Identifying coping strategies that regulate negative climate emotions without reducing pro-environmental behavior.

Negative climate emotions may represent both a psychological burden and a motivator for pro-environmental behavior (PEB). Identifying coping strategies that reduce distress without undermining engagement is therefore crucial. In this preregistered online experiment (N = 313), negative climate emotions were induced via film and participants were randomized to meaning-focused coping (MFC), emotional acceptance, or cognitive distraction. Negative and positive affect were assessed before and after coping, and PEB was measured using a fully incentivized behavioral task involving real time and effort costs. All coping strategies reduced negative affect, with distraction producing the strongest short-term reduction. Higher post-coping negative affect predicted greater odds of WEPT engagement. Importantly, participants in the MFC condition showed a higher likelihood of engaging in PEB compared to acceptance and distraction, and these differences persisted after statistical adjustment for post-coping negative affect. Exploratory analyses further indicated that MFC increased positive affect relative to the other strategies, consistent with theoretical accounts proposing that meaning-focused coping can generate positive emotions that support sustained engagement. Trait climate change distress predicted both state negative affect and PEB, but did not moderate the association between affect and behavior. These findings suggest that while distraction may be effective for short-term affect reduction, meaning-focused coping may better sustain behavioral engagement in the context of negative climate emotions.