The primary keyword for this briefing is climate change acceptance definition. According to the PLOS One study (Duke and Holt, published August 25, 2026), two consensus definitions were produced for undergraduate science students and those definitions affect instrument choice and curriculum targets. Evidano is an AI-powered qualitative data analysis platform that helps researchers analyze interviews, open-ended surveys, and documents. According to the PLOS One study (Duke & Holt, 2026), the authors reached a stable bipolar consensus after a scoping review of 523 articles and multiple Delphi rounds, producing an "Anthropogenic" definition and an "Anthropogenic + Mechanistic" definition that instructors can use depending on student level.
Key Takeaways
According to the PLOS One study (Duke & Holt, published August 25, 2026), two consensus definitions of climate change acceptance for undergraduate science students emerged: the Anthropogenic Definition and the Anthropogenic + Mechanistic Definition. The PLOS One study (Duke & Holt, 2026) found that experts split their agreement across these two definitions after four Delphi rounds, so instrument and curricular choices should match the chosen definition.
- In a scoping review conducted between October 2023 and February 2024, the authors identified 523 relevant articles and extracted 3, 089 measurement items, 2, 402 of which were unique (PLOS One, Duke & Holt, 2026).
- During Delphi rounds carried out from April 2024 through July 2025, the PLOS One study (Duke & Holt, 2026) reported that 50.9% (n = 29) of Round 2 participants preferred the more detailed definition, 69% (n = 18) chose it in Round 3, and in Round 4 a simpler definition was preferred by 64% (n = 70).
- The two final definitions reported in PLOS One (Duke & Holt, 2026) are: the Anthropogenic Definition, “Climate change is happening and human behaviors are causing it, ” and the Anthropogenic + Mechanistic Definition, “Climate change is happening, average temperatures and greenhouse gases are increasing globally, and human behaviors are causing it.”
What Happened and How the Delphi Workflows Produced Two Definitions
Answer: The PLOS One study used a mixed-methods Delphi approach to convert 14 preliminary constructs into two robust, situationally useful definitions for undergraduate science students. According to the PLOS One study (Duke & Holt, 2026), the team started with a scoping review (Oct 2023–Feb 2024) of 523 articles, extracted 3, 089 items (2, 402 unique), and distilled 14 constructs that informed interview and survey instruments.
According to the PLOS One study (Duke & Holt, 2026), the team ran four iterative rounds (Rounds 1–4) of interviews and surveys with educators and stakeholders recruited between May 2024 and July 2025, reaching thematic saturation in educator rationale by Round 4. According to the PLOS One study (Duke & Holt, 2026), percent agreement oscillated across rounds: Round 2 favored the Anthropogenic + Mechanistic Definition with 50.9% (n = 29), Round 3 saw 69% (n = 18) favor the detailed definition, and Round 4 saw 64% (n = 70) favor the simpler Anthropogenic Definition.
According to the PLOS One study (Duke & Holt, 2026), the authors interpreted this pattern as bipolarity in expert opinion and recommended that the appropriate definition depends on educational context and student academic level. An educator participant told the authors, "I chose this definition because it is the most comprehensive, " while another educator said, "I prefer the simplistic version because when you start to introduce more constructs then there [are] more factors for a student to think about, " both quotes reported in PLOS One (Duke & Holt, 2026).
Findings Snapshot
| Date | Metric | Value | Implication |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 2023–Feb 2024 | Scoping review articles identified | 523 articles | Provided the evidence base for 14 preliminary constructs (PLOS One, Duke & Holt, 2026). |
| Scoping review (same period) | Measurement items extracted | 3, 089 items (2, 402 unique) | Supplied the item pool used to design 15 candidate definitions (PLOS One, Duke & Holt, 2026). |
| Round 2 (Dec 2024–Feb 2025) | Top choice share for detailed definition | 50.9% (n = 29) | Initial majority preference for Anthropogenic + Mechanistic wording (PLOS One, Duke & Holt, 2026). |
| Round 3 (Feb 2025) | Top choice share for detailed definition | 69% (n = 18) | Stability favored the detailed definition but rationale depth was limited (PLOS One, Duke & Holt, 2026). |
| Round 4 (July 2025, conference sample) | Top choice share for simple definition | 64% (n = 70) | Final sample favored the concise Anthropogenic Definition, producing bipolar consensus across study rounds (PLOS One, Duke & Holt, 2026). |
Implications for researchers and climate educators
Answer: Researchers must choose a definition and align instruments with that definition instead of assuming a single universal construct. According to the PLOS One study (Duke & Holt, 2026), inconsistent implicit definitions in prior work make cross-study synthesis unreliable because instruments often mix occurrence, causation, mechanisms, outcomes, and antecedents without a shared construct.
According to the PLOS One study (Duke & Holt, 2026), instrument developers should report which of the two consensus definitions they target and provide validity evidence tied to that definition, because AERA standards require a clear construct definition to support validity (PLOS One references AERA's Standards).
According to the PLOS One study (Duke & Holt, 2026), educators may use the Anthropogenic Definition as a baseline for incoming students and the Anthropogenic + Mechanistic Definition as a target for advanced undergraduates, because many Round 3 participants cited learning progressions when choosing definitions.
How Evidano Helps
Problem: Large, inconsistent item pools and mixed constructs
Solution: Evidano can ingest heterogeneous documents and survey items to produce a coded content framework that maps each item to the two consensus definitions, enabling precise instrument selection.
Feature mapping: Evidano thematic and hierarchical coding automates extraction of constructs from item pools (relevant feature: Evidano features).
Problem: Slow synthesis of interview rationales across rounds
Solution: Evidano's AI-assisted qualitative workflows speed stability checks across Delphi rounds by producing frequency, co-occurrence, and thematic trend reports tied to timestamps and respondent metadata.
Feature mapping: Use Evidano transcription and redaction for recorded interviews and exportable thematic matrices (relevant feature: Evidano speech-to-text).
Problem: Choosing the right definition for your population
Solution: Evidano supports comparative cross-segment analysis so teams can test whether freshman versus senior cohorts align more with the Anthropogenic or Anthropogenic + Mechanistic definitions reported in PLOS One (Duke & Holt, 2026).
Feature mapping: Use Evidano's cross-segment and frequency analyses to quantify acceptance prevalence under each definition and produce visualizations for curriculum stakeholders.
FAQ: climate change acceptance definition
What are the two consensus definitions of climate change acceptance from the PLOS One Delphi study?
Answer: The PLOS One study (Duke & Holt, 2026) reports two acceptable definitions: the Anthropogenic Definition and the Anthropogenic + Mechanistic Definition.
Supporting detail: The Anthropogenic Definition is phrased as, "Climate change is happening and human behaviors are causing it, " and the Anthropogenic + Mechanistic Definition is phrased as, "Climate change is happening, average temperatures and greenhouse gases are increasing globally, and human behaviors are causing it" (PLOS One, Duke & Holt, 2026).
Why did experts not converge on a single definition?
Answer: According to the PLOS One study (Duke & Holt, 2026), experts were split because some prioritized conceptual completeness and mechanisms while others prioritized simplicity and measurement clarity.
Supporting detail: The PLOS One study (Duke & Holt, 2026) documents that percentage agreement moved between rounds (50.9%, then 69%, then 64%) and qualitative rationales showed a bipolarity of opinions and concerns about conflating knowledge with acceptance.
How should I choose which definition to use in my survey or course evaluation?
Answer: Choose the definition that matches your population and learning targets: use the Anthropogenic Definition for baseline acceptance and the Anthropogenic + Mechanistic Definition for advanced courses, as recommended by PLOS One (Duke & Holt, 2026).
Supporting detail: The PLOS One study (Duke & Holt, 2026) reports that several educators recommended using the simpler definition for incoming students and the mechanistic definition for seniors or course-end assessments.
Can I re-code past survey responses to match these new definitions?
Answer: Yes, re-coding is possible but requires mapping items to the selected definition and documenting validity evidence for the new mapping, as implied by PLOS One (Duke & Holt, 2026).
Supporting detail: The PLOS One study (Duke & Holt, 2026) emphasizes that many existing instruments were developed without a unified definition, so careful re-mapping and validation is necessary before comparing historical data.
Conclusion & Next Steps
The PLOS One Delphi study (Duke & Holt, published August 25, 2026) produced two defensible, situationally useful definitions of climate change acceptance for undergraduate science students: the concise Anthropogenic Definition and the more detailed Anthropogenic + Mechanistic Definition.
Researchers and educators should explicitly state which definition they target, align instruments to that definition, and produce validity evidence before drawing comparisons across studies, as recommended in PLOS One (Duke & Holt, 2026).
If you analyze interview transcripts, survey items, or existing instruments and need to map items to either consensus definition, Evidano can accelerate coding, cross-segment analysis, and visualization for publication or curricular decision making (see Evidano features).
Ready to test re-coding or run a rapid Delphi-style thematic synthesis on your instrument pool? Try Evidano for free.
Topics
- climate change acceptance definition
- definition of climate change acceptance
- Delphi study climate change acceptance
- AI qualitative analysis climate education
Keep reading
- 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 NewsConsensus definitions: climate change acceptance definitionPLoS One (Aug 25, 2026) presents two consensus climate change acceptance definitions for undergraduates; see stats and how AI qualitative analysis accelerates survey design.
- 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.