Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42743264›Full record

ArticlePLOS mental health2026

Toward human-centred resilience quantification: The role of eco-affective state variables.

Lucas Murrins Marques

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS mental health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Lucas Murrins MarquesMental Health Department, Santa Casa de São Paulo School of Medical Sciences, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2999-2448

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Resilience has become one of the most influential ideas in how societies plan for climate change and environmental risk, guiding decisions in disaster preparedness, urban planning, and sustainability policy. Yet most tools used to measure resilience focus on physical infrastructure, institutional capacity, and socio-economic indicators, and pay comparatively little attention to how people actually experience environmental change as it unfolds. This gap matters, because how communities feel about a changing environment, whether they feel distressed, disconnected, or motivated to act, shapes whether adaptation efforts can be sustained over time. This Essay argues that resilience quantification is incomplete without accounting for these lived, emotional responses, here termed eco-affective state variables: patterned, population-level affective responses that emerge from sustained human-environment interactions. I focus in particular on two such states, solastalgia (distress caused by unwelcome change to one's home environment) and soliphilia (an affective orientation of care and commitment toward one's environment), because together they capture both the psychological cost of environmental change and the affective resource that allows people to keep engaging with it. I propose that these states can be tracked as complementary indicators, moderating factors, and early-warning signals within existing resilience frameworks, without replacing conventional metrics or treating environmental distress as a clinical problem. Incorporating eco-affective states into resilience metrics can help identify communities under strain before this strain becomes visible in conventional indicators, with direct implications for urban planning, climate adaptation, and environmental public health.

Identifiers

PMID42743264
PMCPMC13577509

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.