4.6 Article

Perception of human ecology: cross-cultural and gender comparisons

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 1, Pages 89-101

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0272-4944(02)00083-X

Keywords

attitudes; culture; ecology; environment; gender; perception; risk

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examined cultural and gender influences on attitudes, beliefs, opinions, and perceived risk factors in human ecology; further, on the level of knowledge about nature and the environment, and finally, on behavior affecting the environment. Subjects from Japan, Germany, Sweden, and the United States completed a survey scale consisting of seven components: (1) image of the sea, (2) image of the mountain, (3) image of the river, (4) sea affairs score, (5) environmental attitudes scale, (6) environmental knowledge scale, and (7) environmental behavior scale. Cultural differences revealed by the analyses included the following: (1) the Japanese group rated the sea, the mountain, and the river as less pleasant than did the other three groups, (2) the Japanese had the highest scores in environmental knowledge and the Americans the lowest, (3) the German group had the lowest sea affairs scores, and (4) both the German and the Swedish participants described and evaluated their behavior as most protective and the Japanese as least protective of the environment. Gender differences were also obtained, between as well as within cultures. Compared with male subjects, female subjects across countries perceived the risk factors as more serious as regards ecological and environmental problems, the global instability caused by economic nationalism, and the growing gap between rich and poor nations. Male subjects showed higher environmental knowledge, whereas females showed higher motivation for ecological thinking and behavior. These findings are discussed in terms of culture, gender, and cognition. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available