This study examines the relations among spiritual intelligence (SI), connectedness to nature (CN), and pro-environmental behavior (PEB) in a sample of 251 Indonesian university students. Employing a cross-sectional design, the study utilized a two-step analytical approach involving Rasch analysis to validate scale reliability and Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to test the structural model. Rasch analysis confirmed the robustness of the SI, CN, and PEB instruments, continuing the transformation of raw data into logit scores. Descriptive and correlational results indicated moderate positive associations among the three constructs. PLS-SEM analysis revealed a positive relation between SI and PEB (β = 0.251, p < 0.001) and a strong relation between SI and CN (β = 0.576, p < 0.001). Additionally, CN was positively related to PEB (β = 0.280, p < 0.001). The mediation analysis also indicated that CN partially mediates the relation between SI and PEB, suggesting that SI relates to green action through heightened ecological connectedness. The model explained a moderate level of variance (R2 = 0.332 for CN; R2 = 0.222 for PEB) with adequate predictive relevance. Theoretically, this study integrates SI into environmental psychology literature. Practically, the findings emphasize the role of spiritual reflection and nature connectedness in fostering sustainable behaviors among Indonesian youth.
AbdullahM. S., & KeshminderJ. S. (2020). Religion and pro-environmental behaviour: A comparative analysis towards environmental protection. International Journal of Environment and Sustainable Development, 19, 174; doi: 10.1504/IJESD.2020.106662
2.
AbumoghliI. (2023). The role of religions, values, ethics, and spiritual responsibility in environmental governance and achieving the sustainable development agenda. Religion and Development, 2, 485–495; doi: 10.30965/27507955-20230008
3.
AfsarB., BadirY., & KianiU. S. (2016). Linking spiritual leadership and employee pro-environmental behavior: The influence of workplace spirituality, intrinsic motivation, and environmental passion. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 45, 79–88; doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.11.011
4.
AjzenI. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211; doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
5.
AlshebamiA. S., AlholibyM. S., ElshaerI. A., SobaihA. E. E., & Al MarriS. H. (2023). Examining the relationship between green mindfulness, spiritual intelligence, and environmental self identity: Unveiling the path to green entrepreneurial intention. Administrative Sciences, 13, 226; doi: 10.3390/admsci13100226
6.
AmelE., ManningC., ScottB., & KogerS. (2017). Beyond the roots of human inaction: Fostering collective effort toward ecosystem conservation. Science (New York, N.Y.), 356, 275–279; doi: 10.1126/science.aal1931
7.
AmramY. J. (2022). The intelligence of spiritual intelligence: Making the case. Religions, 13, 1140; doi: 10.3390/rel13121140
8.
BakarS. A., HussinH., RozaniM. A. S., & AhmadZ. A. S. (2025). Environmental ethics in the Qur’an: A thematic analysis of conservation and stewardship. Global Journal Al-Thaqafah, 31–45; doi: 10.7187/GJATSI122025-3
9.
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; doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.026
10.
BondT, & FoxC. M. (2015). Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental measurement in the human science (3rd ed.). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315814698
11.
CapaldiC. A., DopkoR. L., & ZelenskiJ. M. (2014). The relationship between nature connectedness and happiness: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 976; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00976
12.
CreswellJ. W., & CreswellJ. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (Fifth edition).SAGE.
13.
DiessnerR., GenthôsR., PraestK., & PohlingR. (2018). Identifying with nature mediates the influence of valuing nature’s beauty on proenvironmental behaviors. Ecopsychology, 10, 97–105; doi: 10.1089/eco.2017.0040
14.
Echarri-IribarrenF., & Echarri-IribarrenV. (2021). Environmental education and ecological spiritual intelligence: The case of Basque mythology. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 37, 120–131; doi: 10.1017/aee.2020.33
15.
FisherJ., & NgD. (2017). Presenting a 4-Item Spiritual Well-Being Index (4-ISWBI). Religions, 8, 179; doi: 10.3390/rel8090179
16.
Garza-TeránG., Tapia-FonllemC., Fraijo-SingB., Borbón-MendívilD., & PoggioL. (2022). Impact of contact with nature on the wellbeing and nature connectedness indicators after a desertic outdoor experience on Isla Del Tiburon. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 864836; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.864836
17.
GengL., XuJ., YeL., ZhouW., & ZhouK. (2015). Connections with nature and environmental behaviors. PloS One, 10, e0127247; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0127247
18.
GiffordR., & NilssonA. (2014). Personal and social factors that influence pro-environmental concern and behaviour: A review. International Journal of Psychology: Journal International De Psychologie, 49, 141–157; doi: 10.1002/ijop.12034
19.
GuazziniA., ValdrighiG., FiorenzaM., & DuradoniM. (2025). The relationship between connectedness to nature and Pro-environmental behaviors: A systematic review. Sustainability, 17, 3686; doi: 10.3390/su17083686
20.
HairJ. F., HultG. T. M., RingleC. M., SarstedtM., DanksN. P., & RayS. (2021). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using R: A Workbook. Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7
21.
HayesA. F. (2022). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (3rd ed.).The Guilford Press.
22.
HongT. K. (2025). The imperative of business ethics and the role of spiritual intelligence in enhancing ethical thinking in the workplace. Unpublished. 10.13140/RG.2.2.30732.63363
23.
HosainiM., EliasH., KraussS. E., & AishahS. (2010). A review study on spiritual intelligence, adolescence and spiritual intelligence, factors that may contribute to individual differences in spiritual intelligence, and the related theories. International Journal of Psychological Studies, 2, 179; doi: 10.5539/ijps.v2n2p179
24.
Ibáñez-RuedaN., Guillén-RoyoM., & GuardiolaJ. (2020). Pro-environmental behavior, connectedness to nature, and wellbeing dimensions among Granada students. Sustainability, 12, 9171; doi: 10.3390/su12219171
25.
KeithR. J., GivenL. M., MartinJ. M., & HochuliD. F. (2022). Environmental self-identity partially mediates the effects of exposure and connection to nature on urban children’s conservation behaviours. Current Research in Ecological and Social Psychology, 3, 100066; doi: 10.1016/j.cresp.2022.100066
KingD. B., & DeCiccoT. L. (2009). A viable model and self-report measure of spiritual intelligence. International Journal of Transpersonal Studies, 28, 68–85; doi: 10.24972/ijts.2009.28.1.68
28.
KurbiyantoA., YusmalianaD., FitrianaF., AltiarikaE., & SabriF. (2024). Environmental ethics in Islamic teachings: Discussing ethical principles in Islamic teachings that emphasize environmental protection and preservation. In SharifiA, CandelariaJ. L, SimanganD, & KanekoS.(Eds.), Navigating Peace and Sustainability in an Increasingly Complex World (pp. 15–34). Springer Nature: Singapore. 10.1007/978-981-97-8772-2_2
29.
LeeT. H., JanF.-H., & YangC.-C. (2013). Conceptualizing and measuring environmentally responsible behaviors from the perspective of community-based tourists. Tourism Management, 36, 454–468; doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2012.09.012
30.
LuetzJ. M., & NunnP. D. (2023). Spirituality and sustainable development: An entangled and neglected relationship. Sustainability Science, 18, 2035–2042; doi: 10.1007/s11625-023-01347-8
31.
MangunjayaF. M., & McKayJ. E. (2012). Reviving an islamic approach for environmental conservation in Indonesia. Worldviews, 16, 286–305; doi: 10.1163/15685357-01603006
32.
MateerT. J.MeltonT. N.MillerZ. D.LawhonB.AgansJ. P., & TaffB. D. (2022). A multi-dimensional measure of pro-environmental behavior for use across populations with varying levels of environmental involvement in the United States. PloS One, 17, e0274083; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0274083
33.
MayerF. S., & FrantzC. M. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 503–515; doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.10.001
34.
MerloG., Pereira-SanchezV., LeeW., WongW., & MoralesM. J. (2025). Connectedness as a mental health pillar: To self, others, and the world. Psychiatric Annals, 55; doi: 10.3928/00485713-20250613-03
35.
MikusińskiG., ElbakidzeM., OrlikowskaE. H., SkaltsaI. G., ŻmihorskiM., & IwińskaK. (2023). Elucidating human–nature connectedness in three EU countries: A pro‐environmental behaviour perspective. People and Nature, 5, 1577–1591; doi: 10.1002/pan3.10523
36.
MuralidharanS., La FerleC., & Roth-CohenO. (2024). How religiosity and spirituality influences the ecologically conscious consumer psychology of Christians, the non-religious, and atheists in the United States. Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 46, 71–87; doi: 10.1177/00846724231225674
37.
MušinovićF. (2020). Spiritual intelligence and business environments. Academica Turistica, 13, 167–177; doi: 10.26493/2335-4194.13.167-177
38.
NavarroO., OlivosP., & Fleury-BahiG. (2017). “Connectedness to nature scale”: Validity and reliability in the French context. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 2180; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02180
39.
OnubiH. O. (2024). Mediating effect of ecospirituality on the relationship betweengreen training and voluntary workplace green behaviour in construction projectsin Nigeria. Kybernetes; doi: 10.1108/K-10-2023-2101
40.
OttoS., & PensiniP. (2017). Nature-based environmental education of children: Environmental knowledge and connectedness to nature, together, are related to ecological behaviour. Global Environmental Change, 47, 88–94; doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.09.009
41.
PascaL. (2022). Pride and guilt as mediators in the relationship between connection to nature and pro-environmental intention. Climatic Change, 175, 5; doi: 10.1007/s10584-022-03458-0
42.
PritchardA., RichardsonM., SheffieldD., & McEwanK. (2020). The relationship between nature connectedness and eudaimonic well-being: A meta-analysis. Journal of Happiness Studies, 21, 1145–1167; doi: 10.1007/s10902-019-00118-6
43.
RafiqueM. O., & RazaK. M. (2026). Islamic green finance. In SmoloE & RafiqueM. O. (Eds.), Islamic green finance: A marriage of ethics and environmental responsibility in light of Maqasid al-Shari’ah. Routledge. 10.4324/9781003540403
44.
RezapouraghdamH., AlipourH., & DarvishmotevaliM. (2018). Employee workplace spirituality and pro-environmental behavior in the hotel industry. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 26, 740–758; doi: 10.1080/09669582.2017.1409229
45.
RichardsonM., HamlinI., ButlerC. W., ThomasR., & HuntA. (2022). Actively noticing nature (not just time in nature) helps promote nature connectedness. Ecopsychology, 14, 8–16; doi: 10.1089/eco.2021.0023
46.
RosaC. D., ProficeC. C., & 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, 1055; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01055
47.
SkrzypińskaK. (2021). Does spiritual intelligence (SI) exist? A theoretical investigation of a tool useful for finding the meaning of life. Journal of Religion and Health, 60, 500–516; doi: 10.1007/s10943-020-01005-8
48.
Suárez-PeralesI., Valero-GilJ., Leyva-de La HizD. I., Rivera-TorresP., & Garcés-AyerbeC. (2021). Educating for the future: How higher education in environmental management affects pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Cleaner Production, 321, 128972; doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128972
49.
SunJ., MaB., & WeiS. (2023). Same gratitude, different pro-environmental behaviors? Effect of the dual-path influence mechanism of gratitude on pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Cleaner Production, 415, 137779; doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137779
50.
Sya’roniM., Nor IchwanM., PratamaM. Y., & MingD. (2025). Ecotheological insights from prophetic hadiths: Reframing Islamic environmental ethics based on SDGs. Pharos Journal of Theology, 106; doi: 10.46222/pharosjot.106.51
51.
UdallA. M., De GrootJ. I. M., De JongS. B., & ShankarA. (2021). How I see me—A meta-analysis investigating the association between identities and pro-environmental behaviour. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 582421; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.582421
52.
WanQ., & DuW. (2022). Social capital, environmental knowledge, and pro-environmental behavior. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19, 1443; doi: 10.3390/ijerph19031443
53.
WuJ. (2025). Green mind, healthy mind: Investigating nature’s role in students’ health-related quality of life in China. BMC Psychology, 13, 334; doi: 10.1186/s40359-025-02609-z
54.
WynesS., & NicholasK. A. (2017). The climate mitigation gap: Education and government recommendations miss the most effective individual actions. Environmental Research Letters, 12, e074024; doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541
55.
YanZ., & ChengE. C. K. (2015). Primary teachers’ attitudes, intentions and practices regarding formative assessment. Teaching and Teacher Education, 45, 128–136; doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2014.10.002
56.
ZafarM. B., & Abu-HussinM. F. (2025). Faith, growth, and ethics: Cross-cultural analysis of religiosity and environment protection vis-a-vis economic priorities among Muslims. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 106, 102716; doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2025.102716
