Climate change images produce an attentional bias associated with pro-environmental disposition

Climate change on the brain: Neural correlates of climate anxiety

Climate change is a global crisis impacting individuals' mental health. Climate anxiety is an emerging area of interest within popular culture and the scientific community. Yet, little is known about the mechanisms underlying climate anxiety. We provide evidence that climate anxiety is related to gray matter volume in the midcingulate cortex as well as its level of functional connectivity with the insula cortex. These neuroanatomical and neurofunctional features of climate anxiety are involved in identifying and anticipating potential threats within the environment and preparing an appropriate action response to such threats. These neural correlates align with those observed in anxiety disorders. Yet, climate anxiety itself as well as the neural correlates of climate anxiety were related to pro-environmental behavior. This may suggest that the midcingulate and insula are part of a network linked to an adaptive aspect of climate anxiety in motivating behavioral engagement.

Ecological anxiety and pro-environmental behaviour: The role of attention

Climate change is a serious threat to human health and the awareness of this threat can elicit ecological anxiety (eco-anxiety), which could be considered a rational and potentially adaptive response. However, the experience of eco-anxiety does not always lead to adaptive behaviour. The present study investigated whether differential patterns of selective attention towards climate-related information, and variability in this attention, might explain this inconsistent relationship. Participants completed a dot-probe assessment of attentional bias to images of both climate change mitigation strategies and of climate change causes and consequences, and measures of eco-anxiety, climate change belief, environmental self-efficacy, and general psychological symptoms. Engagement in pro-environmental behaviours was measured using a daily behavioural diary. Eco-anxiety and attentional bias independently predicted behaviour, but did not interact. However, attentional bias variability moderated the relationship between eco-anxiety and behaviour, such that higher eco-anxiety predicted greater behavioural engagement, but only when attentional bias variability was low. This was the first known study to examine the potential moderating effect of attentional bias on the relationship between eco-anxiety and pro-environmental behaviours. This growing field of research can help in identifying how the rational response of eco-anxiety can be better harnessed to motivate an adaptive response to the climate crisis.

Reliability of attention bias and attention bias variability to climate change images in the dot-probe task

Climate change is one of the most pressing issues of the 21st century, which is perhaps why information about climate change has been found to capture observers' attention. One of the most common ways of assessing individual differences in attentional processing of climate change information is through the use of reaction time difference scores. However, reaction time-based difference scores have come under scrutiny for their low reliability. Given that a primary goal of the field is to link individual differences in attention processing to participant variables (e.g., environmental attitudes), we assessed the reliability of reaction time-based measures of attention processing of climate change information utilizing an existing dataset with three variations of the dot-probe task. Across all three samples, difference score-based measures of attentional bias were generally uncorrelated across task blocks (r = -0.25 to 0.31). We also assessed the reliability of newer attention bias variability measures that are thought to capture dynamic shifts in attention toward and away from salient information. Although these measures were initially found to be correlated across task blocks (r = 0.17-0.67), they also tended to be highly correlated with general reaction time variability (r = 0.49-0.83). When controlling for general reaction time variability, the correlations across task blocks for attention bias variability were much weaker and generally nonsignificant (r = -0.25 to 0.33). Furthermore, these measures were unrelated to pro-environmental disposition indicating poor predictive validity. In short, reaction time-based measures of attentional processing (including difference score and variability-based approaches) have unacceptably low levels of reliability and are therefore unsuitable for capturing individual differences in attentional bias to climate change information.

The stability and reliability of attentional bias measures in the dot-probe task: Evidence from both traditional mean bias scores and trial-level bias scores

A new method of calculating attentional bias from the dot-probe task measures fluctuations in bias towards and away from emotional stimuli over time using trial level bias score metrics. We assessed the stability and reliability of traditional attentional bias scores and trial level bias score measures of attentional bias across time in two five-block dot-probe task experiments in non-clinical samples. In experiments 1 and 2, both traditional attentional bias scores and trial level bias score measures of attentional bias did not habituate/decrease across time. In general, trial level bias score metrics (i.e., attention bias variability as well as the mean biases toward and away from threat) were more reliable than the traditional attention bias measure. This pattern was observed across both experiments. The traditional bias score, however, did improve in reliability in the later blocks of the fearful face dot-probe task. Although trial level bias score measures did not habituate and were more reliable across blocks, these measures did not correlate with state or trait anxiety. On the other hand, trial level bias score measures were strongly correlated with general reaction time variability-and after controlling for this effect no longer superior in reliability in comparison to the traditional attention bias measure. We conclude that general response variability should be removed from trial level bias score measures to ensure that they truly reflect attention bias variability.

Affective Images of Climate Change

Climate change is not only a scientific phenomenon, but also a cultural one. Individuals' opinions on climate change are often based on emotion rather than on scientific evidence. Therefore, research into the emotional characteristics of the imagery that the non-expert public find relevant to climate change is important in order to build a database of effective climate change imagery, which can then be used by scientists, policymakers, and practitioners in mobilizing climate adaptation and resilience efforts. To this end, we collected ratings of relevance to climate change as well as emotional arousal and valence on 320 images to assess the relationship between relevance to climate change and the emotional qualities of the image. In addition, participants' environmental beliefs were measured, to investigate the relationship between beliefs and image ratings. The results suggest that images rated highly relevant to climate change are higher in negative emotional valence and emotional arousal. Overall, images were rated as being more relevant to climate change by participants with higher pro-environmental disposition. Critically, we have compiled the mean relevance, valence, and arousal ratings of each of these 320 images into a database that is posted online and freely available (https://affectiveclimateimages.weebly.com; https://www.nmu.edu/affectiveclimateimages) for use in future research on climate change visuals.