Investigating the impact of climate change on mental health among Libyan Arabs: a validation study of the Hogg Eco-Anxiety Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Anxiety, especially within the realm of eco-anxiety, has become an increasingly significant focus of research. In our exploration of eco-anxiety within the Arab Libyan population, we employed a cross-sectional approach and successfully validated the Hogg Eco-Anxiety Scale (HEAS-13). Across two separate subsamples, both Exploratory ( n = 790) [M = 21.64 (SD = 3.51), % women = 86.8] and Confirmatory Factor Analysis ( n = 829) [M = 22.24 (SD = 3.76), % women = 84.6] confirmed the validity of HEAS-13. This scale effectively captured four distinct dimensions of eco-anxiety: affective symptoms, rumination, behavioral symptoms, and anxiety regarding one’s negative impact on the planet. Moreover, the total HEAS-13 and its dimensions had good internal consistency coefficients, ranging from 0.65 to 0.82. The findings highlight significant correlations between eco-anxiety subscales, behavioral symptoms, and rumination, indicating distinct profiles of eco-anxiety. Additionally structural equation modelling analysis revealed that eco-anxiety dimensions serve as a significant predictor of various psychological symptoms, climate change perception and climate value, emphasizing the interconnectedness between eco-anxiety and psychological distress. Furthermore, Sex-specific differences in eco-anxiety and its associations with climate change perceptions are explored, suggesting heightened awareness and involvement among females. The results emphasize eco-anxiety as a quantifiable psychological phenomenon, demonstrably measured through our 13-item eco-anxiety scale and associated with the mental health outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".