Environmental problems are worsening as human behavior continues to damage the environment. However, not all human behavior has negative environmental consequences, and many people make concerted efforts to behave in environmentally sensitive ways. Yet, the personal qualities that contribute to ecological behavior remain imprecisely characterized. The present study explored two individual difference variables believed to support ecological behavior: (1) dispositional mindfulness and (2) nature connectedness. In this pursuit, two participant samples (N = 54, N = 299) completed self-report surveys on dispositional mindfulness, mindfulness practice involvement, nature connectedness, and ecological behavior. Path analysis revealed positive associations between dispositional mindfulness, nature connectedness, and self-reported ecological behavior, with nature connectedness found to mediate the relationship between dispositional mindfulness and self-reported ecological behavior in both samples. Examining the multidimensional dispositional mindfulness construct more granularly, results indicated the mindful tendency to observe internal and external events nonjudgmentally was particularly important for self-reported ecological behavior. Finally, mindfulness practitioners reported greater nature connectedness and more self-reported ecological behavior. Implications of these findings for human ecological behavior are explored.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmelE. L., ManningC. M., & ScottB. A. (2009). Mindfulness and sustainable behavior: Pondering attention and awareness as means for increasing green behavior. Ecopsychology, 1, 14–25.
2.
AustinJ. H. (2010). Zen-brain reflections. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3.
BaerR. A., SmithG. T., HopkinsJ., KrietemeyerJ., & ToneyL. (2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13, 27–45.
4.
BarbaroN., & PickettS. M. (2016). Mindfully green: Examining the effect of connectedness to nature on the relationship between mindfulness and engagement in pro-environmental behavior. Personality and Individual Differences, 93, 137–142.
5.
BarnoskyA. D., MatzkeN., TomiyaS., WoganG. O., SwartzB., QuentalT. B., … MerseyB. (2011). Has the Earth's sixth mass extinction already arrived?. Nature, 471, 51–57.
6.
BernsteinA., HadashY., LichtashY., TanayG., ShepherdK., & FrescoD. M. (2015). Decentering and related constructs: A critical review and metacognitive processes model. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 599–617.
7.
BrownK. W., & KasserT. (2005). Are psychological and ecological well-being compatible? The role of values, mindfulness, and lifestyle. Social Indicators Research, mindfulness, 349–368.
8.
BrownK. W., & RyanR. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 822.
9.
BrüggerA., KaiserF. G., & RoczenN. (2011). One for all? Connectedness to nature, inclusion of nature, environmental identity, and implicit association with nature. European Psychologist, environmental identity, 324–333.
10.
BuhrmesterM., KwangT., & GoslingS. D. (2011). Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality data?. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3–5.
11.
CarmodyJ., & BaerR. (2008). Relationships between mindfulness practice and levels of mindfulness, medical and psychological symptoms and well-being in a mindfulness-based stress reduction program. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 31, 23–33.
12.
DambrunM., & RicardM. (2011). Self-centeredness and selflessness: A theory of self-based psychological functioning and its consequences for happiness. Review of General Psychology, 15, 138–157.
13.
EberthJ., & SedlmeierP. (2012). The effects of mindfulness meditation: A meta-analysis. Mindfulness, 3, 174–189.
14.
EconomosC. D., BrownsonR. C., DeAngelisM. A., & NovelliP. (2001). What lessons have been learned from other attempts to guide social change?. Nutrition Reviews, 59, S40–S56.
GeigerS. M., OttoS., & SchraderU. (2018). Mindfully green and healthy: An indirect path from mindfulness to ecological behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–11.
17.
GrossmanP., NiemannL., SchmidtS., & WalachH. (2004). Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health benefits: A meta-analysis. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 57, 35–43.
18.
HanleyA. W., DeringerS. A., & HanleyR. T. (2017). Dispositional mindfulness may be associated with deeper connections with nature. Ecopsychology, 9, 225–231.
19.
HarrisP. G. (2007). Collective action on climate change: The logic of regime failure. Natural Resources Journal, 47, 195–224.
20.
HowellA. J., DopkoR. L., PassmoreH., & BuroK. (2011). Nature connectedness: Associations with well-being and mindfulness. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 166–171.
21.
JacobJ., JovicE., & BrinkerhoffM. B. (2009). Personal and planetary well-being: Mindfulness meditation, pro-environmental behavior and personal quality of life in a survey from the social justice and ecological sustainability movement. Social Indicators Research, 93, 275–294.
22.
KaiserF. G., RanneyM., HartigT., & BowlerP. A. (1999). Ecological behavior, environmental attitude, and feelings of responsibility for the environment. European Psychologist, 4, 59–74.
23.
KaiserF. G., & WilsonM. (2004). Goal-directed conservation behavior: The specific composition of a general performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1531–1544.
24.
KhouryB., LecomteT., FortinG., MasseM., TherienP., BouchardV., … HofmannS. G. (2013). Mindfulness-based therapy: A comprehensive meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 33, 763–771.
25.
LorenzoniI., Nicholson-ColeS., & WhitmarshL. (2007). Barriers perceived to engaging with climate change among the UK public and their policy implications. Global Environmental Change, 17, 445–459.
26.
MasonW., & SuriS. (2012). Conducting behavioral research on Amazon's Mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 1–23.
27.
Masson-DelmotteV., ZhaiP., PörtnerH.-O., RobertsD., SkeaJ., ShuklaP. R., … WaterfieldT. (Eds.). (2018). IPCC, 2018: Summary for policymakers. In Global warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. Geneva, Switzerland: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
28.
MayerF., & FrantzC. M. (2004). The Connectedness to Nature Scale: A measure of individuals' feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 503–515.
29.
MayerF. S., FrantzC. M., Bruehlman-SenecalE., & DolliverK. (2009). Why is nature beneficial?. Environment and Behavior, 41, 607–643.
30.
NisbetE. K., ZelenskiJ. M., & MurphyS. A. (2009). The nature relatedness scale: Linking individuals' connection with nature to environmental concern and behavior. Environment & Behavior, 41, 715–740.
31.
OberyA., & BangertA. (2017). Exploring the influence of nature relatedness and perceived science knowledge on proenvironmental behavior. Education Sciences, 7, 1–14.
32.
OckwellD., WhitmarshL., & O'NeillS. (2009). Reorienting climate change communication for effective mitigation: Forcing people to be green or fostering grass-roots engagement?. Science Communication, 30, 305–327.
33.
PusaksrikitT., PongsakornrungsilpS., & PongsakornrungsilpP. (2013). The development of the mindful consumption process through the sufficiency economy. Advances in Consumer Research, 41, 332–336.
34.
RennO. (2011). The social amplification/attenuation of risk framework: Application to climate change. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 2, 154–169.
35.
RosaC. D., ProficeC., & ColladoS. (2018). Nature experiences and adults' self-reported pro-environmental behaviors: The role of connectedness to nature and childhood nature experiences. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1–10.
36.
RouseS. V. (2015). A reliability analysis of Mechanical Turk data. Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 304–307.
37.
SchultzP. W. (2002). Inclusion with nature: The psychology of human-nature relations. In SchmuckP. & SchultzW. P. (Eds.), Psychology of sustainable development (pp. 62–78). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.
38.
SolJ., & WalsA. (2015). Strengthening ecological mindfulness through hybrid learning in vital coalitions. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 10, 203–214.
39.
StegL., & VlekC. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 309–317.
40.
TangY.-Y., HölzelB. K., and PosnerM. I. (2015). The neuroscience of mindfulness meditation. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 16:213–225.
41.
UnsworthS., PalickiS.-K., & LustigJ. (2016). The impact of mindful meditation in nature on self-nature interconnectedness. Mindfulness, 7, 1052–1060.
42.
VagoD. R., & SilbersweigD. A. (2012). Self-awareness, self-regulation, and self-transcendence (S-ART): a framework for understanding the neurobiological mechanisms of mindfulness. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, doi:10.3389/fnhum.2012.00296.
43.
WamslerC., BrossmannJ., HenderssonH., KristjansdottirR., McDonaldC., & ScarampiP. (2018). Mindfulness in sustainability science, practice, and teaching. Sustainability Science, 13, 143–162.
44.
WhitmarshL., & O'NeillS. (2010). Green identity, green living? The role of pro-environmental self-identity in determining consistency across diverse pro–environmental behaviours. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 305–314.
45.
WolskoC., & LindbergK. (2013). Experiencing connection with nature: The matrix of psychological well-being, mindfulness, and outdoor recreation. Ecopsychology, 5, 80–91.
46.
YadenD. B., HaidtJ., HoodR. W.Jr., VagoD. R., & NewbergA. B. (2017). The varieties of self-transcendent experience. Review of General Psychology, 21, 143–160.
47.
YangY., HuJ., JingF., & NguyenB. (2018). From awe to ecological behavior: The mediating role of connectedness to nature. Sustainability, 10, 2477.
