Stories

Civic Science Fellow Ovidia Stanoi fosters dialogue in a “chronic crisis” 

As wildfires blaze with alarming frequency, and coastal cities confront the relentless rise of sea levels, climate change emerges not just as an escalating, long-term challenge for scientists but as an immediate crisis affecting communities worldwide.  

But despite widespread awareness of its severity, and the majority of Americans believing that we should take action, many people avoid discussing the topic, even in close circles. The communication barriers responsible for this are at the heart of Civic Science Fellow Ovidia Stanoi’s work at the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center. Her innovative research explores the idea that the lack of explicit discussion of climate change isn’t just a result of inaction but a root cause of it as well. 

“I’m really interested in what makes people talk—or not talk—about difficult societal issues such as climate change,” she says. “Polls indicate high levels of concern, yet these issues rarely surface in daily conversations. Is it fear of being labeled a pessimist? Helplessness? My goal is to understand and dismantle these barriers.” 

Ovidia’s interest in tackling this issue at the community level is inspired in part by her childhood in post-communist Romania. Born three years after the fall of a totalitarian regime, she grew up witnessing the importance of social bonds in a country striving to rebuild its civil institutions and trust. 

“My family lived under dictatorship most of their lives,” she says. “Engaging those who’ve never had a voice fascinates me. How do you encourage civic engagement where mistrust is embedded?” Much as social bonds were an important driver of effectively coping with the end of communism, so could they help to create the kind of robust communities able to confront the challenges of climate change. 

The question of how young societies build civic engagement accompanied Ovidia to the United States, where she pursued international relations as an undergraduate at Brown University before her interests shifted toward psychology and resilience, a journey that culminated in a Ph.D. from Columbia University. Her graduate research integrated insights from neuroscience and social networks to examine how people’s wellbeing and health behaviors are determined by interactions between individual motivations and social environments. This work provided a useful perspective for understanding the barriers to climate change action as well. 

At the Annenberg Public Policy Center, Ovidia’s research merges insights from communication, neuroscience, and climate science to explore how communities can use dialogue to tackle persistent climate challenges. Working closely with mentors such as renowned scientists Emily Falk, Danielle Cosme, and Michael Mann, she is exploring how everyday conversations can evolve into catalysts for meaningful collective action. Most people turn to their friends, co-workers, and acquaintances to determine what is normal and use this information when making decisions about their own behavior. Through informal conversations, every individual actively participates in shaping the behavioral norms of their communities. These norms are the background against which societal change happens. 

“We’re confronting crises that aren’t going away,” she says. “My research focuses on equipping communities emotionally, so they’ll continue to feel driven to act.” 

Changing the dialogue 

One puzzle in climate discourse is how communities process catastrophic events like wildfires or hurricanes as isolated occurrences rather than parts of an ongoing crisis. Communities often rally in the immediate aftermath, through fundraising, rebuilding, and sharing stories. But these discussions subside in a month or two, leaving the deeper challenge unaddressed. 

“It mirrors acute crises. We leap into action temporarily,” she says. “But climate change is more like a chronic disease. Our coping mechanisms for ongoing stress are lacking.” With chronic health conditions, there’s a tendency to avoid discussions, with the ill person fearing that any negativity might lead to emotional burdens on others or isolation from their community.  

The research Ovidia is doing during her Fellowship shows that similar dynamics are at play with climate discussions. People avoid talking about climate change because they fear emotional discomfort and disagreement. Encouragingly, when primed to think about people they feel comfortable talking to, study participants also recognize climate change conversations as an important avenue for empowering action, building social connection, and finding common ground.  

Ovidia is now designing naturalistic conversation studies to capture how emotional responses and social cues shape conversations about climate change in real time. The hope is not only to reveal the underlying mechanisms of daily communication but also to develop strategies that will foster more productive and resilient community dialogue—and action. 

The approach Ovidia has embraced emphasizes dialogue dynamics: how informal conversations can shift social norms over time. “If nobody in your circle mentions the heat wave or the fires, you might assume that it isn’t on their minds and that they don’t believe anything needs to change,” she says. “But then, if a few people start expressing real concern or describing personal actions they’re taking, that can fundamentally shift the entire group’s perception of urgency.” 

Her research is adding to a growing body of work that suggests there are nuanced differences between ideological groups in how and when people speak up. “For political conservatives, social norms can be particularly influential. When they feel their environment disapproves of discussing climate change, they tend to suppress their emotions more,” she says. “Whereas for liberals, if they’re upset or angry about it, they’re more likely to speak up regardless of the perceived norms.” 

Ovidia’s work indicates that vulnerability might play a key role in kickstarting dialogue about climate change. While research in other fields has shown that personal disclosures can deepen conversations, she is now exploring whether this approach could also work in climate discussions. A simple invitation such as, “I’m feeling ‘X’ about the climate. Have you thought about it?” might be transformative. 

“Sharing emotions rather than inundating someone with data can take the pressure off and foster empathy instead of defensiveness,” she says. Drawing on decades of research in emotional regulation, Ovidia says that the willingness to open up about personal fears or uncertainties is one of the most powerful predictors of closeness and mutual understanding among people. 

Spreading the dialogue 

Much of today’s climate messaging emanates from top-down government or expert briefings. “Official statements are indispensable, but everyday interactions have transformative potential,” Ovidia says. “When your best friend says, ‘I’ve been losing sleep over these record heatwaves,’ and you respond with ‘let’s learn more about this together,’ that connection shifts the conversation from despair to active engagement.” 

Ovidia is investigating whether structured interventions can capitalize on this dynamic to inspire more hopeful and motivated discussions about climate solutions among diverse groups.  

One project involves recruiting pairs of strangers that either agree or disagree about climate change into laboratory settings. In these sessions, some individuals will receive conversation prompts centered on emotional expression and empowerment, while others will be instructed to engage in persuasion. Ovidia is planning to test which strategies foster a more optimistic tone and build people’s sense of agency, for different audiences. “Participants should leave conversations feeling heard and motivated.” 

Previous research suggests these peer-to-peer conversations can create ripple effects throughout communities, as participants carry climate discussions into their own social circle. Ovidia hopes to translate these strategies to broader community contexts like schools or neighborhood organizations. “Picture high school seniors trained in dialogue techniques taking those skills home, extending them to their families,” she says.  

Although she is still developing and testing her interventions, Ovidia’s goal is clear: to cultivate a culture where discussing climate change becomes a supportive, empowering norm rather than an overwhelming burden. Over the next year, she plans to gather data and establish partnerships with various community groups willing to pilot these methods, laying the groundwork for broader civic engagement.  

Ultimately, Ovidia’s work offers dual benefits. On one hand, her focus on elevating everyday climate dialogue equips communities with the tools to speak openly about their challenges and emotions, fostering resilience and solidarity that fuel grassroots change. On the other hand, by generating rigorous, interdisciplinary research that captures these interactions, her projects can inform effective policymaking and public communication strategies. 

Restoring trust 

In the face of polarizing political discourse and daunting environmental threats, Ovidia’s work highlights the power each individual has to influence meaningful change. “Our biggest hurdle might be in telling ourselves that nothing is possible,” she says. “But when we collectively value what’s at stake and take the risk to be vulnerable, we transform fear into action.” 

Reflecting on her upbringing in Romania, where civic action sparked societal change, Ovidia draws parallels between preserving democracy and combating climate change. After the fall of communism, she heard stories from her family and saw for herself how Romanian communities rebuilt themselves and worked to restore trust. At the heart of transformative social change was dialogue, which served as a foundational tool for forging social connections and cultivating solidarity among diverse groups. In moments of societal reimagining, conversations become essential. They enable individuals and communities to bridge divides, confront past injustices, and co-create visions for the future.  

“They had to solve problems like, how do you build private institutions when everything used to be state-owned? How do you get people to engage in democratic practices when they’ve never done that. How do you get rid of corruption?” 

Ovidia also witnessed Romanian communities rally for environmental causes, fighting against damaging policies and plans, such as proposed gold mining projects.  

“Activism taught me the power of the communal voice,” she says. “Proactive conversations can reshape futures before irreversible damage is done.”  

Ovidia is a member of the 2024-25 Civic Science Fellows cohort. Her Fellowship is supported by the Rita Allen Foundation and Burroughs Wellcome Fund.