A top think tank has criticised the language used by government, media and pressure groups to debate the problem of climate change.

Dubbing the use of alarmist language as "climate porn", the Institute for Public Policy Research called for more moderate use of terms and expressions.

The study analysed more than 600 articles from the UK press, as well as over 90 TV, radio and press ads, news clips and websites.

It concluded that the discussion on climate change is "confusing, contradictory and chaotic".

This could leave the public feeling "disempowered and uncompelled to act".

The two most notable trends identified in the debate over climate change were alarmism and an over-emphasis on small actions.

The IPPR said that alarmism "refers to climate change as awesome, terrible, immense and beyond human control" and suggests the problem is too big to tackle.

In contrast, the 'small actions' approach - the dominant feature in campaign communications from government and green groups - asks the public to do a few small things to counter climate change.

But the think tank said this was "likely to beg the question: how can this really make a difference?"

Climate change communications "should avoid using inflated or extreme language and placing the focus on small actions to solve the problem", concluded the research.

Simon Retallack of the IPPR said: "If the public is to be persuaded of the need to act we must understand how climate change is being communicated in the UK.

"Currently, climate communications too often terrify or thrill the reader or viewer while failing to make them feel that they can make a difference, which engenders inaction.

"Government and green groups should avoid giving the impression that 'we are all doomed' and spend less time convincing people that climate change is real.

"The focus should be on the big actions that people can take to address climate change, like switching to a hybrid car, fitting a wind turbine or installing cavity wall insulation, not just the small ones such as turning down the thermostat or switching off the lights.

"Climate-friendly behaviours need to be made to feel like 'the kinds of things that people like us do' to large groups of people."

A spokesman for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs spokesman welcomed the report as "a very useful contribution to our understanding of how to tackle climate change".

"The report is very timely as we are considering how best to engage people to move towards what WWF-UK has called 'one planet living'. This is the idea that, if everyone in the world consumed as many natural resources as we do in the UK, we would need three planets to support us," said the spokesman.

"We are working with organisations on improving co-ordination of communication, better targeting and identifying and promoting the behaviours that people can take to have the greatest positive impact on the environment."