Concepts and measures related to connection to nature: Similarities and differences

By Kim‐Pong Tam. 2013

618 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis, Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/01c5a8cf1b64ed9420da3fd82717b2579e13789f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

In Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis

In Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Citations in the corpus

Engaging with Natural Beauty May Be Related to Well-Being Because It Connects People to Nature: Evidence from Three Cultures (2017, neutral): “Since the beginning of the 21st century, researchers have increasingly directed their attention toward measuring and examining correlates of nature connectedness—the degree to which people feel subjectively connected to the natural world (Tam, 2013).”
The relationship between nature connectedness and happiness: a meta-analysis (2014, background): “As previously mentioned, nature connectedness consistently predicts pro-environmental attitudes and concern about the environment (Mayer and Frantz, 2004; Leary et al., 2008; Nisbet et al., 2009; Tam, 2013a).”
Into the Wild: The Effects of 360° Immersive Nature Videos on Feelings of Commitment to the Environment (2019, background): “…of nature experiences, environmental psychologists are especially interested in finding ways to strengthen individuals’ environmental connectedness, which can be described as the subjective feeling of being connected to or part of the environment or nature (Beery & Wolf-Watz, 2014; Tam, 2013).”
Are Some Natural Environments More Psychologically Beneficial Than Others? The Importance of Type and Quality on Connectedness to Nature and Psychological Restoration (2019, background): “…correlation, r = .58, p < .001, was similar to other studies testing measures 2 of connectedness to nature (e.g., Cervinka et al., 2012; Mayer & Frantz, 2004; Tam, 2013 with correlations 3 between .39 and .62), thus, increasing confidence in using this item to measure connectedness to nature.”
Flourishing in nature: A review of the benefits of connecting with nature and its application as a wellbeing intervention (2015, background): “Individuals who are more connected to nature spend more time outdoors (Mayer & Frantz, 2004; Nisbet, Zelenski, & Murphy, 2009; Tam, 2013), and nature contact often increases momentary feelings of connectedness (Mayer, Frantz, Bruehlman-Senecal, & Dolliver, 2009; Nisbet, 2013, 2014; Nisbet &…”
Cross-Cultural Validation of A Revised Environmental Identity Scale (2021, methodology): “EID scores have been found to correlate with both environmental concern and pro-environmental behavior [25,35].”
The mediating role of place attachment between nature connectedness and human well-being: perspectives from Japan (2019, background): “Similar to eudaimonic wellbeing, nature connectedness is found to strongly associate with hedonic well-being (often termed as subjective wellbeing) including life satisfaction, positive affect, and happiness (Mayer and Frantz 2004; Nisbet et al. 2011; Tam 2013; Capaldi et al. 2014), and are as signi”
Mindfulness and connectedness to nature: A meta-analytic investigation (2018, neutral): “As well as being a universal tendency, desire for nature connectedness may be stronger in some individuals than others and can comprise a relatively stable individual-difference characteristic (Tam, 2013).”
Applying the pathways to nature connectedness at a societal scale: a leverage points perspective (2020, methodology): “Nature Connectedness is measurable using psychometric scales containing carefully constructed sets of items (for available measures see Tam 2013) and several studies suggest it can be increased through carefully designed interventions to prompt engagement with nature (e.g. Richardson and Sheffield…”
The green care code: How nature connectedness and simple activities help explain pro‐nature conservation behaviours (2020, background): “…engaged in a variety of activities (Asah, Bengston, & Westphal, 2012; Martin et al., 2019; Mayer & Frantz, 2004; Nisbet, Zelenski, & Murphy, 2009; Tam, 2013), of greater valuing and concern for nature (Frantz & Mayer, 2014), and of greater levels of both pro-environmental (see meta-analysis by…”
Connectedness as a Core Conservation Concern: An Interdisciplinary Review of Theory and a Call for Practice (2014, background): “‘‘Shifting baselines’’ (in memory, perception) [283] Alienation from rural and wild environments [3, 7, 55, 160]”
Ecological Identity: The Development and Assessment of a Measurement Scale (2018, background): “To be sure, however, connectedness and identity are often used in similar ways to capture related phenomena (cf. Stryker & Serpe, 1994; Tam, 2013), and what distinguishes them from each other is open to debate.”