46 chapter 2 2004). Note that posttraumatic growth differs from transilience as, first, transilience reflects the perceived possibility of positive change deriving from adversity in the future, while posttraumatic growth focuses on the aftermath of a traumatic event. Second, climate change risks do not always match the definition of ‘trauma’, which is typically a one-time very acute personal stressor (Bonanno, 2004). We also wanted to explore the relationship between transilience and the Climate Change Anxiety scale (Clayton & Karazsia, 2020), a validated measure which assesses the extent to which people experience both cognitive and functional impairment as a result of being confronted with climate change risks.14 We expect that higher transilience is either non-significantly related or negatively related to climate change anxiety, as transilience implies that people perceive they do have the capacity to adapt to climate change. Method Participants and Procedure We used the survey platform Prolific to collect responses from 800 members of the general public in the United Kingdom. We requested data collection from a representative sample in terms of age, ethnicity, and sex (accuracy around 95%). In total, 793 people consented to participate in our study, and they were compensated £1.80 for participation. A total of 7 participants who indicated not to believe in the reality of climate change were automatically sent to the end of the survey, as in Study 3. After data inspection and cleaning,15 782 responses were retained (see demographics in Supplementary Material). Measures Most of the measures were the same as in Study 3, with some minor modifications. Below we only specify the changes made, as well as the additional measures. See full overview of the items in Appendix B. Descriptives and reliability coefficients are found in Table 2.13. Individual Adaptation Intentions and Behaviours. We added three transformative items (e.g., ‘Shifting my diet to incorporate food that are more resistant to and/or better suited for the changing climate in my area’). A factor analysis with principal axis extraction and oblimin rotation showed that the transformative items did not load on a separate factor, thus we incorporated the transformative behaviours in the scale used 14 We do not measure climate change negative affect in this study, since it is reflected in the validated climate change anxiety scale. 15 Participants who failed an attention check asking them to select the response ‘agree’ were removed (n = 4). No participant completed the survey within 3 minutes (median completion time = 9,4 minutes). Analyses with the total sample, led to similar results as those reported, only the correlation between transilience and risk perception (already weak) became non-significant.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw