Next Article in Journal
Integrated Wellness Needs of Saudi University Students: Mental Health as a Key Determinant of Lifestyle and Quality of Life
Previous Article in Journal
Dysregulated Oxidative Stress Pathways in Schizophrenia: Integrating Single-Cell Transcriptomic and Human Biomarker Evidence
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Psychiatry International
Volume 6
Issue 3
10.3390/psychiatryint6030105
psychiatryint-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Psychological Factors Influencing Climate Anxiety in Young Adults: Exploring the Impact of Age, Trait Anxiety, Flexible Goal Adjustment and Tenacious Goal Pursuit

by
Kévin Nadarajah
1,2,*,†,
Tivizio Pavic
2,†,
Laurent Brun
3,
Stéphanie Bordel
1,2 and
Alain Somat
2
1
Équipe de Recherche Psychologie Appliquée (PsyCAP), Centre d’Études et d’Expertise sur les Risques, l’Environnement, la Mobilité et l’Aménagement (Cerema), 22000 Saint-Brieuc, France
2
Laboratoire de Psychologie: Cognition, Comportement, Communication (LP3C), Université Rennes 2, 35000 Rennes, France
3
Laboratoire Interdisciplinaire de Recherche en Didactique, Éducation et Formation (LIRDEF), University of Montpellier and University Paul Valéry Montpellier, 34092 Montpellier, France
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Psychiatry Int. 2025, 6(3), 105; https://doi.org/10.3390/psychiatryint6030105
Submission received: 6 May 2025 / Revised: 7 July 2025 / Accepted: 1 September 2025 / Published: 3 September 2025
Versions Notes

Abstract

Climate change and its consequences for human beings are considered to be a major mental health problem, commonly referred to as ‘climate anxiety’. This particular form of anxiety is currently the subject of extensive research. Research is investigating its relationship to more general forms of anxiety as well as the coping strategies that can be put in place to manage it. The present study was conducted to examine the role of variables such as age, trait anxiety, tenacious goal pursuit, and flexible goal adjustment on climate-related anxiety. A cross-sectional study was conducted in which 396 participants completed the questionnaire. Hierarchical multiple regression analysis was used to analyze the data. Results from the hierarchical regression model revealed that age, trait anxiety and flexible goal adjustment had a positive and significant effect on climate anxiety scores. In this study, the older the young participants are, the higher their trait anxiety scores, and the higher their levels of flexible goal adjustment, the more climate anxiety they experience. Contrary to our hypotheses, flexible goal adjustment was positively associated with climate anxiety, suggesting that accommodative coping may in some contexts amplify rather than alleviate emotional distress. This study highlights the increased vulnerability to climate anxiety of older participants among the young adults with trait anxiety and higher levels of accommodative coping strategies (i.e., FGA). These findings provide some guidelines for clinical practice, in particular by questioning educational intervention and cognitive flexibility in young adults.

1. Introduction

Climate change, considered as a major threat by the World Health Organization, could cause 250,000 deaths and cost up to 4 billion dollars a year, with significant repercussions on mental health [1]. This threat weighs particularly heavily on young adults, 84% of whom say they are concerned about this issue [2]. Young adults are also significantly more affected by the problem than older adults [3]. Youth are more likely to suffer the negative consequences of climate change than older people [4]. They are also more exposed to the negative consequences of climate change due to their high exposure to the media [5], as well as their low weight in political decision-making [2]. Among young people born between the mid-1990s and early 2010s, the consequences of climate change may lead to an existential crisis (e.g., fear of the future, loss of meaning, etc.) that could have repercussions on health and psychological well-being [4]. For example, a meta-analysis shows that a 1 °C rise in average monthly temperature is associated with a 1.5% increase in suicides [6]. This growing concern is part of the concept known as ‘climate anxiety’ or ‘eco-anxiety’, defined as “a type of emotional response to climate change that can impair functioning and might be linked to specific mental health problems, including depression and generalized anxiety, and in severe cases, substance use and suicidal thinking” [7] (pp. e879–e880).
Climate anxiety has three types of causes: direct (e.g., forest fires, floods), indirect (e.g., exposure to anxiety-provoking information in the media) and psychosocial (e.g., geopolitical conflicts over resources, [8]). Climate anxiety is closely related to general anxiety (e.g., [9,10]). Individuals’ expectations about the consequences of climate change (e.g., melting ice, global warming, etc.) may lead them to feel negative emotions that can increase their general anxiety [9]. As a global phenomenon, anxiety is generally functional and adaptive, enabling individuals to anticipate or prevent potential threats. However, when it becomes excessive, it can also be dysfunctional, leading to negative consequences such as fatigue, agitation, irritability, etc. [11,12]. In Cosh and collaborators’ [13] study on the relationship between climate change and mental health, it is reported that 18 of the 35 studies analyzed focused on clinical anxiety, characterized by severe symptoms requiring treatment. According to these authors, climatic anxiety reflects a reaction to the evaluation of a current situation, rather than a general tendency for the individual to feel anxious. For Crandon and collaborators [10] the debate remains open. These authors consider that there is insufficient empirical evidence to determine whether climate anxiety is a response to the threats of climate change, or whether it reflects a more general anxiety tendency [14,15].
Research is increasingly focusing on identifying processes and strategies that can be used to cope with climate-related anxiety (e.g., problem-focused, meaning-focused and emotion-focused coping) [16]. In this context, the model proposed by Crandon and collaborators [10] provides a basis for understanding how this anxiety is developed and how it can be treated. According to this model, climate anxiety is the result of systemic factors (e.g., media, environmental policies) and existential conflicts. These conflicts result from a heightened awareness of the threat posed by climate change to the future of the planet and humanity. This climate anxiety translates into emotional (sadness, anger, fear, etc.) and behavioral (avoidance, denial, withdrawal, etc.) manifestations. Faced with these negative consequences, individuals may adopt more or less appropriate cognitive or behavioral coping strategies. Individuals can implement coping strategies, such as adopting proactive measures or creating supportive communities [17]. Conversely, some strategies may be less appropriate, such as substance use [18] or catastrophism [10]. In line with this model, managing the climate anxiety caused by this existential conflict requires individuals to implement immediate coping strategies, as well as deeper dynamic adjustments in the way they view their future and life goals [7].
In-depth adaptation to the consequences of climate change can be achieved through dynamic adaptation processes. Brandtstädter and Renner [19] propose two dynamic coping strategies, an assimilative mode (i.e., tenacious goal pursuit, TGP) and an accommodative mode (i.e., flexible goal adjustment, FGA). Assimilative coping consists of maintaining one’s initial objectives by modifying one’s perception of the situation (e.g., by considering that technological innovations will solve climate change [20]). Accommodative coping refers to the modification of an individual’s preferences and/or objectives so that they can adapt to the challenges of a given situation (e.g., deciding to rationalize their travel to reduce their carbon footprint) [20]. These two coping modes (i.e., TGP and FGA) aim to preserve, or even improve, life satisfaction when individuals are faced with extreme situations (e.g., a flood [21]). Indeed, higher scores of tenacity or flexibility are positively correlated with greater life satisfaction, better control and less depression [22]. Both coping strategies are associated with a reduction in stress and psychological distress [21,23]. Assimilative mode would be the default strategy; however, as soon as the situation became uncontrollable for individuals, for example, in the event of a flood, the accommodative mode would be activated [24].
Accommodative mode is characterized by greater sensitivity to a variety of external stimuli (e.g., the media [25]). Individuals who have activated an accommodative mode would then be more inclined to pay attention, or even seek out new information (e.g., solutions, actions, etc.). These two coping modes are therefore likely to reduce emotional distress in the face of uncontrollable or chronic stress factors (e.g., [21,22]).
The consequences of climate change are often considered uncontrollable by individuals: rising temperatures, extreme storms, increased drought, warming and rising sea levels, species extinction, food shortages, poverty and population displacement, increased health risks [26]. Thus, every individual has to live and deal with the ecological crisis [16]. Processes associated with TGP and FGA can play a key role in enabling individuals to adapt emotionally to perceived threats. However, to the authors’ knowledge, no study has specifically investigated the link between tenacious goal pursuit, flexible goal adjustment and climate anxiety.

Current Research

The present research was conducted to investigate the role of trait anxiety and motivational coping strategies (i.e., TGP and FGA) on the disposition of individuals to experience climate anxiety. To the authors’ knowledge, no study has specifically investigated the relationships between these psychological factors. To test these relationships, four hypotheses were formulated:
Hypothesis 1. 
Youth are more likely to experience climate anxiety.
Hypothesis 2. 
The higher the trait-anxiety score, the more likely people are to experience climate anxiety.
Hypothesis 3. 
The higher the tenacious goal pursuit score, the less likely individuals are to experience climate anxiety.
Hypothesis 4. 
The higher the flexible adjustment goal score, the less likely individuals are to experience climate anxiety.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants and Procedure

A cross-sectional study was conducted and 396 participants aged 18 or over were recruited (M = 21.8, SD = 6.86, min = 18, max = 68, 72.5% women). The great majority (90.9%) of participants were aged between 18 and 25, with the remaining 9.1% aged 26 and over. This sample was the subject of a publication [27] on some of the participants and data presented in this article (i.e., climate anxiety measure). Participants were invited to take part in a study of people’s feelings and perceptions of the consequences of climate change. In order to test the various hypotheses of this non-interventional study, participants were invited to complete an online questionnaire through the LimeSurvey platform®. It was shared on the university’s networks and on the social media platforms (Linkedin®; Facebook® and Twitter®). The survey included several measures and was completed by participants in the following order: information leaflet and consent form, anxiety-trait, TGP and FGA scales, and finally the climate anxiety scale. To avoid participants completing the survey more than once, only one response per IP address could be submitted. No missing data is to be reported in this dataset.

2.2. Measures

2.2.1. STAI-Y

Trait anxiety was measured using the 20 items of the Y form of the Anxiety-Trait Inventory (STAI-Y, [28,29]), validated in France. Anxiety-trait corresponds to a general perception of anxiety that is fairly stable over time. Participants respond to each item of this subscale on a 4-point scale ranging from “not at all” to “very much”. In line with the authors’ recommendations, after reversing the scores of the nine inverted items (e.g., “I’m very calm”), a score ranging from 20 to 80 was calculated to highlight the trait anxiety level of individuals, a higher score being associated with a greater level of anxiety.

2.2.2. Tenacious Goal Pursuit (TGP) and Flexible Goal Adjustment (FGA)

Tenacity in goal pursuit (TGP) and flexible goal adjustment (FGA) were measured using the 20-items of the Brandtstädter and Renner tenacity/flexibility scale [19], validated in French [22] with a Likert scale from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 7 (Strongly agree). TGP corresponds to an assimilative mode, i.e., the active adjustment of life circumstances to personal preferences, the modification of the situation to better adapt it to personal goals and projects (e.g., “To avoid disappointments, I don’t set my goals too high”). The FGA corresponds to a mode of accommodation, i.e., the process by which personal goals are adjusted according to situational constraints (e.g., “I find it easy to see something positive even in a serious mishap”). The CFA two factor theoretical model yielded a good fit to the data [χ2 (34) = 112, p < 0.001, CFI = 0.94, TLI = 0.92, SRMR = 0.04, RMSEA = 0.076, 90% CI [0.06, 0.09]. McDonald’s omega coefficients were calculated from a confirmatory factor analysis and showed a satisfactory fit for each dimension (TGP, ω = 0.82; FGA, ω = 0.83). McDonald’s omega values above 0.8 indicate good internal reliability [30].

2.2.3. Climate Anxiety

Climate anxiety was measured using the 13-item scale validated in French from the Climate Change Anxiety Scale [9,31]. Participants were asked to answer on a response scale ranging from 1 (never) to 7 (always). The scale includes items dealing with cognitive–emotional impairments (e.g., “I find myself crying because of climate change”) and functional impairments (e.g., “My concerns about climate change make it hard for me to have fun with my family or friends”). The One-factor model showed a good fit to the data: [χ2 (20) = 75.5, p < 0.001, CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.93, SRMR = 0.04, RMSEA = 0.084, 90% CI [0.06, 0.10]. McDonald omega coefficient was adequate (ω = 0.85).

2.3. Data Analysis

A series of t-tests (one sample, paired sample) was performed to characterize the level of participants on each variable. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed to analyze how well our data fit the expected measurement model, complemented by a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on selected items. The reliability of the subscales was calculated using Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega coefficients. Finally, a hierarchical multiple regression analysis was performed to predict climate anxiety. This approach was chosen in order to build a theory-guided model. To assess multicollinearity, tolerance and variance inflation factor (VIF) values were calculated for each predictor. The results indicate that there is no significant multicollinearity issue, as all VIF values are below the recommended threshold of 5, and all tolerance values are above 0.20 [32]. Specifically, age (VIF = 1.02; tolerance = 0.98), trait anxiety showed acceptable values (VIF = 1.21; tolerance = 0.83), as well as TGP (VIF = 1.07; tolerance = 0.93) and FGA (VIF = 1.16; tolerance = 0.87). All statistical tests were two-tailed and a p-value < 0.05 was defined as the significance level.

3. Results

3.1. Preliminary Analysis

A factorial analysis was carried out on the 33 questionnaire items, and an iterative phase of deleting items was carried out when they did not reach the factorial contribution threshold set at 0.5. Based on factor loadings, 15 items were excluded. The final scales included 8 items for climate anxiety, 6 items for tenacious goal pursuit (TGP), and 4 items for flexible goal adjustment (FGA). EFA yielded a good fit to the data [χ2 (102) = 233, p < 0.001, TLI = 0.916, RMSEA = 0.057 (90% CI [0.05, 0.07]). Based on this analysis, a CFA was performed, showing a good fit to the data [χ2 (132) = 270, p < 0.001, CFI = 0.94, TLI = 0.93, SRMR = 0.05, RMSEA = 0.051 (90% CI [0.04, 0.06]) with three well-defined factors (|λ| = 0.55–0.89, M = 0.72), no items were deleted during this analysis. For more details on these factor analyses, see Supplementary Materials Tables S1 and S2 and Figure S1. The final version of the scales used in the following analyses was based on the reduced item sets resulting from the EFA/CFA.
Following scale validation, descriptive statistics and a series of t-tests compared with scale medians were conducted to characterize participants’ level on each variable. Thus, two-tailed one-sample t-tests were conducted to compare each score to the normative reference value (i.e., the midpoint of the scale, set at 4), except for the trait anxiety score, which was compared to a normative value based on the literature [33]. Table 1 shows the means, standard deviations, minimums, and maximums for each variable. In the study sample, Climate anxiety (M = 1.71, SD = 0.92) was lower than the scale median (Mdn = 4), t(395) = −49.5, p < 0.001, d = −2.49, indicating a lower level of climate anxiety than the norm. Similarly, tenacious goal pursuit (M = 3.47, SD = 1.21) was also lower than the scale median (Mdn = 4), t(395) = −8.72, p < 0.001, d = −0.44, suggesting a lower tendency to persevere with goals compared with the scale median. In contrast, flexible goal adjustment (M = 4.19, SD = 1.37) was significantly higher than the median (Mdn = 4), t(395) = 2.79, p = 0.005, d = 0.14, indicating a slightly higher than expected ability to adjust goals. The trait anxiety scores were compared with the normative value of 45.69, which is the average for a population of participants aged 18 to 36 [33]. The results showed that the mean trait anxiety score (M = 48.1, SD = 9.84) was significantly higher than the normative mean, t(395) = 4.80, p < 0.001, d = 0.24, indicating a slightly higher level of trait anxiety in this sample. In addition, a paired-samples t-test was performed to directly compare TGP and FGA scores. The results show a significant difference between the two variables, t(395) = −7.56, p < 0.001, with a moderate effect size (d = −0.38), indicating that the participants in this study fit more into strategies of flexibility rather than tenacity in managing their goals. For the age variable, given the large number of young people in the sample, age was first transformed logarithmically (log10) and then standardized for regression analyses (M = 0, SD = 1).
Table 2 displays Pearson’s correlation coefficients between the different variables. Significant positive correlations were observed between climate anxiety and age (r = 0.15, p = 0.003), trait anxiety and climate anxiety (r = 0.26, p < 0.001), between FGA and age (r = 0.13, p = 0.01) and between TGP and trait anxiety (r = 0.25, p < 0.001). However, flexible goal adjustment was negatively associated with trait anxiety (r = −0.35, p < 0.001). All significance levels were set at p < 0.05, p < 0.01, and p < 0.001, where applicable.

3.2. Main Analysis

The results of the hierarchical multiple regression are presented in Table 3. In Model 1 (age only), age positively predicted climate anxiety (β = 0.15, p = 0.003, sr2 = 0.022), accounting for 1.9% of the variance (Adj R2 = 0.019, F(1, 394) = 8.86, p = 0.003). Model 2 (age and trait anxiety) improved the prediction of climate anxiety, increasing the explained variance from 1.9% to 8.7% (Adj R2 = 0.087, ΔR2 = 0.07, F(2, 393) = 19.86, p < 0.001). While age remained a significant predictor (β = 0.16, p < 0.001, sr2 = 0.028), trait anxiety (STAI-Y Trait) also significantly predicted climate anxiety (β = 0.27, p < 0.001, sr2 = 0.071). Model 3 (age, trait anxiety, and FGA and TGP coping strategies) further improved the prediction, increasing the explained variance to 10.5% (Adj R2 = 0.105, ΔR2 = 0.022, F(4, 391) = 12.53, p < 0.001). Age (β = 0.15, p = 0.002, sr2 = 0.024) and trait anxiety (β = 0.33, p < 0.001, sr2 = 0.091) remained significant predictors. Additionally, FGA emerged as a significant predictor (β = 0.15, p = 0.003, sr2 = 0.022), while TGP showed no significant effect on climate anxiety (β = −0.05, p = 0.33, sr2 = 0.003). Hypotheses 1 was not supported by our analyses. Contrary to our expectations, the results indicate that older individuals in this sample experience higher levels of climate anxiety. Hypothesis 2 was supported, with trait anxiety emerging as a significant and positive predictor of climate anxiety. Hypothesis 3 and 4 were not supported. Indeed, no significant relationship was found between TGP and climate anxiety (H3). Hypothesis 4 was also not confirmed, with findings showing a positive relationship between FGA and climate anxiety, which is contrary to our initial prediction.

4. Discussion

The aim of this study was to examine the role of dispositional variables (i.e., trait anxiety, flexible goal adjustment and tenacious goal pursuit) on individuals’ propensity to experience climate anxiety. The results indicate that (1) age and trait anxiety are positive predictors of climate anxiety and (2) TGP is not associated with climate anxiety, while (3) FGA plays a significant positive role with respect to these feelings.
Firstly, the results of this study indicate that it is the oldest respondents who are the most anxious about climate change. However, in accordance with the literature [2], the first hypothesis assumed the opposite. Indeed, it was assumed that younger respondents would have higher levels of climate change anxiety.
In fact, in this sample composed mainly of young people, it was the oldest among them who felt the most climate anxiety. While this result may be surprising, recent publications are beginning to question the unilateral nature of climate anxiety felt by younger people. The study by Meo and collaborators [34] reveals that the older young people are, the more anxiety they feel, and that this is due to higher levels of income and education. According to the second hypothesis, a higher trait anxiety score also appears to be a vulnerability factor that predisposes individuals to climate anxiety. Indeed, individuals with high trait anxiety experience more climate anxiety as measured by the Clayton and Karazsia scale [9], which confirms the specificity of this scale’s measurement [35]. Hence, in accordance with Spielberger’s seminal work [28], trait-anxiety may be considered as a stable factor influencing the perception of danger (i.e., the consequences of climate change). These “anxious” individuals are more likely to react emotionally to a threat [36]. They also have difficulty receiving and processing new information [37]. In response to a perceived threat (e.g., climate change), these individuals may activate a dual process, i.e., a primary fear mode followed by the implementation of coping strategies [38]. Yet, in the context of climate change, one of these strategies could be maladaptive. People who are more sensitive to the consequences of climate change could adopt a process of selective exposure [39,40]. This mechanism would lead them to preferentially expose themselves to information confirming their beliefs about the consequences of climate change, while focusing on negative information, thus increasing their anxiety about the climate. In addition, these individuals may be more vulnerable than others to the global consequences of climate change. Indeed, it has been shown that people with a high anxiety trait may have a lower tolerance threshold for serious societal information [41]. These results are in line with the literature showing links between general anxiety and climate anxiety [13].
Secondly, contrary to the hypotheses formulated, the assimilative adaptation mode (i.e., TGP) has no effect on perceived climate anxiety, which refutes hypothesis 3. Indeed, it had been hypothesized that a high score for tenacious goal pursuit reduced climate-related anxiety. This lack of effect could be explained by the very nature of climate change. Perceived as global, it could give individuals the false impression that their individual actions do not contribute significantly to solving this planetary problem [42]. The assimilative mode would then appear ineffective, even illusory, when it comes to exercising real control over the situation to regulate the climatic anxiety experienced by individuals. Thus, faced with the reality of the situation, individuals seem to resign themselves and reorient their objectives, rather than engaging in a strategy to change the situation. This phenomenon is in line with the work of Brandtstädter and Renner [19], who explain that the transition from assimilation to accommodation depends on the degree of perceived control over the situation. Indeed, according to the motivational development model [43], the accommodative mode seems to be a more effective way of adapting to threats perceived as uncontrollable or irreversible.
In this study, Hypothesis 4 assumed that a higher flexible goal adjustment score would reduce climate anxiety. Yet, the results of this study show that this adaptation mode is associated with an increase in perceived climate anxiety. Indeed, according to the literature, cognitive flexibility could have been a coping strategy to avoid excessive climate anxiety [19,44]. In this context, given the existential nature of the climate crisis [45], the FGA could have maladaptive effects. Indeed, faced with the uncontrollability of the situation, individuals would be unable to adopt an assimilative strategy and would instead adopt an accommodative one. However, the transition from one to the other implies a restructuring of fundamental beliefs and goals, which could temporarily lead to psychological disorganization and distress [46]. This stage could lead to greater awareness of the seriousness of the situation and the threat. Consequently, adapting goals to this uncontrollable reality would lead to an emphasis on anxiogenic stimuli (e.g., environmental problems), which would amplify emotional reactions rather than attenuate them [47].
One explanation for this paradoxical effect is that people’s propensity to adopt this flexible mode could lead them to expose themselves to, or even seek out, negative information about climate change. This in turn results in a higher level of emotional salience. Indeed, information seeking appears to be a proactive and reactive behavioral response that affects the way an individual copes with the psychological impacts of climate change [48]. Thus, this focus on anxiety-provoking information (e.g., media [27]) could lead individuals to modify their goals, forcing them to constantly reassess their hierarchy of priorities in the face of a situation beyond their control [22]. This exposure may in turn foster maladaptive rumination processes [49,50]. These processes, involving repetitive thoughts focused on the negative consequences of climate change, could reflect a persistent attempt to find adjustments to a threat perceived as uncontrollable, and thus amplify the anxiety felt. A recent study on eco-anxiety and ecological grief [16] supports this interpretation. This narrative analysis underlines the complexity of adaptation mechanisms, and explains that the challenges of climate change are so vast that an emotionally involved person can find themselves in distress if they are unable to act effectively. In this respect, FGA could imply greater emotional involvement, which would be more closely linked to a deep commitment to climate change than to an adaptation strategy [51,52].
In addition to this interpretation, it is also plausible that FGA acts less as a protective coping strategy and more as a marker of greater emotional sensitivity. Thus, this emotional sensitivity or flexibility would lead individuals to greater vulnerability, as they would be more reactive to environmental stressors [53,54]. In this perspective, individuals who score higher in FGA may be more emotionally reactive to climate threats, which would partly explain the positive association between flexibility and climate anxiety in this sample. Similar findings were observed during the COVID-19 pandemic, as individuals with difficulties adjusting their goal reported more negative feelings, and were less likely to achieve them [55].
Several limitations of this study are worth mentioning. First, the hierarchical regression model can only explain a limited part of the variation observed in individuals’ levels of climate anxiety. Second, a significant part of the variance could be explained by other factors not taken into account in this model. Among these are socio-professional categories, political orientation and personal experiences of extreme weather events [56]. Third, it would be relevant if some measures could be performed at separate times, such as climate anxiety, the tenacious and flexible goal adjustment scales. Coping strategies may express themselves differently over time [10]. It is therefore possible that the participants in this study were in an early phase of this adaptation process, which could explain their higher levels of climate anxiety. Future longitudinal research could investigate the evolution of these coping mechanisms in the context of climate change and associated anxiety. Fourth, although women appear to be most affected by climate-related anxiety, the high proportion of women in the sample limits the findings’ generalizability to the whole population [57]. Fifth, the cross-sectional design of this study prevents an understanding of these adaptation mechanisms over time, which limits the possibility of drawing conclusions about the temporal or causal relationship of these strategies. To overcome this limitation, future research could benefit from the adoption of a longitudinal model (at least three waves of data collection). This would enable more detailed observation of how coping strategies evolve over time. Similarly, in this study, certain control variables—in particular ideological or contextual factors such as political orientation or level of exposure to environment-related media—were not taken into account, despite their proven influence on climate-related anxiety [56]. It is encouraged that future studies include such variables and consider diversified samples in order to improve the generalizability of results and further explore these coping mechanisms.
Beyond methodological improvements, future studies could also explore how coping strategies (i.e., TGP and FGA) influence long-term outcomes, such as chronic climate anxiety or psychological resilience. It would also be interesting to examine their role in climate-related motivation and engagement, including participation in environmental organizations and adoption of pro-environmental behaviors. Studying these processes over time and across diverse populations could deepen our understanding of adaptive responses to climate anxiety and inform targeted interventions.

5. Conclusions

Results from this study highlight that individuals of older age, with high levels of trait anxiety, and a high level of activation of the goal accommodation mode (i.e., FGA) are more vulnerable than others to climate anxiety. These results demonstrate once again the importance of better understanding the psychological processes at work when faced with the consequences of climate change. Although generally associated with benefits, in this study accommodation seems to play a rather paradoxical role, contributing instead to the amplification of climate anxiety. These results suggest several perspectives for researchers and practitioners. For example, in primary prevention, it could be interesting to intervene with young people by using educational interventions. For example, educational awareness strategies such as cooperative learning could be tested to promote emotional regulation of anxiety-provoking information linked to the consequences of climate change. The aim would be to enable young people to debate climate change issues in an organized and structured way. Researchers and practitioners could, for example, adapt the methodology used for the Jigsaw Classroom [58] or the Cooperative Controversy [59] to organize collaborative debates. Young people could build on the different points of view of others and work together to realize that behavioral strategies can address some of the challenges of climate change. In secondary prevention, interventions could seek to strengthen the cognitive flexibility through which people cope with the first signs of anxiety. For instance, methods inspired by Wells’ [60] metacognitive therapy based on emotional regulation strategies could be tested to specifically target negative thoughts and ruminations. In this case, the goal would be to target the “cognitive-attentional syndrome” relating to ruminations and persistent thoughts by mobilizing, for example, detached mindfulness [61].
In conclusion, these promising results need to be tested and replicated in future research to deepen our understanding of the complexity of coping strategies implemented by individuals in response to the consequences of climate change.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/psychiatryint6030105/s1, Table S1: Exploratory factor analysis Climate anxiety items, TGP and FGA (rotation method: oblimin; extraction: minimum residus), Kmo and Bartlett’s test results in the EFA; Figure S1: Scree Plot of eigenvalue; Table S2: Reliability estimates, descriptive statistics and saturations of factors.

Author Contributions

K.N.: conceptualization, investigation, methodology, project administration, resources, supervision, validation, visualization, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing. T.P.: methodology, resources, supervision, validation, visualization, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing. L.B.: validation, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing. S.B.: validation, writing—review and editing. A.S.: validation, writing—review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study is defined as non-interventional research and was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (1964) and its subsequent amendments (2001), the ethical principles of the French Code of Ethics for Psychologists (2012), as well as the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and the American Psychological Association Code of Conduct (2017). Ethical review and approval were waived for this study due to legal regulations in France (LOI n° 2012-300 “Loi Jardé”).

Informed Consent Statement

Participants were informed of the purpose of the study in a cover letter and were assured that their data would remain confidential. Participants were required to give explicit consent to access the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data are openly available at OSF (accessed on OSF: https://osf.io/5yjk6 accessed on 1 September 2025).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. World Health Organization. Climate Change and Health. World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland. 2023. Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/climate-change-and-health (accessed on 31 August 2025).
  2. Hickman, C.; Marks, E.; Pihkala, P.; Clayton, S.; Lewandowski, R.E.; Mayall, E.E.; Wray, B.; Mellor, C.; Susteren, L. van Climate anxiety in children and young people and their beliefs about government responses to climate change: A global survey. Lancet Planet. Health 2021, 5, e863–e873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Patrick, R.; Snell, T.; Gunasiri, H.; Garad, R.; Meadows, G.; Enticott, J. Prevalence and determinants of mental health related to climate change in Australia. Aust. N. Z. J. Psychiatry 2023, 57, 710–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Helldén, D.; Andersson, C.; Nilsson, M.; Ebi, K.L.; Friberg, P.; Alfvén, T. Climate change and child health: A scoping review and an expanded conceptual framework. Lancet Planet. Health 2021, 5, e164–e175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Diffey, J.; Wright, S.; Uchendu, J.O.; Masithi, S.; Olude, A.; Juma, D.O.; Anya, L.H.; Salami, T.; Mogathala, P.R.; Agarwal, H.; et al. “Not about us without us”—The feelings and hopes of climate-concerned young people around the world. Int. Rev. Psychiatry 2022, 34, 499–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Thompson, R.; Lawrance, E.L.; Roberts, L.F.; Grailey, K.; Ashrafian, H.; Maheswaran, H.; Toledano, M.B.; Darzi, A. Ambient temperature and mental health: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Planet. Health 2023, 7, e580–e589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Lewandowski, R.E.; Clayton, S.D.; Olbrich, L.; Sakshaug, J.W.; Wray, B.; Schwartz, S.E.O.; Augustinavicius, J.; Howe, P.D.; Parnes, M.; Wright, S.; et al. Climate emotions, thoughts, and plans among US adolescents and young adults: A cross-sectional descriptive survey and analysis by political party identification and self-reported exposure to severe weather events. Lancet Planet. Health 2024, 8, e879–e893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ogunbode, C.A.; Pallesen, S.; Böhm, G.; Doran, R.; Bhullar, N.; Aquino, S.; Marot, T.; Schermer, J.A.; Wlodarczyk, A.; Lu, S.; et al. Negative emotions about climate change are related to insomnia symptoms and mental health: Cross-sectional evidence from 25 countries. Curr. Psychol. 2023, 42, 845–854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Clayton, S.; Karazsia, B.T. Development and validation of a measure of climate change anxiety. J. Environ. Psychol. 2020, 69, 101434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Crandon, T.J.; Scott, J.G.; Charlson, F.J.; Thomas, H.J. A theoretical model of climate anxiety and coping. Discov. Psychol. 2024, 4, 94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-5TM, 5th ed.; American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc.: Arlington, VA, US, 2013; 947p, ISBN 978-0-89042-554-1. [Google Scholar]
  12. Barlow, D.H.; Durand, V.M.; Hofmann, S.G. Abnormal Psychology: An Integrative Approach, 8th ed.; Student Edition; Cengage Learning: Boston, MA, USA, 2017; ISBN 978-1-305-95044-3. [Google Scholar]
  13. Cosh, S.M.; Ryan, R.; Fallander, K.; Robinson, K.; Tognela, J.; Tully, P.J.; Lykins, A.D. The relationship between climate change and mental health: A systematic review of the association between eco-anxiety, psychological distress, and symptoms of major affective disorders. BMC Psychiatry 2024, 24, 833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Leal, P.C.; Goes, T.C.; da Silva, L.C.F.; Teixeira-Silva, F. Trait vs. state anxiety in different threatening situations. Trends Psychiatry Psychother. 2017, 39, 147–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Materia, C.J. Climate State Anxiety and Connectedness to Nature in Rural Tasmania. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  16. Pihkala, P. The Process of Eco-Anxiety and Ecological Grief: A Narrative Review and a New Proposal. Sustainability 2022, 14, 16628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Stollberg, J.; Jonas, E. Existential threat as a challenge for individual and collective engagement: Climate change and the motivation to act. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 2021, 42, 145–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Dodds, J. The psychology of climate anxiety. BJPsych Bull. 2021, 45, 222–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Brandtstädter, J.; Renner, G. Tenacious goal pursuit and flexible goal adjustment: Explication and age-related analysis of assimilative and accommodative strategies of coping. Psychol. Aging 1990, 5, 58–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Hanssen, M.M.; Vancleef, L.M.G.; Vlaeyen, J.W.S.; Hayes, A.F.; Schouten, E.G.W.; Peters, M.L. Optimism, Motivational Coping and Well-being: Evidence Supporting the Importance of Flexible Goal Adjustment. J. Happiness Stud. 2015, 16, 1525–1537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Thomsen, T.; Greve, W. Accommodative coping in early adolescence: An investigation of possible developmental components. J. Adolesc. 2013, 36, 971–981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Bailly, N.; Hervé, C.; Joulain, M.; Alaphilippe, D. Validation of the French version of Brandtstädter and Renner’s Tenacious Goal Pursuit (TGP) and Flexible Goal Adjustment (FGA) scales. Eur. Rev. Appl. Psychol. 2012, 62, 29–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Kelly, R.E.; Wood, A.M.; Mansell, W. Flexible and tenacious goal pursuit lead to improving well-being in an aging population: A ten-year cohort study. Int. Psychogeriatr. 2013, 25, 16–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Brandstätter, V.; Bernecker, K. Persistence and Disengagement in Personal Goal Pursuit. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2022, 73, 271–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Brandtstädter, J.; Rothermund, K. The Life-Course Dynamics of Goal Pursuit and Goal Adjustment: A Two-Process Framework. Dev. Rev. 2002, 22, 117–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. United, N. Causes and Effects of Climate Change. Available online: https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/causes-effects-climate-change (accessed on 23 August 2022).
  27. Nadarajah, K.; David, J.-C.; Brun, L.; Bordel, S.; Moyon, L.; Le Foll, D.; Delouvée, S.; Somat, A. “We Are Running Out of Time”: Temporal Orientation and Information Seeking as Explanatory Factors of Climate Anxiety among Young People. Psych 2022, 4, 560–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Spielberger, C.D. State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Adults; Mind Garden: Palo Alto, CA, USA, 1983. [Google Scholar]
  29. Spielberger, C.D.; Bruchon-Schweitzer, M.; Paulhan, I. STAI-Y: Inventaire d’anxiété état-Trait Forme Y; Éditions du Centre de Psychologie Appliquée, DL: Paris, France, 1993; ISBN 978-2-7253-0003-0. [Google Scholar]
  30. Feißt, M.; Hennigs, A.; Heil, J.; Moosbrugger, H.; Kelava, A.; Stolpner, I.; Kieser, M.; Rauch, G. Refining scores based on patient reported outcomes—Statistical and medical perspectives. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2019, 19, 167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Mouguiama-Daouda, C.; Blanchard, M.A.; Coussement, C.; Heeren, A. On the Measurement of Climate Change Anxiety: French Validation of the Climate Anxiety Scale. Psychol. Belg. 2022, 62, 123–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Hocking, R.R. Methods and Applications of Linear Models: Regression and the Analysis of Variance, 3rd ed.; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2013; ISBN 978-1-118-59304-2. [Google Scholar]
  33. Valente, G.; Diotaiuti, P.; Corrado, S.; Tosti, B.; Zanon, A.; Mancone, S. Validity and measurement invariance of abbreviated scales of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-Y) in a population of Italian young adults. Front. Psychol. 2025, 16, 1443375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Meo, S.A.; Shafi, K.M.; Hussain, A. The psychological cost of climate change: Anxiety among adolescents and young adults—A cross-sectional study. Front. Psychiatry 2025, 16, 1422338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Hannachi, T.; Yakimova, S.; Somat, A. A Follow up on the Continuum Theory of Eco-Anxiety: Analysis of the Climate Change Anxiety Scale Using Item Response Theory among French Speaking Population. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2024, 21, 1158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Endler, N.S.; Kocovski, N.L. State and trait anxiety revisited. J. Anxiety Disord. 2001, 15, 231–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Knowles, K.A.; Olatunji, B.O. Specificity of Trait Anxiety in Anxiety and Depression: Meta-Analysis of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 2020, 82, 101928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Beck, A.T.; Clark, D.A. An information processing model of anxiety: Automatic and strategic processes. Behav. Res. Ther. 1997, 35, 49–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Knobloch-Westerwick, S. Choice and Preference in Media Use: Advances in Selective Exposure Theory and Research; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2014; ISBN 978-1-315-77135-9. [Google Scholar]
  40. Perrissol, S.; Somat, A. L’exposition sélective: Bilan et perspectives. [Selective exposure: Assessment and perspectives.]. L’Année Psychol. 2009, 109, 551–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ming, X.; Luo, G.; Wang, J.; Dou, H.; Li, H.; Lei, Y. Integrating behavioral and neurophysiological insights: High trait anxiety enhances observational fear learning. NeuroImage 2025, 307, 121037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Zhao, J.; Luo, Y. A framework to address cognitive biases of climate change. Neuron 2021, 109, 3548–3551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Heckhausen, J.; Wrosch, C.; Schulz, R. A motivational theory of life-span development. Psychol. Rev. 2010, 117, 32–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Kashdan, T.B.; Rottenberg, J. Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 2010, 30, 865–878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Popovski, V. Climate Change as an Existential Threat: Translating Global Goals into Action. Environ. Policy Law 2024, 54, 127–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Brandstätter, V.; Herrmann, M. Goal disengagement in emerging adulthood: The adaptive potential of action crises. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 2016, 40, 117–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Maran, D.A.; Begotti, T. Media Exposure to Climate Change, Anxiety, and Efficacy Beliefs in a Sample of Italian University Students. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 9358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Reser, J.P.; Swim, J.K. Adapting to and coping with the threat and impacts of climate change. Am. Psychol. 2011, 66, 277–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Martin, L.L.; Tesser, A. Some ruminative thoughts. In Ruminative Thoughts; Advances in Social Cognition; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1996; Volume 9, pp. 1–47. ISBN 978-0-8058-1815-4. [Google Scholar]
  50. Ojala, M.; Cunsolo, A.; Ogunbode, C.A.; Middleton, J. Anxiety, Worry, and Grief in a Time of Environmental and Climate Crisis: A Narrative Review. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2021, 46, 35–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Clayton, S. Climate anxiety: Psychological responses to climate change. J. Anxiety Disord. 2020, 74, 102263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Hornsey, M.J.; Harris, E.A.; Bain, P.G.; Fielding, K.S. Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 2016, 6, 622–626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Belsky, J.; Pluess, M. Beyond diathesis stress: Differential susceptibility to environmental influences. Psychol. Bull. 2009, 135, 885–908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Bonanno, G.A.; Burton, C.L. Regulatory Flexibility: An Individual Differences Perspective on Coping and Emotion Regulation. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2013, 8, 591–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Svensson, H.; Shoots-Reinhard, B.; Cole, S. Goal disruption during COVID-19: Reimagining goals during a global pandemic. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 2023, 17, e12863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Whitmarsh, L.; Player, L.; Jiongco, A.; James, M.; Williams, M.; Marks, E.; Kennedy-Williams, P. Climate anxiety: What predicts it and how is it related to climate action? J. Environ. Psychol. 2022, 83, 101866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Verplanken, B.; Marks, E.; Dobromir, A.I. On the nature of eco-anxiety: How constructive or unconstructive is habitual worry about global warming? J. Environ. Psychol. 2020, 72, 101528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Aronson, E.; Patnoe, S. Cooperation in the Classroom: The Jigsaw Method, 3rd ed.; Pinter & Martin Ltd.: London, UK, 2011; ISBN 978-1-905177-22-6. [Google Scholar]
  59. Johnson, D.W.; Johnson, R.T. Cooperation and Competition: Theory and Research; Cooperation and competition: Theory and research; Interaction Book Company: Edina, MN, USA, 1989; 257p, ISBN 978-0-939603-10-7. [Google Scholar]
  60. Wells, A. Metacognitive Therapy for Anxiety and Depression; Metacognitive therapy for anxiety and depression; Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2009; ISBN 978-1-59385-994-7. [Google Scholar]
  61. Normann, N.; Morina, N. The Efficacy of Metacognitive Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front. Psychol. 2018, 9, 2211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Descriptive statistics.
Table 1. Descriptive statistics.
VariableMSDMin.Max.
Age0.001.00−0.725.30
STAI- Y Trait48.19.842575
Climate Anxiety1.710.9215.13
TGP3.471.2117
FGA4.191.371.257
M = Mean; SD = Standard deviation; Min. = Minimum value; Max. = Maximum value.
Table 2. Correlation matrix for measurement model.
Table 2. Correlation matrix for measurement model.
12345
1. Climate anxiety/
2. Age0.15 **/
3. STAI-Trait0.26 ***−0.05/
4. FGA0.060.13 *−0.35 ***/
5. TGP0.030.050.25 ***−0.08/
Note. * p < 0.05. ** p < 0.01. *** p < 0.001.
Table 3. Multivariate regression analyses results for the continuous variable: Climate anxiety.
Table 3. Multivariate regression analyses results for the continuous variable: Climate anxiety.
Explanatory VariablesMultivariate Analysis df1df2p-Value
β (SE)95% CI for βp-ValueSr2Adjusted R2ΔR2ΔF
Model 1 0.019
Age 0.15 (0.05)[0.05, 0.25]0.0030.02
Model 2 0.0870.0730.211393<0.001
Age 0.16 (0.04)[0.07, 0.26]<0.0010.03
STAI-Y Trait 0.27 (0.00)[0.17, 0.36]<0.0010.07
Model 3 0.1050.0224.8123910.009
Age 0.15 (0.04)[0.05, 0.24]0.0020.02
STAI-Y Trait0.33 (0.00)[0.23, 0.43]<0.0010.09
FGA0.15 (0.03)[0.05, 0.25]0.0030.02
TGP−0.05 (0.04)[−0.14, 0.05]0.330.00
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Nadarajah, K.; Pavic, T.; Brun, L.; Bordel, S.; Somat, A. Psychological Factors Influencing Climate Anxiety in Young Adults: Exploring the Impact of Age, Trait Anxiety, Flexible Goal Adjustment and Tenacious Goal Pursuit. Psychiatry Int. 2025, 6, 105. https://doi.org/10.3390/psychiatryint6030105

AMA Style

Nadarajah K, Pavic T, Brun L, Bordel S, Somat A. Psychological Factors Influencing Climate Anxiety in Young Adults: Exploring the Impact of Age, Trait Anxiety, Flexible Goal Adjustment and Tenacious Goal Pursuit. Psychiatry International. 2025; 6(3):105. https://doi.org/10.3390/psychiatryint6030105

Chicago/Turabian Style

Nadarajah, Kévin, Tivizio Pavic, Laurent Brun, Stéphanie Bordel, and Alain Somat. 2025. "Psychological Factors Influencing Climate Anxiety in Young Adults: Exploring the Impact of Age, Trait Anxiety, Flexible Goal Adjustment and Tenacious Goal Pursuit" Psychiatry International 6, no. 3: 105. https://doi.org/10.3390/psychiatryint6030105

APA Style

Nadarajah, K., Pavic, T., Brun, L., Bordel, S., & Somat, A. (2025). Psychological Factors Influencing Climate Anxiety in Young Adults: Exploring the Impact of Age, Trait Anxiety, Flexible Goal Adjustment and Tenacious Goal Pursuit. Psychiatry International, 6(3), 105. https://doi.org/10.3390/psychiatryint6030105

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop