Cross-cultural validity of the Nature Relatedness Scale (NR-6) and links with wellbeing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nature relatedness refers to individual differences in subjective connectedness with the natural environment. We aimed to cross-culturally validate the Nature Relatedness scale and examine links between nature relatedness and wellbeing. We also tested whether spirituality or self-transcendent emotions such as gratitude mediate the relationship between nature relatedness and wellbeing. University student participants (N = 798) from four countries (Hungary, India, South Korea, and Canada) completed the short-form Nature Relatedness scale (NR-6; Nisbet & Zelenski, 2013), the Inclusion of Nature in Self scale (Schultz, 2002a), and measures of hedonic and eudaimonic wellbeing. Cross-cultural differences were found in a number of nature relatedness principal components, as well as differences in links between nature relatedness, spirituality, and wellbeing. In all four countries, gratitude formed a significant indirect path from nature relatedness to mental health and quality of life. The findings suggest that spiritual aspects of human-nature relationships may contribute to wellbeing across cultures.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".