Climate Change Perspectives in Lithuania: Exploring Science Attitudes and Personality Correlations

A recent comprehensive study investigating public perceptions of climate change in Lithuania has revealed significant divisions in beliefs, with nearly a third of the adult population expressing lower endorsement of its reality, human causes, and potential dangers. The research, conducted by a team of academics from Mykolas Romeris University, highlights the crucial role of attitudes towards science and individual personality traits in shaping these views, offering valuable insights for targeted climate communication strategies.

The findings, published in Frontiers in Psychology, emerged from a nationally representative survey of 1,005 Lithuanian adults conducted between June 21 and July 7, 2024. Using a methodology that combined latent profile analysis (LPA) with logistic regression and mediation analyses, the study aimed to identify distinct clusters of climate-change beliefs, understand the science attitudes that differentiate these clusters, and explore how personality traits influence these attitudes, both directly and indirectly through science perceptions.

Identifying Distinct Climate Belief Profiles

The latent profile analysis identified two primary segments within the Lithuanian adult population concerning climate change: a "Higher Endorsement" group, comprising 70.8% of respondents, and a "Lower Endorsement" group, making up the remaining 29.2%. The Higher Endorsement group consistently expressed strong agreement that climate change is real, is primarily human-caused, and will lead to dangerous consequences. In contrast, the Lower Endorsement group showed significantly less conviction across these three key indicators.

This segmentation is particularly noteworthy in the context of Lithuania’s evolving societal priorities. While European surveys indicate Lithuanians generally acknowledge the need for climate adaptation and have experienced extreme weather events, national priorities such as energy security and broader geopolitical concerns often compete for public attention. This dynamic, as suggested by the European Parliament Research Service in 2025, can influence how climate messages are received and prioritized. The study’s findings underscore that a substantial portion of the population remains less engaged with or skeptical of established climate science, necessitating tailored communication approaches rather than a one-size-fits-all strategy.

The Pivotal Role of Science Attitudes

The research further explored the science attitudes that distinguish these two climate-belief profiles. Logistic regression analyses revealed that specific beliefs about science significantly predicted membership in the Higher Endorsement class. Individuals who strongly believed that "science can solve any problem" were 25% more likely to belong to the Higher Endorsement group. Similarly, those who supported "unrestricted scientific inquiry" showed a 57.6% higher likelihood of being in this group. Furthermore, a belief in the importance of state funding for research also increased the odds of higher climate-change endorsement by 34.9%.

These results align with broader scholarship emphasizing the importance of epistemic trust in science. As noted by researchers like Fischhoff (2019) and Kappel and Holmen (2019), confidence in science’s problem-solving capacity and its authority is a strong correlate of accepting scientific consensus on complex issues. The study suggests that while general positivity towards science might not be universally influential, specific beliefs about science’s scope, its role in society, and the necessity of its funding are critical differentiators in climate change acceptance.

Conversely, certain other pro-science beliefs, such as "science improves people’s lives" or that "research is necessary even if not immediately applicable," did not significantly differentiate between the two climate-belief profiles. This suggests that a more nuanced understanding of public perceptions of science is required, moving beyond generalized trust to focus on specific perceptions of scientific inquiry and its societal support structures.

Personality Traits and Their Indirect Influence

Beyond attitudes towards science, the study delved into the influence of personality traits. Using a short-form version of the Big Five Inventory, the researchers examined the roles of conscientiousness, extraversion, and neuroticism. The mediation analysis revealed that these personality traits influenced climate-change attitudes indirectly, primarily through their impact on attitudes toward science.

Specifically, conscientiousness demonstrated a positive total effect on climate-change attitudes. This effect was partly direct and partly mediated by positive attitudes toward science, suggesting that conscientious individuals, who tend to favor structured and evidence-based approaches, may be more receptive to both scientific information and messages emphasizing responsibility.

Extraversion presented a more complex picture. While it had a negative direct association with climate-change attitudes, indicating that highly extraverted individuals might be less inclined to directly endorse climate change beliefs, it showed a significant positive indirect effect through science attitudes. This suggests that engaging extraverted individuals through interactive science communication, social collaboration, and collective action framing could be an effective strategy to foster greater climate engagement.

Neuroticism did not exhibit a significant direct effect on climate-change attitudes. However, it had a positive indirect effect mediated by attitudes toward science. This implies that for individuals experiencing higher levels of anxiety or threat sensitivity, strengthening their trust in and positive perceptions of science could be a key pathway to increasing their receptivity to climate change information and potential interventions. The study’s findings suggest that while direct engagement with climate science might be challenging for some, building a stronger foundation of trust in scientific institutions and processes could yield positive downstream effects.

Implications for Climate Communication in Lithuania

The research offers substantial implications for how climate change is communicated in Lithuania. The identified segmentation into "Higher" and "Lower" endorsement groups calls for a targeted approach:

• For the Lower Endorsement Group: Communication efforts should prioritize building trust and addressing misconceptions. Utilizing narrative-based strategies that create emotional connections to climate issues and demonstrate local relevance, such as impacts on agriculture, forests, and extreme weather events, may be particularly effective.
• For the Higher Endorsement Group: Messages can focus on empowerment, efficacy, and concrete pathways for action, reinforcing existing beliefs and encouraging further engagement.

Furthermore, the study underscores the importance of fostering positive attitudes toward science across the population. By enhancing public perception of science as legitimate, transparent, and socially responsive, communicators can indirectly bolster acceptance of climate science. This might involve highlighting the value of unrestricted scientific exploration and advocating for robust state funding for research, as these factors were found to be significant predictors of higher climate-change endorsement.

The personality-informed tailoring of communication also emerges as a critical strategy. For extraverted individuals, interactive and community-based initiatives could prove more impactful, while for those high in neuroticism, empathetic approaches that offer reassurance and emphasize science’s problem-solving capabilities might be more beneficial.

Contextualizing the Findings

Lithuania’s unique post-Soviet history and its ongoing energy security transition provide a crucial backdrop for understanding these findings. Public trust in institutions and perceptions of expertise in Lithuania may be influenced by these historical and contemporary factors. While the identified mechanisms linking science attitudes and personality to climate beliefs may have broader applicability across European contexts, their specific manifestation in Lithuania warrants careful consideration of local socio-political and media landscapes.

Limitations and Future Directions

The study acknowledges several limitations. Its cross-sectional design prevents definitive causal claims, and the mediation models are theoretical in nature. The measurement of climate-change beliefs, while capturing key aspects, could be expanded to encompass policy preferences and behavioral intentions in future research. The low entropy in the LPA solution suggests some overlap between the identified classes, meaning the segmentation should be viewed probabilistically. Additionally, the use of a short-form personality inventory led to the exclusion of some traits due to modest internal consistency, highlighting the need for more comprehensive personality measures in future studies to ensure measurement precision.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this research provides robust evidence of audience segmentation regarding climate-change beliefs in Lithuania, revealing a significant minority holding lower endorsement of its reality and causes. Attitudes toward science emerge as a critical differentiator between these groups and a key mediator linking personality traits to climate-change attitudes. These findings strongly advocate for a nuanced, segmentation-driven approach to climate communication, emphasizing the enhancement of public trust in and the perceived relevance of science to effectively engage diverse audiences and foster greater acceptance of climate science.