Campbell paradigm

Last updated
Behavior within the Campbell Paradigm Behavior model Campbell Paradigm.jpg
Behavior within the Campbell Paradigm

The Campbell paradigm is a behavioral theory from social psychology. The paradigm was developed by social psychologist Florian G. Kaiser and his colleagues, Katarzyna Byrka and Terry Hartig, in 2010, [1] building on an earlier suggestion by Donald T. Campbell, [2] after whom the paradigm is named. It offers an explanation for why and when individuals engage in particular behaviors. It is mainly (but not exclusive) applied to behaviors that are aimed at fighting climate change and protecting the environment. [1]

Contents

Overview

The Campbell paradigm suggests that behavior (e.g., switching off lights when leaving a room) is typically the result of two factors: a person's commitment to fighting climate change and protecting the environment (i.e., a person's environmental attitude) and the costs that come with a specific behavior (e.g., having to remember to switch off the lights; see Fig. 1). The paradigm stands in contrast to the widespread rational choice theories, whose prototype is the theory of planned behavior in psychology. Rational choice theories explain behavior through a behavior's expected utility. [3]

The Campbell paradigm is based on the controversial assumption that attitude and behavior are genuinely consistent. Accordingly, behavior arises spontaneously as a manifestation of a person's attitude [4] (quite analogous to the tripartite model of attitude by Rosenberg and Hovland). [5] In contrast to Campbell's deterministic model (in which he aimed to explain engagement), Kaiser and colleagues lowered their aspiration to explaining only the probability of engagement. Thus, they adopted the Rasch model as a less rigid depiction of the paradigm (see the formula and its explanation). [1]

The Rasch model describes the natural logarithm of the ratio of the probability () that person k will switch off the lights (the specific behavior i) to the inverse probability () that person k will not switch off the lights as a function of person k's attitude (: e.g., his or her environmental attitude) minus all the financial and figurative costs that come with switching off lights (: e.g., needing to remember to switch off the lights when one leaves a room). This means more or less that k's general attitude () along with i's specific costs () determine the probability () that behavior i will become manifest should the opportunity arise. [6]

Only if a person's attitude exceeds the costs of a behavior will the behavior have a reasonable chance of manifesting (see Fig. 1). [7] This account of why and when behavior occurs also serves as the theoretical basis for the measurement of individual attitudes. [4]

Attitude measurement

Within the Campbell paradigm, a person's attitude is derived from the behavioral costs that this person will incur to achieve the goal that is implied by the attitude. [8] For example, the goal implied by environmental attitude is to protect the environment, whereas the goal implied by a health-focused attitude is to maintain or restore health. [9] [10]

Behavioral costs include everything that makes behavior objectively more or less demanding: things such as effort, time, and financial costs, but also social norms and expectations, cultural practices, and the antagonistic social preferences that go hand in hand with certain behaviors. [4] To illustrate: Someone with a pronounced preference for music by Taylor Swift (i.e., a person with a strong, positive attitude toward Taylor Swift's music) will generally put forth considerable effort and spend large amounts of money to attend a concert by her. By contrast, people with less of a commitment to Taylor Swift's music will attend a concert only if given a ticket as a gift. And those who do not like Taylor Swift at all will change the station when a song by her comes on the radio.

On the one hand, this example shows that people can engage in different behaviors to express a more or less strong commitment to/preference for Taylor Swift's music (e.g., attend a concert, listen to a song when it is played on the radio). On the other hand, the example also makes clear that whatever a person does to listen to Taylor Swift is accompanied by costs; these costs are again unique to a specific behavior. Consequently, the costs that someone bears and, thus, the behaviors that someone will engage in to attain the attitudinal goal, can be used to determine people's attitude levels. So far, several attitude scales have been developed on the basis of the Campbell paradigm: environmental attitude, [9] [11] attitude toward nature, [6] [9] [11] (negative) attitude toward anthropogenic climate change, [12] health-focused attitude, [10] attitude toward social contacts or privacy in the office, [13] attitude toward one's own mental vigor, [14] and attitude toward social expectations (i.e., people's conformity). [15]

Behavioral explanation

Behavior as the cost-moderated function of individual attitude Conjunctive model behavior.jpg
Behavior as the cost-moderated function of individual attitude
Behavior as a function of two countervailing factors (attitude, and the costs of a specific behavior) Compensatory.jpg
Behavior as a function of two countervailing factors (attitude, and the costs of a specific behavior)

In social psychology, attitudes have traditionally reflected people's personal reasons and, thus, their personal behavioral propensities. [16] [5] Analogously, what later became a measure of environmental attitude [9] [11] [17] was initially introduced as a measure of people's propensity to protect the environment. [18] [19] [20] This classical view of attitude as a personal reason is of course ultimately justified only when one is able to reliably and consistently anticipate manifest behavior with an attitude measure, [7] that is, if the notorious attitude-behavior gap does not really exist. [21] [22] [23] [24]

The Campbell paradigm's explanation of behavior is extremely parsimonious as can be concluded from the Rasch model. The likelihood of engaging in a behavior is a function of two countervailing factors: a person's attitude and the sociocultural boundary conditions in which the behavior takes place (see Fig. 1). These objective conditions ultimately determine the specific costs of a behavior. [8] [25] [26] [27] Accordingly, a vegetarian lunch is the result of not only a person's particular level of environmental attitude but also of the sociocultural boundary conditions in which the person's lunch is chosen; [28] for example, the promise of a financial reward makes vegetarian lunches more attractive. The question that remains is “for whom?”

The literature contains a considerable number of (sometimes contradictory) conjunctive behavioral explanations [29] that speak of the cost-moderated efficacy of people's attitudes (see Fig. 2a). [30] [31] [32] [33] By contrast, the Campbell Paradigm suggests that behavioral costs are unrestrictedly behaviorally effective and independent of people's attitude levels (see Fig. 2b). In other words, financial rewards make vegetarian lunches more probable for everyone. [34] This countervailing relationship between behavioral costs and attitude has been repeatedly quasi-experimentally confirmed in environmental protection research. [35] [36] [37]

Apparent circularity

If a person's attitude is derived from the behaviors that the person engages in, we cannot really be surprised to subsequently find that the very same behaviors are explained by this attitude. In other words, what is the point of predicting that Peter will donate money to Greenpeace after we have already seen him donate money to Greenpeace? This apparent circularity is why, for many including Campbell himself, [2] explaining behavior on the basis of the Campbell paradigm seems trivial and thus pointless. [38] However, Kaiser and colleagues have argued that any form of circularity can be comparatively easily avoided. [4]

When individual differences in people's attitude (e.g., in environmental attitude) are derived from verbal behaviors expressed in questionnaires (i.e., opinions, e.g., "protecting the environment is important"; appraisals, e.g., "I regret not doing more to combat climate change"; and claims of engaging in a behavior, e.g., "I recycle paper"), it is by no means trivial to use the correspondingly derived attitudinal differences to predict whether people will actually eat vegetarian lunches. Circularity can thus be avoided if the indicators (i.e., the manifestations used to derive individual levels of an attitude) and the consequences of the attitude (e.g., its manifest effects, the criteria to be explained) are logically and practically distinct. [4]

In order to measure individual differences in a certain attitude, one can therefore use verbal behaviors, such as retrospective self-reports of behavior, stated intentions, appraisals, and opinions. [39] This can be done with questionnaires. As consequences of people's attitude, one can then employ real behavior (e.g., the manifest choice of a vegetarian lunch) [34] or objectively measurable traces of behavior (e.g., the amount of electricity a person consumes annually). [40]

Independent reviews and tests of the measurement approach

Related Research Articles

In the field of psychology, cognitive dissonance is described as the mental disturbance people feel when they realize their cognitions and actions are inconsistent or contradictory. This may ultimately result in some change in their cognitions or actions to cause greater alignment between them so as to reduce this dissonance. Relevant items of information include peoples' actions, feelings, ideas, beliefs, values, and things in the environment. Cognitive dissonance is typically experienced as psychological stress when persons participate in an action that goes against one or more of those things. According to this theory, when an action or idea is psychologically inconsistent with the other, people do all in their power to change either so that they become consistent. The discomfort is triggered by the person's belief clashing with new information perceived, wherein the individual tries to find a way to resolve the contradiction to reduce their discomfort.

In psychology, trait theory is an approach to the study of human personality. Trait theorists are primarily interested in the measurement of traits, which can be defined as habitual patterns of behavior, thought, and emotion. According to this perspective, traits are aspects of personality that are relatively stable over time, differ across individuals, are relatively consistent over situations, and influence behaviour. Traits are in contrast to states, which are more transitory dispositions.

Sociosexuality, sometimes called sociosexual orientation, is the individual difference in the willingness to engage in sexual activity outside of a committed relationship. Individuals who are more restricted sociosexually are less willing to engage in casual sex; they prefer greater love, commitment and emotional closeness before having sex with romantic partners. Individuals who are more unrestricted sociosexually are more willing to have casual sex and are more comfortable engaging in sex without love, commitment or closeness.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Environmental psychology</span> Academic study of the minds relationship to ones immediate surroundings

Environmental psychology is a branch of psychology that explores the relationship between humans and the external world. It examines the way in which the natural environment and our built environments shape us as individuals. Environmental psychology investigates how humans change the environment and how the environment influences humans' experiences and behaviors. The field defines the term environment broadly, encompassing natural environments, social settings, built environments, learning environments, and informational environments. According to an article on APA Psychnet, environmental psychology is when a person thinks to a plan, travels to a certain place, and follows through with the plan throughout their behavior.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Theory of planned behavior</span> Theory that links behavior

The theory of planned behavior (TPB) is a psychological theory that links beliefs to behavior. The theory maintains that three core components, namely, attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control, together shape an individual's behavioral intentions. In turn, a tenet of TPB is that behavioral intention is the most proximal determinant of human social behavior.

Self-determination theory (SDT) is a macro theory of human motivation and personality that concerns people's innate growth tendencies and innate psychological needs. It pertains to the motivation behind people's choices in the absence of external influences and distractions. SDT focuses on the degree to which human behavior is self-motivated and self-determined.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Affect (psychology)</span> Experience of feeling or emotion

Affect, in psychology, is the underlying experience of feeling, emotion, attachment, or mood. It encompasses a wide range of emotional states and can be positive or negative. Affect is a fundamental aspect of human experience and plays a central role in many psychological theories and studies. It can be understood as a combination of three components: emotion, mood, and affectivity. In psychology, the term affect is often used interchangeably with several related terms and concepts, though each term may have slightly different nuances. These terms encompass: emotion, feeling, mood, emotional state, sentiment, affective state, emotional response, affective reactivity, disposition. Researchers and psychologists may employ specific terms based on their focus and the context of their work.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Value-action gap</span> When a persons values do not correlate with their actions

The value-action gap is the discrepancy between the stated values of an individual or organisation and their actions. More generally, it is the difference between what people say and what people do. The phrase is associated with environmental geography, relating to attitudes and behaviors surrounding environmental issues. Numerous studies have reported an increase in global environmental concern, but have shown that environmental engagement is not adjusting in accordance.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">HEXACO model of personality structure</span> Six-dimensional model of human personality

The HEXACO model of personality structure is a six-dimensional model of human personality that was created by Ashton and Lee and explained in their book, The H Factor of Personality, based on findings from a series of lexical studies involving several European and Asian languages. The six factors, or dimensions, include honesty-humility (H), emotionality (E), extraversion (X), agreeableness (A), conscientiousness (C), and openness to experience (O). Each factor is composed of traits with characteristics indicating high and low levels of the factor. The HEXACO model was developed through similar methods as other trait taxonomies and builds on the work of Costa and McCrae and Goldberg. The model, therefore, shares several common elements with other trait models. However, the HEXACO model is unique mainly due to the addition of the honesty-humility dimension.

An implicit bias or implicit stereotype is the pre-reflective attribution of particular qualities by an individual to a member of some social out group.

Self-concealment is a psychological construct defined as "a predisposition to actively conceal from others personal information that one perceives as distressing or negative". Its opposite is self-disclosure.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nature connectedness</span>

Nature connectedness is the extent to which individuals include nature as part of their identity. It includes an understanding of nature and everything it is made up of, even the parts that are not pleasing. Characteristics of nature connectedness are similar to those of a personality trait: nature connectedness is stable over time and across various situations.

Person–environment fit is the degree to which individual and environmental characteristics match. Person characteristics may include an individual's biological or psychological needs, values, goals, abilities, or personality, while environmental characteristics could include intrinsic and extrinsic rewards, demands of a job or role, cultural values, or characteristics of other individuals and collectives in the person's social environment. Due to its important implications in the workplace, person–environment fit has maintained a prominent position in Industrial and organizational psychology and related fields.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Place attachment</span> Environmental psychology concept

Place attachment is the emotional bond between person and place, and one way of describing the relationship between people and spatial settings. It is highly influenced by an individual and his or her personal experiences. There is a considerable amount of research dedicated to defining what makes a place "meaningful" enough for place attachment to occur. Schroeder (1991) notably discussed the difference between "meaning" and "preference," defining meaning as "the thoughts, feelings, memories and interpretations evoked by a landscape" and preference as "the degree of liking for one landscape compared to another."

Green consumption is related to sustainable development or sustainable consumer behaviour. It is a form of consumption that safeguards the environment for the present and for future generations. It ascribes to consumers responsibility or co-responsibility for addressing environmental problems through the adoption of environmentally friendly behaviors, such as the use of organic products, clean and renewable energy, and the choice of goods produced by companies with zero, or almost zero, impact.

Sense of direction is the ability to know one's location and perform wayfinding. It is related to cognitive maps, spatial awareness, and spatial cognition. Sense of direction can be impaired by brain damage, such as in the case of topographical disorientation.

Difficulty of engagement is a notion in the Campbell paradigm, a model of behavior change with person-independent difficulty.

Pro-environmental behaviour is behaviour that people consciously choose in order to minimize the negative impact of their actions on the environment. Barriers to pro-environmental behaviour are the numerous factors that hinder individuals when they try to adjust their behaviours toward living more sustainable lifestyles.

Vicarious cognitive dissonance is the state of negative arousal in an individual from observing a member of their in-group behave in counterattitudinal ways. The phenomenon is distinguished from the type of cognitive dissonance proposed by Leon Festinger, which can be referred to as personal cognitive dissonance, because the discomfort is experienced vicariously by an observer rather than the actor engaging in inconsistent behavior. Like personal cognitive dissonance, vicarious cognitive dissonance can lead to changes in the observer’s attitudes and behavior to reduce psychological stress.

Florian G. Kaiser is a Swiss psychologist. Since 2008, he has been a professor of personality and social psychology at the Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg in Germany, currently serving as Chair of its Department of Personality and Social Psychology.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Kaiser, Florian G.; Byrka, Katarzyna; Hartig, Terry (2010). "Reviving Campbell's Paradigm for Attitude Research". Personality and Social Psychology Review. 14 (4): 351–367. doi:10.1177/1088868310366452. ISSN   1088-8683. PMID   20435803. S2CID   5394359.
  2. 1 2 Campbell, Donald T. (1963). "Social Attitudes and Other Acquired Behavioral Dispositions.". Psychology: A study of a science. Study II. Empirical substructure and relations with other sciences. Volume 6. Investigations of man as socius: Their place in psychology and the social sciences. McGraw-Hill. pp. 94–172. doi:10.1037/10590-003.
  3. ↑ "The Social Learning Theory of Julian B. Rotter". psych.fullerton.edu. Retrieved 2020-04-09.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 Kaiser, Florian G.; Wilson, Mark (2019). "The Campbell Paradigm as a Behavior-Predictive Reinterpretation of the Classical Tripartite Model of Attitudes". European Psychologist. 24 (4): 359–374. doi:10.1027/1016-9040/a000364. ISSN   1016-9040. PMC   7039345 . PMID   32116425.
  5. 1 2 Rosenberg, M.J.; Hovland, C.I.; McGuire, W.J.; Abelson, R.P.; Brehm, J.W. (1960). "Attitude organization and change: An analysis of consistency among attitude components". apa.org. Retrieved 2020-04-09.
  6. 1 2 Brügger, Adrian; Kaiser, Florian G.; Roczen, Nina (2011). "One for All?: Connectedness to Nature, Inclusion of Nature, Environmental Identity, and Implicit Association with Nature". European Psychologist. 16 (4): 324–333. doi:10.1027/1016-9040/a000032. ISSN   1016-9040.
  7. 1 2 Kaiser, Florian G. (2021). "Climate change mitigation within the Campbell paradigm: Doing the right thing for a reason and against all odds". Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences. 42: 70–75. doi: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.03.024 . ISSN   2352-1546.
  8. 1 2 Kaiser, Florian G.; Lange, Florian (2021). "Offsetting behavioral costs with personal attitude: Identifying the psychological essence of an environmental attitude measure". Journal of Environmental Psychology. 75: 101619. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101619. ISSN   0272-4944. S2CID   235555825.
  9. 1 2 3 4 Kaiser, Florian G.; Hartig, Terry; Brügger, Adrian; Duvier, Caroline (2013). "Environmental Protection and Nature as Distinct Attitudinal Objects: An Application of the Campbell Paradigm". Environment and Behavior. 45 (3): 369–398. doi:10.1177/0013916511422444. ISSN   0013-9165. S2CID   144530516.
  10. 1 2 Byrka, Katarzyna; Kaiser, Florian G. (2013). "Health performance of individuals within the Campbell paradigm". International Journal of Psychology. 48 (5): 986–999. doi:10.1080/00207594.2012.702215. ISSN   0020-7594. PMID   22857604.
  11. 1 2 3 Kaiser, F.G.; Brügger, A.; Hartig, T.; Bogner, F.X.; Gutscher, H. (2014). "Appreciation of nature and appreciation of environmental protection: How stable are these attitudes and which comes first?". European Review of Applied Psychology. 64 (6): 269–277. doi:10.1016/j.erap.2014.09.001.
  12. ↑ Urban, Jan (2016). "Are we measuring concern about global climate change correctly? Testing a novel measurement approach with the data from 28 countries". Climatic Change. 139 (3–4): 397–411. Bibcode:2016ClCh..139..397U. doi:10.1007/s10584-016-1812-0. ISSN   0165-0009. S2CID   157712943.
  13. ↑ Haans, Antal; Kaiser, Florian G.; de Kort, Yvonne A.W. (2007). "Privacy Needs in Office Environments: Development of Two Behavior-Based Scales". European Psychologist. 12 (2): 93–102. doi:10.1027/1016-9040.12.2.93. ISSN   1016-9040.
  14. ↑ Beute, Femke; Kaiser, Florian G.; Haans, Antal; de Kort, Yvonne (2017). "Striving for mental vigor through restorative activities: Application of the Campbell Paradigm to construct the Attitude toward mental vigor scale". Mental Health & Prevention. 8: 20–26. doi: 10.1016/j.mhp.2017.09.001 .
  15. ↑ Brügger, Adrian; Dorn, Michael H.; Messner, Claude; Kaiser, Florian G. (2019). "Conformity Within the Campbell Paradigm: Proposing a New Measurement Instrument". Social Psychology. 50 (3): 133–144. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000366. ISSN   1864-9335. S2CID   150708539.
  16. ↑ DeFleur, M. L.; Westie, F. R. (1963). "Attitude as a Scientific Concept". Social Forces. 42 (1): 17–31. doi:10.2307/2574941. ISSN   0037-7732. JSTOR   2574941.
  17. ↑ Kaiser, Florian G.; Oerke, Britta; Bogner, Franz X. (2007). "Behavior-based environmental attitude: Development of an instrument for adolescents". Journal of Environmental Psychology. 27 (3): 242–251. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2007.06.004.
  18. ↑ Kaiser, Florian G. (1998). "A General Measure of Ecological Behavior". Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 28 (5): 395–422. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01712.x. ISSN   0021-9029.
  19. ↑ Kaiser, Florian G.; Wilson, Mark (2000). "Assessing People's General Ecological Behavior: A Cross-Cultural Measure". Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 30 (5): 952–978. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02505.x. ISSN   0021-9029.
  20. ↑ Kaiser, Florian G.; Wilson, Mark (2004). "Goal-directed conservation behavior: the specific composition of a general performance". Personality and Individual Differences. 36 (7): 1531–1544. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2003.06.003.
  21. ↑ Bickman, Leonard (1972). "Environmental Attitudes and Actions". The Journal of Social Psychology. 87 (2): 323–324. doi:10.1080/00224545.1972.9922533. ISSN   0022-4545. PMID   5042528.
  22. ↑ DeFleur, Melvin L.; Westie, Frank R. (1958). "Verbal Attitudes and Overt Acts: An Experiment on the Salience of Attitudes". American Sociological Review. 23 (6): 667. doi:10.2307/2089055. JSTOR   2089055.
  23. ↑ LaPiere, R. T. (1934). "Attitudes vs. Actions". Social Forces. 13 (2): 230–237. doi:10.2307/2570339. ISSN   0037-7732. JSTOR   2570339. S2CID   35196521.
  24. ↑ Wicker, Allan W. (1969). "Attitudes versus Actions: The Relationship of Verbal and Overt Behavioral Responses to Attitude Objects". Journal of Social Issues. 25 (4): 41–78. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.464.5816 . doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1969.tb00619.x.
  25. ↑ Kaiser, Florian G.; Biel, Anders (2000). "Assessing General Ecological Behavior". European Journal of Psychological Assessment. 16 (1): 44–52. doi:10.1027//1015-5759.16.1.44. ISSN   1015-5759.
  26. ↑ Kaiser, Florian G.; Keller, Carmen (2001). "Disclosing Situational Constraints to Ecological Behavior: A Confirmatory Application of the Mixed Rasch Model* * The original data upon which this paper is based are available at www.hhpub.com/journals/ejpa". European Journal of Psychological Assessment. 17 (3): 212–221. doi:10.1027//1015-5759.17.3.212. ISSN   1015-5759.
  27. ↑ Scheuthle, Hannah; Carabias-Hutter, Vicente; Kaiser, Florian G. (2005). "The Motivational and Instantaneous Behavior Effects of Contexts: Steps Toward a Theory of Goal-Directed Behavior1". Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 35 (10): 2076–2093. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02210.x. hdl: 11475/5684 . ISSN   0021-9029.
  28. ↑ Kaiser, Florian; Arnold, Oliver; Otto, Siegmar (2014). "Attitudes and Defaults Save Lives and Protect the Environment Jointly and Compensatorily: Understanding the Behavioral Efficacy of Nudges and Other Structural Interventions". Behavioral Sciences. 4 (3): 202–212. doi: 10.3390/bs4030202 . ISSN   2076-328X. PMC   4219263 . PMID   25379277.
  29. ↑ Kaiser, Florian G.; Schultz, P. Wesley (2009). "The Attitude-Behavior Relationship: A Test of Three Models of the Moderating Role of Behavioral Difficulty 1". Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 39 (1): 186–207. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00435.x. hdl: 10211.3/199464 . S2CID   144238858.
  30. ↑ Diekmann, Andreas; Preisendörfer, Peter (1998). "Environmental Behavior: Discrepancies between Aspirations and Reality". Rationality and Society. 10 (1): 79–102. doi:10.1177/104346398010001004. ISSN   1043-4631. S2CID   145059601.
  31. ↑ Schultz, P. Wesley; Oskamp, Stuart (1996). "Effort as a Moderator of the Attitude-Behavior Relationship: General Environmental Concern and Recycling". Social Psychology Quarterly. 59 (4): 375. doi:10.2307/2787078. JSTOR   2787078.
  32. ↑ Guagnano, Gregory A.; Stern, Paul C.; Dietz, Thomas (1995). "Influences on Attitude-Behavior Relationships: A Natural Experiment with Curbside Recycling". Environment and Behavior. 27 (5): 699–718. doi:10.1177/0013916595275005. ISSN   0013-9165. S2CID   143574475.
  33. ↑ Truelove, Heather Barnes; Carrico, Amanda R.; Weber, Elke U.; Raimi, Kaitlin Toner; Vandenbergh, Michael P. (2014). "Positive and negative spillover of pro-environmental behavior: An integrative review and theoretical framework". Global Environmental Change. 29: 127–138. Bibcode:2014GEC....29..127T. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.09.004.
  34. 1 2 Kaiser, Florian G.; Henn, Laura; Marschke, Beatrice (2020). "Financial rewards for long-term environmental protection". Journal of Environmental Psychology. 68: 101411. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101411. S2CID   216464668.
  35. ↑ Byrka, Katarzyna; Kaiser, Florian G.; Olko, Joanna (2017). "Understanding the Acceptance of Nature-Preservation-Related Restrictions as the Result of the Compensatory Effects of Environmental Attitude and Behavioral Costs". Environment and Behavior. 49 (5): 487–508. Bibcode:2017EnvBe..49..487B. doi:10.1177/0013916516653638. ISSN   0013-9165. S2CID   148329711.
  36. ↑ Taube, Oliver; Kibbe, Alexandra; Vetter, Max; Adler, Maximilian; Kaiser, Florian G. (2018). "Applying the Campbell Paradigm to sustainable travel behavior: Compensatory effects of environmental attitude and the transportation environment". Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. 56: 392–407. Bibcode:2018TRPF...56..392T. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2018.05.006. S2CID   150269782.
  37. ↑ Taube, Oliver; Vetter, Max (2019). "How green defaults promote environmentally friendly decisions: Attitude-conditional default acceptance but attitude-unconditional effects on actual choices". Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 49 (11): 721–732. doi:10.1111/jasp.12629. ISSN   0021-9029. S2CID   204378953.
  38. ↑ Raden, David (1977). "Situational Thresholds and Attitude-Behavior Consistency". Sociometry. 40 (2): 123–129. doi:10.2307/3033515. JSTOR   3033515.
  39. ↑ Kaiser, Florian G.; Merten, Martin; Wetzel, Eunike (2018). "How do we know we are measuring environmental attitude? Specific objectivity as the formal validation criterion for measures of latent attributes". Journal of Environmental Psychology. 55: 139–146. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2018.01.003.
  40. ↑ Arnold, Oliver; Kibbe, Alexandra; Hartig, Terry; Kaiser, Florian G. (2018). "Capturing the Environmental Impact of Individual Lifestyles: Evidence of the Criterion Validity of the General Ecological Behavior Scale". Environment and Behavior. 50 (3): 350–372. Bibcode:2018EnvBe..50..350A. doi:10.1177/0013916517701796. ISSN   0013-9165. S2CID   46948370.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.