| Literature DB >> 35884676 |
Mbarka Akounach1,2, Thierry Lelard3, Anaïs Beaumont1,2, Sylvie Granon2, Harold Mouras1.
Abstract
In our contemporary societies, environmental issues are more and more important. An increasing number of studies explore the biological processes involved in environment perception and in particular try to highlight the mechanisms underlying the perception of environmental scenes by our brain. The main objective of the present study was to establish whether the visualization of clean and polluted environmental scenes would lead to differential postural reactions. Our hypothesis was based on a differential postural modulation that could be recorded when the subject is confronted with images representing a "polluted" environment, differential modulation which has been reported in previous studies in response to painful-scenes compared to non-painful scenes visualization.Thirty-one subjects participated in this study. Physiological measurements [heart rate variability (HRV) and electrodermal activity] and postural responses (Center Of Pression-COP-displacements) were recorded in response to perception of polluted or clean environmental scenes. We show, for the first time, that images representing polluted scenes evoke a weaker approach movement than images representing clean scenes. The displacement of the COP in the anteroposterior axis reflects an avoidance when subjects visualize "polluted" scenes. Our results demonstrate a clear distinction between "clean" and "polluted" environments according to the postural change they induce, correlated with the ratings of pleasure and approach evoked by images.Entities:
Keywords: affective neuroscience; mental simulation; pollution; posturography
Year: 2022 PMID: 35884676 PMCID: PMC9313123 DOI: 10.3390/brainsci12070869
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Brain Sci ISSN: 2076-3425
Figure 1Temporal course of experimental session.
Figure 2Mean Evoked Pleasure (A) and Evoked Approach Desire (B) (mean ± SEM) on 44 images (22 presenting a polluted environment and 22 presenting a clean environment) according to Passive observation condition (left side of each panel) and Mental simulation observation condition (right side of each panel). Statistical differences are shown as *** p < 0.001.
Figure 3Mean Position (A) and Position’s Standard Deviation (B) of the COP along the anteroposterior axis (mm) according to Passive observation condition (left side of each panel) and Mental simulation observation condition (right side of each panel). Significant differences exist for viewing a polluted scene and viewing a clean scene (p = 0.011). * p < 0.05, means ± standard deviations.
Figure 4Mean amplitude of the phasic response of electrodermal activity for Clean (blue) and the Polluted (Grey) condition considering the difference between the passive and mental simulation observation conditions (A) or averaged on all experimental conditions (B).
The means ± standard deviation of the different parameters derived from the heart rate variability for each condition. RMSSD = Root Mean Square of Successive R-R intervals; SDNN = Standard Deviation of all NN intervals.
| “Passive Observation” | “Mental Simulation Observation” | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clean | Polluted | Clean | Polluted | |
|
| 38.31 ± 14.32 | 44.48 ± 19.98 | 44.00 ± 16.59 | 45.84 ± 26.56 |
|
| 35.37 ± 13.63 | 41.90 ± 19.06 | 40.16 ± 14.22 | 42.59 ± 19.21 |
Figure 5Distribution of participants by INS score; G1: score ≤ 5; G2: score < 5.
Figure 6(left) Displacement of the COP in the AP axis according to the connection to nature. (right) Shift of the COP in the AP axis according to the INS score (Inclusion of Nature in the Self index).
Figure 7(A) Distribution of participants according to WES scores (G1: Low motivation; G2: Moderate motivation; G3: High motivation). (B) Graphical representation of average motivation scores by cluster for a four-cluster solution.
Figure 8Shift of the COP in the AP axis according to the level of motivation towards ecological behaviors assessed by the WES scale.
Correlational table between the posturographic, subjective, physiological and psychometric data.
| Pleasure | Approach | EDA | HRV | INS | Motivation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.034 * |
|
| 0.683 | 0.971 | 0.765 |
|
|
| 0.639 | 0.419 | 0.558 | 0.605 | |
|
| 0.578 | 0.457 | 0.335 | 0.385 | ||
|
| 0.141 |
| 0.348 | |||
|
| 0.562 |
| ||||
|
|
|
Acronyms: COP-AP = Center of Pressure-AnteroPosterior displacement; HRV = Heart Rate Variability; EDA = electrodermal activity; INS = Environmental Concerns (INS; Schultz, 2001) scale. Significant differences are indicated as: * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.