2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2021.102396
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Habitual food, energy, and water consumption behaviors among adults in the United States: Comparing models of values, norms, and identity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

4
15
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
4
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…After creating variables with the household dynamic process factor scores, we ran a stepwise multiple linear regression model, regressing self-reported frequency of pro-environmental actions on household dynamic process scales, NEP scores, and demographic control variables. Using exploratory factor analysis, we determined that food, energy, and water actions in this sample are not distinct constructs that could be reduced to three unique scales, aligning with our findings from a national survey earlier in this project (Floress et al 2022 ). Thus, for this analysis, we used the average of the 20 items to compute a score for each respondent ( α = 0.77, M = 4.36, SD = 0.72).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 72%
“…After creating variables with the household dynamic process factor scores, we ran a stepwise multiple linear regression model, regressing self-reported frequency of pro-environmental actions on household dynamic process scales, NEP scores, and demographic control variables. Using exploratory factor analysis, we determined that food, energy, and water actions in this sample are not distinct constructs that could be reduced to three unique scales, aligning with our findings from a national survey earlier in this project (Floress et al 2022 ). Thus, for this analysis, we used the average of the 20 items to compute a score for each respondent ( α = 0.77, M = 4.36, SD = 0.72).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 72%
“…The person who wants to gather information about new vehicles like hybrid electric vehicles and wants to impact others through the information has a personality like a car expert. When a person considers himself a car expert or environment-friendly, adopting a hybrid vehicle becomes more attractive to him and shows a more positive attitude toward adopting a hybrid electric vehicle (Schuitema et al, 2013;Floress et al, 2022). So, in the context of HEVs, in this study, we can hypothesise that: H5: Social value identity positively affects consumers' attitudes toward adopting a hybrid electric vehicle.…”
Section: Social Value Identitymentioning
confidence: 85%
“…Then these self-identities help to create a relationship between personal values and an environment-friendly attitude (Steg et al, 2014). Individual behaviour which can contribute to environmental sustainability is a particular form of social identity which can provide a symbolic benefit to the individual when adopting a hybrid electric vehicle, like showing himself as an environment-friendly person who can ready to adopt new and green technology to protect the environment (Whitmarsh and O'Neill, 2010;Floress et al, 2022). The person who wants to gather information about new vehicles like hybrid electric vehicles and wants to impact others through the information has a personality like a car expert.…”
Section: Social Value Identitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The relationship between pro‐environmental identity and personal norms was developed in the original VIP model. Many studies supported this relationship in geoenvironmental consumer behavior (e.g., Floress et al, 2022; Lee et al, 2021; Schuster et al, 2022) and employee pro‐environmental behavior (Ruepert & Steg, 2018).…”
Section: Literature Review and Hypotheses Developmentmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…The model provides support to the findings of Szmigin et al (2009), who argued that ethical consumption is encapsulated in relationships of obligation and that consumers express their ethical postures based on their priorities. Many studies provided empirical support for VIP (e.g., Floress et al, 2022; Kim & Seock, 2017; Lee et al, 2021; Schuster et al, 2022).…”
Section: Literature Review and Hypotheses Developmentmentioning
confidence: 99%