ARTICLE IN PRESS

0272-4944/$ - se

doi:10.1016/j.je

�CorrespondE-mail addr

Journal of Environmental Psychology 28 (2008) 109–120

www.elsevier.com/locate/jep

Engaging with the natural environment:The role of affective connection and identity

Joe Hinds�, Paul Sparks

Department of Psychology, University of Sussex, Falmer, East Sussex BN1 7QH, UK

Available online 17 November 2007

Abstract

Research has shown pro-environmental behaviour to be positively associated with the strength of emotional connection towards the

natural environment. The present study (N ¼ 199) investigated the predictive utility of an extended model of the theory of planned

behaviour (TPB) [Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 50,

179–211] for people’s intentions to engage with the natural environment. It was hypothesised that both affective connection and

identification with the natural environment would contribute significantly to the prediction of people’s intentions. A secondary

hypothesis was that participants who had grown up in rural areas would report more positive orientations towards engaging with the

natural environment than would urban participants. The research found that affective connection was a significant independent predictor

of intentions to engage with the natural environment. Environmental identity was only a significant predictor in the absence of affective

connection in the regression model. As predicted, rural and urban participants differed significantly along the measured variables.

r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Natural environment; Affective connection; Attitudes; Identity; Experience

1. Introduction

Modern lifestyles have, for much of the developed world,created psychological and physical divisions between hu-man inhabitants and the natural world. Since the 1850s, themajority of Britain’s population have made their work andhome in towns and cities (Thomas, 1983). It has beenargued that the result of this trend has been for manypeople to no longer experience the natural world directlybut rather indirectly or vicariously (Kellert, 2002; Schultz,2002). Reduced direct contact with the natural world hasbeen labelled the ‘extinction of experience’ by Pyle (1978),which, he claims, leads to a cycle of apathy and a lack ofconcern with ecological issues, the natural environmentand the wildlife within it. A mitigation of this moderntrend, however, could have positive outcomes for theenvironment: Experiences in the natural environment havebeen found to have significant correlations with pro-environmental behaviour, such as recycling, signing peti-

e front matter r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

nvp.2007.11.001

ing author. Tel.: +44012 7367 8059.

ess: J.hinds@sussex.ac.uk (J. Hinds).

tions in favour of environmental protection and usingpublic transport (Finger, 1994). Nord, Luloff, and Bridger(1998) found strong correlations between frequency ofvisits to forest areas and self-reported pro-environmentalbehaviours such as contributing money to environmentalorganisations and environmentally conscious consumerism(see also Teisl & O’Brien, 2003).Similarly, intimate contact with the natural world,

especially during childhood, has been suggested to beessential in forming meaningful bonds with, and promotingpositive values towards, the natural environment (Chawla,2002; Horwitz, 1996; Kellert, 2002). For instance, Buntingand Cousins (1985) found that the inclination to positivelyrespond to nature was significantly stronger in ruralchildren than for their urban counterparts. Their findingsalso revealed that children’s self-reported activity prefer-ence differed between these groups: Children higher inwhat they term ‘pastoralism’ were more likely to undertakeactivities such as hiking, camping and taking care ofanimals, whilst children scoring higher on ‘urbanism’ weresignificantly associated with just one activity: Watchingtelevision.

ARTICLE IN PRESSJ. Hinds, P. Sparks / Journal of Environmental Psychology 28 (2008) 109–120110

This general pattern of greater experience with thenatural environment leading to more pro-environmentalattitudes is compatible with the view that when people havedirect experiences of an object, their evaluations of thatobject tend to be more affectively based than they are forthose people who have only indirect experience (Millar &Millar, 1996). There is also evidence that direct experienceof an attitude object facilitates stronger attitude–behaviourconsistency (Fazio & Zanna, 1981). Repeated exposure toan attitude object may also be instrumental in the growthof positive affective connections with that object (cf.Zajonc, 2001, on the ‘mere exposure’ effect).

As well as promoting more positive environmentalattitudes and behaviour, experience of the natural environ-ment has been reported to have various health and well-being benefits (Kaplan & Talbot, 1983). For example,lower rates of sick-calls for prisoners with greater access tonatural environment views have been reported (Moore,1981) as has an increase in recovery rates for hospitalpatients with windows facing hospital gardens (Ulrich,1984). Positive social and cognitive outcomes may alsoaccrue as a result of contact with natural places: Improvedcognitive functioning has been reported for children whohave moved from urban environments to environmentsconsidered to be characterised by higher levels of natural-ness (Faber Taylor, Kuo, & Sullivan, 2002; Wells, 2000).Moreover, regarding the natural environment as a place ofleisure, and using it for restorative or respite experiences,can create a time for self-reflexivity (Kaplan & Kaplan,1989; Kaplan, 1995). This, it has been suggested, may leadto positive change in psychological well-being (Herzog,Black, Fountaine, & Knotts, 1997).

1.1. Affective connection

The importance of affect in the context of humanrelationships with the natural environment has beenproposed by several commentators (Kals & Maes, 2002;Kals, Schumaker, & Montada, 1999; Kaplan & Kaplan,1989). Empirical research has found, for instance, thatengendering greater empathy towards nature tends toincrease the level of connectedness people feel towards it(Schultz, 2000). It has also been shown that affect can beboth an important predictor of environmental attitudesand rated as more important by participants, relative tocognitions, in forming their attitudes to environmentalissues such as logging native forests (Pooley & O’Conner,2000). Similarly, Kals et al. (1999) have demonstrated thatan emotional affinity with nature is able to predict natureprotective behaviour, such as public commitments toenvironmental organisations and the use of public trans-port. They also showed emotional affinity to be predictedby past and present exposure to the natural environment.

These empirical data have helped support Wilson’s(1984, 1993) ‘‘biophilia’’ hypothesis, which has suggestedthat, as a species, we have an inherent affiliation to thenatural environment. Wilson posited that the natural world

continues to influence the human condition through ourprevious close and enduring evolutionary relationship withit. Essentially, the argument is that our technologicaldevelopment has been so rapid that our evolutionaryadaptation to modern environments has yet to developsubstantially. Therefore, according to Wilson (1993), thereis still a need to be with nature: we have an ‘‘y innatelyemotional affiliationyto other living organisms’’ (p. 31).There are, however, some advocates of the biophiliahypothesis who have suggested that the genetic bond maywell be a weak one, requiring the addition of learning,culture and experience of nature to optimise biophilictendencies (Kellert, 2002; see also Kahn, 1997). Therefore,it might be expected that affective connection would playan important part in predicting intentions to engage withthe natural environment. Moreover, it may also beexpected that those people with greater experience of thenatural environment may express greater affective connec-tions with it than with those with lesser experience.

1.2. Environmental identity

As well as eliciting emotional bonds, experiences of thenatural environment may also foster place-identity (Manzo,2003; Proshansky, 1978). Proshansky (1978) defines place-identity as the ‘‘dimensions of self that define theindividual’s personal identity in relation to the physicalenvironment’’ (p. 155). Felonneau (2004) has even coinedthe term ‘‘topological identity’’ (p. 45) to refer to the degreeto which one feels an emotional connection with a placeand the people associated with it (see also Lalli, 1992).The importance an identification with, or sense of

connection to, the environment has only recently beenrecognised, broadening the mainstream concept of identityformation to include, for example, how people seethemselves in relation to the natural world (Clayton &Opotow, 2003). For instance, environmental identity,defined as ‘‘the meanings that one attributes to the self asthey relate to the environment’’ has been found to haveboth a direct effect on environmental behaviour and anindirect effect through environmental attitudes (Stets &Biga, 2003, p. 406). Furthermore, these researchers havefound that the stronger the environmental identity, themore positive the attitudes towards the environment.Similarly, a high correlation has been reported between ameasure of environmental identity and self-reportedenvironmental behaviours, such as energy efficiency(Clayton, 2003) and recycling (Mannetti, Pierro, & Livi,2004).Therefore, taken together, affective connection and

environmental identity are potentially important explana-tory concepts within environmental psychology research.Exposure to the natural environment may facilitate thedevelopment of emotional bonds and identification with it,which may in turn lead to positive psychological well-beingand to the formation of positive attitudes and behaviourstowards the natural environment.

ARTICLE IN PRESSJ. Hinds, P. Sparks / Journal of Environmental Psychology 28 (2008) 109–120 111

1.3. The theory of planned behaviour

The theory of planned behaviour (TPB) proposes thatpeople act or behave in accordance with their intentionstowards particular behaviours providing they perceivesome degree of control over implementing those beha-viours (Ajzen, 1991). Intentions, seen as proximal pre-dictors of behaviour, are in turn dependent upon threeseparate factors: attitudes towards the behaviour, sub-jective norms and perceived behavioural control (PBC)(Ajzen, 2001). Thus, intentions to behave in a particularway may be predicted by strength of attitude towards thatbehaviour, the extent to which the behaviour is perceivedto be compatible with perceived social approval and thedegree to which the behaviour is perceived to lie withinone’s personal control.

Within the TPB, attitudes towards a given behaviour aresaid to be determined by salient beliefs about behaviouraloutcomes (behavioural beliefs) and the evaluations of thosebehavioural outcomes (outcome evaluations). An estimateof attitude is obtained by multiplying each behaviouralbelief with the corresponding outcome evaluation andsumming the resulting products (Ajzen, 1988). It is alsoclaimed that when behavioural beliefs and outcomeevaluations are taken together they may represent anindirect measure of attitude that has been shown to havehigh correlations with more direct measures of attitudes(Ajzen, 1988, 2002a).

The TPB has been applied to a wide range ofbehavioural domains (Ajzen, 2002b) including those thatrelate to environmental issues. For example, it has beenused to good effect in predicting adoption of green energyand increased bus use (Bamberg, 2003; Bamberg, Ajzen, &Schmidt, 2003), intentions to recycle (Mannetti et al., 2004;Terry, Hogg, & White, 1999), and buying organic foods(Sparks & Shepherd, 1992).

Although the TPB has demonstrated its effectiveness as amodel, the inclusion of additional predictors should beacceptable providing they explain additional variance overand above the theory’s existing variables (Ajzen, 1991). Forexample, several researchers have shown that the TPB maybenefit, in terms of its predictive utility, from the inclusionof variables such as identity and affect (see Conner &Armitage, 1998, for a review), moral obligation, self-identity, and past behaviour (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993;Manstead & Parker, 1995).

The role of attitude measurement (within the TPBframework), in particular in relation to the distinctionbetween affect and cognition within attitudes, has pro-voked much debate (Breckler & Wiggins, 1989a; Trafimow& Sheeran, 1998). It has been proposed that currentmethods of measuring attitudes within the TPB have atendency to capture cognitive, ‘rational’, evaluations butnot affective dimensions of attitudes (Conner & Sparks,1995; French et al., 2005; Manstead & Parker, 1995; vander Pligt, Zeelenberg, van Dijk, de Vries, & Richard, 1998).For example, Ajzen and Timko (1986) found that attitudes

towards generally recommended health practices, mea-sured with a 20-item semantic differential scale, comprisedtwo distinct factors. The first was deemed to be reflective ofparticipants’ cognitive evaluations and consisted of bi-polar adjective-pairings such as ‘harmful–beneficial’ and‘wise–foolish’. The second was deemed to be reflective ofmore affective judgements with item pairings such as‘pleasant–unpleasant’ and ‘interesting–boring’. Interest-ingly, there was not a significant correlation between thesetwo factors, each of which was argued to be measuringdiscrete aspects of the same attitudes. Moreover, theaffective dimension of attitudes was found to be a highlysignificant predictor of health behaviour independently ofthe impact of the more cognitive dimensions (Ajzen &Timko, 1986). Consequently, Ajzen (2002a) has proposedthat the direct method for assessing attitudes, namely thesemantic differential, should elicit both cognitive andaffective aspects of attitudes.Although it has been argued that it is very unlikely that

there can ever be ‘pure’ cognitive and affective elements ofattitudes (Eagly, Mladinic, & Otto, 1994), there is aplausible assumption that, for some attitudes towardssome behaviours or objects, either affect or cognitiveelements may predominate (Trafimow & Sheeran, 1998).For example, it has been shown that affective respon-ses rather than cognitive responses have the strongerrelationship with global attitudes towards blood donation(Breckler & Wiggins, 1989a). There is also an influentialline of argument in the literature that suggests thatattitudes are often essentially affectively based (Wilson &Dunn, 1986; Wilson, Dunn, Kraft, & Lisle, 1989). There-fore, the present study also undertook to discover if theprediction of environmental attitudes could be improvedusing measures of affective connection in addition tobehavioural belief and outcome evaluation product terms,the determinants of attitudes within the TPB (Ajzen, 1988).

1.3.1. Affect and the TPB

Affective factors (often assessed in the form of antici-pated negative affective reactions) have been demonstratedin several studies to add significantly to the TPB model(Parker, Stradling, & Manstead, 1996; Richard, de Vries, &van der Pligt, 1998; Richard, van der Pligt, & de Vries,1995). They also tend to be used when researching topicsthat are ‘‘heavily affectively laden’’ (Conner & Sparks,1995, p. 149) such as leisure activities (Ajzen & Driver,1991) and safe sex practices (Chan & Fishbein, 1993;Richard et al., 1998).Moreover, Richard et al. (1998) demonstrated that when

anticipated affective reactions and attitudinal measure-ments remain distinct factors in questionnaire protocols,the attitude measure may be made redundant in itspredictive capacity, whereas the anticipated affectivemeasure may account for a significant amount of thevariance in behaviour. However, Richard et al. (1998) notethat greater use should be made of specific affective reac-tions when assessing outcome evaluations and behavioural

ARTICLE IN PRESSJ. Hinds, P. Sparks / Journal of Environmental Psychology 28 (2008) 109–120112

beliefs in order to fully appreciate the independence ofaffective beliefs from more cognitive beliefs. Although thisresearch area tends to be dominated by the assessment ofnegative affective reactions, some applications with posi-tive affective reactions have been reported (Richard, vander Pligt, & de Vries, 1996). Therefore, because of therelative scarcity of an assessment of affect (positive affect inparticular) in the literature, it is important to try and clarifythe importance of affective connection, both within anatural-environment research focus and within the meth-odological framework of the TPB. Drawing on previousresearch (e.g., Kals et al., 1999; Mayer & Frantz, 2004) wedefine affective connection with the natural environment asthe subjective experience of an emotional attachment withthe natural environment.

1.3.2. Identity and the TPB

Self-identity often seems to represent an importantaddition to the TPB (Sparks & Shepherd, 1992; Terry etal., 1999; see also Charng, Piliavin, & Callero, 1988). Forinstance, Sparks and Shepherd (1992) found that identify-ing strongly as a green consumer contributed significantlyand independently to intentions to consume organicvegetables. It has been noted, however, that the effect ofidentity as a predictor may vary according to the targetbehaviour in question (Conner & Armitage, 1998).

Moreover, there has been some criticism that measuresof identity merely act as proxies for past behaviour(Charng et al., 1988; Sparks & Guthrie, 1998; Stets &Biga, 2003) or intentions (Fishbein, 1997). In order tofurther inform the natural-environment psychologicalliterature regarding the importance of environmentalidentity (cf. Clayton & Opotow, 2003) a different kind ofmeasure of identification with the natural environment wasincluded in the present study. The aim of this measure wasboth to avoid items that could be construed as proxyindicators of intentions and behaviours and to representaspects of identity that are more ‘personal’ than many ofthe more ‘role-based’ forms of identity that are oftenaddressed in this kind of research (cf. Mannetti et al.,2004).

1.4. The present study

From the research literature it appears that experience ofthe natural environment may elicit positive environmentalattitudes and behaviours, as well as facilitating positivepsychological well-being. Therefore, identifying the ante-cedents of intentions to engage with the natural environ-ment may be seen as a useful contribution to the literature.It would also appear that environmental identity andaffective connection combined with key TPB variables maybe important predictors of intentions to engage with thenatural environment.

On the basis of the above considerations, the presentresearch focussed on three key hypotheses. First, weexpected that a sense of affective connection with the

natural environment would be found to be a significantindependent predictor of participants’ intentions to engagewith the natural environment (because such affectiveexperience is not well represented within standard TPBvariables). Second, and for similar reasons, we expectedthat environmental identity would also be found to be asignificant independent predictor of participants’ inten-tions. Finally, we expected that participants from ruralbackgrounds, because of their potential greater exposure tothe natural environment, would be distinguished fromurban participants by having significantly more positiveratings for behavioural intentions, attitudes, subjectivenorm, PBC, identification, and affective connection.

2. Method

2.1. Participants

Participants (N ¼ 199; female ¼ 166, male ¼ 33) wereundergraduate social science students at the University ofSussex, UK. Participants represented a conveniencesample, in that that they agreed to participate in the studyin return for course credits as part of the requirements oftheir degree programme. Their mean age was 21.7 years(range 18–53).

2.2. Materials

All participants received an identical four page ques-tionnaire concerning ‘‘Attitudes and the Natural Environ-ment’’. Following the instructions, a working definition of‘‘Engaging with the natural environment’’ was presented as‘‘being in and actively participating in areas and settingsproduced by nature, such as woodland, hills, lakes, valleys,coastal areas, mountains, rivers and forests’’. The ques-tionnaire assessed the central concepts of the TPB as wellas a number of additional measures, some of which are notreported here. All responses were recorded on seven-pointLikert-type scales (response scale end points are indicatedin parentheses). Reverse coding of variables was carriedout where appropriate.

2.2.1. Childhood location

Following questions relating to age and gender, partici-pants were asked to indicate the type of location in whichthey grew up: ‘‘In which area did you spend most of yourchildhood?’’ with three possible responses, ‘Urban’(n ¼ 71), ‘Suburban’ (n ¼ 90), and ‘Rural’ (n ¼ 36).

2.2.2. Behavioural beliefs and outcome evaluations

Eight behavioural beliefs about engaging with thenatural environment were constructed from an initial beliefelicitation pilot study, conducted according to Ajzen’s(2002a) guidelines, with a sample of undergraduatestudents (N ¼ 30). The most frequently reported responseswere included in the main questionnaire. These were: ‘‘Myengaging with the natural environment wouldy’’ ‘‘allow

ARTICLE IN PRESS

1It must be noted that the original intention was for these items to

measure aspects of ‘ecocentric’ attitudes (Thompson & Barton, 1994).

However, given their clear affective content, we consider them good

indicators of affective connection to the natural environment.

J. Hinds, P. Sparks / Journal of Environmental Psychology 28 (2008) 109–120 113

me to experience beautiful scenery’’, ‘‘make me feel happy’’,‘‘be too isolating’’, ‘‘help me escape the stresses of life’’,‘‘give me a sense of connection with nature’’, ‘‘be anuncomfortable experience’’, ‘‘be inconvenient for me’’, and‘‘help promote environmental awareness’’ (extremely un-

likely to extremely likely). These were followed by the eightcorresponding outcome evaluation questions, which simplyasked participants to evaluate each of the outcomesmentioned in the behavioural belief items, ‘‘Please evaluateeach of the followingy’’ (extremely bad to extremely good).

2.2.3. Attitudes

Attitudes were assessed using a five-item semanticdifferential measure. Responses were recorded to thestatement, ‘‘For me, engaging with the natural environmentwould bey’’ (extremely bad to extremely good; extremely

harmful to extremely beneficial; extremely foolish to ex-

tremely wise; extremely unpleasant to extremely pleasant andextremely unenjoyable to extremely enjoyable), anchored atthe end points only. The mean of these items (a ¼ 0.88) wasused to form a composite measure of attitudes.

2.2.4. Subjective norm

Subjective norm was measured with two items: ‘‘Mostpeople who are important to me probably think that Ishould engage with the natural environment’’ (strongly

disagree to strongly agree) and ‘‘If I were to engage with thenatural environment, most people who are important to mewould probablyy’’ (disapprove strongly to approve

strongly). The mean of these items (r ¼ 0.49) was used toform a composite measure of subjective norm.

2.2.5. Behavioural intentions

Behavioural intentions were measured with the three items‘‘I shall try to engage with the natural environment withinthe next two weeks’’ (definitely shall not try and definitely

shall try), ‘‘I shall make an effort to engage with the naturalenvironment in the next two weeks’’ (definitely false anddefinitely true), and ‘‘I intend to engage with the naturalenvironment in the next two weeks’’ (strongly disagree tostrongly agree). The mean of these items (a ¼ 0.93) was usedto form a composite measure of intentions.

2.2.6. Perceived behavioural control

PBC was measured with the items ‘‘How much controldo you have over whether or not you engage with thenatural environment’’ (no control and complete control) and‘‘It is mostly up to me whether or not I engage with thenatural environment’’ (strongly disagree to strongly agree).The mean of these items (r ¼ 0.63) was used to form acomposite measure of PBC.

2.2.7. Affective connection

Affective connection was measured with the items(adapted from Thompson & Barton, 1994), ‘‘Sometimeswhen I am unhappy I find comfort in nature’’, ‘‘It makesme sad to see natural environments destroyed’’, ‘‘Being out

in nature is a great stress reducer for me’’ and ‘‘I need timein nature to be happy’’ (strongly disagree to strongly agree).The mean of these four items (a ¼ 0.77) was then used toform a measure of affective connection.1

2.2.8. Environmental identity

Identification with the natural environment was mea-sured with the three items ‘‘I see myself as someone whoempathises with the natural environment’’, ‘‘For me,engaging with the natural environment gives me a greatersense of who I am’’, and ‘‘I identify with the naturalenvironment’’ (strongly disagree to strongly agree). Themean of these items (a ¼ 0.75) was used to form a measureof environmental identity.

3. Results

Means, standard deviations and inter-correlations forthe TPB constructs, behavioural intentions, attitude,subjective norm and PBC, and the added constructsof environmental identity and affective connection (seeTable 1), indicate that although some correlations aredeemed to be high (Cohen, 1988) there was only oneextreme case, namely that between affective connection andidentification (r ¼ 0.80). However, an examination of thecollinearity statistics revealed that each predictor variablefell within the acceptable boundaries of tolerance (40.3)and the VIF coefficient (o10), thus ruling out anysubstantive multi-collinearity (cf. Field, 2000). Addition-ally, although the sample was predominantly female, aseries of t-tests found no differences between males andfemales on the extended TPB variables.

3.1. Predicting behavioural intentions

A hierarchical regression was carried out of intentions toengage with the natural environment on attitudes (step 1),subjective norms (step 2), PBC (step 3), environmentalidentity (step 4) and affective connection (step 5). Themodel was a significant predictor of intentions to engage inthe natural environment, R ¼ 0.69, po0.001. Results showthat there were significant percentage change in thevariance explained by the inclusion of attitudes, F change¼ 98.91, po0.001; subjective norm, F change ¼ 15.65,

po0.001; environmental identity, F change ¼ 20.00, po0.001 and affective connection, F change ¼ 9.80, po0.002.There was no significant incremental contribution to themodel from PBC (Table 2).Final beta values show significant independent predictive

effects for attitude (b ¼ 0.23, p ¼ 0.002), subjective norm(b ¼ 0.22, p ¼ 0.001) and affective connection (b ¼ 0.28,p ¼ 0.002) but not for PBC (b ¼ 0.08, p ¼ 0.12) nor

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 1

Descriptive statistics and inter-correlations for the extended TPB variables (N ¼ 199)

1 2 3 4 5 6 M SD

1. Behavioural intentions – 0.58��� 0.45��� 0.22�� 0.56��� 0.61��� 4.86 1.48

2. Attitude – 0.43��� 0.22�� 0.61��� 0.62��� 5.74 0.84

3. Subjective norm – 0.12 0.33��� 0.37��� 5.18 1.03

4. Perceived behavioural control – 0.16� 0.17� 5.40 1.11

5. Environmental identity – 0.80��� 5.04 1.10

6. Affective connection – 5.51 1.00

�po0.05.��po0.01.���po0.001.

Table 2

Hierarchical regressions of intentions to engage with the natural environment (N ¼ 199)

Step Predictor R R2 Increment to R2 F change Final b

1. Attitudes 0.58 0.33 0.33 98.91��� 0.23��

2. Subjective norm 0.62 0.38 0.05 15.65��� 0.20���

3. Perceived behavioural control 0.63 0.39 0.01 2.84 0.08

4. Environmental identity 0.67 0.45 0.06 20.00��� 0.12

5. Affective connection 0.69 0.48 0.03 9.80�� 0.28��

��po0.01.���po0.001.

J. Hinds, P. Sparks / Journal of Environmental Psychology 28 (2008) 109–120114

environmental identity (b ¼ 0.12, p ¼ 0.20). Moreover,these results remained largely unaffected after controllingfor childhood location. Although able to account for anadditional 1.5% of the variance in the model(Fchange ¼ 4.03, po0.019), the effect of childhood locationon intentions as a independent significant predictor wasmarginal (b ¼ �0.13, p ¼ 0.09).2

Therefore, it appears that the more positive participants’attitudes, the greater their intentions to engage with thenatural environment. Moreover, affective connection andsubjective norm had a positive relationship with beha-vioural intentions towards engaging with the naturalenvironment: those with a strong affective connection withthe natural environment reported being more likely toengage with the natural environment, as did participantswho perceived social approval about engaging with it.Thus, the first hypothesis was supported in that affectiveconnection was found to be a significant, independentpredictor of intentions. However, the second hypothesisregarding the predictive utility of environmental identitywas only supported when affective connection was notincluded in the regression analysis.

3.2. Predicting attitudes

Means, standard deviations and inter-correlations forattitudes, behavioural belief and outcome evaluation

2Dummy variables were computed using ‘Rural’ as the baseline measure

with this beta weight representing the effect of dummy variable one: the

difference between ‘Rural’ and ‘Urban’ on intentions.

product terms,3 and affective connection, indicated thatthere were no overly high inter-correlations betweenpredictor variables (see Table 3). As an additional analysis,a hierarchical regression was also carried out of attitudes toengage with the natural environment on all of the beliefs(step 1) and affective connection (step 2). Beliefs andaffective connection accounted for 54% of the variance inattitudes. Results show that affective connection (b ¼ 0.30,po0.001), the ‘‘allow me to experience beautiful scenery’’belief (b ¼ 0.15, p ¼ 0.027), the ‘‘be inconvenient for me’’belief (b ¼ 0.13, p ¼ 0.023) and the ‘‘help promote environ-mental awareness’’ belief (b ¼ 0.14, p ¼ 0.011) were eachsignificant independent predictors of attitudes (Table 4).

3.3. The influence of childhood location

A 3 (childhood location: urban, suburban, rural) � 6(extended TPB variables: behavioural intentions, PBC,subjective norm, attitudes, affective connection, andenvironmental identity) MANOVA carried out to deter-mine if there were differences on the extended TPBvariables according to childhood location revealed asignificant overall effect of childhood location, llargest ¼ 0.11, F(6, 191) ¼ 3.43, p ¼ 0.004.Univariate one-way ANOVAs are reported in Table 5

for childhood location for each of the variables. Asthe prediction for this comparison is directional, thegiven p values have been corrected by a factor of 2 to

3For ease of exposition, behavioural belief and outcome evaluation

product terms will be referred to as beliefs for the remainder of the paper.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 3

Inter-correlations and descriptive statistics for attitudes, beliefs and affective connection (N ¼ 199)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 M SD

1. Attitudes – 0.46��� 0.57��� 0.06 0.50��� 0.51��� 0.24��� 0.30��� 0.35��� 0.62��� 5.74 .84

2. ‘Beautiful scenery’ – 0.51�� �0.09 0.46�� 0.45�� 0.26�� 0.11 0.25�� 0.44�� 5.42 3.12

3. ‘Make me feel happy’ – 0.14 0.48�� 0.50�� 0.31�� 0.30�� 0.19�� 0.58�� 5.79 2.73

4. ‘Be too isolating’ – 0.08 �0.01 0.31�� 0.24�� �0.15� �0.08 0.85 3.69

5. ‘Help me escape the stresses of life’ – 0.49��� 0.12 0.16� 0.28��� 0.50��� 4.26 3.57

6. ‘Sense of connection with nature’ – 0.15� 0.09 0.37�� 0.57�� 3.08 3.23

7. ‘Be an uncomfortable experience’ – 0.30�� 0.08 0.08 3.98 3.45

8. ‘Be inconvenient’ – �0.01 0.21�� 1.71 3.34

9. ‘Promote environmental awareness’ – 0.31�� 1.82 3.35

10. Affective Connection – 5.51 1.00

�po0.05.��po0.01.���po0.001.

Table 4

Multiple regression of attitudes towards engaging with the natural environment on beliefs (step 1) and affective connection (step 2) (N ¼ 199)

Step Predictors R R2 Increment to R2 F change Final b

1. ‘Beautiful scenery’ 0.70 0.49 0.49 22.52��� 0.15�

‘Make me feel happy’ 0.13

‘Be too isolating’ 0.04

‘Help me escape the stresses of life’ 0.11

‘Sense of connection with nature’ 0.07

‘Uncomfortable experience’ 0.08

‘Be inconvenient’ 0.13�

‘Promote environmental awareness’ 0.14�

2. Affective connection 0.73 0.54 0.04 17.44��� 0.30���

�po0.05.���po0.001.

J. Hinds, P. Sparks / Journal of Environmental Psychology 28 (2008) 109–120 115

give one-tailed values (cf. Field, 2000). Levene’s test forhomogeneity is assumed unless otherwise stated.

There were significant effects for behavioural intentions,F(2,195) ¼ 5.51, p ¼ 0.005, for PBC, F(2,195) ¼ 5.32,p ¼ 0.0064 and, marginally, for subjective norm, F(2,195)¼ 2.46, p ¼ 0.088, environmental identity, F(2,195) ¼2.77, p ¼ 0.065 and affective connection, F(2,195) ¼ 2.41,p ¼ 0.093. There was no main effect for attitudes,F(2,195) ¼ 2.02, p ¼ 0.136. However, the contrast betweenurban and rural participants revealed that for all variablesrural participants gave significantly higher ratings than didurban participants (see Table 5).

4. Discussion

The present findings concur with natural-environmentfocused research regarding the importance of the inclusionof measures of affect (Kals & Maes, 2002; Kals et al., 1999;Pooley & O’Conner, 2000). Although Kals et al. (1999)suggest that past and present experience of the naturalenvironment predicts positive emotional affinity with it, in

4Equal variances not assumed.

the present study, this observation is extended by indicat-ing that the more one has an affective connection with thenatural environment, the greater one’s intentions to engagewith it. Therefore, the present findings support Kals andMaes (2002) and Kals and colleagues’ (1999) workregarding the importance of affective connection innatural-environment issues.The present findings are also congruent with the research

literature that addresses the importance of the developmentof meaningful bonds with the natural environment duringchildhood (Bunting & Cousins, 1985; Chawla, 2002;Horwitz, 1996; Kellert, 2002). The hypothesis that partici-pants from a rural childhood would differ significantly fromurban participants in terms of the research variables wasclearly supported. Participants from rural childhoodsreported more positive affective connections, strongeridentification, stronger behavioural intentions, more positiveattitudes, more acceptable subjective norm, and greater PBCabout engaging with the natural environment than didparticipants with urban childhoods. Thus, the findings alsosupport both the Kals et al. (1999) argument that pastexperience of the natural environment has an important roleto play in the formation of positive affective relationships

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 5

Means and standard deviations for the extended TPB variables by

childhood location showing contrasts significant levels with Rural as the

referent group

Rural (N ¼ 36) Urbana (N ¼ 71) Suburbanb (N ¼ 90)

Behavioural intentions

M 5.36 4.48���� 4.98

(SD) (1.35) (1.39) (1.49)

Attitudes

M 5.99 5.67�� 5.68�

(SD) (0.78) (0.88) (0.80)

Subjective norm

M 5.51 5.11�� 5.08��

(SD) (0.95) (0.99) (1.07)

Perceived behavioural control

M 5.82 5.12���� 5.47

(SD) (0.65) (1.20) (1.11)

Environmental identity

M 5.37 4.85��� 5.02

(SD) (1.09) (1.15) (1.03)

Affective connection

M 5.83 5.41�� 5.45�

(SD) (0.90) (0.99) (1.03)

aSignificance levels refer to Contrast 1 (Rural vs. Urban) 1 tailed.bSignificance levels refer to Contrast 2 (Rural vs. Suburban) 2 tailed.�po0.06.��po0.05.���po0.01.����po0.001.

J. Hinds, P. Sparks / Journal of Environmental Psychology 28 (2008) 109–120116

with it and more theoretical work on the role of direct andrepeated exposure to an attitude object and affect (Millar &Millar, 1996; Zajonc, 2001).

Moreover, the results are informative regarding theutility of the TPB as a theoretical framework within anatural environment research focus. The present studyrevealed that our extended TPB model could account foralmost half of the variance in intentions to engage with thenatural environment, which is relatively high compared tomany previous TPB findings (see Armitage & Conner,2001). The study also finds support for a significant andindependent role of affective connection in predictingpeople’s intentions to engage with the natural environment.The results show that affective connection explains anadditional 8% of the variance in intentions to engage withthe natural environment, when not only the standard TPBpredictors of intentions but also when a measure ofenvironmental identity are included in the regressionmodel. In fact this finding along with the predictive effectof affective connection on attitudes indicates both a directand an indirect effect of this variable on people’sintentions. There is, therefore, an argument from thesefindings for the inclusion of an assessment of additionalaffective factors within an extended TPB model, thussupporting previous suggestions in this regard (Chan &Fishbein, 1993; Parker et al., 1996; Richard et al., 1998,

1995). The significant contribution of affective connectionto the attitude object, such as the natural environment inthe present study, suggests that it should perhaps beconsidered as an additional predictor for the TPB model,following Ajzen’s (1991) comments regarding the opennessof the model to additional predictor variables. However,the breadth of behaviours for which such an additionalvariable may be a useful predictor clearly merits empiricalexploration, as has been advised by Ajzen and Fishbein(2005).Although the inclusion of affective connection had a

significant independent predictive contribution, the inclu-sion of environmental identity into an extended TPB modelas a predictor of intentions to engage with the naturalenvironment failed to explain any unique variance onceaffective connection was included. This may be explainedby the particularly high correlation between affectiveconnection and environmental identity in the model. Asaffective connection was a significant predictor it wouldseem that elements of environmental identity, as measuredhere, could have been encapsulated by the affectivemeasure. Certainly, the suggestion that people oftenidentify with what they care about (Frankfurt, 1988)would be entirely consistent with this interpretation.Interestingly, previous researchers who have utilisedmeasures of identity and found them to be significantpredictors in various models have done so without theinclusion of explicit measures of affect (Charng et al., 1988;Mannetti et al., 2004; Sparks & Guthrie, 1998; Sparks &Shepherd, 1992; Stets & Biga, 2003; Terry et al., 1999).Moreover, the framing of the environmental identity

items used for the present study may require criticalattention. It has been remarked, for instance, thatidentification with the natural environment lies along asocial continuum with some environmental identitiesevidencing far fewer social associations than others(Clayton & Opotow, 2003). People may form environ-mental identities that have a strong social component, suchas belonging to and actively participating with environ-mental groups and community environmental pro-grammes. Other forms of environmental identity mayreflect minimal social influence or engagement, such asexperiencing individual emotional connections to place(Clayton & Opotow, 2003).The measure of identification incorporated in the present

study reflects a more personal form of identification ratherthan the kinds of social, or role-based identity which havefrequently been used in previous TPB work (however, seeMannetti et al., 2004). It might be suggested therefore thatthe inclusion of other forms of identity, such as social orrole identity, might explain additional variance in themodel over and above that explained by the TPB and byaffective connection. It is also possible that the strength ofan environmental identity may well be different forparticipants with differing degrees of previous exposureto the natural environment (Felonneau, 2004; Manzo,2003). This was borne out in the current findings, with

ARTICLE IN PRESSJ. Hinds, P. Sparks / Journal of Environmental Psychology 28 (2008) 109–120 117

participants from rural backgrounds having strongeridentification with the natural environment than didparticipants from urban backgrounds.

There are some caveats to be considered with regardingthe findings generally. Our sample was predominantlyfemale. Bunting and Cousins (1985) reported that femaleswere more likely to respond favourably to the naturalenvironment than were males, a finding that has receivedsome degree of support elsewhere (Stern, Dietz, & Kalof,1993; Zelezny, Chua, & Aldrich, 2000). However, as notedby Stern et al. (1993), there is a degree of inconsistency inthe literature in this regard. Some studies have found littlein the way of gender differences in regard to concern aboutpollution (Lyons & Breakwell, 1994), and undertakingresponsible environmental behaviours (Hines, Hungerford,& Tomera, 1986/1987). However, despite no differencesbeing found between males and females on the extendedTPB variables, the present sample was predominatelyfemale and there remains the possibility that this asym-metry may have influenced the pattern of results.

The present study also used a rather rudimentarymeasure of environmental experience, viz. childhoodlocation. A more detailed assessment of environmentalexperience is warranted in order to make more assuredstatements about the relationship between experience of thenatural environment and positive perceptions about it (seeNord et al., 1998).

The degree to which the present findings might begeneralised to a wider population should also be consid-ered. The study sample consisted of undergraduate socialscience students, not a representative sample of the generalpopulation. Therefore, care should be taken not toextrapolate these results beyond our sample until furtherresearch can determine the extent to which the presentfindings have broader applicability.

There may also be some concern regarding the inter-correlations between predictor variables described in thepresent study. As pointed out by Cohen (1988), correla-tions between variables exceeding 0.50 in social psycholo-gical research tend to indicate high levels of inter-correlation. However, there remains within the TPBframework a large body of research that suggests thatcorrelations of this magnitude are relatively common-place(Bamberg, 2003; Bamberg et al., 2003; Norman, Clarke, &Walker, 2005; Sparks & Guthrie, 1998). In particular, therelationship between attitudes and behavioural intentionsis such within the TPB that meta-analyses reveal consis-tently high inter-correlations (e.g., r ¼40.50) (Sheeran &Taylor, 1999). Coupled with the multi-collinearity analysiswhich indicated no overly problematic overlap betweenvariables, the high correlations reported here raise littlecause for concern.

The current findings support research that has shown theimportance of both beliefs and affect in predictingenvironmental attitudes (Pooley & O’Conner, 2000)through the demonstrated contribution that affectiveconnection and beliefs can have in predicting attitudes

towards engaging with the natural environment. Accordingto Ajzen (2002a, 2002b), the summed products ofbehavioural beliefs and corresponding outcome evaluationshould be significant determinants of attitudes towardsbehaviours. Although this was indeed the case in thereported research, the addition of affective connectionexplained a further 10% of the variance in attitudes. Thesefindings also add weight to the literature on the importanceof the study of affect in environmental psychology whereattitudes towards environmental issues, it has been argued,are more affectively driven compared to other attitudes(Pooley & O’Conner, 2000; Schultz, 2000).Moreover, at a more theoretical level, the deficit in the

predictive utility of beliefs, highlighted here by contribu-tion of affective connection, may be an artefact of theframing of the initial belief elicitation study (French et al.,2005). Participants are asked, based upon the TPB guide-lines, to list the advantages and disadvantages of engagingwith the natural environment (Ajzen, 2002a). As has beencontended by Wilson et al. (1989), asking people toconsider their reasons, rather than focussing on feelingstowards the target object, may tap more cognitive aspectsof attitudes. Eliciting reasons for, or, as in the presentstudy, advantages and disadvantages of engaging with thenatural environment, may be especially suboptimal ways ofassessing the antecedents of people’s attitudes in suchcases (Trafimow & Sheeran, 1998; Wilson & Dunn, 1986;Wilson et al., 1989; Zanna & Rempel, 1988). Similarly,Manstead and Parker (1995) suggest that belief-basedattitudes towards a behaviour may represent moredeliberative reactions compared with more automaticreactions associated with direct measures of attitudes(cf. Jessop, Churchill, & Sparks, unpublished manuscript;Manstead & Parker, 1995). Automatic or gut reactionsassociated with direct measures of attitudes may thereforetap aspects of attitudes that are more affective in natureand which represent important fundamental dimensionsof attitudes towards some attitudinal objects. Researchin the domain of the natural environment, for example,has indicated a positive relationship between implicitor subconscious connections with nature with explicitenvironmental attitudes (Schultz, Shriver, Tabanico, &Khazian, 2004). On a related theme, it is interestingthat the role of unconscious processes in judgementand decision making has attracted much recent atten-tion within the discipline (Gigerenzer, 2007; Wilson,2002).It is noteworthy that the affective connection items used

here which comprised items such as, ‘‘being out in nature isa great stress reducer’’ seem to tap aspects of affective well-being. There remains, therefore, the possibility that thequality of affective connection that motivates peopletowards engaging with the natural environment mightbe beneficial for affect-based psychological well-being(Herzog et al., 1997; Kaplan & Talbot, 1983; Ulrich,1983) as well as having the potential for engenderingpositive environmental attitudes and behaviour.

ARTICLE IN PRESSJ. Hinds, P. Sparks / Journal of Environmental Psychology 28 (2008) 109–120118

Attitude research has been frequently admonished forinsufficient attention to affective influences on behaviour(Breckler & Wiggins, 1989b; Giner-Sorolla, 1999). Whileapplications of the TPB have certainly not been immune tosuch criticisms (Manstead & Parker, 1995; van der Pligt etal., 1998; Zanna & Rempel, 1988) there have been fewapplications in this regard that have offered boththeoretical and empirical contributions (but see Jessopet al., unpublished manuscript; Richard et al., 1996).

The study thus provides both a useful contribution todiscussions addressing affective connection as an importantpredictive factor in the context of environmental issues andas an additional variable in an extended TPB. We do notdoubt that both theoretical and measurement refinementswould be beneficial, and that the inclusion of objectivemeasures of actual behaviour in future research would helpstrengthen the assessment of the role of a sense of affectiveconnection. Nevertheless, we would suggest that thepresent research offers a useful indication of the impor-tance of affective factors in natural-environmental researchand in attitude–behaviour models generally. Moreover, itoffers an insight into the need to examine the nature ofinter-relationships between measures of affect, on the onehand, and identity on the other and of the appliedimportance of seeking to understand environment-related behaviour in terms of the inter-relationshipsbetween people’s affective connections, their sense of theirown identity and their direct experience of the naturalenvironment.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the three anonymousreviewers of this article for their valuable constructivecomments and insights on an earlier draft of this manu-script.

References

Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality, and behaviour. Chicago, IL: Dorsey

Press.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational

Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.

Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and operation of attitudes. Annual Review of

Psychology, 52, 27–58.

Ajzen, I., 2002a. Constructing a TPB questionnaire: Conceptual and

methodological considerations. Retrieved January 14, 2003, from:

/http://www.unix.oit.umass.edu/�aizen/tpb.htmlS.

Ajzen, I., 2002b. The theory of planned behavior: A bibliography. Retrieved

January 14, 2003, from: /http://www.people.umass.edu/aizen/

tpbrefs.htmlS.

Ajzen, I., & Driver, B. L. (1991). Prediction of leisure participation from

behavioural, normative, and control beliefs: An application of the

theory of planned behaviour. Leisure Sciences, 13, 185–204.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2005). The influence of attitudes on behavior. In

D. Albarracın, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of

attitudes (pp. 173–221). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Ajzen, I., & Timko, C. (1986). Correspondence between health attitudes

and behaviour. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 7, 259–276.

Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned

behaviour: A meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychol-

ogy, 40, 471–499.

Bamberg, S. (2003). How does environmental concern influence specific

environmentally related behaviours? A new answer to an old question.

Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 21–32.

Bamberg, S., Ajzen, I., & Schmidt, P. (2003). Choice of travel mode in

the theory of planned behavior: The roles of past behavior, habit,

and reasoned action. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 25,

175–187.

Breckler, S. J., & Wiggins, E. C. (1989a). Affect versus evaluation in the

structure of attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25,

253–271.

Breckler, S. J., & Wiggins, E. C. (1989b). On defining attitude and attitude

theory: Once more with feeling. In A. R. Pratkanis, S. J. Breckler, & A.

G. Greenwald (Eds.), Attitude structure and function (pp. 407–427).

New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Bunting, T. E., & Cousins, L. R. (1985). Environmental dispositions

among school-age children: A preliminary investigation. Environment

and Behavior, 17, 725–768.

Chan, D. K.-S., & Fishbein, M. (1993). Determinants of college women’s

intentions to tell their partners to use condoms. Journal of Applied

Social Psychology, 23, 1455–1470.

Charng, H.-W., Piliavin, J. A., & Callero, P. L. (1988). Role identity and

reasoned action in the prediction of repeated behaviour. Social

Psychology Quarterly, 51, 303–317.

Chawla, L. (2002). Spots of time: Manifold ways of being in nature in

childhood. In P. H. Kahn Jr., & S. R. Kellert (Eds.), Children

and nature: Psychological, sociocultural and evolutionary investigations

(pp. 199–225). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Clayton, S. (2003). Environmental identity: A conceptual and operational

definition. In S. Clayton, & S. Opotow (Eds.), Identity and the natural

environment: The psychological significance of nature (pp. 45–65).

Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Clayton, S., & Opotow, S. (2003). Introduction: Identity and the natural

environment. In S. Clayton, & S. Opotow (Eds.), Identity and the

natural environment: The psychological significance of nature (pp. 1–24).

Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences

(2nd ed). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Conner, M. J., & Armitage, C. (1998). Extending the theory of planned

behaviour: A review and avenues for further research. Journal of

Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1429–1464.

Conner, M. J., & Sparks, P. (1995). The theory of planned behaviour and

health behaviours. In M. Conner, & P. Norman (Eds.), Predicting

health behaviour: Research and practice with social cognition models

(pp. 121–162). Buckingham: Open University Press.

Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort

Worth, TX: Harcourt College Publishers.

Eagly, A. H., Mladinic, A., & Otto, S. (1994). Cognitive and affective

bases of attitudes towards social groups and social policies. Journal of

Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 113–137.

Faber Taylor, A. F., Kuo, F. E., & Sullivan, W. C. (2002). Views of nature

and self-discipline: Evidence from inner city children. Journal of

Environmental Psychology, 22, 49–63.

Fazio, R. H., & Zanna, M. P. (1981). Direct experience and attitude–

behaviour consistency. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,

14, 161–202.

Felonneau, M.-L. (2004). Love and loathing of the city: Urbanophilia and

urbanophobia, topological identity and perceived incivilities. Journal

of Environmental Psychology, 24, 43–52.

Field, A. (2000). Discovering statistics using SPSS for windows: Advanced

techniques for beginners. London: Sage Publications.

Finger, M. (1994). From knowledge to action? Exploring the relationship

between environmental experiences, learning and behavior. Journal of

Social Issues, 50, 141–160.

Fishbein, M. (1997). Predicting, understanding and changing socially

relevant behaviours: Lessons learned. In C. McCarty, & S. A. Haslam

ARTICLE IN PRESSJ. Hinds, P. Sparks / Journal of Environmental Psychology 28 (2008) 109–120 119

(Eds.), The message of social psychology (pp. 77–91). Oxford, UK:

Blackwell.

Frankfurt, H. G. (1988). The importance of what we care about:

Philosophical essays. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

French, D. P., Sutton, S., Hennings, S. J., Mitchell, J., Wareham, N. J.,

Griffin, S., et al. (2005). The importance of affective beliefs and

attitudes in the theory of planned behaviour: Predicting intention to

increase physical activity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35,

1824–1848.

Gigerenzer, G. (2007). Gut feelings. London: Allen Lane.

Giner-Sorolla, R. (1999). Affect in attitude: Immediate and deliberative

perspectives. In S. Chaiken, & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in

social psychology. New York: Guilford.

Herzog, T. R., Black, A. M., Fountaine, K. A., & Knotts, D. J. (1997).

Reflection and attentional recovery as distinctive benefits of restorative

environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17, 165–170.

Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R., & Tomera, A. N. (1986/1987). Analysis

and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behaviour: A

meta analysis. Journal of Environmental Education, 18, 1–8.

Horwitz, W. A. (1996). Development origins of environmental ethics: The

life experience of activists. Ethics and Behavior, 6, 29–54.

Jessop, D. C., Churchill, S., & Sparks, P. (unpublished manuscript). High

fat food consumption: The role of implicitly measured attitudes.

Kahn, P. H. (1997). Developmental psychology and the biophilia

hypothesis: Children’s affiliation with nature. Developmental Review,

17, 1–61.

Kals, E., & Maes, J. (2002). Sustainable development and emotions. In P.

Schmuck, & W. P. Schultz (Eds.), Psychology of sustainable develop-

ment (pp. 97–122). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Kals, E., Schumaker, D., & Montada, L. (1999). Emotional affinity

toward nature as a motivational basis to protect nature. Environment

and Behavior, 31, 178–202.

Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The experience of nature: A psychological

perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an

integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15,

169–182.

Kaplan, S., & Talbot, J. F. (1983). Pyschological benefits of a wilderness

experience. In I. Altman, & J. F. Wohlwill (Eds.), Human behavior and

the environment: Advances in theory and research: Behavior and the

natural environment (Vol. 6, pp. 163–203). New York: Plenum Press.

Kellert, S. R. (2002). Experiencing nature: Affective, cognitive, and

evaluative development in children. In P. H. Kahn Jr., & S. R. Kellert

(Eds.), Children and nature: Psychological, sociocultural and evolu-

tionary investigations (pp. 117–151). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Lalli, M. (1992). Urban-related identity: Theory, measurement and

empirical findings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12, 285–303.

Lyons, E., & Breakwell, G. M. (1994). Factors predicting environmental

concern and indifference in 13- to 16-year-olds. Environment and

Behavior, 26, 223–238.

Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., & Livi, S. (2004). Recycling: Planned and self-

expressive behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 227–236.

Manstead, A. S. R., & Parker, D. (1995). Evaluating and extending the

theory of planned behavior. In W. Stroebe, & M. Hewstone (Eds.),

European review of social psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 69–96). Chichester,

UK: Wiley.

Manzo, L. C. (2003). Beyond house and haven: Toward a revisioning of

emotional relationships with places. Journal of Environmental Psychol-

ogy, 23, 47–61.

Mayer, F. S., & Frantz, C. M. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale:

A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. Journal of

Environmental Psychology, 24, 503–515.

Millar, M. G., & Millar, K. U. (1996). The effects of direct and indirect

experience on affective and cognitive responses and the attitude–

behavior relation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32,

561–579.

Moore, E. O. (1981). A prison environment’s effect on health care service

demands. Journal of Environmental Systems, 11, 17–34.

Nord, M., Luloff, A. E., & Bridger, J. C. (1998). The association of forest

recreation with environmentalism. Environment and Behavior, 30,

235–246.

Norman, P., Clark, T., & Walker, G. (2005). The theory of planned

behaviour, descriptive norms, and the moderating role of group

identification. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35, 1008–1029.

Parker, D., Stradling, S. G., & Manstead, A. S. R. (1996). Modifying

beliefs and attitudes to exceeding the speed limit: An intervention

study based on the theory of planned behaviour. Journal of Applied

Social Psychology, 26, 1–19.

Pooley, J. A., & O’Conner, M. (2000). Environmental education and

attitudes. Environment and Behavior, 32, 711–723.

Proshansky, H. M. (1978). The city and self-identity. Environment and

Behavior, 10, 147–169.

Pyle, R. M. (1978). The extinction of experience: A loss of neighborhood

species endangers our experience of nature. Horticulture, 56, 64–67.

Richard, R., de Vries, N., & van der Pligt, J. (1998). Anticipated regret

and precautionary sexual behavior. Journal of Applied Social

Psychology, 28, 1411–1428.

Richard, R., van der Pligt, J., & de Vries, N. (1995). Anticipated affective

reactions and prevention of AIDS. British Journal of Social

Psychology, 34, 9–21.

Richard, R., van der Pligt, J., & de Vries, N. (1996). Anticipated affect and

behavioural choice. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 18, 111–129.

Schultz, P. W. (2000). Empathizing with nature: The effects of perspective

taking on concern for environmental issues. Journal of Social Issues,

56, 391–406.

Schultz, P. W. (2002). Inclusion with nature: The psychology of

human–nature relations. In P. Schmuck, & W. P. Schultz (Eds.),

Psychology of sustainable development. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Aca-

demic.

Schultz, P. W., Shriver, C., Tabanico, J. J., & Khazian, A. M. (2004).

Implicit connections with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology,

24, 31–42.

Sheeran, P., & Taylor, S. (1999). Predicting intentions to use condoms: A

meta-analysis and comparison of the theories of reasoned action and

planned behaviour. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29,

1624–1675.

Sparks, P., & Guthrie, C. A. (1998). Self-identity and the theory of

planned behaviour: A useful addition or an unhelpful a artifice?

Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1393–1410.

Sparks, P., & Shepherd, R. (1992). Self-identity and the theory of planned

behaviour: Assessing the role of identification with ‘‘green consumer-

ism’’. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55, 388–399.

Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., & Kalof, L. (1993). Value orientations, gender, and

environmental concern. Environment and Behavior, 25, 322–348.

Stets, J. E., & Biga, C. F. (2003). Bringing identity theory into

environmental sociology. Sociological Theory, 21, 398–423.

Teisl, M. F., & O’Brien, K. (2003). Who cares and who acts? Outdoor

recreationists exhibit different levels of environmental concern and

behavior. Environment and Behavior, 35, 506–522.

Terry, D. J., Hogg, M. A., & White, K. M. (1999). The theory of planned

behaviour: Self-identity, social identity and group norms. British

Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 225–244.

Thomas, K. (1983). Man and the natural environment: Changing attitudes

in England 1500–1800. London: Penguin Books.

Thompson, S. C., & Barton, M. A. (1994). Ecocentric and anthropocentric

attitudes toward the environment. Journal of Environmental Psychol-

ogy, 14, 149–157.

Trafimow, D., & Sheeran, P. (1998). Some tests of the distinction between

cognitive and affective beliefs. Journal of Experimental Social

Psychology, 34, 378–397.

Ulrich, R. S. (1983). Aesthetic and affective response to natural

environment. In I. Altman, & J. Wohlwill (Eds.), Human behavior

and environment: Behavior and the natural environment (Vol. 6,

pp. 85–125). New York: Plenum.

Ulrich, R. S. (1984). View through a window may influence recovery from

surgery. Science, 224, 420–421.

ARTICLE IN PRESSJ. Hinds, P. Sparks / Journal of Environmental Psychology 28 (2008) 109–120120

van der Pligt, J., Zeelenberg, M., van Dijk, W. W., de Vries, N. K., &

Richard, R. (1998). Affect, attitudes and decisions: Let’s be more

specific. In W. Strobe, & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of

social psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 33–66). Chichester, UK: Wiley.

Wells, N. M. (2000). At home with nature: Effects of ‘‘greenness’’ on

children’s cognitive functioning. Environment and Behavior, 32, 775–795.

Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Wilson, E. O. (1993). Biophilia and the conservation ethic. In S. R.

Kellert, & E. O. Wilson (Eds.), The biophilia hypothesis (pp. 31–41).

Washington, DC: Island Press.

Wilson, T. D. (2002). Stranger to ourselves: Discovering the adaptive

unconscious. Harvard: HUP.

Wilson, T. D., & Dunn, D. S. (1986). Effects of introspection on

attitude–behavior consistency: Analyzing reasons versus focusing on

feelings. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 249–263.

Wilson, T. D., Dunn, D. S., Kraft, D., & Lisle, D. J. (1989). Introspection,

attitude change, and attitude–behavior consistency: The disruptive

effects of explaining why we feel the way we do. Advances in

Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 287–342.

Zajonc, R. B. (2001). Feeling and thinking: Closing the debate over the

independence of affect. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.), Feeling and thinking: The

role of affect in social cognition (pp. 31–58). Cambridge, UK:

Cambridge University Press.

Zanna, M. P., & Rempel, J. K. (1988). Attitudes: A new look at an old

concept. In D. Bar-Tel, & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), The social

psychology of knowledge (pp. 315–334). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge

University Press.

Zelezny, L. C., Chua, P.-P., & Aldrich, C. (2000). Elaborating on

gender issues in environmentalism. Journal of Social Issues, 56,

443–457.