Abstract
In recent environmental research, relational values (RVs) have emerged as a new group of values to explain environmental behavior. Although this new concept is attracting attention, empirical studies on the subject are still rare. On this basis, we have conducted three studies to analyze an existing measurement tool for RVs and compared the construct with the concept of connection to nature. In study 1, we confirmed convergent and discriminant validity of the RV scale by comparing it with the Two Factor Model of Environmental Values (2-MEV) model using a sample of n = 350 university students. Additionally, study 1 verified reliability using test–retest reliability on three different groups of students (n1 = 53; n2 = 37; n3 = 48). In study 2, principal component analyses were performed to examine the structure of RVs and to compare it to the concept of connection to nature by reusing the sample 350 university students from study 1. The results show that RVs and connection to nature are not fundamentally distinct constructs, but overlap. However, if the structure of the RV measurement is forced to a single factor, no perfect fit is found, making a multidimensional solution more likely. A third study was conducted to review the results from study 2 using confirmatory factor analysis on a new sample of 878 university and high school students. Study 3 confirmed RVs as a multidimensional construct with three factors: care, community, and connection. It also proved the overlap of the connection to nature and RV concepts to some extent.
Highlights
Why should nature be preserved and protected? This question is often answered from an instrumental or an intrinsic position (Tallis and Lubchenco, 2014)
Since connection to nature is very important in the context of environmental education and environmental psychology, and since we found some theoretical similarities between the concept and relational values (RVs), we investigated the structural relationship between the RV items and connection to nature in studies 2 and 3
In study 2, we executed a series of PCAs on the same sample of 350 university students used in study 1 (Section “Convergent and Discriminant Validity”) to explore the fundamental structure of the concept of RVs
Summary
This question is often answered from an instrumental or an intrinsic position (Tallis and Lubchenco, 2014). In terms of the instrumental point of view, the focus is on ecosystem services for the protection of nature. Instrumentalists argue that this beneficial approach is more effective than an intrinsic value of nature (Reid et al, 2006). A weakness of the instrumental view is the existence of natural things that have little or no value to humans. For this reason, intrinsic values should not be disregarded. Instrumental arguments are more often effective for the general public and should be used in contexts where conservation is crucial (Tallis and Lubchenco, 2014)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
