CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 164Environmental and sustainability educationClimate Change Communication and PerceptionPro-Environmental Behavior and Attitudes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Educating for resilience: parent and teacher perceptions of children's emotional needs in response to climate change

Baker, Cambry, Clayton, Susan, Bragg, Eshana·2021·Environmental Education Research
DOI 10.1080/13504622.2020.1828288
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Children are worried about climate change. Environmental education aims to increase knowledge and pro-environmental behavior but typically gives little attention to meeting children’s emotional needs. This is particularly important as direct and indirect impacts of climate change, including the Australian bushfires in 2019–20, become more salient. This study explored caretaker perceptions of children’s climate change emotions, and the needs and challenges around supporting children, through an online survey of Australian parents and teachers (n = 141). Parents and teachers similarly reported that children experience anxiety and express interest in talking about climate change. They described challenges that inhibit their ability to talk to the children, whilst also identifying positive experiences of doing so. We conclude that parents and teachers would benefit from resources to help them support their children’s environmental learning in a way that fosters emotional wellbeing and promotes hopefulness. We suggest principles that acknowledge feelings, emphasize solutions, and encourage action.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13504622.2020.1828288

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Abbott J., 2019, InPsych, 41
  2. Clayton S., 2017, Psychology and Climate Change: Human Perceptions, Impacts, and Responses
  3. Eaton M., 2017, Contemplative Approaches to Sustainability in Higher Education: Theory and Practice, 40
  4. NSW Rural Fire Service, 2019, Bush Fire Bulletin, 41

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 164

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Baker, C., Clayton, S., & Bragg, E.
Affiliations
  • College of Wooster (US)
  • Sustainable Futures Australia and SIT Study Abroad, Byron Bay, NSW, Australia
Corresponding author
Clayton, Susan
ORCID
Clayton, Susan
Venue
Environmental Education Research
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2020-10-08
Volume
27
Issue
5
Pages
687-705
ISSN
  • 1350-4622 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-5871
DOI
10.1080/13504622.2020.1828288
OpenAlex
W3091780768
Cited by
164
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 47 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 1
FWCI
16.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Environmental Education Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Environmental and sustainability education
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Climate Change Communication and Perception
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Pro-Environmental Behavior and Attitudes
Keywords
climate anxiety, emotional needs of children, parental attitudes, teacher perceptions, climate change education, environmental education, emotional well-being, hope, 2019-2020 Australian bushfires, pro-environmental behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review