RESUMO
Climate change is occurring more rapidly than expected, requiring that people quickly and continually adapt to reduce human suffering. The reality is that climate change-related threats are unpredictable; thus, adaptive behavior must be continually performed even when threat saliency decreases (e.g. time has passed since climate-hazard exposure). Climate change-related threats are also intensifying; thus, new or more adaptive behaviors must be performed over time. Given the need to sustain climate change-related adaptation even when threat saliency decreases, it becomes essential to better understand how the relationship between risk perceptions and adaptation co-evolve over time. In this study, we present results from a probability-based representative sample of 2,774 Texas and Florida residents prospectively surveyed 5 times (2017-2022) in the presence and absence of exposure to tropical cyclones, a climate change-related threat. Distinct trajectories of personal risk perceptions emerged, with higher and more variable risk perceptions among the less educated and those living in Florida. Importantly, as tropical cyclone adaptation behaviors increased, personal risk perceptions decreased over time, particularly in the absence of storms, while future tropical cyclone risk perceptions remained constant. In sum, adapting occurs in response to current risk but may inhibit future action despite increasing future tropical cyclone risks. Our results suggest that programs and policies encouraging proactive adaptation investment may be warranted.
RESUMO
In several highly publicized hearings, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Judge Brett Kavanaugh presented two opposing accounts of an alleged sexual assault. In the wake of these proceedings, partisans appeared similarly divided in how they regarded this political event. Using a U.S. national sample (N = 2,474) and a mixed-methods design, we investigated partisans' perceptions of, and responses to, the Ford-Kavanaugh hearings. Respondents reported their views of the hearings soon after they occurred. We used topic modeling to analyze these open-ended responses and found uniquely partisan topics emerged, including judicial impartiality and due process. Acute stress (AS) responses to the hearings were also related to partisan identities and perceptions; both Republicans (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.78, 0.84]) and individuals who wrote more about Republican topics (IRR = 0.72, 95% CI = [0.56, 0.92]) reported lower AS than their Democratic counterparts. Results demonstrate different partisan perceptions with implications for mental health outcomes.
RESUMO
When an individual or group trauma becomes a shared public experience through widespread media coverage (e.g., mass violence, being publicly outed), sharing a social identity with a targeted individual or group of victims may amplify feelings of personal vulnerability. This heightened perceived threat may draw people to engage with trauma-related media because of increased vigilance for self-relevant threats, which can, in turn, amplify distress. We studied this possibility among two U.S. national samples following the 2016 Pulse nightclub massacre in Orlando, FL (N = 4675) and the 2018 Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Judge Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court Senate hearings (N = 4894). Participants who shared LGBT or Hispanic identities with Pulse massacre victims reported greater exposure to massacre-related media and acute stress. Participants who shared Dr. Blasey Ford's identities as a victim of interpersonal violence and a Democrat reported more hearings-related media exposure and acute stress. Indirect effects of shared single identity on acute stress through self-reported event-related media exposure emerged in both studies. Results for sharing dual identities with victims were mixed. These findings have implications for media use and public health.
