A study published in Environment and Behavior suggests that people feel attached to wilderness landscapes due to nature’s ability to fulfill the basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness.
Much research has examined the way individuals form attachments with the physical spaces they inhabit. However, the way people form bonds with natural landscapes remains somewhat of a mystery. Study authors Adam C. Landon and his team speculated that it may have something to do with the fulfillment of psychological needs.
“Generally, I find the psychological processes that underpin humans’ connection to nature fascinating, and critically important in this period of widespread global change. The more we understand about why people come to value nature, the better, and I think place attachment falls under this umbrella,” said Landon, a scientist at the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and adjunct assistant professor at the University of Minnesota.
“There is increasing attention paid to the role of nature in psychological functioning, we think our study builds on this, to demonstrate that wilderness contexts support optimal psychological functioning, and that contextual support yields affective outcomes in the form of place attachment.”
Inspired by Ryan and Deci’s Self-Determination Theory, the authors considered the three psychological needs believed to underlie human motivation. These needs are: autonomy — the need for independence, competence — the need to develop mastery by overcoming challenges, and relatedness — the need to connect with others.
A sample of 795 Americans who had recently visited a natural area within the Southern Appalachian region was recruited for a survey. The respondents were told to think of a wilderness area that is special to them and were asked questions designed to assess their place attachment to that area. Assessments included place identity (e.g., “I identify with my special wilderness area.”), emotional attachment (e.g., “I feel a strong sense of belonging with my special wilderness area.”), and place dependence (e.g., “I cannot imagine a better place for the things I like to do than my special wilderness area.”).
Respondents were also questioned on how their chosen wilderness area met their needs for autonomy (e.g., “I feel free to visit my special wilderness area in my own way.”), competence (e.g., “I feel that I am able to complete activities that challenge me when I visit my special wilderness area.”), and relatedness (e.g., “I feel connected to people who I interact with while I visit my special wilderness area.”).
Results showed that a landscape’s ability to fulfill psychological needs predicted respondents’ place attachment to the natural area in question. When taken together, the three needs explained “approximately half of the variance in each dimension of place attachment.”
“The importance that people attribute to a physical space is in part a result of that space supporting their psychological needs for feeling connected to other people, experiencing feelings of competence, and autonomy in their behavioral choices,” Landon told PsyPost.
While there were significant associations between each of the psychological needs and each of the place attachment dimensions, there were some associations that were more pronounced. For instance, place identity was found to be the most strongly tied to relatedness. While people may look to the wilderness for solitude, Landon and associates point out that people often partake in nature activities alongside significant others. Furthermore, activities like backcountry recreation likely bring with them a community of likeminded enthusiasts.
Interestingly, emotional attachment to the wilderness showed the biggest correlation with respondents’ belief that the landscape provided them autonomy. Given that wilderness experiences tend to qualify as leisure activities, this is not surprising. Freedom and intrinsic motivation are considered crucial to the definition of leisure.
“There are a few caveats. Importantly, this is a cross-sectional study, not an experiment. While we think our approach provides strong evidence for a link between psychological needs satisfaction and the development of attachment to place, we encourage systematic testing of the causal link in the laboratory,” Landon said.
“There is also room to expand on this work to look at other contexts that support needs satisfaction and attachment, beyond wilderness, and outcomes of place attachment, including beliefs about protection of place and well-being, among others.”
Despite the limitations, the study offers strong evidence that human connection to nature is linked to the fulfillment of basic psychological needs.
As Landon and associates observe, “The relationship that we demonstrate has implications for practice, including the management of natural areas, and values important to natural resource stakeholders . . . Wilderness landscapes afford a unique opportunity for self-regulated behaviors and, accordingly, warrant special consideration as places of value and protection.”
The study, “Psychological Needs Satisfaction and Attachment to Natural Landscapes”, was authored by Adam C. Landon, Kyle M. Woosnam, Gerard T. Kyle, and Samuel J. Keith.
(Image by silviarita from Pixabay)
