Who Benefits from Environmental Identity? Studying Environmental Identity and Mental Wellbeing in Russia

Abstract

Background. Environmental Identity (EID) is a construct that demonstrates the extent to which people perceive themselves as a part of nature, incorporated in it, and defined by it. This concept, despite being relatively new, has proven to be associated with various beneficial traits such as emotional calmness, vigor, reduced stress, increased attentiveness, and positive mental effect (Kals, Schumacher, & Montada; Pretty et al.; Hartig et al., Raanaas et al.). It is also connected with nature conservation behavior and empathy towards people and nature (Scott & Willits; Paul, Hartmann, & Apaolaza-Ibáñez; Tam; Modi & Patel). While there have been analyses correlating personality traits with other naturerelated concepts-e.g., environmental engagement, environmental concern, and ecological behavior (Milfont & Sibley; Wuertz; Markowitz et al.), there is little evidence of which personality traits are connected with Environmental Identity. Objective. Current research has three objectives: 1) to test the connection between Environmental Identity and Mental Wellbeing on a Russian sample; 2) to discover which personality traits are connected with Environmental Identity; and 3) to find out whether or not these personality traits moderate the Environmental Identity-Mental Wellbeing connection. Three hundred and twelve (312) students, of which 79.2% were females, participated in the study. The majority of participants (90.4%) were undergraduate students at Russian universities under 20 years old. Methods. To perform our study, we used the Environmental Identity scale, the Short Big Five, and the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale. Results. We confirmed the connection between Environmental Identity and Mental Wellbeing on a Russian sample. Openness to Experience was the only significant personality trait predictor of Environmental Identity. Moderation analysis did not reveal any personality traits to be significant moderators between Environmental Identity and Mental Wellbeing. Conclusion. We concluded that the impact of Environmental Identity on Mental Wellbeing does not depend on specific personality traits, suggesting that it has a universal resource function, and is important for Russian people in general in terms of their mental wellness.

Do Authentic People Care about the Environment? A View from Two Paradigms

“…First of all, Accepting External Influences, and the totals of the Ecological Lifestyle, Social Activities, and Ecological Self-Restraint scores were lower in the male group. This means, in line with previous results (Irkhin, 2020;Lawton, Brymer, Clough, & Denovan, 2017), that the men were less closely connected with the outer world, compared with women. In other words, men seemed to be more individualistic (Borkenau, McCrae & Terracciano, 2013).…”

“…Connection to nature also appears to be gender-related. Women have consistently shown higher relatedness to nature (Lawton, Brymer, Clough, & Denovan, 2017;Irkhin, 2020) and more participation in pro-ecological activities than men (Richardson, Cormack, McRobert, & Underhill, 2016;Dietz et al, 1998;Kennedy & Kmec, 2018).…”

Anthropocentric, biospheric and egobiocentric environmental values and green product purchase intention: The mediating effect of environmental identity

“…GPPI has been investigated in the context of greenwashing and consumer trust (Aji & Sutikno, 2015), socio‐cultural factors (Chan, 2001), consumer responses (Thøgersen et al, 2010), consumers perceived readiness (Arli et al, 2018), cross‐cultural markets (Ferraz et al, 2017), and mental well‐being (Irkhin, 2020). With regard to EI, several studies confirm that individuals with a strong EI have stronger GPPI (Eby et al, 2019; Meijers et al, 2019; Schwartz et al, 2020; Wang, Shen, et al, 2021; Wang, van der Werf, et al, 2021).…”

Towards Pro-enviromental Psychology and Education: Personality Traits and Sociodemographic Correlates of Enviromental Identity and Voluntary Simplicity

“…Opublikowana w 2020 roku meta-analiza 38 badań Souttera, Batesa i Mõttusa (2020) wskazała, że otwartość na doświadczenia oraz uczciwość-pokora są najsilniejszymi korelatami osobowościowymi zachowań prośrodowiskowych. Wymiary te korelują także z konstruktem powiązania z przyrodą (Lee, Ashton, Choi, Zachariassen, 2015), natomiast otwartość na doświadczenia koreluje bezpośrednio z tożsamością środowiskową (Irkhin, 2020). Innymi korelatami osobowościowymi zachowań ekologicznych są ugodowość i sumienność oraz w słabszym stopniu ekstrawersja, natomiast emocjonalność nie ma istotnego znaczenia dla zachowań i postaw prośrodowiskowych (Soutter i in., 2020).…”

“…Rozpatrując znaczenie zmiennych socjodemograficznych, można podkreślić, że płeć była już wcześniej rozważana przez Clayton (2003) jako jeden z czynników, który może różnicować nasilenie tożsamości środowiskowej. W ostatnich latach wiele badań poparło tę hipotezę i wskazało, że kobiety przejawiają silniejszą tożsamość środowiskową niż mężczyźni (Kızılay i Tanık Önal, 2019;Irkhin, 2020;Clayton i in., 2021), w tym w polskiej próbie (Larionov, 2020). Znalazło to potwierdzenie w niniejszych badaniach, gdzie kobiety uzyskały istotne statystycznie wyższe wyniki tożsamości środowiskowej (η 2 = 0,054) i zaangażowania w dobrowolną prostotę (η 2 = 0,018), jednak siła efektu różnic międzypłciowych była poniżej średniej.…”