Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40880806›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

Examining the relationship between ecological anxiety and pro-environmental behavior: personal and collective actions.

Gal Hagit Carasso Romano, Rotem Sippori, Sharon Soroker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

3 authors.

Gal Hagit Carasso RomanoFaculty of Social Sciences & Humanities, Tel-Hai College, Tel Hai, Israel.
Rotem SipporiFaculty of Social Sciences & Humanities, Tel-Hai College, Tel Hai, Israel.
Sharon SorokerFaculty of Social Sciences & Humanities, Tel-Hai College, Tel Hai, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ecological anxiety-defined as anxiety related to environmental degradation and climate change-has become increasingly prevalent, particularly among individuals who are environmentally conscious. This study investigated the correlation between ecological anxiety and both personal and collective pro-environmental behavior among 224 participants, predominantly members of environmental groups with inherent environmental concern. The study aimed to clarify the extent to which ecological anxiety motivates different forms of environmental behavior, and whether personal and collective actions serve similar psychological functions. Using Pearson's correlation and regression analysis, the research identified significant positive correlations between ecological anxiety and both forms of environmental behavior, with a notably stronger correlation for collective behavior. The study also examined whether environmental actions serve as coping mechanisms that provide individuals with a sense of control over uncontrollable environmental situations, or alternatively, whether these actions could exacerbate anxiety among those actively engaged in addressing environmental challenges. These findings are particularly relevant for mental health professionals, environmental educators, and policymakers, as they emphasize the need to consider both personal and collective dimensions of environmental behavior. Integrating this perspective into educational programs and policy design may help transform ecological anxiety into a constructive force for environmental engagement and resilience.

Indexed as

climate crisiscollective pro-environmental actionecological anxietyenvironmental awarenessenvironmental psychologypersonal pro-environmental action

Identifiers

PMID40880806
PMCPMC12382445

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.