Content uploaded by Takashi Naito
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Takashi Naito
Content may be subject to copyright.
Running head: Gratitude and regret towards nature
This paper is pre-print version that was presented at 4th International postgraduate
research colloquium. Bangkok, 2007.
The revised paper was published as
Naito, T, Matsuda, T., Intasuwan,P., Chuawanlee, W., Thanachanan, S., Ounthitiwat,J.,
and Fukushima, M. (2010). Gratitude For, and regret toward, nature:
Relationships to proenvironmental intent of university students from Japan.
Social behavior and personality, 38(7), 993-1008.
Gratitude and regret towards nature:
Relationships to proenvironmental intent in university students from Japan
Takashi Naitoa, Pachongchit Intasuwanb, Tomoko Matsudaa, Meiko Fukushimac,
Wiladlak Chuawanleeb, Supaporn Thanachananb, Jarun Ounthitiwatb
a Department of Psychology, Ochanomizu University, 2-1-1, Otsuka, Bunkyoku,
Tokyo, Japan
b Srinakahrinwirot University, Thailand
c Faculty of Human Cultures, Sakushin Gakuin University, Japan
Abstract
The present study examined the hypothesis that gratitude and/or regret toward
nature positively relate to proenvironmental intent among university students from
Japan (N=228). Based on preliminary studies, we constructed a questionnaire
containing scales of gratitude, regret, and general feelings or impressions toward nature,
as well as a scale of proenvironmental intent, which was adapted from frequently-used
scales of proenvironmental attitude. The partial regression coefficients of gratitude and
regret indicated that regret was significantly related to proenvironmental intent. A
complimentary study using a scenario about environmental behaviors confirmed the
significance of regret to environmental protection in Japanese students.
Keywords: gratitude, regret, moral emotion, proenvironmental intent, Japan
People have a wide range of feelings towards nature or natural objects. For
example, they may express a variety of feelings, such as comfort or fear, towards forests,
oceans, or wild animals. We call these feelings general impressions of nature. In the
present study, we focus on impressions of nature that include feelings of gratitude,
indebtedness, and regret, and we examine these as possible predictors of
proenvironmental intent and behaviors. We make the following conceptual distinctions
among the feelings of gratitude, indebtedness, and regret. Gratitude is defined as a
joyful feeling toward the benefactor from receiving a benefit, indebtedness as a feeling
of obligation to repay the benefactor, and regret as a feeling of sorrow or apology
toward the benefactor.
In an analysis of the concept of gratitude, Roberts (2004) identified sufficient
conditions for gratitude in terms of benefactor/recipient motives and benefits: A
benevolent benefactor acts from a desire to help rather than a sense of duty, and the
recipient receives a benefit and desires to express indebtedness and attachment to the
benefactor. In the context of the present study, nature is the benefactor and people are
the recipients. We adopt a broad definition of gratitude toward nature as people’s
positive feelings, including attachment, which are caused by the awareness that nature
brings positive outcomes to them. However, we do not refer to benefactor motives in
the definition, because this would require personification of the natural environment.
Manifestations of gratitude or regret towards the environment are observed in various
social rituals. For example, during harvest festivals in rural Japan, gratitude is expressed
to the gods that are believed to influence the climate, soil, and general environmental
conditions that produce good rice harvests. In the Loy Krathong festival in Thailand,
people apologize to the water god for polluting the rivers. In these rituals, people's
feelings of gratitude or apology towards nature are reflected in ceremonial behaviors.
Although affective or emotional responses to nature, such as empathy for the
environment, have been shown to increase concern for environmental issues (e.g.,
Schultz, 2000), little information is available about their effect on proenvironmental
intent, which can lead to the intent to perform caring behaviors towards the natural
environment.
Gratitude as a moral emotion
Gratitude has been regarded as a moral emotion that can lead to moral
behaviors (McCullough, Kilpatrick, Emmons, & Larson, 2001; Tangney, Stuewig, &
Mashek, 2007). Some studies have shown positive relations between feelings of
gratitude and prosocial dispositions or prosocial behaviors (Bartlett & DeSteno, 2006;
Tsang, 2006a).
These results are suggestive of a relation between gratitude towards nature and
proenvironmental intent and behaviors. Just as feelings of gratitude towards people and
nature have common features, so too are proenvironmental intent and behavior
conceptually compatible with prosocial intent and behavior. Prosocial behavior refers to
"voluntary actions that are intended to help or benefit another individual or group of
individuals" (Eisenberg & Mussen, 1989, p. 3). Applying this definition,
proenvironmental behavior may be defined as voluntary actions that are intended to
benefit nature or the natural environment in terms of its maintenance and growth. The
definition includes behaviors that stem from self-interest and other motivations. These
considerations together lead us to hypothesize that gratitude towards nature results in
enhancement of proenvironmental intent and behaviors.
Gratitude, regret, and indebtedness
In Roberts's (2004) analysis of gratitude, the recipient desires to express
indebtedness to the benefactor. In other recent studies, gratitude has been regarded as an
emotion that is dissociated from indebtedness (e.g., McCullough, Kilpatrick, Emmons,
& Larson, 2001), with empirical evidence of differences in function for the two
emotions (Tsang, 2006b; Watkins, Seheer, Ovnicek, & Kolts, 2006). For example,
Watkins, Seheer, Ovnicek, and Kolts (2006) showed that when a gift was bestowed by a
benefactor with increasing expectations of return, indebtedness increased but gratitude
decreased.
Social anthropologists have also suggested that the significance and functions of
gratitude and indebtedness vary with cultural conditions (Benedict, 1946). In a
milestone study of Japanese society, Benedict (1946) described how Japanese people
feel strong indebtedness, in addition to gratitude, when they receive favors from others,
with the indebtedness strongly regulating their social behaviors. Recently, Naito,
Wangwan, and Tani (2005) asked university students from Japan and Thailand to report
their positive feelings of gratitude to benefactors, negative feelings including
indebtedness and regret, and increase in prosocial motivation, after reading helping
stories while imagining that they were the beneficiaries. In both Japanese and Thai
students, positive feelings, including gratitude, correlated with increased prosocial
motivation. However, only in Japanese male students were negative feelings, including
indebtedness and regret, positively correlated with increased prosocial motivation.
Furthermore, when indebtedness and regret factors were separated from negative feeling
items, in Japanese female students these factors significantly correlated with prosocial
motivation. The results of this study lead to a hypothesis that indebtedness and regret as
well as gratitude would have a strong relation to proenvironmental intent for Japanese
people.
Influence of gratitude, indebtedness, and regret on proenvironmental intent
The primary purpose of the present study was to confirm the general hypothesis
that gratitude, indebtedness and/or regret toward nature have positive relations to
proenvironmental intent in an Asian society, Japan. These feelings are supposed to
strengthen proenvironmental intent, or the intent to preserve nature, by awareness of the
obligation to repay nature as the benefactor. We therefore expect to find significant
influences of gratitude, indebtedness, and regret toward nature on proenvironmental
intent.
Preliminary study
Collecting names of natural objects and adjectives applicable to nature
We carried out a preliminary study in order to construct questionnaire items
regarding general feelings or impressions of nature in Japan to be used in the main study.
The participants were 168 university students in Tokyo and Tochigi, Japan (33 males
and 135 females). Students in classes of teaching methods of moral education and
educational psychology who wished to participate were asked to remain after class to
respond to the questionnaire. In the questionnaire, they were asked to list objects that
the word “nature” conjured up for them (Q1). They were then asked to list adjectives
that the noun “nature” suggested to them. These responses were used to identify general
impressions towards nature (Q2).
For the questionnaire, we adopted five most frequent responses to Q1: forests,
rivers, seas, wild animals, and weather. The object land, which was the sixteenth most
frequent response, was added to the list to widen its scope.
On the basis of previous studies (Nishiwaki, 2004), we tentatively adopted four
categories in which to group the adjective responses to Q2: (a) aesthetic, (b) fearfulness,
(c) largeness, and (d) healing. Three frequent adjectives were chosen from each of the
four categories, yielding twelve adjectives for the questionnaire (beautiful, clean, fertile,
threat, dreadful, severe, vast, great, grand, relaxed, refreshing, and comfortable).
Selection of question items of proenvironmental intent
In the past decade, many scales of proenvironmental attitude have been
constructed that include both intent and behavioral aspects. Some recent studies have
been conducted to integrate these environmental attitude scales. For example, Milfont
and Duckitt (2004) examined a model with two second-order factors using a 99-item
questionnaire based on the Revised New Ecological Paradigm Scale (Dunlap, Van Liere,
Mertig, & Jones, 2000), the Eco-centric and Anthropocentric Environmental Attitude
Scales (Thompson & Barton, 1994), the Ecological World View Scale (Blaikie, 1992),
and the ENV Scale (Bogner & Wiseman, 1999). The results of an exploratory factor
analysis yielded 10 factors or subscales: Enjoyment of Nature, External
Control/Effective Commitment, Intent of Support, Anthropocentric Concern, Rejection
of Exemptionalism /Confidence in Science and Technology, Eco-crisis/Limits to
Growth/Nature’s Balance, Human Dominance/Altering Nature, Care with Resources,
Anti-Anthropocentrism, and Necessity of Development. Finally, Milfont and Duckitt
confirmed two second-order factors, Preservation and Utilization.
For the purposes of the present study, we selected from these ten subscales two
subscales that measure proenvironmental intent: Intent of Support (e.g., I often try to
persuade others that the environment is an important thing), and Care with Resources
(e.g., I always switch the light off when I do not need it any more). Additionally, three
subscales were adopted as measures of non-intentional or non-behavioral aspects in
order to show differential relations with gratitude and other variables: External Control/
Effective Commitment (e.g., Controls should be placed on industry to protect the
environment from pollution, even if it means things will cost more), Anthropocentric
Concern (e.g., One of the best things about recycling is that it saves money), and
Human Dominance/Altering Nature (e.g., Grass and weeds growing between pavement
stones really looks untidy).
We discussed the cultural relevance of the forty-two original items included in the
five categories by Milfont and Duckitt (2004). As a result of this discussion, two new
items in the category Care with Resources were added to the item pool and three items
were slightly altered. Finally, six items each for External control/Effective commitment
and Intent of Support Care with Resources were selected from the pooled items along
with five items each for Anthropocentric Concern and Human Dominance/Alternating
Nature.
Method
Participants
Voluntary respondents were 228 students of two universities in Tokyo and
Tochigi, Japan (67 males and 161 females, mean age = 19.43, SD = 1.38). The majors
of the participants were social science and humanities (188) and science (40). Students
who wished to participate were asked to remain after class to respond to the
questionnaire. The students received ballpoint pens as rewards.
Instruments
Based on the preliminary study, we developed a questionnaire to measure general
impressions of natural objects, gratitude and indebtedness to nature, and environmental
attitude.
(a) Questions on general impressions of natural objects (12 items)
From the preliminary study, we chose six objects: forest, river, wild animals,
weather, sea, and land. For each object, the participants were asked to indicate the
strength of their feelings about the applicability of each of the twelve adjectives on a
five-point scale, from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much). The order of the adjective items
was randomized. The instructions in the case of forest were as follows.
“We would like to ask you how you feel about the word forest. To what degree do
you feel that each of the words from 1 to 12 below is applicable to forest? If you feel
strongly that it is applicable, circle 5, and if you do not have any feelings at all, circle 1.
For each item circle the number which indicates the degree you feel.”
(b) Questions on gratitude, indebtedness, and regret towards natural objects (6 items)
Two words expressing gratitude (gratitude and thanks), two words expressing
indebtedness (feeling of dept and indebtedness), and two words expressing regret from
receiving others' favors (feeling of sorrow and feeling of apology) were chosen by
consulting Japanese dictionaries and findings of sociolinguists (e.g., Okamoto, 1991).
These words were selected according to the aforementioned working definitions of
gratitude, indebtedness, and regret.
Following the twelve question items concerning the general impression of each
natural object, the participants were asked to indicate the strength of their feelings of
gratitude, indebtedness, and regret toward that object on six five-point scales, from 1
(not at all) to 5 (very much). The order of the items was randomized.
(c) Scale of proenvironmental intent and other aspects of environmental attitude (28
items)
A 28-item environmental attitude scale including the items of proenvironmental
intent was used. The order of the items was randomized. Because the original items
were written in English, equivalence of the Japanese version and the English version of
the questionnaire was checked by Japanese and British professional English teachers in
Japan using a back translation procedure.
Results and Discussion
Scale of general impressions of natural objects. The total scores of each
adjective item for the six objects were calculated, and then a principal-components
factor analysis with promax rotation was conducted using the data matrix of 12
adjective items × the number of participants. The first four eigenvalues were 6.85, 1.95,
0.59, and 0.47. Using a selection criterion of eigenvalues greater than 1.0, two factors
were chosen for further analysis. The two factors explained 68.2% of the total variance.
The items relaxed, clean, comfortable, beautiful, refreshing, vast, fertile, had high
loadings on the first factor (> .75 ) and low loadings on the second factor (< .25), and
the items threat, dreadful, and severe had high loadings on the second factor(> .75 ) and
low loadings on the first factor (< .25). The items great and grand had substantial factor
loadings on both the first and the second factors (> .25); therefore, these two items were
omitted in subsequent analyses. Based on these results, two variables were identified for
the subsequent analyses. The first variable was the total score of the first seven items,
relaxed, clean, comfortable, beautiful, refreshing, vast, and fertile, and it was labeled
positive values of nature. The second variable was the total score of the items threat,
dreadful, and severe, and was named fearfulness. Cronbach’s alphas of the two
variables were .93 and .87. The correlation between these two variables was .40.
Gratitude, indebtedness, and regret towards nature. The total scores of each
gratitude, indebtedness, and regret item for the six objects were calculated and a
principal factor analysis with promax rotation was conducted using the data matrix of
six gratitude items × the number of participants. Principal component analyses revealed
that the first four eigenvalues were 4.40, 0.79, 0.34, and 0.29. Although only the first
factor met the selection criterion (eigenvalue > 1.0), two factors were adopted for
further analysis in order to examine our hypothesis that gratitude and indebtedness or
regret differently correlate with proenvironmental intent.
The items thanks, gratitude, and feeling of debt (an expression of gratitude in
Japan) had high loadings on the first factor (> .75) and low loadings on the second
factor (< .25), and the items feeling of sorrow and feeling of apology had high loadings
on the second factor (> .75) and low loadings on the first factor (< .25). The item
indebtedness had substantial factor loadings on both the first and the second
factors(> .25); therefore, this item was omitted in subsequent analyses. These two
factors explained 80.86% of the total variance.
We argued in the previous section that both indebtedness and regret are feelings
related to gratitude. However, the results of the factor analyses identified only gratitude
and regret as clearly distinct factors. Based on this result, we focused on the feeling of
regret as well as gratitude in subsequent analyses. For these analyses, two variables
were constructed. The first variable was the total score of thanks, gratitude, and feeling
of debt for the six objects, and it was labeled gratitude. The second variable was the
total score of feeling of sorrow and feeling of apology, and it was named regret. The
correlations between these two variables were .65, and alpha coefficients of the first and
second variables were .90 and .95. Table 1 shows Means and SDs of positive values,
fearfulness, gratitude, and regret toward the six natural objects.
Environmental intent and other aspects of proenvironmental attitude. We
examined the applicability of the categories of Milfont and Duckitt (2004) to Japanese
students. When the items were classified into the categories, Cronbach’s alphas of these
subscales were insufficient, ranging from .53 to .75. Therefore, we searched for more
relevant factor models by an exploratory factor analysis.
A principal component analysis showed that seven eigenvalues were greater than
1.0 (5.22, 2.86, 2.12, 1.67, 1.54, 1.15, and 1.08). Although all these factors met the
selection criterion (eigenvalues > 1.0), a principal-component factor analysis with
promax rotation showed that two factors had substantial factor loadings (> .30) on only
three or fewer items. Consequently, we chose the number of factors according to the
pattern of eigenvalues, which suggested three factors for further analysis. The three
factors explained 30.3% of the total variance.
We constructed subscales of proenvironmental attitude using items that had
loadings greater than .30 on a given factor but no loadings greater than .25 on another
factor. The first factor had substantial loadings (> .30) on three items that were
classified as Intent of Support and six items that were classified as Care with Resources
in the Milfont and Duckitt (2004) categories. We named this subscale intent of support
and care with resources. Cronbach’s alpha of the variable was .81. The second factor
had substantial loadings on four items of External Control/ Effective Commitment, four
items of Human Dominance/Altering Nature (items were in reversed direction) and two
items of Anthropocentric Concern in the classification of Milfont and Duckitt (2004).
We named this subscale external control/non-altering nature; Cronbach’s alpha was .75.
The third factor had substantial loadings on two items of Intent of Support and three
items of Anthropocentric Concern; we named the corresponding subscale intent of
support/anthropocentric concern. Cronbach’s alpha was .65. The increase of the three
Cronbach’s alphas showed that the new factors were more relevant factors than previous
ones.
We regarded the first and third factors (intent of support and care with resources
and intent of support/anthropocentric concern) as measures of proenvironmental intent.
We did this because these variables included items showing intent to support and/or
care for resources, rather than merely expressing opinions concerning the values of
nature. In contrast, the second factor (external control/non-altering nature) was
regarded as a non-behavioral aspect of proenvironmental attitude.
Relations of gratitude and regret with proenvironmental intent
We examined the hypothesis that there are significant partial regression
coefficients from gratitude and/or regret toward nature to proenvironmental intent
when the variables of other general impressions are controlled.
As Table 2 shows, gratitude and regret had significant simple correlations with
the three variables of proenvironmental intent and attitude. Although these results are in
line with the hypothesis, they may be partly explained in terms of a methodological
limitation of the present research: All of the items for gratitude and regret asked
respondents to report the degree to which they felt gratitude and regret by using
different words. Thus, it is possible that individual differences in response style or in
preference for high responses on the scales were compounded with net individual
differences in disposition to feel gratitude and regret.
In order to control for possible effects of response style and general impressions
toward nature other than gratitude and regret, we examined the hypothesis in the context
of a model that included: (a) a correlation between the general impression variables
(positive values and fearfulness); (b) regressions from the two general impression
variables to the three proenvironmental variables (intent of support and care with
resources, external control/non-altering nature, and intent of support/anthropocentric
concern); and (c) regressions from external control/non-altering nature to intent of
support and care with resources, external control/non-altering nature, and intent of
support/anthropocentric concern. In the model, we tested the significance of partial
regression coefficients of the paths from gratitude and regret to the three variables of
proenvironmental attitude.
Regret had significant partial regression coefficients to the three variables of
proenvironmental attitude (the two variables of proenvironmental intent and the
non-behavioral aspect of proenvironmental attitude). Gratitude had no significant
partial regression coefficients to any variables of proenvironmental attitude, as shown in
Table 2. These results support the hypothesis that gratitude and/ regret are related to
proenvironmental intent, although there was no clear difference between their
correlations with proenvironmental intent and their correlations with variables of
non-behavioral aspects of proenvironmental attitude.
Complementary Study
The previous study showed regret to be a mediator of attitudes toward
environmental protection among Japanese university students. One limitation of this
study was that it used as variables feelings of gratitude and regret towards specific
natural objects such as forests and rivers, without considering participants' feelings
about more generalized environmental problems. A complementary study was
conducted to investigate the relationship between gratitude, regret, and
proenvironmental attitude in concretely-described situations involving environmental
problems. We expected to confirm the predominant role of regret as a mediator in
Japanese students using these hypothetical scenarios.
Method
Participants
Voluntary respondents were 169 students of two universities in Tokyo and
Tochigi, Japan (40 males and 129 females, mean age = 19.58, SD = 1.58). Students who
wished to participate were asked to remain after class to respond to the questionnaire.
The students received ballpoint pens as rewards.
Instruments
We developed a short form of a questionnaire to measure feelings of gratitude and
regret toward nature, and intent to support the natural environment in hypothetical
situations. We composed three stories in which the protagonists and members of their
groups unwittingly damaged a natural object such as a river, a forest, or an ocean. The
scenario for the river was as follows.
“Imagine that you were working for a company. The company created a branch
office on a distant island where no one had lived before, and you and 500 other
company employees had to move and take up residence there. The houses were
built upstream on the only river on the island. The water in the river was clean
and could be used as drinking water by everyone. Used water was purified by a
machine before being returned to the river. Now ten years have passed, and the
returned water has changed the quality of water in the river, new forms of algae
are multiplying, and most of the fish that lived there previously have died.”
The following types of questions followed each scenario.
Feelings of gratitude and regret (7 items)
Participants were asked to express the degree of gratitude and regret they would feel
toward the natural objects harmed by them (river, forest, or ocean). We adopted the six
items of gratitude and regret used in the main study and added a new item, “feelings of
indebtedness”, to increase the number of items in the regret category. The participants
were asked to respond on a five-point scale from 1 (don’t feel so at all) to 5 (feel
strongly).
Change in Proenvironmental Attitude (4 items)
The participants were asked about the enhancement of their intent to protect the
environment in the hypothetical situations. Four question items for each scenario were
taken from the subscale "intent of support and care with resources" in the main study.
The items in the case of the river scenario were as follows: “Come to think more about
things thrown away into rivers”, “Come to think more about helping people who are
beginning movements to purify rivers”, “Come to think more about participating in
clean-up movements”, and “Try to learn more about river purification.” The participants
were asked to answer on a five-point scale from 1 (don’t feel so at all) to 5 (feel
strongly).
Recognition of situations (2 items)
We added two question items to confirm the validity of the measures of feelings
of gratitude and regret in the hypothetical scenarios. The first item concerned the feeling
of having received benefits from natural objects: “How much would you receive a favor
from the river during the time? (in the river scenario)”. This item was predicted to have
a substantial correlation with gratitude. The second item tapped rightness of past actions
toward the environment: “Was the acts for the river until the time when the pollution
was found right or wrong? (in the river scenario)”. This item was predicted to have a
negative correlation with regret. The participants were asked to respond to each item on
a seven-point scale from 1 (absolutely wrong) to 7 (absolutely right). Each participant
received all three scenarios in the same order.
Results and Discussion
Construction of variables
Scales of gratitude and regret: The total scores of each item for each of the three
scenarios were calculated and a principal component analysis of the gratitude items was
carried out. Two eigenvalues greater than 1 were obtained, 3.71 and 1.61. A subsequent
principal component factor analysis with promax rotation revealed a factor pattern
similar to that of the main study. The items with a high factor loading for the first factor
included the items thanks (.90), gratitude (.91), indebtedness (.85), and owe (.82). The
total scores for these items were calculated for each participant and named "gratitude."
The items with a high factor loading on the second factor were sorry for bothering (.90)
and sorry (.90). The total scores for the two items were calculated and the resulting
variable was named "regret." The item “feeling a debt” had relatively low factor
loadings on the two factors (.31 and .22) and was therefore removed from the
subsequent analysis. Cronbach’s Alphas for “gratitude” and "regret" were .92 and .89.
Change in Proenvironmental Attitude Scale: The four total scores of each item for the
three scenarios were calculated. A principal component analysis revealed only one
factor with an eigenvalue greater than 1.0 (3.21), and a subsequent principal-component
factor analysis showed that 74% of the total variance was explained by one factor. The
total score for the four items was calculated and a variable termed "change in
proenvironmental attitude" was constructed (α coefficient = .92).
Correlation between Change in Proenvironmental Attitude and Feeling of Gratitude
and Regret towards the Environment
Regret had significant correlations with change in proenvironmental attitude (r
= .57, p < .001), with rightness of past actions towards the environment (r = -.30, p
< .001), and with benefit from the environment (r = .42, p < .001). Gratitude had
significant correlations with benefit from the environment (r = .24, p < .01) and
rightness of past actions towards the environment (r = .19, p < .05). The correlation
between gratitude and change in proenvironmental attitude was significant (r = .33, p
< .001). Although gratitude had a significant partial correlation with change in
proenvironmental attitude in controlling regret (pr = .22, p < .01), the results suggested
the predominance of regret in affecting proenvironmental attitude.
The relationships between the variables used in the study were further examined
through a path analysis with maximum-likelihood estimation. Predicted paths and
correlations in the model are shown in Figure 3. The goodness-of-fit indices indicate a
good fit between the model and the data (i.e., RMSEA = .00, GFI =1.00, CFI =1.00).
This model again suggests the predominant contribution of regret to behavioral aspects
of proenvironmental attitude in Japanese students.
General Discussion and Conclusion
The present study confirms the general notion that gratitude and/or related
feelings toward nature are related to proenvironmental intent. Recently, Bamberg and
Möser (2007) made a comprehensive review of studies concerning determinants of
proenvironmental behaviors and suggested the significance of intermediate variables
such as feelings of guilt, moral norms, and so on. The findings of the present study
suggest that feelings of regret should be added to the list of variables which relate to
proenvironmental intent and behaviors. The present study opens the door to further
studies of influences of moral emotion such as gratitude and the related feelings on
proenvironmental intent.
Cultural influences
Consideration of the religious background of Japan suggests that the results may
have been influenced by the socio-cultural conditions of Japanese society. Although
Buddhism, which teaches gratitude as an important virtue, has influenced customs and
moral cognition in Japan, Confucianism and Native Shinto, a prevailing native religion,
have also influenced Japanese customs and moral behaviors throughout history
(Ellwood, 2007). Native Shinto stresses emotional harmony with others, including
nature. In Shintoism, there are many gods in nature or natural objects, and people
should thank them and feel indebtedness for their many contributions (Hartz, 2004).
Such ideas may underlie personification of natural objects in thinking about the relation
between people and nature.
Confucianism emphasizes obligations to others in terms of human relationships,
such as the parent-child relationship, so that a sense of obligation may increase the
moral significance of regret and indebtedness as feelings of unfulfilled obligations in
Japanese society. The emphasis on regret and indebtedness with personification of
nature may strengthen the relation between regret at harming nature. Only regret
towards nature had significant paths to variables of proenvironmental attitude in
Japanese students. It is an open question whether the feeling of regret is the only
predictor of proenvironmental intent and behaviors in other cultures. Additional studies
in other societies will contribute to the discussion of possible cultural variations.
Limitations of the present study
One of the limitations of the present study was its use of scales and categories of
proenvironmental intent that were originally developed for use in Western cultures
This fact rather provides further evidence for current arguments about cultural
differences in environmental attitude. Several recent studies have shown cross-cultural
differences and commonalities in the structure of environmental attitude (Johnson,
Bowker, & Cordell, 2004; Leung & Rice, 2002; Milfont, Duckitt, & Cameron, 2006;
Schultz & Zelezny, 1998). Milfont, Duckitt, and Cameron (2006) compared the
influence of biospheric, altruistic, and egoistic concerns on proenvironmental behaviors
of European and Asian New Zealanders. For European New Zealanders, biospheric
concern predicted proenvironmental behavior positively, whereas egoistic concern
predicted it negatively; for Asian New Zealanders, biospheric and altruistic concerns
predicted proenvironmental behavior positively but egoistic concerns failed to predict
the behaviors. Perhaps Asian societies in general, on the basis of cultural or religious
beliefs, conceive of self and nature as being connected or undifferentiated. This suggests
the possibility that in such societies, both anthropocentric concerns and responses to
selfish needs may be positively correlated to other factors of proenvironmental attitude
and behaviors.
Second, the questionnaire items concerning gratitude and regret took the form of
inquiring about the degree to which each feeling was felt. It is possible that the
consistency of these feelings was overestimated, given that there are individual
differences in sensitivity in response to question items. Third, the questionnaire method
used in the present study employed the subcategories of proenvironmental intent and
attitude as dependent variables. This method may be limited in its ability to predict real
behaviors because of the possible factor of social desirability in responding to question
items. Forth, the present study had the common limitations of correlation research, and
the findings therefore do not show any causal relations between the variables. It is
possible to argue that environmental attitude causes feelings such as apology. Causal
relations and the interactive nature of feelings such as gratitude and proenvironmental
behaviors can be more clearly explained by other methods such as panel analyses and
experimental studies.
Despite these limitations, the present study suggests that emotional components
such as regret and gratitude toward nature contribute in their own ways to
proenvironmental intent. This has general implications for environmental education.
Although the primary objective of environmental education is helping people to acquire
knowledge about the current situation of the natural environment and to understand the
relationship between human conduct and the natural environment, the present study
suggests that environmental education also needs to pay attention to feelings of
gratitude and regret toward nature as important mediators between other general
feelings toward nature and proenvironmental intent.
Further studies concerning the psychological process from primary feelings
toward nature to regret or gratitude are needed for effective environmental education.
References
Bamberg, S., & Möser, G. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera:
A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental
behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 7, 14-25.
Bartlett, M.Y., & DeSteno, D. (2006). Gratitude and prosocial behavior: Helping when
it costs you. Psychological Science. 17, 319-325.
Benedict, R. (1946). The chrysanthemum and the sword: Patterns of Japanese culture.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Blaikie, W. H. (1992). The nature and origins of ecological world views: An Australian
study. Social Science Quarterly, 73, 144–165.
Bogner, F. X., & Wiseman, M. (1999). Toward measuring adolescent environmental
perception. European Psychologist, 4, 139-151.
Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A., & Jones, R. E. (2000). Measuring
endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of
Social Issues, 56, 425– 442.
Eisenberg, N., & Mussen, P. (1989). The roots of prosocial behavior in children.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellwood, R. (2007). Introducing Japanese religions. New York: Routledge.
Hartz, P.R. (2004). Shinto. (Rev. ed.). New York: Facts On File.
Johnson, C. Y., Bowker, J. M., & Cordell, H. K. (2004). Ethnic variation in
environmental belief and behavior: An examination in a social psychological
context. Environment and Behavior, 36, 157-186.
Leung, C., & Rice, J. (2002). Comparison of Chinese-Australian and Anglo-Australian
environmental attitudes and behavior. Social Behavior and Personality, 30,
251-262.
McCullough, M.E., Kilpatrick, S.D., Emmons, R.A., & Larson, D.B. (2001). Is
gratitude a moral affect? Psychological Bulletin, 127, 249-266.
Milfont, T. L. & Duckitt, J. (2004). The structure environmental attitude: A first-and
second-order confirmatory factor analysis, Journal of Environmental Psychology,
24, 289-303.
Milfont, T.L., Duckitt, J, & Cameron, L. D. (2006). A cross-cultural study of
environmental motive concerns and their implications for proenvironmental
behavior. Environment and Behavior, 38, 745-767.
Naito, T., Wangwan, J., & Tani, M. (2005). Gratitude in university students in Japan and
Thailand. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 247-263.
Nishiwaki T. (2004). Nihonjinno shukyouishiki [Religious mind of Japanese people].
Kyoto: Minerubashobou.
Okamoto, S. (1991).Kanshyahyougenno tsukaiwakeni kanyosuru youin [Linquistic
expressions of gratitude]. Bulletin of Aichgakuin University, 6, 95-105.
Roberts, C.R. (2004). The blessings of gratitude: A conceptual analysis. In R. A.
Emmons & M. E. McCullough (Eds.), The psychology of gratitude (pp 58-78).
New York: Oxford University Press.
Schultz, P.W. (2000). New environmental theories: Empathizing with nature: The
effects of perspective taking on concern for environmental issues. Journal of
Social Issues, 56, 391–406.
Schultz, P. W., & Zelezny, L. C. (1998). Values and proenvironmental behavior: A
five-country survey. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29, 540-558.
Tangney, J.P., Stuewig, J., & Mashek,D.J. (2007). Moral emotions and moral behavior.
Annual Review of Psychology, 58,345-372.
Thompson, S. C. G., & Barton, M. A. (1994). Ecocentric and anthropocentric attitudes
toward the environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 14, 149-157.
Tsang, J. (2006a). Gratitude and prosocial behavior: An experimental test of gratitude.
Cognition & Emotion, 20, 138-148.
Tsang, J. (2006b). The effects of helper intention on gratitude and indebtedness.
Motivation and Emotion, 30, 198-204.
Watkins, P. C., Seheer, J., Ovnicek, M., & Kolts, R. (2006). The debt of gratitude:
Dissociating gratitude and indebtedness. Cognition and Emotion, 20, 217-241.
Table 1
Means and SDs of positive values, fearfulness, gratitude, and regret toward six natural
objects (5-point scales)
Variables
Objects
M
SD
Positive values
Forest
3.81
.52
7 items
River
3.34
.75
Wild animals
2.57
.80
Weather
3.09
.80
Sea
4.01
.58
Land
3.34
.75
Fearfulness
Forest
2.53
.90
3 items
River
2.76
.90
Wild animals
3.52
.95
Weather
2.31
1.01
Sea
3.29
1. 06
Land
2.31
1.05
Gratitude
Forest
3.86
.88
3 items
River
3.79
.93
Wild animals
2.72
1.03
Weather
3.87
1.04
Sea
3.43
1.08
Land
3.92
1.00
Regret
Forest
2.90
1.00
2 items
River
3.02
1.03
Wild animals
2.87
1.08
Weather
2.86
1.21
Sea
2.89
1.09
Land
3.03
1.19
N=228
Table 2
Standardized partial regression coefficients of paths from gratitude and regret to
variables of proenvironmental intent in Japanese students
1. *p <.05. **p<.01. ***p < .001.
2 N=228
3. β: Standardized partial regression coefficients
Regression
From
To
β
Simple r
Gratitude
Intent of support and
care with resources
-.03
.19**
Intent of support/
anthropocentric concern
.08
.31***
External control/
non-altering nature
.05
.24***
Regret
Intent of support and
care with resources
.26***
.29***
Intent of support/
anthropocentric concern
.16*
.29***
External control/
non-altering nature
.18*
.23***
Caption
Figure 1
Path diagram of benefit from the environment, rightness of past acts, gratitude and
regret toward nature, and change in proenvironmental attitude
Dotted line: path coefficient is significant at .05 level
Broken line: significant at .01 level
Solid line: significant at .001 level
Numerals in italics are R2
GFI = 1.00, CFI=1.00, and RMSEA=.00, χ2 =.15, df=2, p =.93
