Abstract
Regardless of age or political affiliation, we as a society are growing more concerned about climate change with regards to our own personal responsibility. This paper sets out to look at climate anxiety in college aged people in the United States as it relates to climate action and to answer the question “Does climate anxiety lead to pro-environmental actions?”. Examples of pro-environmental actions in this case would be personal habits such as recycling or conserving energy. Eighty-three college aged 21 people (ages 18-24) participated in a survey that asked about their personal feelings about climate change and their pro-environmental habits. It was found that this age group had a higher than average level of climate anxiety and participated in a variety of pro-environmental actions, but there was not found to be a significant correlation between personal action and levels of climate anxiety. This information can be utilized by scientists and policymakers going forward to promote climate-conscious decision-making. Having a study focusing on older students is important because they are the educated youth who are going to be stepping up and being placed in positions of power in the future. It also gives us a basis for what even younger kids will feel is important as they age.
Introduction
In recent years, studies about stress related to climate change have shown that the psychological impacts of climate change are becoming just as prevalent as the physical ones (Palinkas & Wong, 2020). As evidence of climate change increases, the amount of people in the United States who view climate change as an emergency is lower than almost every other high-income country (Flynn et al., 2021) but is considerably higher than it has been in previous years (Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, 2009). As levels of concern about climate change rise, it is apt to consider the possibility that, for some, this concern could be a type of anxiety. Anxiety is a maladaptive response to stressors, considered a clinical form of worry, often resulting in a constant state of worry that can even manifest as physical symptoms (Wittchen and Hoyer, 2001). It has been found that those who experience anxiety stemming from climate change are less likely to be involved with the environmental movement and collective action, but there was no correlation to personal action (Stanley et al., 2021). This study aims to look closer at the connection to personal action by investigating whether or not college age students who report feeling stressed, angry, or upset by climate change have higher or lower rates of personal action (recycling, conserving water, etc), as college age students tend to be more concerned about climate change than older generations. Finding out whether or not those experiencing negative emotions caused by climate change are more or less likely to take pro-environmental behaviors in their personal life would contribute to the existing literature on this topic and would help to inform further research as well as possibly highlighting the environmental habits of young people and showing how many young people consider climate change to be a serious threat to human life.
Literature Review
Environmental Health
It is an undisputed fact that where you live has an impact on your health. Living in cities where air pollution is worse leads to higher rates of asthma (New York City Department of Health (NYCDOH), 1999) as well as strokes, lung cancer, and other health problems (World Health Organization, 2016). All aspects of the environment could have potential impacts on the health of the people who live there. However, as the climate changes, these expected health impacts from the environment are increasing dramatically (Watts et al., 2019). There are more extreme weather events (such as flooding, hurricanes, and wildfires), air quality is getting worse, and crop yields are decreasing (NYCDOH, 1999). This leads to more injuries from environmental disasters, more spreading of diseases, and hunger from failing crops. Climate change is negatively impacting the health of affected individuals and as long as climate change persists, it serves as a danger to human health (Amann et al., 2019).
Psychology of Climate Change
Just as climate change affects physical health, it affects mental health. Experiencing the negative impacts of climate change, such as an extreme weather event, can be incredibly distressing. This disproportionately affects minority and lower-income communities, leading to increased worry about climate change (Fritze et al., 2008). As our news cycles become increasingly more negative and news coverage overall becomes more available, the devastating impacts of climate change are more visible than ever before. Even though a lot of Americans are not experiencing climate change firsthand, they still bear witness to its horrors. So of course, hearing about climate change in the news can cause stress. Still, in communities that aren’t directly affected by climate change, the likelihood of making decisions to reduce the impacts of climate change has been observed to be low. This led to an increased interest in climate change by psychologists who wanted to examine why the behavioral response to climate change was so minute when compared to its prevalence and effects (Clayton & Manning, 2018). The main factor influencing people’s willingness to acknowledge that climate change is being caused by human behavior is how they feel it impacts their way of life, both financially and socially (Clayton et al., 2015). Simply informing people about the impacts of climate change isn’t as impactful as witnessing the effects personally. Climate change and actions around it are often not discussed in communities because the “social pressures… [are] so strong and contradictory”, which leads to worse issues and more worrying over time (Pihkala, 2020). Another possible reason why the response to climate change is disproportionate to its potential effects is Terror Management Theory, or TMT (Wolfe and Tubi, 2019). When humans are reminded of their inevitable mortality, they have a variety of responses, two of which are denial and avoidance. Because climate change is a global threat that cannot be solved easily, these maladaptive behaviors can kick in as a response. It is natural to have adverse psychological responses to a phenomenon as distressing as climate change and it is important to stress that this research is not an effort to diagnose those who are upset by climate change (Horwitz and Wakefield 2007), but climate change is a worldwide phenomenon that is getting worse over time (McMichael et al. 2006) and to ignore its potential mental health impacts would be a disservice to public health.
Climate Anxiety
Over time, scientists began to ask the question: Could the stress caused by climate change be so strong for some that it might be considered anxiety? If it was affecting the person to the point that it was impacting how they function, that would serve as a pretty good indicator of a serious problem. Some people might feel emotions other than anxiety due to climate change, and those who feel negative emotions like stress, sadness, or frustration due to climate change do not necessarily have anxiety or any other clinical disorder (Horwitz and Wakefield 2007)(Stanley et al., 2021). For simplicity’s sake, the rest of this paper will refer to these emotions as “negative emotions” stemming from climate change, or “climate anxiety”. In studies conducted in the United States, it was found that there are some individuals who report feeling climate anxiety (Clayton and Karazsia, 2020). Most of the people affected were younger, and it was a small portion of the general population, but more people than expected reported some degree of functional or cognitive impairment from negative emotions caused by climate change. Interestingly, this same study found that those with climate anxiety usually had general anxiety disorders as well. Climate anxiety was also found to affect people regardless of class, which suggests that climate change is recognized as such a global crisis that stress stemming from it could possibly transcend social or economic status (Whitmarsh et al., 2022). Even if participants reported feeling impaired due to climate change “sometimes,” that is still substantial and helps to prove that climate change is having a measurable negative impact on mental health.
Emotion and Environmental Actions
Knowing how people respond to climate change on an emotional level can help to inform how pro-environmental messages should be promoted effectively. When trying to encourage or discourage certain behaviors, one often has to consider whether negative (fear-based) or positive messaging would be more effective (Ettinger et al., 2021). One of the best examples of successful fear-based messaging is anti-smoking ads. It is generally believed that fear-based messaging works as long as it doesn't reassure the consumer (Janis and Feshbach, 1953). However, this approach has not traditionally worked in promoting environmental action. When people feel threatened by climate change but are not feeling its physical effects, they tend to distance themselves from the stressor (Feinberg and Willer, 2011). Also, climate change is a novel case of risk assessment in humans: The issue of climate change is irrevocably tied to political, social, and environmental issues alike, as well as being considered on a different level of magnitude than smoking (Reser and Bradley, 2017). The two main categories of climate action are individual action, specifically reducing personal impact, and collective action, which concerns more community-based projects. Those suffering from the effects of climate anxiety actually tend to have lower levels of environmental involvement at the collective action level. This makes sense, considering Terror Management Theory (TMT). Interestingly, those reporting anger due to climate change reported an increase in both individual and collective action (Stanley et al., 2021). This finding seems to suggest that although anger is a negative emotion, it might indicate positive change when associated with climate change. If someone is angered by climate change, they are more likely to be inspired to act than if they are worried about climate change. Overall, pro-environmental decisions have more to do with people’s personal opinions on climate change than fear-based campaigning tactics meant to promote that behavior (Ettinger et al., 2021).
Data & Methods
Eighty-three participants took a survey with two demographic questions, three yes/no general questions, six Likert scale questions meant to gauge level of climate concern, and six check list questions asking about personal environmental actions.
Survey
Demographics:
What is your age?
Have you been diagnosed with an anxiety or any other mood disorder?
Answer the following questions (yes/no):
5. It is my responsibility to prevent climate change.
6. I feel that I worry about natural disasters more than my peers.
7. I feel that the government is not doing enough to prevent climate change.
Rate how often the following statements apply to you on a 1-5 scale (1 meaning never, 5 meaning always):
9. How worried are you about climate change?
10. Thinking about climate change makes me feel sad.
11. Thinking about climate change makes me feel scared.
12. Thinking about climate change makes me feel powerless.
13. I feel guilty when I waste water.
14. I feel guilty when I waste energy.
Check all that apply:
15. I recycle.
16. I turn off the lights when I leave a room.
17. I try to conserve energy and reduce my impact on the environment.
18. I try to conserve water.
19. I compost my food waste.
20. Conserving energy and reducing my impact makes me feel better about climate change.
Although those who experience climate anxiety the most tend to have been diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorders as well (Clayton and Karazsia, 2020), those who reported having anxiety or another related mood disorder were screened out of the survey. Of these 83 initial participants, 44 were screened out for reporting that they have been diagnosed with anxiety or another mood disorder. This is because the principle researcher for this study lacks professional psychological knowledge and training and would be unable to offer support if the survey caused the participant to need help for any reason. Also, excluding those with mental health disorders will help to limit the amount of variables in the data (i.e. knowing that the feelings of anxiety are actually stemming from climate concerns rather than a generalized anxiety disorder). This is recognized as a limitation of the study, and the high number of reported mood disorder diagnoses is something for future researchers to keep in mind when attempting a study like this.
Figure 1. Pie chart showing the percentage of participants that were screened out for reporting having been diagnosed with anxiety or another mood disorder.
The original plan was to collect data completely anonymously, however, Google Forms needed to collect participant emails in order to send them a copy of their Informed Consent Form. Before the data was analyzed, responses were ordered by age and emails were replaced by numbers 1 through 44 in order to remove any identifiers. One of the yes/no questions asked if the participant felt they worry about natural disasters more than their peers. To test whether or not this indicated if people think the level of climate change concern among their peers is low or people think a majority of their peers are similarly worried about climate change, the average of the 6 Likert scale questions was calculated for each participant. Then, these averages were separated into “Yes” or “No” groups, depending on whether or not they felt they worried about natural disasters more than their peers, and averaged again.
Next, to test if this study was able to establish a correlation between personal action and climate anxiety, each participant’s responses to the “check all that apply” section were tallied individually. Then, they were directly compared to the average likert scale answers for each participant. To find a correlation, a graph (Figure 2) was generated graphing the two against each other. The r-squared value was calculated to show significance, with an r-squared value over 0.7 general indicating positive correlation. Here it is acknowledged that this might not be the most ideal way to compare the data, as the average level of climate anxiety is measured on an arbitrary scale. However, this is the best visualization of the data. A moving average graph (Figure 3) was also generated, and it also serves as a good visual for overall correlation between individuals.
Results
When analyzing the data, it was found that roughly 1/3rd of the participants reported feeling that they worry about natural disasters more than their peers. This indicates that either people think the level of climate change concern among their peers is low or that people think a majority of their peers are similarly worried about climate change.
The people who said “Yes” to feeling that they worry about natural disasters more than their peers did have a higher level of climate anxiety than the “No” group, with the “Yes” group having an average concern level of 3.986 and the “No” group having a concern level of 3.506. This is not a massive difference, but notable regardless. Two of the fifteen in the “Yes” group rated themselves at a 5 (Always) for all of the Likert Scale questions. To know for sure if participants thought they worried more than their peers or that their peers share a similar level of concern, more information would have to be collected, perhaps in the form of a larger survey with written responses or interviews.
The r-squared value for this study was 0.1506, which is not indicative of positive correlation.
Figure 2. Linear correlation graph plotting reported level of climate anxiety against reported amount of pro-environmental action.
Figure 3. Moving average
graph showing connection
between individual’s level of
climate anxiety and
pro-environmental habits.
Despite the apparent lack of correlation, 63% participants indicated that taking pro-environmental actions in their daily lives did help ease their concerns about climate change. This was consistent across reported levels of concern, although notably, those who took very few personal environmental actions tended to not agree with that statement.
Conclusion
There wasn’t found to be a significant coorelation between feelings of climate anxiety and personal action. This knowledge, in combination with previous studies, gives a pretty good indication that there is no correlation between personal action and level of concern about climcate change. More likely, people’s willingness to participate in pro-environmental actions is linked to their lifestyle, community, and beliefs as discussed in the literature review. Climate change is a global issue that illicits very different responses depending on proximity to its physical effects. If someone already has strong biospheric values, like respecting the Earth and preventing pollution, they are more likely to participate in pro-environmental actions after consuming climate action messaging (Goldberg et al., 2019), (Bouman et al., 2020). Biospheric values are distinct from altruistic and hedonistic values and it is important to include that distinction when discussing personal motivations (De Groot and Steg, 2007a; Steg et al., 2014). People are more likely to support pro-environmental actions “if they can relate them to local experiences or if they see the relevance to their own health and well-being.”(Clayton et al., 2017). Independently of climate anxiety, there is potential to further study the negative emotions caused by climate change and how they connect to climate action. This study does provide insight into how young adults in the United States feel about climate change and their personal environmental habits. Even if there isn’t a connection between levels of stress about the climate and pro-environmental habits, there is still a high level of concern about climate change felt by all.
Camryn can be contacted at https://www.linkedin.com/in/camryn-gallagher-sustainability/
Bibliography
Bouman, T., Verschoor, M., Albers, C. J., Böhm, G., Fisher, S. D., Poortinga, W., ... & Steg, L.
(2020). When worry about climate change leads to climate action: How values, worry and personal responsibility relate to various climate actions. Global Environmental Change, 62, 102061.
Clayton, S., Devine-Wright, P., Stern, P. et al. (2015). Psychological research and global climate
change. Nature Climate Change, 5(7), 640–646. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2622
Clayton, S., & Karazsia, B. T. (2020). Development and validation of a measure of climate
change anxiety. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 69, 101434.
Clayton, S., & Manning, C. (Eds.). (2018). Psychology and climate change: Human perceptions,
impacts, and responses. Academic Press.
Clayton, S., Manning, C., Krygsman, K., & Speiser, M. (2017). Mental health and our changing
climate: Impacts, implications, and guidance. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association and ecoAmerica.
Ettinger, J., Walton, P., Painter, J. et al., (2021). Climate of hope or doom and gloom? Testing the
climate change hope vs. fear communications debate through online videos. Climatic Change 164(19), https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-02975-8
Feinberg, M., & Willer, R. (2011). Apocalypse Soon?: Dire Messages Reduce Belief in Global
Warming by Contradicting Just-World Beliefs. Psychological Science, 22(1), 34–38.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610391911
Fritze, J. G., Blashki, G. A., Burke, S., & Wiseman, J. (2008). Hope, despair and transformation:
Climate change and the promotion of mental health and wellbeing. International journal
of mental health systems, 2(1), 1-10.
Goldberg, M. H., Gustafson, A., Ballew, M. T., Rosenthal, S. A., & Leiserowitz, A. (2019). A
Social Identity Approach to Engaging Christians in the Issue of Climate Change. Science
Communication, 41(4), 442–463. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547019860847
Horwitz A.V. & Wakefield J.C. (2007). The loss of sadness: how psychiatry transformed normal
sorrow into depressive disorder. Oxford University Press, New York.
Janis, I. L., & Feshbach, S. (1953). Effects of fear-arousing communications. The Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 48(1), 78–92. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0060732
McMichael A.J., Woodruff R.E., & Hales S. (2006). Climate change and human health: present
and future risks. Lancet. 367(9513), 859-69. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68079-3
New York City Department of Health (NYC DOH), 1999. Asthma Facts. New York, NY.
Palinkas, L. & Wong, M. (2020). Global climate change and mental health. Current Opinion in
Psychology, 32, 12-16, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.06.023
Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (2009). Fewer Americans see solid evidence
of global warming. Retrieved March 23, 2010, from http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1386/cap-andtrade-global-warming-opinion
Pihkala, P. (2020). Anxiety and the ecological crisis: an analysis of eco-anxiety and climate
anxiety. Sustainability, 12(19): 7836. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12197836
Reser, J. P., & Bradley, G. L. (2017). Fear appeals in climate change communication. In Oxford
research encyclopedia of climate science.
Stanley, S. K., Hogg, T. L., Leviston, Z., & Walker, I. (2021). From anger to action: Differential
impacts of eco-anxiety, eco-depression, and eco-anger on climate action and wellbeing.
The Journal of Climate Change and Health, 1, 100003.
Watts, N., Amann, M., Arnell, N., Ayeb-Karlsson, S., Belesova, K., Boykoff, M., Montgomery,
H., et al. (2019). The 2019 report of The Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: ensuring that the health of a child born today is not defined by a changing climate. The Lancet, 394(10211), 1836-1878.
Whitmarsh, L., Player, L., Jiongco, A., James, M., Williams, M., Marks, E., &
Kennedy-Williams, P. (2022). Climate anxiety: What predicts it and how is it related to climate action?. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 83, 101866.
Wittchen, H. U., & Hoyer, J. (2001). Generalized anxiety disorder: nature and course. Journal of
Clinical Psychiatry, 62, 15-21.
Wolfe, S. E., & Tubi, A. (2019). Terror Management Theory and mortality awareness: A missing
link in climate response studies?. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change,
10(2), e566.
World Health Organization. (2016). Ambient air pollution: A global assessment of exposure and
burden of disease.
Yorumlar