People can accurately judge biodiversity through sight and sound

People’s intuitive perception of biodiversity through visual and audio cues is remarkably accurate and aligns closely with scientific measures of biodiversity. This is according to new research published in the British Ecological Society journal, People and Nature.

In a new study led by researchers at the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv), the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ) and the Friedrich Schiller University Jena, participants with no ecological training were asked to sort images and audio recordings of forests based on perceived biodiversity.

The researchers found that the biodiversity levels that participants perceived from the images and audio recordings closely matched the actual biodiversity of the forests.

How we perceive the natural world has implications for our health. Previous research has suggested that it is perceived biodiversity, rather than measured biodiversity, that is linked to our wellbeing.

Lead author Kevin Rozario, iDiv, said: “Because it’s suspected that perceived biodiversity translates into mental health benefits, it’s important to identify what people perceive with regards to biodiversity, what the contribution of the different senses could be, and under which circumstances people’s perception of biodiversity best aligns with what ecologists measure.”

To understand what indicators of biodiversity people were perceiving, the researchers also asked the study participants to sort the images and audio recordings according to any criteria that stood out to them.

Visually, people noticed vegetation density, light conditions or colour. Acoustically, people noticed birdsong characteristics, volume or emotions that the audio evoked.

“Not only are we experiencing an extinction of species, but also and extinction of biodiverse experiences.” said Kevin Rozario.

“We recommend to conserve and restore diverse forests characterised by a variety of tree species and structures to also provide habitats for different vocalising bird species. These conservation measures will have the dual benefit of meeting conservation goals while also increasing people’s experience of biodiversity and therefore likely increasing mental wellbeing.”

In each of the two sorting studies, 48 participants were presented with 57 photographs or 16 audio recordings of forest patches throughout Germany, Belgium and Poland with varying levels of biodiversity.

The actual biodiversity of the forests in the photographs was assessed using a combination of four commonly used forest diversity indicators: tree species richness, forest structural diversity, understory structural diversity and understory abundance. Actual biodiversity in the audio files was measured via bird species richness.

In the study, the researchers asked participants to sort the images and audio recordings based on anything that stood out to them when looking at or listening to the forest stimuli and then sort them based on perceived visual or acoustic diversity, respectively.

The researchers caution that people’s abilities to accurately perceive biodiversity may be reliant on them being able to directly compare environments with different biodiversity levels. They point to similar studies that found that participants could not easily perceive biodiversity when they were asked to rate one environment on its own.

The researchers also note that the majority of their study participants were university educated women and that future studies could look to replicate their methods with more representative samples of the general population.

-ENDS-