This post explains the PLOS One Delphi study that defined climate change acceptance for undergraduate science students and what those definitions mean for qualitative researchers. Evidano is an AI-powered qualitative data analysis platform that helps researchers analyze interviews, open-ended surveys, and documents. According to the PLOS One article published on Aug 25, 2026, researchers used a mixed-methods Delphi approach that integrated a scoping review, a pilot student survey, and four rounds of expert interviews and surveys to reach stable consensus.
Key Takeaways
According to the PLOS One study published on Aug 25, 2026, experts converged on two defensible definitions of climate change acceptance for undergraduate science students: an "Anthropogenic Definition" and an "Anthropogenic + Mechanistic Definition" (PLOS One).
- The PLOS One scoping review (Oct 2023 to Feb 2024) analyzed 523 articles and extracted 3, 089 measurement items, 2, 402 of which were unique, providing the item pool that informed the Delphi (PLOS One, Aug 25, 2026).
- The Delphi process in the PLOS One study recruited experts between Apr 2024 and Jul 2025 and included 210 experts and stakeholders overall, producing stable consensus after four rounds (PLOS One, Aug 25, 2026).
- Round-level results in the PLOS One article showed 50.9% (n = 29) selected the four-construct definition in Round 2, 69% (n = 18) selected it in Round 3, and 64% (n = 70) preferred the simpler two-construct definition in Round 4, illustrating bipolarity in expert opinion (PLOS One, Aug 25, 2026).
- One educator participant in the PLOS One study said, "it was the most comprehensive, " when explaining why they preferred the longer definition, highlighting the trade-off between completeness and simplicity (PLOS One, Aug 25, 2026).
What Happened and how the Delphi worked
The PLOS One study used a mixed-methods Delphi to build and test candidate definitions for climate change acceptance in undergraduate science students and to assess content validity.
According to the PLOS One article (published Aug 25, 2026), the team first conducted a scoping review from Oct 2023 to Feb 2024 that identified 523 relevant articles and extracted 3, 089 items, 2, 402 of which were unique, forming a preliminary framework of 14 constructs (PLOS One, Aug 25, 2026).
According to the PLOS One article, researchers then piloted items with 15 undergraduate students in Apr 2024 and ran four Delphi rounds with educators and stakeholders between May 2024 and Jul 2025, using interviews, iterative surveys, and frequency counts to test definition preference and stability (PLOS One, Aug 25, 2026).
According to the PLOS One article, expert responses stabilized around two final definitions: the Anthropogenic Definition (occurrence + human causation) and the Anthropogenic + Mechanistic Definition (adds temperature and greenhouse gas mechanisms), and the team retained both because consensus oscillated across rounds (PLOS One, Aug 25, 2026).
Findings snapshot
| Date | Metric | Value | Implication |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 2023–Feb 2024 | Scoping review articles | 523 articles | Provided item pool and 14 preliminary constructs (PLOS One) |
| Scoping review result | Extracted items | 3, 089 items (2, 402 unique) | Basis for candidate definitions (PLOS One) |
| Apr 2024 | Pilot students | 15 ecology undergraduates | Checked interview protocol and early student perspectives (PLOS One) |
| Apr 2024–Jul 2025 | Delphi recruitment | 210 experts and stakeholders (total reported in abstract) | Four rounds of interviews and surveys produced stability and bipolarity of opinions (PLOS One) |
| Round 2 (reported) | Top choice | 50.9% (n = 29) favored Anthropogenic + Mechanistic | Completeness favored in initial round (PLOS One) |
| Round 3 (reported) | Top choice | 69% (n = 18) favored Anthropogenic + Mechanistic | Mechanistic details seen as strength (PLOS One) |
| Round 4 (reported) | Top choice | 64% (n = 70) favored Anthropogenic | Simplicity and classroom utility favored (PLOS One) |
Implications for qualitative researchers and educators
The PLOS One results mean qualitative researchers must explicitly state which definition of climate change acceptance they measure and why.
According to the PLOS One article (Aug 25, 2026), choosing the Anthropogenic Definition targets baseline belief (occurrence + human causation) and may be appropriate for incoming undergraduates or broad surveys, while the Anthropogenic + Mechanistic Definition targets deeper mechanistic understanding and may suit advanced courses or evaluative studies (PLOS One).
According to the PLOS One article, instruments developed before a consensus definition may conflate knowledge and acceptance, so qualitative analysts should re-code past open-ended responses against the two definitions to test construct validity and comparability (PLOS One).
According to the PLOS One article, researchers designing mixed or qualitative studies should report which definition they used, provide example items, and justify their choice by student level, learning goals, or policy relevance to enable meaningful synthesis across studies (PLOS One).
How Evidano helps
Problem: Instruments lack a shared definition → Solution
Evidano is an AI-powered qualitative data analysis platform that helps researchers analyze interviews, open-ended surveys, and documents.
Evidano feature: Use coded frameworks to map open-response data to the two consensus definitions from the PLOS One article, enabling rapid reanalysis of past datasets to test how definition choice shifts results (PLOS One).
Evidano feature: Upload transcripts and use the platform’s thematic and frequency analysis to surface how often respondents express 'occurrence', 'human causation', 'greenhouse gases', or 'temperature' language, which directly aligns with the two definitions (see Evidano features).
Problem: Manual synthesis is slow and inconsistent → Solution
Evidano feature: The platform ingests transcripts and open-ended survey responses, runs reproducible thematic coding, and produces cross-segment comparisons so educators can see whether freshmen or seniors align with the Anthropogenic or Anthropogenic + Mechanistic definition.
Evidano feature: Use Evidano’s transcription with custom dictionary and PII redaction when processing classroom interviews or conference survey audio prior to analysis; this reduces prep time and maintains data governance (see speech-to-text).
Problem: You need evidence to pick a definition for your study → Solution
Evidano feature: Run quick pilot transcripts through Evidano, extract illustrative quotes that map to each definition and produce a short memo for IRBs or curriculum committees demonstrating which definition fits your learning goals.
Evidano feature: Export codebooks and frequency matrices to support psychometric work suggested by the PLOS One authors to evaluate instrument validity across definitions (PLOS One).
FAQ: climate change acceptance for undergraduates
What are the two consensus definitions the PLOS One Delphi produced?
Answer: The PLOS One Delphi produced an "Anthropogenic Definition" and an "Anthropogenic + Mechanistic Definition."
According to the PLOS One article published on Aug 25, 2026, the Anthropogenic Definition states simply that climate change is happening and human behaviors are causing it, while the Anthropogenic + Mechanistic Definition adds that average temperatures and greenhouse gases are increasing globally (PLOS One).
Why did experts not settle on a single definition?
Answer: Experts split because of a trade-off between simplicity and comprehensiveness.
According to the PLOS One study, rounds of survey data showed oscillation in preference, some educators prioritized concise, classroom-usable wording, while others prioritized mechanistic detail, producing bipolarity and stability across rounds (PLOS One, Aug 25, 2026).
Which definition should I use for my undergraduate survey?
Answer: Choose the Anthropogenic Definition for baseline acceptance measures and the Anthropogenic + Mechanistic Definition if you require mechanistic understanding as part of acceptance.
According to the PLOS One article, choice depends on student level and learning goals: instructors measuring incoming students or broad public opinion may prefer the simpler definition, while those evaluating course outcomes or advanced majors may choose the mechanistic definition (PLOS One).
How can qualitative research demonstrate which definition fits a sample?
Answer: Qualitative research can map participant language to the four constructs the PLOS One team identified and report frequencies and exemplar quotes for each construct.
According to the PLOS One article, the authors triangulated a scoping review, a pilot student survey, and expert interviews to validate constructs; replicating that triangulation at smaller scale (coded themes, frequency counts, and illustrative quotes) identifies which definition best matches your sample (PLOS One).
Conclusion & Next Steps
The PLOS One Delphi study (published Aug 25, 2026) anchored climate change acceptance for undergraduate science students to two empirically supported definitions, offering researchers and educators a clear choice depending on learning goals (PLOS One).
Qualitative researchers should re-examine instruments and open-ended data against these two definitions to improve comparability across studies and to justify instrument validity as recommended by AERA standards (PLOS One).
If you want to re-code transcripts, generate thematic and frequency analyses, and produce a reproducible memo linking your data to either definition, Evidano can accelerate that work and preserve data governance (see Evidano features).
Try a hands-on reanalysis of a small pilot dataset to see which definition your students align with, and then scale your study accordingly. Try Evidano for free.
Topics
- climate change acceptance for undergraduates
- defining climate change acceptance
- Delphi study climate acceptance
- qualitative research climate education
Keep reading
- Commentary on NewsTwo Consensus Definitions: climate change acceptance definitionSummarizes the PLOS One Delphi study (published Aug 25, 2026) that produced two climate change acceptance definitions and shows AI-enabled qualitative methods to measure them.
- Commentary on NewsTwo Definitions: Climate Change Acceptance for UndergradsHow a PLoS One Delphi study (Aug 25, 2026) defined climate change acceptance for undergraduate science students, and how AI-enabled qualitative analysis applies it.
- Commentary on NewsResearcher-in-the-loop: AI-enabled UX researchHow the researcher-in-the-loop model governs AI-enabled UX research. Learn practical governance, stats from the August 2026 piece, and how Evidano supports this workflow.