MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7106437781 · doi:10.1016/j.wss.2025.100325

Psychometric properties of an Adapted Climate Change Coping Scale in a sample of Canadian adolescents

2025· article· en· W7106437781 on OpenAlexafffundabout

Bibliographic record

VenueWellbeing Space and Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change Communication and Perception
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of AlbertaAthabasca UniversityWestern University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaOulun YliopistoVetenskapsrådetAcademy of FinlandFederation for the Humanities and Social Sciences
KeywordsCoping (psychology)OperationalizationConvergent validityFeelingMental healthExploratory factor analysisConstruct validityAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• A 16-item Adapted Climate Change Coping Scale (CCCS-A) operationalizes coping with thoughts and feelings about climate change into four dimensions. • The dimensions of coping in the CCCS-A were: de-emphasizing, distracting, problem-focused coping, and meaning-focused coping. • The CCCS-A is evidenced as being a reliable and valid instrument. Climate change is a threat to the health and wellbeing of adolescents. Many adolescents express concern, worry, and anxiety about climate change. Yet, how adolescents are coping with their thoughts and feelings about climate change is not well understood. The objective of this research was to explore the psychometric properties of an Adapted Climate Change Coping Scale (CCCS-A) in a non-probabilistic sample of approximately 800 Canadian adolescents. Exploratory factor analysis was utilized. Internal reliability was assessed, and convergent validity was examined through analysis of correlations with related constructs. Correlations with wellbeing and mental health measures were also explored. The results indicated that four dimensions of coping with thoughts and feelings about climate change (de-emphasizing, distracting, problem-focused coping, and meaning-focused coping) were operationalized through a scale with 16-items. This extends prior scales in that it includes both measures of de-emphasizing and distracting coping within a single survey tool. Evidence of construct validity was found, and the internal reliability of subscales were good (ω ranged from 0.79 to 0.88). The sub-scales showed evidence of convergent validity. Additionally, all coping dimensions were positively associated with wellbeing, while associations with mental health problems were mixed across coping dimensions. The CCCS-A is a survey tool with demonstrated validity and reliability that captures a range of coping strategies adolescents use in response to climate change. This addresses a critical gap in climate change and mental wellbeing research by presenting a validated tool to assess adolescent climate change coping mechanisms.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.607

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.217
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.153 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWellbeing Space and SocietySame topicClimate Change Communication and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207