Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature

By John Cook, D. Nuccitelli, S. Green, Mark Richardson, Bärbel Winkler, Rob Painting, R. Way, P. Jacobs, A. Skuce. 2013

256 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics ‘global climate change’ or ‘global warming’. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming. In a second phase of this study, we invited authors to rate their own papers. Compared to abstract ratings, a smaller percentage of self-rated papers expressed no position on AGW (35.5%). Among self-rated papers expressing a position on AGW, 97.2% endorsed the consensus. For both abstract ratings and authors’ self-ratings, the percentage of endorsements among papers expressing a position on AGW marginally increased over time. Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.

Subfields: Global and Planetary Change, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/02822d9bd3d277e0f2ea21fd42cbe341aa7f2c6c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Sociology and Political Science

  1. Tan Yigitcanlar

Citations in the corpus