are in concordance with what was
named the better-than-average effect: People
report they are more satisfied with their
life as whole than the average person. While
better-than-average effect was proposed within
a psychological framework, and is explained by
the need of ▶ self-enhancement or well-being
▶ homeostasis, the climate of opinion approach
insists on the social influence effects of media
that builds a picture of dissatisfaction or ill-being
in the larger geographical areas: Mass-media
build our perception that people in the country
are rather stressed or dissatisfied with social
conditions.
Noelle-Neumann (1987) found this kind of
discrepancy to be true not only for the evaluation
of personal conditions, but also of conditions
in the immediate vicinity, compared with the
condition in the country in general. Indeed,
further works show that the perception of climate
of opinion varies with ▶ psychological distance.
For example, people from one’s city or from
C 956
country are judged to be less satisfied with life
than family, friends, or neighbors. This is
explained in the framework of the influence of
mass-media: Evaluation of how satisfied people
are in the country can only be the results of news
on TV, radio, and so on, while we make an idea
on how closer people are satisfied by simply
interacting with them. Moreover, an increased
level of media use is associated with lower levels
of evaluation of satisfaction of people in the
country (Baltatescu, 2001).
Critiques and Limitations
The theory of spiral of silence was subject to
various critiques (see, for example, Scheufele &
Moy, 2000), most of them focusing on the
mechanisms of conformity. Individual or social
psychological traits are associated with variations
in conformity effects. For example, a more
positive self-concept discourages conformity.
Collectivism is associated with a drive for
conformity to the group. In other contexts, the
conformity effect was not even confirmed
(Jeffres, Neuendorf, & Atkin, 1999).
Cross-References
▶ Collectivism
▶ Communication and Personal Well-Being
▶ Cross-Cultural Comparison
▶ Homeostasis
▶ Mass Media and Quality of Life
▶ Media Literacy
▶ Moral Theories
▶ Positivity Bias
▶ Psychological Distance
▶ Public Opinion
▶ Self-enhancement
▶ Subjective Indicators
References
Asch, S. E. (1955). Opinions and social pressure. Scientific
American, 193(5), 31–35. doi:10.1038/scientifi-
camerican1155-31.
View publication stats
Clinical Counseling
Baltatescu, S. Mass-media, climate of opinion and
subjective well-being. International conference:
The role of mass media and the new information
and communication technologies during the
democratization process of the societies in
Central and Eastern Europe, Oradea, October
11–14, 2001.
Becker, C. L. (1932). The heavenly city of the eighteenth
century philosophers. New Haven: Yale University
Press.
Geiger, H. (1955). New climate of opinion. Manas
Journal, VIII(27), 1–4.
Jeffres, L. W. (2008). Climate of opinion. In
W. Donsbach (Ed.), The international encyclopedia
of communication (pp. 520–522). Malden, MA:
Blackwell.
Jeffres, L. W., Neuendorf, K. A., & Atkin, D. (1999).
Spirals of silence: Expressing opinions when
the climate of opinion is unambiguous. Political
Communication, 16(2), 115–131. doi:10.1080/
105846099198686.
McDaniel, C. (2004). Climates of opinion. Accessed June
4, 2012, from http://modeforcaleb.blogspot.ro/2004/
09/climates-of-opinion.html.
Noelle-Neumann, E. (1974). The spiral of silence:
A theory of public opinion. Journal of Communica-
tion, 24(2), 43–51.
Noelle-Neumann, E. (1987, November). Quality of life
indicators. Measuring economic and social
well-being: The german experience. Paper presented
at Statistics Users’ Conference, London. Accessed
May 20, 2012, from http://worlddatabaseofhappiness.
eur.nl/hap_bib/freetexts/noelle-neumann_e_1987.pdf.
Ritter, H. (1986). Dictionary of concepts in history.
Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Salmon, C. T., & Glynn, C. J. (1996). Communication and
public opinion as social control. In M. B. Salwen &
D. W. Stacks (Eds.), An integrated approach to
communication theory and research. Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Salmon, C. T., & Kline, F. G. (1983). The Spiral of
Silence Ten Years Later: An Examination and Evalu-
ation. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the Inter-
national Communication Association, Dallas, TX,
May 26–30.
Scheufele, D. A., & Moy, P. (2000). Twenty-five years of
the spiral of silence: A conceptual review and
empirical outlook. International Journal of Public
Opinion Research, 12(1), 3–28.
Skotheim, R. A. (1969). The historian and the
climate of opinion. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley
Pub. Co.
Clinical Counseling
▶ Counseling