The increasing uncertainty with global change often stifles action and results in calls for more data before moving beyond status quo environmental decisions (Mahapatra and Ratha 2016, Ripple et al. 2017, Montefalcone et al. 2025). Advancing science and collecting more data are crucial; however, science alone (i.e., “western” or “positivist” science, as described in Fuller 2001; Reid et al. 2021) may be insufficient to reduce uncertainty to a comfortable level for decision making. Therefore, increasing personal and collective capacity to make proactive decisions may require decision makers to recognize that their own understanding of the world, and therefore interpretation of scientific data, is influenced by all Four Realms of human perception: Physical, Mental, Emotional, and Transcendental (Wolf 2017, Dukes et al. 2021, Clifford et al. 2022). Empirically trained “positivist” scientists are often skilled in Physical and Mental Realm understanding but may be less well-equipped in Emotional and Transcendental Realm understanding (Fuller 2001, Park et al. 2020, Tashakkori et al. 2020). A Four Realms understanding of uncertainty remains connected to scientific data while also acknowledging inherently human perception of uncertainty, including emotional responses and transcendental grounding. Here, pairing scientific knowledge from the Physical and Mental Realm with one's own Emotional and Transcendental Realm understanding may contribute to proactive data-driven decisions rooted in intra- and interpersonal connections (Wolf 2017, Wilson-Mendenhall and Dunne 2021, Gerber et al. 2023). In this special session, participants and organizers collectively explored techniques to raise cognitive awareness of how the Four Realms affect their own perception (Table 1). To read and think about the Four Realms is a Mental Realm form of understanding. To better understand the role of the Emotional Realm in one's work requires feeling and acknowledging emotions that come up. To better understand the role of the Transcendental Realm in one's work requires connecting to something greater than oneself. But how? During our session, we invited participants to practice techniques in pairs, layering on complexities as the session progressed. We used multiple techniques to explore the Four Realms in our session (Table 1) and highlight two techniques in more detail below. The Five Whys described here is adapted from previous applications in problem solving, goal setting, and decision making (Ohno 1988, Selmer 2004, Serrat 2017). Asking why is a way to uncover underlying factors, reveal hidden assumptions, and identify root causes (Ohno 1988, Serrat 2017). Asking why may facilitate deeper understanding and personal reflection (Selmer 2004) as to why people think the way they do (what are their values, sense of purpose, responsibility, and connection to others?). For scientists and practitioners working in complex environmental issues, The Five Whys can help reveal their own Transcendental Realm grounding, which may then increase engagement in and persistence through difficult and uncertain decision contexts (Lane and Klenke 2004). Further, raising cognitive awareness of Emotional and Transcendental Realms in one's self and understanding of others may foster solutions-oriented dialogue even when people disagree over preferred responses to uncertainty (Bell 2013, Buijs and Lawrence 2013, Kimmerer 2013, Shultz et al. 2022, Warren 2023). To start the Five Whys Four Realms exercise, we asked session attendees to think about how uncertainty comes up in their work as an ecologist. We invite you, the reader, to engage in this exercise below by pausing and taking time to answer the prompts as you read. If you were to describe uncertainty to someone, what would you say? Uncertainty is… what? Write down an adjective that comes to mind: Uncertainty is adjective. Looking at what you wrote, now ask “Why?” For example, if you wrote “Uncertainty is uncomfortable” ask “Why is uncertainty uncomfortable?” Or if you wrote “Uncertainty is intriguing” ask “Why is uncertainty intriguing?” Try to make your answer as concise as possible. Make sure to answer why, not how or what. Also, make sure to not simply rephrase the previous statement. Now, looking at your response to the first “why,” ask “why” again. Again, keep the answer brief and make sure you are truly answering why. Repeat this process until you have asked “why” 5 times (see Table 2). It is okay if it is hard to answer. We often do not take time to make explicit the why behind what we think. Sit with it and let your mind expand its scope of consideration. Looking at your Five Why responses, can you identify which realm (or realms) is most associated with each response? It is okay, and expected, that some responses may be difficult to categorize. For example, the statement “uncertainty is uncomfortable” could be considered in the Physical Realm—as physical sensations of uncomfortableness arise (e.g., muscle aching or tension, fidgeting, inability to sit still), and may be considered in the Emotional Realm—as associated emotions arise (e.g., feeling anxious). Similarly, the statement “uncertainty leads to poor decisions” could be considered in the Physical Realm as an observation that one has seen uncertainty lead to poor decisions, and may be considered in the Mental Realm—if one is using logic and reason to determine that uncertainty inherently causes poor decisions. The difficulty in clearly categorizing some responses highlights that each realm is overlapping, and all together contributes to one's holistic perception. There is nothing magical about asking why five times versus four or six, but it is useful to ask enough times that you move through multiple realms in your responses. If you haven't moved into another realm, keep asking why and making sure you are truly answering why, not rephrasing or answering how or what. People are often encouraged to identify common ground to find solutions; however, groups with un-common ground may think more critically, pluralistically, and accurately about a complex topic (Sommers 2006, Phillips et al. 2009). Further, diverse perspectives may help more creative group ideas emerge in uncertainty (Cheruvelil et al. 2014, Jackson 2023). To illustrate, the Table 2 examples depict perspectives with different transcendental grounding (“The world is inherently connected” and “I am responsible for creating a positive future”). Acknowledging the different transcendental groundings may open creative space around how to take personal responsibility for the future while simultaneously recognizing there is so much in the world we cannot control. Additionally, the Five Whys is a useful technique when another person presents a viewpoint that is different from your own. Rather than assuming they are simply “wrong,” and you are “right,” this technique may help you understand why you hold the view you hold and, if you ask others about their “why,” it may help you understand why others hold other views. This can help in developing a pluralistic view of environmental issues and increase understanding and empathy for other views. After completing the Five Why's exercise, we asked participant pairs to share stories with each other of a time they experienced uncertainty in their work. Then, they reflected on their stories and shared with each other if and how emotions arose at the time they were experiencing uncertainty, using as much emotional specificity as possible. We provided participants with an emotion wheel (image search for “feelings wheel” online to find one for yourself), to help them practice emotional granularity (i.e., distinguishing between specific emotions; Barrett et al. 2010; Wilson-Mendenhall and Dunne 2021). Emotion wheels depict more broad emotional categories in the center and more precise emotional descriptions on the outer ring. Practicing emotional granularity allows a person to more specifically identify the emotional response occurring in any given moment. Greater emotional granularity is related to increased ability to cope with stressful situations or unpleasant emotions (Kashdan et al. 2015). In Table 2, we find emotions of discomfort (“Uncertainty is uncomfortable”) and intrigue (“Uncertainty is intriguing”). A more emotionally granular description of “uncomfortable” may be “scared” or “helpless” and a more emotionally granular description of “intriguing” may be “interested” or “curious.” During the session activities, participants in listener roles noted that when a speaker provided a more precise description of an emotion, they were able to empathize more quickly with the speaker. For example, a listener may not know how to best respond when someone describes “anger” (a broad emotional category) but may more quickly empathize with more precise emotional descriptions of feeling “strongly skeptical,” “dismissive,” or “disrespected.” To apply emotional granularity in environmental decision contexts, we suggested to participants to pay attention to emotions as they arise through the decision-making process. This practice increases personal resilience through difficult tasks and increases empathy with others, fostering improved interpersonal connections (Singh 2018, Batavia et al. 2021, Van Kleef and Côté 2022). Acknowledging emotions and practicing emotional granularity is one aspect of mindfulness (Wilson-Mendenhall and Dunne 2021). In turn, mindfulness is particularly powerful in helping specialists (scientists and practitioners) creatively engage in problem solving and move beyond status quo thinking (Lane and Klenke 2004). Combining the Five Whys and emotional granularity may help unlock more creative potential in uncertain environmental decision contexts. Common emotional responses to uncertainty-ridden environmental challenges include dismissive, vulnerable, overwhelming, helpless, or perplexed feelings. Noticing these emotional responses and reflecting on them using the Five Whys may increase intra- and interpersonal understanding. We have observed this type of emotional reflection help people reach shared understanding and commit to a more open minded and creative problem-solving process (Ward et al., Unpublished Manuscript). Thank you to all who came to the Action in Uncertainty Special Session at the 2025 ESA Conference. What a wonderfully engaged audience we had! Also, 90 min is too short! We were barely able to scratch the surface. Participant feedback included a lot of appreciation for teaching specific techniques to tap into the Four Realms and all feedback survey responses indicated participants planned to try to incorporate techniques into their workplace. Many participants indicated that the session content would help them create stronger connections with others to help them work through uncertainty. After learning about the Four Realms in the context of conflict management and transformation (Doermann and Wolf 2012), we (the authors) have been coalescing around the Four Realms as a way for scientists and practitioners to better navigate uncertainty. This is the first time that we dug into the content explicitly with a new group of people. We look forward to engaging with the broader scientific and practitioner community on this topic moving forward! We thank the ESA Annual Meeting organizers for including this Special Session in the 2025 meeting and the session participants. The findings and conclusions in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. NKW initiated and organized the development of the session and manuscript, with significant and extensive support from all coauthors. The authors declare no conflict of interest. Data were not used for the creation of this article.
Ward et al. (2026) studied this question.