Efficacy Foundations for Risk Communication: How People Think About Reducing the Risks of Climate Change

Believing action to reduce the risks of climate change is both possible (self‐efficacy) and effective (response efficacy) is essential to motivate and sustain risk mitigation efforts, according to current risk communication theory. Although the public recognizes the dangers of climate change, and is deluged with lists of possible mitigative actions, little is known about public efficacy beliefs in the context of climate change. Prior efficacy studies rely on conflicting constructs and measures of efficacy, and links between efficacy and risk management actions are muddled. As a result, much remains to learn about how laypersons think about the ease and effectiveness of potential mitigative actions. To bring clarity and inform risk communication and management efforts, we investigate how people think about efficacy in the context of climate change risk management by analyzing unprompted and prompted beliefs from two national surveys (N = 405, N = 1,820). In general, respondents distinguish little between effective and ineffective climate strategies. While many respondents appreciate that reducing fossil fuel use is an effective risk mitigation strategy, overall assessments reflect persistent misconceptions about climate change causes, and uncertainties about the effectiveness of risk mitigation strategies. Our findings suggest targeting climate change risk communication and management strategies to (1) address gaps in people's existing mental models of climate action, (2) leverage existing public understanding of both potentially effective mitigation strategies and the collective action dilemma at the heart of climate change action, and (3) take into account ideologically driven reactions to behavior change and government action framed as climate action.     

Inferences on the Means of Two Log-Normal Distributions: A Computational Approach Test

In this article, we propose a novel approach for testing the equality of two log-normal populations using a computational approach test (CAT) that does not require explicit knowledge of the sampling distribution of the test statistic. Simulation studies demonstrate that the proposed approach can perform hypothesis testing with satisfying actual size even at small sample sizes. Overall, it is superior to other existing methods. Also, a CAT is proposed for testing about reliability of two log-normal populations when the means are the same. Simulations show that the actual size of this new approach is close to nominal level and better than the score test. At the end, the proposed methods are illustrated using two examples.     

A new long-term survival model with dispersion induced by discrete frailty

Lifetime Data Analysis - Frailty models are generally used to model heterogeneity between the individuals. The distribution of the frailty variable is often assumed to be continuous. However, there...     

Efficacy,Action, and Support for Reducing Climate Change Risks

A growing body of research demonstrates that believing action to reduce the risks of climate change is both possible (self‐efficacy) and effective (response efficacy) is essential to motivate and sustain risk mitigation efforts. Despite this potentially critical role of efficacy beliefs, measures and their use vary wildly in climate change risk perception and communication research, making it hard to compare and learn from efficacy studies. To address this problem and advance our understanding of efficacy beliefs, this article makes three contributions. First, we present a theoretically motivated approach to measuring climate change mitigation efficacy, in light of diverse proposed, perceived, and previously researched strategies. Second, we test this in two national survey samples (Amazon's Mechanical Turk N = 405, GfK Knowledge Panel N = 1,820), demonstrating largely coherent beliefs by level of action and discrimination between types of efficacy. Four additive efficacy scales emerge: personal self‐efficacy, personal response efficacy, government and collective self‐efficacy, and government and collective response efficacy. Third, we employ the resulting efficacy scales in mediation models to test how well efficacy beliefs predict climate change policy support, controlling for specific knowledge, risk perceptions, and ideology, and allowing for mediation by concern. Concern fully mediates the relatively strong effects of perceived risk on policy support, but only partly mediates efficacy beliefs. Stronger government and collective response efficacy beliefs and personal self‐efficacy beliefs are both directly and indirectly associated with greater support for reducing the risks of climate change, even after controlling for ideology and causal beliefs about climate change.     

The identification of logistic regression models with errors in the variables

The simple logistic regression model with normal measurement error and normal regressor is shown to be identifiable without any extra information about the measurement error. The multiple logistic regression model with more than one regressor variable measured with error is not identifiable. If the covariance matrix of the measurement error is known up to a scalar factor, the model is identified. Further we discuss why in spite of the identifiability the models cannot be estimated in a reasonable way without extra information about the measurement error.     

Adolescent Protective Factors Promoting Resilience in Young Adults at Risk for Depression

In a longitudinal, community-based study, adolescent protective factors for those at risk for depression were identified that were associated with resilient outcomes in young adulthood. For those with childhood risk factors for major depression, significant protective factors included family cohesion, positive self appraisals, and good interpersonal relations. Findings may help inform the development of prevention and treatment programs for adolescents vulnerable to depression. Implications for future research and clinical practice are discussed.     

Luxembourg's Foreign Policy: Does Small Size Help or Hinder?

As a very small state, Luxembourg would not appear to qualify as an influential foreign policy actor either in Europe or the world. Yet the country's international influence has long belied its reputation as a small state. This article reviews the literature on small-state foreign policy and finds that it offers numerous contradictory conclusions. As a case study it then addresses Luxembourg in the 1990s, with particular attention to two themes: its active participation in the European Union (EU) and its policies directed at maintaining economic prosperity. The paper goes on to explain Luxembourgish foreign policy behaviour through three levels of analysis and assesses to what extent smallness is a benefit or a hindrance to Luxembourg's success in meeting its international goals.