Measuring  Ecological  Character Angela  Kurth,  Kallie  Renfus,  Rebecca  Noble,  Jessica  Zohrer,  Margaret  Moran,  Darcia  Narvaez      

INTRODUCTION

Indigenous societies around the world traditionally have deep respect for the natural world as a partner, life source and teacher. In reviewing differences between indigenous and mainstream Western worldviews, Narvaez (2013, 2014) noted several elements of difference: autonomy space, empathetic core, and commonself perspective. Are these different attitudes and worldviews related to ecological behavior? We examined this question by developing and testing several measures.

METHOD

Participants: For Exploratory Factor Analysis, 450 USA adults (48% male; Mage-= 38.5, SD = 12.8; 77.8% Euro-American; wide distribution of income) and for CFA and correlations, 695 USA adults (45.9% male; ; Mage-= 36.67, SD = 11.9; 81.7% Euro-American; wide distribution of income) recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk .

Ecological Intelligence Measures We performed Exploratory Factor and Confirmatory Analyses on these sets of items representing (a) empathy for humans and nonhumans; (b) embedded partnership with nature; actions circumscribed by effects on others; flourishing of All in mind.

After eliminating factor loadings below .5, two sets of items emerged:

1.  Ecological Empathy (α=.96) CHECK measures empathy for humans known and unknown, and for nonhumans (“In the past week I remember feeling sympathy /concern for …” e.g.: “the wellbeing of the earth”). We examined mean scores.

2.  Ecological Mindfulness (α=.94) examines attitudes and behaviors regarding cooperation with living things (“In the past week, I…” e.g., “treated a plant with respect”). We used the mean scores.

Confirmatory factor analysis with Yuan-Bentler correction was used to assess the fit of these two sets, fit indices suggest the model was sufficient (CFI = .92, RMSEA = .07)

(Note: for all correlations,** p < .01 level, * p < .05)

Our two new scales, Ecological Empathy (EE) and Ecological Mindfulness (EM), were moderately correlated but showed different patterns of relations with other measures. EE was less strongly related to other ecological variables than EM. EM may be tapping into the more cognitive aspects of ecological relations, much like any explicit measure of morality. In a separate analysis with a new triune ethics IAT (n=xxx;; undergraduates only), only EM scores were related to implicit preference for engagement over self-protectionist ethics.

Surprisingly, EM was more strongly related to moral capacities and moral orientations than EE. Again, it may be a matter of measurement—all the measures are tapping into explicit analysis of the self. As expected, neither EE nor EM was related to self-protectionism orientations.

Our two new checklists, the Green Action variables were strongly correlated with each other. They were both weakly correlated with existing measures of ecological concern (Connectedness to Nature Scale; New Ecological Paradigm Scale), suggesting that they are tapping into something different. Both Green Action variables were weakly correlated with moral capacities and moral orientations. However, both were strongly related to Ecological Empathy, suggesting that relational concern drives action rather than explicit intention.

CONCLUSION

Ecological moral intelligence may be a new area for research.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS

Further analyses and studies should be conducted. Mediation analyses could be conducted to parse aspects of moral development that relate to each of the new variables. Contact Information: Darcia Narvaez, dnarvaez@nd.edu

We also developed a Daily Green Action Index and Six-Month Green Action Index based on a review of actions recommended to reduce carbon footprint. We collected various lists of green actions and suggestions to create our items. We divided the list into actions that would occur more frequently and less frequently for the two scales. Item ratings were added for a summary score.

Validation

Concurrent validity. We assessed the relationship of our new scales with an existing measure: the Connectedness to Nature Scale (CNS; Mayer, 2004; e.g., “I often feel part of the web of life”). We expected positive moderate correlations. The New Ecological Paradigm Scale focuses on cognitive understanding of ecological issues (NEPS; Dunlap, Van Liere, Mertig, & Jones, 2000; e.g., “The balance of nature is very delicate and easily upset”).

Convergent validity. We collected responses on empathy, perspective taking and personal distress (Davis, 1983) and expected moderate correlations. We also examined moral orientations according to triune ethics theory (TET; Narvaez, 2008, 2014, in press). Specifically we examined Self-Protectionism (“controlled, tough, unyielding, competitive”); Engagement (caring, compassionate, merciful, cooperative); and Reflective Imagination (“reflective, thoughtful, inventive, and reasonable”). Respondents rate how much they want to be or are perceived to be like these characteristics (e.g. “My friends think I have these characteristics”). We expected moderate correlations with engagement and communal imagination.

Predictive validity. We expected that scores on our new measures, Ecological Empathy Measure and Conscious Ecological Action Measure, would be strongly positively correlated with the Daily Green Index and the Six-Month Green Action Index.

Table 1. Means and Standard Deviations (n=693)

Ecological Empathy  We are interested in your experience. Please respond according to the frequency of your feelings in the past week.  

In the past week I felt concern for...

 

1.  …the natural world  2.  … a particular species  3.  … an animal going extinct  4.  … an animal I don’t know  5.  … an insect  6.  … a tree  7.  … a forest  8.  … a plant  9.  … a mountain  10. … a river  11. … a lake or pond  12. … the ocean(s)  13. … biodiversity  14. … groups of animals  15. … groups of plants  16. … the wellbeing of the earth

1 2 3 4 5 Never On one

day On

several days

Every day Multiple times a

day

Ecological Mindfulness  We are interested in your experience. Please respond according to the frequency of your experience in the past week.  

In the past week I... 

 

1.  Treated animals like my brothers and sisters  2.  Showed respect for a plant  3.  Recognized a wild animal around my home  4.  Paid attention to the habitat of animals and plants

around my home  5.  Respected Nature  6.  Tried to live as a partner with Nature  7.  Felt responsible for the wellbeing of Nature  8.  Respected the living things around me  9.  Cared for the landscape of nonhuman entities

where I live  10. Tried to be mindful of earth care wherever I was  11. Made decisions guided by their effects on the

natural world  12. Made decisions with humility as one of many

earth creatures  13. Acted with awareness of the needs of biodiversity  14. Acted with awareness of the needs of animals  15. Acted with awareness of the needs of plants  

Daily Green Action Index  

Please indicate how often you have taken the action listed.  

In the past week, I…

21.  Consumed only animal friendly products  

22. Made an effort to not eat meat 23. Tried to avoid buying anything I

didn’t really need  24. Put recyclable materials into

recycling instead of the trash  25. Used reusable bags for shopping  26. Bought locally grown products  27. Hung up washed clothes to dry

instead of using the dryer  28. Made my own personal products

instead of buying them pre-made (e.g., shampoo)  

29. Purposefully purchased fair trade products  

30. Used biodegradable soap, shampoos.  

31. Reduced use of disposable products by using reusable containers  

32. If I needed to buy disposable products, I chose paper or glass products instead of plastic.  

33. Considered the footprint of products before I bought them: from resource extraction, to production, distribution, consumption, and disposal.  

34. Actively tried to simplify my life  35. Drank tap water instead of bottled

water  36. Avoided using heating/cooling

system and changed clothing instead  

1.  Turned the tap off when brushing teeth and shaving  

2.  Turned off the lights or television when I left the room  

3.  Unplugged phone and computer chargers after use  

4.  Unplugged phone as soon as it is charged  

5.  Biked, walked, or used mass transit instead of driving  

6.  Composted organic waste  7.  Washed in cold or warm water

instead of hot  8.  Used cloth instead of paper

napkins  9.  Took shorter showers  10. Printed double sided  11. Used reusable water bottle / coffee

mug  12. Encouraged others to make eco-

friendly choices  13. Used scratch paper instead of fresh

paper whenever possible  14. Washed dishes by hand instead of

using a dishwasher  15. Let my hair dry naturally instead of

using the hair dryer  16. Used natural cleaners (e.g., lemon

juice, vinegar) instead of chemical cleaners  

17. Avoided using plastic  18. Practiced slow food (home

cooking) instead of fast food  19. Carpooled 20. Avoided excess packaging in what

I purchased  

Six Month Green Action Index

Please indicate how often you have taken the action listed.

In the past six months, I…

1.  Sought information on how to live a more eco friendly life 2.  Donated old clothes 3.  Purchased used and secondhand items 4.  Recycled batteries 5.  Grew my own vegetables 6.  Contacted a business to complain about the effects of their products on the

environment 7.  Tried to decrease my desires for products that are harmful to the

environment 8.  Tried to decrease my effects on the local ecology (e.g., did not kill insects

but put them outside) 9.  Took actions to encourage biodiversity (e.g., organic lawn care) 10.  Avoided using products that are toxic to living organisms (e.g., pesticides,

insecticides, soaps with phosphates, mineral oil) 11.  Advocated ecologically-responsible actions to higher ups (e.g., boss,

political leaders) 12.  Replaced incandescent light bulbs with energy-efficient bulbs 13.  Participated in an environmental awareness day in your community. 14.  Wrote to my lawmakers or elected officials urging them to act with urgency

and put care for the environment 15.  Encouraged my community to support mass transit and other alternatives to

the automobile for commuting

1   2   3   4   5   6   7  Never   Once   Two times   3-4 times   5-8 times   6-12 times   More than

12 times  

Variable M SD Possible Range

α

Ecological Empathy (n=16) 2.64 .99 1-5 .959 Ecological Mindfulness (n=15) 2.02 .88 1-5 .952

CONCURRENT VALIDITY Connectedness to Nature Scale (n=14) 3.43 .59 1-5 .809 New Ecological Paradigm Scale (n=16) 3.62 .72 1-5 .905

CONVERGENT VALIDITY Empathy (n=7) 3.72 .58 7-35 .708 Perspective Taking (n=7) 3.80 .70 7-35 .557 Personal Distress (n=7) 2.49 .83 7-35 .593 TET Engagement (n=5) 4.10 .70 5-25 .902 TET Reflective Imagination (n=5) 4.06 .66 5-25 .902 TET Self Protectionism (n=5) 2.57 1.08 5-25 .870

PREDICTIVE VALIDITY Daily Green Action Index (n=37) 90.28 25.41 37-185 .941 Six-Month Green Action Index (n=15) 36.98 16.27 15-105 .893

 

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

1. Ecological Empathy

--

2. Ecological Mindfulness

.67** --

3. Connectedness to Nature Scale

.38** .57** --

4. New Ecological Paradigm Scale

.34** .41** .38** --

5. Empathy .14** .33** .33** .20** -- 6. Perspective Taking

.14** .334* .33** .20** .54** --

7. Personal Distress

.01 -.12** -.01 -.03 -.04 -.13** --

8. TET Engagement

.13** .30** .30** .11** .58** .46** -.12** --

9. TET Reflective Imagination

.14** .33** .33** .19** .39** .42** -.25** .58** --

10. TET Self Protectionism

-.03 -.05 -.05 -.17** -.23** -.18** -.05 -.17** -.10** --

11. Daily Green Action Index

.60** .32** .33** .33** .20** .22** -.12** .16** .19** .04 --

12. Six-Month Green Action Index

.66** .32** .27** .37** .14** .16** -.03 .13** .16** .02 .72**

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

See Table 1 for means and standard deviations, Table 2 for correlations. Table 2. Correlations

1 2 3 4 5 Never On one day On several days Every day Multiple times a

day