Gender,Exposure to News,Knowledge About Climate Change,and Prosociality Predict Climate Anxiety Scores in Mexican Students

Abstract

Climate change represents a threat to the future of young people everywhere; from a mental health point of view, emotions such as fear and intense worry can manifest themselves as a construct termed climate anxiety (CA). Using an online survey, we evaluated the general anxiety and CA of a sample of university students [n = 461, 64.5% identified as women; mean age (standard deviation) = 21.4 (1.6)] as well as a diverse set of psychosocial variables (i.e., exposure to social media and news, knowledge about climate change, prosociality, and their disposition to donate to conservation efforts) to obtain a profile of potential measures associated with vulnerability to CA. Using generalized linear models, we found that participants who identified as women, spent more time reading news sites, had more knowledge about climate change, were more prosocial and more willing to donate to conservation efforts had higher CA scores, but not more generalized anxiety. In addition, we found that students whose courses involved information about climate change had higher CA scores. Identifying the characteristics of individuals vulnerable to CA may help address their negative feelings so that they can overcome anxiety and turn to meaningful positive action.

Introduction

Climate change is a term that describes the long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns; although some of these shifts are the consequence of natural phenomena, most recent ones are the result of human activity (United Nations, 2022). The recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Pörtner et al., 2022) reports an increased frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, which resulted in adverse impacts, losses, and damages to nature and people and thus “mental health challenges, including anxiety and stress, are expected to increase under further global warming in all assessed regions” (p. 15). Consequently, there has been a growing interest in the psychological consequences of this environmental crisis (Ojala, Cunsolo, Ogunbode, Middleton, 2021).

The American Psychological Association established the term eco-anxiety to raise awareness about the effects of the climate crisis on mental health (Clayton et al., 2017). Albrecht (2011) presents eco-anxiety as one of the emergent negative psychoterratic impacts of environmental change and defines it as a type of anxiety “related to a changing and uncertain environment” (p. 49). Since, climate anxiety (CA) has perhaps become one of the most discussed forms of eco-anxiety as well as the most relevant among youth (Panu, 2020). Although not yet recognized as a clinically significant condition (Cianconi, Betrò, & Janiri, 2020), it is an attempt to acknowledge the negative effects of the adaptive response to the current environmental crisis (Verplanken & Roy, 2013).

Despite its negative connotations, CA may be a crucial part of the fight against climate change as it affects an individual's ability to make decisions and may ultimately influence human action. The social movement scholar Jasper (2018) claims that “in contrast to paralyzing panic, some anxiety is useful, perhaps necessary, for mobilizing protest. Without it, few would vote, protest, or engage in other political activities. A map of a society's anxieties is a map of its politics” (p. 41). In this sense, it would be useful to identify demographic and psychosocial predictors of vulnerability to CA.

When researching aspects related to anxiety, gender is one of the main demographic variables worth exploring. Anxiety refers to a group of disorders; one of the most diagnosed forms is Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD), which is characterized by frequently worrying about events that merit little or no reason to worry about them. Reports have consistently shown that women have higher prevalence for GAD (Christiansen, 2015). CA and GAD share some commonalities (excessive worry, trouble controlling their worries, hard time concentrating, etc.) as well as some differences, mainly regarding trigger events. Some studies have already suggested that gender differences exist in CA (Heeren, Mouguiama-Daouda, & Contreras, 2022; Wullenkord, Tröger, Hamann, Loy, & Reese, 2021), although not all (Clayton & Karazsia, 2020). As such, a fundamental question would be to further confirm whether gender is a factor of vulnerability to CA.

Another important factor is exposure. In the span of a few decades, information about climate change has gone from books and specialized journals to frequently appearing in news outlets (Hase, Mahl, Schäfer, & Keller, 2021) or trending in social media (Boulianne, Lalancette, & Ilkiw, 2020). As one of the preferred forms of news consumption among youth (Pew Research Center, 2022), social media plays a central role in how people feel about climate change as it can make the experience of others more “personal or concrete” (Anderson, 2017). Furthermore, social media can help increase engagement with climate change issues (Parry, McCarthy, & Clark, 2022). However, increased exposure could intensify the emotional response to climate change and in turn affect our decision-making capabilities (Paulus & Angela, 2012).

Vulnerability to CA could also be given by how much an individual is aware about climate change as this can evoke emotions such as fear, guilt, or helplessness (Hicks & Bord, 2001; Norgaard, 2011; Taber & Taylor, 2009). Managing information is crucial as an effort to increase awareness, and yet, although desirable, it may lead people to denial (Norgaard, 2011). Being aware about climate change could increase anxiety if there is not a collective and effective response, which would help people cope with negative emotions as they can start building alternatives and imaginaries to face the problem (Streeby, 2018). To be aware of climate change could also help individuals make informed decisions about their daily habits or political outlook (Kurup, Levinson, & Li, 2021; Ojala, 2012; Poma, 2019). For example, they may choose to support their government's efforts to curb CO₂ emissions, which despite having negative short-term repercussions on their daily life, could help efforts to reduce the effects of climate change in the long term.

Another factor of vulnerability to CA is prosociality (MacKay, Parlee, & Karsgaard, 2020), a tendency to act in a manner that intentionally benefits other people by actions such as helping, teaching, sharing, saving, or donating. On the one hand, performing daily pro-environmental actions such as recycling or reducing energy and water use can take on a larger social value as they promote a feeling of contributing to a “greater good,” which in turn may reduce negative emotions such as anxiety (Torstveit, Sütterlin, & Lugo, 2016). Prosociality is also linked to empathy and a feeling of community.

Seeing or thinking about how climate change may affect others can generate grief that can be channeled into anger and other emotions (Poma & Gravante, 2021). On the other hand, prosociality may be at odds with climate action as people acting on altruistic values may be content to sacrifice other species or destroy ecosystems for the benefit of their community members. These dilemmas can be avoided if individuals prioritize altruistic and as well as biospheric values (Poma, 2019; Steg, 2016), as in the case of young activists for climate justice (Poma & Gravante, 2021; Stephenson, 2015; Tokar, 2014).

In this study, we set out to evaluate the relationship between CA and psychosocial predictors of vulnerability in a sample of Mexican college students. Young people are already recognized as among those more vulnerable to CA as they come to realize how climate change will impact their futures (Wu, Snell, & Samji, 2020). In middle-income countries such as Mexico, young adults make up one of the largest demographics and soon will be one of the most important groups in terms of voting power (INEGI, 2021). Specifically, we hypothesize that the most vulnerable individuals in our sample will mainly be those who identify as women, spend more time reading news, have the most knowledge about climate change and are highly prosocial. In addition, these predictors will not be related to general anxiety scores, making them particular to CA. Furthermore, we expect that having academic experience with climate change will be associated with higher CA scores.

Methods

Using an online questionnaire, we surveyed the general anxiety, CA profiles, climate change knowledge and prosociality of 18- to 25-year-old undergraduate university students. To restrict responses, we asked for a university-domain e-mail address conditioned access to the questionnaire for a limited age interval. The survey was shared by the authors repeatedly on social media platforms specifically targeting student groups of the largest public universities in Mexico. The survey was accessible from February 11 to April 11, 2021. As an economic incentive we held a raffle in which four participants were chosen to win an electronic gift card of $1000 MXN (∼$50 USD).

Ethical statement

All procedures were approved by the ethics committee for research with human subjects at the Instituto de Investigaciones Biomédicas of the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM).

Participants

We obtained a sample of 485 undergraduates. After closing the survey, we filtered out those with blank responses, irrelevant answers, or zero scores (n = 17). We also excluded the small proportion of individuals who selected “other” as their gender given the small percentage they represented (n = 7). The final sample consisted of 461 students.

Online questionnaire

The questionnaire was built with Google Forms. After consenting, participants were asked about their age, gender (male, female, or other) and their major. They were also asked to provide categorical estimates of how much time per day they spend on social media and how much time of that was spent consuming news. After this, they had to respond to a series of questionnaires described hereunder.

The General Anxiety Disorder screening tool (GAD-7; Spitzer, Williams, & Kroenke, 2006) consists of seven questions used for a brief diagnosis of general anxiety. The Spanish version of the GAD-7 has demonstrated good validity and suitability for use among Spanish speakers (Mills et al., 2014). The questions consider the perception of anxiety symptoms during the past two weeks using a 4-point Likert scale (from 0 or “not at all” to 3 or “nearly every day”). Ratings are calculated by adding all responses and the range goes from 0 to 21 points, where 0–4 suggests mild anxiety, 5–9 suggests moderate anxiety, 10–14 suggests moderate to severe anxiety, and 15–21 suggests severe anxiety. In this study, the Cronbach's alpha of GAD-7 was 0.87 (95% CI = 0.85–0.88).

The Climate Anxiety Scale (CAS; Clayton & Karazsia, 2020) is an evaluation of 22 questions scored in the form of a Likert scale ranging from 0 or “never” to 4 or “almost always” with no clear cutoff points defined. Adding items 1–13 produces a main score of CA, whereas the sum of items 1–8 provides a measure of cognitive-emotional impairment, items 9–13 of functional impairment, items 14–16 of experience of facing climate change, and 17–22 of behavioral engagement. The internal reliability of CAS, as measured by Cronbach's alpha, was high in the present sample. We had a Cronbach's alpha of 0.91 (95% CI = 0.89–0.92) for the CAS score, 0.86 (95% CI = 0.84–0.88) for the cognitive-emotional impairments subscale, 0.81 (95% CI = 0.78–0.84) for the functional impairments, 0.83 (95% CI = 0.80–0.86) for the experience of climate change, and 0.71 (95% CI = 0.67–0.75) for behavioral engagement.

As a proxy for general awareness, we constructed the Climate Change Knowledge Quiz by selecting and adapting questions of quizzes form The Washington Post (2020; 2019). It consists of 10 questions each worth 1 point: a maximum of 10 points for a perfect score. For each question, multiple answers were provided with “I don't know” as a possible option. The quiz had low internal consistency, with a Cronbach's alpha 0.55 (95% CI = 0.49–0.61) as some questions were harder than others (please refer to the Supplementary Data to see which questions were answered correctly by most and which were correctly answered by a few).

The Prosociality Scale (Wilson, O'Brien, & Sesma, 2009) consists of eight questions that evaluate prosociality on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 or “no/seldom” to 4 or “extremely/almost always” with no definitive cutoff points. The final score is obtained by adding the answers for every question and ranges from 8 to 24. This scale had a Cronbach's alpha of 0.77 (95% CI = 0.74–0.8).

The Dichotomic Altruism Game is a simple donation game in an environmental conservation context. Participants make hypothetical donations with five levels of familiarity: a friend, a green project for their community, conservation of a state park, national non-governmental organization (NGOs), and international NGOs. In each level, the player decides whether to donate (scoring a 1 for that level) keep the money (scoring a 0). The score ranges from 0 to 5. Answers were not greatly consistent, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.63 (95% CI = 0.58–0.68). Please consult the Supplementary Data to see in which scenarios most people chose to keep the money and in which most people chose to donate.

Scales and quiz questions that were originally in English were translated by the authors in consultation with English native speakers who were fluent in Spanish. Translated scales and questions were translated back to English and evaluated for accuracy. A pilot study (n = 10) was conducted to evaluate whether participants understood the questions. Spanish versions of all scales are provided in the Supplementary Data.

Statistical analysis

Mean and standard deviation were used to describe characteristics and scores of the sample. We used Student's t-tests to compare values by gender. Generalized linear models were used to evaluate the association between demographic characteristics (age and gender), consumption of information (social media and news), psychosocial characteristics (knowledge about climate change, prosociality, and donation game), and GAD-7 and CAS scores. A visual inspection of the diagnostic plots showed studentized residuals did not reveal violations of the model assumptions.

Furthermore, we evaluated the influence of the different undergraduate majors' curricula on all scores by grouping them according to whether the curricula explicitly covered content about climate change (yes/no) or approaches to the reduction of the effects of climate change (mitigation) or changes in life in a changing climate (adaptation) (yes/no). The majors included in each group can be found in Supplementary Data.

Significance was set at p < 0.05 and all tests were two-tailed. All statistical analyses were performed in R (R Core Team, 2021).

Results

Descriptive statistics for study variables are shown in Table 1. We did not find age differences between gender groups (t = −1.50, 95% CI = −0.583 to 0.0795, p = 0.136), whereas women did spend more time in social media (t = 3.63, 95% CI = 0.263–0.887, p < 0.001), men spent more time reading news (t = −2.18, 95% CI = −8.67 to −0.446, p = 0.03).

Table 1.

Mean and Standard Deviation for Each of the Subscales of the Climate Anxiety Scale as well as Mean Predictor Scores

VARIABLES	TOTAL ( n = 461)	MEN ( n = 155)	WOMEN ( n = 306)
VARIABLES	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)
Time on social network (hours per day)	3.52 (1.63)	3.14 (1.6)	3.71 (1.62)
Time reading news sites (minutes per day)	28.73 (21.14)	31.74 (21.07)	27.21 (21.05)
General anxiety scores	8.69 (4.87)	6.83 (4.17)	9.64 (4.93)
CA subscales scores
CA	12.38 (9.05)	8.99 (7.07)	14.1 (9.46)
Cognitive-emotional impairment	8.16 (5.91)	5.9 (4.67)	9.31 (6.15)
Functional impairment	4.21 (3.7)	3.08 (2.91)	4.79 (3.92)
Experience of CC	4.87 (3.4)	4.45 (3.35)	5.08 (3.42)
Behavioral engagement	18.06 (3.68)	16.88 (3.78)	18.65 (3.49)
Prosociality scores	23.91 (4)	22.99 (4.12)	24.37 (3.87)
Donation game scores	3.13 (1.32)	2.72 (1.49)	3.34 (1.18)

CA, climate anxiety; CC, climate change; M, mean, SD, standard deviation.

Regarding scores, women reported higher general anxiety scores (t = 6.43, 95% CI = 1.95–3.68, p < 0.001) and 14.7% of the sample showed a score of 14 or above which is suggestive of moderate to severe anxiety. In a similar manner, scores were higher for women in the CA subscale (t = 6.52, 95% CI = 3.57–6.65, p < 0.001) as well in all the others (cognitive-emotional impairment: t = 6.63, 95% CI = 2.40–4.42, p < 0.001; functional impairment: 3 (t = 5.26, 95% CI = 1.07–2.34, p < 0.001; experience of climate change: t = 1.89, 95% CI = −0.03 to 1.28, p < 0.01; behavioral engagement: t = 4.86, 95% CI = 1.05–2.48, p < 0.001). For the CA subscale, only 5% of the sample scored 30 or above. We found no difference between the knowledge about climate change of men and women (t = −1.87, 95% CI = −0.68 to 0.02, p = 0.06).

However, mean scores of the climate change knowledge quiz showed participants had, in general, a poor knowledge of the effects of climate change, with around half the sample scoring what would be considered a failing grade. We also found gender differences in the prosociality scores (t = 3.46, 95% CI = 0.59–2.1, p < 0.001), as well as in the amount chosen to donate (t = 4.52, 95% CI = 0.35–0.89, p < 0.001) with women being more prosocial and generous, respectively. Interestingly, in the donation game the percentage of people who chose to donate followed an inverted U-shape, choosing themselves over their friends and donating to local but not global conservation efforts. Scores for each item of each scale can be found in the Supplementary Data.

Estimates for the regression models evaluating the association between general anxiety and its sample characteristics as well as CA and its sample characteristics are shown in Table 2. Gender of the individual and time spent on social networks were significantly associated with GAD-7 scores. In contrast, gender, time spent consuming news, climate change knowledge, prosociality, and donation scores are significantly associated with CAS scores.

Table 2.

Generalized Linear Models of General Anxiety and Climate Anxiety as Response Variables

TERM	GENERAL ANXIETY			CLIMATE ANXIETY
TERM	EST. (SE)	95% CI	p	EST. (SE)	95% CI	p
(Intercept)	11.87 (3.22)	5.56 to 18.18	<0.001	−5.93 (5.7)	−17.1 to 5.23	0.3
Age	−0.17 (0.13)	−0.42 to 0.08	0.19	0.16 (0.23)	−0.28 to 0.61	0.47
Gender (female)	−2.61 (0.49)	−3.58 to −1.65	<0.001	5.06 (0.87)	3.36 to 6.76	<0.001
News sites (minutes per day)	0 (0.01)	−0.02 to 0.03	0.72	0.05 (0.02)	0.01 to 0.09	0.01
Social media (hours per day)	0.3 (0.14)	0.03 to 0.58	0.03	−0.01 (0.25)	−0.5 to 0.48	0.97
Knowledge about CC	0.08 (0.12)	−0.15 to 0.31	0.49	1.27 (0.21)	0.86 to 1.68	<0.001
Prosociality	−0.03 (0.06)	−0.14 to 0.08	0.58	0.22 (0.1)	0.02 to 0.42	0.03
Donation game	0.12 (0.18)	−0.23 to 0.46	0.5	0.71 (0.31)	0.1 to 1.32	0.02

Italics mark significant values.

CI, confidence interval; Est. (SE), estimate (standard error).

Estimates describing the relationship between the sample characteristics and each of the subscales of the CA scale are shown in Table 3. We found men to have lower scores for all subscales. In addition, climate change awareness was associated with higher scores on all subscales, whereas prosociality and donation game scores were associated with higher scores on the behavioral engagement subscale.

Table 3.

Generalized Linear Models of Subscales of the Climate Anxiety Scale as Response Variables

	SUBSCALES
	CEI			FI			ECC			BE
	EST. (SE)	95% CI	p	EST. (SE)	95% CI	p	EST. (SE)	95% CI	p	EST. (SE)	95% CI	p
Intercept	−3.52 (3.72)	−1.82 to 3.77	0.34	−2.41 (2.4)	−7.11 to 2.29	0.31	−2.05 (2.2)	−6.36 to 2.26	0.35	5.35 (2.17)	1.09 to 9.61	0.01
Age	0.11 (0.15)	−0.18 to 0.4	0.45	0.05 (0.09)	−0.13 to 0.24	0.59	0.08 (0.09)	−0.1 to 0.25	0.39	0.08 (0.09)	−0.09 to 0.25	0.34
Gender (female)	3.4 (0.57)	2.29 to 4.51	<0.001	1.66 (0.37)	0.94 to 2.38	<0.001	0.75 (0.34)	0.09 to 1.4	0.03	1.33 (0.33)	0.68 to 1.98	<0.001
News sites (minutes per day)	0.03 (0.01)	0.01 to 0.06	0.01	0.02 (0.01)	0 to 0.03	0.04	0.01 (0.01)	0 to 0.02	0.18	0.01 (0.01)	0 to 0.02	0.15
Social networks (hours per day)	0.01 (0.16)	−0.31 to 0.33	0.95	−0.02 (0.11)	−0.23 to 0.19	0.85	−0.12 (0.1)	−0.3 to 0.07	0.23	−0.16 (0.1)	−0.35 to 0.03	0.09
Knowledge about CC	0.83 (0.14)	0.56 to 0.09	<0.001	0.44 (0.09)	0.27 to 0.61	<0.001	0.6 (0.08)	0.45 to.76	<0.001	0.44 (0.08)	0.29 to 0.6	<0.001
Prosociality	0.13 (0.07)	0 to 0.26	0.05	0.09 (0.04)	0.01 to 0.18	0.03	0.06 (0.04)	−0.02 to 0.14	0.14	0.31 (0.04)	0.23 to 0.38	<0.001
Donation game	0.45 (0.2)	0.05 to 0.85	0.03	0.26 (0.13)	0 to 0.52	0.05	0.21 (0.12)	−0.02 to 0.45	0.08	0.52 (0.12)	0.29 to 0.75	<0.001

Italics mark significant values.

BE, behavioral engagement; CI, confidence interval; CEI, cognitive-emotional impairment; ECC, experience of climate change; EST. (SE), estimate (standard error). FI, functional impairment.

Estimates describing how the content of the curriculum of majors influenced the sample's scores can be found in Table 4. CA, general anxiety, and climate change awareness scores were higher for the group of students whose major has a curriculum explicitly covering climate change than those who did not. In addition, CA and climate change awareness scores were higher for the group of students whose major included topics involving strategies to mitigate the effects of climate change or to adapt to life in a changing climate than those who did not.

Table 4.

Climate Anxiety Scores Group by Major and Controlled for by Gender

GROUPING	SCALE	CONTRAST	EST. (SE)	95% CI	ADJUSTED p
CC is covered as content (n_yes = 137)	CA	Yes vs. no	4.81 (0.87)	3.11–6.5	<0.001
	General anxiety	Yes vs. no	1.19 (0.48)	0.26–2.13	0.01
	Knowledge about CC	Yes vs. no	1.45 (0.18)	1.1–1.8	<0.001
Mitigation/adaptation to CC is covered in content (n_yes = 198)	CA	Yes vs. no	3.23 (0.81)	1.63–4.82	<0.001
	Knowledge about CC	Yes vs. no	0.67 (0.17)	0.33–1.01	<0.001

Discussion

In this study, we aimed to explore the relationships between CA and potential predictors of vulnerability in a sample of Mexican students. When comparing scores by gender, we found differences for GAD-7 scores, every subscale of the CAS as well as for most predictors, except for age and knowledge about climate change. Regressions showed that time spent consuming news, knowledge about climate change, and prosociality scores were significantly and positively associated with CA scores, but not with general anxiety scores. Finally, we found that those students whose degrees included courses with climate change-related content showed higher levels of CA.

We found gender differences in general anxiety and CA scores. In general terms, anxiety can be an adaptive trait meant to keep us alert from unspecific threats (Nesse, 1994) and overall, women more prone to suffering from the many different forms of anxiety (see McLean, Asnaani, Litz, & Hofmann, 2011 for a review on the topic). In the case of CA, gender differences may be linked to concrete negative consequences which women will be more likely to experience as a result of the climate emergency (Sorensen, Murray, Lemery, & Balbus, 2018). Despite their differences, general anxiety and CA may have a pooled effect in dilemmas faced by women in everyday decisions: taking public transport versus going by car is a trade-off between personal security and climate change action.

Perhaps the aspect that pertains the most to the current sample of young middle class educated women is maternity. Decisions such as having children under increasingly uncertain conditions may weigh more on women of this sector of the population. Although there are many aspects to factor in, the main concern seems to be the impact that climate change will have on their children's quality of life (Schneider-Mayerson & Leong, 2020) and, for a minority of young middle and upper-class young women, the ecological footprint that entails the decision to have a child. However, it is still unknown how many women are choosing a childless future due to climate change.

We found a different pattern of association between predictors of GAD-7 and CA scores. Despite sharing several common cognitive (persistent thoughts, difficult concentrating, etc.) and physical symptoms (restlessness, fatigue, etc.), CA can be distinguished from general anxiety, as the former is based on the increasingly unambiguous perception that climate change is a global threat to current and future generations as captured by the slogan of recent climate strikes: “there is no planet B.” This study provides further support to the idea that these are similar, but separate constructs.

Time spent on social media was positively associated with general anxiety scores, whereas only the consumption of news within social media was positively associated with CA scores. Social media encompasses a large spectrum of websites and apps from different genres, some whose main aim is to inform, whereas others only intend to entertain. Overuse of social media has been previously associated with anxiety symptoms (Shensa, Sidani, Dew, Escobar-Viera, & Primack, 2018; Vannucci, Flannery, & Ohannessian, 2017).

Clayton and Karazsia (2020) report to have originally included an item referring to seeking information but decided against its inclusion in the final version of the scale. A key difference between this study and our own is recognizing that for the age group evaluated here, consumption of news mainly occurs within social media, which may reflect a more accurate portrayal of how news is accessed by young adults. In this sense, we were able to distinguish the effect of seeking information about current events from just passing time in social media, which had no effect on CA and may constitute a form of escapism (Whiting & Williams, 2013).

Although exposure to news about climate change has increased for the past three decades (Carabaza et al., 2015; Gordon, Deines, & Havice, 2010), it continues to follow a model that focuses on negative aspects and fails to promote changes in attitudes or behavior. Poma and Gravante (2022) argue for the need of a new climate change narrative so as to guide emotional responses, including those related to CA, into meaningful action, whereas Salama and Aboukoura (2018) emphasize that, when reporting effects to climate change, people's emotions should be recognized to understand the audience motivation and ways in which they can be inspired to change their behavior.

We found that knowledge about climate change was positively associated with CA. This is similar to the findings of Kelly (2017), which show a positive relationship between knowledge and greater environmental concern. Awareness can refer to knowledge or to experience: whereas the former involves theoretical information (e.g., loss of biocultural diversity, sources greenhouse gas emissions, or the status of international agreements intended to curb carbon emissions), the latter involves a firsthand experience, greater levels of concern and even pathological fear (Dean et al., 2018; Searle & Gow, 2010).

Most of our participants may have likely experienced only gradual impacts of climate change in Mexico City (e.g., water scarcity, periodic heat waves, or flooding) and thus CA scores in our population are probably more related to awareness than direct experience. The combination of knowledge and emotion may be needed to sway people into action and activism. Informed young people can cope with negative emotions by sharing these feelings with others, thus building a collective identity of a generation without a future, as Poma and Gravante (2021) observed in young climate activists.

Prosociality scores significantly and positively predicted CA. People with greater levels of empathy can also be at risk of experiencing higher levels of anxiety as they grow from a concern and rumination about people's actions and how they can affect others (Knight, Stoica, Fogleman, & Depue, 2019). Prosociality can reduce anxiety if it is linked to action (e.g., activism) positive emotions, kindness and compassion can improve general mental health (Post, 2005). As Jasper (2018) puts it, “it feels good to do the right thing” (p. 14). This may add to previously mentioned psychosocial aspects, as again, activism may be the preferred course of action for people with high levels of prosociality and CA.

Students whose majors cover topics about climate change had higher scores of CA. Although we found course content to have an effect, it is important to recognize that information does not automatically change opinions or induce action as seen by Harker-Schuch and Bugge-Henriksen (2013). In fact, climate change information does not seem to be generating the expected moral shock (Kleres & Wettergren, 2017). Therefore, we recommend that information in courses that cover climate change should emphasize action along with theoretical aspects.

Strengths and limitations

This study presents a translation of the CAS (Clayton & Karazsia, 2020) that can be used for Spanish speakers. Although the sample included only Mexican students, our results may not be generalizable to other groups; however, current results provide one of the first descriptions of climate change anxiety involving a sample belonging to the Global South.

Although we recruited a large student sample, online surveys bias respondents to those with internet access. Answers were not timed, and participants could have looked for responses online. Finally, data collection took place during the COVID-19 pandemic, and this could have influenced responses, for instance, in higher baseline anxiety levels and more time spent on news sites or social media.

Conclusion

This study finds that individuals who identify as a woman, read more news, know about climate change, and are more prosocial are among those more vulnerable to CA. In addition, the predictors of vulnerability to CA are different to those of generalized anxiety. Finally, we found that information in the form of course content seems to influence CA scores. Understanding the psychosocial profiles of vulnerable individuals may be helpful to identify them and assist them in finding positive coping mechanisms such as social action or activism.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all the students who participated in this study. We greatly appreciate the insight provided by two anonymous reviewers.

Availability of Data

Data reported in this article are available at ().

Authors' Contributions

Conceptualization, investigation, methodology, and writing—original draft preparation by A.S.R.-L. Conceptualization, formal analysis, writing—original draft preparation, and supervision by M.F.R. Conceptualization and writing—original draft preparation by A.P.

Author Disclosure Statement

No competing financial interests exist.

Funding Information

Funding was provided by a Dirección General de Asuntos del Personal Académico (DGAPA) Programa de Apoyo a Proyectos de Investigación e Innovación Tecnológica (PAPIIT) research grant (no. IN207120) awarded to the corresponding author, from which a scholarship was given to the first author.

Supplementary Material

References

Albrecht

(2011). Chronic environmental change: Emerging “psychoterratic” syndromes. In I. Weissbecker (ed.), Climate change and human well-being: Global challenges and opportunities (pp. 43–56). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.

Anderson

A. A.

(2017). Effects of social media use on climate change opinion, knowledge, and behavior. In H. Von Storch (ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press

Boulianne

, Lalancette

, & Ilkiw

(2020). School strike 4 climate: Social media and the international youth protest on climate change. Media and Communication, 8, 208–218.

Carabaza

, Lozano

J. C.

, González

, Pasco

, Reyes

, Berumen

, & Álvarez

(2015). Cobertura del medio ambiente en la televisión mexicana. Comunicación y Sociedad, 7, 45–76.

Christiansen

D. M.

(2015). Examining sex and gender differences in anxiety disorders. In F. Durbano (ed.), A Fresh Look at Anxiety Disorders (pp. 17–49). London, United Kingdom: IntechOpen.

Cianconi

, Betrò

, & Janiri

(2020). The impact of climate change on mental health: A systematic descriptive review. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11, 74.

Clayton

, & Karazsia

(2020). Development and validation of a measure of climate change anxiety. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 69, 101434.

Clayton

, Manning

C. M.

, Krygsman

, & Speiser

(2017). Mental Health and Our Changing Climate: Impacts, Implications, and Guidance. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, and ecoAmerica.

Dean

J. H.

, Shanahan

D. F.

, Bush

, Gaston

K. J.

, Lin

B. B.

, Barber

, Franco

, & Fuller

R. A.

(2018). Is nature relatedness associated with better mental and physical health?. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15, 1371.

10.

Gordon

J. C.

, Deines

, & Havice

(2010). Global warming coverage in the media: Trends in a Mexico City newspaper. Science Communication, 32, 143–170.

11.

Harker-Schuch

, & Bugge-Henriksen

(2013). Opinions and knowledge about climate change science in high school students. Ambio, 42, 755–766.

12.

Hase

, Mahl

, Schäfer

M. S.

, & Keller

T. R.

(2021). Climate change in news media across the globe: An automated analysis of issue attention and themes in climate change coverage in 10 countries (2006–2018). Global Environmental Change, 70, 102353.

13.

Heeren

, Mouguiama-Daouda

, & Contreras

(2022). On climate anxiety and the threat it may pose to daily life functioning and adaptation: A study among European and African French-speaking participants. Climatic change, 173, 1–17.

14.

Hicks

, & Bord

(2001). Learning about global issues: Why most educators only make things worse. Environmental Education Research, 7, 413–425.

15.

INEGI (2021). Censo de Población y Vivienda 2020. Mexico City, Mexico: Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática.

16.

Jasper

J. M.

(2018). The Emotions of Protest. Chicago, Illinois, USA: Chicago Press University.

17.

Kelly

(2017). Eco-anxiety at university: Student experiences and academic perspectives on cultivating healthy emotional responses to the climate crisis. Independent Study Project (ISP) Collection, 2642.

18.

Kleres

, & Wettergren

(2017). Fear, hope, anger, and guilt in climate activism. Social Movement Studies, 16, 507–519.

19.

Knight

L. K.

, Stoica

, Fogleman

N. D.

, & Depue

B. E.

(2019). Convergent neural correlates of empathy and anxiety during socioemotional processing. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 13, 94.

20.

Kurup

P. M.

, Levinson

, & Li

(2021). Informed-decision regarding global warming and climate change among high school students in the United Kingdom. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 21, 166–185.

21.

MacKay

, Parlee

, & Karsgaard

(2020). Youth engagement in climate change action: Case study on indigenous youth at COP24. Sustainability, 12, 6299.

22.

McLean

C. P.

, Asnaani

, Litz

B. T.

, & Hofmann

S. G.

(2011). Gender differences in anxiety disorders: Prevalence, course of illness, comorbidity and burden of illness. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 45, 1027–1035.

23.

Mills

S. D.

, Fox

R. S.

, Malcarne

V. L.

, Roesch

S. C.

, Champagne

B. R.

, & Sadler

G. R.

(2014). The psychometric properties of the generalized anxiety disorder-7 scale in Hispanic Americans with English or Spanish language preference. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 20, 463–468.

24.

Nesse

R. M.

(1994). Fear and fitness: An evolutionary analysis of anxiety disorders. Ethology and Sociobiology, 15, 247–261.

25.

Norgaard

K. M.

(2011). Living in Denial. Climate Change, Emotions, and Everyday Life. Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA: MIT Press.

26.

Ojala

(2012). Hope and climate change: The importance of hope for environmental engagement among young people. Environmental Education Research, 18, 625–642.

27.

Ojala

, Cunsolo

, Ogunbode

C. A.

, Middleton

(2021). Anxiety, worry, and grief in a time of environmental and climate crisis: A narrative review Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 46, 1–24.

28.

Panu

(2020). Anxiety and the ecological crisis: An analysis of eco-anxiety and climate anxiety. Sustainability, 12, 7836.

29.

Parry

, McCarthy

S. R.

, & Clark

(2022). Young people's engagement with climate change issues through digital media–a content analysis. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 27, 30–38.

30.

Paulus

M. P.

, & Angela

J. Y.

(2012). Emotion and decision-making: Affect-driven belief systems in anxiety and depression. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16, 476–483.

31.

Pew Research Center. (2022, September 4). Social media fact sheet. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/social-media/

32.

Poma

(2019). Cambio climático y activismo ambiental: El papel de los apegos al lugar. [Climate change and environmental activism: The role of place attachments]. Tla-me-laua, 12, 212–237.

33.

Poma

, & Gravante

(2021). Entre frustración y esperanza: Emociones en el activismo climático en México. [Between frustration and hope: Emotions in the climate activism in Mexico]. Ciencia Política, 16, 117–156.

34.

Poma

, & Gravante

(2022). Generando con-ciencia sobre el cambio climático. Nuevas miradas desde México. [Generating con-science about climate change. New perspectives from Mexico], . Mexico City, Mexico: Instituto de Investigaciones Sociales, UNAM.

35.

Pörtner

H. O.

, Roberts

D. C.

, Tignor

, Poloczanska

E. S.

, Mintenbeck

, Alegría

, Craig

, Langsdorf

, Löschke

, Möller

, Okem

, & Rama

(2022). Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

36.

Post

S. G.

(2005). Altruism, happiness and health: It's good to be good. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 12, 66–77.

37.

R Core Team. (2021). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.

38.

Salama

, & Aboukoura

(2018). Role of emotions in climate change communication. In W. Leal Filho et al. (eds.), Handbook of Climate Change Communication: Vol. 1, Climate Change Management. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69838-0_9

39.

Schneider-Mayerson

, & Leong

K. L.

(2020). Eco-reproductive concerns in the age of climate change. Climatic Change, 163, 1007–1023.

40.

Searle

, & Gow

(2010). Do concerns about climate change lead to distress?. International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, 2, 362–379.

41.

Shensa

, Sidani

J. E.

, Dew

M. A.

, Escobar-Viera

C. G.

, & Primack

B. A.

(2018). Social media use and depression and anxiety symptoms: A cluster analysis. American Journal of Health Behavior, 42, 116–128.

42.

Sorensen

, Murray

, Lemery

, & Balbus

(2018). Climate change and women's health: Impacts and policy directions. PLOS Medicine, 15, e1002603.

43.

Spitzer

, Williams

, & Kroenke

(2006). A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: The GAD-7. Archives of Internal Medicine, 166, 1092–1097.

44.

Steg

(2016). Values, norms, and intrinsic motivation to act proenvironmentally. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 41, 277–292.

45.

Stephenson

(2015). What We're Fighting Foe Now Is Each Other: Dispatches from the Front Lines of Climate Justice. Boston, Massachusetts: Beacon Press.

46.

Streeby

(2018). Imagining the Future of Climate Change. World-making through Science Fiction and Activism. Oakland, California, USA: University of California Press.

47.

Taber

, & Taylor

(2009). Climate of concern—a search for effective strategies for teaching children about global warming. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4, 97–116.

48.

Tokar

(2014). Toward climate justice: Perspectives on the climate crisis and social change. Porsgrunn, Norway: New Compass Press.

49.

Torstveit

, Sütterlin

, & Lugo

R. G.

(2016). Empathy, guilt proneness, and gender: Relative contributions to prosocial behaviour. Europe's Journal of Psychology, 12, 260–270.

50.

United Nations. (2022, September 4). What Is Climate Change?. https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/what-is-climate-change

51.

Vannucci

, Flannery

K. M.

, & Ohannessian

C. M.

(2017). Social media use and anxiety in emerging adults. Journal of Affective Disorders, 207, 163–166.

52.

Verplanken

, & Roy

(2013). “My worries are rational, climate change is not”: Habitual ecological worrying is an adaptive response. PLoS One, 8, e74708.

53.

Washington Post. (2019). Quiz: How much do you know about climate change?. https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2019/11/22/quiz-how-much-do-you-know-about-climate-change/

54.

Washington Post. (2020). Climate news quiz: Australian wildfires and garbage. https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2020/02/24/can-you-pass-this-10-question-climate-quiz/

55.

Whiting

, Williams

(2013). Why people use social media: A uses and gratifications approach. Qualitative Market Research, 16, 362–369.

56.

Wilson

D. S.

, O'Brien

D. T.

, & Sesma

(2009). Human prosociality from an evolutionary perspective: Variation and correlations at a city-wide scale. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30, 190–200.

57.

, Snell

, & Samji

(2020). Climate anxiety in young people: A call to action. The Lancet Planetary Health, 4, e435–e436.

58.

Wullenkord

M. C.

, Tröger

, Hamann

K. R.

, Loy

L. S.

, & Reese

(2021). Anxiety and climate change: A validation of the Climate Anxiety Scale in a German-speaking quota sample and an investigation of psychological correlates. Climatic Change, 168, 1–23.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.06 MB