Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Scientific Reports logoLink to Scientific Reports
. 2024 Aug 20;14:19314. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-69920-4

Opportunity to view the starry night sky is linked to human emotion and behavioral interest in astronomy

Rodolfo Cortes Barragan 1,✉, Andrew N Meltzoff 1,2,✉
PMCID: PMC11336222  PMID: 39164331

Abstract

Prior to the modern era, the stars in the night sky were readily visible across the globe, but light pollution has created disparities in the opportunity to see these astronomical objects with the naked eye. This alteration may measurably impact human behavior. We hypothesize that light pollution is related to the development of people’s interest in astronomy, which often serves as a “gateway” to science more broadly. In a state-by-state analysis, we used location information to examine astronomy interest data for millions of US residents. Results show that, among populations with low light pollution, a feeling of “wonder about the universe” is prevalent (r = 0.50). We found that this human emotion mediates the association between low light pollution and behavioral interest in astronomy. Although the effects of light pollution on astronomy, biology, ecology, and health are well-known, the present work demonstrates that light pollution is also relevant to human scientific behavior, with broad implications for science education and society.

Subject terms: Psychology and behaviour, Human behaviour

Introduction

In addition to being a problem for ground-based astronomy1–3, anthropogenic light at night is transforming world ecologies4–6. Even in locations hundreds of kilometers away from the main sources of artificial light—the urban areas—the propagation of light through the atmosphere degrades the visibility of the night skies7. This artificial light has consequences for biological processes as diverse as animal migration8, pollination9, circadian rhythms10, and gene expression11. Artificial light at night also affects human health12,13. There is a growing consensus that this light can be considered a conventional environmental pollutant14. A major underexplored issue is how light pollution, which blocks humans’ natural views of the starry night sky, might affect human behavior and even scientific curiosity.

Prior to incandescent street and building lighting, starlight served as a fixture of the nighttime for human groups around the globe15. Human civilizations relied on the stars to inform agricultural, navigational, and cultural practices16. In the industrial era, stars in the night sky began to disappear from the daily experience of urban populations17,18. This anthropogenic phenomenon is growing rapidly, and the stars are becoming a rare sight for many human populations2,7,19. These changes in the visibility of the starry night sky may plausibly affect human psychology and behavior, especially in relation to interest in one of humanity’s oldest sciences—astronomy.

We hypothesized that there would be a specific psychological mediator between the loss of the visible starry night sky and dampened behavioral interest in astronomy: A feeling of “wonder” about the universe. Indeed, historic and modern astronomers have informally reported that their own inspiration for studying the universe was seeing the starry night sky and feeling “wonder” about the universe20–24. These narratives are consistent with theories in psychological science, which propose that wonder—a human emotion combining curiosity, amazement, and elation—is a strong motivator of human behaviour25. Wonder involves recognizing gaps in current understanding and endeavoring to bridge those gaps by acquiring new knowledge26. Here we hypothesize that the loss of the visible starry night sky reduces the opportunities for humans to feel wonder about the universe and dampens interest in astronomy, a “gateway science”27.

Results

At the level of the individual person, there are no known measures of exposure to light pollution. Thus, we examined physical measurements of artificial night sky brightness, as reported at the state level in the US by Falchi and colleagues28. Consistent with their call to use their dataset to explore issues in the behavioral sciences2,7,28, we focused on gradients of light pollution that allow the naked human eye to view nighttime stars at the zenith, i.e., low light pollution (Fig. 1a; also see Supplementary Information, Sect. 1.1 for measurement details).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

State maps of low light pollution, wonder about the universe, astronomy interest, and correlations between measures. (a) Map of US states showing low light pollution28, purple (darker purple indicates less light pollution). (b) Map of US states showing respondents’ sense of wonder about the universe from the Pew Research Center29, pink (darker pink indicates more wonder about the universe). (c) Pearson correlations between low light pollution and wonder about the universe, and between low light pollution and other psychological emotions. (d) Map of US states showing composite measure of behavioral interest in astronomy, blue (darker blue indicates more interest in astronomy). All measures are z-standardized and defined in the Supplemental Information (also see Methods).

Contemporaneously with Falchi et al.28 collecting measurements, the Pew Research Center collected data from 35,071 US respondents using a rigorous survey that captured psychological measures from a representative sample of residents in each state29. This Pew survey included the psychological question “How often do you feel a deep sense of wonder about the universe?” measured on a 5-point Likert scale (Supplementary Information, Sect. 1.2). This measure varied by state across the US (Fig. 1b).

Light pollution and wonder about the universe

Our analyses of these two independent datasets show a positive association at the state level between low light pollution and feelings of wonder about the universe, r = 0.50, p < 0.001 (Fig. 1c). Importantly, the Pew survey also measured three other psychological questions that served as controls in the present study, because they were collected in randomized order on the same individuals who answered the question about wonder (specifically, Pew collected measures of gratitude/thankfulness, spiritual peace/well-being, and meaning/purpose of life, Supplementary Information, Sect. 1.2). These psychological variables also varied by state across the US (Supplementary Fig. 1), but there was no significant association (ps > 0.27) between low light pollution and any of these control covariates (Fig. 1c).

For completeness, we note that for a sample of 50 (df = 48), a Pearson r coefficient would need to meet or exceed r = 0.28 [absolute value] to achieve p < 0.05. Also, because the low light pollution data were skewed, necessitating interpretive caution, we re-calculated the r using a dichotomous median split for the light pollution data, and found that the correlation remained significant, see Supplementary Information, Sect. 2.

Wonder about the universe and astronomy interest

Psychological perspectives hold that emotions such as wonder can drive learning and exploration30,31. We hypothesized that wonder about the universe would be associated with behavioral interest in astronomy, and developed eight measures of such interest at the state level (Supplementary Information, Sects. 1.3–1.9).

The first measure was seeking to learn about astronomy. Using the billions of searches conducted on Google32, we found that states with more wonder about the universe also have a higher proportion of total internet searches for “astronomy,” r = 0.52, p < 0.001 (Supplementary Information, Sect. 1.3 and Supplementary Fig. 2a).

Second, we examined people’s interest in contributing to astronomical knowledge. We found a positive association between state-level wonder about the universe and the percent of the state population that submits data to the NSF-NOIRLab’s citizen scientist project Globe at Night33, r = 0.40, p = 0.004 (Supplementary Information, Sect. 1.4 and Supplementary Fig. 2b).

Third, interest in astronomy may be seen more broadly in popular culture, and Nobel laureate astrophysicist Kip Thorne consulted on a scientifically-grounded film depiction of exoplanetary exploration, Interstellar34. State-level wonder was positively associated with the state-level proportion of peoples’ web video searches for Interstellar, r = 0.50, p < 0.001 (Supplementary Information, Sect. 1.5 and Supplementary Fig. 2c).

The fourth and fifth analyses were conducted on a measure of peoples’ interest in voyaging to another planet. Specifically, signing up to have their name inscribed on a chip and sent to Mars affixed to NASA’s InSight lander and Perseverance rover. State-level wonder about the universe was positively associated with the percent of the state population that submitted their name to voyage aboard InSight, r = 0.56, p < 0.001, and Perseverance, r = 0.65, p < 0.001 (Supplementary Information, Sect. 1.6 and Supplementary Fig. 2d,e).

Sixth, people can take concrete steps to send their physical selves into space by training to become an astronaut. In 2020, NASA invited astronaut applications from those with documented STEM backgrounds, and more than 12,000 applied to join this “Artemis Generation.” We submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to NASA, and they released to us the number of astronaut applications from each of the states. State-level wonder about the universe was positively associated with the percent of people from each state with STEM-related backgrounds who applied to become a NASA astronaut, r = 0.34, p = 0.017 (Supplementary Information, Sect. 1.7 and Supplementary Fig. 2f.).

Seventh, the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is NASA’s latest large strategic science mission27, and millions of people “follow” the telescope via Twitter (now X). We found that state-level wonder about the universe was positively associated with the percent of the state population that follows @NASAWebb, r = 0.53, p < 0.001 (Supplementary Information, Sect. 1.8 and Supplementary Fig. 2g).

Eighth, wonder about the universe may correlate with general interest in NASA, which can be indexed by subscriptions to the NASA Newsletter. Via a FOIA request, we received more than 975K de-identified records from NASA and found that state-level wonder about the universe was positively associated with the percent of the state population subscribed to NASA’s Newsletter, r = 0.37, p = 0.009 (Supplementary Information, Sect. 1.9 and Supplementary Fig. 2h).

Finally, we formed a composite measure of “behavioral interest in astronomy” (Fig. 1d; also see Supplementary Information, Sect. 1.10). As expected, there was a significant positive association between this state-level composite measure of behavioral interest in astronomy and state-level feelings of wonder about the universe (from the Pew survey), r = 0.64, p < 0.001 (Fig. 2a). Also as expected, there were no significant associations between behavioral interest in astronomy and the other variables from the Pew survey that served as controls in this study (Fig. 2b–d).

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Scatterplots of association of wonder about the universe (and other emotions) with behavioral interest in astronomy (N = 50 states). (a) scatterplot showing significant correlation between wonder about the universe and composite measure of behavioral interest in astronomy (pink). (b–d) Scatterplots of the nonsignificant correlations between other control psychological measures and composite measure of behavioral interest in astronomy (gray). Shaded areas show 95% confidence intervals. All measures are z-standardized (see Methods).

Mediation analyses

We used statistical mediation models to assess the connections among light pollution, wonder about the universe, and behavioral interest in astronomy, using 95% confidence intervals with 5,000 bootstrap samples35. If a variable is demonstrated to serve as a “mediator,” it can be said to serve as a link between two other variables35 (see Methods). We examined whether wonder about the universe mediates between light pollution and behavioral interest in astronomy, even when controlling for other possible demographic covariates.

In this mediation analysis, we tested whether the observed positive association between low light pollution and behavioral interest in astronomy, r = 0.45, p < 0.001, was mediated by wonder about the universe. As hypothesized, this effect was obtained: mediator effect ab = 0.21, 95% C.I. [0.09, 0.35] (Fig. 3a,b). Additionally, we examined potential confounders: education, poverty, race, population size, and population density (Supplementary Information, Sect. 1.11). When including these covariates, wonder about the universe was still a significant mediator between light pollution and behavioral interest in astronomy, mediator effect ab = 0.14, 95% C.I. [0.04, 0.28], and education was the only covariate associated with behavioral interest in astronomy (see Table 1). When we performed sensitivity analyses by analyzing the data using alternative models, we obtained substantively similar results (Supplementary Information, Sect. 3).

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

Mediation analysis. (a) Beta weights of the regression coefficients in mediation model showing low light pollution correlated with wonder about the universe (Path a) and wonder about the universe correlated with interest in astronomy (Path b), with the mediator (indirect) effect ab = 0.21. ***p < 0.001. (b) Smoothed density plots showing distribution of bootstrapped beta values produced in (a) by Hayes’ PROCESS Model 435 with the following indicators: dashed vertical red line (beta value of zero), solid horizontal orange lines (95% confidence intervals of bootstrapped beta values), orange squares (medians of bootstrapped beta values).

Table 1.

Model summary, including covariates, predicting behavioral interest in astronomy (using Hayes’ PROCESS Model 4 procedure [35]).

Variable b b SE t p 95% C.I
Low light pollution 0.20 0.10 1.96 0.057 − 0.01–0.40
Wonder about the universe 0.27 0.09 3.09 0.0036 0.09–0.45
Covariates
 Education 0.43 0.12 3.57 0.00091 0.19–0.67
 Poverty 0.07 0.12 0.57 0.57 − 0.17–0.30
 Race 0.07 0.09 0.76 0.45 − 0.11–0.24
 Population size 0.05 0.09 0.57 0.57 − 0.12–0.22
 Population density − 0.09 0.10 − 0.90 0.38 − 0.29–0.11
Open in a new tab

All measures were z-standardized. N = 50 states.

Discussion

Light pollution has adverse consequences for biological and ecological systems4–13,36 as well as for the science of astronomy itself1,2,37. However, its effects on human behavior have been understudied. In this investigation, by combining data from the physical and psychological sciences, we showed that low light pollution is linked with the tendency of the population to feel wonder about the universe and to become interested in exploring it. This association exhibited some specificity—other psychological measures that had been measured in the same individuals at the same time in tandem with wonder about the universe were not associated with light pollution. The inclusion of multiple demographic covariates did not change the significant findings in the mediation model. That is, the mediation modelling still showed that a psychological factor (wonder about the universe) mediated the association between the physical environment (light pollution) and human behavior (interest in astronomy).

These findings suggest that humans’ loss of the opportunity to see the starry night sky is related to peoples’ behavior. From a human developmental and educational perspective, one is immediately drawn to the question of whether light pollution may influence the development of children’s and adolescents’ interest in science38–41. For example, seeing the starry night sky might prompt youths to think more about the physical universe, and to join relevant social/academic affinity groups to advance this knowledge as they develop academically42,43. One empirical study in central coastal California (a region of somewhat low light pollution) found that children as young as three- and four-years of age express curiosity about astronomical objects, asking caregivers for explanations (e.g., “Why do the stars shine?”)44. The opportunity to see the stars in the night sky could engender interest in astronomy and greater chances of gaining practice in everyday scientific thinking. Indeed, many astronomers report that, in their youth, seeing the night sky triggered a feeling of “wonder” about the universe, and that this was a motivator for them aspiring to become a scientist20–24,45. Further psychological work is needed to understand how children’s feelings of wonder and awe46–48 interact with early caregiver support44,49 and experiences in formal education50,51 to promote interest and engagement with astronomy, the natural world, and the process of science to address questions about the universe.

Additionally, data from diverse cultures are needed. This is especially the case for Africa, Latin America, Oceania, as well as European countries where light pollution is rapidly encroaching upon formerly pristine dark skies52,53. To combat this, light pollution researchers54 and architects55 are proposing interventions on lighting practices. Keeping light pollution in check may nurture “citizen science”1,2,33 which, itself, engenders public enthusiasm and financial support for science27. When interdisciplinary teams of scientists partner with communities most affected by light pollution (and other environmental challenges56,57) both science and society can benefit58–62.

We acknowledge two limitations of the present work. First, our findings are at the level of the US states and do not apply to individual people, which logically constrains the inferences that can be drawn63,64. Research that examines light pollution, wonder about the universe, and astronomy interest within the same individual, rather than at the state level, is needed. A second limitation is that correlations do not specify causality, and it remains possible that those who have an interest in astronomy, or a sense of wonder about the universe, may choose to live in low light pollution states. To more directly address causality, longitudinal studies of people as they develop intellectual interests, coupled with random-assignment educational interventions, would be valuable.

Conclusion

Light pollution is recognized as an international concern. UNESCO representatives, government officials, and scientists jointly authored the La Palma Declaration, classifying the unpolluted night sky as an “inalienable right of humankind”65. Astronomers1 and light pollution researchers66 are calling for concrete actions to curb light pollution. As suggested here, increasing access to the starry night sky may also help to promote more equitable opportunities to feel wonder about the universe, which can motivate interest and engagement in science20,67. The present findings thus begin to suggest how light pollution is not only impacting biological and ecological processes, but also human behavior, science education, and society.

Methods

Analytic strategy

All analyses used the 50 US states68. All measures were z-scored to allow construction of the composite score, and to facilitate comparisons among the measures and between the states. Positive/negative z-scores indicate the values are above/below the central tendency of the distribution for that measure. Prior to mediation analyses, regression assumptions were checked and met.

Mediation analysis method

In mediation analysis35, the predictor variable X is examined for its effect on mediator variable M (Path a), and M is examined for its effect on outcome variable Y (Path b). The mediator (indirect) effect, ab, is the product of Path a and Path b. The effect of X on Y is Path c. Path c’ is the effect of X on Y while accounting for M. Mediation was tested with Hayes’ PROCESS modeling tool (Model 4)35.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information. (918.7KB, pdf)
Supplementary Tables. (51.4KB, xlsx)

Acknowledgements

We thank E. Sanders and R. Brooks for valuable statistical advice. For feedback on earlier drafts, we are grateful to S. Hawley, P. Kuhl, C. Dweck, E. Brummelman, M. Hahn, E. Sanders, and R. Brooks. We thank the Stanford University Diversifying Academia, Recruiting Excellence (DARE) Doctoral Fellowship Program, the National Science Foundation’s Broadening Participation Postdoctoral Research Award (Grant 1807789), and the Bezos Family Foundation for their generous support. The opinions expressed herein, including any implications for policy, are those of the authors and not of Pew Research Center or funders. The Pew Research Center and funders bear no responsibility for the analyses or interpretations of the data presented here.

Author contributions

R.C.B. and A.N.M. designed the research. R.C.B. performed research. R.C.B. analyzed data. R.C.B. and A.N.M. wrote the paper.

Data availability

The datasets that support the findings of this study are available as raw data (Supplementary Table 1) and as the z-transformed analytic dataset (Supplementary Table 2).

Code availability

No special statistical code was used beyond that standardly embedded in R, RStudio, R packages (ggplot2, ggridges, usmap), SPSS 28.0.0.0, and Hayes’ PROCESS 4.2. Geocodio software was used to convert latitude and longitude to geographical units (for Globe at Night). FileMaker (Version 19) was used to code text data into geographical units (for JWST and the NASA Newsletter).

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Footnotes

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Contributor Information

Rodolfo Cortes Barragan, Email: barragan@uw.edu.

Andrew N. Meltzoff, Email: meltzoff@uw.edu

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41598-024-69920-4.

References

  • 1.Editorial Board. Let there be (natural) light. Nat. Astron.7, 235 (2023).
  • 2.Falchi, F. & Bará, S. Light pollution is skyrocketing. Science379, 234–235 (2023). 10.1126/science.adf4952 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Green, R. F., Luginbuhl, C. B., Wainscoat, R. J. & Duriscoe, D. The growing threat of light pollution to ground-based observatories. Astron. Astrophys. Rev.30, 1 (2022). 10.1007/s00159-021-00138-3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Sanders, D., Frago, E., Kehoe, R., Patterson, C. & Gaston, K. J. A meta-analysis of biological impacts of artificial light at night. Nat. Ecol. Evol.5, 74–81 (2021). 10.1038/s41559-020-01322-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Gaston, K. J., Bennie, J., Davies, T. W. & Hopkins, J. The ecological impacts of nighttime light pollution: A mechanistic appraisal. Biol. Rev. Camb. Phil. Soc.88, 912–927 (2013). 10.1111/brv.12036 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Hölker, F., Wolter, C., Perkin, E. K. & Tockner, K. Light pollution as a biodiversity threat. Trends Ecol. Evol.25, 681–682 (2010). 10.1016/j.tree.2010.09.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Falchi, F. et al. The new world atlas of artificial night sky brightness. Sci. Adv.2, e1600377 (2016). 10.1126/sciadv.1600377 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Horton, K. G. et al. Artificial light at night is a top predictor of bird migration stopover density. Nat. Commun.14, 7446 (2023). 10.1038/s41467-023-43046-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Knop, E. et al. Artificial light at night as a new threat to pollination. Nature548, 206–209 (2017). 10.1038/nature23288 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Haim, A. & Zubidat, A. E. Artificial light at night: Melatonin as a mediator between the environment and epigenome. Philos. Trans. R Soc. B Biol. Sci.370, 20140121 (2015). 10.1098/rstb.2014.0121 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Giraudeau, M., Sepp, T., Ujvari, B., Ewald, P. W. & Thomas, F. Human activities might influence oncogenic processes in wild animal populations. Nat. Ecol. Evol.2, 1065–1070 (2018). 10.1038/s41559-018-0558-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Walker, W. H., Walton, J. C., DeVries, A. C. & Nelson, R. J. Circadian rhythm disruption and mental health. Transl. Psychiatry10, 28 (2020). 10.1038/s41398-020-0694-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Dominoni, D. M., Borniger, J. C. & Nelson, R. J. Light at night, clocks and health: From humans to wild organisms. Biol. Lett.12, 20160015 (2016). 10.1098/rsbl.2016.0015 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Bará, S. & Falchi, F. Artificial light at night: a global disruptor of the night-time environment. Philos. Trans. R Soc. B Biol. Sci.378, 20220352 (2023). 10.1098/rstb.2022.0352 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Selin, H. Astronomy Across Cultures: The History of Non-Western Astronomy (Springer, 2000). [Google Scholar]
  • 16.North, J. Cosmos: An Illustrated History of Astronomy and Cosmology (University of Chicago Press, 2008). [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Gallaway, T. On light pollution, passive pleasures, and the instrumental value of beauty. J. Econ. Issues44, 71–88 (2010). 10.2753/JEI0021-3624440104 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Koslofsky, C. Evening’s Empire: A History of the Night in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge University Press, 2011). [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Davies, T. W. & Smyth, T. Why artificial light at night should be a focus for global change research in the 21st century. Glob. Change Biol.24, 872–882 (2018). 10.1111/gcb.13927 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Prescod-Weinstein, C. The Disordered Cosmos: A Journey into Dark Matter, Spacetime, & Dreams Deferred (Bold Type, 2021). [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Rees, M. Our Cosmic Habitat (Princeton University Press, 2008). [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Ghose, S. Her Space, Her Time: How Trailblazing Women Scientists Decoded the Hidden Universe (Random House, 2023). [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Loeb, A. Extraterrestrial: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2021). [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Hawking, S. Brief Answers to the Big Questions (Bantam Books, 2018). [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Paulson, S., Shiota, M. L., Henderson, C. & Filippenko, A. V. Unpacking wonder: From curiosity to comprehension. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci.1501, 10–29 (2021). 10.1111/nyas.14317 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Shiota, M. L. Awe, wonder, and the human mind. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci.1501, 85–89 (2021). 10.1111/nyas.14588 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics for the 2020s (National Academies Press, 2021).
  • 28.Falchi, F. et al. Light pollution in USA and Europe: The good, the bad and the ugly. J. Environ. Manag.248, 109227 (2019). 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.06.128 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Pew Research Center. 2014 Religious Landscape Studyhttps://www.pewforum.org/about-the-religious-landscape-study/ (2016).
  • 30.Fredrickson, B. L. The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. Am. Psychol.56, 218–226 (2001). 10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Keltner, D. & Haidt, J. Approaching awe, a moral, spiritual, and aesthetic emotion. Cogn. Emot.7, 297–314 (2003). 10.1080/02699930302297 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Choi, H. & Varian, H. Predicting the present with Google Trends. Econ. Rec.88, 2–9 (2012). 10.1111/j.1475-4932.2012.00809.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Kyba, C. C. M., Altıntaş, Y. Ö., Walker, C. E. & Newhouse, M. Citizen scientists report global rapid reductions in the visibility of stars from 2011 to 2022. Science379, 265–268 (2023). 10.1126/science.abq7781 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Thorne, K. The Science of Interstellar (Norton, 2014). [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Hayes, A. F. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach (Guilford Press, 2018). [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Dominoni, D. M. et al. Why conservation biology can benefit from sensory ecology. Nat. Ecol. Evol.4, 502–511 (2020). 10.1038/s41559-020-1135-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Falchi, F. et al. Light pollution indicators for all the major astronomical observatories. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.519, 26–33 (2023). 10.1093/mnras/stac2929 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Hayes, C. R. et al. First results from the Dark Skies, Bright Kids astronomy club draw-a-scientist test. Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res.16, 010131 (2020). 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.16.010131 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Meltzoff, A. N., Kuhl, P. K., Movellan, J. & Sejnowski, T. J. Foundations for a new science of learning. Science325, 284–288 (2009). 10.1126/science.1175626 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Gopnik, A. & Meltzoff, A. N. Words, Thoughts, and Theories (MIT Press, 1997). [Google Scholar]
  • 41.O’Keefe, P. A., Dweck, C. S. & Walton, G. M. Implicit theories of interest: Finding your passion or developing it?. Psychol. Sci.29, 1653–1664 (2018). 10.1177/0956797618780643 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Master, A., Cheryan, S. & Meltzoff, A. N. Social group membership increases STEM engagement among preschoolers. Dev. Psychol.53, 201–209 (2017). 10.1037/dev0000195 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Meltzoff, A. N. Origins of social cognition: Bidirectional self-other mapping and the “Like-Me” hypothesis. In Navigating the Social World: What Infants, Children, and Other Species Can Teach Us (eds Banaji, M. & Gelman, S.) 139–144 (Oxford University Press, 2013). [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Callanan, M. A., Shirefley, T. A., Castañeda, C. L. & Jipson, J. L. Young children’s ideas about astronomy. J. Astron. Earth Sci. Educ.6, 45–58 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Johnson, K. E. Dark skies, bright kids: Helping young students reach for the stars. University of Virginia Magazinehttps://uvamagazine.org/articles/dark_skies_bright_kids (2012).
  • 46.Stamkou, E., Brummelman, E., Dunham, R., Nikolic, M. & Keltner, D. Awe sparks prosociality in children. Psychol. Sci.34, 455–467 (2023). 10.1177/09567976221150616 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Campos, B., Shiota, M. N., Keltner, D., Gonzaga, G. C. & Goetz, J. L. What is shared, what is different? Core relational themes and expressive displays of eight positive emotions. Cogn. Emot.27, 37–52 (2013). 10.1080/02699931.2012.683852 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Goldy, S. P., Jones, N. M. & Piff, P. The social effects of an awesome solar eclipse. Psychol. Sci.33, 1452–1462 (2022). 10.1177/09567976221085501 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Cortes Barragan, R., Brooks, R., Sanders, E. A. & Meltzoff, A. N. Prosociality in young Latinx children: Exploring the role of grandparents. J. Lat. Psychol.12, 79–99 (2024). 10.1037/lat0000241 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Goudeau, S. et al. What causes social class disparities in education? The role of mismatches between academic contexts and working-class socialization context and how the effects of mismatches are explained. Psych. Rev. (in press). [DOI] [PubMed]
  • 51.Master, A., Meltzoff, A. N. & Cheryan, S. Gender stereotypes about interests start early and cause gender disparities in computer science and engineering. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA118, e2100030118 (2021). 10.1073/pnas.2100030118 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Mu, H. et al. Evaluation of light pollution in global protected areas from 1992 to 2018. Remote Sens.13, 1849 (2021). 10.3390/rs13091849 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Kaushik, K., Nair, S. & Ahamad, A. Studying light pollution as an emerging environmental concern in India. J. Urban Manag.11, 392–405 (2022). 10.1016/j.jum.2022.05.012 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Bará, S., Falchi, F., Lima, R. C. & Pawley, M. Can we illuminate our cities and (still) see the stars?. Int. J. Sustain. Lighting23, 58–69 (2021). 10.26607/ijsl.v23i2.113 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Zielinska-Dabkowska, K. M. Healthier and environmentally responsible sustainable cities and communities. A new design framework and planning approach for urban illumination. Sustainability14, 14525 (2022). 10.3390/su142114525 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.van de Linden, S. & Weber, E. U. Editorial overview: Can behavioral science solve the climate crisis?. Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci.42, iii–viii (2021). 10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.09.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Imaz, M. & Sheinbaum-Pardo, C. Science and technology in the framework of the sustainable development goals. World J. Sci. Technol. Sustain.14, 2–17 (2017). [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Varela Perez, A. M. The increasing effects of light pollution on professional and amateur astronomy. Science380, 1136–1140 (2023). 10.1126/science.adg0269 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Venkatesan, A., Lowenthal, J., Prem, P. & Vidaurri, M. The impact of satellite constellations on space as an ancestral global commons. Nat. Astron.4, 1043–1048 (2020). 10.1038/s41550-020-01238-3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Moreno, J. Creation of inclusive spaces with astromimicry. Nat. Astron.6, 291 (2022). 10.1038/s41550-022-01635-w [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Venkatesan, A. et al. Towards inclusive practices with indigenous knowledge. Nat. Astron.3, 1035–1037 (2019). 10.1038/s41550-019-0953-2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Prescod-Weinstein, C. Curiosity and the end of discrimination. Nat. Astron.1, 0145 (2017). 10.1038/s41550-017-0145 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Robinson, W. S. Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. Am. Sociol. Rev.15, 351–357 (1950). 10.2307/2087176 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Brewer, P. & Venaik, S. The ecological fallacy in national culture research. Organ. Stud.35, 1063–1086 (2014). 10.1177/0170840613517602 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Starlight Initiative. Declaration in Defence of the Night Sky and the Right to Starlight. In International Conference in Defence of the Quality of the Night Sky and the Right to Observe the Stars, 1–8 https://fundacionstarlight.org/docs/files/33_english-declaration-in-defense-of-the-quality-of-the-night-sky-and-the-right-to-starlight.pdf (2007).
  • 66.Falchi, F., Bará, S., Cinzano, P., Lima, R. C. & Pawley, M. A call for scientists to halt the spoiling of the night sky with artificial light and satellites. Nat. Astron.7, 237–239 (2023). 10.1038/s41550-022-01864-z [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Determann, J. M. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Astronomy: A Modern History (Springer, 2023). [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Rentfrow, P. J. Geographical psychology. Curr. Opin. Psychol.32, 165–170 (2020). 10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.09.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Information. (918.7KB, pdf)
Supplementary Tables. (51.4KB, xlsx)

Data Availability Statement

The datasets that support the findings of this study are available as raw data (Supplementary Table 1) and as the z-transformed analytic dataset (Supplementary Table 2).

No special statistical code was used beyond that standardly embedded in R, RStudio, R packages (ggplot2, ggridges, usmap), SPSS 28.0.0.0, and Hayes’ PROCESS 4.2. Geocodio software was used to convert latitude and longitude to geographical units (for Globe at Night). FileMaker (Version 19) was used to code text data into geographical units (for JWST and the NASA Newsletter).

Articles from Scientific Reports are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES