Do Emotions, Nature Relatedness, and Conservation Concern Influence Students’ Evaluations of Arguments about Biodiversity Conservation?

Iresha Jayasinghe; Rebekka Darner

doi:10.29333/ijese/9157

Do Emotions, Nature Relatedness, and Conservation Concern Influence Students’ Evaluations of Arguments about Biodiversity Conservation?

Full Text (PDF)

Iresha Jayasinghe ¹ , Rebekka Darner ² ^*

More Detail

¹ The Ohio State University, USA² Illinois State University, USA^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

Understanding human treatment towards nature provides insight into mitigating human induced environmental issues. This study determines whether individuals’ relationships with nature (NR), emotions experienced during evidence evaluation, and conservation concern drive evaluation of scientific arguments made about biodiversity conservation. Although we predicted that participants with strong NR would exhibit motivated reasoning, resulting in strong argument-evaluation skills as they evaluate an anti-conservation argument, we found that participants’ emotions during evidence evaluation were more predictive of their argument-evaluation skills. Further, participants with either low or high conservation concern demonstrated better argumentation skills. These findings suggest that while fostering strong relationships with nature may be important, of greater importance is to address emotions experienced when evaluating evidence. Furthermore, this study indicates a possibility that one’s reasoning about arguments made about biodiversity conservation may be motivated by how important one deems conservation to be.

Keywords

Conservation education
nature relatedness
emotion
scientific argumentation
motivated reasoning

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED, Volume 17, Issue 1, 2021, Article No: e2230

https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/9157

Publication date: 13 Nov 2020

Article Views: 2372

Article Downloads: 1615

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

Albarracin, D., & Kumkale, G. T. (2003). Affect as information in persuasion: A model of affect identification and discounting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(3), 453-469. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.453
Allchin, D. (2012). Teaching the nature of science through scientific errors. Science Education, 96(5), 904–926. doi:10.1002/sce.21019
Asterhan, C. S. C., & Schwarz, B. B. (2009). Argumentation and explanation in conceptual change: Indications from protocol analyses of peer-to-peer dialog. Cognitive Science, 33(3), 374–400. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01017.x
Bart, J., Platte, R., Andres, B., Brown, S., Johnson, J., & Larned, W. (2013). Importance of the national petroleum reserve–Alaska for aquatic birds. Conservation Biology, 27(6), 1304-1312. doi:10.1111/cobi.12133
Batt, S. (2009). Human attitudes towards animals in relation to species similarity to humans: A multivariate approach. Bioscience Horizons: The International Journal of Student Research, 2(2), 180–190. doi:10.1093/biohorizons/hzp021
Catsambis, S. (1994). The path to math: Gender and racial-ethnic differences in mathematics participation from middle school to high school. Sociology of Education, 67, 199-215. doi:10.2307/2112791
Chi M. T. H. (2008). Three types of conceptual change: Belief revision, mental model transformation, and categorical shift. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chiew, K. S., & Braver, T. S. (2011). Positive affect versus reward: emotional and motivational influences on cognitive control. Frontiers in psychology, 2, 279. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00279
Colléony, A., Clayton, S., Denis, C., Saint Jalme, M., & Prevot, A. (2017). Human preferences for species conservation: Animal charisma trumps endangered status. Biological Conservation, 206, 263-269. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2016.11.035
Czech, B., Krausman, P. R., & Borkhataria, R. (1998). Social construction, political power, and the allocation of beneﬁts to endangered species. Conservation Biology, 12, 1103-1112. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1998.97253.x
DeKay, M. L., & McClelland, G. H. (1996). Probability and utility of endangered species preservation programs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 2(1), 60-83. doi:10.1037/1076-898x.2.1.60
Devine A., Fawcett K., Szucs D., Dowker A. (2012). Gender differences in mathematics anxiety and the relation to mathematics performance while controlling for test anxiety. Behav. Brain Funct., 8, 1–9. doi:10.1186/1744-9081-8-33
Dowker, A., Sarkar, A., & Looi, C. Y. (2016). Mathematics Anxiety: What Have We Learned in 60 Years?. Frontiers in psychology, 7, 508. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00508
Driver, R., Newton., P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A
Dunlap, R., Liere, K. D., Mertig, A., & Jones, R. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425-442. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00176
Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39–72. doi:10.1080/03057260208560187
Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A.W. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8.Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Else-Quest, N., Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. (2010). Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 103-127. doi:10.1037/a0018851
Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). The broadenand-build theory of positive emotions. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci., 359, 1367–1378. doi:10.4135/9781412956253.n75
Garcia-Marques, T., & Loureiro, F. (2016). Dispositional beliefs regarding “affect as information” determine the perception of persuasive self-efficacy. Analise Psicologica, 34(1), 73–86. doi:10.14417/ap.1098
Glassner, A., & Schwarz, B. (2007). What stands and develops between creative and critical thinking? Argumentation?. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 2(1), 10-18. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2006.10.001
Gough, M. F. (1954). Mathemaphobia: Causes and treatments. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 28(5), 290–294. doi:10.1080/00098655.1954.11476830
Harrington, L. (2015). International commercial trade in live carnivores and primates 2006-2012: Response to Bush et al. 2014. Conservation Biology, 29(1), 293–296. doi:10.1111/cobi.12448
Isen, A. M., & Daubman, K. A. (1984). The influence of affect on categorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1206-1217. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1206
Isen, A. M., Daubman, K. A., & Nowicki, G. P. (1987). Positive affect facilitates creative problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1122–1131. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.6.1122
Kaplan, S. (2000). Human Nature and Environmentally Responsible Behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 491–508. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00180
Kellert, S. R. (1978). Policy implications of a national study of American attitudes and behavioral relations to animals. U.S. Department of the Interior, Stock Number 024-101-00482-7, U.S., Government Printing Office, Washington DC.
Kunda, Z. (1987). Motivation and inference: Self-serving generation and evaluation of evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 636-647. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.53.4.636
Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480-98. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480
Lee, Y. C. (2007). Developing decision-making skills for socio-scientific issues. Journal of Biological Education, 41, 170-177. doi:10.1080/00219266.2007.9656093
Lee, H. S., Liu, O. L., Pallant, A., Roohr, K. C., Pryputniewicz, S., & Buck, Z. E. (2014). Assessment of uncertainty-infused scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(5), 581–605. doi:10.1002/tea.21147
Mauss, I. B., & Robinson, M. D. (2009). Measures of emotion: A review. Cogntive Emotion, 23(2), 209-237. doi: 10.1080/02699930802204677.
Millar, R. & Osborne, J. (Eds.). (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London: King’s College.
Nisbet, E. K., & Zelenski, J. M. (2013). The NR-6: A new brief measure of nature relatedness. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(NOV), 1–11. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00813
Nisbet, E. K., Zelenski, J. M., & Murphy, S. A. (2009). With nature to environmental concern and behavior. Environment and Behavior, 41(5), 715–740. doi:10.1177/0013916508318748
Presley, M., Sickel, A., Muslu, N., Merle-Johnson, D., Witzig, S., Izci, K., & Sadler, T. (2013). A framework for socio-scientific issues based education. Science Educator. 22. 26-32.
Richardson, F. C., & Suinn, R. M. (1972). The mathematics anxiety rating scale: Psychometric data. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 19, 551-554. doi:10.1037/h0033456
Tam, K. P. (2013). Concepts and measures related to connection to nature: Similarities and differences. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 64–78. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.01.004
Tisdell, C.,Wilson, C., Nantha, H.S. (2006). Public choice of species for the ‘Ark’: Phylogenetic similarity and preferred wildlife species for survival. Journal for Nature Conservation, 14(2), 97–105. doi:10.1016/j.jnc.2005.11.001
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Villata, S., Cabrio, E., Jraidi, I., Benlamine, M., Chaouachi, M., Frasson, C., & Gandon, F. (2017). Emotions and personality traits in argumentation: An empirical evaluation. Argument & Computation, 8, 1-27. doi:10.3233/aac-170015
Wang, H., Hong, Z., Lin, H., & Tsai, C. (2020). The relationships among adult sustainability attitudes, psychological well-being, nature relatedness, and interest in scientific issues. Current Psychology, doi:10.1007/s12144-020-00708-1
Wyer, R. S., & Dieter, F. (1983). The effects of feedback about self and others on the recall and judgments of feedback-relevant information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19(6), 540–59. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(83)90015-x

How to cite this article

APA

Jayasinghe, I., & Darner, R. (2021). Do Emotions, Nature Relatedness, and Conservation Concern Influence Students’ Evaluations of Arguments about Biodiversity Conservation?. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 17(1), e2230. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/9157

Vancouver

Jayasinghe I, Darner R. Do Emotions, Nature Relatedness, and Conservation Concern Influence Students’ Evaluations of Arguments about Biodiversity Conservation?. INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED. 2021;17(1):e2230. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/9157

AMA

Jayasinghe I, Darner R. Do Emotions, Nature Relatedness, and Conservation Concern Influence Students’ Evaluations of Arguments about Biodiversity Conservation?. INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED. 2021;17(1), e2230. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/9157

Chicago

Jayasinghe, Iresha, and Rebekka Darner. "Do Emotions, Nature Relatedness, and Conservation Concern Influence Students’ Evaluations of Arguments about Biodiversity Conservation?". Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education 2021 17 no. 1 (2021): e2230. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/9157

Harvard

Jayasinghe, I., and Darner, R. (2021). Do Emotions, Nature Relatedness, and Conservation Concern Influence Students’ Evaluations of Arguments about Biodiversity Conservation?. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 17(1), e2230. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/9157

MLA

Jayasinghe, Iresha et al. "Do Emotions, Nature Relatedness, and Conservation Concern Influence Students’ Evaluations of Arguments about Biodiversity Conservation?". Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, vol. 17, no. 1, 2021, e2230. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/9157