The Dispositional Empathy with Nature scale (DEN) — dispositional tendency to understand and share the emotional experience of the natural world — offers a methodological tool for the study of the affective component of environmental concern. In this paper, the factor structure of the Spanish version of the DEN scale is tested (N = 394). The originally proposed one-factor structure is found using exploratory factor analysis — FACTOR program — with Unweighted Least Squares procedure and optimal implementation of parallel analysis (GFI = .99), along with high internal consistency (α = .93). The Spanish DEN scale shows moderate correlations between environmental concern measures (r = .36 – .44, p < .01) and low-to-moderate correlations with dispositional empathy with humans (r = .30 – .42, p < .05), indicating the distinctiveness of the scale. The Spanish version of the DEN scale is an adequate and reliable instrument for the measurement of empathic tendencies towards nature. Some recommendations regarding its future use are made.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmérigoM.AragonésJ. I.De FrutosB.SevillanoV.CortésB. (2007). Underlying dimensions of ecocentric and anthropocentric environmental belief. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 10, 97–103. doi:10.1017/S1138741600006351
2.
AmiotC. E.BastianB. (2015). Toward a psychology of human–animal relations. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 6–47. doi:10.1037/a0038147
3.
Baron-CohenS.WheelwrightS. (2004). The empathy quotient: An investigation of adults, with Asperger Syndrome or high functioning autism, and normal sex differences. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34, 163–175. doi:10.1023/B:JADD.0000022607.19833.00
4.
BatsonC. D. (1991). The altruism question: Toward a social-psychological answer. Hillsdale, NI: Erlbaum.
5.
BerenguerJ. (2007). The effect of empathy in pro-environmental attitudes and behavior. Environment & Behavior, 39, 269–283. doi:10.1177/0013916506292937
6.
BriggsN. E.MacCallumR. C. (2003). Recovery of weak common factors by maximum likelihood and ordinary least squares estimation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38, 25–56. doi:10.1207/S15327906MBR3801_2
7.
BurghardtG. M. (1985). Animal awareness. American Psychologist, 40, 905–919. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.40.8.905
8.
CastelloI.BarberaD. (2015). Cultural entrepreneurship and the role of visuals in interactive frame alignment process. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2015, 13148. doi:10.5465/AMBPP.2015.13148abstract
9.
ClaytonS. (2003). Environmental identity: A conceptual and an operational definition. In ClaytonS.OpotowS. (Eds.), Identity and the natural environment. The psychological significance of nature (pp. 45–65). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
10.
CrowneD. P.MarloweD. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349–354. doi:10.1037/h0047358
11.
DavisM. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 44, 113–126. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113
12.
DunlapR.Van LiereK.MertingA.JonesR. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425–442. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00176
13.
EpleyN.WayztA.AkalisS.CacioppoJ. T. (2008). When we need a human: Motivational determinants of anthropomorphism. Social Cognition, 26, 143–155. doi:10.1521/soco.2008.26.2.143
14.
EpleyN.WaytzA.CacioppoJ. T. (2007). On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114, 864–886. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.864
15.
FerrandoP. J.Anguiano-CarrascoC. (2010). El análisis factorial como técnica de investigación en psicología [Factor analysis as a research technique in psychology]. Papeles del Psicólogo, 31(1), 18–33.
16.
FerrandoP. J.ChicoE. (2000). Adaptación y análisis psicométrico de la escala de deseabilidad social de Marlowe y Crowne [Adaptation and psychometric analysis of the Social Desirability Scale of Marlowe and Crowne]. Psicothema, 12(3), 383–389.
17.
FranzC. M.MayerF. S. (2014). The importance of connection to nature in assessing environmental education programs. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 41, 85–89. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.10.001
18.
GiffordR.SussmanR. (2012). Environmental attitudes. In ClaytonS. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (pp. 65–80). New York: Oxford University Press.
19.
Gomez-BenitoC.NoyaF. G.PaniaguaA. (1999). Actitudes y comportamientos hacia el medio ambiente en España [Attitudes and behaviors towards the environment in Spain]. Madrid: CIS.
20.
HernándezB.HidalgoM. C. (2010). Actitudes y creencias hacia el medio ambiente [Attitudes and beliefs about the environment]. In AragonésJ. I.AmérigoM. (Eds.), Psicología ambiental [Environmental psychology] (pp. 285–306). Madrid: Pirámide.
21.
HernándezB.SuárezE.Corral-VerdugoV.HessS. (2012). The relationship between social and environmental interdependence as an explanation of pro-environmental behavior. Human Ecology Review, 19(1), 1–9.
22.
HornJ. L. (1965). A rationale and technique for estimating the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179–185. doi:10.1007/BF02289447
23.
JylhäK. M.AkramiA. (2015). Social dominance orientation and climate change denial: The role of dominance and system justification. Personality & Individual Differences, 86, 108–111. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.041
24.
KaiserF. G.SchultzP. W.BerenguerJ.Corral-VerdugoV.TankhaG. (2008). Extending planned environmentalism: Anticipated guilt and embarrassment across cultures. European Psychologist, 31, 288–297. doi:10.1027/1016-9040.13.4.288
25.
KalsE.SchumacherD.MontadaL. (1999). Emotional affinity toward nature as a motivational basis to protect nature. Environment & Behavior, 31, 178–202. doi:10.1177/00139169921972056
26.
KelleyT. L. (1935). Essential traits of mental life. Harvard studies in education (Vol. 26). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
27.
Lloret-SeguraS.Ferreres-TraverA.Hernández-BaezaA.Tomás-MarcoI. (2014). El análisis factorial exploratorio de los ítems: una guía práctica, revisada y actualizada [Exploratory factor analysis of items: A practical, reviewed, and up-to-date guide]. Anales de Psicología, 30, 1151–1169. doi:10.6018/analesps.30.3.199361
28.
López-PérezB.Fernández-PintoI.AbadF. J. (2008). TECA. Test de Empatía Cognitiva y Afectiva [TECA. Cognitive and Affective Empathy Test]. Madrid: Tea Ediciones.
29.
Lorenzo-SevaU. (1999). Promin: A method for oblique factor rotation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 34, 347–356. doi:10.1207/S15327906MBR3403_3
30.
Lorenzo-SevaU.FerrandoP. J. (2006). FACTOR: A computer program to fit the exploratory factor analysis model. Behavior Research Methods, 38(1), 88–91. doi:10.3758/BF03192753
31.
MayerF. S.FrantzC. M. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 503–515. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.10.001
32.
MestreV.FríasM. D.SamperP. (2004). La medida de la empatía: análisis del Interpersonal Reactivity Index [The measure of empathy: Analysis of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index]. Psicothema, 16, 255–260.
33.
MilfontT. L.RichterI.SibleyC. G.WilsonM. S.FischerR. (2013). Environmental consequences of the desire to dominate and be superior. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 1127–1138. doi:10.1177/0146167213490805
34.
MilfontT. L.SibleyC. G. (2016). Empathic and social dominance orientations help explain gender differences in environmentalism: A one-year Bayesian mediation analysis. Personality & Individual Differences, 90, 85–88. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2015.10.044
35.
MuñizJ.ElosúaP.HambletonR. K. (2013). Directrices para la traducción y adaptación de los tests: segunda edición [Guidelines for the translation and adaptation of tests: Second edition]. Psicothema, 25(2), 151–157. doi:10.7334/psicothema2013.24
36.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (2007). Mplus user’s guide (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
37.
NisbetE. K.ZelenskiJ. M.MurphyS. A. (2009). The nature relatedness scale: Linking individuals’ connection with nature to environmental concern and behaviour. Environment & Behavior, 41, 715–740. doi:10.1177/0013916508318748
38.
OlivosP.AragonésJ. I.AmérigoM. (2011). The Connectedness with Nature Scale and its relationship with environmental beliefs and identity. International Journal of Hispanic Psychology, 4(1), 5–19.
39.
Pérez-AlbénizA.PaúlJ.EtxeberríaJ.MontesM. P.TorresE. (2003). Adaptación del Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) al español [Adaptation of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) to Spanish]. Psicothema, 15, 267–272.
40.
RestallB.ConradE. (2015). A literature review of connectedness to nature and its potential for environmental management. Journal of Environmental Management, 159, 264–278. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.05.022
41.
SchultzP. W. (2000). Empathizing with nature: The effects of perspective taking on concern for environmental issues. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 391–406. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00174
42.
SchultzP. W. (2001). Assessing the structure of environmental concern: Concern for self, other people, and the biosphere. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 1–13.
43.
SchultzP. W.StoneW. F. (1994). Authoritarianism and attitudes toward the environment. Environment and Behavior, 26, 25–37. doi:10.1177/0013916594261002
44.
SchultzP. W.ZeleznyL. C. (1999). Values as predictors of environmental attitudes: Evidence for consistency across 14 countries. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19, 255–265. doi:10.1006/jevp.1999.0129
45.
SevillanoV. (2007). Empatía y cognición social en la preocupación por el medio ambiente [Empathy and social cognition in environmental concern] (PhD dissertation). Editorial Complutense. Retrieved fromhttp://eprints.ucm.es/7517
46.
SevillanoV.AragonésJ. I.SchultzP. W. (2007). Perspective taking, environmental concern, and the moderating role of dispositional empathy. Environment & Behavior, 39, 689–705. doi:10.1177/0013916506292334
47.
SevillanoV.FiskeS. T. (2016). Warmth and competence in animals. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 46(5), 276–293. doi:10.1111/jasp.12361
48.
SternP. C.DietzT.AbelT.GuagnanoG. A.KalofL. (1999). A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Human Ecology Review, 6, 81–97.
49.
SwimJ. K.SternP. C.DohertyT. J.ClaytonS.ReserJ. P.WeberE. U.HowardG. S. (2011). Psychology’s contributions to understanding and addressing global climate change. American Psychologist, 66(4), 241–250. doi:10.1037/a0023220
50.
TamK. P. (2013a). Dispositional empathy with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 35, 92–104. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.05.004
51.
TamK. P. (2013b). Concepts and measures related to connection to nature: Similarities and differences. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 64–78. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.01.004
52.
TamK.-P.LeeS.-L.ChaoM. M. (2013). Saving Mr. Nature: Anthropomorphism enhances connectedness to and protectiveness toward nature. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 514–521. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2013.02.001
53.
ThompsonS.BartonM. (1994). Ecocentric and anthropocentric attitudes toward the environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 14, 149–157. doi:10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80168-9
54.
TimmermanM. E.Lorenzo-SevaU. (2011). Dimensionality assessment of ordered polytomous items with parallel analysis. Psychological Methods, 16, 209–220. doi:10.1037/a0023353
55.
VozmedianoL.San JuanC. (2005). Escala Nuevo Paradigma Ecológico: propiedades psicométricas con una muestra española obtenida a través de Internet [New ecological paradigm scale: Psychometric properties with a Spanish sample obtained via the Internet]. Medio Ambiente Y Comportamiento Humano, 6, 37–49.
