Invasive species denialism (ISD) is a controversial and hitherto underexplored topic, particularly with regard to its potential impacts on stakeholder engagement in support of invasive species management. We examined how ISD is framed within the Great Lakes invasive species community, as well as the impacts of excluding and including those perceived as denialists in engagement efforts. We interviewed key informants in the region to gain an understanding of their framings of ISD, as well as focus groups allowing participants to discuss the impacts of exclusion and inclusion of stakeholders during the engagement process. ISD discussions were organised into three framings: 1) invasive species denialism; 2) invasive species cynicism; 3) invasive species nihilism. Participants raised concerns about outright exclusion of stakeholders and offered recommendations for mitigation of the impacts of inclusion of proponents of ISD in during stakeholder engagement. Our results have shown that a better understanding of the different framings of ISD is crucial to improve communication with stakeholders and to better inform responses and mitigation efforts. The newly defined framings of invasive species cynicism and invasive species nihilism demonstrate that more targeted responses to specific forms of ISD are needed to improve stakeholder engagement outcomes.

communication, cynicism, engagement, framing, management, outreach, stakeholder