The relationship of environmental attitudes and values among students in different cultures (using the example of Japan and Russia)

Aim. To analyze the relationship between environmental attitudes and values among students in different cultures (using the example of Japan and Russia).
Methodology. A cross-cultural study was conducted at two universities: Ehime University (Japan) (n=147) and Chelyabinsk State University (Russia) (n=223). The main tool was a set of standardized questionnaires.
Results. The results of the study showed that there were no differences in most of values among Japanese and Russian students. At the same time, the factorization of the data revealed differences in the structure of the value systems of students of different cultures both in terms of the number of factors and their severity. It has been established that the younger generation in both countries feels the need to communicate with nature and recognizes itself as a part of it. The correlation analysis revealed the interrelation of ecological attitudes and values in both cultural groups. In the Russian sample, there is a uniform involvement of both tangible and intangible values in these relationships, while in the Japanese sample, intangible values dominate.
Research implications. The results of the study expand the understanding of the cultural determinants of environmental attitudes and behavior. They allow us to outline the directions for solving environmental problems from the perspective of a cultural and axiological approach.

1. Aleksandrova E. S. [Relationship of proecological behavior and personal values of the individual: gender aspect]. In: Teoreticheskaya i eksperimental'naya psihologiya [Theoretical and experimental psychology], 2021, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 13–19.

2. Akhmameteva A. D., Kamenev N. O., Gerasimova L. A. [Greening of public consciousness on the example of Russia and Japan]. In: Aktual'nye problemy aviacii i kosmonavtiki [Actual problems of aviation and cosmonautics], 2013, no. 9, pp. 261–262.

3. Gordeeva S. S. [Essence and structure of social attitudes in sociology and social psychology]. In: Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Psihologiya. Sociologiya [Perm University Herald. Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology], 2016, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 135–140. DOI: 10.17072/2078-7898/2016-3-135-140.

4. Efimova I. A. [Age-sex features of ecological attitudes of teenagers]. In: Izvestiya Rossijskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta im. A. I. Gercena [Izvestia: Herzen University Journal of Humanities & Sciences], 2015, no. 178, pp. 63–68.

5. Mdivani M. O., Aleksandrova E. S., Sorokina S. S. [The interrelation of environmental consciousness and environmental behavior: peculiarities of evaluating the mutual influence of nature and man]. In: Akmeologiya [Acmeology], 2018, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 9–14.

6. Mdivani M. O., Khisambeev Sh. R. [Environmental self-consciousness as a basis of procecological behavior]. In: Azimut nauchnyh issledovanij: pedagogika i psihologiya [Azimuth of scientific research: pedagogy and psychology], 2017, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 346–348.

7. Panyukova Yu. G. [Intergenerational differences in proecological values: the content of modern foreign psychological research]. In: Mezhpokolencheskie otnosheniya: sovremennyj diskurs i strategicheskie vybory v psihologo-pedagogicheskoj nauke i praktike [Intergenerational relations: modern discourse and strategic choices in psychological and pedagogical science and practice], 2020, no. 1, pp. 92–94.

8. Prokhoda V. A. [Environmental responsibility of the population: experience of sociological measurement]. In: Chelovek [Chelovek], 2022, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 146–164. DOI: 10.31857/s023620070026110-8.

9. Khmelenok E. A. [The problem of definition of “environmental values”]. In: Filosofskie nauki [Philosophical sciences], 2010, no. 2, pp. 63–68.

10. Chistopolskaya K. A., Enikolopov S. N., Nikolaev E. L., Semikin G.I. [Nature connectedness and its contribution to mental health]. In: Belgorodskiy V. S., Kasheev O. V., Antonenko I. V., Karickiiy I. N., ed. Perspektivy psihologicheskoj nauki i praktiki: sbornik statej Mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii. RGU im. A. N. Kosygina / 16 iyunya 2017 goda [Prospects of psychological science and practice: collected articles of the International scientific and practical conference]. Moscow, Russian State University named after A. N. Kosygin, 2017, pp. 764–767.

11. Yurova K. O., Fomina N. B. [Environmental problems and ways to solve them on the example of Japan and Russia]. In: Prirodnoresursnyj potencial, ekologiya i ustojchivoe razvitie regionov Rossii: sbornik statej XXI Mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii / Penza, 23–24 yanvarya 2023 goda [Natural resource potential, ecology and sustainable development of Russian regions: collected articles of the XXI International scientific and practical conference / Penza, January 23–24, 2023]. Penza, Penza State Agrarian University Publ., 2023, pp. 292–296.

12. Bolderdijk J. W., Gorsira M., Keizer K. Values determine the (in)effectiveness of informational interventions in promoting pro-environmental behavior. In: PLoS One, 2013, vol. 12, no. 8. Available at: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ (accessed: 10.04.2023). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0083911.

13. Clayton S., Czellar S., Nartova-Bochaver S. Cross-cultural validation of a revised environmental identity scale. In: Sustainability, 2021, vol. 4, no. 13, pp. 1–12.

14. De Dominicis S., Schultz P. W., Bonaiuto M. Protecting the Environment for Self-interested Reasons: Altruism Is Not the Only Pathway to Sustainability. In: Frontiers in Psychology, 2017, no. 8. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles (available at: 14.10.2023). DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01065.

15. Haws K. L., Winterich K. P., Naylor R. W. Seeing the world through GREEN-tinted glasses: Green consumption values and responses to environmentally friendly products. In: Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2014, vol. 3, no. 24, pp. 336–354. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcps.2013.11.002.

16. Kilbourne W., Pickett G. How materialism affects environmental beliefs, concern, and environmentally responsible behavior. In: Journal of Business Research, 2008, vol. 9, no. 61, pp. 885–893. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.09.016.

17. Martin C., Czellar S. The extended Inclusion of Nature in Self scale. In: Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2016, no. 47, pp. 181–194. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.05.006.

18. Mayer F. S., Frantz C. M. The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feelings in community with nature. In: Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2004, no. 24, pp. 504–515.

19. Mosanya M., Kwiatkowska A. New Ecological Paradigm and third culture kids: Multicultural identity configurations, global mindset and values as predictors of environmental worldviews. In: International Journal of Psychology, 2023, vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 103–115. DOI: 10.1002/ijop.12887.

20. Nkaizirwa J. P., Nsanganwimana F., Aurah C. M. On the predictors of pro-environmental behaviors: integrating personal values and the 2-MEV among secondary school students in Tanzania. In: Heliyon, 2022, vol. 8, no. 3. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (accessed: 14.10.2023). DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09064.

21. Song Y., Bao H., Shen S. Understanding the Influence of Initial Values of College Students in Shaping Pro-Environmental Behavioral Intention. In: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2022, vol. 15, no. 19. Available at: https://www.mdpi.com (accessed: 14.10.2023). DOI:10.3390/ijerph19159730.

22. Tian H., Liu X. Pro-Environmental Behavior Research: Theoretical Progress and Future Directions. In: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2022, vol. 11, no. 19. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (accessed: 13.10.2023). DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19116721.