Climate change risk perception in the USA and alignment with sustainable travel behaviours

30. Lorenzoni I, Nicholson-Cole S, Whitmarsh L. Barriers perceived to engaging with climate change among the UK public and their policy implications. Global environmental change. 2007 Aug 1; 17(3– 4):445–59. 31. Keith DW. Geoengineering the climate: History and prospect. Annual review of energy and the environ- ment. 2000 Nov; 25(1):245–84. 32. Sagristano MD, Trope Y, Liberman N. Time-dependent gambling: Odds now, money later. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2002 Sep; 131(3):364. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-3445.131.3. 364 PMID: 12214752 33. Shelley MK. Gain/loss asymmetry in risky intertemporal choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1994 Jul 1; 59(1):124–59. 34. Anderson K. Duality in climate science. Nature Geoscience. 2015 Oct 12; 8(12):898. 35. Corner A, Parkhill K, Pidgeon N, Vaughan NE. Messing with nature? Exploring public perceptions of geoengineering in the UK. Global Environmental Change. 2013 Oct 1; 23(5):938–47. 36. Fuss S, Canadell JG, Peters GP, Tavoni M, Andrew RM, Ciais P, et al. Betting on negative emissions. Nature climate change. 2014 Oct; 4(10):850–3. 37. Peeters P, Higham J, Kutzner D, Cohen S, Go¨ssling S. Are technology myths stalling aviation climate policy?. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 2016 May 1; 44:30–42. 38. Sims R, Schaeffer R, Creutzig F, Cruz-Nu´ ñez X, D’Agosto M, Dimitriu D, et al. Climate change 2014: Mitigation of climate change. In: Fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press; 2014.

39. Scott D, Hall CM, Go¨ssling S. A report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and its implications for tourism: Why we will always have Paris. Journal of Sustainable Tourism. 2016 Jul 2; 24(7):933–48. 40. Frittaion CM, Duinker PN, Grant JL. Narratives of the future: suspending disbelief in forest-sector sce- narios. Futures. 2010 Dec 1; 42(10):1156–65. 41. Fan W, Yan Z. Factors affecting response rates of the web survey: A systematic review. Computers in human behavior. 2010 Mar 1; 26(2):132–9. 42. Scheier MF, Carver CS, Bridges MW. Distinguishing optimism from neuroticism (and trait anxiety, self- mastery, and self-esteem): a reevaluation of the Life Orientation Test. Journal of personality and social psychology. 1994 Dec; 67(6):1063. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.67.6.1063 PMID: 7815302 43. Kilbourne WE, Beckmann SC, Thelen E. The role of the dominant social paradigm in environmental atti- tudes: A multinational examination. Journal of business Research. 2002 Mar 1; 55(3):193–204. 44. Lowe T, Brown K, Dessai S, de Franc¸a Doria M, Haynes K, Vincent K. Does tomorrow ever come? Disaster narrative and public perceptions of climate change. Public understanding of science. 2006 Oct; 15(4):435–57. 45. Dunlap RE, Van Liere KD. The “new environmental paradigm”. The journal of environmental education. 1978 Jul 1; 9(4):10–9.https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.1978. 10801875 46. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology. 2006 Jan 1; 3(2):77–101.

47. Saldaña J. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage; 2015. 48. Krippendorff K. Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage publications; 2018 May 9. 49. United States Census Bureau. Age and Sex Coposition in the United States: 2016. 2018 Aug 9 [Cited 2 Febuary 2020]. In United States Census Bureau [Internet]. [about 3 screens] Available from: https:// www.census.gov/data/tables/2016/demo/age-and-sex/2016-age-sex-composition.html 50. United States Census Bureau. Educational Attainment in the United States: 2016. 2017 March 31 [Cited 2 February 2020]. In United States Census Bureau [Internet]. [about 2 screens]. Available from: https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2016/demo/education-attainment/cps-detailed-tables.html 51. Bentley FR, Daskalova N, White B. Comparing the reliability of Amazon Mechanical Turk and Survey Monkey to traditional market research surveys. Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2017 May:1092–1099. 52. Heen MS, Lieberman JD, Miethe TD. A comparison of different online sampling approaches for generat- ing national samples. Center for Crime and Justice Policy. 2014 Sept 1(9):1–8. 53. Leiserowitz AA. American risk perceptions: Is climate change dangerous? Risk Analysis: An Interna- tional Journal. 2005 Dec; 25(6):1433–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2005.00690.x PMID: 16506973 54. Lorenzoni I, Pidgeon NF. Public views on climate change: European and USA perspectives. Climatic change. 2006 Jul 1; 77(1–2):73–95.

55. Nisbet MC, Myers T. THE POLLS—TRENDS. Public Opinion Quarterly. 2007 Sep 1; 71(3). PLOS ONE Climate change risk perception in the USA and alignment with sustainable travel behaviours PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0244545 February 3, 2021 16 / 17