Advertisement

Air pollution affects our mood differently

A team from Stamford University have investigated the degree to which air quality can affect people’s mood, and how much that can vary on an individual basis.

Expanding upon the established links between exposure to air pollution and negative mental health consequences, the team have proposed a new construct they have named Affective Sensitivity to Air Pollution (ASAP) – the degree to which a person’s emotional states vary in response to changes in local air quality.

a man holds his head while sitting on a sofa

The unique element of ASAP is that goes further than examining differences in individuals’ exposures to air pollution, by examining the differences in their sensitivities to air pollution.

The sample for the study was 150 participants in Penn State’s Intraindividual Study of Affect, Health, and Interpersonal Behavior (iSAHIB) programme, who had completed three, 3-week ‘measurements bursts’ during which they reported on their social interactions, thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. 

The Stamford team combined this data with that from United States’ Air Quality Index (AQI) and examined how variations in air quality impacted on two components of individuals’ affective state: arousal, the level of physiological activation, and valence, the positivity or negativity of their mood.

‘As expected,’ the paper explains, ‘we found that Affective Sensitivity to Air Pollution was indeed discernable, that the prototypical individual’s affect arousal was lower than usual on days with higher than usual air pollution, and that—most importantly—there were indeed substantial interindividual differences in ASAP for both affect arousal and affect valence.’

The team say that one of the implications of their findings is that ASAP could partially explain one of the mechanisms by which exposure to air pollution increases longer-term risk for adverse mental health outcomes, like symptoms of anxiety and depression. 

Furthermore, although the whole sample lived in one geographic region (Pennsylvania) and experienced similar exposure to air pollution, they still presented different ASAP: ‘Aligning with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s redefinition of climate vulnerability, these interindividual differences in ASAP underscore the distinction between sensitivity and exposure to climate change.’

The full paper can be read here.

Paul Day
Paul is the editor of Public Sector News.
Help us break the news – share your information, opinion or analysis
Back to top