阅读笔记 | Pro-environment Behaviour--through the New Environmental Paradigm Perspective

Different PEB:

environmental activism, non-activist behaviour in the public sphere, private sphere environmentalism, and other significant environmental behaviours.

Different causal variables of PEB: 

Attitude variables, contextual factors, personal capabilities, and habits or routines. (already 20 years ago Stern suggested that these could be grouped into this quartet)

The theoreticlal foundation of these causal 'attitudinal' factors (norms, beliefs, and values)

1) The Value-Belief-Norm Theory

The VBN cluster of variables was a far stronger predictor of each behavioral indicator than the other theories, because it offers an account of attitude formation that can deal with new or changing attitude objects, and more generally, with how environmental concern and environmental issues are socially constructed.

None of the theories, however, was very successful in predicting the sole indicator of activism (participation in an environmental demonstration), which appears to depend on other factors in addition to an environmentalist predisposition.

The VBN theory believes that the link from values to environmentalism is mediated by particular beliefs, such as beliefs about which kinds of people or things are affected by environmental conditions (AC) and about whether there are individual actions that could alleviate threats to valued persons or things (AR)​​​​​​​.

Implications of VBN: 

a. Environmentalist personal norms and the predisposition to proenvironmental action can be influenced by information that shapes these beliefs. For example, how environmentalism can be affected by the findings of environmental science (about consequences), publicity and commentary about those findings, and the actual and perceived openness of the political system to public influence (which may affect perceptions of personal responsibility).

b. it is an interpretation of environmentalist and antienvironmentalist rhetoric as efforts to activate or deactivate people’s environmental norms by highlighting certain kinds of values or consequences.

The VBN theory is thus compatible with the constructed-preference tendency in cognitive psychology.

2) Norm-activation theory: 

specific personal moral norms (behavior-specific predispositions)

3) The theory of planned behavior (TPB): 

attitudes toward acts (behavior-specific predispositions)

4) Cognitive Dissonance theory

5) Other theories for behavior-specific beliefs

NOTE: Environmentally significant behavior can also be affected by nonenvironmental attitudes, such as those about attributes of consumer products that are correlated with environmental impact (e.g., speed, power, and luggage capacity in motor vehicles), or about frugality, luxury, waste, or the importance of spending time with family.

Attitude-Behaviour Inconsistencies

Different causal variables also appear to work different ways in influencing behavior. These different groups of causal variables, and the different kinds of pro-environmental behaviours, contribute to the aforementioned attitude-behaviour inconsistencies in both research and practical initiatives aimed at behavioural change.

A first step toward understanding the complexities is to elaborate on the truism that behavior is a function of the organism and its environment. In​​​​​​​ ABC formulation (Guagnano et al., 1995): behavior (B) is an interactive product of personal-sphere attitudinal variables (A) and contextual factors (C). The attitude-behavior association is strongest when contextual factors are neutral and approaches zero when contextual forces are strongly positive or negative, effectively compelling or prohibiting the behavior in question (an inverted U-shaped function). According to the ABC formulation, that the different types of causal factors may interact, implies that interpretations based only on main effects can be seriously misleading.

One of the suggested explanations for this inconsistency between cause and effect variables is lack of measurement specificity, which means that instead of scrutinizing the effects of behaviour-specific attitudes/intentions/beliefs on specific behaviours, researchers and practitioners alike have focused on more general environmental attitudes or beliefs and found either nonsignificant behavioural effects, or results that have been inconsistent.

New Environmental Paradigm (NEP)

NEP represents higher order beliefs about the human–environment relationship. It suggests that humans depend on a natural world that is ecologically balanced and that there is a limit to economic growth.

The difference of NEP and the extensively used attitude concept rest on beliefs:

1. Attitude-Behaviour model (not our focus) focus on beliefs related to an object or a certain behaviour. Attitudes are always measured in relation to a specific object (e.g., a product, a person, a behaviour, an idea).

2. NEP draws on overarching and far-reaching beliefs about the world we live in, a higher order beliefs or more fundamental ecological beliefs, they still represent our perception of how humans should relate to the environment. But the measurement ‘object’ of NEP is always the same.

NEP is representative for the changing beliefs: the dawn of a new world view with ecological issues placed centre stage; an increased awareness of environmental issues over the last 50 years.

The reasons have threehold:

1. Beliefs guide the behaviour.

Following the same line of reasoning that applies to attitude-behaviour models: people are prone to act in accordance with their beliefs. In NEP: we are likely to adopt a behaviour that ensures a belief-behaviour consistency (here means a far broader range of behaviours) and behaviours that violate this consistency may result in cognitive dissonance or imbalance.

2. Values guide the behaviour.

Following the Vested Interest Theory (VIT): it describes how a consumer’s interest in an object depends on how it corresponds with his/her value orientation or individual characteristic. Values are the principles and the fundamental guide whcih determine behaviours. Hence, NEP is closely related to values, we argue that strong beliefs in issues comprised in NEP serve as the same fundamental guiding principle that shape our behaviour across a variety of situations.

The difference between 'values', 'beliefs', 'attitude' and 'behaviour':

1. Values (价值观) are the core of an individual. What one values determine their direction in life.

2. Beliefs (信仰) are a shorter-term view of the person's situation and worldview. Beliefs are assumptions and convictions we hold to be true based on past experiences. 

Values	Beliefs
principles or standards of behaviours; one's judgement of what is important in life	The conviction or acceptance that sth exists or is true, especially without proof
e.g. loyalty, fairnedd, courage, respect, compassion...	e.g. lying is bad, cheating is immoral, god creates the world...
related to day-to-day life	mostly related to religion, experience, or what is taught

3. Attitude (态度) is a judgment made on the 'attitude object' (a person, place, task, event, skill, etc.). Judgments from attitude can range from positive, negative or neutral. Attitudes arise from an inner framework of values and beliefs, developed over time. Attitudes are comprised of three components: emotions, behaviours and thoughts. These three components can also be described as the 'ABC' model: affective, behavioural and cognitive.

4. Behaviours are how these internalised systems (attitudes, beliefs and values) are expressed.

Relationships:

• Feedback and behaviour management can change attitudes.
• Changing attitudes can also change values and beliefs and vice versa.

3. Evidences of influenced behaviours.

A multitude of studies have shown that endorsement of the NEP is significantly related to behavioural intentions, and various self-reported and observed pro-environmental behaviours. NEP is 'the most widely used measure of environmental concern in the literature'. The widespread number of studies modelling NEP as a driver of pro-environmental behaviours typically find that NEP is a powerful predictor of behaviour.

Measurement of endorsement of NEP: 15-item scale reported by Dunlap et al. (2000)

Dunlap, R.E.; Liere, K.D.V.; Mertig, A.G.; Jones, R.E. New Trends in Measuring Environmental Attitudes: Measuring Endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: A Revised NEP Scale. J. Soc. Issues 2000, 56, 425442, doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00176.

Except one's endorsement of the NEP, this paper also explores the moderating effects of two personality traits on the effects of NEP on PEB, locus of control and self-construal, respectively.

Moderator 1: Locus of Control

Locus of control is a personality trait that explains how people differ in the degree to which they believe they are themselves in control of the things that happen to them in life.

Two types:

• People with a predominant internal locus of control (ILC): believe that what happens to them is mainly a result of their own actions and behaviour (“I make things happen”)
• People with a predominant external locus of control (ELC): believe that the outcomes of life events are primarily caused by external forces beyond their personal control (“things happen to me”).

Locus of control will influence the engagement in active behaviour, because individual believes that they themselves are able to influence the outcome of that activity.

The actual PEB needs motivation + internal locus of control. The author argued that NEP serves as a motivational force that drives consumers to pursue behaviour in line with their overarching beliefs. Its role is likely to result in the same kind of behavioural effects as other kinds of intrinsic motivation.

∴ The actual PEB needs NEP + internal locus of control. The locus of control acts the moderating role.

Measurement of locus of control: five items adapted Rotter (1966) by adding likert scale

Rotter, J.B. Generalized Expectancies for Internal Versus External Control of Reinforcement. Psychol. Monogr. 1966, 80, 1–28, doi:10.1037/h0092976.

Moderator 2: Self-Construal

Self-construal is a self-definition focusing on how one relates to others, that is the self-versus-other focus.

It distinguishes between whether we consider ourselves as autonomous and independent from others, independent selfconstrual, or part of a collective in close relationships with others, interdependent self-construal.

Our self-construal will influence our focus in life, whether we are motivated to achieve the best solution for ourselves '个人利益优先' (independent self-construal) or the focus is on the best outcome for the social group we consider ourselves a part of '社会/群体最优' (interdependent self-construal).

Interdependent individuals are more prone to define their identity through relationships to others, the public component of the self is an important feature, and they emphasize actions that are appropriate in the eyes of others and thus are in line with expectations and social norms. Interdependent individuals are more concerned with expressing identity-relevant information through their behaviour.

Because NEP is an overarching belief structure, or a more fundamental world view than more context specific attitudes, authors suggest that it is also related to our self-image and our shared self, interdependents therefore should be more inclined to behave in accordance with their level of NEP endorsement than independents.

Measurement of self-construal: Six items for self-construal were adapted from Singelis (1994). High scores on the scale feature individuals with interdependent self-construal.

Singelis, T.M. The Measurement of Independent and Interdependent Self-Construals. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 1994, 20, 580–591, doi:10.1177/0146167294205014.

​​​​​​​

​​​​​​​But the result is not significant, this may be caused by them being equally prone to perform NEP-consistent behaviour, but for different reasons. The independents may be motivated to behave in line with their NEP-related beliefs, not because they care for others, but because they will behave so no matter what others think.

Another Synthesis Theory-Dual-process models

Synthetic theories or models:  

which incorporate variables from more than one of the above broad classes, postulate relationships among them, and use them to explain one or more types of environmentally significant behavior.

One suggestion: the distinction between attitudes and habits as causes of behavior closely parallels the distinction in a variety of “dual-process” models (Smith & DeCoster, 2000) between conscious and effortful behaviors and automatic or associative ones. Dual-process models may therefore have something to say about proenvironmental behavior.

Sources:

Stern, P. C. (2000). New Environmental Theories: Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00175. Available at: https://www.uni-goettingen.de/de/document/download/2170a4cf4ce55cbdfb2856011a8930bb.pdf/08_stern_2000.pdf​​​​​​​

Derdowski, L., Grahn, Å., Hansen, H., & Skeiseid, H. (2020). The New Ecological Paradigm, Pro-Environmental Behaviour, and the Moderating Effects of Locus of Control and Self-Construal. Sustainability, 12. Sustainability | Free Full-Text | The New Ecological Paradigm, Pro-Environmental Behaviour, and the Moderating Effects of Locus of Control and Self-Construal