Posts Tagged ‘Pennsylvania State University’

American Psychologist publishes special issue on global climate change

June 21st, 2011

American Psychologist publishes special issue on global climate change

New peer-reviewed articles update APA’s 2009 task force report.

American Psychologist, the flagship journal of the American Psychological Association (APA), has published a special issue on “Psychology and Global Climate Change.” The May-June 2011 issue contains seven peer-reviewed articles that are based upon and update the contents of a 2009 APA task force report. All eight of the task force members, who work in a variety of areas across psychology, contributed to the writing of the articles in the special issue.

The articles, each of which can be read independently, are:

Janet Swim of Pennsylvania State University chaired the task force and helped manage preparation of the articles.  She commented, “I’m pleased and proud to see this special issue in print.  Our task force was able to bring together a diverse set of ideas and experiences to develop a resource that we hope advances psychologists’ involvement in the topic of global climate change and, more generally, environmental sustainability.”

The issue can be accessed through APA’s PsycNET website (at no cost for most APA members and those with institutional subscriptions).

You may read Thomas Doherty’s contribution below:

Greening our minds: How nature nurtures the brain

April 12th, 2010

Thomas Doherty was featured in Detroit’s Metro Times on the topic of ecopsychology, green spaces, and the restorative aspects of gardening.

See article below as published originally HERE.

Greening our minds

How nature nurtures the brain

By Larry Gabriel

Greening our mindsLast week’s sunshine and warmth had me out raking and picking up the yard in anticipation of getting my garden growing. I even started some seeds germinating indoors and wondered if it was too early to put lettuce seeds in the ground. Lettuce does well in cooler weather and is one of the first things to come up each spring.

It feels good to get out and do these things after being cooped up inside for the winter. As I walked around the neighborhood with my dog, I ran into a few others who were preparing their yards or flower beds for the coming season. Everyone was smiling, beaming as they went about their work, obviously feeling good.

That’s one of the great things about gardening, it makes you feel good. There’s something about connecting with nature and nurturing life that brings it out. The Detroit Food Justice Task Force, a group that promotes urban agriculture, believes that too. The organization’s list of shared basic values includes the concept of Earth connection, which stems from the belief that there is a “spiritual, comforting and even healing component as people work with soil in an outdoor environment.”

That’s a pretty lofty idea; however, it is in harmony with the relatively new and growing science of ecopsychology. Ecopsychology is based on the idea that there is a deeply bonded and reciprocal relationship between humans and nature. The Earth-connection value of the DFJTF taps into part of ecopsychology’s thrust.

“Community gardens are beneficial in terms of getting people to interact in positive ways,” says Marc Berman, a researcher in cognitive psychology and industrial engineering at the University of Michigan. “Our research shows interacting with nature is good for cognitive functioning, and in growing your own food you might get some healthy produce out of it. It’s hard to think of a downside. It’s vital, though, to get the people actually living in a community involved in the developmental stages. Residents need to have ownership. If you get people interested and involved it should lead to all the those benefits mentioned.”

Berman ran an experiment in which a group of subjects took a three-mile walk in the Ann Arbor Nichols Arboretum, a wooded area with gardens and trails. He had another group walk along a busy street. Subsequent testing showed that the group that took the walk in the Arb performed better on tests of mental focus and memory than the group that walked along the city street. Soft fascinations (rustling leaves, babbling brooks) found in nature increase focus and memory, while the harsh stimuli (car horns, billboards) of an urban setting cause a cognitive overload. That may seem obvious to some, but as Detroiters reshape and refocus the city, scientific data will help convince politicians and power brokers just how important green spaces are.

It’s obvious that the city plans green spaces as a way of developing much of the abundant vacant lots and abandoned buildings. Mayor Dave Bing mentioned it several times in his State of the City address. Bing never mentioned urban agriculture as part of that plan, although City Council is considering it in rewriting zoning laws for Detroit. And various plans offered by independent groups all see gardening and agriculture as vital parts of a new Detroit. It’s all good according to ecopsychology, although there are different strata of goodness between looking out your window at trees and getting your hands dirty in the garden.

So if we’re all on the same page here, why do we need the science to prove the importance of greening? Because it will give a firm basis to thinking about natural settings and gardens as part of a permanent solution rather than a placeholder until something else comes along. We don’t need to again give away our greenery for industrial development.

And maybe we should have our police officers out there with hoes and rakes. Berman points to research showing that environment matters in crime fighting. Studies in the Netherlands and in Lowell, Mass., tested what is called the Broken Window Theory, which has become part of the crime-fighting strategy in New York and other cities. The theory holds that people in an orderly environment will behave in an orderly manner, and that a disorderly environment promotes disorderly behavior. The two studies in high-crime areas showed that an increase in police presence was less effective in decreasing crime than cleaning up debris and fixing broken-down buildings. If you added gardening too, these experts predict that it would rise to another level.

“In gardening, the potential benefits include self-confidence and self-efficacy. Gardening is restorative and has some of same benefits as going into a wilderness area,” says Dr. Thomas Doherty, an ecopsychologist at the Sustainable Self clinic in Portland, Ore. “It’s a reflexive, meditative activity.”

That beats where your thinking goes when dodging cars, listening to horns blare, taking in billboards, stepping on broken glass, etc.

Dr. Janet Swim, a professor of psychology at Pennsylvania State University, adds: “There is a sense of efficacy, the ability to do something that you can’t do elsewhere. You develop a sense of pride in what you’re doing. It’s an alternative to the materialistic world, an attachment to other sources of well-being. The more time people spend in natural setting, the less materialistic they are.”

Oops, that’s a slip. If gardening makes people less materialistic it’ll be harder to get the bigwigs behind that. Our economic drivers depend on selling more and more stuff to people — stuff you probably don’t need and probably can’t use while hoeing a row of greens. But there are plenty of other benefits to help bring folks around. The website of the Landscape and Human Health Laboratory at the University of Illinois is full of such data (lhhl.illinois.edu). A sample of recent findings touted there includes: Green activities reduce ADHD symptoms; the right residential landscaping can discourage crime; green residential landscaping strengthens communities, and, my favorite, adding trees near residences can reduce domestic violence. LHHL’s Capacity to Learn study, which examines the effect of schoolyard nature on children’s learning and academic achievement, might be useful as Detroit Public Schools retools for the future.

Ecopsychology’s concerns are far wider than just the effect of gardening and nature on your mental well-being. And Berman cautions that not everyone responds in the same way to any one stimulus. The field of study is also about complex systems and how humans fit in as opposed to standing outside and manipulating nature. But there is plenty of food for thought just in looking at how we can help heal hurting individuals through some rather simple means, and add to some bigger solutions for the city.

In the meantime, we all can grow a little something in the yard or in a planter, and look out for our own mental balance. I’ve already eaten chives and kale that that survived the cold weather — although parsley, which usually makes it through winter, doesn’t seem to have made it this year. It felt really good to have fresh stuff from the garden already. And it always feels good while fixing dinner to go out in the yard and harvest something rather than jumping in the car and driving to the store to pay for something shipped from hundreds or thousands of miles away. You can’t do it all at once, but a few steps to the yard are giant steps in the right direction.

Psychological Factors Help Explain Slow Reaction to Global Warming, Says APA Task Force

August 5th, 2009

Report urges psychologists to play larger role in limiting climate change effects

TORONTO – While most Americans think climate change is an important issue, they don’t see it as an immediate threat, so getting people to “go green” requires policymakers, scientists and marketers to look at psychological barriers to change and what leads people to action, according to a task force of the American Psychological Association.

Scientific evidence shows the main influences of climate change are behavioral – population growth and energy consumption. “What is unique about current global climate change is the role of human behavior,” said task force chair Janet Swim, PhD, of Pennsylvania State University. “We must look at the reasons people are not acting in order to understand how to get people to act.”

APA’s Task Force on the Interface Between Psychology and Global Climate Change examined decades of psychological research and practice that have been specifically applied and tested in the arena of climate change, such as environmental and conservation psychology and research on natural and technological disasters. The task force presented its findings at APA’s 117th Annual Convention in Toronto in a report that was accepted by the association’s governing Council of Representatives.

The task force’s report offers a detailed look at the connection between psychology and global climate change and makes policy recommendations for psychological science.

It cites a national Pew Research Center poll in which 75 percent to 80 percent of respondents said that climate change is an important issue. But respondents ranked it last in a list of 20 compelling issues, such as the economy or terrorism. Despite warnings from scientists and environmental experts that limiting the effects of climate change means humans need to make some severe changes now, people don’t feel a sense of urgency. The task force said numerous psychological barriers are to blame, including:

  • Uncertainty – Research has shown that uncertainty over climate change reduces the frequency of “green” behavior.
  • Mistrust – Evidence shows that most people don’t believe the risk messages of scientists or government officials.
  • Denial – A substantial minority of people believe climate change is not occurring or that human activity has little or nothing to do with it, according to various polls.
  • Undervaluing Risks – A study of more than 3,000 people in 18 countries showed that many people believe environmental conditions will worsen in 25 years. While this may be true, this thinking could lead people to believe that changes can be made later.
  • Lack of Control – People believe their actions would be too small to make a difference and choose to do nothing.
  • Habit – Ingrained behaviors are extremely resistant to permanent change while others change slowly. Habit is the most important obstacle to pro-environment behavior, according to the report.

The task force highlighted some ways that psychology is already working to limit these barriers. For example, people are more likely to use energy-efficient appliances if they are provided with immediate energy-use feedback. Devices that show people how much energy and money they’re conserving can yield energy savings of 5 percent to 12 percent, according to research. “Behavioral feedback links the cost of energy use more closely to behavior by showing the costs immediately or daily rather than in an electric bill that comes a month later,” said Swim.

Also, some studies have looked at whether financial incentives can spur people to weatherize their houses. The research has shown that combined strong financial incentives, attention to customer convenience and quality assurance and strong social marketing led to weatherization of 20 percent or more of eligible homes in a community in the first year of a program. The results were far more powerful than achieved by another program that offered just financial incentives.

The task force identified other areas where psychology can help limit the effects of climate change, such as developing environmental regulations, economic incentives, better energy-efficient technology and communication methods.

“Many of the shortcomings of policies based on only a single intervention type, such as technology, economic incentives or regulation, may be overcome if policy implementers make better use of psychological knowledge,” the task force wrote in the report.

The task force also urged psychologists to continue to expand that knowledge. Environmental psychology emerged as a sub-discipline in the early 20th century but didn’t really gain momentum until the 1980s, according to the report. But the task force said studying and influencing climate change should not be left to a sub-discipline; many different types of psychologists can provide an understanding of how people of different ages respond to climate change. “The expertise found in a variety of fields of psychology can help find solutions to many climate change problems right now,” Swim said. “For example, experts in community and business psychology can address the behavioral changes necessary as businesses and nonprofits adapt to a changing environment.”

Invited Address:Report of the APA Task Force on Psychology and Global Climate Change,” Janet Swim, PhD, Pennsylvania State University, Session: 2305, 3:00 – 3:50 PM, Friday, Aug. 7, Metro Toronto Convention Centre, North Building – Level 200, Meeting Room 201 E.

Discussion: “APA Task Force on Psychology and Global Climate Change—Perspectives of Task Force Members,” Susan D. Clayton, PhD, College of Wooster, Thomas J. Doherty, PsyD, Lewis and Clark College, Robert Gifford, PhD, University of Victoria, George Howard, PhD, University of Notre Dame, Janet K. Swim, Pennsylvania State University, Session: 2352, 4:00-4:50 PM, Friday, Aug. 7, Metro Toronto Convention Centre, North Building – Level 100, Meeting Room 103B

Members of the APA Task Force on the Interface Between Psychology and Global Climate Change:

Chair: Janet K. Swim, PhD, Pennsylvania State University

Susan Clayton, PhD, College of Wooster

Thomas Doherty, PsyD, Lewis and Clark College

Robert Gifford, PhD, University of Victoria

George Howard, PhD, University of Notre Dame

Joseph Reser, PhD, Griffith University

Paul Stern, PhD, National Academies of Science

Elke Weber, PhD, Columbia University

pdf Full text of the APA task force report is available from the APA Public Affairs Office and at http://www.apa.org/releases/climate-change.pdf