<|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:"Perceived economic security, relative gratification, and xenophobic sentiment during the Trump administration."
Abstract:"The bulk of prior research focuses on economic hard times as a source of material insecurity and relative deprivation in fueling negative attitudes toward immigrants and immigration. The present study shifts the focus to a novel concept: relative gratification. During the height of Trump administration, the American economy enjoyed unprecedented growth and stability. Yet, as our study shows, anti-immigrant sentiment became more pronounced among US citizens with greater perceived material security, i.e., those who felt more relatively gratified. What is the logic behind this seemingly paradoxical outcome? By drawing on insights from the social psychology literature, we propose and demonstrate that favorable macroeconomic conditions instilled in some people a sense of privileged entitlement and heightened national pride, both of which contributed to hostilities toward the foreign born. Our moderation analysis also indicates that controlling for a proxy for Trump approval, this relationship was stronger for Republican-leaning individuals as well as those who self-identify as being more politically conservative.."
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 = [3];
Q3 = [1];
Q4 = [0];
Q5 = [1];
Q6 = [1].
Perceived economic security, relative gratification, and xenophobic sentiment during the Trump administration
The bulk of prior research focuses on economic hard times as a source of material insecurity and relative deprivation in fueling negative attitudes toward immigrants and immigration. The present study shifts the focus to a novel concept: relative gratification. During the height of Trump administration, the American economy enjoyed unprecedented growth and stability. Yet, as our study shows, anti-immigrant sentiment became more pronounced among US citizens with greater perceived material security, i.e., those who felt more relatively gratified. What is the logic behind this seemingly paradoxical outcome? By drawing on insights from the social psychology literature, we propose and demonstrate that favorable macroeconomic conditions instilled in some people a sense of privileged entitlement and heightened national pride, both of which contributed to hostilities toward the foreign born. Our moderation analysis also indicates that controlling for a proxy for Trump approval, this relationship was stronger for Republican-leaning individuals as well as those who self-identify as being more politically conservative.