Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Systematic research comparing environmental consciousness as a multidimensional construct among primary school students in urban and rural settings remains limited. Accordingly, this cross-sectional study examined item-level response patterns among urban and rural students across four dimensions of environmental consciousness: affective, cognitive, conative, and active. The sample comprised 182 fifth- and sixth-grade students from 11 schools in Ternate, Indonesia, including 95 urban and 87 rural students. Data were collected using an adapted Ecobarometer. Categorical and ordinal responses were analyzed using Chi-square and Mann–Whitney U tests, respectively. The Benjamini–Hochberg procedure was applied separately within each dimension, and the dimension-adjusted p values were used as the primary criterion for statistical significance. Statistically significant differences remained for only three affective items including perceived urgency of environmental conservation, the perceived relationship between everyday lifestyles and the environment, and the attribution of environmental problems to inadequate recycling, and one active item concerning the self-reported avoidance of littering at home. These findings point to selective, item-specific variation rather than an overall difference in environmental consciousness between the two groups. Environmental education may therefore need to help students connect the urgency of environmental issues and their everyday lifestyles with concrete environmental consequences while providing contextually meaningful opportunities for action. Nevertheless, the findings should be interpreted cautiously because of the relatively small, geographically limited sample and the reliance on students’ self-reports.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lukmana et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: