Meta-analytical evidence of a self–other discrepancy in climate change-related risk perceptions

In mitigating and adapting to climate change-related risks, unbiased risk assessments are essential. Yet individuals systematically rate their personal risks as lower than those of others, believing themselves to be less at risk than others (that is, a self–other discrepancy). In a preregistered multi-level meta-analysis, we estimate the overall effect and boundary conditions for a self–other discrepancy in climate change-related risk perceptions. The synthesis incorporated 60 datasets, comprising 83 effect sizes from 70,337 participants across 17 countries. Results revealed that in 81 of 83 datasets, participants perceived their personal climate change-related risks as lower than others ( d  = −0.54, 95% CI [−0.68, −0.39]). This skewness was robust across specific extreme weather-related hazards and general climate change-related risks. Notably, the self–other discrepancy was less pronounced when comparisons involved specific others (for example, neighbours) or high-risk regions (for example, Asia), and more pronounced when the referents were compatriots or humanity as a whole or when the context was low-risk regions (for example, Europe). These results highlight a critical implication for the general public and a challenge for risk communicators: a widespread misperception, where people perceive personal climate change-related risks as lower than others, may hinder public engagement in mitigation and adaptation efforts.