Skip to main content
. 2015 Oct 27;12(10):13560–13586. doi: 10.3390/ijerph121013560

Table A2.

Results of exploratory factor analysis of psychological adaptation to the thermal environment of urban plaza.

Psychological Adaptation Strategies to the Thermal Environment of Urban Plaza Mean Psychological Adaption
Intro-Control Shift Passive Respondent
Mental disengagement 3.05 0.738 0.496 0.074
Environmental stimulation 2.99 0.725 0.512 0.226
Habituation 3.26 0.719 0.325 0.367
Perceived control 2.99 0.703 0.391 0.102
Endurance and confrontive 3.24 0.652 0.463 0.412
Rationalization 3.34 0.633 0.511 0.415
Past Experience 3.21 0.600 0.401 0.338
Distraction 3.65 0.417 0.821 0.243
Relaxing 3.57 0.445 0.811 0.230
Product transfer 3.28 0.565 0.757 0.193
Naive optimism 3.57 0.534 0.745 0.373
Wishful thinking 3.35 0.358 0.475 0.105
Time of exposure 3.12 0.247 0.280 0.776
Negative thinking 3.32 0.255 0.166 0.754
Eigenvalue 5.218 1.186 1.051
Explained variance 37.274 8.470 7.507
Cumulative explained variance 37.274 45.744 53.251
Factors mean 3.15 3.48 3.22
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin = 0.895 Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.862

Note 1: Sample sizes are 2076 and observations are 392 persons; Note 2: Thermal adaptation items were scored on a 5-point Likert Scale (“1” = strongly disagree, “5” = strongly agree); Note 3: Through item analysis, 3 items that received similar responses among all respondents, namely complaining, seeking spiritual support and seeking professional support, and items that could not accurately and effectively identify psychological characteristics were deleted. Then through EFA, 4 items, namely personal choice, expectation, naturalness and being humorous were deleted because their total correlation value or standardized factor loading were too low, or because their deletion increased the total Cronbach’s Alpha; Note 4: Assessment by scholars in related fields indicated that the “enduring” and “confrontive” items have a high degree of similarity, and are therefore combined.