<|begin_of_text|><|start_header_id|>system<|end_header_id|>You are an expert on climate change, human mobility and migration. Answer the question truthfully.<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>user<|end_header_id|>Here are the title and abstract of a scientific paper probably related to climate change, human mobility and migration..
Title:"Process in the Community, Detain Offshore or 'Turn Back the Boats'? Predicting Australian Asylum-seeker Policy Support from False Beliefs, Prejudice and Political Ideology."
Abstract:"Over the past few decades, there has been a progressive implementation of policies designed to deter the arrival of people seeking protection. In Australia, this has included offshore processing and towing boats of asylum seekers away from Australian waters. In a community survey of 164 Australians, this study examined the predictive role of false beliefs about asylum seekers, prejudice and political ideology in support of three policies. Multiple hierarchical regression models indicated that, although political ideology and prejudice were significant predictors of policy support, false beliefs was the strongest predictor. For the policy of processing asylum seekers in the community, less endorsement of false beliefs was a significant predictor, while, for the policy of offshore processing, more endorsement of false beliefs was a significant predictor. For the boat turn-back policy, an increase in false-belief endorsement was the strongest predictor; although increases in prejudice and a prejudice-political ideology interaction (i.e. the predictive value of prejudice was stronger for participants who identified as politically conservative) also independently predicted support. Practical implications and future research avenues are discussed.."
I have six questions you need to answer.
Q1: Is this article is about 'human migration mobility': 1 = yes; 0 = no. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q2: What drivers of migration and mobility does the article study? 0 = 'other', 1 = 'climate', 2 = 'environment', 3 = 'economic', 4 = 'conflict', 5 = 'political', 6 = 'social', 7 = 'family'. Answer with a number or a sequence of numbers separated by commas. Do not give a textual explanation. 

Q3: What is the overall sentiment of the article?:0 = 'neutral', 1 = 'negative', 2 = 'positive'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q4: What type of climate or environmental keywords are explicitly mentioned?:  0 = 'none', 1 = 'algal blooms', 2 = 'infestation', 3 = 'infectious diseases', 4 = 'ocean acidification', 5 = 'sea ice', 6 = 'acid rain', 7 = 'drought', 8 = 'cold wave', 9 = 'heat wave', 10 = 'glacial', 11 = 'wildfire', 12 = 'air pollution', 13 = 'biodiversity loss', 14 = 'coastal erosion', 15 = 'land degradation', 16 = 'deforestation', 17 = 'desertification', 18 = 'water pollution', 19 = 'diebacks', 20 = 'permafrost loss', 21 = 'sand mining', 22 = 'sea level rise', 23 = 'earthquake', 24 = 'tsunami', 25 = 'volcanic', 26 = 'flood', 27 = 'avalanche', 28 = 'landslide', 29 = 'downburst', 30 = 'thunderstorm', 31 = 'sandstorm', 32 = 'haze', 33 = 'storm', 34 = 'cyclone', 35 = 'blizzard', 36 = 'hail', 37 = 'snow', 38 = 'tornado', 39 = 'wind', 40 = 'hurricane', 41 = 'typhoon', 42 = 'other'. Answer with a number or a sequence of numbers separated by commas. Do not give a textual explanation. 

Q5: What discipline does the article belong to?: 0 = 'other', 1 = 'social science', 2 = 'natural science', 3 = 'arts and humanities', 4 = 'multidiscipline and interdiscipline'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q6: Does the article apply quantitative and/or statistical analysis?: 0 = 'no', 1 = 'yes'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Use the following template: 

Q1 = [];
Q2 = [];
Q3 = [];
Q4 = [];
Q5 = [];
Q6 = [].<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>assistant<|end_header_id|>Answer:
Q1 = [1];
Q2 = [5,6];
Q3 = [1];
Q4 = [0];
Q5 = [1];
Q6 = [1].
Process in the Community, Detain Offshore or 'Turn Back the Boats'? Predicting Australian Asylum-seeker Policy Support from False Beliefs, Prejudice and Political Ideology
Over the past few decades, there has been a progressive implementation of policies designed to deter the arrival of people seeking protection. In Australia, this has included offshore processing and towing boats of asylum seekers away from Australian waters. In a community survey of 164 Australians, this study examined the predictive role of false beliefs about asylum seekers, prejudice and political ideology in support of three policies. Multiple hierarchical regression models indicated that, although political ideology and prejudice were significant predictors of policy support, false beliefs was the strongest predictor. For the policy of processing asylum seekers in the community, less endorsement of false beliefs was a significant predictor, while, for the policy of offshore processing, more endorsement of false beliefs was a significant predictor. For the boat turn-back policy, an increase in false-belief endorsement was the strongest predictor; although increases in prejudice and a prejudice-political ideology interaction (i.e. the predictive value of prejudice was stronger for participants who identified as politically conservative) also independently predicted support. Practical implications and future research avenues are discussed.