Sabine Caillaud
email: s.caillaud@univ-lyon2.fr

Marjolaine Doumergue

Marie Préau

Valérie Haas

Nikos Kalampalikis

The past and present of triangulation and social representations theory: A crossed history

Keywords: Social representations, triangulation, sociogenesis, cognitive polyphasia, validity

come   L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire

Psychology is at the forefront of the epistemological and methodological battle opposing qualitative and quantitative methods. Situated at the intersection of social and natural sciences, psychology can be regarded as one of the historical catalysts for the construction of the divide between the natural sciences and humanities. The former is defined as nomothetic, seeking for explaining and resorting to experimental methods, while the latter is considered idiographic, seeking for understanding through qualitative methods [START_REF] Bouterse | A Diversity of Divisions: Tracing the History of the Demarcation between the Sciences and the Humanities[END_REF]. The recent formal entry of QR in the American Psychological Association may reorganise the divide and compel psychology to consider from a fresh perspective how some of the field's "founding fathers" (e. g. Wundt, Piaget) employed both qualitative and quantitative methods [START_REF] Brinkmann | Historical Overview of Qualitative Research in the Social Sciences[END_REF]. Moreover, it opens the way for QR to assume its full potential: combining multiple methods and endorsing multidisciplinarity, and contributing to social change by understanding and diminishing the boundaries between social groups [START_REF] Gergen | The promises of qualitative research[END_REF]. Certainly, the tensions characterizing psychology are all the more accentuated -and therefore best observed -in social psychology, a discipline situated at the intersection between the individual and the social. Indeed, on the one hand, social psychology is defined as a nomothetic and experimental science where the social is an external context in which individuals act. On the other hand, some authors have developed a more societal social psychology, considering the very object of the discipline as the study of the inherent conflict between and the mutual constitution of the social and the individual [START_REF] Moscovici | Le scandale de la pensée sociale[END_REF]. Historically, the proponents of the first approach were almost American, whereas the second was developed by Europeans. SRT, among other theories (Himmelweit & Gaskell, 1990), has contributed to the development of this more societal social psychology and constitutes an epistemological turning point in the discipline [START_REF] Lopes | Social representations and societal psychology[END_REF]. SRT primarily looks at social knowledge and practices, how they are constructed, and how they evolve when moving from one lifeworld to another. The first summary of research practices in the emerging field of social representations (SR) was outlined by Jodelet in 1982(cf. Jodelet, 2015), laying the groundwork for a socio-genetic and anthropological perspective. At that time, these studies were situated in "the area of study of SR in the real environment". This socio-genetic approach is characterised by two specific features: a) the type of objects chosen as targets of representation (situated, holistic or complex objects or systems, e.g. a scientific theory, culture, women, children, health, body, justice, etc.); b) the methods for studying them (oral, spontaneous, interviews, pictorial, documentary, epistolary, etc.) [START_REF] Kalampalikis | La perspective sociogénétique des représentations sociales[END_REF].

Despite the fact that social psychology is multifaceted in practice, a recent study clearly highlights that societal social psychology is largely underrepresented in one of the main European journals on social psychology. This absence creates an image of social psychology as being exclusively experimental (Rizzoli, et al, 2018). This underrepresentation can be explained by different reasons, one being that despite the fact that QR occupies an important place in research on SR, the epistemological and methodological debates surrounding QR were ignored by social psychology for a long time [START_REF] Flick | Interpretive Social Psychology -Qualitative Methods in the Study of Social Representations[END_REF][START_REF] Flick | Social Representations[END_REF], leading to any recognition of the value of QR in social psychology being excluded. This is not to say that these debates were not taken seriously by SRT right from its beginning. For example, most studies in the field implemented different methods in the same research study in order to strengthen their study design, all the while ignoring the concept of triangulation and its evolution [START_REF] Caillaud | Triangulation méthodologique, ou comment penser son plan de recherche[END_REF], and ignoring the epistemological and ontological debates that characterizes QR and its inherent diversity [START_REF] Wertz | Qualitative inquiry in the History of Psychology[END_REF][START_REF] Spencer | Philosophical Approaches to Qualitative Research[END_REF]. Furthermore, SRT, and more broadly societal social psychology, may strengthen its position by tackling these epistemological debates and by fully assuming its methodological position in terms of triangulation. This paper seeks to: 1-outline how SRT can strengthen its epistemological and theoretical approaches by embracing triangulation and 2-highlight that an examination of past and current debates on SRT can provide relevant insights for QR in psychology. The originality of this paper lies in the fact that it pursues these goals by adopting a cross-historical perspective on triangulation, a concept stemming from QR, and SRT. We will first explain the epistemological context nestled within the origins of each approach, (first historical period), how both approaches developed before they finally met (second period), and how their encounter led to their mutually reinforcement of epistemological positions (third period). As we will see, in both fields, the epistemological turning point was not immediate. It involved a long process whereby researchers first had to make do with the methodological tools available to them, trying to meet the scientific criteria of their respective discipline at the time, and then little by little engaging ever more in a new epistemological perspective. We will present different published studies which will illustrate concretely how QR was and is practiced in the field of SRT when triangulation is employed. Finally, we will discuss 1-the possibilities offered by triangulation to enable SRT to become fully engaged in societal social psychology and 2-how SRT can help QR reach some of its full potential.

1. The first period: time for new proposals 1.1 The initial studies In France, in the 1950s, vivid tensions opposed the proponents of an experimental psychology and a more philosophical psychology interested in psychoanalysis (Ohayon, 1956). Moscovici, a student from Daniel Lagache, partisan of the unity of psychology, embarked on large-scale research in order to understand how a new scientific theory (psychoanalysis) moved into the sphere of everyday knowledge and was appropriated by different social groups: SRT was born. During the "founding moment", the first proponents of SRT "tried to do two things at once: to direct social psychology epistemologically as a discipline and, at the same time, give it a specific subject matter, an epistemological horizon, deepening the theory on social knowledge" (Kalampalikis, 2013, p. 8). Indeed, SRT seeks to understand how the multitudinous forms of knowledge and beliefs with which we deal everyday are the result of numerous transformations taking place during social interactions. Moscovici later explained that in order to counter the criticism that everyday knowledge lacks logic, "the only way to understand everyday knowledge and beliefs was to reimmerse them in the actual social laboratory where they take shape, namely the social setting of communication" (1988, p. 215). Furthermore, Moscovici (1961a) considered that "a study of a population of individuals and a content analysis of a population of documents are the techniques best suited to the scientific examination of social representations " (1961a, p. 15). He therefore used three methodological tools (the diary-questionnaire, the interview and press analysis) on a large stratified sample. Moscovici developed a whole list of arguments for the need to combine psychosocial methods in the in vivo analysis of a contemporary phenomenon, by borrowing group observation techniques from the fields of anthropology and ethnography. The presentation of his results was organized into two separate parts: results from the interviews and the questionnaires in the first part, and the results from a media analysis in the second.

By situating the processes of knowledge and belief transformation in the social setting of communication, Moscovici called for a holistic approach to the phenomenon under study, and therefore used observational methods rather than an experimental method, the latter only enabling partial analysis of some very specific elements of knowledge transformation. Very concerned by the issue of validity and the shortcomings of observation, in his afterword, Moscovici again underlined the lack of technical solutions to explore the processes by which humans construct their everyday knowledge and beliefs. In his opinion (1961a, p. 22), the limits of observational methods (such as interviews, surveys and media analyses) may be overcome by comparison with other similar studies or by confirmation through experimentation. Finally, this research enabled Moscovici to draw up some of the general principles that characterize everyday knowledge and common sense, principles that still guide and inspire social psychologists in this field today. Cognitive polyphasia, which we present later, is one of these.

Although the study by Moscovici (1961a) on Psychoanalysis is widely quoted, few readers are aware of his second study conducted in parallel with his thesis. The study attempted to provide keys to understanding the phenomenon of industrial reconversion within a small group (Moscovici, 1961b). The researchers investigated the role that the opinions and representations of the workers played in this process of conversion from a traditional, rewarding activity (hat-making factory) to a new activity (plastic panels) following the demands of the economic market. This analysis required a monographic and multimethodological approach: a) on-site observations, individual and group interviews with trade union representatives, managers, and technicians; b) a diary-questionnaire leading to individual interviews of workers at home, and a questionnaire for these same workers; c) an economic and socio-demographic analysis of the region.

For the first time, [START_REF] Herzlich | Health and illness: A social psychological analysis[END_REF], in her PhD's study on SR of health and illness, used exclusively qualitative methods by borrowing methods from sociology and anthropology [START_REF] Herzlich | A journey in the field of health: From social psychology to multi-disciplinarity[END_REF]. In the preface of Herzlich's book, [START_REF] Moscovici | Health and Illness: A social analysis[END_REF], who supervised the PhD, warned the reader that he/she would "find no questionnaires, scales or statistical tests" and that "sophisticated methods may be, in a technical sense, more professionally respectable, but they have been less well adapted to the object of their inquiry and therefore make a less genuine contribution to the progress of science" (Moscovici, 1973, pp. xiii-xiv, see also [START_REF] Farr | Heider, Harré and Herzlich on health and illness: Some observations on the structure of 'représentations collectives[END_REF].

Since the very beginning of SRT therefore, it has posed theoretical and methodological challenges which researchers try to tackle using different methods concomitantly.

Triangulation or how to manage the tensions between causal inferences and symbolic interactionism

During effectively the same period, yet in a different geographical and academic setting (Department of Sociology at the University of Illinois), Denzin (1970Denzin ( /1978) ) introduced the concept of triangulation into the debate on the validity of QR. Although QR methods had been used for a long time in psychology they were still marginalized [START_REF] Willig | Introduction[END_REF]. Their reappearance was due to the lack of suitably of quantitative methods to answer certain research questions and a lack of relevant results using quantitative methods [START_REF] Patton | Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods[END_REF][START_REF] Jodelet | Aperçus sur les méthodologies qualitatives[END_REF][START_REF] Del Rio Carral | Introduction[END_REF]. Furthermore, in a context where quantitative methods and -at least in psychology -the experimental method, constituted the gold standards [START_REF] Denzin | Introduction. The discipline and practice of qualitative research[END_REF][START_REF] Willig | Introduction[END_REF], the revival of qualitative methods soon brought their validity into question. This led to criteria from quantitative research being applied for the first time to QR. Denzin (1970Denzin ( /1978) ) developed the idea that every research method is a type of symbolic interaction (including experimental methods) and should therefore be analysed as an observational encounter. Two social interactants -the observer and the observed -meet in a specific situation during a time sequence and develop a relationship. Echoing Moscovici's theory, each research method creates, to a certain extent, a specific social setting of communication. All the elements of this encounter introduce potentially "distorting factors" which the researcher needs to be aware of. In fact, according to Denzin, all research methods must provide answers to causal inferences and should therefore pay attention to rival causal factors. Furthermore, Denzin introduced new method evaluation guidelines without contesting the old ones: "by wedding the two (the scientific method and the interactionist point of view) a degree of rigor and precision may be added to the final set of evaluative principles" (1978, p. 21). Based on both sets of principles, he further described the strengths and limitations of the different methods as follows: experimentation is best suited to the principles of causal analysis whereas participant observation-based methods rank high on the principles of symbolic interactionism 1 . Consequently, as no method perfectly fits both principles, each research study should combine different methods, in order that the limitations of one method be counterbalanced by the strengths of another. Scientific validity is situated at the intersection between the two sets of principles. This balance-checklist approach of validity is termed triangulation (in reference to Webb et al, 1966). The term originates from the military and navigation contexts and describes a method to situate an object's exact position by using at least two known points. Denzin also referred to [START_REF] Campbell | Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix[END_REF] multitrait-multimethod matrix (a combination of different methods measuring the same trait) in order to increase validity, and this created links between triangulation and correlation: results from one method are valid if they are similar (i.e. correlated) to results obtained using another method. Therefore, Denzin clearly developed triangulation as a strategy of validity. In the last part of his book, Denzin suggested different types of triangulation and provided some guidelines for planning triangulation.

To conclude, during this first historical period, both Denzin and Moscovici outlined the limitations of the experimental method, highlighting that it lacked the social dimension. Denzin's point of departure was a reflection of methodology. He considered that it was imperative to take into account the specific social situation in which data are produced. Moscovici's starting point was a new research question (the transformation of social knowledge). He called for the development of methods able to support analysis of the social setting of communication in which this phenomenon occurs. Moreover, both authors agreed that scientific validity can be achieved by comparing the results from different methods, and that valid results are therefore convergent.

The second period: developing a deeper and broader understanding 2.1 Triangulation in Debate

The criteria used for quantitative research methods soon proved to be unsuitable when judging the credibility of QR (e.g. [START_REF] Glaser | Discovery of substantive theory: a basic strategy underlying qualitative research[END_REF]: QR looks at the points of view of the actors themselves, in the way they construct and continuously transform their social world. This is not to say that physical reality does not exist. However, QR does not seek to discover one real reality. Rather, it aims to understand numerous social realities, their constructions and transformations. Validity criteria from quantitative research are not transposable to QR because of epistemological and ontological differences [START_REF] Guba | Competing paradigms in qualitative research[END_REF]. Various attempts were made to develop suitable validity criteria specific to QR (for a review see [START_REF] Santiago-Delefosse | Complexity of the paradigms present in quality criteria of qualitative research grids[END_REF]. However, the wide diversity of QR made it impossible to propose well-defined criteria without the risk of excluding certain qualitative approaches. Furthermore, strategies to enhance quality were put forward instead of strategies for validity [START_REF] Barbour | Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog?[END_REF][START_REF] Parker | Criteria for qualitative research in psychology[END_REF][START_REF] Rolfe | Validity, trustworthiness and rigour: qualitative and the idea of qualitative research[END_REF][START_REF] Flick | Managing quality in qualitative research[END_REF].

Thus, criticism grew against the initial conceptualisation of triangulation by Denzin. Despite its interactionist approach, the first definition of triangulation postulated that the same object/phenomenon can be studied by different methods. It assumed the existence of one reality and ignored the fact that each method constructs the object under study [START_REF] Fielding | Linking data[END_REF]. Despite eventually abandoning the idea of validity, [START_REF] Denzin | The research act. A theoretical introduction to sociological methods[END_REF] still faced paradoxes (Flick, 1992a, b): he considered that triangulation seeks deeper understanding yet that it would raise sociologists above the personal biases that stem from single methodologies; interactionism seeks to develop interpretations and not to test hypotheses in a context where objective reality cannot be captured. Finally, at that time, triangulation was defined as the combination of two or more research strategies in the study of the same empirical units. It was used in a pragmatic way (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007), i.e. implementing research methods that best suited the research questions at hand without considering their epistemological compatibility.

Developing a sociogenetic approach to SR

At the same time, in France, in the field of SR, the use of different methods was envisaged from a new perspective (Chombard de [START_REF] Chombard De Lauwe | Un Monde autre : l'enfance. De ses représentations à son mythe[END_REF][START_REF] Kaës | Images de la culture chez les ouvriers français[END_REF][START_REF] Milgram | Psychological maps of Paris[END_REF]. Denise [START_REF] Jodelet | Civils et Bredins[END_REF][START_REF] Jodelet | Folies et représentations sociales[END_REF][START_REF] Jodelet | Représentations sociales et mondes de vie[END_REF] conducted a study on mental illness in Ainay-le-Château, a community where people with mental diseases were placed in foster homes and supervised by the hospital at the end of the 1970s. It is the emblematic example of the use of a multiple and interdisciplinary methodology in SRT, combining four types of approaches: ethnological (participant observation, community contacts), sociological (surveys on the hospital institution, on all centres accommodating patients, on the placement and its function, and on residents' lifestyles), psychosocial (individual interviews with the people looking after the patients and sometimes with the patients themselves, observation of the interactions with the patients) and historical (analysis of hospital reports, press, etc.). Jodelet defended adopting a methodological stance which was multidisciplinary in nature and which was similar in style to the "community monograph" (1989). This approach, focussing on a limited social unit, aimed to understand "a system of representations which can be developed around its conditions of production and function" (1986). One of the best known results from this work is the apparent contradiction between the discourse about mental health (considered as not contagious) and observed daily practices (symbolic barriers being created between the mentally-ill and the host families as if the illness is contagious).

To conclude, during this second historical period, discrepancies and contradictions between results from different methods were no longer considered a threat to scientific validity, rather they enabled a deeper understanding of the phenomenon studied. More specifically, in order to gain more validity, methodological designs moved from a straightforward juxtaposition of methods to the pragmatic use of methods, in order to get a fuller picture of the phenomenon studied.

3. The third period: Bringing SRT and triangulation together

The encounter

Despite its multi-methodological approach, triangulation remained a foreign concept in the literature on SRT until 1992 when Sotirakopoulou & Breakwell called for the use of multimethodological approaches in the study of the various components of SR (beliefs, opinions, attitudes, knowledge, feelings, images, etc.). Their strategy, similar to the pragmatic combination of methods, was to break down SR into different parts, each of which is then investigated using different methods, .

At the same time, Flick was developing his ideas about the concept of triangulation (1991, 1992a). He commented on the paper by Sotirakopoulou & Breakwell in a review about SRT. To our knowledge, this was the first time that triangulation was explicitly used in literature on SRT. Flick (1992b) turned to the proposal by [START_REF] Fielding | Linking data[END_REF] which suggested combining theories and methods carefully and purposefully for the purpose of adding greater breadth and depth to the analysis as opposed to pursuing objective truth or to a pragmatic approach. He suggested going a step further in order to face two critical questions: 1-how should results from different methods be gathered (especially when they are discrepancies and contradictions)? and 2-how different are the methods which are used in reality? (e.g., interviews and surveys too provide access to feelings, knowledge, beliefs, etc.). He found concrete solutions in Jodelet's work (1989): e.g., the content of SR was investigated by interviews, while the processes of SR (their social effects and functions in social life) were investigated by observations. Also, Flick (1992a, b) suggested that the full potential for triangulation is reached when the different methods embody different theoretical perspectives: when constructing a research study design based on triangulation, the methods employed should be systematically combined because of the different theoretical perspectives they embody, and not (only) because of pragmatic reasons. Furthermore, their compatibility on an epistemological level should be considered to ensure that results stemming from different methods will be combined and not just accumulated. Accordingly, triangulation becomes a source of extra knowledge: the use of different methods reflecting different theoretical perspectives, seeks to include complementary and contradictory results. It is an extension of the research programme, not just a way to confirm results from other methods [START_REF] Flick | Mantras and myths: the disenchantment of mixed-methods research and revisiting triangulation as a perspective[END_REF]. Recently, he characterized this approach as a "systematic triangulation of perspectives" [START_REF] Flick | Mantras and myths: the disenchantment of mixed-methods research and revisiting triangulation as a perspective[END_REF], in other words, it refers to the triangulation of methodologies including methods and their theoretical and epistemological backgrounds. This type of triangulation can take place on the level of data collection and/or data analysis [START_REF] Caillaud | Triangulation des méthodes d'analyse du discours en psychologie sociale. Deux exemples d'études sur les représentations sociales de l'écologie[END_REF]. Figure 1 summarizes the main differences between the different approaches to triangulation.

Why is a systematic triangulation relevant for SRT?

Before outlining how triangulation can strengthen specific theoretical aspects, we shall first illustrate, through Kalampalikis' monographic study (2002Kalampalikis' monographic study ( , 2007)), how a systematic triangulation is vital to developing a holistic approach to SR. The study deals with the antagonism over the use of a name between two national groups. The recent history of the dispute began with the independence of the Republic of Macedonia in 1991. This political act sparked strong reactions from its neighbouring country Greece, which refused to recognise it by that name, claiming that the name Macedonia belonged exclusively to Greek cultural heritage. Only in 2018 did the two countries come to a political agreement to change the name to the Republic of North Macedonia in order to facilitate its application to join the EU and NATO. However, despite this recent diplomatic agreement, there is still a great deal of antagonism over the issue, with public protests and political fallout often featuring in the headlines, revealing quite a palpable identity and symbolic threat between the two national groups, effectively the perceived threat of identity indifferentiation. In Greece, these stormy reactions are expressed through the use of arguments based on the ancient history of the region. Kalampalikis' study is inspired by the desire to find meaning, to analyse and to interpret a complex and intense social phenomenon. The demonstration essentially drew on accumulated and validated knowledge in qualitative social psychology studies while attempting, when necessary, to broaden the scope of its investigation to the other social disciplines -anthropology, sociology, history -with the exclusive aim of acquiring a better understanding of the reality of the phenomenon. Triangulation operated between the "objective" culture (press analysis), institutional culture (analysis of history school books) and "subjective" culture (association cards, semi-structured individual interviews and focus groups). In this way, the author sought to have access to three different versions of the same phenomenon: the subjective version, the institutional version, and finally, the historical version. According to Jodelet (2007, p. 7), despite the injunctions of the pioneers in the discipline, Kalampalikis' study is one of these rare cases where a "psychosocial focus" (a psychosocial point of view) is applied to clarify history in the making.

Having looked at the epistemological reasons (holistic approach) why triangulation is relevant for SRT, we shall now turn our attention to theory-related aspects. The first aspect we shall discuss relates to cognitive polyphasia. As human beings belong to different groups, SR thrive on different sources of knowledge (common sense, scientific knowledge, ideology, etc.) and from different kinds of rationalities [START_REF] Kalampalikis | Les Grecs et le mythe d'Alexandre. Étude psychosociale d'un conflit symbolique à propos de la Macédoine[END_REF][START_REF] Kalampalikis | More than a theory: a new map of social thought[END_REF][START_REF] Provencher | Towards a better understanding of cognitive polyphasia[END_REF]. Therefore, it would seem that SR are constituted by contradictory knowledge. For example, in Jodelet's study (1989), the observed daily practice of excluding people with mental diseases is the expression of past common sense knowledge (mental illness is contagious) while in the discourse on illness, it is scientific/medical discourse which is expressed (mental illness is not contagious)). This juxtaposition of the two types of knowledge (scientific and common sense) reflects cognitive polyphasia. Furthermore, these apparent contradictions between both are expressed through the different dimensions of SR (e.g. discourse and practices.). By providing the different theoretical perspectives each method embodies, [START_REF] Jodelet | Folies et représentations sociales[END_REF] gives us with a framework for interpreting the functions which these apparent contradictions perform.

The second aspect to discuss is that SR are also defined as a process, i.e. as the construction and transformation of social knowledge. The genesis of SR occurs at different levels [START_REF] Duveen | Introduction[END_REF]. Different methods of data collection and/or data analysis are appropriated at each of these levels. Triangulation is useful to theoretically interpret similarities and differences at these different levels.

One recent research study exploring the SR of gamete donation in France focused on the controversial question of anonymous donation [START_REF] Doumergue | Don, parentés et représentations sociales[END_REF]. It was a multi-level study of the processes of symbolic appropriation of these practices at the institutional (specifically, analysis of parliamentary actors' discourses) and experiential (subjective accounts from interviews with people who became parents thanks to a sperm donation) levels. The analysis of the parliamentarian and parental constructions of anonymity highlighted the same common sense logic in both: the idea that if the child knew the donor's name, this would constitute kinship, or even make legally established filiation possible (which is not legally the case and does not come under the scope of the law in question). Therefore, the reified rationality of Law is supplanted by a logic of common sense, attached to the mainstream model of Western kinship, even in the parliamentarians' discourse: anonymity is built to protect this model, from the perspective of the exclusivity of kinship (no parents other than the parents). For two thirds of the parents in the study, anonymity ensured the total absence of the donor and established the father's paternity. The similarities between these two representational sociogeneses thus emphasize the almost hegemonic nature of the ideological and normative social expectations in terms of kinship. Furthermore, this outcome, which is the result of triangulation, ensures that the analysis of parental constructions cannot be simply reduced to the psychological level (where favouring anonymity would simply be interpreted in terms of incomplete mourning of male sterility).

Finally, triangulation can also be used to outline how SR of the same object by different groups bears the traces of specific group relationships and/or social identity stakes. A study conducted on the role played by psychological information in the evaluation and compensation of children's disabilities, will help us illustrate this point [START_REF] Caillaud | Représentations croisées du rôle des psychologues dans le champ du handicap : les attentes des MDPH et les comptes rendus psychologiques[END_REF]. In accordance with a law passed in France in 2005, the assessment and subsequent compensation (i.e., benefits, care, specialist schooling etc.) for disabilities are no longer performed on the sole basis of biomedical elements, rather in accordance with a global approach to the individual that includes, among other elements, the psychological dimension. Disabilities are assessed and compensated by multidisciplinary groups of professionals on the basis of reports written by various professionals (physicians, psychologists, teachers, etc.). Ten years after the introduction of the new law, the study investigated both the representations and expectations these professionals had of psychology (using focus groups and a survey) and the representations of psychology conveyed by psychological reports addressed to the multidisciplinary groups. The findings from focus groups and the survey shed light on tensions between the old biomedical approach (where the psychologist was only able to measure cognitive deficiencies) and the new global approach (where the psychologist is considered to be able to analyse the cognitive, affective and social dimensions of the situation) that were widespread in the multidisciplinary groups in charge of compensation. In this context, where the contribution of psychology was still questioned and its professional identity threatened, psychologists provided reports which reproduced the historical duality between qualitative and quantitative psychology. This was interpreted as a strategy both to be considered legitimate -in an identity threatening context -through confirmation of the central importance of quantitative elements (indeed, the discourse about IQ is the most representative of all reports' conclusions) and to support the idea of a more global approach in psychology.

To conclude, by considering the theoretical perspective that underpins the use of different research methods, the researcher becomes aware of the specific 'in-between' spaces in which he studies SR in the making. Accordingly, triangulation offers a way to operationalize the idea that SR are "alive and dynamic -existing only in the encounter, in the in-between space we create in dialogue and negotiation with others" (Howarth, 2006, p. 68).

Perspectives and challenges

Writing about history is not just about depicting the past. It is also a way to depict the present and to forecast the future [START_REF] Brinkmann | Historical Overview of Qualitative Research in the Social Sciences[END_REF]. To conclude our work in this article, we outline how SRT can help to realize some of the full potential of QR (multiple methods, multidisciplinarity and contributing to social change: Gergen, Josselson, Freman, 2015) and how triangulation can help SRT to adopt a more societal social psychology.

The short history of the first conventional studies on SR illustrates the almost genetic relationship which links SRT studies to triangulation. As we described in this article, drawing on SRT, the concept of triangulation has thus developed new perspectives to plan research designs based on multiple methods and allowing for the integration of contradictory results (e.g. [START_REF] Caillaud | New meanings for old habits? Representations of climate change in France and in Germany[END_REF], 2017). Moreover, the psychology of SR is marked by an epistemological tension, therefore a force, positioning SRT as an interface between sociology, anthropology and history. From this point of view, at least three forms of triangulation (theoretical, methodological, interdisciplinary) are essential when examining the contents of representations and the construction of a social world object [START_REF] Apostolidis | Représentations sociales et triangulation : une application en psychologie sociale de la santé[END_REF][START_REF] Kalampalikis | La perspective sociogénétique des représentations sociales[END_REF]. Also, SRT furnishes a relevant theoretical and epistemological frame to promote the development of multimethods and multidisciplinarity.

Triangulation may also contribute to the development of the critical potential of SRT [START_REF] Howarth | A social representation is not a quiet thing: exploring the critical potential of social representations theory[END_REF][START_REF] Batel | Developing a critical agenda to understand proenvironmental actions: contributions from social representations and social practices theories[END_REF][START_REF] Caillaud | Social Representations Theory: a Dialogical Approach to the Ecological Crisis[END_REF]: i.e. going beyond simple descriptions of SR in order to develop a potentially transformative account. First, triangulation offers a means to legitimize the use of different knowledge systems by social actors: by moving from one method to another, the researcher moves from one local sphere of knowledge construction to another, and is engaged with SR produced in different contexts and/or by different groups whose validity is recognized locally. In this way, SR can take a critical stance: i.e. the existing understandings of reality and the normative ways of producing this reality at the group level are questioned equally for all social groups/contexts. Moreover, triangulation, by moving from one method to the whole research study design, and from one local sphere of knowledge production to a global approach, can foster understanding of social and identity issues between groups and how they feed their knowledge. It can also help us understand how different SR compete in a "battle of ideas" whereby one group imposes its version of reality over another [START_REF] Moscovici | The history and actuality of social representations[END_REF]. In triangulation, power and group relationships are analysed and can explain not only why some impose themselves, and how and why some minorities may endorse dominant SR despite being negative for the minorities' identities [START_REF] Joffe | Social representations of aids: towards encompassing issues of power[END_REF], but also how and why social change occurs. Furthermore, triangulation ensures that SRT provides a relevant theoretical framework to support QR in understanding and reducing boundaries between groups, and in fostering social change.

To conclude, in this paper, in order to highlight how QR and SRT can further strengthen each other, we analysed how SRT and the concept of triangulation in QR developed in parallel over the years before finally meeting each other. This cross-historical approach is unique and provides new perspectives [START_REF] Werner | Beyond comparison: Histoire croisée and the challenge of reflexivity[END_REF]. By combining both a synchronic (comparing how epistemological and methodological issues are managed by SRT and by triangulation) and a diachronic (comparing different times) approach, the cross-historical perspective makes also salient shifts in points of view that occurred during the encounter between SRT and triangulation (turning away from a strategy of validity to embrace a strategy of extra knowledge). Analysing these changes offers a way to recompose old elements and categorisations: the old divide between qualitative and quantitative methods may be reorganised and considered from a fresh perspective. Indeed, when one considers the theoretical and epistemological backgrounds of qualitative and quantitative methods, one can see their potential compatibility. Accordingly, we can reinvent ways of using both together, qualitative methods being more than just a way to explore a phenomenon while waiting for quantitative validation. Using the concept of triangulation, authors developed reflections which constituted more concrete pathways to explore the use of both qualitative and quantitative methods [START_REF] Kelle | Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in research practice: purposes and advantages[END_REF][START_REF] Howe | Mixed methods, mixed causes?[END_REF]. This is not to say that the systematic use of both qualitative and quantitative methods should be advocated as the new gold standard (as is sometimes the case in mixed-methods research, see Fetters & Molina-Azorin 2017). However, new research practices can be developed which take into account practices used in psychology in the past, when both methods were simultaneously used without one being deemed "more scientific" than the other [START_REF] Brinkmann | Historical Overview of Qualitative Research in the Social Sciences[END_REF]. Effectively, it is about looking at the old from a new angle.

Figure 1 :

 1 Figure 1: Main differences between the different triangulation approaches

We use the terminology employed by Denzin himself: experiment is defined as a specific research design while observation is defined as a field strategy combining document analysis, interviewing, direct participation and introspection. Furthermore, observation is not, in his view, a method of data collection that can be used in an experimental design.


Sabine Caillaud
email: s.caillaud@univ-lyon2.fr

Silvia Krauth-Gruber

Virginie Bonnot

Running head: Collective emotions in France and Germany Facing climate change in France and Germany: different emotions predicting the same behavioral intentions

Keywords: collective emotions, pro-environmental intentions, cultural comparison, France, Germany

Collective emotions are considered relevant factors in predicting pro-ecological behavior.

However, the literature provides no insight into the role played by culture, despite the fact that emotions depend on specific appraisals, which are culturally grounded. As climate change is appraised as a political issue in France and as a moral issue in Germany, we hypothesize that different patterns of emotional responses will be observed in France and in Germany when facing climate change. 145 French students and 92 German students completed a questionnaire. The main results indicate that participants in France report feeling high levels of self-focused emotions, and these emotions best predicted their intentions to act in favor of the environment. In Germany, other-focused emotions are mostly reported and best predicted pro-ecological intentions. These results may have some important implications when planning measures to enhance pro-ecological behaviors.

Facing climate change in France and Germany: different emotions predicting the same behavioral intentions?

Introduction

Climate change is one of the greatest challenges facing humanity. Largely rooted in human activities, a change in individual practices is certainly essential in limiting the problem [START_REF] Steg | Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: an integrative review and research agenda[END_REF]. Emotions are known to play a significant role in adopting proenvironmental behavior [START_REF] Kals | Emotional affinity toward nature as a motivational basis to protect nature[END_REF]Montada & Kals, 2000;Meijnders, Cees & Midden, 2001a, 2001b;[START_REF] Kals | Sustainable development and emotions[END_REF][START_REF] Berenguer | The effect of empathy in proenvironmental attitudes and behaviors[END_REF][START_REF] Kaiser | Extending planned environmentalism. Anticipated guilt and embarassement across culture[END_REF]. Several studies have outlined that various collective emotions predict an individual's intention to act in an eco-friendly way [START_REF] Ferguson | Collective guilt mediates the effect of beliefs about global warming on willingness to engage in mitigation behavior[END_REF][START_REF] Harth | Guilt, anger and pride about in-group environmental behaviour: different emotions predict distinct intentions[END_REF]Mallet, Melchiori & Strickroth, 2013). Collective emotions (also called group-based emotions) are those that are felt (or expressed) by individuals as members of a group rather than as unique individuals. For instance, individuals may feel guilty for their group's environmentally-costly behavior although they personally already engage in quite a few eco-friendly practices. Minimal identification with the ingroup is required to experience collective emotions [START_REF] Wohl | Collective guilt: emotional reactions when one's group has done wrong or been wronged[END_REF]. Collective emotions are particularly relevant when addressing climate change, since most individuals are not always directly involved with it but are still concerned on a group level.

However, subtle cultural variations should also be considered when studying the role played by emotions in predicting pro-ecological behaviors. Indeed, based on cultural norms (e.g., [START_REF] Kitayama | Culture, self, and emotion: A cultural perspective on 'self-conscious' emotions[END_REF][START_REF] Eid | Norms for Experiencing Emotions in Different Cultures: Interand Intranational Differences[END_REF] and cultural values [START_REF] De Leersnyder | the Social and Behavioral Sciences: An Interdisciplinary, Searchable, and Linkable Resource[END_REF], some emotions are more likely to be experienced and expressed than others. Moreover, whether collective emotions are elicited or not depends on appraisal of the situation. To feel collective emotions such as collective guilt, people must not only identify with their group but also acknowledge their group's responsibility for climate change [START_REF] Wohl | Collective guilt: emotional reactions when one's group has done wrong or been wronged[END_REF]. Furthermore, they must believe that they can repair the harm done or at least slow down climate change [START_REF] Ferguson | Collective guilt mediates the effect of beliefs about global warming on willingness to engage in mitigation behavior[END_REF]. These appraisals are culturally grounded [START_REF] Ratner | A cultural-psychological analysis of emotions[END_REF]. Research has indeed shown that environmental issues, such as climate change, are actually appraised in different ways according to the cultural context [START_REF] Gelisen | Explaining popular support for environmental protection. A multilevel analysis of 50 nations[END_REF][START_REF] Swim | Country contexts and individuals' climate change mitigating behaviors: a comparison of U.S. versus German individuals' efforts to reduce energy use[END_REF][START_REF] Castro | Social representations of sustainability: reseraching time, institution, conflict and communication[END_REF]. Finally, culture plays a role in determining the specific emotions that encourage pro-environmental behaviors. For instance, pride has been shown to be a better predictor of pro-environmental intentions than guilt for individuals living in collectivistic cultures, compared to individualistic cultures [START_REF] Onwezen | Environmentally friendly consumer choices: cultural differences in the self-regulatory function of anticipated pride and guilt[END_REF].

We therefore hypothesize that, depending on the culture in question, different emotions will be felt, which in return will predict willingness to engage in pro-environmental behaviors. This may have important consequences when planning measures to promote ecological behaviors. In the present research, we focus on the role played by collective emotions in triggering pro-environmental behaviors in two European countries: France and Germany.

These countries are compared because of their specific historical and sociological differences regarding the way they consider ecological issues [START_REF] Chibret | Les associations écologiques en France et en Allemagne. Une analyse culturelle de la mobilisation collective[END_REF][START_REF] Rudolf | Pratiques et discours sur l'environnement en France et en Allemagne [The environment a social construction[END_REF][START_REF] Keller | Müll -die gesellschaftliche Konstruktion des Wertvollen[END_REF][START_REF] Jacquiot | Comparaison des processus de formation et de diffusion du mouvement écologiste en RFA et en France [Comparison of the training and distribution processes of the ecology movement in the FRG and France[END_REF].

Representations of climate change in France and Germany

France and Germany are both industrialized and capitalist European democracies. Their populations are comparable, as are their economic structures (OECD, 2016). Despite their socio-economic similarities, previous research has shown discrepancies in the way French and German people envision climate change. According to the Special Eurobarometer 409 (2014), more Germans consider climate change to be the most serious problem facing the world compared to French people (27% vs. 14%). In Germany, businesses and industries are perceived as more involved in tackling climate change than in France (52% vs. 42%). The reverse is true when considering the responsibility of environmental groups in bringing about change (27% of French respondents vs. only 11% of German respondents). Moreover, although in both countries around 30% consider themselves to be involved in tackling climate change, more German respondents (65%) report having taken personal actions to fight climate change than French (50%). This finding echoes other results showing that most Germans consider that overall, citizens are doing enough to fight climate change [START_REF] Kuckartz | Globaler Klimawandel und Gerechtigkeit: Einstellung und Verhalten der BürgerInnen in Deutschland und Europa[END_REF].

Finally, this survey reveals differences in the way French and German people engage in proenvironmental behaviors. To take only a few examples, 43% of German respondents (vs. 24% in France) report regularly using environment-friendly transport, and 22% of Germans (vs. only 4% of French respondents) avoid taking short-haul flights when possible. A comparison with a previous Eurobarometer (2011) indicates that these results are stable over time.

Qualitative research in social psychology has also reported subtle differences in the social representations of climate change, which echo previous historical and sociological analyses about the way both countries manage ecological issues [START_REF] Chibret | Les associations écologiques en France et en Allemagne. Une analyse culturelle de la mobilisation collective[END_REF][START_REF] Rudolf | Pratiques et discours sur l'environnement en France et en Allemagne [The environment a social construction[END_REF][START_REF] Keller | Müll -die gesellschaftliche Konstruktion des Wertvollen[END_REF][START_REF] Jacquiot | Comparaison des processus de formation et de diffusion du mouvement écologiste en RFA et en France [Comparison of the training and distribution processes of the ecology movement in the FRG and France[END_REF]. For instance, the German press adopts a global interpretation of climate change: they envision climate change as a problem for all humanity. Thus, German newspapers anchor their discourse in moral issues, where fighting climate change becomes a duty to all humanity. In contrast, the French press develops a discourse about local geopolitical and financial issues and engages more often in social comparisons (e.g., which country has the biggest greenhouse gas production) and points to the rich/poor countries dichotomy (Caillaud, Kalampalikis, & Flick, 2011). These differences in the press discourse are reflected in the way individuals and groups talk about climate change in both countries [START_REF] Caillaud | New meanings for old habits? Representations of climate change in France and in Germany[END_REF].

Finally, research also revealed variability in the way French and German people consider ecological practices [START_REF] Caillaud | Focus groups and ecological practices: a psychosocial approach[END_REF]. In Germany, they are perceived as altruistic (i.e., other-centered), echoing the moral interpretation of climate change found in the press. In France, people's ecological practices tend to be consistent with their own political values; their motives are thus more self-centered. Discourses on climate change and practices are thus organized in different patterns in both countries, and climate change refers to different social realities.

Self-focused and other-focused collective emotions

According to appraisal theories [START_REF] Roseman | Appraisal determinants of discrete emotions[END_REF][START_REF] Roseman | A model of appraisal in the emotion system: Integrating theory, research, and applications[END_REF][START_REF] Scherer | Appraisal considered as a process of multi-level sequential checking[END_REF], the way people think about and appraise a situation will determine the specific emotions they are more likely to report. Individuals' emotional reactions are in part determined by their appraisal of a situation as concerning the self or others. For example, when attention is directed towards the ingroup's advantaged situation or to the ingroup's past wrongdoing, or inaction, individuals are more likely to experience self-focused negative emotions such as guilt, shame, worry or sadness. Other-focused emotions (like empathy, pity, or moral indignation) are experienced when attention is directed towards victims of the ingroup's actions or inaction (see [START_REF] Leach | Poisoning the consciences of the fortunate": The experience of relative advantage and support for social equality[END_REF][START_REF] Wakslak | Moral outrage mediates the dampening effect of system justification on support for redistributive social policies[END_REF]Iyer et al., 2008;[START_REF] Harth | Advantaged Group's Emotional Reactions to Intergroup Inequality: The Dynamics of Pride, Guilt, and Sympathy[END_REF].

Based on appraisal theories [START_REF] Roseman | Appraisal determinants of discrete emotions[END_REF][START_REF] Roseman | A model of appraisal in the emotion system: Integrating theory, research, and applications[END_REF][START_REF] Scherer | Appraisal considered as a process of multi-level sequential checking[END_REF] and on past research showing differences in the way French and German people interpret and confront environmental issues, we hypothesize that climate change gives rise to different answers, i.e. different patterns of appraisal and emotions linked to behavioral intentions. More concretely.

we make the following hypotheses:

In Germany, where it is believed that citizens are already doing enough to tackle climate change, participants should attribute less responsibility to themselves, as individuals and as a group, than to others. Moreover, as climate change is perceived as a global moral issue, we expect that Germans consider responsibility in a broad sense (e.g. human activity and governments) and are focused on the plight of victims. As such, they should be more prone to feeling other-focused emotions, such as moral indignation about what their group is doing, and empathy for victims of climate change. These other-centered emotions should, in turn, drive their environmental behavioral intentions.

In France, climate change is represented as a financial and political issue opposing industrialized and poor countries. Lay people tend to act ecologically to be consistent with their own political values. Thus, French people should emphasize the responsibility of industrialized countries and their own. They should be more prone to feeling self-focused emotions such as guilt, embarrassment, and sadness about what their group is doing wrong.

These self-focused emotions should, in turn, be better predictors of their intentions to act in an eco-friendly way.

Method

Participants

A total of 237 psychology students agreed to complete the questionnaire. Data were collected in France and Germany during the students' classroom time and under the supervision of a lecturer. The French sample involved 145 students (124 women and 18 men, Mage = 22.5, SD = 7.4) and the German sample 92 students (56 women and 36 men, Mage = 22.9, SD = 4.1). Sex ratio was the only significant difference in both samples, χ² (1, 237) = 22.01, p < .001. Only, 8.3% of the French and 10% of the German participants reported an ecological commitment (no significant difference, p = .65).

Material and Procedure

Data presented in this article were collected as part of a larger investigation assessing spontaneous associations with ecological issues, identification with different groups, collective emotions, beliefs about climate change, coping strategies, environmental behavioral intentions and self-reported pro-ecological behavior regarding climate change. Only the variables relevant to our hypotheses will be presented here.

In cross-cultural studies cultural biases deserve particular attention [START_REF] Wagner | Qualitative and quantitative research across cultures and languages: cultural metrics and their application[END_REF]. Thus, the French questionnaire was translated into German by two native German-speaking bilingual researchers involved in the research in France (the first and second authors) and monitored by a German researcher in Germany. This translation led to some adaptations in the French questionnaire so that both versions would match and be consistent.

The questionnaire was introduced as a study on ecology. First, participants were asked to answer three open-ended questions to identify the main dimensions of the French and German students' representations. They had to list four words that spontaneously came to mind when thinking about ecology. Then, they were asked to name four ecological problems so that we could determine whether climate change was a preoccupation for them. Finally, they were asked to report their feelings when thinking about these problems. These open-ended questions were aimed at replicating results from previous studies regarding cultural differences between France and Germany.

On the following page, students' identification with three groups (the national group, as inhabitants of industrialized countries, as citizens of the world), was measured by assessing the extent to which they felt they belonged to each of these groups, from (1) "not at all" to (5) "very much".

Next, students had to read a brief description of the causes and consequences of climate change. Then, collective emotions were assessed by asking participants, to indicate the extent to which they, as members of an industrialized country such as France (vs. Germany), felt various emotions when thinking about climate change, from 1 "not at all feeling this emotion" to 5 "very much feeling this emotion" (26 emotional terms adapted from Elliot & Devine, 1994 and translated into French by Gosling et al., 2006). We aggregated the emotional terms (synonyms) reflecting the same emotion to measure self-focused emotions (fear, guilt, embarrassment, and sadness) and other-focused emotions (indignation and empathy for victims). Collective guilt was measured using five items adapted from Ferguson & Branscombe, 2010 (e.g., I feel guilt when I think about how we, the industrialized countries like France/Germany, contribute to climate change; α = .86 for the German sample and α = .88 for the French sample).

We also asked students to indicate the extent to which various agents (i.e., themselves, their country, industrialized countries, poor countries, governments, human activities and nature itself) could be held accountable for climate change (from 1 "not at all responsible" to 5 "very responsible").

Finally, we measured behavioral intentions to act pro-ecologically with an eight-item list including a variety of behavioral intentions such as signing petitions, providing financial support to pro-environmental associations, or lowering the heating by a few degrees to protect the environment (adapted from Homburg & Stollberg, 2006). The scale reliability was good in both countries ( = .71 in Germany and  = .80 in France). Indeed, a gap may exist between intentions to act pro-environmentally and effective behaviors. However, effective behaviors are difficult to measure and intentions are their best predictor [START_REF] Barr | Are we all environmentalists now? Rhetoric and reality in environmental action[END_REF]. Moreover, measuring effective behaviors also present some limits: some behaviors considered by the researcher as ecological are indeed performed for other reasons by individuals [START_REF] Caillaud | Social Representations Theory: a dialogical approach to the ecological crisis[END_REF].

On the last page of the questionnaire, various socio-demographic questions were asked (e.g., age, gender, and previous commitment to ecological organizations).

Results

As recommended by [START_REF] Wagner | Can culture be a variable? Dispositional explanation and cultural metrics[END_REF][START_REF] Wagner | Qualitative and quantitative research across cultures and languages: cultural metrics and their application[END_REF], analyses were conducted separately in each country1 . This procedure has previously been used for comparative studies [START_REF] Milfont | A cross-cultural study of environmental motive concerns and their implications for proenvironmental behavior[END_REF][START_REF] Onwezen | Environmentally friendly consumer choices: cultural differences in the self-regulatory function of anticipated pride and guilt[END_REF]. Sex and previous ecological commitment were both controlled in the analyses. Sex had no significant effect in any of the analyses and therefore will not be discussed further. Ecological commitment will only be discussed when it has a significant effect. Concerning the open answers, a content analysis [START_REF] Patton | Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods[END_REF] was conducted with the software Atlas-ti.

Spontaneous associations

The first words associated with ecology (see Figure 1) in France were quite positive (e.g., nature, green, environment, the Earth, recycling, respect, sustainable development). The most frequent negative word elicited was pollution (13.1%). It is worth noting that 20% of French participants mentioned at least one word referring to the political sphere such as the Green Party, Nicolas Hulot (a well-known French political activist at the time), politics, etc.

In Germany, positive words were less common (e.g., nature, forest, protecting the environment) while negative words or problems were cited more often (e.g., climate change, greenhouse effect, catastrophes, waste, oil slick, etc.). Whereas French participants reported not thinking much about pollution, the word pollution was cited by 38.04% of German participants. Lastly, political terms were almost absent (2.17%).

When answering the last open-ended questions, participants reported their emotions, as well as feelings of responsibility, powerlessness, and individual practices. French participants answered more on a cognitive or attitudinal level (e.g., their level of interest in ecological problems) than German participants, χ²(1, 237) = 4.37, p = .04. German participants, on the contrary, used more emotional words than French participants (28.8%), χ²(1, 237) = 26.54, p < .001).

Thus, French participants anchored their answers on a political level and positioned themselves in a more attitudinal way than German participants did. German participants spontaneously adopted a more emotional discourse and focused more on negative issues (like pollution). This is coherent with findings from the literature previously presented. Despite these cultural differences, the most cited problems were quite similar in both countries: climate change and greenhouse effect were cited by 40% and 21.38% of French participants and by 40.22% and 31.52% of Germans, respectively. Thus, in both countries, climate change is one of the central ecological problems that participants spontaneously think about.

Group identification

Participants were asked if they felt various collective emotions as members of industrialized countries. We therefore verified that they identified with that particular group (French sample: M = 4.59, SD = 0.61; German sample: M = 3.84, SD = 1.01). T-tests revealed that the level of identification was indeed significantly higher than the middle of the scale both in France, t(144) = 31.43, p < .001, and in Germany, t(91) = 7.90, p < .001.

Attribution of responsibility

Two MANOVAs with the potential responsible actors as a repeated measure (using the Bonferroni correction) were run to investigate how French and German respondents evaluated the share of responsibility of the various actors in climate change (see Table 1). In Germany, there was a significant effect of responsible actors, F(6, 79) = 73.44, p < .001, Wilks lambda = .15, η²p = .84. Thus, actors were significantly attributed different responsibility levels with some notable exceptions. Participants attributed the highest responsibility to industrialized countries, governments and human activity, which did not differ from each other, and significantly more (p < .001) than to themselves and poor countries. In France, attributions of responsibility differed too, F(6, 132) = 86.96, p < .001, Wilks lambda = .20, η²p = .79.

Government and human activity were not distinguished (p = 1) and were attributed the most responsibility after industrialized countries (p = .03). All the other attributions of responsibility differed significantly from each other (p < .001).

Reported collective emotions

Two MANOVAs with the different emotions as a repeated measure (using the Bonferroni correction) and with sex and commitment as covariates were run to investigate which emotions were reported by German and French respondents (see Table 2).

In Germany, there was a significant effect of the type of emotions, F(6, 79) = 27.87, p < .001, Wilks lambda = .36, η²p = .68. Participants reported feeling more empathy for victims of climate change than all other emotions (all ps < .01). The following most highly reported emotions were fear and indignation, then sadness (p < .01 compared to fear). Finally, embarrassment, guilt, and surprise were the emotions least likely to be reported, significantly less than indignation (all ps < .01). Finally, t-tests show that empathy and fear were reported at levels significantly higher than the middle of the scale, whereas embarrassment, guilt, and surprise were reported at levels significantly lower than the middle of the scale (all ps < .001).

In France, a significant effect of the type of emotions was also found, F (6, 129) = 39.03, p < .001, Wilks lambda = .35, η²p = .65. As in Germany, the participants reported feeling mostly empathy for victims (comparisons with all other emotions significant at p < .001).

Then, among the most highly reported emotions, embarrassment was elicited at a level comparable to fear, followed by sadness and indignation (ps < .02 compared to fear), and followed by guilt (all ps < .01 compared to indignation and sadness). As in Germany, the emotion least likely to be prompted was surprise (comparisons with all other emotions significant at p < .001). Finally, all emotions are reported on levels that are significantly higher than the middle of the scale (all ps < .001) except of guilt (p = .46), and surprise which is significantly lower than the middle of the scale (p < .001).

Aside from empathy, which was strongly felt in both countries, fear was the second most reported emotion in both countries. Moreover, and on the same level as fear, the results suggest that Germans are more likely to feel indignation, while French participants are more likely to feel embarrassment.

A correlational analysis confirmed that, in both countries, the more respondents attributed responsibility for climate change to industrialized countries, the more collective emotions they reported2 (correlations between .21 and .33 in Germany and between .29 and .37 in France). One notable exception was that, contrary to Germany where attribution of responsibility to industrialized countries was significantly correlated with collective empathy for victims, r(89) = .41, p < .001, the correlation was only marginal in France, r(144) = .15, p = .07, and significantly different, z = 2.05, p = .04.

Collective emotions and intentions of pro-ecological behavior

To explore which collective emotions best predict intentions to act pro-environmentally, multiple regressions were performed on the French and German samples3 . Our hypothesis was that in Germany, other-focused emotions such as indignation or empathy would best predict intentions, whereas in France, self-focused emotions such as embarrassment or guilt would best predict environmental behavioral intentions. Sociodemographic variables (i.e., ecological commitment) that influence the variables were entered in the regression. These results are presented in Table 3.

In Germany, the model explained 14% of the variance, F(8, 77) = 2.74, p = .01 with empathy for victims being the only significant predictor. In France, the model explained 43% of the variance, F(8, 127) = 13.72, p < .001. The significant predictors were sadness, guilt and ecological engagement. Thus, as expected, different collective emotions predict proecological behavioral intentions in France and in Germany. Moreover, in Germany, emotions explain much less variance (15% in Model 2) than in France (40.7% in Model 2).

Discussion

This study is mainly concerned with the question of cross-cultural differences both in self-reported collective emotions regarding climate change and in the specific collective emotions that best predict behavioral intentions to take action. Results are for the most part in line with our hypotheses.

This study confirmed through open-ended questions that French and German students make different appraisals of climate change. Consequently, different patterns of responsibility attribution were observed, which confirmed our hypotheses. In Germany, individuals attribute more responsibility to human activity in a broad sense, including industrialized countries and governments, than to their own country or themselves. French participants attribute more responsibility to industrialized countries than to others, which is consistent with their geopolitical approach of climate change. Moreover, in France, individuals attribute more responsibility to themselves than poor countries, and this was not the case in Germany.

The results show that empathy for victims and fear are highly reported in both countries.

In line with our hypotheses, embarrassment, a self-focused emotion, was the second most reported emotion, whereas in Germany it is indignation. The fact that empathy for victims was also frequently reported in France was not expected, but the very high mean, the low SD and the absence of correlation with responsibility attribution could indicate normative answers in France. Moreover, the comparison of the different collective emotions reported in both cultural contexts highlights a paradox: overall, German participants reported feeling fewer emotions than French participants4 , while given more spontaneous emotional evocations when completing the open-ended and word association tasks. This is interesting in itself, especially regarding cross-cultural differences. First, it may relativize impact of comparative results obtained using culture-dependent scales (i.e., the fact that German participants have particularly low scores on collective emotion scales; see [START_REF] Wagner | Qualitative and quantitative research across cultures and languages: cultural metrics and their application[END_REF]. It may also highlight the normative nature of collective emotions (see [START_REF] Bonnot | Emotional reactions to the French colonization in Algeria: The normative nature of collective guilt[END_REF][START_REF] Bonnot | Guilt norms regarding historical violence and implications for intergroup relations in France[END_REF]. In fact, it may be that constraining participants to evaluate the extent to which they feel various specific emotions downplayed the willingness of German participants to report them (not wanting to appear too emotional after they had displayed these emotions previously) but incited French participants to display these emotions that they had not revealed previously, in order not to appear too unemotional. Consequently, we recommend a more extensive use of open-ended questions to investigate collective emotions so as to minimize the normative pressures to report them.

Finally, and again consistent with our hypotheses, the results clearly show that different specific emotions best predict intentions to act-pro-environmentally in both countries: sadness and guilt (i.e., self-focused emotions) in France and empathy (other-focused emotions) in Germany. We should also note that ecological commitment is a good predictor of intentions to act pro-environmentally in France but not in Germany. This confirms sociological and historical analyses [START_REF] Chibret | Les associations écologiques en France et en Allemagne. Une analyse culturelle de la mobilisation collective[END_REF][START_REF] Dobré | L'écologie au quotidien. Eléments pour une théorie sociologique de la résistance ordinaire[END_REF][START_REF] Rudolf | Pratiques et discours sur l'environnement en France et en Allemagne [The environment a social construction[END_REF] and research on ecological practices [START_REF] Caillaud | Focus groups and ecological practices: a psychosocial approach[END_REF] showing that in Germany, ecological behaviors are considered to be altruistic behaviors, whereas in France, they are a way to act according to one's political values. This has quite concrete consequences when developing programs to encourage ecological behaviors. Indeed, if it is well-known that different factors may play a role in predicting ecological behaviors (perceived costs, perceived moral issues, emotions, etc.), a carefully planned measure should take the specificities of the cultural context into account to determine which factors are the most relevant [START_REF] Steg | Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: an integrative review and research agenda[END_REF]. As such, our results indicate that it may be somewhat counterproductive to use models based on pro-social motives or altruism (like the norm-activation-model, [START_REF] Schwartz | Normative influence on altruism[END_REF] to increase ecological behaviors in France or to use collective guilt in a German program. Instead, an analysis of the way climate change is appraised within a specific cultural context should help to determine which model is best to use.

It is worth noting that the emotions best predicting intentions were not necessarily those most reported (e.g., fear was highly reported but did not predict intentions in either country, and empathy was highly reported in but did not predict intentions). The finding that group-based sadness, a negative self-focused emotion [START_REF] Shaver | Emotion knowledge: Further exploration of a prototype approach[END_REF], predicts proenvironmental behavior is somewhat surprising because sadness is generally associated with inaction or withdrawal [START_REF] Smith | Anger, Fear, or Sadness: Faculty Members' Emotional Reactions to Collective Pay Disadvantage[END_REF][START_REF] Paladino | Why did Italians protest against Berlusconi's sexist behaviour? The role of sexist beliefs and emotional reactions in explaining women and men's pathways to protest[END_REF]. However, people may engage in prosocial actions to reduce an unpleasant negative affective state, especially when they have no other way to obtain relief [START_REF] Cialdini | Transgression and altruism: A case for hedonism[END_REF]. In the case of climate change, ignoring or withdrawing from the situation may be more difficult than acting upon those emotions.

Clearly, our results do not provide a complete understanding of the cultural differences in the way French and German people deal with climate change. For example, we only assessed one appraisal dimension (attribution of responsibility), and future research should investigate the role of other appraisal dimensions. For example, it would be interesting to consider ecological practices as a way of reducing an actual/ideal group discrepancy in France ("what we do" vs. "what we wish to do") or an actual/ought group discrepancy ("what we do" vs.

"what we should do") in Germany. Indeed, it has been shown that the perceived discrepancies between the "actual" and the "ideal" or the "ought" group lead to the experience of different collective emotions [START_REF] Bizman | Group-based emotional distress: an extension of self discrepancy theory[END_REF].

Several other limitations of our research are worth mentioning. Firstly, any definitive conclusions regarding causality between appraisals of responsibility, emotions and intentions to act pro-environmentally are precluded due to the use of a correlational design. Moreover, even if we can be confident that intentions are good predictors of behaviors [START_REF] Ajzen | Nature and operation of attitudes[END_REF][START_REF] Bamberg | Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford and Tomera: a new meta-analysis of psychosocial determinants of pro-environmental behaviour[END_REF], we did not measure effective behaviors. Finally, the intention to act pro-environmentally to deal with negative emotions is one coping strategy, among others, that should also be considered (i.e., denial, Homburg & Stollberg, 2006;Homburg, Stollberg & Wagner, 2007). Despite these limitations, the present study offers insight into the importance of considering cultural specificities to understanding the appraisal of ecological issues like climate change, the emotional reactions they trigger, and their consequences for social change, as well as better apprehending their contextual malleability [START_REF] Batel | Developing a critical agenda to understand pro-environmental actions: contributions from social representations and social practices theories[END_REF][START_REF] Batel | Developing a critical agenda to understand pro-environmental actions: contributions from social representations and social practices theories[END_REF]Clayton et al., 2016). Climate change is indeed a scientific phenomenon, but it is appropriated and reconstructed in different cultural contexts, resulting in different social realities. Consequently, in answering the question of how to promote pro-environmental behaviors, attention should be paid to the way climate change and ecological issues in general are socially and culturally appraised in order to be relevant.

Table 1 . Attribution of responsibility for climate change in France and Germany

 1

		Mean (SD)
	Attribution of responsibility	France	Germany
	Industrialized countries	4.59 (0.62)	4.22 (0.81)
	Governments	4.40 (0.73)	4.06 (0.82)
	Human activity	4.34 (0.77)	3.95 (0.88)
	Their own country	3.92 (0.83)	3.24 (0.83)
	Themselves	2.89 (1.01)	2.48 (0.87)
	Poor countries	2.41 (1.67)	2.62 (1.08)
	Nature	1.64 (1.00)	1.80 (1.03)

Table 2 . Emotions reported in France and in Germany Variables

 2 entered in the regression (enter method): embarrassment, fear, indignation, sadness, guilt, empathy, ecological commitment, sex

	Variables entered in the model	B	SE B	β	p
	In France:
	-empathy	-.008	.075	-.007	.917
	-fear	.027	.105	.031	.794
	-indignation	.065	.102	.078	.525
	-embarrassment	.157	.091	.183	.086
	-sadness	.242	.091	.292	.009
	-guilt	.125	.062	.156	.045
	-ecological commitment	.541	.199	.188	.008
	-sex	-.060	.165	-.025	.717
	In Germany:
	-empathy	.066	.069	.287	.018
	-fear	.019	.146	.029	.895
	-indignation	.190	.137	.274	.168
	-embarrassment	.031	.105	.041	.771
	-sadness	-.108	.119	-.160	.368
	-guilt	.111	.082	.161	.179
	-ecological commitment	.271	.246	.112	.275
	-sex	-.273	.156	-.203	.084

Table 3 . Regression coefficients for the predictor variables entered in the model Figure 1. Words most frequently associated with ecology in France and in Germany (%)

 3

We chose to conduct separate analyses for each country for two main reasons (see[START_REF] Wagner | Can culture be a variable? Dispositional explanation and cultural metrics[END_REF]. First, it is compatible with the idea that the specific relationships between appraisals, emotions and intentions are necessary and not contingent, as they refer to different social realities. Moreover, despite the precautions taken in translating the questionnaire, it is still possible that some items (specifically concerning emotions) do not have exactly the same meaning in both countries.

Except for the emotion "surprise", which was not correlated with any responsibility attribution in either country.

As tolerance and VIF values were not entirely satisfactory, we also conducted a regression with the enter method that confirmed the results, even if additional variables were significant predictors. In Germany, the model included empathy and indignation and explained 15% of variance, F(2, 83) = 7.8, p < .001. In France, the model included sadness, guilt, embarrassment, and ecological commitment, and explained

44.3% of variance, F(4, 131) = 27.8, p < .001. Also, the results appear robust.

A two-way mixed MANOVA was conducted on the collective emotions (empathy, embarrassment, fear, indignation, sadness, guilt, and surprise) and showed a small but significant effect of nationhood, F(1, 218) = 6.19, p = .01, η²p = .03: overall, French participants reported higher levels of emotions than Germans did.

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.