MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3009086145 · doi:10.22215/etd/2020-13953

From mother to Mother Nature: The role of interpersonal attachment in human–nature relations

2020· dissertation· en· W3009086145 on OpenAlexafffund
Colin A. Capaldi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsPsychologySocial connectednessAttachment theorySocial psychologyInterpersonal communicationInterpersonal relationshipTraitDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past two decades, environmental psychologists have become increasingly interested in the concept of nature connectedness: the degree to which people feel connected to the natural world.Nature connectedness has been shown to predict a variety of important individual differences, including stronger proenvironmental attitudes and behaviours, and greater well-being.Despite the increased attention that this topic has recently received, there is a dearth of research that has comprehensively examined how people's relationship to nature might be related to and influenced by social relationships and contexts.In this dissertation, I consider and test the applicability of attachment theory to human-nature relations.Across two studies, I examined whether interpersonal attachment orientations (i.e., attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance) are associated with nature connectedness at the trait-level.I also investigated whether momentary activation of specific attachment-related schemas influence people's motivation to connect with nature, and whether dispositional attachment orientations and nature connectedness moderate the impact of these temporarily activated schemas on motivation to connect with nature.Evidence for relationships between interpersonal attachment orientations and nature connectedness at the trait-level were weak and inconsistent across the two studies.Motivation to connect with nature did not differ across experimental conditions in either study, but some evidence was found for interpersonal attachment orientations moderating the effect of some of the experimental conditions.In general, the current research did not provide clear and consistent evidence for a link between how people relate to close others and how they relate to nature, or for attachment-related contexts impacting people's motivation to connect with nature.Based on these results, one could conclude that attachment theory appears to have limited relevance for understanding human-nature relations.Limitations and future research directions are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUrban Green Space and Health→French-language works237,207→