Effects of contact with nature on connectedness,environmental identity and evoked contents (Efectos del contacto con la naturaleza en conectividad,identidad ambiental y contenidos evocados)

Abstract

Spanish

Natural experiences influence identity and the way of interacting with the environment, and their effects are varied, including well-being and positive thoughts towards nature. This study analyses the effects produced as a result of real or virtual experiences of nature. A total of 288 people took part in this research, distributed among three experimental conditions: nature walk, images of nature and control group. Changes were registered in terms of connectedness and environmental identity, caused by the experimental conditions and differences in the free evocations generated. Connection to nature was higher among those who took part in the nature walks, related to the evocation of positive emotions, memories of social experiences in nature and pro-environmental reflections. These results are interesting for the field of environmental education and the promotion of environmental values and behaviours.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Arnocky

Stroink

DeCicco

(2007). Self-construal predicts environmental concern, cooperation, and conservation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27, 255–264.

Brügger

Kaiser

F. G.

Roczen

(2011). One for all? Connectedness to nature, inclusion of nature, environmental identity, and implicit association with Nature. European Psychologist, 16, 324–333.

Capaldi

C. A.

Dopko

R. L.

Zelensk

J. M.

(2014). The relationship between nature connectedness and happiness: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 976.

Carrus

Scopelliti

Lafortezza

Colangelo

Ferrini

Salbitano

Sanesi

(2015). Go greener, feel better? The positive effects of biodiversity on the well-being of individuals visiting urban and peri-urban green areas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 134, 221–228.

Castro

J. M. C.

Martini

H. A.

(2014). Potencia estadística y cálculo del tamaño del efecto en G* Power: Complementos a las pruebas de significación estadística y su aplicación en psicología. Salud & Sociedad, 5, 210–222.

Chawla

Cushing

D. F.

(2007). Education for strategic environmental behaviour. Environmental Education Research, 13, 437–452.

Chiang

Y. C.

Jane

H. A.

(2017). Wild or tended nature? The effects of landscape location and vegetation density on physiological and psychological responses. Landscape and Urban Planning, 167, 72–83.

Clayton

(2003). Environmental identity: A conceptual and an operational definition. In Clayton

Opotow

(Eds.), Identity and the natural environment. The psychological significance of nature (pp. 45–65). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Clayton

(Ed.). (2012). Handbook of environmental and conservation psychology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

10.

Cohen

(1994). The earth is round (p < .05). American Psychologist, 49, 997–1003.

11.

Davis

Rea

Waite

(2006). The special nature of the outdoors: Its contribution to the education of children aged 3-11. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 10(2), 3–12.

12.

Davis

Gatersleben

(2013). Transcendent experiences in wild and manicured settings: The influence of the trait “connectedness to nature”. Ecopsychology, 5, 92–102.

13.

Faul

Erdfelder

Lang

A. G.

Buchner

(2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191.

14.

Franco

L. S.

Shanahan

D. F.

Fuller

R. A.

(2017). A review of the benefits of nature experiences: More than meets the eye. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14, 864.

15.

Frantz

C. M.

Mayer

F. S.

(2014). The importance of connection to nature in assessing environmental education programs. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 41, 85–89.

16.

Galindo

M. P.

Corraliza

J. A.

(2000). Environmental aesthetics and psychological well-being. Psychology in Spain, 4, 13–27.

17.

Hinds

Sparks

(2011). The affective quality of human-natural environment relationships. Evolutionary Psychology, 9, 451–469. doi: 10.1177/147470491100900314

18.

Hoot

R. E.

Friedman

(2011). Connectedness and environmental behavior: Sense of interconnectedness and pro-environmental behavior. International Journal of Transpersonal Studies, 30, 89–100.

19.

Howell

A. J.

Dopko

R. L.

Passmore

H. A.

Buro

(2011). Nature connectedness: Associations with well-being and mindfulness. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 166–171.

20.

Hoyle

Hitchmough

Jorgensen

(2017). All about the ‘wow factor’? The relationships between aesthetics, restorative effect and perceived biodiversity in designed urban planting. Landscape and Urban Planning, 164, 109–123.

21.

Ives

C. D.

Giusti

Fischer

Abson

D. J.

Klaniecki

Dorninger

von Wehrden

(2017). Human–Nature connection: A multidisciplinary review. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 26–27, 106–113.

22.

Kaplan

(2001). The nature of the view from home psychological benefits. Environment and Behavior, 33, 507–542.

23.

Kaplan

(1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15, 169–182.

24.

Kashima

Farsides

Kim

Strack

Werth

Yuki

(2004). Culture and context-sensitive self: The amount and meaning of context-sensitivity of phenomenal self differ across cultures. Self and Identity, 3, 125–141.

25.

Liefländer

A. K.

Fröhlich

Bogner

F. X.

Schultz

P. W.

(2013). Promoting connectedness with nature through environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 19, 370–384.

26.

Loureiro

Olivos

(2017, September). The role of environmental values, environmental identity, and contact with nature, in predicting support for pro-environmental behaviours . Paper presented at International Conference on Environmental Psychology, A Coruña, Spain.

27.

Loureiro

Olivos

Navarro

(2014, September). Contacto com ambiente natural, ligação à natureza e bem-estar . Paper presented at IX Congresso Iberoamericano de Psicologia/II Congresso Ordem dos Psicólogos Portugueses, Lisboa, Portugal.

28.

Mayer

F. S.

Frantz

C. M.

(2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 503–515.

29.

Mayer

F. S.

Frantz

C. M.

Bruehlman-Senecal

Dolliver

(2009). Why is nature beneficial? The role of connectedness to nature. Environment and Behavior, 41, 607–643.

30.

Navarro

Olivos

Fleury-Bahi

(2017). Connectedness to nature scale: Validity and reliability in the French context. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 2180.

31.

Olivos

Aragonés

J. I.

(2011). Psychometric properties of the environmental identity scale (EID). Psyecology, 2, 65–74.

32.

Olivos

Aragonés

J. I.

(2014). Medio ambiente, self y conectividad con la naturaleza. Revista Mexicana de Psicología, 31, 71–77.

33.

Olivos

Aragonés

J. I.

Amérigo

(2011). The connectedness with nature scale and its relationship with environmental beliefs and identity. Internacional Journal of Hispanic Psychology, 4, 5–19.

34.

Olivos

Aragonés

J. I.

Navarro

(2013). Educación ambiental: Itinerario en la naturaleza y su relación con conectividad, preocupaciones ambientales y conducta. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 45, 501–511.

35.

Pasca

Aragonés

J. I.

Coello

M. T.

(2017). An analysis of the connectedness to nature scale based on item response theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1330.

36.

Perrin

J. L.

Benassi

V. A.

(2009). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of emotional connection to nature? Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 434–440.

37.

Sánchez

de la Garza

López

(2010, Abril). Un estudio de mediciones de actitudes implícitas hacia al medio ambiente en estudiantes de biología y psicología: ¿biofilia? Revista Electrónica Psicología Científica.com, 12(21). Retrieved from http://www.psicologiacientifica.com/mediciones-actitudes-hacia-medio-ambiente-biofilia/

38.

Schroeder

H. W.

(1991). Preference and meaning of arboretum landscapes: Combining quantitative and qualitative data. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11, 231–248.

39.

Schroeder

H. W.

(2002). Experiencing nature in special places. Journal of Forestry, 100, 8–14.

40.

Schroeder

H. W.

(2007). Place experience, gestalt, and the human-nature relationship. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27, 293–309.

41.

Schultz

P. W.

Tabanico

(2007). Self, identity, and the natural environment: Exploring implicit connections with nature. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 1219–1247.

42.

Southon

G. E.

Jorgensen

Dunnett

Hoyle

Evans

K. L.

(2017). Biodiverse perennial meadows have aesthetic value and increase residents’ perceptions of site quality in urban green-space. Landscape and Urban Planning, 158, 105–118.

43.

Staats

Gatersleben

Hartig

(1997). Change in mood as a function of environmental design: Arousal and pleasure on a simulated forest hike. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17, 283–300.

44.

Strauss

Corbin

(1994). Grounded theory methodology. In Denzin

N. K.

Lincoln

Y. S.

(Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 217–285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

45.

Tam

K. P.

(2013). Concepts and measures related to connection to nature: Similarities and differences. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 64–78.

46.

Thomashow

(1995). Ecological identity, becoming a reflective environmentalist. London: MIT Press.

47.

Wells

N. M.

Lekies

K. S.

(2006). Increasing children’s freedom of movement, and other papers. Children, Youth and Environments, 16(1), 1–24.

48.

Wilson

(1984). Biophilia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

49.

Wyles

K. J.

White

M. P.

Hattam

Pahl

King

Austen

(2017). Are some natural environments more psychologically beneficial than others? The importance of type and quality on connectedness to nature and psychological restoration. Environment and Behavior. doi:10.1177/0013916517738312