We Saw the Future and We Felt Something

Abstract

In a world increasingly dominated by visual media (VM), climate change communication faces both new opportunities and challenges. While news headlines about climate-related disasters, such as the record-breaking global temperatures in January 2025, are ever-present, their emotionally heavy and often negative framing can lead to public disengagement or despair [1]. Research has shown that fear-based messaging alone may not effectively motivate climate action, while the inclusion of hope and other positive emotions can enhance message impact [1].  However, the field remains divided over whether positive or negative emotional appeals are more effective in fostering climate change engagement. This divide remains persistent when evaluating the impact of emotion on climate change attitudes elicited specifically by VM: Recommendations for depicting negative future scenarios to elevate engagement with and pledges for climate change issues [2], as well as advice for positive depictions in order to capture attention and foster motivation [3], are present in the existing research body. As visual communication on platforms like Instagram and TikTok continues to eclipse text-based content, further investigation into the conflicting results and gaining a better understanding of the emotional mechanics of VM climate change communication becomes essential.

Novel and compelling approaches to visualizing our climate-altered future are being paved by artificial intelligence (AI) tools. As AI-generated VM will gain more relevance in the future, this study explores how it might shape public engagement with climate issues and whether negative or positive framing is more effective. Two AI-generated visuals of future climate scenarios, sharing the same composition but differing in emotional tone and depicted outcome, are compared in terms of their emotional and motivational effects. One visual is framed as a catastrophic outcome (gloomy) and the other as a hopeful, post-intervention success story (hopeful). After completing a pre-screening to assess environmental disposition, participants view one of the two AI-generated visuals and complete surveys measuring affective response, climate change attitude, and motivation to act.

It is hypothesized that the hopeful visual elicits significantly more positive emotion, while the gloomy visual generates greater negative emotion. The central research question remains: Which visual framing, hopeful or gloomy, is more effective in shifting attitudes and encouraging climate-related action? By comparing emotional and attitudinal outcomes of different visual framings, this study contributes to a deeper understanding of how AI-generated media can be used as a tool for emotionally resonant and behaviorally impactful climate change communication.

References

[1] A. Husain-Naviatti, “The power of human narrative: Inspiring action on climate change.” Environmental Science and Policy, vol. 163, Nov. 24, 2025. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103954.

[2] G. Salazar, M. C. Monroe, M. Ennes, J. A. Jones, D. Veríssimo, “Testing the influence of visual framing on engagement and pro-environmental action” Conservation Science and Practice, Aug. 22, 2025. doi: 10.1111/csp2.12812.

[3] J. M. Carlos, H. Kaull, M. Seinhauer, A. Zigarac, J. Cammarata, “Paying attention to climate change: positive images of climate change solutions capture attention” Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 71, Aug. 20, 2025. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101477.