Nature Relatedness Scale (NR-21)

1. Abstract

The Nature Relatedness Scale (NR-21) is a prominent psychometric instrument developed by Elizabeth K. Nisbet, John M. Zelenski, and Steven A. Murphy (2009) designed to assess individual differences in cognitive, affective, and experiential connectivity with the natural environment. Built upon foundational insights from ecopsychology and evolutionary paradigms such as the biophilia hypothesis, the instrument operationalizes human-nature connectedness as an enduring, multidimensional trait. The scale consists of 21 self-report items evaluated on an authentic 5-point Likert response scale ranging from 1 (Disagree strongly) to 5 (Agree strongly).

Psychometrically, the NR-21 is governed by a robust three-factor structure comprising: (1) NR-Self, reflecting the cognitive internalization of nature into personal identity; (2) NR-Perspective, measuring broader ecological worldviews, political-environmental consciousness, and awareness of planetary interdependencies; and (3) NR-Experience, tapping an individual’s physical comfort, affinity, and desire to actively engage with natural, outdoor environments. Extensive empirical evaluations across diverse non-clinical, student, and community cohorts demonstrate superior internal consistency, with overall scale Cronbach’s alpha coefficients routinely falling between α = .87 and α = .90, while subscale reliabilities range from α = .66 to α = .88. Furthermore, the instrument exhibits substantial test-retest stability across multiple months (temporal correlation r = .85), establishing its utility as a stable trait metric rather than a transient state. Structural equation modeling, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) confirm convergent, discriminant, and predictive validities across environmental psychology, environmental education, conservation behavior, and subjective well-being domains. Ultimately, the NR-21 serves as a definitive methodological standard for tracking the human relationship with the biosphere, predicting pro-environmental lifestyles, and investigating the mental health benefits of natural ecosystems.

2. Keywords

Nature Relatedness Scale, NR-21, human-nature connection, biophilia hypothesis, environmental identity, ecopsychology, subjective well-being, conservation behavior, psychometrics, environmental attitudes

3. Authors

The Nature Relatedness Scale was conceptualized, developed, and empirically validated by a team of psychological scientists based at Carleton University in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada:

• Elizabeth K. Nisbet, Ph.D. — Associate Professor of Psychology at Trent University (formerly at Carleton University). Dr. Nisbet specializes in environmental psychology, ecopsychology, sustainable behavior, and the nexus between ecological connectivity and human health.
• John M. Zelenski, Ph.D. — Full Professor of Psychology at Carleton University. Dr. Zelenski directs the Carleton University Happy Lab, concentrating on positive psychology, personality processes, subjective well-being, and nature-induced positive emotions.
• Steven A. Murphy, Ph.D. — Professor and senior academic administrator (currently President and Vice-Chancellor of Ontario Tech University, formerly associated with the Sprott School of Business at Carleton University). His methodological expertise encompasses organizational behavior, psychometric modeling, and statistical measurement.

Correspondence concerning the original validation of the instrument can be addressed to the Department of Psychology, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1S 5B6, or via institutional academic correspondence channels.

4. Purpose

The primary purpose of the Nature Relatedness Scale (NR-21) is to measure the extent to which an individual emotionally identifies with, cognitively understands, and behaviorally immerses themselves in the natural living world. In modern industrial societies, anthropogenic urbanization and technological immersion have fostered an unprecedented disconnect between humans and the biosphere—a psychological phenomenon frequently termed environmental amnesia or nature deficit. While earlier environmental assessment instruments focused predominantly on generalized environmental concern, sociopolitical ideological attitudes, or knowledge of resource scarcity (such as the New Ecological Paradigm), Nisbet and colleagues recognized an acute conceptual gap: existing tools failed to capture personal, felt relationships, somatic comfort in wild settings, and deep self-identification with nonhuman life.

The theoretical rationale rests upon the premise that true sustainability and environmental stewardship are rooted not merely in cognitive awareness of ecological peril, but in an intrinsic sense of selfhood that encompasses the natural environment. In research settings, the NR-21 is implemented to model pathways linking human environmental orientation to pro-environmental behaviors, including household resource conservation, carbon footprint reduction, green consumer choices, ecotourism engagement, and civic activism. Furthermore, in clinical and positive psychological contexts, the NR-21 provides a standardized framework for investigating the therapeutic affordances of nature exposure. Clinicians and behavioral health researchers utilize the scale to evaluate green-prescriptions, outdoor wilderness therapies, and the buffering effects of nature relatedness against anxiety, depressive symptoms, and chronic psychological distress.

5. Psychological Construct

The Nature Relatedness construct operationalizes an individual’s personal connection to nature across three distinct yet interdependent dimensions. Rather than treating nature connectedness as a monolithic, one-dimensional sentiment, the scale delineates cognitive, philosophical, and physical-experiential facets:

NR-Self (Self-Identification with Nature)

The NR-Self subscale reflects an internal, personal identification with nature. It conceptualizes the degree to which an individual integrates the biosphere into their core self-concept and psychological schema. Individuals scoring high on this dimension view themselves as an indivisible extension of the living ecosystem rather than as independent observers or masters of the nonhuman world. This dimension encapsulates spiritual affinities, empathy toward nonhuman animals, and an overarching awareness that human survival is inextricably intertwined with ecological health. Typical manifest indicators evaluate whether an individual views their relationship with nature as essential to who they are, their personal empathy for animal suffering, and their mindfulness of wildlife within their immediate surroundings.

NR-Perspective (Ecological Worldview and Human Stewardship)

The NR-Perspective subscale assesses an individual’s broad ecological worldview, ethical framing of nature, and critical evaluation of human dominance over ecosystems. This facet addresses institutional, political, and societal paradigms, capturing an individual’s rejection of anthropocentric exploitation and resource extraction. High scores reflect an ethical stance advocating for the intrinsic rights of nonhuman flora and fauna, alongside a belief in individual agency regarding global ecological crises. Conversely, lower scores on this subscale reflect fatalism (e.g., believing that individual action cannot mitigate planetary degradation) or strong anthropocentrism (e.g., asserting that humans have an unconstrained prerogative to exploit natural resources).

NR-Experience (Physical Affinity and Comfort in Natural Settings)

The NR-Experience subscale measures an individual’s visceral comfort, bodily desire, and behavioral disposition toward physical nature. This experiential component delineates whether a person actively seeks out immersive outdoor encounters, such as wilderness trekking, remote camping, or gardening, and whether they maintain psychological comfort when encountering untamed environments. Individuals with elevated NR-Experience scores exhibit low levels of biophobia; they find sensory pleasure in soil, vegetation, and unpredictable weather, displaying an intrinsic longing for remote wild habitats over manicured human landscapes.

6. Theoretical Framework

The theoretical architecture of the Nature Relatedness Scale synthesizes principles from ecopsychology, evolutionary psychology, ecological philosophy, and self-expansion theory. Historically, deep ecologists such as Arne Næss posited the concept of the ecological self, asserting that maturity in human identity requires expanding the boundaries of selfhood beyond personal ego and social roles to embrace the entire biotic community. In ecological psychology, Leopold’s land ethic similarly argued that human ethics must expand from interpersonal codes to encompass soils, waters, plants, and animals.

From an evolutionary perspective, the NR-21 is deeply informed by Edward O. Wilson’s biophilia hypothesis (1984), which contends that humans possess an innate, genetically evolved affinity for the natural world and living organisms. Because hominin evolution occurred entirely within wild, non-built landscapes, the human sensory, cognitive, and affective systems are adapted to natural patterns and biomorphic cues. The disruption of this evolutionary match through rapid urbanization can result in alienation, anxiety, and ecological indifference. Nisbet, Zelenski, and Murphy (2009) translated these broad socio-philosophical hypotheses into measurable psychological traits, integrating Russell and Snodgrass’s environmental affective response models and Arthur Aron’s Inclusion of Other in the Self (IOS) framework. By conceptualizing nature as an entity that can be psychologically included within the self, the NR-21 operationalizes how personal identity, affective valuation, and behavioral preference converge into an integrated ecological disposition.

7. Validity

The psychometric validity of the Nature Relatedness Scale has been verified through multiple independent investigations assessing construct, convergent, discriminant, and criterion-related validities:

• Convergent Validity: The NR-21 demonstrates robust positive correlations with antecedent environmental scales. It correlates strongly with the New Ecological Paradigm (NEP; r = .50 to .65, p < .001), the Connectedness to Nature Scale (CNS; r = .70 to .80), and Mayer and Frantz’s ecological engagement matrices. Furthermore, NR-Self correlates substantially with environmental identity measures (r > .75), demonstrating that the scale accurately taps ecological self-construal.
• Discriminant Validity: The scale successfully differentiates general subjective connection to the world from domain-specific environmental affinity. While modestly correlated with Openness to Experience (r ≈ .30 to .38) and Agreeableness (r ≈ .20 to .25) within the Big Five personality traits, the NR-21 does not collapse into any single general personality dimension. Importantly, it displays negligible correlations with social desirability scales (r < .15), demonstrating that responses are not distorted by impression management.
• Criterion-Related and Predictive Validity: The NR-21 displays remarkable predictive power regarding actual and self-reported pro-environmental practices. In empirical validation trials, participants scoring high on the NR-21 were significantly more likely to belong to conservation organizations, buy organic or fair-trade products, demonstrate reduced personal energy consumption, participate in ecological activism, and seek nature-based recreational travel. In corporate and consumer research, nature relatedness reliably predicts willingness to pay price premiums for sustainable goods and public funding support for conservation initiatives.
• Well-being Criterion Validity: Demonstrating powerful links to mental health, NR scores positively predict psychological flourishing, vitality, autonomy, personal growth, positive affect, and life satisfaction, while correlating inversely with psychological distress and depression.

8. Reliability

The Nature Relatedness Scale exhibits strong internal consistency across varied demographic samples:

• Internal Consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha): In the initial instrument validation studies by Nisbet et al. (2009), the composite 21-item scale yielded an overall internal consistency of α = .87 to α = .89 across university undergraduate and broader community samples. Subscale coefficients confirmed distinct internal cohesion: NR-Self yielded α = .84 to .88; NR-Perspective yielded α = .66 to .78; and NR-Experience yielded α = .78 to .80. Subsequent independent cross-cultural replications in the United Kingdom, Australia, and across Europe have mirrored these metrics, routinely reporting composite alphas between .85 and .91.
• Test-Retest Stability: Over longitudinal assessment periods spanning six to eight weeks, the test-retest reliability of the overall NR-21 scale was documented at r = .85 (p < .001). Subscale stability over the same duration remained similarly high: NR-Self (r = .84), NR-Perspective (r = .74), and NR-Experience (r = .81). These longitudinal values demonstrate that the instrument measures an enduring personality trait rather than fleeting situational mood states.

9. Factor Analysis

The factorial validity of the NR-21 was originally investigated using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using principal axis factoring with oblique (Promax) rotation to accommodate the expected theoretical intercorrelations among underlying nature-related dimensions:

• Exploratory Factor Analysis: Initial EFA supported the extraction of three distinct factors accounting for substantial cumulative variance. Factor 1 (NR-Self) accounted for the greatest portion of common variance, with salient item loadings ranging from .45 to .83. Factor 2 (NR-Perspective) and Factor 3 (NR-Experience) yielded clearly defined independent clusters with minimal cross-loadings. Inter-factor correlations ranged between r = .35 and r = .55, confirming that while these facets tap distinct sub-constructs, they share an underlying latent core of general nature relatedness.
• Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA): Subsequent CFA testing compared alternative measurement models: a single-factor unidimensional model, a three-factor orthogonal model, and a three-factor correlated model. The three-factor correlated model yielded superior fit to the observed data across standard fit indices: χ²/df ratio < 2.5, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) ≥ .92, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) ≥ .91, and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) ≈ .05 to .06 (90% CI [.048, .068]), confirming the structural validity of the tripartite taxonomy.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

• Instrument Type: Self-administered psychometric rating scale / questionnaire
• Format: Paper-and-pencil or online digital survey
• Number of Items: 21 items
• Target Population: Adolescents and adults (typically aged 16 and older) across general, clinical, and environmental research settings
• Completion Time: Approximately 5 to 7 minutes
• Response Scale: 5-point Likert scale (1 = Disagree strongly, 2 = Disagree a little, 3 = Neither agree nor disagree, 4 = Agree a little, 5 = Agree strongly)
• Reverse Scored Items: Items 2, 3, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 18
• Subscale Item Distribution:
  • NR-Self: Items 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 16, 17, 21 (8 items)
  • NR-Perspective: Items 2, 3, 10, 11, 13, 14, 18 (7 items)
  • NR-Experience: Items 1, 4, 6, 15, 19, 20 (6 items)
• Scoring Procedure: Items designated for reverse scoring must first be inverted using the transformation formula: Score_Inverted = 6 - Score_Original. Once reverse scoring is complete, subscale scores are computed by calculating the arithmetic mean of their constituent items. The overall Nature Relatedness composite score is calculated as the mean of all 21 items, resulting in a continuous score from 1.00 to 5.00, where higher scores reflect deeper nature relatedness.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Nature Relatedness Scale was formally published in 2009 by Elizabeth K. Nisbet, John M. Zelenski, and Steven A. Murphy in the academic journal Environment and Behavior (Sage Publications). The scale is made freely accessible for academic, empirical, non-commercial research and educational applications without the requirement of paying royalty fees, provided proper bibliographic citation is granted to the original authors. Researchers planning commercial deployments, corporate psychometric audits, or profit-generating clinical integrations must contact the lead authors or the copyright holding journal publisher for formal licensing permissions.

12. References

• Capaldi, C. A., Dopko, R. L., & Zelenski, J. M. (2014). The relationship between nature connectedness and happiness: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, Article 976. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00976
• Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 425–442. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00176
• Mayer, F. S., & Frantz, C. M. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(4), 503–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.10.001
• Nisbet, E. K., & Zelenski, J. M. (2013). The NR-6: A new brief measure of nature relatedness. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, Article 813. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00813
• Nisbet, E. K., Zelenski, J. M., & Murphy, S. A. (2009). The nature relatedness scale: Linking individuals’ connection with nature to environmental concern and behavior. Environment and Behavior, 41(5), 715–740. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916508318748
• Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia: The human bond with other species. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674045231
• Zelenski, J. M., & Nisbet, E. K. (2014). Happiness and feeling connected: The distinct role of nature relatedness. Environment and Behavior, 46(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916512451901

13. Items of the Scale