Next Article in Journal
Organic Agriculture in the Context of 2030 Agenda Implementation in European Union Countries
Previous Article in Journal
Training in Digital Skills—The Perspective of Workers in Public Sector
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 13
10.3390/su151310581
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Brief Report

Relationships between Outdoor Recreation-Associated Flow, Pro-Environmental Attitude, and Pro-Environmental Behavioral Intention

by
Gun-Soo Han
Department of Sports and Leisure Studies, College of Humanities, Daegu University, 201 Daegudae-ro, Gyeongsan-si 38453, Republic of Korea
Sustainability 2023, 15(13), 10581; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310581
Submission received: 18 May 2023 / Revised: 30 June 2023 / Accepted: 4 July 2023 / Published: 5 July 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Health, Well-Being and Sustainability)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study was performed to identify relationships between flow associated with outdoor recreation, pro-environmental attitude, and pro-environmental behavioral intention. One hundred and thirty-one students from outdoor recreation clubs at 20 universities participated in the study. Structural equation modeling by using AMOS 20.0 revealed the following. First, outdoor recreation-associated flow has a direct positive effect on pro-environmental attitudes. Second, the pro-environmental attitude has a direct positive effect on pro-environmental behavioral intention. Third, outdoor recreation-associated flow does not have a direct positive effect on pro-environmental behavioral intention. Fourth, outdoor recreation-associated flow indirectly influences pro-environmental behavioral intention mediated by environmental attitude.

1. Introduction

1.1. Needs of Study

Worldwide environmental pollution has contaminated and altered the environment [1]. Air, soil, and water qualities continually decrease, and many wild animals face extinction [1]. According to the World Health Organization [2], climate change will increase the number of deaths by nearly 250,000 between 2030 and 2050 due to malnutrition, diarrhea, and heat exposure. To address this deepening disastrous situation, environmental education teaching is desperately needed to minimize and redress environmental damage and its adverse effects on people’s lifestyles [3]. Successful environmental education is closely related to individual attitudes to the environment [4,5,6], and by providing a means of approaching this topic, outdoor recreation may increase pro-environmental attitudes and pro-environmental behavioral intentions [7,8,9]. However, little is known about the relationships between outdoor recreation, pro-environmental attitude, and pro-environmental behavioral intention. Recognizing the influence of engaging in outdoor recreational activities on individuals’ attitudes and behaviors toward the environment is crucial for developing effective strategies that promote environmental stewardship and foster sustainable lifestyles. This understanding provides a valuable basis for designing interventions, policies, and educational initiatives that harness the potential of outdoor recreation to cultivate a strong sense of environmental responsibility and inspire individuals to actively contribute to the preservation of the environment.
Therefore, the objective of this study is to investigate the relationships among outdoor recreation-associated flow, pro-environmental attitude, and pro-environmental behavioral intention based on the following theoretical review and research hypothesis.

1.2. Literature Review

1.2.1. Outdoor Recreation-Associated Flow

Flow is a psychological state in which you feel emotional well-being, free from self-consciousness and enjoying yourself deeply, when individual skill and activity level are matched [10]. A state of flow is best achieved when individuals have clear goals, a sense of control, completely concentrate, and exhibit action-awareness merging toward a certain activity [10]. Csikszentmihalyi [11] originally conceptualized flow and defined it as “a holistic sensation that people feel when they act with total involvement” (p. 36) and as “the state in which people are so involved in an activity that nothing else seems to matter; the experience itself is so enjoyable that people will do it even at great cost, for the sheer sake of doing it”. (p. 4). Jackson and Csikszentmihalyi [10] studied the experiences of sports athletes and found that harmonious experience is achieved when athletes enjoy and focus on their athletic performances and view them as positive, euphoric, and intrinsically motivating experiences [10]. Athletes generally experience flow during practice or competition, and this experience is an essential part of a positive sporting experience [10,12,13]. Stein, Kimiecik, Daniels, and Jackson [14] reported that non-elite athletes and recreational sports enthusiasts experience flow in a similar manner to elite athletes.
Outdoor recreation can be defined as recreational activities in nature using natural resources [15]. Outdoor recreation reminds people of the importance of sustainable natural ecosystems and protecting the natural environment and its animals and plants [16]. By doing so, outdoor recreation provides a harmonious connection between people and nature [17]. Previous studies [7,8,9,18] have shown outdoor recreation is an important environmentally-related research topic. Furthermore, it has been established that participation in outdoor recreation is positively related to a pro-environmental attitude [7,8,18] and pro-environmental behavioral intention [9,19,20]. Outdoor recreational involvement can be assessed by measuring activity frequencies, but a measure of outdoor recreation flow would provide a clearer indication since it indicates positive psychological involvement with the activity [10,12,13]. In addition, numerous studies have explored the relationship between leisure participation and leisure flow, consistently demonstrating a positive association. For instance, Kim, Heo, Lee, and Jeong [21] conducted a study to examine the correlation between leisure participation, leisure flow, and leisure satisfaction. The study findings indicated a positive relationship between engaging in leisure activities and experiencing flow, suggesting that higher levels of participation were associated with an increased likelihood of experiencing a heightened flow state. Therefore, it would be appropriate to consider using outdoor recreation flow as a measure of outdoor recreation participation.

1.2.2. Pro-Environmental Attitude

Attitude is defined as “a learned predisposition to respond in a consistently favorable or unfavorable manner to a given object” [22] (p. 6), is closely related to behavioral intention, and could predict future intentions [22]. On the other hand, an environmental attitude involves a collection of values and feelings about environmentally related activities or issues [20,23], and a positive environmental attitude develops responsibility for environmental protection and improvement [19,20]. According to Dunlap and Heffernan [7], a positive relationship exists between outdoor recreation participation and environmental attitude. Dunlap and Heffernan [7] found that “appreciative” outdoor recreation, such as cross-country skiing and hiking, but not non-motorized activities, may positively affect pro-environmental attitudes. Knopp and Tyger [8] and Wolsko and Lindberg [18] also concluded outdoor recreation has a positive effect on pro-environmental attitudes, and Mayer et al. [24] found that a positive experience in nature was linked with an increase in pro-environmentalism.
Hypothesis 1:
Outdoor recreation-associated flow has a positive effect on pro-environmental attitudes.
Levine and Strube [25], in a cohort of college students, and Zarei, Ehsani, Moghimehfar, and Aroufzad [5] found that a pro-environmental attitude has a positive effect on pro-environmental behavioral intention. Baird, Hutson, and Plummer [4] reported level of connection with nature is positively related to future pro-environmental behavioral intention and that people have clearer personal future intentions when they identify strongly with nature [4]. Ahmed et al. [26] found people demonstrating a higher level of environmental concern are more likely to adopt pro-environmental behavior [26,27], and Casaló and Escario [28] found that environmental attitude is positively related to pro-environmental behavior. Other studies also support the notion that environmental attitudes are powerful predictors of pro-environmental behavior [29,30,31].
Hypothesis 2:
Pro-environmental attitude has a positive effect on pro-environmental behavioral intention.

1.2.3. Pro-Environmental Behavioral Intention

Behavioral intention is defined as “the degree to which a person has formulated conscious plans to perform or not perform some specified future behavior” [32] (p. 214). In this context, pro-environmental behavioral intention can be defined as actions intended to be eco-friendly, aimed at conserving natural resources and improving environmental quality, for example, by purchasing products or services that do not harm the environment or society [33,34,35]. Ahmed, Zehou, Raza, Qureshi, Yousufi, Babutsidze, and Chai [26] reported that individuals with higher environmental attachment tend to exhibit more pro-environmental behavior, and Larson, Whiting, and Green [9] suggested adult outdoor recreation participation and pro-environmental behavior are strongly related.
Hypothesis 3:
Outdoor recreation-associated flow has a positive effect on pro-environmental behavioral intention.
The studies mentioned above strongly suggest that pro-environmental attitude mediates outdoor recreation-associated flow and pro-environmental behavioral intention since past studies support the existence of positive relationships between (a) outdoor recreation-associated flow and pro-environmental attitude [7,8,18], (b) pro-environmental attitude and pro-environmental behavioral intention [5,25], and (c) outdoor recreation-associated flow and pro-environmental behavioral intention [9]. Furthermore, Larson, Whiting, and Green [9] suggested that a pro-environmental attitude might mediate the relationship between outdoor recreation-associated flow and pro-environmental behavioral intention.
Hypothesis 4:
Outdoor recreation-associated flow indirectly influences pro-environmental behavioral intention mediated by environmental attitude.
Therefore, we undertook to determine the nature of relationships between outdoor recreation-associated flow, pro-environmental attitude, and pro-environmental behavioral intention using these four hypotheses.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants

Participants were selected by convenience sampling. Two hundred twenty questionnaires were distributed to outdoor recreation clubs at 20 colleges in South Korea. A total of 153 were returned, and 22 were excluded as they contained missing values. Thus, the study was conducted using 131 usable responses. Of the 131 participants, 74% were male, 26 were female, and overall mean age was 23.5 years (Table 1). Prior to the survey, trained research assistants explained the purpose and potential risks of the study and provided participants with contact information. Participants were informed that they could withdraw from the study at any time.

2.2. Instruments

The survey consisted of four sections that addressed outdoor recreation-associated flow, pro-environmental attitude, pro-environmental behavioral intention, and demographic information. Five items of outdoor recreation-associated flow were used, as described by Han and Park [36]. A five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), was used to score responses; higher scores indicated a higher level of outdoor recreation-associated flow. Pro-environmental attitude was measured using three items derived from Mei, Ling, and Piew [37]. A five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), was used to score survey responses, where a higher score indicated a higher level of pro-environmental attitude. Pro-environmental behavioral intention was measured using three items adapted from Norton, Zacher, Parker, and Ashkanasy [38]. A five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), was used to score survey responses, where a higher score indicated that the respondent had a higher level of pro-environmental behavioral intention (Table 2). The scale was originally developed and distributed in the Korean language. To provide readers with a point of reference, the Korean version of the scale underwent translation into English by two translators proficient in both languages, ensuring the accuracy of the translation. The English version of the scale is presented in Table 2.

2.3. Data Analysis

SPSS version 20.0 and AMOS version 20.0 were used for the data analysis. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was examined by applying the two-step approach [39]. First, the psychometric properties of the measurement model were evaluated by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Second, relationships between variables were assessed by examining SEM. Overall model fit, the reliabilities of constructs and their corresponding indicators, the convergent validity, and discriminant validity were assessed [40,41,42]. The mediating effects of pro-environmental attitude on outdoor recreation-associated flow and pro-environmental behavioral intention were tested by bootstrapping using 5000 bootstrap samples and a 95% confidence interval (CI) [43]. Research architecture diagram is presented in Figure 1.

3. Results

3.1. Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Cronbach’s alpha values range from 0.73 to 0.89. The convergent validity was ensured by evaluating the construct reliability (CR) (0.74 to 0.89) and the average variance extracted (AVE) (0.49 to 0.67) for all latent constructs [41]. Although a scale (pro-environmental attitude—PEA) has an AVE of 0.49, which is slightly below the required value of 0.50 [41], it would not significantly undermine the reliability of the study’s results. In addition, evidence of discriminant validity was found since the AVE of all latent variables was larger than their squared correlations [42]. Furthermore, all fit indices for the measurement model satisfied the recommended values: χ2 = 80.904, p = 0.00, χ2/df = 1.97, CFI = 0.94, RMR = 0.05, SRMR = 0.05, and RMSEA = 0.08 [40] (see Table 2).

3.2. Structural Equation Modeling

The final structural model had a reasonable fit to the data [40]: χ2 = 80.904, p = 0.000; χ2/df = 1.97; CFI = 0.94; RMR = 0.05; SRMR = 0.05; RMSEA = 0.08. The structural equation model identified the following (Table 3 and Figure 1). The outdoor recreation-associated flow had a significant direct effect on pro-environmental attitude (β = 0.239, p < 0.05), and pro-environmental attitude had a significant direct effect on pro-environmental behavioral intention (β = 0.719, p < 0.001). However, outdoor recreation-associated flow did not have a significant direct effect on pro-environmental behavioral intention (β = −0.010, p > 0.05) but had a significant indirect effect on pro-environmental behavioral intention mediated by pro-environmental attitude (β = 0.172, p < 0.01) (Figure 2 and Table 3).

4. Discussion

This study identifies significant effects between outdoor recreation-associated flow, pro-environmental attitude, and pro-environmental behavioral intention. First, outdoor recreation-associated flow significantly and directly affected pro-environmental attitude. This result is supported by previous studies [7,8]. Knopp and Tyger [8] analyzed 379 winter outdoor recreation (e.g., skiing and motorized) participants. They found a positive relationship between winter outdoor recreation and environmental attitude, especially among skiers, who also preferred bicycling, canoeing, and backpacking more than winter motorsport enthusiasts, which suggested that environmental attitudes depend on outdoor recreation type. Dunlap and Heffernan [7] analyzed the results of a statewide survey conducted on 3101 respondents in Washington state and found a positive association between participation in outdoor recreational activities and a positive attitude toward protecting nature. They also suggested that participants in “appreciative” non-consumptive outdoor activities, such as camping, hiking, and visiting parks, tended to be more concerned about the protection of forests and unspoiled natural areas and their preservation than participants in consumptive activities. These studies adequately demonstrate that outdoor recreation has a positive effect on pro-environmental attitudes and suggest that to maximize the positive influence of outdoor recreation, it needs to be non-consumptive and non-motorized.
Second, a pro-environmental attitude was found to have a significant direct effect on pro-environmental behavioral intention, which also concurs with previous studies [6,20,25,29]. Ramsey and Rickson [6] reported that pro-environmental attitudes formed by increased knowledge of pollution abatement lead to the active promotion of environmental quality, which indicated that knowledge changes attitude and, in turn, behavior [6]. Bamberg and Möser [29] posited that pro-environmental behavioral intention is affected by pro-environmental attitude but added that other psycho-social variables, such as social norms, feelings of guilt, internal attribution, and problem awareness, also affect attitude and intention. Levine and Strube [25] analyzed the relationships between general environmental attitude, pro-environmental behavioral intention, and environmentally friendly behavior using data obtained from ninety undergraduate students and found that environmental attitude positively affects intention and that intention positively affects behavior. Levine and Strube [25] emphasized the importance of considering more than one predictor, such as environmental knowledge, gender, and age, when attempting to understand the drivers of environmentally friendly behavior and suggested that environmental attitude be studied using two dimensions of implicit and explicit attitude.
Sabzehei, Gholipoor, and Adinevand [20] analyzed 370 female university students and found that environmental awareness influences environmental behavior both directly and indirectly and suggested that pro-environmental behavior is heavily dependent on environmental awareness. Recent studies published in 2020 and 2021 also indicate that pro-environmental attitude and pro-environmental behavioral intention are positively related [4,5]. Baird, Hutson, and Plummer [4] assessed levels of future intentions for pro-environmental behavior and connection to nature among 511 outdoor sports participants. They reported that pro-environmental behavioral intention depends upon the level of connection with nature and that the strongest connection to nature leads to the strongest intention to adopt pro-environmental behavior. Zarei, Ehsani, Moghimehfar, and Aroufzad [5], by combining the theory of planned behavior (TPB) [44] and value-belief-norm theory (VBN) [45], found that among 787 mountain hikers, a pro-environmental attitude had a positive effect on pro-environmental behavioral intention.
Third, we found that outdoor recreation-associated flow does not have a significant direct effect on pro-environmental behavioral intention, which is not supported by a previous study [9]. Larson, Whiting, and Green [9] reported a strong positive relationship between outdoor recreation participation and pro-environmental behavior among adults. We believe this difference may have been caused by demographic, sample size, or outdoor recreation type differences. Larson, Whiting, and Green [9] studied 497 U.S. state park visitors aged ≥ 18 years, whereas the present study was conducted on 131 members of outdoor recreation clubs at 20 Korean colleges. Thus, this discrepancy suggests that the effect of outdoor recreation participation on pro-environmental behavioral intention depends on sociodemographic characteristics. To understand fully the relationship between outdoor recreation participation and pro-environmental behavioral intention, a follow-up study is required that considers the social-demographic characteristics of participants, such as race, gender, and age.
Fourth, outdoor recreation-associated flow indirectly affected pro-environmental behavioral intention mediated by pro-environmental attitude. This result is supported by previous studies [5,7,8,18,25,26,27]. Notably, the effect of outdoor recreation-associated flow on pro-environmental behavioral intention was found to be indirect, which suggests it is difficult to change pro-environmental behavioral intention by outdoor recreation participation exclusively. Thus, we suggest further studies be conducted on the combined effects of outdoor recreation participation and pro-environmental attitude on pro-environmental behavioral intention rather than on the effects of single factors.
Meanwhile, previous research consistently indicates that engaging in outdoor recreation has a positive impact on both pro-environmental attitude and pro-environmental behavioral intention, operating through various mechanisms. These mechanisms include strengthening the connection with nature, enhancing environmental knowledge, fostering a sense of responsibility, and shaping social norms. Participation in outdoor recreational activities allows individuals to directly experience natural environments, fostering a sense of connection and appreciation for nature [46,47]. These experiences contribute to the development of pro-environmental attitudes by deepening individuals’ understanding of the value and importance of the natural world [48]. Furthermore, outdoor recreation provides opportunities for environmental education and interpretation, enabling individuals to acquire knowledge about ecosystems, wildlife, and conservation issues [19,49]. Exposure to this environmental knowledge shapes attitudes and raises awareness of environmental challenges [50]. Engaging in outdoor recreation also evokes a sense of responsibility and stewardship towards the environment [51,52]. As individuals develop a deeper connection with natural spaces, they become more inclined to take actions that protect and preserve the environment [53]. Additionally, outdoor recreation often involves group activities and interactions, creating opportunities for social learning and the cultivation of shared environmental values and norms [54,55]. Observing others engaging in pro-environmental behaviors during outdoor activities influences individuals’ attitudes and intentions to adopt similar behaviors [56].
The findings of this study have the following practical implications for environmental education. First, as Knopp and Tyger [8] and Wolsko and Lindberg [18] reported, non-mechanized outdoor activities such as skiing, camping, hiking, and visiting parks provide a more effective means of teaching the importance of environmental awareness. This finding suggests that school curricula should include an outdoor recreation component in physical education or that outdoor recreation be treated as a special weekend activity. Such outdoor recreational activities would raise environmental consciousness and enhance pro-environmental attitudes by demonstrating to students the importance of the environment and the urgent need to address environmental pollution [57,58]. Second, people tend to adopt behaviors when they believe goals are achievable, which creates a feeling of increased self-efficacy [59]. Therefore, outdoor recreation activities and associated environmental protection education programs should be designed for students in specific grades. Third, the experience of interactions with nature at an early age can promote continued participation in outdoor recreation activities later in life [60,61]. Similarly, the formation of values regarding conservation, stewardship, and responsible behavior in childhood is crucial because these also influence standards of environmental behavior in adulthood [62,63,64].

5. Conclusions

This study identifies relationships between outdoor recreation-associated flow, pro-environmental attitude, and pro-environmental behavioral intention. The outdoor recreation-associated flow was found to have a direct positive effect on pro-environmental attitude and an indirect positive effect on pro-environmental behavioral intention mediated by pro-environmental attitude. Furthermore, a pro-environmental attitude directly and positively affects pro-environmental behavioral intention. Participating in outdoor recreational activities that elicit a state of flow has the potential to strengthen individuals’ connection with the natural environment, expand their environmental knowledge, instill a sense of responsibility, and influence social norms. Recognizing and utilizing these interconnections can significantly enhance the efficacy of strategies aimed at fostering sustainable lifestyles and promoting environmental conservation. Additionally, integrating environmental education elements into outdoor recreation programs can serve as an effective approach to cultivating pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors.
However, some limitations of the present study need to be considered. First, this study did not account for gender as a variable, and second, the participants in this study were all Korean. Thus, we suggest a study be undertaken to determine the influence of gender and that studies be performed in several countries to investigate the effects of cultural and ethnic differences.

Funding

This research was supported by Daegu University Research Grant 2020.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Abbas, M.Y.; Singh, R. A survey of environmental awareness, attitude, and participation amongst university students: A case study. Int. J. Sci. Res. 2014, 3, 1755–1760. [Google Scholar]
  2. Prüss-Ustün, A.; Wolf, J.; Corvalán, C.; Bos, R.; Neira, M. Preventing Disease through Healthy Environments: A Global Assessment of the Burden of Disease from Environmental Risks; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  3. Landscape Architecture Korea. Available online: https://www.lak.co.kr/m/news/view.php?id=12800 (accessed on 3 January 2023).
  4. Baird, J.; Hutson, G.; Plummer, R. Examining links between connections to nature and intentions for pro-environmental behavior as outcomes of NOLS. J. Outdoor Rec. Educ. Leadersh. 2020, 12, 367–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zarei, I.; Ehsani, M.; Moghimehfar, F.; Aroufzad, S. Predicting mountain hikers’ pro-environmental behavioral intention: An extension to the theory of planned behavior. J. Park Recreat. Admi. 2021, 39, 70–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Charles, E.R.; Roy, E.R. Environmental knowledge and attitudes. J. Environ. Educ. 1976, 8, 10–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Dunlap, R.E.; Heffernan, R.B. Outdoor recreation and environmental concern: An empirical examination. Rural. Soc. 1975, 40, 18–30. [Google Scholar]
  8. Knopp, T.B.; Tyger, J.D. A study of conflict in recreational land use: Snowmobiling vs. ski-touring. J. Leis. Res. 1973, 5, 6–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Larson, L.R.; Whiting, J.W.; Green, G.T. Exploring the influence of outdoor recreation participation on pro-environmental behaviour in a demographically diverse population. Local Environ. 2011, 16, 67–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Jackson, S.; Csikzentmihalyi, M. Flow in Sports; Human Kinetics: Champaign, IL, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  11. Csikszentmihalyi, M. Beyond Boredom and Anxiety; Jossey Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA, 1975. [Google Scholar]
  12. Jackson, S.A. Athletes in flow: A qualitative investigation of flow states in elite figure skaters. J. Appl. Sport Psychol. 1992, 4, 161–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Jackson, S.A. Factors influencing the occurrence of flow state in elite athletes. J. Appl. Sport Psychol. 1995, 7, 138–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Stein, G.L.; Kimiecik, J.C.; Daniels, J.; Jackson, S.A. Psychological antecedents of flow in recreational sport. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 1995, 21, 125–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Demirel, M.; Gurbuz, B.; Karakucuk, S. Effects of recreational activities participation on environmental attitudes and reliability and validity of new ecological paradigm scale. Spormetre Beden Eğitimi Ve Spor Bilim. Derg. 2009, 7, 47–50. [Google Scholar]
  16. Ustun, U.D.; Gumusgul, O.; Isık, U.; Demırel, D.H.; Demırel, M. A comparison of environmental values: The effect of outdoor recreation. Int. J. Sport Stud. 2013, 3, 1023–1029. [Google Scholar]
  17. Wastern Sdney University. Available online: https://researchdirect.westernsydney.edu.au/islandora/object/uws:24236/datastream/PDF/view (accessed on 3 January 2023).
  18. Wolsko, C.; Lindberg, K. Experiencing connection with nature: The matrix of psychological well-being, mindfulness, and outdoor recreation. Ecopsychology 2013, 5, 80–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Hungerford, H.R.; Volk, T.L. Changing Learner Behaviour through Environmental Education. J. Environ. Educ. 1990, 21, 8–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Sabzehei, M.T.; Gholipoor, S.; Adinevand, M. A survey of the relationship between environmental awareness, attitude and pro-environmental behavior of female students at Qom University. Environ. Educ. Sustain. Dev. 2016, 4, 5–16. [Google Scholar]
  21. Kim, H.J.; Heo, J.; Lee, S.Y.; Jeong, H.S. The relationship between leisure participation and leisure flow: The mediating effect of leisure satisfaction. J. Lei. Res. 2017, 49, 176–191. [Google Scholar]
  22. Fishbein, M.; Ajzen, I. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research; Reading: Addison-Wesley, MA, USA, 1975. [Google Scholar]
  23. Schultz, P.W.; Shriver, C.; Tabanico, J.J.; Khazian, A.M. Implicit connections with nature. J. Environ. Psychol. 2014, 24, 31–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Mayer, F.S.; Frantz, C.M.; Bruehlman-Senecal, E.; Dolliver, K. Why is nature beneficial: The role of connectedness to nature. Environ. Behav. 2009, 41, 607–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Levine, D.S.; Strube, M.J. Environmental attitudes, knowledge, intentions and behaviors among college students. J. Soc. Psychol. 2012, 152, 308–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ahmed, M.; Zehou, S.; Raza, S.A.; Qureshi, M.A.; Yousufi, S.Q. Impact of CSR and environmental triggers on employee green behavior: The mediating effect of employee well-being. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 2225–2239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Babutsidze, Z.; Chai, A. Look at me saving the planet! The imitation of visible green behavior and its impact on the climate value-action gap. Ecol. Econ. 2018, 146, 290–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Casaló, L.V.; Escario, J.J. Heterogeneity in the association between environmental attitudes and pro-environmental behavior: A multilevel regression approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 175, 155–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Bamberg, S.; Möser, G. Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. J. Environ. Psychol. 2007, 27, 14–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Rodríguez-Barreiro, L.M.; Fernández-Manzanal, R.; Serra, L.M.; Carrasquer, J.; Murillo, M.B.; Morales, M.J.; Calvo, J.M.; Valle, J.D. Approach to a causal model between attitudes and environmental behaviour. A graduate case study. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 48, 116–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kaiser, F.G.; Oerke, B.; Bogner, F.X. Behavior-based environmental attitude: Development of an instrument for adolescents. J. Environ. Psychol. 2007, 27, 242–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Warshaw, P.R.; Davis, F.D. Disentangling behavioral intention and behavioral expectation. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol 1985, 21, 213–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ogiemwonyi, O.; Harun, A.B. Theory of planned behaviour approach to understand pro-environmental behaviour among young green consumers in Malaysia. Israel J. Ecol. Evol. 2001, 67, 168–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Castro, R. Naturaleza y función de las actitudes ambientales. Estud. De Psicol. 2001, 22, 11–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Conraud-Koellner, E.; Rivas-Tovar, L.A. Study of green behavior with a focus on Mexican individuals. iBusiness 2009, 1, 124–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Han, G.S.; Park, J.A. Role of the flow in physical education class between school life stress and aggressiveness among adolescents. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Mei, O.J.; Ling, K.C.; Piew, T.H. The antecedents of green purchase intention among Malaysian consumers. Asian Soc. Sci. 2012, 8, 39–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Norton, T.A.; Zacher, H.; Parker, S.L.; Ashkanasy, N.M. Bridging the gap between green behavioral intentions and employee green behavior: The role of green psychological climate. J. Organ. Behav. 2017, 38, 996–1015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Anderson, J.C.; Gerbing, D.W. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psy. Bull. 1988, 103, 411–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis: International Version; Pearson Education: London, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  41. Nunnally, J.C.; Bernstein, I.H. Psychological Theory; MacGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  42. Lichtenstein, D.R.; Netemeyer, R.G.; Burton, S. Distinguishing coupon proneness from value consciousness: An acquisition-transaction utility theory perspective. J. Mark. 1990, 54, 54–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Zhao, X.; Lynch, J.G., Jr.; Chen, Q. Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. J. Cons. Res. 2010, 37, 197–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Stern, P.C.; Dietz, T.; Abel, T.; Guagnano, G.A.; Kalof, L. A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Hum. Ecol. Rev. 1999, 6, 81–97. [Google Scholar]
  46. Ryan, R.M.; Weinstein, N.; Bernstein, J.; Brown, K.W.; Mistretta, L.; Gagné, M. Vitalizing effects of being outdoors and in nature. J. Environ. Psychol. 2010, 30, 159–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Zelenski, J.M.; Nisbet, E.K. Happiness and feeling connected: The distinct role of nature relatedness. Environ. Behav. 2014, 46, 3–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Kals, E.; Schumacher, D.; Montada, L. Emotional affinity toward nature as a motivational basis to protect nature. Environ. Behav. 1999, 31, 178–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Chawla, L. Life paths into effective environmental action. J. Environ. Educ. 1999, 31, 15–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Disinger, J.F. Environmental concern: A conceptual and measurement review. J. Environ. Educ. 1993, 24, 6–13. [Google Scholar]
  51. Chawla, L.; Derr, V. The development of conservation behaviors in childhood and youth. In Handbook of Environmental Psychology and Quality of Life Research; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; pp. 603–620. [Google Scholar]
  52. Kellert, S.R. Building for Life: Designing and Understanding the Human-Nature Connection; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  53. Zhang, J.W.; Howell, R.T.; Iyer, R. Engagement with natural beauty moderates the positive relation between connectedness with nature and psychological well-being. J. Environ. Psychol. 2014, 38, 55–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Cialdini, R.B.; Reno, R.R.; Kallgren, C.A. A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1990, 58, 1015–1026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Schwartz, S.H. Normative influences on altruism. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 1977, 10, 221–279. [Google Scholar]
  56. Gifford, R. The dragons of inaction: Psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. Am. Psychol. 2011, 66, 290–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Armitage, C.J.; Christian, J. From attitudes to behaviour: Basic and applied research on the theory of planned behaviour. Curr. Psychol. 2003, 22, 187–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Valente, T.W.; Paredes, P.; Poppe, P.R. Matching the message to the process: The relative ordering of knowledge, attitudes, and practices in behavior change research. Hum. Comm. Res. 1998, 24, 366–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Huang, H. Media use, environmental beliefs, self-efficacy, and pro-environmental behavior. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 2206–2212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Bixler, R.D.; Floyd, M.F.; Hammitt, W.E. Environmental socialization: Quantitative tests of childhood play hypothesis. Environ. Behav. 2002, 34, 795–818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Kellert, S.R. Experiencing nature: Affective, cognitive, and evaluative development in children. In Children and Nature: Psychological, Sociocultural, and Evolutionary Investigations; Kahn, P.H., Kellert, S.R., Eds.; The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2002; pp. 117–151. [Google Scholar]
  62. Tarrant, M.A.; Cordell, H. Amenity values of public and private forests: Examining the value–attitude relationship. Environ. Manag. 2002, 30, 692–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Louv, R. Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder; Algonquin Books: Chapel Hill, NC, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  64. Dewey, A.M. Shaping the Environmental Self: The Role of Childhood Experiences in Shaping Identity Standards of Environmental Behavior in Adulthood. Sociol. Perspect. 2021, 64, 657–675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 15 10581 g001 550
Figure 1. Research architecture diagram.
Figure 1. Research architecture diagram.
Sustainability 15 10581 g001
Sustainability 15 10581 g002 550
Figure 2. Proposed structural model. Solid lines indicate significant paths at * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001, and dotted lines indicate non-significant paths. Values shown next to the solid lines are standardized regression coefficients.
Figure 2. Proposed structural model. Solid lines indicate significant paths at * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001, and dotted lines indicate non-significant paths. Values shown next to the solid lines are standardized regression coefficients.
Sustainability 15 10581 g002
Table
Table 1. Demographic information.
Table 1. Demographic information.
VariablesCategoriesN%
GenderMale9774.0
Female3426.0
Age20–224030.5
23–256751.2
25–272418.3
Outdoor recreation club participationLess than 1 year6348.1
1 to 2 years1914.5
2 to 3 years1612.2
Over 3 years3325.2
Table
Table 2. Summary of items.
Table 2. Summary of items.
ItemsMλαCRAVEφ2
Outdoor recreation-associated flow (FOE) 0.890.890.630.25–0.62
FOE1: I experience a sense of harmony between my thoughts and actions when I engage in outdoor recreation.4.080.68
FOE2: I experience a sense of mental coherence while participating outdoor recreation.3.440.70
FOE3: During outdoor recreation, I feel a thrilling sense of excitement.3.640.78
FOE4: I have a wonderful time while engaging in outdoor recreation.3.760.83
FOE5: Participating in outdoor recreation engrosses my mind and body.3.650.93
Pro-environmental attitude (PEA) 0.730.740.490.18–0.31
PEA1: Promoting sustainable living is of paramount importance.4.230.60
PEA 2: Increasing environmental awareness holds significant value.4.080.78
PEA 3: I endorse the necessity for further environmental conservation initiatives and regulations.4.050.71
Pro-environmental behavioral intention (PBI) 0.850.860.670.37–0.53
PBI1: I strive to engage in eco-friendly practices in my everyday life. 3.910.73
PBI 2: I aim to incorporate environmentally conscious behaviors into my daily routines. 4.050.85
PBI 3: My intention is to actively participate in pro-environment actions on a daily basis.4.170.86
Note. M = mean, λ = factor loadings, α = Cronbach’s alpha, CR = construct reliability, AVE = average variance extracted, φ2 = squared correlations.
Table
Table 3. Results of structural equation modeling.
Table 3. Results of structural equation modeling.
PathDirectIndirect
bb95% CI
LLUL
RH1: Outdoor recreation-associated flow→
pro-environmental attitude		0.239 *
RH2: Environmental attitude→
pro-environmental behavioral intention		0.719 ***
RH3: Outdoor recreation-associated flow→
pro-environmental behavioral intention		−0.010
RH4: Outdoor recreation-associated flow→
pro-environmental attitude→pro-environmental behavioral intention		 0.172 **0.0760.390
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, b = standardized regression weight.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Han, G.-S. Relationships between Outdoor Recreation-Associated Flow, Pro-Environmental Attitude, and Pro-Environmental Behavioral Intention. Sustainability 2023, 15, 10581. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310581

AMA Style

Han G-S. Relationships between Outdoor Recreation-Associated Flow, Pro-Environmental Attitude, and Pro-Environmental Behavioral Intention. Sustainability. 2023; 15(13):10581. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310581

Chicago/Turabian Style

Han, Gun-Soo. 2023. "Relationships between Outdoor Recreation-Associated Flow, Pro-Environmental Attitude, and Pro-Environmental Behavioral Intention" Sustainability 15, no. 13: 10581. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310581

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop