I was invited by the wonderful Social and Cultural Cognition (SCC) group in the Department of Psychology at the University of Bath to come along to their research meetings and give a little presentation about my PhD. My messy multi-disciplinary project has roots in many academic fields and the more I get into climate emotions and audience behaviour change, the more I learn about the relevance of learning more from the field of social psychology. As this is what underpins how we as individuals perceive and act on what we learn and understand about the global crises. I think its best to be clear, I am very new to this field. That is why I was immensely thankful to the group for inviting me along to their research meeting as I knew I had a lot to learn from them all!

But, before I start to waffle, I just wanted to say a massive thank you to the group for their openness, intrigue and true kindness. I felt so welcomed and supported by everyone who gave up their time and offered so much help. And thank you also for letting me partake in your Christmas activities too. You are a truly fantastic bunch of super interesting people, I really hope to bump into you again soon.

---

I had met Professor Gregory Maio after he appeared on a panel at the recent Wildscreen Festival. The panel was put together by Wendy Darke, founder of True to Nature, and explored the topic of young audiences and asked: how do we connect with them and inspire and engage them with the natural world. It was fascinating to hear the science of values and behaviour change which explained the role of awe and curiosity in facilitating nature connection. As a topic for a panel, it validated the importance of filmmakers working with academics and social scientists when wanting to make more impactful films targeted at children and young people. As you can imagine, the invite to meet Professor Maio’s research group to learn more about studies really excited me.

And they didn’t disappoint! After delivering my small (over enthusiastic and waffly rant) presentation and finishing with a plea for any recommendations, they kindly offered much advice and poignant questions which got me thinking. I wanted to share a few of them below. Warning, they come with no answers as I am definitely still learning!

Long-term bi-directional relationships

What does that even mean? Or refer to?

So, when thinking about audience impact of watching Natural History documentaries, there are several different responses that can be considered. Some include the effect on audience’s emotions, behaviour, attitudes, values and interest. These can be short-term, like instantaneous disgust or fear from a hunt scene, or long-term, like feeding a life long interest in nature. The variety, complexity and temporal effects are very hard to measure. Therefore, in a scientific study they can often be missed or go unrecognised. Particularly as these effects then inter-relate with different areas of the audience’s wider lives in ways that may increase or diminish them. For example, interest in nature may wain if there is a large thunderstorm that prevents them from going outside to experience it in person.

It is this wider, or contextual, relationship between these effects and other parts of the audience’s lives that made my ears perk up. As it may be a two way system. An external love for nature could make people turn on the TV to watch a Natural History series, but it may also lead to an increased likelihood that they would change their behaviours in response to watching one of these series.

Complexity of audience impact

This journey of an audience member is not something I can map out as part of my research. But, it raises interesting questions when thinking about the role of the genre in maintaining or increasing a long-term love and interest in nature. As this may lead them to take more sustainable decisions and actions in the future.

However, as mentioned by one of the lecturers, the impact of that interest in influencing nature-related behaviours is complicated. As they may encourage them to participate in local conservation initiatives, or it may encourage fuel-intensive behaviours such as long-haul flights and travel. But if that tourism then supports the funding of community initiatives and the protection of habitats, the measurement of impact and whether they are “good” or “bad” for the planet becomes rather difficult.

At this point, it was also questioned: who are the audience of the series? As who can benefit from the impacts of awe and nature connection from watching these series? With more content moving onto paid for streaming platforms, virtual nature in the format of Natural History documentaries, is not universally accessible. And which geographical countries may not have access to watch these series? If thought about in the context of potential impact of the series, who in the audience has local access to green or blue space and who can afford to travel elsewhere to experience the type of environments these series present?

---

I was given many other fascinating questions to think about such as the role of narrative persuasion, to the connection between novelty and awe, the difference between awe and curiosity and the impact of these series on the audiences openness to new experiences. These I will save you from reading and admit I need to go away to read more on as they are new and exciting opportunities for my project.

Before I finish, I must apologise for the lack of photos. I definitely enjoyed the Christmas and night time views of Bath with my eyes without thinking to enjoy with my camera. Trust me. It was beautiful.

Finally, I want to say thank you. I was inspired by everyone’s own projects and very excited by my own. And I was very bruised from the amazing time ice skating with everyone. So I wish them all a great winter break and lots of luck, I look forward to seeing where their feedback and recommendations take me.