This study investigated the effect of multiple text-graphic interventions to facilitate conceptual change on the topic of human induced climate change. Given the superiority of refutation texts over standard expository texts, the goal of the present study was to determine if this effect could be enhanced, thereby creating an even more powerful intervention. Thus, three interventions were tested against one another--a refutation text augmented with graphics (condition 1), graphicacy intervention plus a refutation text (condition 2), and a graphicacy plus text-graphic integration intervention plus a refutation text (condition 3). Furthermore, this study examined the extent to which individual difference measure including epistemic cognition, positive and negative emotions, attitudes, and political affiliation influenced leaning and conceptual change. Two hundred and forty-five adults were sampled from an online survey platform (Mechanical Turk) and randomly assigned to one of the three experimental conditions. Results revealed that while the refutation text was successful at producing conceptual change, it was difficult to improve upon this already successful intervention. Moreover, analyses revealed that all individual difference measures had a significant impact on conceptual change---higher levels of epistemic cognition, liberal-leaning political affiliation, positive emotions, negative emotions, and positive attitudes around climate change all predicted greater levels of conceptual change. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com.bibliotheek.ehb.be/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]