Connected to Birds but Not Bees: Valence Moderates Implicit Associations with Nature

Environment and Behavior

Volumn 42, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 625-642

  Verges, Michelle ^a   Duffy, Sean ^b  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY SOUTH BEND   (United States)

^b RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

built and natural environment; connectedness with nature; environmental attitudes; self perception

Indexed keywords

BEE; BIRD; ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES; NATURAL SELECTION; PERCEPTION; THEORETICAL STUDY; TREE;

APOIDEA; AVES;

EID: 77955589442     PISSN: 00139165     EISSN: 1552390X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0013916508330210     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Barker, K., Fong, L., Grossman, S., Quin, C., & Reid, R. (1994). Comparison of self-reported recycling attitudes and behaviors with actual behavior. Psychological Reports, 75, 571-577.
2. Bosson, J.K., Swann, W.B. Jr., & Pennebaker, J.W. (2000). Stalking the perfect measure of implicit self-esteem: The blind men and the elephant revisited? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 631-643.
3. Bradley, M.M., & Lang, P.J. (1999). Affective norms for English words (ANEW): Instruction manual and affective ratings. The Center for Research in Psychophysiology, University of Florida. (Technical Report C-1).
4. Clayton, S., & Opotow, S. (2003). Identity and the natural environment: The psychological significance of nature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Corral-Verdugo, V. (1997). Dual 'realities'of conservation behavior: Self-reports vs observations of re-use and recycling behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17, 135-145.
6. Dasgupta, N., McGhee, D.E., Greenwald, A.G., & Banaji, M.R. (2000). Automatic preference for White Americans: Eliminating the familiarity explanation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 316-328.
7. De Houwer, J. (2001). A structural and process analysis of the Implicit Association Test. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 443-451.
8. Duffy, S., & Verges, M. (in press). Forces of nature affect implicit connections with nature. Environment and Behavior.
9. Dunlap, R.E., Van Liere, K.D., Mertig, A.G., & Jones, R.E. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425-442.
10. Estes, Z., & Adelman, J. (2008). Automatic vigilance for negative words in lexical decision and naming: Comment on Larsen, Mercer, and Balota (2006). Emotion, 8, 441-444.
11. Estes, Z., & Verges, M. (2008). Freeze or flee? Negative stimuli elicit selective responding. Cognition, 108, 557-565.
12. Fazio, R. (2001). On the automatic activation of associated evaluations: An overview. Cognition and Emotion, 15, 115-141.
13. Govan, C.L., & Williams, K.D. (2004). Reversing or eliminating IAT effects by changing the affective valence of the stimulus items. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 357-365.
14. Greenwald, A.G., Banaji, M.R., Rudman, L.A., Farnham, S.D., Nosek, B.A., & Mellott, D.S. (2002). A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychological Review, 109, 3-25.
15. Greenwald, A.G., & Farnham, S.D. (2000). Using the Implicit Association Test to measure self-esteem and self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 1022-1038.
16. Greenwald, A.G., McGhee, D.E., & Schwartz, J.K.L. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464-1480.
17. Greenwald, A.G., Nosek, B.A., & Banaji, M.R. (2003). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 197-216.
18. Heine, S.J., Lehman, D.R., Markus, H.R., & Kitayama, S. (1999). Is there a universal need for positive self-regard? Psychological Review, 106, 766-794.
19. Mayer, F.S., & Frantz, C.M. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individual's feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 503-515.
20. Mayer, F.S., Franz, C.M., Bruehlman-Senecal, E., & Dolliver, K. (in press). Why is nature beneficial?: The role of connectedness to nature. Environment and Behavior.
21. Mitchell, J.P., Nosek, B.A., & Banaji, M.R. (2003). Contextual variations in implicit evaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 455-469.
22. Nisbet, E., Zelenski, J.M., & Murphy, S.A. (in press). The nature relatedness scale: Linking individuals' connection with nature to environmental concern and behavior. Environment and Behavior.
23. Opotow, S., & Weiss, L. (2000). Denial and the process of moral exclusion in environmental conflict. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 475-490.
24. Oskamp, S., & Schultz, W.P. (2005). Attitudes and opinions (3rd Ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
25. Schultz, P.W. (2001). Assessing the structure of environmental concern: Concern for the self, other people, and the biosphere. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 327-339.
26. Schultz, P.W. (2002). Inclusion with nature: The psychology of human-nature relations. In P. Schmuck, & P. W. Schultz (Eds.), The psychology of sustainable development (pp. 61-78). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
27. Schultz, P.W., Shriver, C. Tabanico, J.J., & Khazian, A.M. (2004). Implicit connections with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 31-42.
28. Schultz, P.W., & Tabanico, J. (2007). Self, identity, and the natural environment: Exploring implicit connections with nature. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 1219-1247.
29. Steffens, M., & Plewe, I. (2001). Items' cross-category associations as a confounding factor in the implicit association test. Zeitschrift fur Experimentelle Psychologie, 48, 123-134.
30. Verges, M., & Duffy, S. (2008). Unpublished data on valence and frequency of nature items. Indiana University, South Bend.
31. Zajonc, R. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35, 151-175.