Three studies are reported that examine the effects of valence on connectedness with nature. In Study 1, results showed that the implicit association test (IAT) effect is robust to the valence of the stimuli. Participants showed stronger self-nature than self-built associations, regardless of whether the stimuli were positively or negatively valenced. Study 2 further tested that the positive IAT effect is due to the valence of the stimuli and showed an equally large IAT effect and a strong positive correlation between the positively and negatively valenced IAT stimuli. In Study 3, we address potential confounding effects of valence with a newly matched set of stimuli. Results were consistent with our prior findings in showing that valence of the stimuli did not affect the IAT scores. We conclude that while there are individual differences in connectedness with nature, such beliefs are not affected by positive or negative aspects of natural or built environments.
ArnockyS.StroinkM. L.De CiccoT. L. (2007). Self-construal predicts environmental concerns, cooperation and conservation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17, 227-237.
2.
BemD. J. (1970). Beliefs, attitudes, and human affairs. Belmont, CA: Brooks-Cole.
3.
BluemkeM.FrieseM. (2006). Do features of stimuli influence IAT effects?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 163-176.
4.
BradleyM. M.LangP. J. (1999). Affective norms for English words (ANEW): Instructionmanual and affective ratings. Technical Report C-1, The Center for Research in Psychophysiology, University of Florida.
5.
BruniC. M. (2006). FlexiFrog and FlexiTwins: Measures of implicit social cognition (Manual prepared for Brookfield Zoo). Chicago, IL.
6.
BruniC. M.FraserJ.SchultzP. W. (2008). The value of zoo experiences for connecting people with nature. Visitor Studies, 11, 139-150.
7.
BruniC. M.SchultzP. W. (2010). Implicit beliefs about self and nature: Evidence from an IAT game. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 95-102.
8.
ClaytonS. (2003). Environmental identity: A conceptual and an operational definition. In ClaytonS.OpotowS. (Eds.), Identity and the natural environment (pp. 45-65). Cambridge, MA: MIT.
9.
De HouwerJ. (2001). A structural and process analysis of the implicit association test. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 443-451.
10.
DunlapR. E.GallupG.GallupA. (1992). Health of the planet: Results of a 1992 international environmental opinion survey of citizens in 24 countries. Princeton, NJ: The George H. Gallup International Institute.
11.
DunlapR. E.GallupG.GallupA. (1993). Global environmental concern: Results from an international public opinion survey. Environment, 35(7-15), 33-39.
12.
DunlapR.Van LiereK.MertigA.JonesR. E. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425-442.
13.
DutcherD. D.FinleyJ. C.LuloffA. E.JohnsonJ. (2007). Connectivity with nature as a measure of environmental values. Environment and Behavior, 39, 474-493.
14.
GovanC. L.WilliamsK. D. (2004). Reversing or eliminating IAT effects by changing the affective valence of the stimulus items. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 357-365.
15.
GreenwaldA. G.BanajiM. R.RudmanL. A.FarnhamS. D.NosekB. A.MellottD. S. (2002). A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychological Review, 109, 3-25.
16.
GreenwaldA. G.McGheeD. E.SchwartzJ. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464-1480.
17.
GreenwaldA. G.NosekB. A.BanajiM. R. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197-216.
18.
KaiserF. (1998). A general measure of ecological behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 395-422.
19.
MayerF. S.FrantzC. M. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 504-515.
20.
MitchellJ. P.NosekB. A.BanajiM. R. (2003). Contextual variations in implicit evaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 455-469.
21.
NisbetE. K.ZelenskiJ. M.MurphyS. A. (2009). The nature relatedness scale: Linking individuals’ connection with nature to environmental concern and behavior. Environment and Behavior, 41, 715-740.
22.
NosekB. A.GreenwaldA. G.BanajiM. R. (2005). Understanding and using the implicit association test: II. Method variables and construct validity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 166-180.
23.
OttawayS.HaydenD. C. A.OakesM. A. (2001). Implicit attitudes and racism: Effects of word familiarity and frequency on the implicit association test. Social Cognition, 19(2), 97-144.
24.
RokeachM. (1968). Beliefs, attitudes, and values: A theory of organization and change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
25.
SchultzP. W. (2000). Empathizing with nature: The effects of perspective taking on concern for environmental issues. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 391-406.
26.
SchultzP. W. (2001). The structure of environmental concern: Concern for self, other people, and the biosphere. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 327-339.
27.
SchultzP. W. (2002). Inclusion with nature: Understanding human nature interactions. In SchmuckP.SchultzP. W. (Eds.), The psychology of sustainable development (pp. 61-78). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
28.
SchultzP. W.ShriverC.TabanicoJ.KhazianA. (2004). Implicit connections with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 31-42.
29.
SchultzP. W.TabanicoJ. (2007). Self, identity, and the natural environment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 1219-1247.
30.
SriramN.GreewaldA. G. (2009). The brief implicit association test. Experimental Psychology, 56, 283-294.
31.
SteffensM. C.PleweI. (2001). Items’ cross-category associations as a confounding factor in the implicit association test. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie, 48, 123-134.
32.
VergesM.DuffyS. (2010). Connected to birds, but not to bees: Valence moderates implicit associations with nature. Environment and Behavior, 42, 625-642.
