Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39792824›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Studying attention to IPCC climate change maps with mobile eye-tracking.

Doga Gulhan, Bahador Bahrami, Ophelia Deroy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Doga GulhanDepartment of Psychology, Royal Holloway, University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0545-7363
Bahador BahramiFaculty of General Psychology and Education, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, München, Germany.
Ophelia DeroyFaculty of Philosophy, Philosophy of Science and the Study of Religion, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, München, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many visualisations used in the climate communication field aim to present the scientific models of climate change to the public. However, relatively little research has been conducted on how such data are visually processed, particularly from a behavioural science perspective. This study examines trends in visual attention to climate change predictions in world maps using mobile eye-tracking while participants engage with the visualisations. Our primary aim is to assess engagement with the maps, as indicated by gaze metrics. Secondary analyses assess whether social context (as social viewing compared to solitary viewing) affects these trends, the relationship between projection types and visual attention, compare gaze metrics between scientific map and artwork viewing, and explore correlations between self-reported climate anxiety scores and attention patterns. We employed wearable, head-mounted eye-tracking to collect data in relatively naturalistic conditions, aiming to enhance ecological validity. In this research, participants engaged with ten world maps displaying near- and far-term climate projections across five data categories, adapted from the online interactive atlas provided by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). To compare scientific information processing with aesthetic perception, participants also viewed two large-scale artworks. Responses to the Climate Change Anxiety Scale (CCAS) were also collected. Participants viewed the displays alone (single-viewing condition, N = 35) or together with a partner (paired-viewing condition, N = 12). Results revealed that the upper parts of the maps, particularly the continental Europe, received significant attention, suggesting a Euro-centric bias in viewing patterns. Spatial gaze patterns were similar between single and paired conditions, indicating that the visual attributes of the maps predominantly shaped attention locations. Although dwell times were comparable, the paired condition showed higher fixation counts, shorter average fixation durations, and longer scanpaths, suggesting a potentially dissociable viewing strategy and more exploratory viewing patterns influenced by social interaction. No substantial differences were observed in attention across projection timeframes or types, although individual variations were noted. Artwork viewing exhibited notably shorter average fixation durations compared to climate map viewing, potentially reflecting different visual engagement styles. Despite positive linear correlations among the four CCAS subscales, there was no apparent correlation between CCAS scores and main gaze metrics, indicating a lack of a direct relationship between self-reported anxiety and gaze behaviour. In summary, visual attention to climate change visualisations appears to be mainly influenced by the inherent visual attributes of the maps, but the social context may subtly influence visual attention. Additionally, the comparison with aesthetic viewing highlights relatively distinct attentional patterns in scientific versus aesthetic engagements.

Indexed as

AttentionClimate ChangeEye-Tracking TechnologyAdultAnxietyEye MovementsFemaleHumansMaleYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39792824
PMCPMC11723542

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.