Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
    • PNAS Nexus
  • Front Matter
    • Front Matter Portal
    • Journal Club
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Publication Charges
  • Submit
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Home
Home
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
    • PNAS Nexus
  • Front Matter
    • Front Matter Portal
    • Journal Club
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Publication Charges
  • Submit
Research Article

Expert credibility in climate change

William R. L. Anderegg, James W. Prall, Jacob Harold, and Stephen H. Schneider
  1. aDepartment of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305;
  2. bElectrical and Computer Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada M5S 3G4;
  3. c William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, Palo Alto, CA 94025; and
  4. dWoods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305

See allHide authors and affiliations

PNAS first published June 21, 2010; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1003187107
William R. L. Anderegg
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected] [email protected]
James W. Prall
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jacob Harold
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stephen H. Schneider
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected] [email protected]
  1. Contributed by Stephen H. Schneider, April 9, 2010 (sent for review December 22, 2009)

  • Article
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Although preliminary estimates from published literature and expert surveys suggest striking agreement among climate scientists on the tenets of anthropogenic climate change (ACC), the American public expresses substantial doubt about both the anthropogenic cause and the level of scientific agreement underpinning ACC. A broad analysis of the climate scientist community itself, the distribution of credibility of dissenting researchers relative to agreeing researchers, and the level of agreement among top climate experts has not been conducted and would inform future ACC discussions. Here, we use an extensive dataset of 1,372 climate researchers and their publication and citation data to show that (i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.

  • citation analyses
  • climate denier
  • expertise
  • publication analysis
  • scientific prominence

Footnotes

  • 1To whom correspondence may be addressed. E-mail: anderegg{at}stanford.edu or shs{at}stanford.edu.
  • Author contributions: W.R.L.A. and J.H designed research; W.R.L.A. and J.W.P. performed research; W.R.L.A. analyzed data; and W.R.L.A., J.W.P., J.H., and S.H.S. wrote the paper.

  • The authors declare no conflict of interest.

  • This article contains supporting information online at www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1003187107/-/DCSupplemental.

    Freely available online through the PNAS open access option.

    Next
    Back to top
    Article Alerts
    Email Article

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PNAS.

    NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Expert credibility in climate change
    (Your Name) has sent you a message from PNAS
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see the PNAS web site.
    CAPTCHA
    This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
    Citation Tools
    Expert credibility in climate change
    William R. L. Anderegg, James W. Prall, Jacob Harold, Stephen H. Schneider
    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Jun 2010, 201003187; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1003187107

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
    Request Permissions
    Share
    Expert credibility in climate change
    William R. L. Anderegg, James W. Prall, Jacob Harold, Stephen H. Schneider
    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Jun 2010, 201003187; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1003187107
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
    • Tweet Widget
    • Facebook Like
    • Mendeley logo Mendeley
    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 118 (51)
    Current Issue

    Submit

    Sign up for Article Alerts

    Jump to section

    • Article
    • Figures & SI
    • Info & Metrics
    • PDF

    You May Also be Interested in

    Protective infrastructure along the San Francisco Bay shoreline.
    Economic impact of sea level rise protection
    Infrastructure built to protect cities from flooding can increase economic damages elsewhere.
    Image credit: Michelle A. Hummel.
    Venus.
    Abiotic source of phosphine on Venus
    Phosphine in the Venusian atmosphere can be explained without biogenic sources and is consistent with ongoing volcanism on Venus.
    Image credit: Wikimedia Commons/NASA.
    Coronavirus.
    Estimating true number of COVID-19 infections
    A study finds underreporting of COVID-19 cases in the United States and that the United States is likely far from achieving herd immunity through infection alone.
    Image credit: Pixabay/geralt.
    Three test tubes with lethal doses of heroin, carfentanil, and fentanyl.
    Inner Workings: Vaccines aim to fight drugs of abuse
    Researchers hope vaccines can serve as a key tool for addressing the opioid epidemic. The first clinical trials are underway, though big challenges remain.
    Image credit: United States Drug Enforcement Administration.
    Factories belch pollution into a hazy sky as the sun peaks out from behind the clouds.
    Journal Club: How to incorporate changing human behaviors into planetary models
    Eyeing the effects of the Anthropocene, researchers offer a novel framework to identify and combine models from across the physical and social sciences.
    Image credit: Shutterstock/Victor Lauer.

    Similar Articles

    Site Logo
    Powered by HighWire
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Twitter
    • Youtube
    • Facebook
    • RSS Feeds
    • Email Alerts

    Articles

    • Current Issue
    • Special Feature Articles – Most Recent
    • List of Issues

    PNAS Portals

    • Anthropology
    • Chemistry
    • Classics
    • Front Matter
    • Physics
    • Sustainability Science
    • Teaching Resources

    Information

    • Authors
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Librarians
    • Press
    • Cozzarelli Prize
    • Site Map
    • PNAS Updates
    • FAQs
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights & Permissions
    • About
    • Contact

    Feedback    Privacy/Legal

    Copyright © 2021 National Academy of Sciences. Online ISSN 1091-6490. PNAS is a partner of CHORUS, COPE, CrossRef, ORCID, and Research4Life.