I recently scanned this report that leveraged domain understanding in psychology to the problem of climate change.  While the problem of climate changed could just as easily be reframed as a problem of recognizing variability and relevance, the research and patterns that the report draws upon can be used in the design process as levers to recognize opportunities and constraints for sustainability and adaptation.

It’s worth noting that the authors admit that the results are not drawn from a representative sample of the world’s population.  Most of the work described comes only from studies done in North America, Europe, and Australia.  Even the researchers who put the report together were from only the United States, Canada, Australia, and one member with dual citizenship in the United States and Germany.  So while the report doesn’t represent a diversity of perspectives, it does emphasize the fact that there are significant gaps in our knowledge about environmental psychology and what intercultural similarities and differences exist in how we perceive and respond to problems like climate change.

Given that much of the work in the report describes what we could call cognitive or psychological biases, there are probably vary important differences in the processes people will use to adapt to climate variability. Indeed, one finding was that perceptions & reactions to climate risks are mediated by cultural values and beliefs.

Examples of design levers (observation followed by lever):

Small probability events tend to be underestimated when based on personal experience. Thus, designer should gather multiple personal experiences (embodiment? experiential learning?)

Recently occurred small probability events tend to be overestimated. Thus designer should show longer time frames (the historical context?)

Emotions influence perceptions of risk with respect to climate change.  Thus, people tend to be conflicted and muted because it is seen as being beyond personal control.

The report also details how psychology looks at the relationship between consumption and behavior, where individual ability + motivation, context, and external motivators shape practice.

There was also a specific focus on the psychosocial impacts of climate change as driven by health an by relationships with common goods.

Adaptation in this context has multiple conduits:

• sense making
• causal and responsibility attributions for adverse instances
• appraisals of impacts
• resources
• possible coping responses
• affective responses
• motivational processes (stability, security, coherence, etc)

Which can be affected by media representations as both formal and informal social discourse that moderates the social construction, representation, amplification, and attenuation of risk and impacts.

In summary, the report identified psychological barriers to climate change action:

• unaware
• unsure
• lack of trust or believeability
• “not in my backyard”
• fixed behavior
• other people’s problem
• belief that actions are unimportant or make no difference
• engaged in token or objectively unhelpful actions
• not under human control
• other competing goals, time, resource, or effort draws

Much of the discussion and research seemed to point to a question of the cognitive architecture of risk.  That is, how are categories learned, does information become relevant, risk construed, and behavior adopted?  And what does that mean for vulnerability and adaptation?

Detection of climate change means distinguishing between climate and weather, making relevant the need for planning and decision making, and addressing expectations based on categories (e.g. latitude or place) since these beliefs bias the direction of our errors in perception.  It also means understanding how information acquisition takes place which leads to differences in perception and action even when it comes from the same source.

associative + affective processes + repeated personal experience = fast and automatic

Good for low probability events

statistics = slow + cognitive effort

Good for recent, high impact events

Ok, that’s all for now. Here’s the reference:

Psychology and Global Climate Change: Addressing a Multi-faceted Phenomenon and Set of Challenges
A Report by the American Psychological Association’s Task Force on the Interface Between Psychology and Global Climate Change