232
A recent US-based study by Joye and Bolderdijk (2015) sought to experimentally test these effects. Using a between-subject design, participants viewed one of
three slideshows online: extraordinary nature (e.g. dramatic mountains, landscapes
dominated by phenomena such as sunsets, thunderstorms), mundane nature (e.g.
lawns, foliage) or neutral (e.g. everyday objects such as a chair). Those who viewed
the extraordinary nature images experienced greater levels of awe, fear and smallness compared to the other two conditions. Participants in both nature conditions
felt more spiritual, caring and connected to others; those who viewed extraordinary
nature scenes felt more ‘other’ oriented (as measured by social values orientation).
10.3.4.4 Parallel Measurement of Biodiversity and Spiritual Well-Being
The previous Sects. (10.3.4.1, 10.3.4.2 and 10.3.4.3) detail studies that do not
explicitly incorporate measures of biodiversity. Two interdisciplinary mixed methods field-based studies of urban public parks in the UK, utilising ecological surveys
alongside quantitative and qualitative social science methods, provide further
insight into how biodiversity might relate to spiritual well-being (Fuller et al. 2007;
Dallimer et al. 2012). Ecological surveys assessed species richness of plants, birds
and butterflies (direct measures of biodiversity) along with diversity of habitats and
tree cover (proxy measures of biodiversity). Self-report questionnaires conducted
with users of the same study sites during the period of ecological sampling explored
motivations for park use and well-being benefits. Well-being measures included
place attachment, place identity and reflection, the former two are related to place
processes (Altman and Low 1992; Twigger-Ross and Uzzell 1996) and the latter,
interpreted as the ability to think about things (e.g. personal matters) and gain perspective (e.g. on life), a dimension of attention restoration theory (Kaplan, S. 1995;
see Marselle 2018). Fuller et al. (2007) reported positive associations between tree
species richness, habitat diversity and both reflection and place identity; bird species richness was positively associated with attachment. Dallimer et al. (2012)
found that all aspects of well-being had positive associations with bird species richness and tree cover but a negative association with plant species richness.
These findings are suggestive that greater diversity could contribute to place processes and restoration. While these are not conceptually considered spiritual outcomes (see Table 10.1), they could be considered a mechanism through which
spiritual well-being might be achieved. For example, given the centrality of meaning and purpose in definitions of spiritual well-being, having opportunities to
“reflect on one’s life, on one’s priorities and possibilities, on one’s actions and one’s
goals” can be considered a deeply restorative experience (Kaplan, R. and Kaplan
1989, p. 197). Indeed, as J.W. Fisher, Francis and Johnson (2000) argue, the “personal domain – wherein one intra-relates with oneself with regards to meaning, purpose and values in life” (p. 135) is an important component of spiritual well-being.
Irvine et al.’s (2013) qualitative analysis of open-ended responses from Fuller
et al.’s (2007) park users, as to why they were using the park and how they felt after
being there, identified numerous statements reflective of features of spiritual wellK. N. Irvine et al.
A recent US-based study by Joye and Bolderdijk (2015) sought to experimentally test these effects. Using a between-subject design, participants viewed one of
three slideshows online: extraordinary nature (e.g. dramatic mountains, landscapes
dominated by phenomena such as sunsets, thunderstorms), mundane nature (e.g.
lawns, foliage) or neutral (e.g. everyday objects such as a chair). Those who viewed
the extraordinary nature images experienced greater levels of awe, fear and smallness compared to the other two conditions. Participants in both nature conditions
felt more spiritual, caring and connected to others; those who viewed extraordinary
nature scenes felt more ‘other’ oriented (as measured by social values orientation).
10.3.4.4 Parallel Measurement of Biodiversity and Spiritual Well-Being
The previous Sects. (10.3.4.1, 10.3.4.2 and 10.3.4.3) detail studies that do not
explicitly incorporate measures of biodiversity. Two interdisciplinary mixed methods field-based studies of urban public parks in the UK, utilising ecological surveys
alongside quantitative and qualitative social science methods, provide further
insight into how biodiversity might relate to spiritual well-being (Fuller et al. 2007;
Dallimer et al. 2012). Ecological surveys assessed species richness of plants, birds
and butterflies (direct measures of biodiversity) along with diversity of habitats and
tree cover (proxy measures of biodiversity). Self-report questionnaires conducted
with users of the same study sites during the period of ecological sampling explored
motivations for park use and well-being benefits. Well-being measures included
place attachment, place identity and reflection, the former two are related to place
processes (Altman and Low 1992; Twigger-Ross and Uzzell 1996) and the latter,
interpreted as the ability to think about things (e.g. personal matters) and gain perspective (e.g. on life), a dimension of attention restoration theory (Kaplan, S. 1995;
see Marselle 2018). Fuller et al. (2007) reported positive associations between tree
species richness, habitat diversity and both reflection and place identity; bird species richness was positively associated with attachment. Dallimer et al. (2012)
found that all aspects of well-being had positive associations with bird species richness and tree cover but a negative association with plant species richness.
These findings are suggestive that greater diversity could contribute to place processes and restoration. While these are not conceptually considered spiritual outcomes (see Table 10.1), they could be considered a mechanism through which
spiritual well-being might be achieved. For example, given the centrality of meaning and purpose in definitions of spiritual well-being, having opportunities to
“reflect on one’s life, on one’s priorities and possibilities, on one’s actions and one’s
goals” can be considered a deeply restorative experience (Kaplan, R. and Kaplan
1989, p. 197). Indeed, as J.W. Fisher, Francis and Johnson (2000) argue, the “personal domain – wherein one intra-relates with oneself with regards to meaning, purpose and values in life” (p. 135) is an important component of spiritual well-being.
Irvine et al.’s (2013) qualitative analysis of open-ended responses from Fuller
et al.’s (2007) park users, as to why they were using the park and how they felt after
being there, identified numerous statements reflective of features of spiritual wellK. N. Irvine et al.