The mental-health cost of war is well documented yet chronically underestimated. WHO-commissioned research published in The Lancet estimated that roughly one in five people living in conflict-affected settings — about 22 percent — experiences a mental-health condition at any given time, most commonly depression, anxiety or post-traumatic stress disorder, roughly double the prevalence seen in stable populations. These conditions are not transient. Longitudinal studies of war survivors show elevated symptoms persisting for years, sometimes decades, after violence ends, eroding work, parenting, physical health and the social trust that rebuilding depends on. Children are especially vulnerable: toxic stress during development is linked to lasting changes in emotion regulation, learning and lifelong health. The economic knock-on effects are large as well, because untreated mental disorders depress productivity, strain households and feed cycles of violence that make recovery harder. Yet in precisely the places where the need is greatest, care is scarcest. Many fragile and conflict-affected states count fewer than one psychiatrist for every 100,000 residents, and humanitarian budgets routinely devote only a small fraction of funding to mental-health and psychosocial support. The result is a vast, untreated reservoir of psychological injury — one that, the new study suggests, drought is making considerably deeper.

To understand why drought intersects so destructively with war, it helps to be precise about what drought actually is. Scientists distinguish meteorological drought — a sustained deficit in precipitation — from agricultural drought, in which soil moisture falls too low to sustain crops, and hydrological drought, in which rivers, reservoirs and aquifers run down. Each form is tracked with standardized indices, such as the Standardized Precipitation Index, that measure how far conditions deviate from long-term norms. What sets drought apart from an earthquake or a flood is its slow onset and punishing duration: it is a creeping emergency that can persist for years, eroding livelihoods grain by grain. Unlike a flood, whose damage is concentrated and visible, a drought’s damage diffuses into prices, harvests and household decisions, making it harder to see — and easier to ignore. The scale is growing. The United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification estimates that the number and duration of droughts have increased by 29 percent since 2000, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projects that additional warming will intensify agricultural and ecological drought across many already water-stressed regions — including several that overlap with the world’s active conflict zones.

Even on its own, drought leaves a distinct psychological signature. Studies of farming and herding communities have linked prolonged water shortage to chronic stress, hopelessness and elevated suicide risk; a major meta-analysis published in Nature Climate Change concluded that suicide rates themselves rise as temperatures climb. Rural populations whose identities and incomes rest on land and livestock are hit first and hardest, and research on agricultural communities documents strong associations between drought and both anxiety and depressive symptoms. Surveys of roughly 10,000 young people across ten countries, published in The Lancet Planetary Health, found that nearly six in ten were very or extremely worried about climate change — a phenomenon now studied under the label of eco-anxiety. Psychologically, drought fuses two especially potent stressors: loss of control over one’s material survival, and uncertainty that never resolves, because no one can say when the rains will return. Chronic activation of the body’s stress machinery — the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, which governs cortisol release — is implicated in depression, memory impairment and inflammatory disease. Drought, in other words, is not merely an economic shock. It is a sustained assault on mental well-being even before any bullets fly.

The central contribution of the new paper is to show what happens when these two assaults collide. In the language of statistics, drought does not simply add a fixed amount of distress on top of war’s toll; it behaves as an effect modifier, changing the very relationship between conflict exposure and psychological harm. If the burdens were merely additive, a person enduring both war and drought would face the sum of two separate risks. Amplification implies something more troubling: under drought conditions, the same degree of war exposure produces a larger psychological toll than it would in water-secure times. Climate scientists have a framework for such overlaps — compound events, in which multiple hazards interact to produce impacts greater than their parts, a concept that now runs through IPCC assessments. What Döring and colleagues make unmistakable is that mental health belongs squarely inside that framework. The distinction is not academic hair-splitting. Additive risks can be managed with parallel programs; interactive risks demand integrated ones, because treating one hazard while ignoring the other leaves the amplification intact. War and drought, managed by policymakers as separate problems in separate ministries, are in reality a single, mutually reinforcing crisis with a compounded human price.

The mechanisms behind this amplification form a cascade that researchers are only beginning to map. Drought destroys harvests and livestock, driving food insecurity, and hunger is tightly coupled to psychological distress: food-insecure households show sharply elevated rates of depression, particularly among mothers, while childhood malnutrition interacts with chronic stress to shape emotional development for a lifetime. Water scarcity forces families — usually women and girls — into longer and more dangerous journeys to collect water, and unsanitary conditions raise the risk of disease outbreaks that layer grief and exhaustion onto scarcity. Heat that accompanies drought disrupts sleep, shortens tempers and is consistently associated with spikes in aggression and interpersonal violence. Meanwhile, drought strips away rural livelihoods and the farming and herding identities that anchor community life, pushing families into displacement, where social support networks fray exactly when they are needed most. Humanitarian agencies, stretched thin by war, are typically resourced for either a conflict response or a climate shock — not both at once. Services crack precisely when psychological need peaks, and untreated distress accumulates in the population like water behind a failing dam.

Nor is the overlap hypothetical; it describes much of the contemporary map of human misery. Syria endured a devastating multi-year drought from 2006 to 2010 that destroyed harvests and helped displace well over a million rural residents — an upheaval that some scholars argued fed the unrest that followed, though that causal chain remains contested in the research literature. The Horn of Africa has seen drought and violence intertwined for decades: Somalia’s 2011 famine unfolded amid active conflict, and the 2020–2023 drought, the region’s driest stretch in some forty years, displaced millions even as fighting blocked aid. In the Sahel, shrinking pastures and dwindling water points have been repeatedly linked to clashes between herders and farming communities. Security analysts adopted the phrase “threat multiplier” years ago to describe how climate stress magnifies existing instability. What the new study adds is a precise psychological dimension to that security language: the multiplier operates inside human minds as well as across battlefields.

Measuring these effects is notoriously difficult, which is what makes rigorous work in this area so consequential. Mental-health surveys inside active war zones battle attrition, danger and the simple impossibility of reaching besieged populations; drought, meanwhile, must be quantified objectively across space and time rather than assumed. Any analysis must also guard against confounding — poverty, weak institutions and pre-existing violence all shape both climate vulnerability and mental health, and disentangling drought’s independent contribution from war’s is a statistical tightrope. Researchers therefore triangulate, combining standardized drought indices with longitudinal mental-health data and models that test explicitly whether drought modifies the effect of conflict exposure. No single study can settle such questions definitively; the field’s conclusions rest on converging lines of evidence rather than any one dataset. But the direction of that evidence is consistent, and its implication is uncomfortable: as warming deepens drought in fragile states, the psychological price of every ongoing war is quietly rising, compounding year after year. The relationship also cuts both ways. If drought deepens war’s psychological damage, then easing drought — through water infrastructure, food aid or insurance schemes — should measurably lighten that damage, a testable prediction that gives the finding practical force.

The policy implications cut across humanitarian aid, climate adaptation and security planning. Mental-health and psychosocial support — long among the most underfunded components of emergency responses — cannot remain an afterthought bolted onto food distributions; the World Health Organization’s mhGAP programme and inter-agency guidelines on mental health in emergencies provide blueprints that rarely reach anything like scale. Drought early-warning systems and forecast-based financing, which release funds before a crisis peaks, could be explicitly paired with psychosocial services so that counseling arrives alongside the water trucks. Investments in drought-resilient water infrastructure, drought-tolerant crops and social-protection schemes should be understood, explicitly, as mental-health interventions, because they blunt the stress cascade before it begins. And climate finance, which has been slow to reach fragile and conflict-affected states, will need to treat those states as priorities rather than exceptions. If drought amplifies the psychological burden of war, the arithmetic of suffering becomes brutal: the droughts of the coming decades will not wait for the wars to end, and it is minds — not only harvests — that will bear the difference.

Published in Nature Health, the study examined 2,618,307 hospitalization records collected between 2000 and 2019 across 852 locations. The researchers focused on the warm seasons in each country and investigated whether hospital admissions for mental and behavioural disorders were more common during periods of unusually high temperatures. Rather than comparing different groups of people, the analysis compared individuals with themselves across different days, allowing the researchers to examine whether hospitalization risk changed when a person’s location experienced a heatwave.

The primary definition of a heatwave was deliberately strict. It required daily mean temperatures to remain above the location-specific 97.5th percentile for at least four consecutive days. In practical terms, this threshold identified temperatures that were exceptionally high for a particular place, taking local climate into account. A temperature that is extreme in one region may be relatively ordinary in another, so using location-specific percentiles allowed the analysis to measure heat stress against the conditions to which local populations are normally exposed.

Under this definition, the relative risk of hospitalization was 1.033 on the same day as the heatwave condition. This corresponds to an estimated 3.3% increase in hospitalization risk compared with non-heatwave control days, with a 95% confidence interval ranging from 1.007 to 1.059. The confidence interval indicates the range of values compatible with the statistical analysis, and because it remained above 1, the researchers classified the association as statistically meaningful. Although a 3.3% increase may appear modest at the individual level, even a small percentage change can translate into a substantial number of additional admissions when extreme heat affects large populations.

The consequences became more pronounced when the researchers considered delayed effects. From the same day through the following eight days, the cumulative relative risk reached 1.056, corresponding to an estimated 5.6% increase in hospitalization risk. The confidence interval for this cumulative estimate was 1.011 to 1.103. This lagged pattern suggests that the mental-health effects of sustained heat may not end when temperatures begin to decline. Physiological strain, sleep disruption, dehydration, medication-related vulnerabilities and the psychological stress of prolonged heat could continue to influence health after the most intense conditions have passed.

To identify these patterns, the researchers used a time-stratified case-crossover design. This method is commonly used to study short-term environmental exposures, such as air pollution, temperature extremes or infectious disease outbreaks. Each hospitalization day was compared with control days for the same location and the same day of the week within a defined time period. By making these comparisons within individuals or closely matched time windows, the approach automatically controls for characteristics that do not change rapidly, such as genetics, long-term socioeconomic status and chronic baseline health. The time-stratified structure also helps reduce bias caused by seasonal trends and weekly hospitalization patterns.

The analysis showed that the association was stronger among older adults. Aging can increase sensitivity to heat through reduced thermoregulatory capacity, a higher prevalence of chronic illness and the use of medications that affect hydration, sweating, blood pressure or sleep. Older people may also be more vulnerable to social isolation during extreme weather, particularly if they live alone or have limited access to cooling environments. The researchers also observed stronger associations in low-population-density areas, where hospitals and emergency services may be farther away, cooling infrastructure may be less available and public-health monitoring may be more limited.

The findings do not establish that every heatwave directly causes a mental-health hospitalization, and the study does not identify a single mechanism responsible for the observed increase. Mental and behavioural disorders encompass a broad range of conditions, while hospitalization is influenced by healthcare access, clinical decisions, family support and the availability of community services. Nevertheless, the consistency of the association across multiple countries and hundreds of locations strengthens the evidence that prolonged extreme heat can act as an acute environmental stressor with consequences for mental health. The use of a large international dataset also helps demonstrate that the relationship is not restricted to one climate zone or healthcare system.

The study arrives as heatwaves are becoming more frequent, intense and persistent in many parts of the world. Climate change is increasing the likelihood of days that exceed historical temperature extremes, raising concern that hospitals will face overlapping surges in heat-related illness and mental-health demand. The researchers’ results point to the importance of including mental and behavioural health in heatwave preparedness plans. Early warnings, welfare checks for vulnerable residents, accessible cooling spaces, medication guidance and coordination between emergency departments and community mental-health services could help reduce the burden. As extreme heat becomes a recurring feature of modern summers, the study suggests that protecting public health will require treating mental-health preparedness as an essential part of heatwave response.

Subject of Research: The association between sustained extreme heat and hospitalizations for mental and behavioural disorders across Brazil, Canada, Chile and New Zealand.

Article Title: Mental health hospitalizations associated with sustained extreme heat in multiple countries

Article References: Liu, Y., Xu, Z., Huang, W. et al. Mental health hospitalizations associated with sustained extreme heat in multiple countries. Nat. Health (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44360-026-00166-2

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s44360-026-00166-2

Keywords: heatwaves, extreme heat, mental health, behavioural disorders, hospitalizations, climate change, public health, older adults, case-crossover analysis, environmental epidemiology

The researchers analysed evidence from 23 studies conducted in different parts of the world, comparing temperature exposure with outcomes including anxiety, depression, emergency mental-health visits and suicide attempts. Their findings indicate that adverse mental-health outcomes rise by almost 1% for every 1 °C increase in daily temperature. During heatwaves, the risk was approximately 25% higher among children and adolescents, while exposure to generally higher temperatures was associated with an increase of about 1.5% in poor mental-health outcomes.

The analysis does not suggest that heat alone causes every mental-health crisis. Instead, it points to a complex interaction between environmental stress, physiological strain, disrupted routines and social pressures. Extreme heat can interfere with sleep, reduce opportunities for exercise and recreation, interrupt schooling and increase family stress. These effects may accumulate over several days, particularly when hot nights prevent the body from recovering from daytime exposure.

Children and adolescents may be especially sensitive because their bodies and behaviour are still developing. Young children have less control over their surroundings and may depend on adults to provide water, shade and cooling. Adolescents are undergoing major neurological, hormonal and emotional changes during a period when mental-health disorders commonly emerge. Heat can also affect concentration, impulse control and emotional regulation, potentially intensifying existing vulnerability.

“ There’s a range of reasons why children are more susceptible to changes in climate that are linked to social and developmental stressors, including disruptions to outdoor activities, their education, and recreational opportunities,” said Associate Professor Jacqueline Stephens, an epidemiologist at Flinders University and co-author of the study. She added that sleep disruption during hot nights can undermine wellbeing and emotional regulation, while caregiving stress and family conflict may increase during heatwaves and other extreme-weather events.

The researchers also highlight the connection between heat and learning. Higher temperatures have been associated with poorer academic performance, and overheated classrooms can make it harder for students to concentrate, process information and remain engaged. For young people already experiencing anxiety or depression, the loss of normal routines and safe social spaces may further reduce access to support. In this way, heat can operate as a “threat multiplier,” amplifying existing social, educational and psychological pressures rather than acting as an isolated risk.

The strongest reported effects appeared in developed countries. The authors suggest that this pattern may partly reflect urban heat islands, in which densely built areas absorb and retain heat, producing higher temperatures than surrounding regions. It may also reflect better access to mental-health services and more comprehensive reporting systems. Conversely, weaker associations in middle-income countries should not necessarily be interpreted as evidence of lower vulnerability. Limited healthcare access, underdiagnosis and under-reporting could conceal substantial impacts.

Corey Bradshaw, a global ecologist at Flinders University and co-author of the review, said that the findings support integrating mental health into climate-adaptation planning. He noted that children and young people may be less likely to adopt protective behaviours during dangerous heat and may face physiological and behavioural limitations that increase their exposure. The authors argue that large-scale interventions should accompany heat-health warnings, including mental-health support and targeted assistance for families during prolonged hot periods.

Dr Syeda Hira Fatima of the University of Canberra’s HEAL Global Research Centre and affiliated with Flinders University said the next step for Australia is to determine where and how children encounter heat in their daily environments. Potential measures include cooler classrooms, improved ventilation, shaded play areas and better-designed buildings. However, the researchers stress that these adaptations should be evaluated scientifically to establish whether they produce measurable improvements in mental health and wellbeing, rather than simply lowering indoor temperature.

The authors caution that evidence linking heatwaves specifically to mental-health outcomes remains limited and should be interpreted carefully until more studies become available. Differences in study design, climate, healthcare systems and definitions of heat exposure make direct comparisons difficult. Even so, the global synthesis shows that extreme heat is not only a physical-health threat. As climate change makes severe heat more frequent and intense, protecting children will require public-health strategies that address sleep, education, family stress and psychological wellbeing alongside dehydration, heat exhaustion and other established dangers.

Subject of Research: People

Article Title: First global synthesis of heat-related mental health impacts in children and young people: a systematic review and meta-analysis

News Publication Date: 4 August 2026

Web References: https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/55/4/dyag121/8741913; https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyag121

References: Kwan S, Stephens J, Bradshaw CJA, Varghese BM, Thompson K, Judge MA, Le Souëf PN and Fatima SH. International Journal of Epidemiology. DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyag121

Image Credits: Flinders University

Keywords: extreme heat, heatwaves, children, adolescents, mental health, climate change, anxiety, depression, sleep disruption, public health, Australia, El Niño, systematic review, Flinders University

The study expands upon previous research that identified a correlation between hotter weather and increased suicide risk but goes further by integrating vast datasets and employing empirical health impact assessments. By analyzing daily temperature fluctuations and their association with suicide rates, the team quantified the existing burden and projected future increases in temperature-related suicide mortality relative to the 2010s baseline.

One notable challenge was the sensitive and inconsistent nature of suicide data worldwide. Many lower- and middle-income countries, plus extensive regions in Africa and the Middle East, lack systematic suicide registration, limiting data inclusion. Social stigma and restrictive access also impeded data gathering. Despite these obstacles, the comprehensive dataset enabled robust regional analyses.

The findings suggest a universal trend of rising suicide risk as temperatures increase, although regional variations exist. For instance, populations in East Asia, accustomed to hot, humid summers, may exhibit physiological and behavioral adaptations that moderate suicide risk at temperature extremes. This implies that local heat adaptability and societal preparedness critically influence suicide vulnerability.

Importantly, the study focused on short-term associations and cannot establish causality, positing that elevated temperatures could act as immediate triggers for suicidal behavior rather than underlying causes. Analytical adjustments for seasonality, long-term trends, and weekday effects were made to isolate temperature impacts. However, the models assumed static population demographics and no future adaptation improvements, highlighting areas for future research.

Lead investigator Associate Professor Yoonhee Kim emphasized the complexity of suicide as a phenomenon influenced by myriad individual, social, and environmental factors. The team’s climatic perspective offers valuable insight into poorly understood patterns, aiming to inform community-level interventions and climate adaptation policies that protect mental health in an increasingly warming world.

Future directions include investigating changing dynamics of temperature-suicide relationships over time and incorporating evolving baseline suicide rates and adaptation to high heat. This research advances a critical, yet underexplored public health frontier, linking environmental change to mental well-being with profound implications for global climate resilience strategies.

Subject of Research: People
Article Title: Multi-country projections of temperature-related suicide mortality
News Publication Date: 30-Jun-2026
Web References: https://doi.org/10.1038/s44220-026-00674-w
Image Credits: ©2026 Ro et al. CC-BY-ND
Keywords: Climate change, Suicide mortality, Temperature effects, Mental health, Environmental epidemiology, Global health projections

The research team, led by Dr. Ruben Juarez at the University of Hawaii, applied rigorous epidemiological methodologies to assess the gradients of psychological distress in populations exposed to wildfire events. Their results reveal a disturbing trend: mental health deterioration is not confined to those directly impacted by fire destruction but cascades into peripheral communities, amplifying the psychological burden across larger geographic and social spectra. This phenomenon suggests that the trauma of wildfires creates a ripple effect, exacerbated by the interconnectedness of social and economic structures in affected regions.

Central to the study’s findings is the role of socioeconomic consequences as a mediator of psychological distress. The researchers highlight housing instability and economic uncertainty as critical stressors that compound mental health challenges. The displacement of communities and the loss of livelihoods due to fires introduce a cascade of stressors that precipitate anxiety, depression, and other forms of psychological distress. This multifactorial chain underscores the need for a holistic approach in addressing mental health, which must encompass not only clinical interventions but also socioeconomic stabilization and support mechanisms.

One of the study’s defining contributions lies in its emphasis on graded psychological distress, moving beyond a binary affected/unaffected model. By quantifying mental health outcomes along a continuum of fire exposure and socioeconomic disruption, the research delineates nuanced gradients of risk. Such an approach allows for more precise identification of vulnerable populations and tailors intervention strategies accordingly. This gradient model challenges existing paradigms that often overlook subtle yet impactful psychological effects in populations not immediately proximate to fire events.

The intersection of environmental science, psychiatry, and economics within this study exemplifies an interdisciplinary approach that is crucial for advancing disaster research. By integrating earth sciences data on wildfire patterns with psychological assessments and socioeconomic analyses, the study creates a comprehensive framework for understanding the multi-dimensional impacts of climate-related disasters. This methodological synergy heralds a new era in science where cross-sector collaboration is key to devising effective public health responses.

Clinically, the study advocates for the urgent integration of mental health services into disaster recovery programs. Traditional disaster response often prioritizes physical infrastructure restoration and acute injury treatment, frequently sidelining the long-term psychological consequences. This study’s evidence compels policymakers and healthcare providers to embed mental health care as a core component of resilience-building strategies, ensuring ongoing support for affected individuals well after the flames are extinguished.

Furthermore, the research calls attention to the critical importance of housing security and economic recovery as foundational pillars in mitigating psychological distress post-wildfire. Stabilizing these domains not only alleviates immediate stress but also fosters a sense of safety and normalcy crucial for psychological healing. This insight shifts the paradigm towards a more integrated approach, advocating for socio-economic policy reforms alongside mental health initiatives in disaster-affected regions.

The implications of this study extend beyond wildfire events, serving as a model for understanding the psychological impacts of a broad spectrum of natural disasters exacerbated by climate change. As wildfires become more frequent and intense globally due to rising temperatures and altered precipitation patterns, the findings represent a clarion call for proactive mental health preparedness and socio-economic support systems. By anticipating the indirect and extended psychological impact zones, emergency response systems can be better tailored to reach populations at risk.

The study further highlights the pervasive nature of psychological stressors that emerge from climate-related disasters, which can manifest in elevated rates of psychiatric disorders, exacerbations of pre-existing mental illness, and increased demand for psychological assessment services. It emphasizes the need for scalable mental health interventions, community outreach, and culturally sensitive care models to effectively address diverse populations impacted by these crises.

Researchers also point out that psychological distress from wildfire exposure can have intergenerational effects, potentially influencing family dynamics, childhood development, and community cohesion. Thus, mental health initiatives must consider not only individual treatment but also family-centered and community-wide interventions to foster resilience and recovery at broader levels.

In light of these findings, disaster response frameworks must evolve to include robust data collection and monitoring systems for psychological distress alongside physical damage assessments. This dual-focus approach ensures that recovery efforts address both tangible and intangible losses, improving overall community resilience and long-term recovery trajectories.

To conclude, this study by Juarez et al. is a seminal contribution to our understanding of the complex human impacts of climate-induced natural disasters. It compels an interdisciplinary, multisectoral approach to disaster recovery that integrates mental health care, housing security, and economic stabilization as inseparable elements. As climate change continues to pose formidable challenges, such nuanced, evidence-based insights are indispensable for shaping resilient societies that can withstand and rebound from environmental shocks.

Corresponding Author: To engage with the study’s lead author, Ruben Juarez, PhD, please contact rubenj@hawaii.edu.

Journal: This pivotal research is published in JAMA Psychiatry, a leading journal renowned for advancing psychiatric science and clinical practice.

Subject of Research: Mental health impacts of wildfire exposure and associated socioeconomic consequences

Article Title: (10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2026.0044)

Keywords: Mental health, homelessness, wildfires, economic recovery, psychological stress, health care, socioeconomics, natural disasters, psychiatry, psychological assessment, climatology

“Selective allyship,” as defined in this context, refers to the tendency within psychological research and practice to address social and environmental issues in a piecemeal or tokenistic manner. This selective approach can manifest as superficial support—such as endorsing diversity statements without systemic change—or focusing on isolated interventions that fail to influence larger societal dynamics. Kutlaca and colleagues suggest that this insufficient engagement leaves the true transformative potential of psychology untapped. Instead, they propose the adoption of actively “empowered actions,” which involve sustained, systemic, and evidence-based efforts that transcend symbolic gestures.

One critical aspect of transitioning from selective allyship to empowered actions involves re-examining the theoretical frameworks psychologists utilize. Traditional models of individual behavior and cognition often overlook the complex interplay between personal agency and structural constraints that underpin global crises. Kutlaca et al. emphasize the need to integrate ecological and sociopolitical perspectives into psychological theories, encouraging researchers to view behavior within the broader context of societal systems and environmental interdependencies. This holistic viewpoint promises to reveal leverage points for interventions that can propagate large-scale transformation.

Furthermore, the article underscores the importance of methodological innovation in operationalizing empowered actions. Conventional psychological research tends to rely heavily on controlled, laboratory-based experiments, which, while valuable for establishing internal validity, may lack ecological validity when applied to multifaceted global challenges. Kutlaca and colleagues advocate for transdisciplinary methodologies that bridge psychology with fields such as environmental science, political science, and public health. Employing mixed methods, longitudinal designs, and community-based participatory research can capture the dynamic, context-dependent nature of behaviors implicated in crises like climate change and systemic inequality.

Critically, the authors draw attention to the ethical imperatives inherent in psychological research and practice related to global crises. Empowered actions must be underpinned by commitments to equity, justice, and inclusivity, ensuring that marginalized communities are not merely subjects of study but co-creators in the development and implementation of interventions. This ethical grounding contrasts starkly with selective allyship’s tendency to reinforce existing power imbalances or to exploit social causes for institutional gain without delivering meaningful change.

A notable contribution of the article lies in its policy-oriented recommendations. Kutlaca et al. call upon psychologists to engage more proactively with policymakers, media, and the public in translating empirical findings into actionable strategies. They propose establishing collaborative platforms that foster dialogue among scientists, governments, grassroots organizations, and affected populations. This ecosystemic approach aims to dismantle silos and promote integrated responses capable of addressing the scale and urgency of contemporary crises.

Within the domain of climate psychology, the authors highlight the necessity of moving beyond awareness campaigns to interventions designed to catalyze collective efficacy and sustained behavioral change. Psychological theories of motivation, identity, and social norms are instrumental here but must be contextualized within socio-ecological models that recognize systemic barriers to action. Empowered actions include facilitating participatory decision-making processes and fostering resilience and hope rather than despair, thus counteracting psychological fatigue and eco-anxiety.

Similarly, when confronting systemic social inequities, the article insists on psychology’s role in challenging institutionalized discrimination and fostering societal transformation. Empowered actions might encompass advocating for anti-racist policies, developing culturally responsive mental health services, and conducting longitudinal research that assesses the impact of social reforms on psychological well-being. These efforts represent a radical departure from tokenistic allyship, emphasizing accountability, structural change, and empowerment.

Moreover, Kutlaca and colleagues emphasize the importance of educational reform in psychology training programs. They argue for curricula that equip future psychologists with the skills to critically assess global crises and participate in interdisciplinary teams. This includes fostering competencies in systems thinking, cultural humility, advocacy, and ethical leadership. Integrating these elements into training will empower professionals to transcend disciplinary boundaries and embrace the complexities of real-world problem-solving.

The article also investigates barriers to implementing empowered actions within the psychological community. Institutional inertia, fragmented funding priorities, and a disciplinary culture favoring individual-level interventions over systemic change are significant obstacles. Kutlaca et al. propose strategies to overcome these barriers, including incentivizing collaborative and translational research, revising publication standards to value social impact, and promoting open science practices to democratize knowledge dissemination.

An innovative discussion in the paper centers on the role of technology and digital platforms in scaling empowered psychological actions. The authors highlight the potential of artificial intelligence, big data analytics, and virtual reality environments in crafting personalized yet scalable interventions targeting behaviors detrimental to planetary and social health. Nonetheless, ethical considerations related to privacy, bias, and digital equity are paramount and must be rigorously addressed to avoid exacerbating existing inequalities.

In sum, the research presented convincingly argues that psychology’s future relevance hinges on a robust integration of empowerment paradigms into research, practice, and policy influences related to global crises. This entails moving beyond symbolic displays of allyship to embrace substantive, systemic, and sustained engagement with the complex challenges humanity faces. Such a transformation promises to amplify psychology’s impact and contribute meaningfully to a more just and sustainable world.

This perspective is timely given the accelerating pace of environmental degradation, pandemics, geopolitical conflicts, and socio-economic disparities. Psychological sciences stand at a crossroads, where entrenched traditions may either be renewed or rendered obsolete by their capacity to evolve and meet contemporary demands. The call to action outlined by Kutlaca and colleagues is thus both a challenge and an opportunity for the discipline to reimagine its societal role profoundly.

As the global community grapples with intersecting crises, the insights underscored in this article provide a critical roadmap. Empowered psychological action, characterized by integrative approaches, ethical commitments, and systemic thinking, could serve as a catalyst for transformative social innovation. It is imperative that psychological science embraces this shift to fulfill its potential as an agent of positive global change.

Subject of Research: Psychological science’s role in shifting from selective allyship to empowered, systemic interventions addressing global crises.

Article Title: Psychology should move from selective allyship to empowered actions to tackle global crises.

Article References:
Kutlaca, M., Radke, H.R.M. & Uluğ, Ö.M. Psychology should move from selective allyship to empowered actions to tackle global crises. Commun Psychol 3, 133 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-025-00316-4

Image Credits: AI Generated

McCarroll’s approach is multifaceted. He argues that pastoral theology provides essential frameworks for understanding human suffering in relation to environmental crises. By incorporating psychological insights, McCarroll positions pastoral care as crucial in helping communities grapple with the emotional toll of climate change. The psychological impacts of climate change are vast, including anxiety, despair, and hopelessness, which can be overwhelming for individuals and communities alike. Through the lens of pastoral care, the emotional struggles stemming from climate disasters can be acknowledged, validated, and addressed in meaningful ways.

The author underscores the importance of a reflective practice that allows individuals and communities to navigate the complexities of climate change. This involves a commitment to not only witness the ecological degradation but also to respond with compassion and action. McCarroll discusses how spiritual traditions often embody an intrinsic reverence for creation, which can serve as a motivating force for action. When faith communities engage with climate issues, they can mobilize collective resources and support networks, fostering resilience and hope in the face of uncertainty.

One of the central themes of the article is the transformative potential of creating a theological narrative surrounding climate change. McCarroll advocates for a paradigm shift in how faith communities perceive their role in environmental stewardship. Instead of viewing ecological crises solely as tragic events, he encourages an interpretation that recognizes opportunities for growth, solidarity, and shared responsibility. This shift not only elevates the discourse but also impels faithful individuals to develop sustainable practices rooted in their spiritual convictions.

Moreover, McCarroll emphasizes the necessity for interdisciplinary collaboration in addressing climate challenges. He posits that pastoral practitioners can benefit significantly from partnering with climate scientists, environmental activists, and policy-makers. By fostering these alliances, faith leaders can broaden their understanding and advocacy around climate change, creating a richer, more informed narrative that resonates with diverse audiences. The blending of theological insights and empirical evidence can enhance the legitimacy and urgency of climate action initiatives.

The psychological dimension is particularly salient in McCarroll’s reflections, as he discusses the phenomena of eco-anxiety and grief associated with climate change. He highlights how pastoral counseling can be instrumental in providing a safe space for individuals to express their fears and frustrations. Spiritual practices, such as prayer and meditation, may also help individuals process their emotions, cultivate resilience, and envision hopeful futures. In this context, religion can serve not only as a coping mechanism but as a proactive force for engagement and activism.

As the effects of climate change become more pronounced, McCarroll urges faith communities to confront their complicity in environmental degradation. He calls for accountability and a recommitment to advocacy that reflects ethical stewardship of the earth. Pastoral leaders are tasked with re-evaluating their resource consumption and engaging in reflection about how their lifestyles align with their ethical beliefs. This process involves examining social and economic structures that perpetuate inequality and environmental harm.

Community engagement is another area that McCarroll explores. He prompts faith leaders to cultivate relationships that empower marginalized groups often disproportionately affected by environmental crises. By elevating the voices of those who suffer most, pastoral care can become a conduit for justice. This approach not only enriches the spiritual mission but also aligns with broader efforts to combat climate injustice.

In discussing methodologies for climate advocacy, McCarroll suggests the development of educational programs within congregations that focus on ecological literacy. Empowering congregants with knowledge about climate science, sustainability practices, and social justice can galvanize grassroots movements for change. Through workshops, discussions, and community service projects, faith communities can catalyze action and inspire a collective commitment to care for creation.

McCarroll’s reflections extend to the broader implications of climate change on spiritual identity. He posits that grappling with the realities of deteriorating ecosystems can lead to spiritual growth and transformation. Faith communities may find renewal in their mission as they respond to the urgent call for environmental action. By reinvigorating doctrines that emphasize care for creation, congregations can forge deeper connections to their faith and to one another.

As the article continues to unfold, McCarroll draws upon specific examples of faith communities actively engaging with climate issues. He presents case studies of congregations that have successfully integrated eco-theological principles into their worship services, service projects, and advocacy campaigns. These examples serve not only as inspiration but also as evidence of the tangible impact that well-rounded pastoral approaches can yield in promoting environmental stewardship.

The urgency of climate action resonates throughout McCarroll’s discussion, as he articulates the unique responsibility of faith leaders in this global crisis. In the face of overwhelming evidence of climate change’s effects, faith communities have the potential to be beacons of hope and catalysts for transformative change. By turning to their spiritual roots and embracing a holistic understanding of theology and psychology, they can enact meaningful responses that transcend despair and promote collective healing.

As the article concludes, McCarroll emphasizes that the dialogue between pastoral theology, psychology, and climate change is still evolving. He invites ongoing reflections and partnerships among theologians, psychologists, and environmentalists to enrich this discourse. The intersection of these fields offers fertile ground for innovation, healing, and action. In embracing a collaborative spirit, communities can not only address the environmental crisis but also cultivate a deeper sense of purpose and connection to the earth and to each other.

Ultimately, McCarroll’s work champions a vision of a future where faith and action intertwine, cultivating a resilient and hopeful response to climate change. Faith communities are called not only to respond to the immediate needs brought about by environmental decline but to reimagine their role as stewarding the planet. The integration of pastoral care and psychological well-being into climate discourse presents an opportunity for holistic approaches to addressing one of the defining issues of our time.

The intersection of spirituality, psychology, and environmentalism signifies a movement toward resilience, advocacy, and hope. As McCarroll illuminates paths forward, his contributions will undoubtedly serve as a guiding light for pastoral practitioners, creating ripples of change across faith communities globally.

Subject of Research: Pastoral Theology and Climate Change

Article Title: Introduction to Pastoral Theological and Psychological Reflections on Climate Change

Article References:

McCarroll, P.R. Introduction to Pastoral Theological and Psychological Reflections on Climate Change.
Pastoral Psychol 74, 1–9 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-025-01203-9

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s11089-025-01203-9

Keywords: Climate change, pastoral care, psychological reflections, environmental stewardship, eco-anxiety, faith communities, advocacy, resilience.

Natural disasters are becoming increasingly frequent and devastating, propelled by climatic shifts and urban vulnerabilities. While physical devastation often dominates the news, the invisible wounds—especially the psychological scars—warrant urgent attention. This investigation pivots towards the mental health ramifications of displacement, an often-understudied consequence of disasters. The disruption of familiar environments, social networks, and sense of security compounds stress and catalyzes psychiatric symptomatology.

Employing robust epidemiological methodologies, the researchers analyzed data drawn from U.S. adult populations affected by various natural catastrophes. The assessment centered on identifying depressive and anxiety symptoms post-displacement, utilizing validated clinical screening instruments. The findings robustly indicate that those displaced who never returned home exhibit significantly higher odds of manifesting depression and anxiety, compared to those who returned or were not displaced at all.

The study highlights that displacement is not a monolithic experience; the degree of mental health impact varies significantly with the permanence and nature of displacement. Permanent relocation or prolonged absence from one’s home is linked with a deterioration of mental well-being. This phenomenon may reflect a constellation of stressors encompassing loss of community ties, economic instability, and the trauma of upheaval itself.

A critical feature of the research is its focus on socially vulnerable populations. These groups—often marginalized by socioeconomic disadvantages, limited access to healthcare, and intersecting health disparities—are disproportionately affected in the aftermath of disasters. The study underscores a systemic failure to adequately support these populations, suggesting that current disaster response frameworks insufficiently address mental health needs in displaced communities.

From a clinical psychology perspective, the study employed stratified analyses that accounted for pre-existing mental health conditions, demographic variables, and the severity of disaster exposure. This nuanced approach allowed the identification of displacement as an independent risk factor for depression and anxiety, beyond confounding variables. Such precise delineation bolsters the call for targeted interventions.

Importantly, the findings have profound implications for public health policy and disaster management strategies. Mental health care integration into disaster response is imperative, especially strategies tailored to displaced populations facing continuous psychosocial stress. The research advocates for scalable, accessible mental health services that can be deployed rapidly in disaster settings, alongside mechanisms to facilitate stable housing and community rebuilding.

The authors also caution about the insidious and often chronic nature of psychological symptoms post-displacement. Depression and anxiety following disaster-induced upheaval can perpetuate a cycle of poor health, diminished productivity, and social withdrawal. These conditions, if unaddressed, may evolve into more severe mental disorders, thereby amplifying the long-term burden on healthcare systems.

Furthermore, the study’s scope included detailed demographic analyses revealing that adults across various age groups are susceptible, but certain subpopulations—such as older adults and those with limited social support—are at elevated risk. The findings emphasize the importance of personalized approaches in mental health interventions, acknowledging the heterogeneity of displaced individuals’ experiences.

The research also touches upon economic ramifications, asserting that homelessness and housing instability post-disaster exacerbate psychological distress. The interdependence between economic hardship and mental health emerges as a critical area for interdisciplinary research and policy innovation. Permanently displaced individuals often face chronic insecurity, which negatively feeds back into their psychological well-being.

In summary, this study shines a crucial light on the mental health crisis entwined with natural disaster displacement in the United States. It broadens the discourse by advocating mental health as a central pillar in disaster preparedness and recovery. By affirming the heightened vulnerability among never-returned displaced adults, the research paves the way for more compassionate and scientifically informed responses to one of the pressing public health challenges of our era.

The urgency conveyed by the authors signals a call to action for mental health professionals, policymakers, emergency planners, and community leaders alike. Only through coordinated, multidisciplinary, and socially equitable efforts can the silent epidemic of disaster-induced psychological distress be effectively mitigated, restoring hope and resilience in displaced populations.

Subject of Research: The association between disaster-induced displacement and mental health outcomes—specifically depression and anxiety—in U.S. adults.

Article Title: Not provided.

News Publication Date: Not provided.

Web References: Not provided.

References: (doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.28546)

Keywords: Depression, Anxiety, Adults, Natural disasters, Homelessness, United States population, Symptomatology, Mental health

The research team embarked on a comprehensive examination of 1.2 billion social media entries posted during 2019, harnessing data from two of the world’s largest platforms: Twitter and Weibo. Employing cutting-edge natural language processing techniques, specifically the Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) model, in 65 different languages, the scientists were able to quantify sentiment scores across a diverse range of cultural and linguistic contexts. Each post was rated on a scale from 0.0, indicating extremely negative emotions, to 1.0, representing highly positive expressions. This large-scale sentiment analysis was then spatially aggregated across nearly 3,000 distinct geographical locations and cross-referenced with local temperature data, enabling a robust correlation between heat extremes and shifts in expressed mood.

A striking discovery emerged when the dataset was dissected in the context of economic disparity. The analysis found that in lower-income countries, where average annual per-capita income falls below $13,845 according to World Bank standards, the negative impact of temperatures exceeding 95 degrees Fahrenheit (35 degrees Celsius) on sentiment increased by approximately 25 percent. In wealthier nations, the effect was discernibly muted, with sentiment negativity rising by around 8 percent under similar heat conditions. This disparity underscores the amplified vulnerability of economically disadvantaged populations to climate-induced psychological stressors, highlighting a critical social equity issue in climate adaptation strategies.

The study’s co-author, Professor Siqi Zheng of MIT’s Department of Urban Studies and Planning and the Center for Real Estate, emphasizes the broader implications of these findings. Zheng notes that this research “opens up a new frontier in understanding how climate stress is shaping human well-being at a planetary scale.” Unlike previous studies that narrowly focused on physical health and economic metrics, this investigation introduces emotional well-being as an integral dimension of climate impact assessment. By integrating sentiment analysis with environmental data, the work pioneers a novel interdisciplinary approach that bridges urban studies, climatology, and psychology.

Technically, the application of BERT—one of the most sophisticated transformer-based language models—enabled nuanced understanding of emotional content across a vast linguistic spectrum. BERT’s ability to grasp complex syntax and semantic subtleties allowed the researchers to accurately decode sentiments embedded in short social media posts, which traditionally pose challenges for natural language processing due to their brevity and informal structure. This methodological innovation permitted a scalable assessment that surpasses conventional survey techniques, enabling real-time, global emotional monitoring over extended periods.

Beyond immediate correlations, the research also ventured into long-term projections, leveraging global climate models to estimate how emotional well-being might evolve under continued warming trends. Assuming some degree of human adaptation to heat stress, the models forecast a 2.3 percent decline in global emotional positivity attributable solely to high-temperature days by the year 2100. Although this figure may appear modest, it represents a significant psychological burden when extrapolated across billions of individuals, with potential cascading effects on social cohesion, productivity, and mental health infrastructures worldwide.

One of the notable challenges and caveats acknowledged by the researchers pertains to the demographic representativeness of social media users. The platforms analyzed tend to underrepresent certain population segments, such as very young children and the elderly, who are simultaneously known to be disproportionately sensitive to heat-related health risks. Consequently, the study’s estimates of emotional impacts may be conservative, as these vulnerable groups could experience even more pronounced declines in well-being during extreme temperature events but are less likely to express these sentiments online.

Moreover, the study elucidates that while heat stress broadly influences sentiment, the underlying mechanisms may be multifaceted. Physiological discomfort, disrupted sleep patterns, social tensions, and economic pressures exacerbated by climatic extremes all converge to shape emotional responses. Such complexity beckons further multidisciplinary inquiry to disentangle causal pathways and identify mitigating interventions. The authors advocate for integrating emotional resilience into societal adaptation frameworks, recognizing that fostering mental robustness will be crucial alongside traditional physical and infrastructural measures.

The global scope and scale of the dataset stand out as pioneering features. This study represents one of the first attempts to harness social media at a planetary level for environmental psychology research. By analyzing sentiments across nearly 3,000 locations distributed worldwide, the researchers achieved unprecedented geographic granularity, capturing heterogenous cultural and economic contexts that color climate-induced emotional experiences. This breadth affords policymakers and scientists a more detailed understanding of where and how to target support and adaptation efforts.

The research was conducted under the aegis of MIT’s Sustainable Urbanization Lab, a hub for interdisciplinary investigations into the interactions between urban environments, climate change, and human behavior. The team’s collaborative approach brought together experts from MIT, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Harvard University, Duke University, Maastricht University, and the Laureate Institute for Brain Research. This diverse expertise ensured rigorous analysis bridging computational linguistics, urban planning, climatology, and behavioral science.

Importantly, the dataset produced by this investigation has been made publicly accessible through the Global Sentiment project, enabling scientists, urban planners, and policymakers worldwide to explore intricate connections between climate variables and human sentiment. This open resource represents a valuable step toward democratizing climate data and fostering informed, evidence-based responses to the growing emotional and social challenges posed by global warming.

As the planet continues to warm, this research underscores the necessity of broadening our understanding of climate impacts beyond the tangible to include the intangible yet profound alterations in human emotional landscapes. By illuminating the silent suffering induced by extreme heat through the lens of social media, the study calls for urgent action to incorporate psychological well-being into global climate strategies, ensuring not only survival but also the emotional health of societies in the decades ahead.

Subject of Research: The impact of rising global temperatures on human emotional well-being, analyzed through large-scale social media sentiment data.

Article Title: Rising Temperatures Are Altering Human Sentiment Globally

News Publication Date: 21-Aug-2025

Web References: https://www.globalsentiment.mit.edu/

References: DOI 10.1016/j.oneear.2025.101422 (One Earth)

Keywords: Social media, Human behavior, Climatology, Earth climate, Climate change, Climate change adaptation

The causal relationships between environmental stressors and physical health conditions are well documented; however, the nexus between heat and mental health has remained largely elusive in quantitative terms until now. This study pioneers by methodically quantifying the burden of mental health disorders that can be attributed specifically to high temperatures exceeding location-specific thresholds. Utilizing disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), a metric that comprehensively accounts for both morbidity and premature mortality, the researchers have provided a novel lens through which to evaluate the mental health risks posed by climate variability and change.

During the baseline period from 2003 to 2018, the study found that elevated temperatures contributed to an annual loss of 8,458 disability-adjusted life years in Australia. This figure may seem abstract, but it strikingly represents 1.8% of the total burden of mental and behavioural disorders nationwide, underscoring a nuanced yet significant environmental determinant of mental health outcomes. The data illuminates how heat exposure translates not only into acute stress and discomfort but also into pervasive, lasting impacts on psychological functioning at the population level.

Importantly, the analysis employed a robust framework that integrates both climatic parameters and demographic variables across the entirety of Australia’s diverse geographic regions. By calibrating temperature thresholds to regional norms, the study ensures that its findings accurately reflect the local realities of heat exposure rather than relying on generic or global averages. This methodological precision allows for a more refined assessment of vulnerability and resilience within Australia’s population clusters.

Projecting into the future, the study paints a sobering picture under two representative concentration pathways—RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5—which serve as standardized climate scenarios reflecting varying degrees of greenhouse gas emissions and mitigation efforts. Under these scenarios, the burden of mental health disorders attributable to high temperature is expected to rise substantially. Estimates suggest an 11.0 to 17.2% increase by the 2030s and a staggering 27.5 to 48.9% surge by the 2050s relative to the baseline period. These projections highlight the escalating mental health toll that unmitigated climate warming will likely inflict on Australian society.

Such sharp increases carry immense implications for healthcare infrastructure, social services, and policy formulation. The growing volume of temperature-linked mental health conditions could strain psychiatric and counselling services, exacerbate social inequalities, and amplify economic costs related to lost productivity and care. The multi-decade horizon of the projections demands proactive strategies focusing not only on reducing carbon footprints but also on enhancing adaptive capacity within communities and healthcare systems.

Adaptation strategies emphasized by the researchers include improving heat warning systems, expanding mental health support during heatwaves, and integrating mental health considerations into climate resilience planning. These approaches can attenuate the adverse effects of warming temperatures, particularly in vulnerable groups such as the elderly, those with pre-existing mental health conditions, and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations. Tailored interventions, informed by region-specific climatic and demographic factors, will be critical in reducing the growing burden.

Beyond adaptation, the study calls for aggressive mitigation efforts to curb global temperature rise. Without significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, the projections indicate that mental health burdens related to heat will amplify, reinforcing the intertwined nature of environmental and public health crises. This underscores the multidimensional benefits of climate action, where protecting the planet concurrently safeguards psychological well-being.

From a technical perspective, this research leverages sophisticated epidemiological modeling coupled with climate data analytics. By integrating health outcome databases with spatiotemporal temperature records, the authors isolate the fraction of mental health burden directly attributable to heat exposures surpassing local thresholds. This methodological innovation addresses prior gaps in understanding the specific contributions of heat stress rather than conflating it with other environmental or socioeconomic determinants.

Moreover, the use of DALYs as the evaluation metric allows for capturing both the years lived with disability and those lost due to premature death, rendering a comprehensive view of health impacts. This aligns with best practices in global health assessments, enabling comparability and policy relevance. The detailed projections further incorporate uncertainty ranges, reflecting different assumptions about population growth, urbanization, and possible adaptation measures, lending robustness to the scenario analyses.

The research also prompts a reevaluation of mental health discourse in the context of climate change. Traditionally, discussions have focused on extreme weather disasters or indirect psychosocial stressors. However, this study spotlights a chronic, insidious pathway whereby persistent heat exposure incrementally degrades mental well-being, potentially contributing to mood disorders, anxiety, cognitive impairments, and exacerbations of existing psychiatric conditions.

Given Australia’s uniquely diverse climate zones—from tropical regions to temperate and arid areas—the findings emphasize heterogeneity in risk profiles and call for geographically nuanced responses. Urban centers, prone to heat island effects, may face disproportionately higher burdens, while isolated rural communities might encounter barriers to both healthcare access and adaptive infrastructure, compounding vulnerabilities.

The temporal trends revealed in the projections further indicate an urgent window for intervention. The relatively near-term increases anticipated by the 2030s suggest that failure to implement timely adaptation and mitigation policies could lock in escalating mental health repercussions. As global temperatures continue their upward trajectory, understanding these subtle yet impactful health consequences becomes critical for comprehensive climate resilience.

In conclusion, this pioneering investigation draws a clear and concerning connection between rising ambient temperatures and mental health burdens. Highlighting a previously underappreciated facet of climate change impacts, it provides policymakers, clinicians, and researchers with crucial evidence to inform integrated health-climate strategies. Australia stands at a crossroads, facing the intertwined challenges of environmental change and mental health, with this study illuminating the pathway forward—combining mitigation of emissions with targeted adaptation measures to protect the psychological well-being of its population in a warming world.

Subject of Research: The burden of mental and behavioural disorders attributable to high-temperature exposure in Australia under current and projected climate scenarios.

Article Title: Increasing burden of poor mental health attributable to high temperature in Australia.

Article References:
Liu, J., Varghese, B.M., Hansen, A. et al. Increasing burden of poor mental health attributable to high temperature in Australia. Nat. Clim. Chang. (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-025-02309-x

Image Credits: AI Generated