The issue of motivating individuals to engage in proenvironmental behaviors (PEB; Scott, Amel, Koger, & Manning, 2016) has become increasingly important. Although research has shown that nature identity, particularly a sense of connectedness to nature (CN), predicts PEB, the present study's goal was to better understand a previously unexplained connection between CN and engagement with natural beauty (ENB) in predicting PEB. Unsurprisingly, the Connectedness to Nature Scale, Engagement with Beauty Scale-Revised, and Pro-Environmental Behavior Scale were correlated with each other; however, our hypothesis that ENB would moderate the relationship between CN and PEB was not supported. The possibility that CN would mediate the relationship between ENB and PEB was explored and confirmed. Thus, an intervention aimed at increasing individual's ENB could motivate individuals to engage in PEB because of an increased sense of connection to the natural world, implicating nature identity (CN) as a potentially crucial intervening variable for translating ENB into proenvironmental behavior. Key Words: Proenvironmental behavior—Connectedness to nature—Engagement with natural beauty—Nature identity.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmesR. T. (2010). The analects of Confucius: A philosophical translation. New York, NY: Ballantine Books.
2.
AndersonM.W. (2012). New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) Scale. Great Barrington, MA: Berkshire Publishing Group.
3.
ArendtF., & MatthesJ. (2016). Nature documentaries, connectedness to nature, and pro-environmental behavior. Environmental Communication, 10, 453–472.
4.
Aristotle. (2002). Nicomachean ethics: Translation, glossary, and introductory essay (SachsJ., Trans.). Newburyport, MA: Focus. (Original work published ca. 340 BCE)
5.
ArmstrongT., & Detweiler-BedellB. (2008). Beauty as an emotion: The exhilarating prospect of mastering a challenging world. Review of General Psychology, 12, 305–329.
6.
BlasiA. (1983). Moral cognition and moral action—A theoretical perspective. Developmental Review, 3, 178–210.
7.
BlasiA. (1984). Moral identity: Its role in moral functioning. In KurtinesW. M. & GewirtzJ. L. (Eds.), Morality, moral behavior, and moral development. New York, NY: Wiley.
8.
BruniC. M., FraserJ., & SchultzW. (2008). The value of zoo experiences for connecting people with nature. Visitor Studies, 11, 139–150.
9.
BruniC. M., WinterP. L., SchultzP. W., OmotoA., & TabanicoJ. J. (2017). Getting to know nature: Evaluating the effects of the Get to Know Program on children's connectedness with nature. Environmental Education Research, 23, 43–62.
10.
CapaldiC. A., PassmoreH.-A., IshiiR., ChistopolskayaK. A., VowinckelJ., NikolaevE. I., & SemikinG. I. (2017). Engaging with natural beauty may be related to well-being because it connects people to nature: Evidence from three cultures. Ecopsychology, 9, 199–211.
11.
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.
12.
DantoA. C. (2003). The abuse of beauty: Aesthetics and the concept of art. Chicago, IL: Open Court.
13.
DavisA. C., & StroinkM. L. (2016). Within-culture differences in self-construal, environmental concern, and proenvironmental behavior. Ecopsychology, 8, 64–73.
14.
DiessnerR., GenthôsR., PohlingR., StacyS., & GüsewellA. (2017). A review of appreciation of beauty: A transcendent love story. Manuscript in preparation.
15.
DiessnerR., IyerR., SmithM., & HaidtJ. (2013). Who engages with moral beauty?. Journal of Moral Education, 42, 139–163.
16.
DiessnerR., KirkC., GuenthnerC., PohlingR., & MobasherS. (2017). Teaching the psychology of engagement with beauty: State and trait. Teaching of Psychology, 44, 63–67.
17.
DiessnerR., SolomR. C., FrostN. K., & DavidsonJ. (2008). Engagement with beauty: Appreciating natural, artistic, and moral beauty. Journal of Psychology, 142, 303–329.
18.
DiessnerR., & SteinerP. (2017). Interventions to increase trait appreciation of beauty. Indian Journal of Positive Psychology, 8, 401–406.
19.
DiessnerR., WoodwardD., StacyS., & MobasherS. (2015). Ten once-a-week brief beauty walks increase appreciation of natural beauty. Ecopsychology, 7, 126–133.
20.
DunlapR. E. (2008). The New Environmental Paradigm Scale: From marginality to worldwide use. The Journal of Environmental Education, 40, 3–18.
21.
DunlapR. E., Van LiereK. D., MertigA. G., & JonesR. E. (2000). New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: Measuring endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425–442.
22.
FieldA. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). London, UK: SAGE Publications Ltd.
23.
FritzM. S., & MacKinnonD. P. (2007). Required sample size to detect the mediated effect. Psychological Science, 18, 233–239.
24.
GaterslebenB., MurtaghN., & AbrahamseW. (2014). Values, identity and proenvironmental behaviour. Contemporary Social Science, 9, 374–392.
25.
GengL., XuJ., YeL., ZhouW., & ZhouK. (2015). Connections with nature and environmental behaviors. PLoS One, 10, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0127247
26.
GiffordR., & NilssonA. (2014). Personal and social factors that influence pro-environmental concern and behaviour: A review. International Journal of Psychology, 49, 141–157.
27.
HaidtJ., & KeltnerD. (2004). Appreciation of beauty and excellence [Awe, wonder, elevation]. In PetersonC. & SeligmanM. E. P. (Eds.), Character strengths and virtues. A handbook of classification (pp. 537–552). Oxford, UK, & Washington, DC: Oxford University Press & American Psychological Association.
28.
HardyS. A., & CarloG. (2011). Moral identity: What is it, how does it develop, and is it linked to moral action?. Child Development Perspectives, 5, 212–218.
29.
HayesA. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling [White paper]. Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf
30.
HertzS. G., & KrettenauerT. (2016). Does moral identity effectively predict moral behavior? A meta-analysis. Review of General Psychology, 20, 129–140.
31.
HitlinS. (2003) Values as the core of personal identity: Drawing links between two theories of self. Social Psychology Quarterly, 66, 118–137.
32.
HitlinS. (2011). Values, personal identity, and the moral self. In SchwartzS. J., LuyckxK., & VignolesV. L. (Eds.), Handbook of identity theory and research (pp. 515–530). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
33.
JovanovićS., GatarićD., PrnjatZ., AndjelkovićG., JovanovićJ. M., LukićB., & LutovacM. D. (2016). Exploring proenvironmental behavior of Serbian youth through environmental values, satisfaction, and responsibility. Social Behavior and Personality, 44, 1057–1068.
34.
KellertS. H. (1993). The biological basis for human values of nature. In KellertS. H. & WilsonE. O. (Eds.), The biophilia hypothesis (pp. 42–72). Washington, DC: Island Press.
35.
LumberR., RichardsonM., & SheffieldD. (2017). Beyond knowing nature: Contact, emotion, compassion, meaning, and beauty are pathways to nature connection. PLoS One, 12, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0177186
36.
MarkleG. L. (2013). Pro-Environmental behavior: Does it matter how it's measured? Development and validation of the Pro-Environmental Behavior Scale (PEBS). Human Ecology, 41, 905–914.
37.
MarkowitzE. E., GoldbergL. R., AshtonM. C., & LeeK. (2012). Profiling the ‘proenvironmental individual’: A personality perspective. Journal of Personality, 80, 81–111.
38.
MarkusH., & KitayamaS. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.
39.
MayR. (1985). My quest for beauty. Dallas, TX: Saybrook Publishing Company.
40.
MayerF. S., & FrantzC. M. (2004). The Connectedness to Nature Scale: A measure of individuals' feeling in the community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 503–515.
41.
MayerF. S., FrantzC. M., Bruehlman-SenecalE., & DolliverK. (2009). Why is nature beneficial? The role of connectedness to nature. Environment and Behavior, 41, 607–643.
42.
NisbetE. K., ZelenskiJ. A., & MurphyS. A. (2009). The nature relatedness scale: Linking individuals' connection with nature to environmental concern and behaviour. Environment and Behaviour, 41, 715–740.
43.
NordlundA. M., & GarvillJ. (2002). Value structures behind proenvironmental behavior. Environment and Behavior, 34, 740–756.
44.
OlivosP., AragonésJ. I., & AmérigoM. (2011). The connectedness to nature scale and its relationship with environmental beliefs and identity. International Journal of Hispanic Psychology, 4, 5–19.
45.
PassmoreH. A., & HolderM. D. (2016). Noticing nature: Individual and social benefits of a two-week intervention. Journal of Positive Psychology, 11, 1–10.
46.
PerrinJ. L., & BenassiV. A. (2009). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of emotional connection to nature?. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 434–440.
47.
PetersonC., & SeligmanM. E. P. (Eds.). (2004). Character strengths and virtues. A handbook of classification. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
48.
PohlingR., DiessnerR., StacyS., WoodwardD., StrobelA., & IyerR. (2017). Reliability, validity, and measurement invariance of the revised Engagement with Beauty Scale (EBS-R). Manuscript in preparation.
49.
RichardsonM., CormackA., McRobertL., & UnderhillR. (2016). 30 days wild: Development and evaluation of a large-scale nature engagement campaign to improve well-being. PLoS One, 11, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0149777
50.
RichardsonM., & SheffieldD. (2015). Reflective self-attention: A more stable predictor of connection to nature than mindful attention. Ecopsychology, 7, 166–175.
51.
RichelT., DiessnerR., MerchiJ., DachsI., Addison WilsonK., & NasrullahS. (2008, March). International reliability studies of the Engagement with Beauty Scale (EBS). Poster session presented at the International Counseling Psychology Conference, Chicago, IL.
SchindlerI., HosoyaG., MenninghausW., BeermannU., WagnerV., EidM., & SchererK. R. (2017). Measuring aesthetic emotions: A review of the literature and a new assessment tool. PLoS One, 12, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0178899
55.
SchultzP. W., & ZeleznyL. C. (1998). Values and proenvironmental behavior: A five-country survey. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29, 540–558.
56.
SchwartzS. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1–65.
57.
ScottB., AmelE., KogerS. M., & ManningC. (2016). Psychology for sustainability (4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
58.
SolimanM., PeetzJ., & DavydenkoM. (2017). The impact of immersive technology on nature relatedness and pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Media Psychology, 29, 8–17.
59.
StegL., De GrootJ. I. M., DreijerinkL., AbrahamseW., & SieroF. (2011). General antecedents of personal norms, policy acceptability, and intentions: The role of values, worldviews, and environmental concern. Society & Natural Resources, 24, 349–367.
60.
StegL., DreijerinkL., & AbrahamseW. (2005). Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies: A test of VBN theory. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25, 415–425.
61.
TamK. P. (2013). Concepts and measures related to connection to nature: Similarities and differences. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 64–78.
62.
WeiberR., & MühlhausD. (2014). Strukturgleichungsmodellierung: Eine anwendungsorientierte Einfuhrung in die Kausalanalyse mit Hilfe von AMOS, SmartPLS und SPSS (2 ed.). [Structural equation modeling: An application-oriented introduction to the causal analysis using AMOS, SmartPLS, and SPSS]. Berlin, Germany: Springer.
63.
ZelenskiJ. M., DopkoR. L., & CapaldiC. A. (2015). Cooperation is in our nature: Nature exposure may promote cooperative and environmentally sustainable behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 42, 24–31.
64.
ZhangJ. W., HowellR. T., & IyerR. (2014). Engagement with natural beauty moderates the positive relation between connectedness with nature and psychological well-being. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 38, 55–63.
65.
ZhangJ. W., PiffP. K., IyerR., KolevaS., & KeltnerD. (2014). An occasion for unselfing: Beautiful nature leads to prosociality. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 37, 61–72.
66.
ZhouK., YeL., GengL., & XuQ. (2015). How do implicit materialism and postmaterialism affect proenvironmental behavior?. Social Behavior and Personality, 43, 1495–1506.
