Offsetting behavioral costs with personal attitudes: A slightly more complex view of the attitude-behavior relation

Environmental Attitudes in 28 European Countries Derived From Atheoretically Compiled Opinions and Self-Reports of Behavior

“…For instance, in one study, the majority of participants expressed the opinion that it is everyone’s responsibility to pick up litter, but only a minority actually did so [see Bickman (1972) ]. And even though the majority of participants in Diekmann’s (1996) Swiss sample stated the opinion that they generally act pro-environmentally, only a minority reported actually turning down the thermostat when they left their homes for more than 4 h. Verbally expressed opinions and reports of past behavior—even when they are a valid reflection of what people think and claim they do—are therefore not automatically valid measures of people’s commitment to protecting the environment ( Kaiser et al, 2021 ), the motivational essence represented by people’s environmental attitudes [see, e.g., Kaiser et al (2010 , 2013) ].…”

“…By contrast, when environmental attitude is grounded in a psychological measurement theory that specifically models the response process by linking people’s latent environmental attitudes with their verbally expressed opinions and self-reports of behavior [i.e., the Campbell paradigm; see, e.g., Kaiser et al (2010) and Kaiser (2021) ], environmental attitude has repeatedly been shown to predict manifest environmentally protective behavior [see, e.g., Kaiser and Byrka (2015) ; Taube et al (2018) , Taube and Vetter (2019) , and Kaiser et al (2020) ] and vice versa. Engagement in a manifest behavior has also been shown to predict people’s environmental attitudes [see Kaiser et al (2021) and Kaiser and Lange (2021) ]. Quite logically, people’s environmental attitudes, grounded in the Campbell paradigm, have also revealed a statistically significant negative association with the same people’s electricity consumption [see Arnold et al (2018) ].…”

Supporting schools to use face recognition systems: a continuance intention perspective of elementary school parents in China

“…Although implicit and explicit attitudes are different, they can both affect behaviors, and individuals’ attitude can promote the value perception before performing a behavior (Kaiser et al, 2021 ). In line with this, the present study explored parents’ DBVW and technological innovativeness in the value perception of the use of face-recognition systems, and continuous intention to use such systems as a research framework.…”

“…As Kaiser & Lange ( 2021 ) suggested, explicit attitude influences behavior by triggering behavioral responses, while implicit attitude operates through the habituation of behaviors (Serenko & Turel, 2019 ). On the other hand, those people with strong explicit attitudes have a greater tendency to perform behavior as value increases (Kaiser et al, 2021 ). Thus, H4 was verified to understand how parents’ DBVW and technological innovativeness significantly related to CIU mediated by value perception.…”

“…Implicit and explicit attitudes are different, but they can both influence one’s behaviors, with explicit attitude influencing behavior by triggering behavioral responses, while implicit attitude can affect the habituation of behaviors (Serenko & Turel, 2019 ). Moreover, those people with strong explicit attitudes have a greater tendency to engage in increasingly costly behavior (Kaiser & Lange, 2021 ) and individuals’ attitudes can predict the value perception before performing a behavior (Kaiser et al, 2021 ). Drawing on the attitude-value-behavior model (Reser & Bentrupperbaumer, 2005 ), the continuous intention to use face recognition systems was explored.…”