城市绿地感知生物多样性的多维结构与量表构建

Multidimensional Structure and Scale Development of Perceived Biodiversity in Urban Green Spaces

摘要

【目的】生物多样性感知是公众在城市绿地中获得心理福祉的重要途径，但现有测量工具存在题项设计依赖物种估算、维度结构不清、信效度检验不足及本土适用性有限等问题，制约了该领域研究证据的累积与比较。本研究面向中国高密度城市绿地，系统开发并验证城市绿地感知生物多样性量表。【方法】基于文献演绎并参考已有问卷的测量维度建构初始题项库，经专家内容效度评定与预调研修订题项；选取成都市6个典型城市公园，对299名绿地使用者开展问卷调查，采用探索性因子分析、验证性因子分析及信效度检验验证量表结构。【结果】最终量表包含感知植物多样性、感知动物多样性、感知生境异质性、感知自然度4个维度，共20个题项，累计方差解释率为71.31%，全量表Cronbach’s α为0.937，各维度均具有良好的结构效度、聚合效度和区分效度。【结论】该量表可有效测量城市绿地生物多样性的感知程度，揭示了公众对生物多样性的判断主要依据植物视觉特征、动物活动、生境结构与自然状态等可直接感知的绿地特征，可为生态体验评价、健康效益研究和公众自然感知评估提供标准化工具。

Abstract

[Objective] Biodiversity perception is an important way for the public to achieve psychological restoration and well-being in urban green spaces. Existing studies have shown that compared to objective biodiversity indicators, perceived biodiversity has a more direct predictive effect on restorative experiences, positive emotions, and place satisfaction, and may play a mediating role between objective biodiversity and psychological well-being. However, the existing measurement tools have multiple limitations: in terms of measurement methods, early studies mostly required respondents to estimate the number of species, which actually measured ecological knowledge and counting ability rather than actual perceptual experience, with high cognitive load and limited data validity; in terms of measurement tools, domestic studies mostly used a small number of items for measurement, with inconsistent dimension divisions, insufficient reliability and validity tests, and lack of comparability among studies, and direct use of foreign scales faces the risk of cultural adaptation. Overall, there is still a lack of a localized perceived biodiversity scale that has been systematically developed and tested with a clear dimensional structure in China. This study aims to develop and validate the Perceived Biodiversity Scale in urban green spaces of China, with the goal of shifting the measurement focus from the judgment of species numbers to the evaluation of on-site experience based on perception cues, providing standardized tools for the assessment of urban green space ecological experiences, health and well-being research, and public natural perception evaluation. [Methods] This study is based on the attention restoration theory and stress reduction theory, defining perceived biodiversity into four dimensions: perceived plant diversity, perceived animal diversity, perceived habitat heterogeneity, and perceived naturalness. Firstly, an initial item pool was constructed through literature deduction, and 7 interdisciplinary experts with backgrounds in urban ecology, landscape architecture, and environmental psychology were invited for content validity assessment. Items with ambiguous expressions or overlapping concepts were eliminated based on the item-level content validity index (I-CVI). Subsequently, a pre-survey was conducted among 36 participants through focus group interviews to identify semantic ambiguities and simplify professional terms, resulting in a pilot scale consisting of 22 items. The empirical investigation selected 6 typical urban parks covering different urban zones and biodiversity gradients in Chengdu as sample sites, and conducted an on-site questionnaire survey among 299 park users. Items were rated on a 7-point Likert scale. In the data analysis stage, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity tests were used to systematically verify the scale structure. [Results] Exploratory factor analysis showed that the KMO value was 0.930, the Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (p < 0.001), and four factors were extracted, with a cumulative variance explanation rate of 71.31%. The factor loadings of each item ranged from 0.574 to 0.831. In the confirmatory factor analysis, after eliminating two items with standardized factor loadings below the 0.500 threshold (VC4 “places with vegetation cover” and VD3 “traces of neatly trimmed artificial landscape”), the model demonstrated an acceptable fit (χ²/df = 3.070, RMSEA = 0.079, CFI = 0.924, TLI = 0.910). The final scale consists of 20 items from four dimensions: perceived plant diversity, perceived animal diversity, perceived habitat heterogeneity, and perceived naturalness. In terms of reliability, the Cronbach’s α coefficient of the full scale was 0.937, and the α coefficients of each dimension ranged from 0.775 to 0.929. In terms of convergent validity, the average variance extracted (AVE) for each dimension ranged from 0.65 to 0.79, and the composite reliability (CR) ranged from 0.78 to 0.93, all meeting the recommended standards. In terms of discriminant validity, according to the Fornell-Larcker criterion, the square roots of the AVE for each dimension were all greater than their correlation coefficients with other dimensions, and the four dimensions had good statistical independence. [Conclusion] The Perceived Biodiversity Scale in urban green space constructed in this study has a clear four-dimensional structure and good psychometric performance, and can effectively measure the public perception of biodiversity. The research results reveal that the public’s judgment of urban green space biodiversity mainly unfolds along four paths: plant visual characteristics, animal activity cues, habitat structural complexity, and natural growth state. This is a multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation based on directly perceivable environmental cues. This scale shifts the measurement of perceived biodiversity from specialized species estimation to public experience evaluation, providing standardized tools for urban green space ecological experience assessment, health benefit research, and public natural perception evaluation. At the same time, it can be used in conjunction with objective biodiversity data to identify deviations between ecological construction effectiveness and public perception experience. The limitations of the study lie in the sample source being adult park users in Chengdu and data collection being concentrated in a single season. The applicability of the scale in different regions, seasons, and populations still needs further verification.

关键词

风景园林 / 环境心理学 / 城市生物多样性 / 生态感知 / 量表编制 / 因子分析

Key words

landscape architecture / environmental psychology / urban biodiversity / ecological perception / scale development / factor analysis

参考文献

[1] 洪海林， 常青 . 社区生活圈绿地多维度暴露特征及其健康效益差异[J]. 风景园林，2025， 32（7）： 46-55.

[2] HONG H L, CHANG Q . Multi-dimensional Exposure Characteristics and Health Benefits Differentiation of Green Spaces Within Community Life Circle[J]. Landscape Architecture, 2025, 32(7): 46-55.

[3] MARSELLE M R, HARTIG T, COX D T C, et al. Pathways Linking Biodiversity to Human Health: A Conceptual Framework[J]. Environment International, 2021, 150: 106420.

[4] 孙雅文， 谭少华， 申纪泽 . 公园绿化覆盖率对人群情感恢复的影响研究[J]. 风景园林，2021， 28（4）： 85-91.

[5] SUN Y W, TAN S H, SHEN J Z . Research on Influence of Park Green Coverage Rate on Crowds Emotional Recovery[J]. Landscape Architecture, 2021, 28(4): 85-91.

[6] YOUNG C, HOFMANN M, FREY D, et al. Psychological Restoration in Urban Gardens Related to Garden Type, Biodiversity and Garden-Related Stress[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2020, 198: 103777.

[7] HARVEY D J, MONTGOMERY L N, HARVEY H, et al. Psychological Benefits of a Biodiversity-Focussed Outdoor Learning Program for Primary School Children[J]. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2020, 67: 101381.

[8] DALLIMER M, IRVINE K N, SKINNER A M J, et al. Biodiversity and the Feel-Good Factor: Understanding Associations Between Self-Reported Human Well-Being and Species Richness[J]. BioScience, 2012, 62(1): 47-55.

[9] HAO J F, GAO T, QIU L . How Do Species Richness and Colour Diversity of Plants Affect Public Perception, Preference and Sense of Restoration in Urban Green Spaces?[J]. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2024, 100: 128487.

[10] MENG L S, LI S H, ZHANG X D . Exploring Biodiversity’s Impact on Mental Well-Being Through the Social-Ecological Lens: Emphasizing the Role of Biodiversity Characteristics and Nature Relatedness[J]. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 2024, 105: 107454.

[11] MENG L S, XIANG P T, LI S H . Economy or Ecology? The Relationship Between Biodiversity and Human Health in Regions with Different Economic Development[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2024, 158: 111238.

[12] 孟令爽， 康宁， 宫宸， 等 . 生物多样性水平对心理健康与福祉的影响系统性综述[J]. 中国园林，2022， 38（11）： 82-87.

[13] MENG L S, KANG N, GONG C, et al. Systematic Review on the Effect of Levels of Biodiversity on Psychological Health and Wellbeing[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2022, 38(11): 82-87.

[14] MARSELLE M R, MARTENS D, DALLIMER M, et al. Review of the Mental Health and Well-Being Benefits of Biodiversity[M]// MARSELLE M R, STADLER J, KORN H, et al. Biodiversity and Health in the Face of Climate Change. Cham: Springer, 2019: 175-211.

[15] METHORST J, REHDANZ K, MUELLER T, et al. The Importance of Species Diversity for Human Well-Being in Europe[J]. Ecological Economics, 2021, 181: 106917.

[16] NASSAUER J I . Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames[J]. Landscape Journal, 1995, 14(2): 161-170.

[17] 林泳宜， 陈静 . 屋顶花园生物多样性感知对大学师生情绪福祉的影响：以同济大学为例[J]. 中国园林，2025， 41（5）： 123-130.

[18] LIN Y Y, CHEN J . The Impact of Rooftop Garden Biodiversity Perception on the Emotional Well-Being of University Faculty and Students: A Case Study of Tongji University[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2025, 41(5): 123-130.

[19] 刘滨谊， 常青， 张琳， 等 . 城市公园绿地主客观植物多样性对居民健康行为的影响[J]. 中国园林，2024， 40（11）： 6-14.

[20] LIU B Y, CHANG Q, ZHANG L, et al. The Influence of Measured and Perceived Biodiversity on Human Health Behavior in Urban Green Spaces[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2024, 40(11): 6-14.

[21] LINDEMANN-MATTHIES P, BOSE E . How Many Species Are There? Public Understanding and Awareness of Biodiversity in Switzerland[J]. Human Ecology, 2008, 36(5): 731-742.

[22] 邱玲， 于小骞， 符瑞瑞， 等 . 视听交互下城市绿地生物多样性对居民健康的影响研究[J]. 中国园林，2025， 41（4）： 48-54.

[23] QIU L, YU X Q, FU R R, et al. Impacts of Urban Green Space Biodiversity on Residents’ Health Under Audio-Visual Interaction[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2025, 41(4): 48-54.

[24] 徐伟振， 史瑞翔， 陈梓怡， 等 . 上海城市公园访客感知生物多样性对其情绪状态的影响：基于恢复性效益的中介效应[J]. 生态学报，2025， 45（18）： 9102-9113.

[25] XU W Z, SHI R X, CHEN Z Y, et al. Study on the Impact of Perceived Biodiversity on Urban Park Visitors’emotional States in Shanghai: The Mediating Effect of Restorative Benefits[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2025, 45(18): 9102-9113.

[26] KAPLAN R, KAPLAN S . The Experience of Nature[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.

[27] ULRICH R S, SIMONS R F, LOSITO B D, et al. Stress Recovery During Exposure to Natural and Urban Environments[J]. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1991, 11(3): 201-230.

[28] HAO J F, LI Y S, HU T X, et al. Vegetation Diversity in Structure, Species or Colour: Coupling Effects of the Different Characteristics of Urban Green Spaces on Preference and Perceived Restoration[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2024, 169: 112897.

[29] SOUTHON G E, JORGENSEN A, DUNNETT N, et al. Perceived Species-Richness in Urban Green Spaces: Cues, Accuracy and Well-Being Impacts[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2018, 172: 1-10.

[30] FISHER J C, BICKNELL J E, IRVINE K N, et al. Bird Diversity and Psychological Wellbeing: A Comparison of Green and Coastal Blue Space in a Neotropical City[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2021, 793: 148653.

[31] FAN X, HU D, FAN Y Y, et al. Urban Restorative Environments: The Critical Role of Building Density, Vegetation Structure, and Multi-Sensory Stimulation in Psychophysiological Recovery[J]. Building and Environment, 2025, 281: 113190.

[32] DA C L, LI Y S, GAO X M, et al. Seasonal Variations in Psychophysiological Stress Recovery from Street Greenery: A Virtual Reality Study on Vegetation Structures and Configurations[J]. Building and Environment, 2024, 266: 112058.

[33] 彭子嘉， 高天， 师超众， 等 . 校园绿地植被结构、生境特征与鸟类多样性关系[J]. 生态学杂志，2020， 39（9）： 3032-3042.

[34] PENG Z J, GAO T, SHI C Z, et al. The Relationships Between Vegetation Structure, Habitat Characteristics and Bird Diversity in Campus Green Spaces[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2020, 39(9): 3032-3042.

[35] FULLER R A, IRVINE K N, DEVINE-WRIGHT P, et al. Psychological Benefits of Greenspace Increase with Biodiversity[J]. Biology Letters, 2007, 3(4): 390-394.

[36] MARSELLE M R, IRVINE K N, LORENZO-ARRIBAS A, et al. Does Perceived Restorativeness Mediate the Effects of Perceived Biodiversity and Perceived Naturalness on Emotional Well-Being Following Group Walks in Nature?[J]. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2016, 46: 217-232.

[37] 郝菊芳， 高天， 邱玲 . 不同绿地生物多样性认知偏好及复愈效益研究[J]. 中国园林，2024， 40（11）： 117-123.

[38] HAO J F, GAO T, QIU L . Biodiversity Perception, Preference and Recovery Benefits in Different Green Spaces[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2024, 40(11): 117-123.

[39] 马彦红， 朱捷， 陈曦 . 城市公园感知生物多样性促进注意力恢复的影响研究[J]. 中国园林，2022， 38（7）： 80-85.

[40] MA Y H, ZHU J, CHEN X . Study on the Influence of Perceived Biodiversity on Attention Recovery in Urban Parks[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2022, 38(7): 80-85.

[41] HA J, KIM H J . The Restorative Effects of Campus Landscape Biodiversity: Assessing Visual and Auditory Perceptions Among University Students[J]. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2021, 64: 127259.

[42] SCHEBELLA M F, WEBER D, SCHULTZ L, et al. The Wellbeing Benefits Associated with Perceived and Measured Biodiversity in Australian Urban Green Spaces[J]. Sustainability, 2019, 11(3): 802.

[43] WHITE M P, WEEKS A, HOOPER T, et al. Marine Wildlife as an Important Component of Coastal Visits: The Role of Perceived Biodiversity and Species Behaviour[J]. Marine Policy, 2017, 78: 80-89.

[44] HOYLE H, HITCHMOUGH J, JORGENSEN A . All About the ‘Wow Factor’? The Relationships Between Aesthetics, Restorative Effect and Perceived Biodiversity in Designed Urban Planting[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2017, 164: 109-123.

[45] CHEN J R, WU B S, DAI K L, et al. Linking Perceived Biodiversity and Restorative Benefits in Urban Parks Through Place Attachment: A Case Study in Fuzhou, China[J]. Diversity, 2024, 16(7): 416.

[46] SI S X, CULLEN J B . Response Categories and Potential Cultural Bias: Effects of an Explicit Middle Point in Cross-Cultural Surveys[J]. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 1998, 6(3): 218-230.

[47] LYNN M R . Determination and Quantification of Content Validity[J]. Nursing Research, 1986, 35(6): 382-386.

[48] 吴明隆 . 问卷统计分析实务：SPSS操作与应用[M].重庆：重庆大学出版社，2010.

[49] WU M L . Practice of Questionnaire Statistical Analysis: SPSS Operation and Application[M]. Chongqing: Chongqing University Press,2010.

[50] 吴明隆 . 结构方程模型：AMOS的操作与应用[M].重庆：重庆大学出版社，2009.

[51] WU M L . Structural Equation Model: Operation and Application of AMOS[M]. Chongqing: Chongqing University Press,2009.

[52] 李笑樱， 闫寒冰 . 教师职业认同感的模型建构及量表编制[J]. 教师教育研究，2018， 30（2）： 72-81.

[53] LI X Y, YAN H B . Exploring the Construction and Measurement of Teachers’ Professional Identity[J]. Teacher Education Research, 2018, 30(2): 72-81.

[54] FORNELL C, LARCKER D F . Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error: Algebra and Statistics[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1981, 18(1): 39-50.

[55] MARTUZA V R . Applying Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Measurement in Education[M]. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1977: 275-293.

基金资助

国家自然科学基金“北京地区城市森林疗养空间特征识别及健康效益定量评价”(51908310)

成都市哲学社会科学规划专项重点项目“银发经济视角下城市社区尺度公园场景营造的机制与模式研究”(2025-SKGH-ZKZX-01)