Predictors of successful graduation emotional assessment specificity while perception of natural and technogenic environments by men and women

Context and relevance. The close association between man and nature (biophilia) during a long time is changing to adaptation to the technogenic and urbanized environment. It has been shown that a high level of biophilia corresponds to a good mood, positive emotions and life satisfaction. However, there is no consensus regarding the men’s and women’s specificity while perception of nature. Objective. To identify the significance of sex and gender factors in self-assessment of emotional reactions when perceiving a virtual natural or man-made environment. Hypothesis. Women are characterized by a more pronounced reaction to the presentation of both natural and man-made environments, which increases with an increase in the femininity index. Methods and materials. The study involved 83 students from different university specialties (M = 21,6, SD = 2,1, 54% female). They watched two specially created films, including the natural or urban environment of a metropolis and its environs. The assessment of their emotional state (valence, arousal and amplitude of the reaction) was performed using the Self-Assessment Manikin (SAM) method and verbal determinants. For self-assessment of attitude to nature, the "Identification with Nature" method was used. The severity of feminine, masculine and androgynous traits was determined according to the Gender Role Identity Questionnaire by S. Bem. Results. A predominance of masculine traits was found in the group of men with tendency for feminine traits in women, with no significant differences in androgynous indices of gender stereotypes of behavior. Regardless of sex, watching a film with natural content evoked positive emotions, and an urban film — negative emotions, the assessment of which increased along with the indicator “identification with nature” with its higher values in women than men however, in the absence of the effect of gender-role stereotypes of behavior. In women, the effect of a negative emotional reaction to man-made stimuli is more pronounced than in men for the self-rating scales of arousal, sadness and avoidance. Conclusions. With a sex-independent polar emotional assessment of the perception of natural and technogenic stimuli, which intensifies along with the “identification with nature” indicator, women are characterized by a more pronounced negative attitude towards the man-made environment.

1. Клейтон, С., Ирхин, Б.Д. Нартова-Бочавер, С.К. (2019). Идентификация с природой в России: валидизация метода и связь с заботой о людях и растениях. Психология. Журнал высшей школы экономики, 16 (1), 85—107. https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2019-1-85-107
   Kleiton, S., Irhin, B.D., Nartova-Bachaver, S.K. (2019). Environmental identity in Russia: validation and relationship to the concern for people and plants. Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics, 16 (1), 85—107. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2019-1-85-107
2. Клецина, И.С. (2003). Практикум по гендерной психологии. СПб: Питер.
   Kletsina, I.S. (2003). Workshop on gender psychology. SPb: Piter. (In Russ.).
3. Уилсон, Э.О. (2017). Биофилия. Врожденная тяга к живому как связь человека с другими биологическими видами. Едиториал УРСС. https://book24.ru/search/?q=%D0%92%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B6%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F%20%D1%82%D1%8F%D0%B3%D0%B0%20%D0%BA%20%D0%B6%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%BC%D1%83%20%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BA%20%D1%81%D0%B2%D1%8F%D0%B7%D1%8C%20%D1%87%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%BA%D0%B0%20%D1%81%20%D0%B4%D1%80%D1%83%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B8
   Uilson, E.O. (2017). Biophilia. The innate attraction to the living as a connection between humans and other biological species. Editorial URSS. (In Russ.).
4. Baceviciene, M., Jankauskiene, R. (2022). The mediating effect of nature restorativeness, stress level, and nature connectedness in the association between nature exposure and quality of life. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 19(4), 2098. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19042098
5. Barrera-Hernández, L.F., Sotelo-Castillo, M.A., Echeverría-Castro, S.B., Tapia-Fonllem, C.O. (2020). Connectedness to nature: Its impact on sustainable behaviors and happinessin children. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00276
6. Bolte, G., Nanninga, S., Dandolo, L. (2019). Sex/gender differences in the association between residential green space and self-rated health-A sex/gender-focused systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 16(23), 4818. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16234818
7. Bradley, M.M., Lang, P.J. (1994). Measuring emotion: The self-assessment Mankin and the semantic differential. J. Behav Ther. & Exp. Psvchiat., 25(1), 49—59.
8. Chang, C., Cox, D.T.C., Fan, Q., Nghiem, T.P.L, et al. (2022). People’s desire to be in nature and how they experience it are partially heritable. PLoS Biol., 20(2), e3001500. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001500
9. Davidov, A., Razumnikova, O., Bakaev, M. (2023). Nature in the heart and mind of the beholder: Psycho-emotional and EEG differences in perception of virtual nature due to gender. Vision (Basel), 7(2), 30. https://doi.org/10.3390/vision7020030
10. Dean, J.H., Shanahan, D.F., Bush, R., Gaston, K.J, Lin, B.B., Barber, E., Franco, L., Fuller, R.A. (2018). Is nature relatedness associated with better mental and physical health? Int J Environ Res Public Health, 15(7), 1371. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15071371
11. Deng, L., Li X., Luo, H., Fu, E.-K., Ma, J., Sun, L.-X., Huang, Z., Cai, S.-Z., Jia, Y. (2020). Empirical study of landscape types, landscape elements and landscape components of the urban park promoting physiological and psychological restoration. Urban For. Urban Green., 48, 126488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2019.126488
12. Fernández, Núñez, M.B., Campos, Suzman, L., Maneja, R., Bach, A., Marquet, O., Anguelovski, I., Knobel P. (2022). Gender and sex differences in urban greenness' mental health benefits: A systematic review. Health Place, 76, 102864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2022.102864
13. Gaekwad, J.S., Sal Moslehian, A., Roös, P.B., Walker, A. (2022). A Meta-Analysis of emotional evidence for the biophilia hypothesis and implications for biophilic design. Front Psychol., 13, 750245. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.750245.
14. Ghosh, V., Alee, R. (2023). Nature heals: The relationship of nature-connectedness with subjective happiness and resilience. International Journal of Indian Psychology, 11(2), 334—344. https://doi.org/10.25215/1102.034
15. Grassini, S., Segurini, G.V., Koivisto, M. (2022). Watching nature videos promotes physiological restoration: Evidence from the modulation of alpha waves in electroencephalography. Front Psychol., 13, 871143. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.871143
16. Hankivsky, O., Springer, K.W., Hunting, G. (2018). Beyond sex and gender difference in funding and reporting of health research. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 3(6). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-018-0050-6.
17. Houlden, V., Weich, S., Porto de Albuquerque, J., Jarvis, S., Rees, K. (2018). The relationship between greenspace and the mental wellbeing of adults: A systematic review. PLoS One, 13(9), e0203000. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203000
18. Huang, Q., Yang, M., Jane, H., Li, S., Bauer, N. (2020). Trees, grass, or concrete? The effects of different types of environments on stress reduction. Landsc. Urban Plan., 193, 103654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.103654
19. Jin, Z., Wang, J., Liu, X., et al. (2023). Stress recovery effects of viewing simulated urban parks: landscape types, depressive symptoms, and gender differences. Land, 12(1), 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12010022
20. Koivisto, M., Grassini, S. (2022). Affective responses to urban but not to natural scenes depend on inter-individual differences in childhood nature exposure. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 82, 101840.
21. Koivisto, M., Koskinen, J., Jokiaho, S., Vahanne, T., Pohjola, M., Kontio, E. (2024). A short simulatednature experience as an effective way to promote restoration from work-related stress. Scand. J. Psychol., 65(5), 954—965. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.13044
22. Lefosse, D., van Timmeren, A., Ratti, C. (2023). Biophilia upscaling: A systematic literature review based on a three-metric approach. Sustainability, 15(22), 15702. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su152215702
23. Li, D., Ruan, Y., Kang, Q., Rong, C. (2022). Gender differences in association of urbanization with psychological stress in Chinese adults: A population-based study. Front Public Health., 10, 1022689. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.1022689
24. Mostajeran, F., Krzikawski, J., Steinicke, F., et al. (2021). Effects of exposure to immersive videos and photo slideshows of forest and urban environments. Sci Rep., 11, 3994. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-83277-y
25. Petri-Romão, P., Engen, H., Rupanova, A., Puhlmann, L., et al. (2024). Self-report assessment of Positive Appraisal Style (PAS): Development of a process-focused and a content-focused questionnaire for use in mental health and resilience research. PLoS One, 19(2), e0295562. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0295562
26. Qiao, L., Zhuang, J., Zhang, X., Su, Y., Xia, Y. (2021). Assessing emotional responses to the spatial quality of urban green spaces through self-report and face recognition measures. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 18(16), 8526. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168526
27. Rammensee, R.A., Morawetz, C., Basten, U. (2023). Individual differences in emotion regulation: Personal tendency in strategy selection is related to implementation capacity and well-being. Emotion, 23(8), 2331—2343. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001234
28. Richardson, E.A., Mitchell, R. (2010). Gender differences in relationships between urban green space and health in the United Kingdom. Social Science & Medicine, 71(3), 568—575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.04.015
29. Sillman, D., Rigolon, A., Browning, M.H.E.M., Yoon, H.V., McAnirlin, O. (2022). Do sex and gender modify the association between green space and physical health? A systematic review. Environ Res., 209, 112869. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2022.112869
30. Sullivan, A. (2020). Sex and the census: Why surveys should not conflate sex and gender identity. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 23(5), 517—524. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2020.1768346
31. Untaru, E.-N., Ariza-Montes, A., Kim, H., Han, H. (2022). Green environment, mental health, and loyalty among male and female patients. J. Mens. Health, 18(10), 207. https://doi.org/10.31083/j.jomh1810207
32. Ulrich, R.S., Simons, R.F., Losito, B.D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M.A., Zelson, M. (1991). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. J. Environ. Psychol., 11(3), 201—230. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80184-7
33. Van den Berg, M., van Poppel, M., van Kamp, I., Andrusaityte, S., Balseviciene, B., Cirach, M., Danileviciute, A., Ellis, N., Hurst, G., Masterson, D. (2016). Visiting green space is associated with mental health and vitality: A cross-sectional study in four European cities. Health Place, 38, 8—15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2016.01.003
34. Wang, J., Liu, N., Zou, J., Guo, Y., Chen, H. (2023). The health perception of urban green spaces and its emotional impact on young adults: an empirical study from three cities in China. Front Public Health, 11, 1232216. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1232216