Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37438436›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Introduction and behavioral validation of the climate change distress and impairment scale.

Johanna Hepp, Sina A Klein, Luisa K Horsten, Jana Urbild, Sean P Lane

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Climate change distress and impairment in Germany.Frontiers in public health · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Johanna HeppDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany. johanna.hepp@zi-mannheim.de.
Sina A KleinSystems Neuroscience in Psychiatry, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Luisa K HorstenExperimental Psychology and Personality, RPTU Kaiserslautern-Landau, Landau, Germany.
Jana UrbildDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Sean P LaneDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Governmental agencies and the medical and psychological professions are calling for a greater focus on the negative mental health effects of climate change (CC). As a first step, the field needs measures to distinguish affective/emotional distress due to CC from impairment that requires further scientific and diagnostic attention and that may require treatment in the future. To this end, we constructed the climate change distress and impairment scale, which distinguishes CC distress (spanning anger, anxiety, and sadness) from impairment. In four studies (N = 1699), we developed and validated English and German versions of the scale. Across samples, spanning 2021-2022, CC distress was at least moderate, while we observed general moderate to high levels of distress and low to moderate levels of impairment. In three English-speaking samples, younger individuals and women were most affected by CC distress, whereas this was not the case in a German-speaking sample, suggesting sociopolitical influencing factors. We demonstrate convergent validity with previous measures and discriminant validity for general negative affectivity and depressive and generalized anxiety disorder symptoms, which underlines that CC distress is not in itself pathological. Employing a fully incentivized social dilemma paradigm, we demonstrate that CC distress and (to a lesser degree) CC impairment predict pro-environmental behavior, underscoring them as possible drivers, and targets, of climate-change mitigation efforts.

Indexed as

Climate ChangeProblem BehaviorAngerAnxietyAnxiety DisordersFemaleHumans

Identifiers

PMID37438436
PMCPMC10338517

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.