Testing the Biophilia Hypothesis Through the Human and Nature Scale on Four Continents

  • Riyan J.G. Van den Born
  • , Natalia Calderón Moya-Méndez
  • , Mirjam de Groot
  • , Ngoc T.B. Duong
  • , Wessel Ganzevoort
  • , Bernadette F. van Heel
  • , Agnieszka D. Hunka
  • , Rob H.J. Lenders
  • , Carena J. van Riper
  • , Massimiliano Scopelliti
  • , Laura N.H. Verbrugge
  • , Wouter T. de Groot

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

According to the biophilia hypothesis, humans have a fundamental tendency to affiliate with nature. If this hypothesis is true, large majorities of people should express a high level of nature-friendliness (a tendency to affiliate with nature), and this level should have low variability across cultures. We tested this proposition using the inter-culturally applicable Human and Nature (HaN) scale. We compare the outcomes from 12 previously published studies that applied the HaN scale on four continents and show that a high level of nature-friendliness was indeed detected in all countries. We also demonstrate that the cross-cultural variability of the nature-friendliness levels was as small as their within-culture variability. Jointly then, these 12 studies offer strong support for the biophilia hypothesis. We share implications that are valuable for policymaking as well as further theoretical development of human-nature relationship research, particularly around relational values with nature and ecological virtue ethics.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)119-130
Number of pages12
JournalEcopsychology
Volume17
Issue number2
Early online dateNov 11 2024
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2025

Keywords

  • Biophilia
  • Cross-cultural
  • HaN
  • Nature-friendliness
  • Relational values
  • Surveys
  • Virtue ethics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology
  • Applied Psychology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Testing the Biophilia Hypothesis Through the Human and Nature Scale on Four Continents'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this