The Ukrainian validation of the Inventory of Climate Emotions: measurement invariance and nomological relationships in a wartime context

Abstract Background Understanding the diverse spectrum of climate-related emotions is essential for promoting pro-environmental behavior and addressing mental health impacts. While the Inventory of Climate Emotions (ICE) has been adapted in several contexts, Ukraine lacks a validated multidimensional tool to assess these affective states. This study aimed to perform the translation, cultural adaptation, and psychometric validation of the Ukrainian version (ICE-UA), filling a gap both for the Ukrainian context and for future cross-cultural comparisons. The research evaluated the instrument’s applicability in two Ukrainian samples collected during the ongoing war, specifically examining measurement invariance across gender, age, data collection waves, and displacement status. Methods An online survey was conducted via Google Forms with 673 Ukrainian adults (mean age = 36.13, SD = 11.37; 67.2% women). The ICE-UA and other psychological measures were used to assess climate-related emotions, eco-anxiety, environmental attitudes and behavior, depressive symptoms, and well-being. Confirmatory factor analysis and multi-group confirmatory factor analysis were used to examine the factor structure, reliability, and measurement invariance across gender, age, study waves (2024 vs. 2025), and displacement status. Spearman’s rank correlations were used to test the nomological relationships of climate emotions with other psychological constructs, and multiple linear regression was used to test differences in climate emotions by gender, age, study wave, and displacement status. Results The eight-factor structure of the ICE-UA was supported with acceptable fit indices: CFI = 0.947, TLI = 0.939, RMSEA = 0.079, and SRMR = 0.057. Internal consistency was high (McDonald’s ω = 0.786 to 0.912), and full measurement invariance was established across gender, age, study waves, and displacement status. Nomological validity was supported by significant associations between climate emotions and relevant psychological constructs. Women scored higher on most ICE-UA emotion subscales, whereas men scored higher on the contempt dimension. Conclusions The ICE-UA is a valid, reliable tool for Ukrainian and cross-cultural research. The comparability of the eight-factor structure across independent data-collection waves during an ongoing war provides further support for the structural validity of the ICE. These findings suggest the feasibility of using this instrument within a dynamic Ukrainian macro-context.