I speak to the trees because nature is my friend: Conceptualization and assessment of connection to nature in solitude
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spending time alone in nature has been found to benefit well-being, but the mechanisms underlying this relation are understudied. The current study validated an assessment of the construct of connectedness to nature in solitude (CNIS) and evaluated a model linking CNIS, time spent alone in nature, and indices of well-being. Participants were N = 812 emerging adults ( M age = 19.45, SD = 1.87) attending university in southeastern Ontario, Canada. Participants completed a series of self-report measures assessing CNIS, time alone in nature, affinity for solitude, nature connectedness, loneliness, aloneliness, and life satisfaction. Factor analysis of the 7-item CNIS Scale indicated a one-factor solution. Regression analyses indicated that at low levels of CNIS, time alone in nature was significantly and positively related to loneliness and aloneliness, but at higher levels of CNIS, this relation was attenuated. The current study provides initial evidence for the importance of CNIS as a moderator of the links between time alone in nature and well-being.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".