From the UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA and the “abnormal people don’t worry about climate change” department comes this load of codswallop. It’s all about messaging, if we didn’t have the MSM pushing the “weather events are now climate driven” BS, for which there is no evidence (even the most recent IPCC report says so), we would not have people “worrying” about it. An online survey of just 342 people was used for this “study”. Shades of Lewandosky…
Researchers explore psychological effects of climate change
Wildfires, extreme storms and major weather events can seem like a distant threat, but for those whose lives have been directly impacted by these events, the threat hits much closer to home.
As reports of such incidents continue to rise, researchers at the University of Arizona set out to learn more about how people’s perception of the threat of global climate change affects their mental health. They found that while some people have little anxiety about the Earth’s changing climate, others are experiencing high levels of stress, and even depression, based on their perception of the threat of global climate change.
While significant research has explored the environmental impacts of climate change, far fewer studies have considered its psychological effect on humans, said UA researcher Sabrina Helm, an associate professor of family and consumer science in the UA’s Norton School of Family and Consumer Sciences in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences.
Helm and her colleagues found that psychological responses to climate change seem to vary based on what type of concern people show for the environment, with those highly concerned about the planet’s animals and plants experiencing the most stress.
The researchers outline in a new study, which appears in the journal Global Environmental Change, three distinct types of environmental concern: Egoistic concern is concern about how what’s happening in the environment directly impacts the individual; for example, a person might worry about how air pollution will affect their own lungs and breathing. Altruistic concern refers to concern for humanity in general, including future generations. Biospheric concern refers to concern for nature, plants and animals.
In an online survey of 342 parents of young children, those who reported high levels of biospheric concern also reported feeling the most stressed about global climate change, while those whose concerns were more egoistic or altruistic did not report significant stress related to the phenomenon.
In addition, those with high levels of biospheric concern were most likely to report signs of depression, while no link to depression was found for the other two groups.
“People who worry about animals and nature tend to have a more planetary outlook and think of bigger picture issues,” Helm said. “For them, the global phenomenon of climate change very clearly affects these bigger picture environmental things, so they have the most pronounced worry, because they already see it everywhere. We already talk about extinction of species and know it’s happening. For people who are predominantly altruistically concerned or egoistically concerned about their own health, or maybe their own financial future, climate change does not hit home yet.”
Those with high levels of biospheric concern also were most likely to engage in pro-environmental day-to-day behaviors, such as recycling or energy savings measures, and were the most likely to engage in coping mechanisms to deal with environmental stress, ranging from denying one’s individual role in climate change to seeking more information on the issue and how to help mitigate it.
Although not generally stressed about climate change, those with high levels of altruistic concern, or concern for the well-being of others, also engaged in some environmental coping strategies and pro-environmental behaviors — more so than those whose environmental concerns were mostly egoistic.
“Climate change is a persistent global stressor, but the consequences of it appear to be slowly evolving; they’re fairly certain to happen — we know that, now — but the impact on individuals seems to be growing really slowly and needs to be taken very seriously,”
said Helm, whose co-authors include UA Norton School researchers Melissa Barnett, Melissa Curran and Zelieann Craig, along with UA alumna Amanda Pollitt.
The research, Helm said, has important public health implications.
“Climate change has evident physical and mental health effects if you look at certain outcomes, such as the hurricanes we had last year, but we also need to pay very close attention to the mental health of people in everyday life, as we can see this, potentially, as a creeping development,” Helm said. “Understanding that there are differences in how people are motivated is very important for finding ways to address this, whether in the form of intervention or prevention.”
###
The paper: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378017305228?via%3Dihub
Some people have worried about climate change a little too much:

Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Pure confirmation bias.
Climate change to date, whatever the actual sources, is imperceptible.
They can not “know” extinctions are happening; because they just are not happening.
people who worry about animals and nature need to relearn their priorities. It’s a bit obvious they’re used to getting fed and kept warm without any personal efforts on their part.
As far as screaming at the sky, I thought they already did; and the ground, and squirrels, at clouds, wateralls, balloons, and anything they imagine might be even remotely conservative…
There is a low base rate of species generation, and a low rate of extinctions going on all the time, and there is no reason to think why land-use changes by humans would not cause some additional extinctions.
The real problem is genetic bottlenecking, and this is serious with some crop plants that don’t exist in the nature or are nearly disappeared as wild species. We should react on things before an extinction or a serious genetic bottleneck happens.
Hugs:
You make a claim, without proof. Then you immediately contradict the claim while attempting to buttress your extinction claim.
Nature happens.
Extremely small limited populations at in constant danger of extinction. Which happens when minor mutation changes allow small populations to thrive in a small locale.
But, do those small populations truly represent extinction events? All too often, small populations are related to much larger populations.
In a world where species splitters find any excuse for to declare and name a new species, or DNA tests that allow identifying any mutation; exactly what defines extinction amongst large populations over closely related life?
An incredible amount of mankind’s crops are based on plants that require substantial intervention by mankind for wide growing area distribution or large dense populations. Without man’s crop tending and harvest then replanting seeds, these crops quickly die out.
These traits have passed down through many generations and their descendants still require mankind to plant, till, harvest those plants. Over the course of 4,000 to 8,000 years, these plants have lived on an extinction brink that does not eliminate the original ancestor plants in the wilds where they were originally found. e.g. maize
All that would be lost, are the sum total of mutations, mankind identified, separated and bred future crops based on that uniqueness. e.g. Corn’s current many rows of large seed kernels instead of the original plant(s) double row of small seeds.
Man has been practicing crop genetic modification for millennia.
Genetic bottlenecks may be salvation for life, as well as an extinction danger.
Look up what is described as mankind’s genetic bottleneck; yet mankind did not become extinct. Instead, that bottleneck event may have set mankind up for the success mankind currently enjoys.
Small genetic differences that are overwhelmed in large populations can allow small populations to adjust to changing conditions faster.
In my own personal studies of human behavior I have found that those who believe in alien abductions, or have personally witnessed the phenomenon, are the most disposed to experience anxiety or depression over any report whatsoever (regardless of how insanely ridiculous it almost invariably is) of a UFO sighting.
Abedee, abedee, abedee; that’s all folks!
Leftists drive you nuts and then call you crazy. Perfect.
The leftists drive each other nuts and then call us crazy! Projection.
Journal Global Environmental Change. Not only Global Change, but Environmental as well. That’s a double red flag.
Could it be that exaggerated concern for the environment is a symptom of a pre-existing depression rather being causal?
‘those highly concerned about the planet’s animals and plants experiencing the most stress.’
Oddly you find the same for sport fans , with the biggest fans being most effected by a teams performance, and religions people with the ‘faithful’ taking it very hard indeed when their dogma is challenged.
Given there both based on lack of logic and poor understanding , with a refusal to deal with reality as it is , rather as people want it to be, you can see how it does relate to AGW followers ,
To further that sentiment, government or any external “authority” is also a religion. It takes faith en masse and obedience for it to have any power, and that power is always wielded in the form of the initation of violence upon the non-violent dissenters. All too often I see religion skeptics (with whom I agree) not recognizing their own religious illogic.
The same goes for atheists, the religion of nothingness or the religion of chance. Strict materialists who only accept the terms with which they set to be the only valid means of discovery of truth. It requires every bit as much faith as those of the spiritual nature who believe in both the material and immaterial, or a creative force with purpose.
What I appreciate about this site and its commenters is that there are diverse opinions about many important issues. Simulaneously, there is an intelligent element and quality of insight that is unmatched on many other websites. Anthony, I am very appreciative of your efforts. Thank you.
It has been a long, arduous journey breaking away from the flock. Unfortunately, I’ve come back to the cave to free the other slaves, but good gracious they love their chains. That ‘programming’ has a hell of a hold on the slaves.
Any predicted warning by the Team is grossly exaggerated, CO2 is good for plants, and even if somehow the alarmists were correct engineers could easily geo engineer to cool earth.
Warming
Steve, posted any bstarr comments over at spencer’s lately? (the good doctor really blew a gasket that day, didn’t he?)…
Lol , I kinda feel bad about doing that !! But is was pretty funny !
Anthony, I believe you’d be doing a great service (for taxpayers in particular) if you would lead the call for all published studies, and all subsequent related news stories, to include two simple pieces of information:
1) the amount of funding consumed in the research project
2) the source of that funding
That grassroots call should be for news organizations to refuse to publish stories on the findings of such research if those two pieces of information are missing from the research publications.
Most every article on Eurekalert contains the funding source, but not the amount.
https://www.eurekalert.org/bysubject/atmospheric.php
True, but I believe if the amount spent for such research were always included in the publication, and thus were always reported as part of resulting news stories, people (taxpayers) would finally start to realize the nature of the “climate research industrial complex”.
The stark comparison of the amount of funding consumed to the value of what’s been produced with that funding will be shocking to even the most progressive-minded of taxpayers, who will not be able to avoid considering the value such funding could create if applied to other more useful pursuits.
Sydney University has a full-time Professor of Climate Change and Mental Health: http://sydney.edu.au/medicine/people/academics/profiles/helen.berry.php
Universities sure ain’t what they used to be.
I think it sounds like the proper combination…
Are they fer it? Or ‘gainst it?
In the media
Helen has engaged extensively with print, radio and television.
Yup, not surprised at all.
Climate hypers can lead to climate bedwetting and diapers.
Issue the climate hypers energy ration coupons and then let them get along on their whatever energy rations they are allowed. Maybe then they would have cause to worry.
Home heating oil was rationed during WW 2 and people had to get through the winter the best they could.
So basically people with mental issues obsess about climate.
Those in the Midwest and Northeast caught in subzero cold might not be stressing very much over a degree or two of “average” warming over the next century. They are eagerly awaiting a much stronger warming phenomenon called “spring”, and the will only have to wait a few months.
I get depressed, by stupidity. And I am not concerned about climate change because the sea level at my childhood beach hasn’t changed in 50 years and the highest temperature ever recorded in Oz happened 57 years ago and my grandpa’s diaries show 1939 had an obscenely hot summer in South Oz and the worst drought in Oz happened over 100 years ago and yesterday an alarmist said that the 2015/2016 el Nino was in fact a super el Nino which means the AGW temperature was even less than they thought and…and..
“those with high levels of biospheric concern were most likely to report signs of depression”
Although if you lose your job due a relentless war on reliable energy while your taxes and bills go up due to government funding of unreliable energy, that could cause depression, too.
“with those highly concerned about the planet’s animals and plants experiencing the most stress”
Translation, those pre-disposed to worry about non-existent threats are the most likely to worry about other non-existent threats.
Clearly this site is biosphereophobic.
Why is it that women researchers come up with rubbish like this?
From the article, “Those with high levels of biospheric concern also were most likely to engage in pro-environmental day-to-day behaviors, such as…” It hurts to think this was probably written without the slightest thought of the greening of the biosphere supported by the combustion of fossil fuels. So pardon me while I engage in the pro-environmental day-to-day commute while returning some much-needed carbon dioxide to help the planet thrive.
One word: Xanax
Climate change has been going on for eons and will continue to happen whether mankind is here or not. The climate change we have been experiencing is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. Climate change is happening so slowly that it takes very sophisticated instruments decades to even detected it. Since becoming a home owner more than 40 years ago the climate zone where I live has not changed one IOTA. Extreme weather events are part of our current climate and no one knows how to make extreme weather events to stop happening. What some people think is climate change are really weather patterns and cycles that are part of the current climate. It is just like the weather, everyone complains about it but no one really does anything about it. If you do not like the weather then file a complaint with the local weather schedular. It you do not like the climate then file a complaint with the local climate schedular. If you think the current climate is bad, the real culprit is Mother Nature and is the one to sue. Lots of luck on collecting on a judgement against Mother Nature.
I solved the problem. I just call it what it is – Weather. There, now get off your asses and get back to work!
“As reports of such incidents continue to rise”
(While the frequency of incidents doesn’t change)
Worry Warts worry more about Existing and Non Existing worrisome issues than do Non Worry Warts.
Academics must be having a competition to come up with, and get published, the most gobsmackingly STOOPID research Paper. There simply must be a Multi Million Dollar prize on offer. While Climate Science and its fakeness/adjustments is having a genuine shot at The Prized Title it is odds on that some Climate Science Quackery of Humanities/Arts/Communication Fantasy will romp home in the contest.
Do Not Send Your Daughter to Academia Mrs Worthington.
Evolution Needed Here.
doctor, doctor,
“Sometimes I think that I am two wigwams”
“You are too tense”
“Doc, tell me the truth — what’s wrong with me?”
“You have Tom Jones syndrome.”
“I’ve never heard of that. Is it rare?”
“It’s not unusual.”