Gezer Melehat, Yıldırım Yıldız, İlhan Mustafa
Faculty of Education, Social Studies Education, Dicle University, Diyarbakir, Türkiye.
Faculty of Education, Measurement and Evaluation in Education, Aydin Adnan Menderes University, Aydin, Türkiye.
Front Psychol. 2025 Apr 25;16:1590126. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1590126. eCollection 2025.
Climate change worry is an increasingly critical issue in eco-psychology literature. A commonly used instrument for measuring this construct is the Climate Change Worry Scale (CCWS), developed by Stewart. This Likert-type scale assesses individuals' climate change worry through 10 items clustered under a single factor. It has been adapted for multiple cultures and utilized in numerous studies conducted across various countries. Nevertheless, no study has synthesized the reliability values obtained from individual studies for the scale. The purpose of the current meta-analysis was to perform a reliability generalization for the CCWS. To this end, an exhaustive literature search was conducted from July 14 to November 17, 2024, in the EBSCO, ERIC, Taylor & Francis, PubMed, and Web of Science databases, as well as Google Scholar, using the keyword "Climate Change Worry Scale." After scrutinizing the identified studies for duplicates and applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, the research focused on the 40 Cronbach's alpha coefficients acquired from 37 papers. The results of the analysis, which involved running the random effects model and the Bonnet transformation, indicated that the pooled Cronbach's alpha was 0.932 (95% CI = 0.919-0.942). The results of the moderator analysis revealed that the sample descriptors and study characteristics included in the meta-analysis did not significantly affect the reliability estimates. Accordingly, the CCWS was found to be an instrument that produces highly reliable measurements regardless of factors such as region, language, participants' age, and the total number of items answered during administration. Finally, the reliability induction rate was determined to be 29.41%. However, the high heterogeneity observed among the reliability estimates of the primary studies exposed the limitations of generalizing the reliability of CCWS scores across different populations and research conditions. This situation also emphasized the importance of providing detailed information about the scale's sample demographics and administration conditions when reporting reliability.
气候变化担忧是生态心理学文献中一个日益关键的问题。测量这一概念的常用工具是由斯图尔特开发的气候变化担忧量表（CCWS）。这个李克特式量表通过10个项目来评估个体对气候变化的担忧，这些项目归为一个单一因素。它已被改编用于多种文化，并在各国进行的众多研究中得到应用。然而，尚无研究综合该量表在个别研究中获得的信度值。当前元分析的目的是对CCWS进行信度概括。为此，于2024年7月14日至11月17日在EBSCO、ERIC、泰勒与弗朗西斯、PubMed和科学网数据库以及谷歌学术中进行了详尽的文献检索，使用关键词“气候变化担忧量表”。在仔细检查所识别研究中的重复项并应用纳入和排除标准后，该研究聚焦于从37篇论文中获得的40个克朗巴哈α系数。分析结果包括运行随机效应模型和邦尼特变换，结果表明合并后的克朗巴哈α系数为0.932（95%置信区间 = 0.919 - 0.942）。调节分析结果显示，元分析中纳入的样本描述符和研究特征对信度估计没有显著影响。因此，发现CCWS是一种无论地区、语言、参与者年龄以及施测过程中回答的项目总数等因素如何，都能产生高度可靠测量结果的工具。最后，信度归纳率确定为29.41%。然而，在主要研究的信度估计中观察到的高度异质性揭示了在不同人群和研究条件下概括CCWS分数信度方面的局限性。这种情况也强调了在报告信度时提供关于量表样本人口统计学和施测条件详细信息的重要性。
