Draft 1 Nature's Gender Bias

This topic submitted by Megan Fletcher, Gina Stamm, Sarah Hutchrns, imon Palmer ( palmersj@muohio.edu ) on 10/7/04 .

Natural Systems 1 Syllabus---Western Program---Miami University

Megan Fletcher
Sarah Hutchens
Simon Palmer
Gina Stamm

Proposal: Nature's Gender Bias

QUESTIONS
Theories
We believe that gender has a significant influence on environmental knowledge and action among college-age students at Miami University. If gender affects environmental action, then using psychology to appeal to a specific gender can create a greater sense of environmental action on a college campus.
Testable Hypothesis
If gender affects environmental concern and action, then female students will be more likely to report a greater environmental concern and action due to an eco-friendly attitude.
Alternative Hypothesis
If gender has no affect on gender and if environmental knowledge affects action, then a student with a greater concern for the environment will be more likely to exhibit environmentally aware actions.
INTRODUCTION
According to Bisbort (2001), Americans each produce an average of four pounds of garbage per day. Obviously, all of that trash needs to go somewhere, and our environment cannot indefinitely support such activity. In order for us to learn to control our ecological footprint, it is necessary to first take stock of the current environmental awareness existing among us.
Our relationship with the environment is twofold: made up of our concern for ecological issues and our willingness to do something to help it. These two components are not necessarily linked, since "although many people view themselves as 'environmentalists' (Pieters, Bijmolt, van Raaij, & de Kruijk, 1998) they do not translate their attitudes into proenvironmental behavior." (Nordlund, et al., 2001) However, although environmentally friendly behavior is not necessarily a result of concern, (Allen, et al., 1999) found that individuals who expressed more concern for the environment were more likely to take action than those who did not.
Previous research into the topic of concern has discovered that different types of attitudes towards our relationship with the earth have a profound effect on the level of concern expressed. Which attitude we espouse often relates to our gender and socialization, although likeliness to act is affected more by other factors. Our research is designed to test the following findings among the students of Miami, operating under the premise that they will hold true.
Our Attitude Toward the Environment
Human attitudes toward the environment can be divided into two basic categories: the anthropocentric and the physiocentric or ecocentric (Nevers, et al., 1997). Anthropocentrism values nature as humans can use it. Ecocentrism believes in the objective value of nature alone. There are several more specific stratifications on this continuum, as explained by (Kahn, 1999), which I have taken the liberty of sorting in a general order from one extreme to the other.
Anthropocentric==> negativistic- dislike for nature==>dominionistic- need to control nature==> utilitarian- exploitation of nature for human benefit==>symbolic- use of nature for self-expression==>naturalistic- pleasure of outdoor activities==> humanistic- possibility of relationships with animals==>aesthetic- pleasure of beauty of nature==>ecologistic-scientific- study of nature==>Ecocentric
Overarching these views is the moralistic view, which assigns right and wrong to our conduct towards the environment to varying degrees, even to the extreme of the Gaia movement, which sees the earth itself as an organism (Nevers, et al., 1997). Also, while some of these may seem to have more emotional bases than logical, Pooley's (2000) study promotes the idea that feelings have a significant affect on our attitude toward the environment. According to Thompson, et al. (1994), developing a somewhat physiocentric attitude toward the world is an important factor in acquiring concern for one's environment.
Gender and Environmental Concern
If one adopts the view that concern for the welfare of the environment is separate from concern for one's own welfare, it is necessary to also have acquired a certain degree of altruism as well as the feeling of being "embedded in [one's] community and in the outside world" (Blocker, et al., 1997). According to Zelezny, et al. (2000), as well as Blocker (1997), females indisputably exhibit higher care for the environment on the New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) scale (Olli et al., 2001) on this basis as a result of their socialization. [The NEP "implies a belief that the interests of nature should have priority over human interests.] This tendency of females towards a more ecocentric view is borne out in their choice of outdoor recreational activities. (Burger, et al., 1998; Teisl, et al., 2003) demonstrated women's preference for activities that were "appreciative" of the natural environment [such as bird watching], as opposed to "consumptive" or "abusive" [such as snowmobiling]. Women are brought up to internalize the role of caregiver, which protective attitude extends to the physical environment (Blocker, et al., 1997).
Other factors influencing women's higher environmental concern, reported by (Blocker, et al., 1997) are that women are socialized to give less weight than men to economic growth, which might otherwise take priority over environmental issues; also that men trust technological advances more than women, and such confidence has a negative relationship to environmental concern. Also, our society encourages males to be independent, and to participate in risky behavior (Eisler, et al., 2003) while women are encouraged to become a part of a whole [the most environmentally active women are generally those exhibiting extraverted, socially well-adjusted traits (Borden, et al., 1978)] and to be more cautious, as they have a better view of possible future outcomes than males. Therefore, women exhibit more foresight in issues of environmental concern.
Environmental Action
As I mentioned earlier, there is no definitive correlation between environmental concern and action. While many studies have been done on the relationship between gender and environmental action, they have had conflicting results, though two of the most recent (Zelezny, et al., 2000; Olli et al., 2001) report that women are also more likely to engage in environmentally friendly behavior. Schewe (2001), however, claims that women are less likely to agree to higher taxes or prices to support some environmental issue, perhaps because of a learned dislike of economic matters.
Factors more likely to directly affect such acts relate to their convenience, as many people who express sympathy for the environment do not extend that feeling to acts that will interfere with what they view as their quality of life (Nordlund, et al., 2002). Schultz, et al. (1995) refers to the three problems of nuisance, location, and indifference that such specific behaviors as recycling pose to those who have no extra incentive. One such motivation would be the existence of a specific health hazard in the environment (Blake, et al., 2001), which tends to influence the rate of environmentally responsible action. Allen, et al. (1999) says that one can only have a sufficient degree of altruism to help the environment when one's basic needs of "self-esteem, belonging, personal control, self-efficacy, and optimism" are met.
The present study plans to test this threefold hypothesis of the various relationships between gender and the environment here on Miami University's campus.
Bibliography

Allen, J.B. & Ferrand, J.L. (1999). Environmental Locus of Control, Sympathy, and Proenvironmental Behavior. Environment and Behavior, 31, 338-353.

Bisbort, A. (2001). Garbage In, Garbage Out: America's Lobe Affair with Littering. Hartford Advocate. Retrieved September 14, 2004, from http://old.hartfordadvocate.com/articles/litter.html

Blake, D.E. (2001). Contextual Effects on Environmental Attitudes and Behavior. Environment and Behavior, 33, 70-725.

Blocker, T.J. & Eckburg, D.L. (1997). Gender and Environmentalism: Results from the 1993 General Social Survey. Social Science quarterly, 78, 841-859.

Borden, R.J. & Francis, J.L. (1978). Who Cares About Ecology? Personality and Sex Differences in Environmental Concern. Journal of Personality, 46, 190-204.

Burger, J.; Sanchez, J.; Gibbons, J.W. & Gochfeld, M. (1998). Gender Differeces in Recreational Use, Environmental Attitudes, and Perceptions of Future Land Use at the Savannah River Site. Environment and Behavior, 30, 472-486.

Eisler, A.D. & H. & Yoshida, M. (2003). Perception of Human Ecology: Cross-Cultural and Gender Comparisons. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 89-101

Kahn, P.H. (1999). The Human Relationship with Nature. Cambridge, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 17-18.

Nevers, P.; Gebhard, U. (1997) Patterns of Reasoning Exhibited by Children and Adolescents in Response to Moral Dilemmas Involving Plants, Animals, and Ecosystems. Journal of Moral Education, 26, 169-187

Nordlund, A.M. & Garvill, J. (2002). Value Structures Behind Proenvironmental Behavior. Environment and Behavior, 34, 740-756.

Olli, E; Grendstad, G. & Welleback, D. (2001). Correlates of Environmental Behaviors: Bringing Back Social Context. Environment and Behavior, 33, 181-208.

Pieters, R.; Bijmott, T.; van Raaij, F.; de Kruijk, M. (1998). Consumers' attributions of Proenvironmental Behavior, Motivation, and Ability to Self and Others. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 17, 215-225.

Pooley, J.A. & O'Connor, M. (2000). Environmental Education and Attutudes: Emotions and Beliefs Are What Is Needed. Environment and Behavior, 32, 711- 723.

Schewe, R. (2001). Learning to Spend: Influences on Attitudes Toward Environmental Spending. Retrieved September 14, 2004, from http://www.resnet.trinity.edu/rschewe/Paper.htm

Schultz, P.W.; Oskamp, S.; & Manieri, T. (1995) Who Recycles and When? A Review of Personal and Situational Factors. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15, 105-121.

Teisl, M. & O'Brien, K. (2003). Who Cares and Who Acts? Outdoor Recreationists Exhibit Different Levels of Environmental Concern and Behavior. Environment and Behavior, 35, 506-522.

Thompson, S.C.G. & Barton, M.A. (1994). Ecocentric and Anthropocentric Attitudes Toward the Environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 14, 149-157.

Zelezny, L.C.; Chua, P. & Aldrich, C. (2000). Elaborating on Gender Differences in Environmentalism. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 443-458.

METHODS

Experimental Design
Our lab will have two primary experiments. In the first experiment we will hand out 120 surveys throughout campus. These surveys will be divided up into two sections, the first testing a person concern for the environment and the second inquiring the person's own actions and involvement toward littering. The results of these surveys will be divided between female and male responses in our final effort to determine if our hypothesis is correct. Each member of our group will be handing out thirty surveys, fifteen to males and fifteen to females. We need to make sure that we have the same number of males and females in order to see the gender effects in the outcome. In order to get a random sampling of students throughout campus each person will survey a different section of the student population. This includes member from the speech team, architecture students, inner discipline study majors, and freshman who live in a dorm located on main campus.
After collecting back the surveys we will calculate the mean score for each individual question for both males and females. We will also calculate the mean for males and females on the two parts of the survey. We will use both of these means when it comes to perform the statistical tests.
The second, more empirical experiment will involve the recording of individual interest in the preservation of nature through a mock anti-litter club. On two separate dates, at the same time, we will set up a table in Shriver Hall, near the cafeteria. On this table we will place literature about what the individual can do to help Ohio's current litter problem. Our time spent each day in the Shriver center will be divided by two themes to our stand. The first will, in idea, be aimed at targeting males through our hypothesis that they have a more doministic connection to nature. We will display a photo of rock climbers scaling a large boulder. For the people who show interest in our "environmental group" we will carefully tally their numbers according to gender. The second part of our time we will display a different picture of a "cute" animal in hopes to attract a more female based following on the idea that females have a more humanistic connection to nature. Each time we are there we will set the booth of for two hours. On the first day we will start out by having the "cute" poster up. After an hour we will change and have the "sport" poster up. The second day we are there we will start with the "sport" poster and then switch to the "cute" poster. While we are there we will ask the students who stop by a one-question survey. The question will aim to create a gender bias pertaining to the variation between the male and female's connection to nature. We will ask the students: does the environment have its own interstice values or is it only the value that we make use of it? We will record their answer to the question. In addition we will make note if they were a male or a female and which poster background was showing. We will then make conclusions and find our results to determine if the prove or disprove our hypothesis.
Sampling
In our first experiment, we will give out 120 surveys, 60 to females and 60 to males. Of the surveys we give out, we will tally the results of 100 that we receive back. We will take a random 50 of the 100 given out to females and a random 50 of the 100 given out to males and tally the results.
Our second experiment will be set up in Shriver Center, the main student center on Miami's campus. This allows for a maximum diversity of our sample population. We will also pick the highest traffic times as well. Because participation is subject based, we will randomly throughout data so that an equal amount of data is gathered for each individual session during each setup of our booth.
Materials
The following materials will be needed:
120 surveys to be handed out around campus with sixteen questions each
Photographs of men and women taking place in outdoor activities
Photographs of "cute" animals in the environment
Table for the booth
Data sheets to collect answers to the question while at the booth
Poster board
Pen and pencil
Glue stick
Scissors
Graphing calculator
Computer with statistical program

Timeline

October 19 final lab packets due
October 26 start knowledge quiz
November 2-5 booth at Shriver Center
November 10 work time with group
November 16 research done
December 7 project due

RESULTS

After collecting the data from the tests we will performs statistical tests on the data. For the two different parts of our tests we will perform one test on all the date. We will find the mean for all the scores and perform a t-test considering that we have two separate populations, one of men and one of women. If we feel that one question stands out more then the others we can perform a separate t-test on just that question.
The second part of our project involves the poster. We will take the answer to the questions we ask as people walk up to our booth and from this information we will be able to perform a phi-squared test. This chi-squared test will be able to tell us whether or not there is an association with the data. From this we will know whether or not the different types of poster background attracted males or females towards our booth. We will also perform another chi-squared test. This time we will use the number of times a male or female came up the booth and which poster background we had.

CONCLUSIONS

After looking at both sets of results through a chi-squared test, we will be able to determine if gender has a significant affect on environmental concern and action. The tests given to a random number of students will determine if students of a particular gender show a greater concern for the environment after answering hypothetical questions. The booth will be a determinant of action, after recording the number of students per gender who approach based on a specific sign on the booth. These parts of our experiment will give testable data to determine if gender plays any role in gender versus the environment. Using this information, it will be easier to understand what factors affect different genders and move them to action. Understanding this, tactics can be designed for each particular gender in order to involve the greatest number of people in environmental awareness and protection.
Through this experiment, we hope to answer several questions regarding out theories. We hope to conclude the significance of gender on both environmental concern and action. We also hope to establish the importance of certain images to draw people to environmental issues. Most of all, we hope to determine the best way to interest young people in the environment and the most efficient ways to keep people involved in saving the environment for future generations to enjoy.
RESEARCH PRESENTATION CONCEPT
We plan on keeping the majority of our concept a secret until the presentation has progressed as to avoid a gender bias. We will first test our concepts on the entire class by distributing the environmental concern test. Then, we will display both booth advertisements and record the psychological response and action for each gender. After testing both of these ideas on the class, we will explain the project theories and our results. We will stress both aspects of the project, concern and action. Finally, we will explain our reasoning in choosing this project idea, because understanding why people relate and react to nature can help to motivate people to work to protect the environment.

Poster background Gender Answer

Booth Data Sheet

Next Article
Previous Article
Return to the Topic Menu