Predicting Pro-Environmental Behaviours in the Public Sphere: Comparing the Influence of Social Anxiety, Self-Efficacy, Global Warming Awareness and the NEP

被引:5
作者
Kosic, Ankica [1 ]
Passafaro, Paola [1 ]
Molinari, Martina [1 ]
机构
[1] Sapienza Univ Rome, Fac Med & Psychol, Via Marsi 78, I-00185 Rome, Italy
关键词
pro-environmental behaviours in the public sphere; social anxiety; perceived self-efficacy; global warming awareness; New Environmental Paradigm (NEP); VALUE ORIENTATION; PERSONALITY; MODEL; PARADIGM; SCALE;
D O I
10.3390/su16198716
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Environmental sustainability depends highly on our ability to identify the determinants of various types of pro-environmental behaviours (PEBs). However, so far, public sphere pro-environmental behaviours (PBS-PEBs) have received little attention in the scientific literature. This paper aims thus to fill this gap by exploring the role of dispositional (i.e., social anxiety and self-efficacy) and social psychological factors (i.e., environmental concern and global warming awareness) in the prediction of PBS-PEBs. An online questionnaire, including measures of these factors, was administered to residents (N = 199) of various Italian cities. The results indicated that (1) dispositional social anxiety (but not self-efficacy) directly (and negatively) predicts PBS-PEBs and that its effect is comparable to that of the social psychological factors considered (environmental concern and global warming awareness); (2) global warming awareness (positively) predicts PBS-PEBs directly, while (3) environmental concern, measured through the NEP scale, does it indirectly. Implications of the results for modelling the role of dispositional anxiety, environmental concern and global warming awareness in studies on PBS-PEBs are briefly outlined.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 82 条
[1]  
Abraham J, 2015, Psychology, V06, P234, DOI [10.4236/psych.2015.63023, 10.4236/psych.2015.63023, DOI 10.4236/PSYCH.2015.63023]
[2]   The theory of planned behavior: Frequently asked questions [J].
Ajzen, Icek .
HUMAN BEHAVIOR AND EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES, 2020, 2 (04) :314-324
[3]   The environmental action scale: Development and psychometric evaluation [J].
Alisat, Susan ;
Riemer, Manuel .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2015, 43 :13-23
[4]   SELF-EFFICACY MECHANISM IN HUMAN AGENCY [J].
BANDURA, A .
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, 1982, 37 (02) :122-147
[5]  
Bandura A., 1977, PSYCHOL REV, V84, P191, DOI [10.1016/0146-6402(78)90002-4, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191, 10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191, DOI 10.1016/0146-6402(78)90002-4]
[6]  
Bandura A., 1999, Self-efficacy: The exercise of control
[7]  
Bandura A., 1995, Self-efficacy in changing societies, DOI DOI 10.1017/CBO9780511527692
[8]   Collective responses to global challenges: The social psychology of pro-environmental action [J].
Barth, Markus ;
Masson, Torsten ;
Fritsche, Immo ;
Fielding, Kelly ;
Smith, Joanne R. .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2021, 74
[9]   Managers' Citizenship Behaviors for the Environment: A Developmental Perspective [J].
Boiral, Olivier ;
Raineri, Nicolas ;
Talbot, David .
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS, 2018, 149 (02) :395-409
[10]   BOOTSTRAPPING GOODNESS-OF-FIT MEASURES IN STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELS [J].
BOLLEN, KA ;
STINE, RA .
SOCIOLOGICAL METHODS & RESEARCH, 1992, 21 (02) :205-229