Anne Margit Reitsema , Valesca S.M. Venhof , Andrik Becht , Bertus F. Jeronimus
{"title":"Distress and denial: Dutch youth aged 16-35 grappling with climate change","authors":"Anne Margit Reitsema , Valesca S.M. Venhof , Andrik Becht , Bertus F. Jeronimus","doi":"10.1016/j.jenvp.2026.102969","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Climate change elicits a wide range of emotional and psychological responses, from anxiety and guilt to denial. Public and media discourse often present climate change distress and denial as opposing camps.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>We move beyond this dichotomy by identifying clusters of climate change distress and denial in 1006 Dutch young adults (aged 16–35, 51.2% women, population-representative).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We measured four dimensions of climate change distress (eco-anxiety, eco-guilt, cognitive-emotional impairment, and functional impairment) and three dimensions of denial (of seriousness, personal impact, and impact elsewhere). Naturally occurring subgroups were identified using latent profile analysis. Profile differences in demographics, emotions, institutional trust, and coping strategies were examined using analysis of variance.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>We identified six profiles: burdened worriers, unburdened worriers, climate change deniers, skeptic worriers, NIMBYs (Not-In-My-BackYard), and conflicted skeptics. Despite low average distress levels, about half of the sample reported moderate to high distress, alongside varying denial levels. High-distress profiles reported more hope and proactive coping, while denial-heavy profiles were linked to fatalism, lower institutional trust, and limited engagement. Profiles differed only minimally by gender, age, income, and living environment; education showed no differences.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>By identifying six distinct patterns, this study moves beyond the activist–denier framing common in public discourse, showing that climate change distress and denial coexist in complex ways among Dutch youth. Future research should examine the stability of these profiles and include additional dimensions, such as ecological grief.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48439,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Psychology","volume":"110 ","pages":"Article 102969"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272494426000708","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Climate change elicits a wide range of emotional and psychological responses, from anxiety and guilt to denial. Public and media discourse often present climate change distress and denial as opposing camps.
Objective
We move beyond this dichotomy by identifying clusters of climate change distress and denial in 1006 Dutch young adults (aged 16–35, 51.2% women, population-representative).
Methods
We measured four dimensions of climate change distress (eco-anxiety, eco-guilt, cognitive-emotional impairment, and functional impairment) and three dimensions of denial (of seriousness, personal impact, and impact elsewhere). Naturally occurring subgroups were identified using latent profile analysis. Profile differences in demographics, emotions, institutional trust, and coping strategies were examined using analysis of variance.
Findings
We identified six profiles: burdened worriers, unburdened worriers, climate change deniers, skeptic worriers, NIMBYs (Not-In-My-BackYard), and conflicted skeptics. Despite low average distress levels, about half of the sample reported moderate to high distress, alongside varying denial levels. High-distress profiles reported more hope and proactive coping, while denial-heavy profiles were linked to fatalism, lower institutional trust, and limited engagement. Profiles differed only minimally by gender, age, income, and living environment; education showed no differences.
Conclusions
By identifying six distinct patterns, this study moves beyond the activist–denier framing common in public discourse, showing that climate change distress and denial coexist in complex ways among Dutch youth. Future research should examine the stability of these profiles and include additional dimensions, such as ecological grief.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Environmental Psychology is the premier journal in the field, serving individuals in a wide range of disciplines who have an interest in the scientific study of the transactions and interrelationships between people and their surroundings (including built, social, natural and virtual environments, the use and abuse of nature and natural resources, and sustainability-related behavior). The journal publishes internationally contributed empirical studies and reviews of research on these topics that advance new insights. As an important forum for the field, the journal publishes some of the most influential papers in the discipline that reflect the scientific development of environmental psychology. Contributions on theoretical, methodological, and practical aspects of all human-environment interactions are welcome, along with innovative or interdisciplinary approaches that have a psychological emphasis. Research areas include: •Psychological and behavioral aspects of people and nature •Cognitive mapping, spatial cognition and wayfinding •Ecological consequences of human actions •Theories of place, place attachment, and place identity •Environmental risks and hazards: perception, behavior, and management •Perception and evaluation of buildings and natural landscapes •Effects of physical and natural settings on human cognition and health •Theories of proenvironmental behavior, norms, attitudes, and personality •Psychology of sustainability and climate change •Psychological aspects of resource management and crises •Social use of space: crowding, privacy, territoriality, personal space •Design of, and experiences related to, the physical aspects of workplaces, schools, residences, public buildings and public space