This study examines psychometric properties of the 6-item Nature-Relatedness Scale (NR-6) using Rasch analysis. Nature relatedness is an important indicator of several markers of human and ecological well-being, and the NR-6 is a common convenient measure. In addition, the NR-6 is an ordinal scale with limited suitability for use with parametric statistics due to inconsistency with fundamental measurement principles. The current Rasch analysis employed the partial credit model using a sample (n = 450) collected from the United States. Initial analysis showed local dependency, low reliability, and poor fit to the Rasch model. The best model fit (χ2[24] = 29.30, p = 0.209) and reliability (Person Separation Index = 0.74) were achieved through combining locally dependent items, reducing measurement error. These findings support the psychometric strength of the NR-6 given the use of the included ordinal-to-linear conversion table, providing improvement without altering the original scale format.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenM. J., & YenW. M. (2002). Introduction to measurement theory. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
2.
AndersenE. B. (1973). A goodness of fit test for the Rasch model. Psychometrika, 38, 123–140.
ÁrnadóttirG., & FisherA. G. (2008). Rasch Analysis of the ADL scale of the A-ONE. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62, 51–60.
5.
ArutaJ., & PakinganK. (2022). Validating nature relatedness scale in the Philippines: Social responsibility as a cultural driver on why nature relatedness promotes green purchase intention. International Social Science Journal, 72, 635–654.
6.
BondT. G., YanZ. G., & HeeneM. G. (2021). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. New York, NY: Routledge.
7.
BowlingA. (2005). Just one question: If one question works, why ask several?. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 59, 342–345.
8.
ChangC. C., ChengG. J. Y., Le NghiemT. P., SongX. P., OhR. R. Y., RichardsD. R., & CarrascoL. R. (2020). Social media, nature, and life satisfaction: Global evidence of the biophilia hypothesis. Scientific Reports, 10, 1–8.
9.
ChristensenK. B., MakranskyG., & HortonM. (2016). Critical values for Yen's Q3: Identification of local dependence in the Rasch model using residual correlations. Applied Psychological Measurement, 41, 178–194.
10.
CraigJ. M., LoganA. C., & PrescottS. L. (2016). Natural environments, nature relatedness and the ecological theater: Connecting satellites and sequencing to shinrin-yoku. Journal of Physiological Anthropology, 35, 1.
11.
DeanJ. H., ShanahanD. F., BushR., GastonK. J., LinB. B., BarberE., FrancoL., & FullerR. A. (2018). Is nature relatedness associated with better mental and physical health?. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15, 1371.
12.
De AyalaR. J. (2013). The theory and practice of item response theory. New York, NY: Guilford Publications.
13.
FinaulahiK. P., SumichA., HeymN., & MedvedevO. N. (2021). Investigating psychometric properties of the self-compassion scale using Rasch methodology. Mindfulness, 12, 730–740.
14.
FisherW. P. (1997). Physical disability construct convergence across instruments: Towards a universal metric. Journal of Outcome Measurement, 1, 87–113.
15.
HagellP., & WestergrenA. (2016). Sample size and statistical conclusions from tests of fit to the Rasch model according to the Rasch unidimensional measurement model (RUMM) program in health outcome measurement. Journal of Applied Measurement, 17, 416–431.
16.
HaseV., MahlD., SchaferM. S., & KellerT. R. (2021). Climate change in news media across the globe: An automated analysis of issue attention and themes in climate change coverage in 10 countries (2006–2018). Global Environmental Change, 70, 102353.
17.
HobartJ., & CanoS. (2009). Improving the evaluation of therapeutic interventions in multiple sclerosis: The role of new psychometric methods. Health Technology Assessment, 13, 3–177.
18.
HopkinsE. G., LyndonM. P., HenningM. A., & MedvedevO. N. (2021). Applying Rasch analysis to evaluate and enhance the academic motivation scale. Australian Journal of Psychology, 73, 1–9.
19.
KaplanS. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15, 169–182.
20.
LawtonE., BrymerE., CloughP., & DenovanA. (2017). The relationship between the physical activity environment, nature relatedness, anxiety, and the Psychological well-being benefits of regular exercisers. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1058.
21.
LeungY., PngM., ConaghanP., & TennantA. (2013). A systematic literature review on the application of rasch analysis in musculoskeletal disease—A special interest group report of OMERACT 11. The Journal of Rheumatology, 41, 159–164.
22.
LinacreJ. M. (1998). Detecting multidimensionality: Which residual data-type works best?. Journal of Outcome Measurement, 2, 266–283.
23.
LinacreJ. M. (1994). Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 7, 328.
24.
LopesS., LimaM., & SilvaK. (2020). Nature can get it out of your mind: The rumination reducing effects of contact with nature and the mediating role of awe and mood. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 71, 101489.
25.
Lundgren-Nilsson, Å., JonsdottirI. H., AhlborgG., & TennantA. (2013). Construct validity of the psychological general well being index (PGWBI) in a sample of patients undergoing treatment for stress-related exhaustion: A Rasch analysis. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 11, 2.
26.
Lundgren-Nilsson, Ã., & TennantA. (2011). Past and present issues in Rasch analysis: The functional independence measure (FIM) revisited. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 43, 884–891.
27.
LuongR. (2022). Factor structure, measurement equivalence, and reliability of the nature relatedness scale short form (NR-6) across males and females. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 82, 101828.
28.
MastersG. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47, 149–174.
29.
MayerF. S., FrantzC. M., Bruehlman-SenecalE., & DolliverK. (2009). Why is nature beneficial? The role of connectedness to nature. Environment and Behavior, 41, 607–643.
30.
MedvedevO. N., KrägelohC. U., TitkovaE. A., & SiegertR. J. (2018). Rasch analysis and ordinal-to-interval conversion tables for the depression, anxiety and stress scale. Journal of Health Psychology, 25, 1374–1383.
31.
MedvedevO. N., Turner-StokesL., AshfordS., & SiegertR. (2018). Rasch analysis of the UK functional assessment measure in patients with complex disability after stroke. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 50, 420–428.
32.
MedvedevO. N., PratscherS. D., & BettencourtA. (2020). Psychometric evaluation of the interpersonal mindfulness scale using Rasch analysis. Mindfulness, 11, 2007–2015.
33.
MillironB., WardD., GrancheJ., MensingerJ., StottD., ChenaultC., MontaltoF., & EllisE. (2022). Nature relatedness is positively associated with dietary diversity and fruit and vegetable intake in an urban population. American Journal of Health Promotion, 36, 1019–1024.
34.
MorrisS. L., NewhouseI., LarocqueT., GillisK. J., SmithL., & NisbetE. K. (2021). Becoming one with nature: A nature intervention for individuals living with cancer participating in a ten-week group exercise and wellness program. International Journal of Exercise Science, 14, 498–518.
35.
NisbetE. K., & ZelenskiJ. M. (2013). The NR-6: A new brief measure of nature relatedness. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 813.
36.
NisbetE. K., ZelenskiJ. M., & MurphyS. A. (2009). The nature relatedness scale: Linking individuals connection with naure to enviromental concern and behavior. Environment and Behavior, 41, 715–740.
37.
NorquistJ. M., FitzpatrickR., DawsonJ., & JenkinsonC. (2004). Comparing alternative Rasch-based methods vs raw scores in measuring change in health. Medical Care, 42, 25.
Phuoc NguyenC. T., & NguyenQ. N. (2022). Is nature relatedness associated with better mental health? An exploratory study on Vietnamese university students. Journal of American College Health [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1080/07448481.2022.2089847.
40.
PuhakkaS., PykyR., LankilaT., KangasM., RusanenJ., IkäheimoT. M., Koivumaa-HonkanenH., & KorpelainenR. (2018). Physical activity, residential environment, and nature relatedness in young men-a population-based MOPO study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15, 2322.
41.
RedondoR., ValorC., & CarreroI. (2022). Unraveling the relationship between well-being, sustainable consumption and nature relatedness: A study of university students. Applied Research Quality Life, 17, 913–930.
42.
RichardsonM., HussainZ., & GriffithsM. D. (2018). Problematic smartphone use, nature connectedness, and anxiety. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 7, 109–116.
43.
SadowskiI., BökeN., MettlerJ., HeathN., & KhouryB. (2020) Naturally mindful? The role of mindfulness facets in the relationship between nature relatedness and subjective well-being. Current Psychology, 41, 5358–5373.
44.
SandhamM. H., MedvedevO. N., HedgecockE., HigginsonI. J., & SiegertR. J. (2019). A Rasch analysis of the integrated palliative care outcome scale. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 57, 290–296.
45.
SchultzP. W. (2001). The structure of environmental concern: Concern for self, other people, and the biosphere. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 327–339.
46.
StevensS. S. (1946). On the theory of scales of measurement. Science, 103, 677–680.
47.
StuckiG., DaltroyL., KatzJ., JohannessonM., & LiangM. (1996). Interpretation of change scores in ordinal clinical scales and health status measures: The whole may not equal the sum of the parts. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 49, 711–717.
48.
TennantA., & ConaghanP. G. (2007). The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: What is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper?. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 57, 1358–1362.
49.
UlrichR. S. (1993). Biophilia, biophobia, and natural landscapes. The biophilia hypothesis, 7, 73–137.
50.
WangH., HongZ., LinH., & TsaiC. (2022). The relationships among adult sustainability attitudes, psychological well-being, nature relatedness, and interest in scientific issues. Current Psychology, 41, 1788–1799.
51.
WrightB. D. (1996). Comparing Rasch measurement and factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 3, 3–24.
52.
WrightB. D., LinacreJ. M., GustafsonJ. E., & Martin-LofP. (1994). Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8, 370.
