Future anxiety and belongingness in young and older adults: An empirical study

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Human beings, by nature, have many expectations that create a feeling of anxiety about the future, but they are endured and long-ranged. They expect to have relationships with others and need to perceive an emotional interest, an interpersonal bond, and sustainment to continue living. Perceiving this link is required for feelings of belongingness, which decreases future anxiety.

AIM

To investigate the future anxiety and belongingness of young and older adults and determine their relationships.

METHODS

The study was conducted with 404 volunteer participants. Data were collected using the demographic characteristics from the “Dark Future Scale” and “General Belongingness Scale”.

RESULTS

The mean age of older adults was 66.76 ± 3.74, while that of younger adults was 36.72 ± 10.12. The average score for “future anxiety” was 18.81 ± 7.59, and for “general belongingness", it was 63.31 ± 1.40. Findings indicated a reverse correlation between future anxiety and belongingness. A significant difference in belonging scores was observed between young and older adults (P = 0.016, which is < 0.05), whereas no significant difference was found regarding future anxiety scores (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Participants had a moderate level of “future anxiety” and higher “belongingness”. Lower belongingness scores correlated with increased future anxiety. Older adults reported a lower sense of belonging than younger individuals.

Key Words: Future anxiety; Belongingness; Older adults; Youngers; Mental well-being

Core Tip: While the feeling of being loved, respected, noticed, and belonging that comes with belonging to a group constitutes an important basis for the psychological health of the individual, the absence of a sense of belonging can increase feelings of rejection, isolation, and alienation, causing anxiety about both the individual's current and future life and thus negatively affecting their mental health. Study findings highlight the ongoing necessity for individuals to foster the development of coping strategies related to future anxiety and cultivate interactive relationships that promote a sense of belonging.

INTRODUCTION

Future anxiety (FA) is an emotional state that arises from uncertainties about the future, negative scenarios, or fear of failure[1]. This type of anxiety can relate to various aspects of life, including careers, relationships, health, finances, and personal goals. Contemplating a future event or situation increases individuals' anxiety levels. This heightened anxiety can be observed days or months before the anticipated event. The individual focuses on what is likely to occur, but their predictions often stem from worst-case scenarios. Future-oriented cognitive processes have been identified as crucial components of anxiety[2]. “Future anxiety", also known as "anticipatory anxiety", serves as the primary driver of generalized anxiety disorder, which is characterized by unproductive and excessive worrying[3]. Supporting studies show that intolerance of uncertainty constitutes the core feature of anxiety and worry[4].

Research has demonstrated a significant relationship between anxiety and worry; however, worry and anxiety do not always coexist[4,5]. Psychologists suggest that FA arises from social and political processes and events. Some security threats include disconnections among people, nations, and countries[1]. Additionally, several health issues, social alienation, and the status of minorities are leading causes of concern about the future[5]. Strong connections and communication are crucial for individuals to share their feelings or belong to various groups. Digital communication has become the norm with technological advancements, often overshadowing face-to-face interactions[6]. While this transformation offers undeniable advantages, it also comes with negative consequences. Belonging can be defined as affiliation with a person, institution, group, society, culture, identity, or a specific area or space[7]. In numerous studies, belonging is examined within the context of interpersonal relationships as a construct related to the self within the framework of the sense of belonging[8-10]. The sense of belonging is a component of relatedness and social/emotional attachment. Viewing belonging as a basic need is essential for the individual, family, and society and is a valuable concept for exploring social and psychological functioning[11,12]. A person is part of society, and the social bonds between society and the individual are important indicators of their hope, happiness, and future success[13]. Belonging can be considered an essential factor in establishing and shaping social bonds. While the feeling of being loved, respected, noticed, and having a sense of belonging to a group forms a crucial foundation for an individual's psychological health, the lack of a sense of belonging can intensify feelings of rejection, isolation, and alienation, leading to anxiety about both the individual's present and future life, thus negatively impacting their mental health[14].

Thus, this study aimed to illuminate individuals' FA and sense of belonging while exploring the relationship between these two aspects. It is worth mentioning that we have not identified any research directly assessing the connection between FA and sense of belonging. This paper seeks to address this gap by emphasizing positive attitudes (such as optimism, hope, effective communication, and bonding) rather than anxiety and worries about the future.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Type, population, and sample of the study

This study aimed to explore young and older adults’ FA and overall sense of belongingness. It was conducted from November 1 to December 30, 2024, and involved 404 voluntary participants aged 18 and older. No specific sampling method was used; the study aimed to include all young individuals (under 60) and older individuals (60 and older). Data was collected online using Google Forms.

Data collection

Demographic characteristics form: The form included details about age, gender, marital status, education, income level, family structure, presence of chronic illness, participation in social activities, and social security.

Dark Future Scale: The Dark Future Scale (DFS) was initially developed by Zaleski et al[1] and later adapted into Turkish by Yakın and Temeloğlu Şen[15]. This scale assesses FA in adolescents and adults within the community and consists of 12 items that measure a single factor. It utilizes a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from “0 = Decidedly false” to “6 = Decidedly true”. A total “FA score” is computed by summing the item scores. The total possible score on the scale ranges from 0 to 30. Higher scores represent higher FA. While the internal consistency coefficient of the original scale, as adapted by Yakın and Temeloğlu Şen[15], was 0.86, in our study, it was 0.90. The DFS scores are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 Demographic characteristics of the participants.

Characteristic	Value
	n	%
Age, years (mean ± SD)
Young < 60	66.76 ± 3.74
Older adults ≥ 60	36.72 ± 10.12
Sex
Female	259	64.1
Male	145	35.9
Marital status
Married	267	66.1
Single	137	33.9
Education
Primary school	30	7.4
Secondary school	96	23.8
Bachelor’s degree	177	43.8
Postgraduate	101	25
Income status
More than expenses	79	19.6
Equals expenses	204	50.4
Less than expenses	121	30
Family structure
Nuclear	315	78
Extended	37	9.1
Living alone	52	12.9
Chronic disease
Yes	110	27.2
No	294	72.8
Social security
Yes	370	91.6
No	34	8.4
Social activity
Yes	175	43.4
No	229	56.6
Total	404	100
Score (mean ± SD)
The total score of FA	18.81 ± 7.59
The total score of GBS	4.35 ± 2.52
The total score of acceptance/inclusion	2.65 ± 1.43
The total score of rejection/exclusion	12.42 ± 3.68

FA: Future anxiety; GBS: General Belongingness Scale.

General Belongingness Scale: The General Belongingness Scale (GBS) originated from Malone et al[14] and was adapted into Turkish by Yıldız[16]. This instrument measures the belongingness levels of individuals through 12 items and two dimensions: Acceptance/inclusion and rejection/exclusion. Items “3-4-6-7-9-12” on the scale were reverse coded and included in the calculation of the rejection/exclusion score. It uses a 4-point Likert-type scale with options: (1) I never agree; (2) I somewhat agree; (3) I mostly agree; and (4) I strongly agree.

The General Belonging Scale can measure the general sense of belonging by reversing the Rejection/Exclusion subscale scores. It can also be used separately for the Acceptance and Rejection subscales without reversing the scores. The total possible scores range from 0 to 42 for each factor (Table 1). Higher scores indicate higher belongingness. The original scale's internal consistency was 0.81; in our study, it was 0.91.

Statistical analysis

Data were evaluated using the SPSS Windows Version 20.00 software. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test indicated that the data were normally distributed (P = 0.000). Analyses included Cronbach's Alpha reliability test, independent t-test, one-way ANOVA, and Pearson correlation analysis. A Games-Howell post-hoc analysis was also conducted to clarify the differences among practical factors. The total scores of the scales and sub-dimensions were calculated.

Ethics

Written consent was obtained from the respondents in the current study. Ethical approval was obtained from the ethical board of a university hospital medical school (date October 25, 2024, No. 9) and the institution where the study was conducted. Additionally, granted permission has been provided from the authors of the instruments.

RESULTS

Demographic characteristics of the participants

The study population comprised 64.1% women and 35.9% men, averaging between 41.56 ± 14.50 years. The minimum age of the participants was 18. Among them, 66.1% were married, and 43.8% held a bachelor’s degree. Additionally, 27.2% had no chronic diseases. Demographic characteristics are presented in Table 1.

Analyses of DFS and GBS

The total score for the DFS was 18.81 ± 7.59, with an internal consistency coefficient of 0.90 for the 12 items. Overall, participants demonstrated a moderate level of FA and a high level of belongingness with respect.

The total score for GBS was 63.31 ± 1.40; for acceptance/inclusion, it was 31.78 ± 7.44; and for rejection/exclusion, it was 31.53 ± 7.79. Statistically significant findings of our study include a negative correlation between "FA" and “Belongingness” (P < 0.05). The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the overall scale was 0.91; subdimensions 1 and 2 scored 0.86 and 0.87.

Comparative analysis of DFS and GBS scores across demographic characteristics

In our study, we found a significant difference in "Belongingness" based on sex, marital status, education, income level, family structure, the presence of chronic illness, social security, and participation in social activities (P < 0.05). Additionally, a significant difference was observed between income level, social activities, and “FA” scores (P < 0.05). Due to unequal variances, the Games-Howell post-hoc analysis indicated that participants who graduated from elementary school had lower belongingness scores. Additionally, there was a significant difference in the belonging scores between young and older adults (0.016 < 0.05), while significance was not found in terms of FA scores (P > 0.05). Detailed results are presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Comparative analysis of Dark Future Scale and General Belongingness Scale scores across demographic characteristics.

Effective factor	Total GBS	Acceptance/inclusion	Rejection/exclusion	DFA
Age
r	-0.147	-0.009	0.129	0.011
P value	0.003a	0.851	0.009	0.827
Sex, mean ± SD
Female	64.84 ± 13.45	32.35 ± 7.12	15.51 ± 7.40	18.96 ± 7.71
Male	60.59 ± 14.74	30.75 ± 7.89	18.15 ± 8.20	18.53 ± 7.39
t	2.944	2.091	-3.31	0.542
P value	0.003a	0.037	0.001a	0.584
Marital status
Married	64.84 ± 12.75	32.43 ± 6.94	15.58 ± 7.05	18.18 ± 7.77
Single	60.34 ± 15.93	30.51 ± 8.20	18.16 ± 8.85	20.03 ± 7.10
t	3.08	2.475	-3.183	-2.034
P value	0.002a	0.014	0.002a	0.02
Education
Primary school	49.66 ± 19.16	24.93 ± 9.34	23.26 ± 10.30	18.76 ± 9.23
Secondary school	62.31 ± 14.33	31.21 ± 7.45	16.90 ± 7.09	19.43 ± 7.68
Bachelor’s degree	64.59 ± 12.21	32.60 ± 6.67	14.81 ± 6.74	19.23 ± 7.01
Postgraduate	66.09 ± 12.83	32.91 ± 7.05	16.46 ± 7.79	17.49 ± 7.91
F	12.356	10.897	10.056	1.413
P value	0.000a	< 0.001a	< 0.001a	0.238
Income status
More than expenses	67.91 ± 11.42	33.96 ± 5.86	14.05 ± 6.35	16.39 ± 7.67
Equals expenses	63.04 ± 14.26	31.74 ± 7.52	16.69 ± 7.93	18.43 ± 7.57
Less than expenses	60.77 ± 14.63	30.42 ± 7.92	17.64 ± 8.12	21.02 ± 7.02
F	6.396	5.537	5.373	9.8
P value	0.002a	0.004a	0.005a	0.000a
Family structure
Nuclear	65.03 ± 12.52	32.70 ± 6.62	15.66 ± 7.14	18.53 ± 7.55
Extended	61.40 ± 13.61	29.97 ± 7.90	16.56 ± 7.14	20.43 ± 8.00
Living alone	54.26 ± 19.00	24.46 ± 9.82	21.19 ± 10.12	19.32 ± 7.50
F	14.361	13.03	11.792	1.169
P value	0.000a	< 0.001a	< 0.001a	0.312
Chronic disease, mean ± SD
Yes	60.92 ± 16.05	30.55 ± 8.23	17.62 ± 8.62	19.80 ± 7.52
No	64.21 ± 13.15	32.24 ± 7.08	16.02 ± 7.43	18.44 ± 7.60
t	-2.1	-2.036	1.841	0.667
P value	0.036	0.042	0.066	0.109
Social security
Yes	63.99 ± 13.78	32.08 ± 7.31	16.08 ± 7.67	18.61 ± 7.62
No	55.97 ± 15.07	28.50 ± 8.16	20.52 ± 8.04	20.91 ± 7.05
t	2.99	2.471	-3.09	-1.801
P value	0.005a	0.018	0.004a	0.079
Social activity
Yes	68.00 ± 10.45	34.24 ± 5.61	14.23 ± 6.14	17.44 ± 7.60
No	59.73 ± 15.37	29.90 ± 8.09	18.16 ± 8.48	19.85 ± 7.43
F	6.115	6.055	-5.179	-3.186
P value	0.000a	< 0.001a	< 0.001a	0.002a
Sample groups, years
Young < 60	64.05 ± 13.51	31.94 ± 7.28	15.88 ± 7.48	18.73 ± 7.44
Older adults ≥ 60	59.46 ± 16.20	30.92 ± 8.23	19.46 ± 8.74	19.23 ± 8.38
t	2.429	1.016	-3.429	-0.485
P value	0.010a	0.050a	0.013	0.216

^aP < 0.05 statistical significance.

r: Correlation analyses; F: One way ANOVA test, and Games-Howell post-hoc analysis; t: Independent t test; GBS: General Belongingness Scale; DFA: Dark future anxiety.

Furthermore, our study showed positive correlations (P < 0.01, 2-tailed) between the General Belongingness score and its sub-scales, indicating a consistent relationship across all instrument dimensions. Detailed findings are presented in Table 3.

Table 3 Correlations between total General Belongingness Scale and the sub-scales.

		Acceptance	Rejection	Total_GBS
Acceptance	Pearson Correlation	1	-0.702b	0.919b
	Sig. (2-tailed)		0.000	0.000
Rejection	Pearson Correlation	-0.702b	1	-0.926b
	Sig. (2-tailed)	0.000		0.000
Total_GBS	Pearson Correlation	0.919b	-0.926b	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)	0.000	0.000
	n	404	404	404

^bP < 0.01, correlation is significant (2-tailed).

GBS: General Belongingness Scale.

DISCUSSION

This study assesses FA and sense of belonging among young and older adults. Current findings indicate that participants generally displayed a moderate level of FA and a high level of belongingness. Notably, a sense of belonging was found to affect FA inversely. Moreover, older adults reported lower belonging compared to younger ones.

There is strong evidence that individuals, particularly younger ones with high levels of extraversion and belongingness, tend to have more positive interactions and closer relationships with others, making them more likely to experience belongingness and less likely to feel concerned about their current and future lives[10,17]. A negative relationship between young individuals and the rejection of belongingness has been reported[18]. This finding aligns with supporting studies. Contrary to the supporting papers, which state that older adults are more likely to experience worry and anxiety due to their lifelong sensitivity to their environment, our findings did not show a significant difference in FA between young and older adults[19,20]. This may stem from the cultural differences within the sample group or an inability to express their feelings and thoughts comfortably.

Furthermore, the belongingness scores for females were higher, while the rejection scores for males were lower in our study; however, gender did not significantly reduce FA. In contrast to our findings, previous research indicated that sex was a significant factor in FA and worry[21,22]. Existing evidence shows that mental disorders, particularly worry and anxiety, are often linked to gender, with a higher prevalence in women than in men[23-25]. Conversely, women reported greater social participation and a stronger sense of community belonging[26]. However, these variables showed no significant findings for men[27]. Belongingness and interaction have been linked to organizational positions among men. Specifically, men in leadership roles within organizations reported a greater sense of belonging to their communities. This may be attributed to the protective effects on mental health from holding critical roles in organizations for both women and men. We can clarify this as follows: Women tend to be more proactive and outward in their social relationships and sense of belonging, not only in crucial roles at work but also throughout various sectors of society.

Our findings indicated statistically significant differences due to income status, marital status, and participation in social activity. The belongingness of married ones and rejection scores of singles were higher. There is strong evidence that singlehood is positively correlated with anxiety about life and boundaries with others[28,29]. For instance, married adults may experience improved relationships with their environment or society because of increased support from a spouse. Contrary to these findings, a significant association between the level of anxiety and unsocialized behaviors in married people was reported in the general population of Poland[30]. During the pandemic, protective instincts regarding spouses and families played a significant role in this worry and antisociality.

In our paper, elementary school graduates' belongingness and acceptance scores were lower, while rejection scores were higher. Studies support that higher education generally correlates with a greater sense of belonging, motivation, and achievement[31,32]. This finding might arise from the discomfort that participants with lower education levels experience, which may make them feel that they do not fit in. Alternatively, there could be a potential lack of fit between their needs and the society they are in.

Our findings indicated that adults with lower incomes worry more about the future than others. In comparison, those with higher incomes tend to experience a greater sense of belonging and lower rejection scores. A study found that women with low economic status tend to feel more unrest and concern about the future[33]. Furthermore, supporting research suggests that higher levels of FA are positively correlated with lower income status, leading to a negative outlook on future possibilities, which in turn increases anxiety[30,34,35]. These findings generally reflect common issues related to financial anxiety and individuals' views on the future. This insight highlights the target groups most anxious about their financial future status. Our study also showed that participating in social activity positively impacted belongingness and decreased FA. Social participation is a contributing factor to good connections and communication among people. It refers to a pattern of behavior in which participants realize and raise their bonds in the process of community interaction[36]. Significant evidence exists that social participation can improve older adults' social adaptation ability. Obtaining more social support, understanding and accepting social belongings, and reducing anxiety due to an unsocialized life positively affect all adults' physical and mental health[36-38]. Considering this information, our paper is in line with the existing literature.

The present study showed evidence that the belongingness of individuals with nuclear families, without chronic diseases, and with social security have a high sense of belonging. A study reported that having chronic diseases and biological and physical issues may reduce people's social connections, especially older ones[39]. According to another study, inclusion in the social security system can positively impact a person's psychological state, providing hope for the future and fostering a strong connection with their environment[40]. Research indicates that lower financial stability and social security levels are linked to higher financial anxiety[41]. Contrary to expectations, our findings revealed that social security was not related to FA or worry. This outcome may arise because most participants do not feel anxious about the future; after all, they have social security.

Our findings clarified that being a part of a small family “nuclear” leads to a higher sense of belonging, higher acceptance scores, and lower rejection. It is reported in a paper that feelings of belonging are not limited to human relationships, whether real or virtual; they are complex and encompass people’s relational and cultural connections. Living in a big family with pets gives individuals a strong sense of belonging[42]. One more study stated that belongingness needs are directly related to culture and ethnicity - notably through widely divergent kinship systems that identify the family structure and the normative expectations and obligations associated with residence, settlement, and social support[43]. We can explain our contrary results with the cultural differences in light of these findings.

According to our findings, age, gender, marital status, education, family structure, chronic disease, and social security were not associated with people's FA. It is important to note that this study has a significant role in clarifying the correlation between the sense of belonging and future-related anxiety. Since achieved belongingness is a basic psychological need and a strong predictor for well-being and other positive outcomes, the lack of it can have detrimental effects on the individual’s mental health, including anxiety about the future.

Limitations of the research

The current study had several limitations. The study participants were restricted to one part of the society, 18 years and above, which may limit the generalizability of the findings. The level of FA and belongingness of the young and older adults was measured using their self-reporting, not their actual knowledge or behaviors. Therefore, the actual anxiety level of participants may be higher, and belonging perceptions may be lower due to this self-reporting.

The small number of elderly individuals participating in our study can be shown as a limitation of our article because they are a vulnerable group in society and experience restrictions and uneasiness in participating in academic studies (delay in understanding survey questions, difficulty in filling out the form, etc.).

CONCLUSION

This study evaluates FA and clarifies the belongingness among young and older adults, finding a moderate level of FA and a high level of belonging perceptions. Higher belongingness was associated with lower FA. The sense of belonging of older adults was lower than that of younger people. While the age of younger and older adults did not impact FA and belongingness, income status and participation in social activities were determined to be effective variables. Another finding from our study is that socially active adults felt a stronger sense of belonging and acceptance in the community, along with experiencing lower levels of FA. The results indicate that social activities are essential for nurturing inclusive and resilient communities. It fosters strong social connections and a sense of belonging among individuals. Particularly for older adults, participating in the community contributes to societal improvement and provides personal benefits through enhanced social support and improved mental well-being. The study emphasizes the importance of further examining FA and the feeling of belongingness of community members and the factors that might be associated with it.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We present our thanks to all participants who participated in this current study. Additionally, our gratitude goes to authors for their contribution in developing and validating the instruments used in this research.