How Environmental Policy Perception and Social Media Use Impact Pro-Environmental Behavior: A Moderated Mediation Model Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses
2.1. Apply TPB to PEB
2.2. Environmental Policy of the Government
2.3. The Mediating Role of SMU
3. Data and Methods
3.1. Measurement
3.2. Data Collection and Samples
3.3. Common Method Bias Test
4. Data Analysis and Results
4.1. Measurement Model Analysis
4.2. Alternative Model Test
4.3. Structural Model and Hypothesis Testing
4.3.1. Result of Direct Paths
4.3.2. Result of Indirect Paths
4.3.3. Result of the Moderating Role of Demographic Factors
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Jans, L. Changing Environmental Behaviour from the Bottom up: The Formation of pro-Environmental Social Identities. J. Environ. Psychol. 2021, 73, 101531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, C.-H.; Chang, T.-W.; Ting, C.-W.; Huang, S.Y.B. How Does Organizational Leadership Promote Pro-Environmental Behavior? A Moderated Mediation Model of Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility Policies. Sustainability 2024, 16, 4716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, Y.; Liu, C. Configuration Analysis of Influencing Factors of Energy-Saving Behaviors: From the Perspective of Consumers’ pro-Environmental Characteristics and Environmentally Friendly Social Atmosphere. Energy 2023, 278, 127906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ballew, M.T.; Omoto, A.M.; Winter, P.L. Using Web 2.0 and Social Media Technologies to Foster Proenvironmental Action. Sustainability 2015, 7, 10620–10648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, J.; Han, R. The Influence of Place Attachment on Pro-Environmental Behaviors: The Moderating Effect of Social Media. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 5100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Atshan, S.; Bixler, R.P.; Rai, V.; Springer, D.W. Pathways to Urban Sustainability through Individual Behaviors: The Role of Social Capital. Environ. Sci. Policy 2020, 112, 330–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tong, Q.; Zheng, Y.; Zhang, J. Does Social Media Use Enhance Low-Carbon Behavioral Intentions? Evidence from Chinese College Students. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2024, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wells, N.M.; Lekies, K.S. Nature and the Life Course: Pathways from Childhood Nature Experiences to Adult Environmentalism. Child. Youth Environ. 2006, 16, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Attiq, S.; Danish Habib, M.; Kaur, P.; Junaid Shahid Hasni, M.; Dhir, A. Drivers of Food Waste Reduction Behaviour in the Household Context. Food Qual. Prefer. 2021, 94, 104300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Griskevicius, V.; Tybur, J.M.; Van den Bergh, B. Going Green to Be Seen: Status, Reputation, and Conspicuous Conservation. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 2010, 98, 392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matthies, E.; Selge, S.; Klöckner, C.A. The Role of Parental Behaviour for the Development of Behaviour Specific Environmental Norms–The Example of Recycling and Re-Use Behaviour. J. Environ. Psychol. 2012, 32, 277–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, J.; Huang, J.; Huang, X.; Sun, S.; Hao, Y.; Wu, H. How Does New Environmental Law Affect Public Environmental Protection Activities in China? Evidence from Structural Equation Model Analysis on Legal Cognition. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 714, 136558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liu, D.; Du, H.; Southworth, F.; Ma, S. The Influence of Social-Psychological Factors on the Intention to Choose Low-Carbon Travel Modes in Tianjin, China. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2017, 105, 42–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, F.; Chen, Q.; Ma, W.; Evans, R. Promoting Public Engagement with Household Waste Separation through Government Social Media: A Case Study of Shanghai. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 320, 115825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wan, C.; Shen, G.Q.; Yu, A. The Moderating Effect of Perceived Policy Effectiveness on Recycling Intention. J. Environ. Psychol. 2014, 37, 55–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fu, L.; Sun, Z.; Zha, L.; Liu, F.; He, L.; Sun, X.; Jing, X. Environmental Awareness and Pro-Environmental Behavior within China’s Road Freight Transportation Industry: Moderating Role of Perceived Policy Effectiveness. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 252, 119796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Mangmeechai, A. Understanding the Gap between Environmental Intention and Pro-Environmental Behavior towards the Waste Sorting and Management Policy of China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Okumah, M.; Martin-Ortega, J.; Novo, P.; J. Chapman, P. Revisiting the Determinants of Pro-Environmental Behaviour to Inform Land Management Policy: A Meta-Analytic Structural Equation Model Application. Land 2020, 9, 135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aral, S.; Dellarocas, C.; Godes, D. Introduction to the Special Issue—Social Media and Business Transformation: A Framework for Research. Inf. Syst. Res. 2013, 24, 3–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, B.; Hu, X.; Gu, M. Promote Pro-Environmental Behaviour through Social Media: An Empirical Study Based on Ant Forest. Environ. Sci. Policy 2022, 137, 216–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allison, C.; Winkler, A.; Childs, A.-R.; Muller, C.; Potts, W. Can Social Media Platforms Be Used to Foster Improved Environmental Behaviour in Recreational Fisheries? Fish. Res. 2023, 258, 106544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hynes, N.; Wilson, J. I Do It, but Don’t Tell Anyone! Personal Values, Personal and Social Norms: Can Social Media Play a Role in Changing pro-Environmental Behaviours? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2016, 111, 349–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, J.; Liang, H.; Zafar, A.U.; Shahzad, M.; Akram, U.; Ashfaq, M. Influence by Osmosis: Social Media Green Communities and pro-Environmental Behavior. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2023, 143, 107706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stren, P. Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behaviour. J. Soc. Issues 2000, 56, 407–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steg, L.; Bolderdijk, J.W.; Keizer, K.; Perlaviciute, G. An Integrated Framework for Encouraging Pro-Environmental Behaviour: The Role of Values, Situational Factors and Goals. J. Environ. Psychol. 2014, 38, 104–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, H.; Zhang, W.; Diao, B.; Liu, Y.; Chen, H.; Long, R.; Cai, S. The Progress and Trend of Pro-Environmental Behavior Research: A Bibliometrics-Based Visualization Analysis. Curr. Psychol. 2023, 42, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gkargkavouzi, A.; Halkos, G.; Matsiori, S. Environmental Behavior in a Private-Sphere Context: Integrating Theories of Planned Behavior and Value Belief Norm, Self-Identity and Habit. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 148, 145–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sopha, B.M.; Christian, A.K.; Bjørnstad, E.; Matthies, E. Literature Research on Energy Behaviour: Behavioural Models, Determinants, Indicators, Barriers and Interventions. In Report in the Enova Project “Indicators of Determinants of Household Energy Behaviours; Enova: Trondheim, Norway, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Ajzen, I. The Theory of Planned Behaviour: Reactions and Reflections. Psychol. Health 2011, 26, 1113–1127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ajzen, I. The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, H.; Hsu, L.-T.J.; Sheu, C. Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior to Green Hotel Choice: Testing the Effect of Environmental Friendly Activities. Tour. Manag. 2010, 31, 325–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klöckner, C.A. A Comprehensive Model of the Psychology of Environmental Behaviour—A Meta-Analysis. Glob. Environ. Change 2013, 23, 1028–1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, D.; Zhao, L.; Ma, S.; Shao, S.; Zhang, L. What Influences an Individual’s pro-Environmental Behavior? A Literature Review. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 146, 28–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Ritchie, B.W. Understanding Accommodation Managers’ Crisis Planning Intention: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Tour. Manag. 2012, 33, 1057–1067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ateş, H. Merging Theory of Planned Behavior and Value Identity Personal Norm Model to Explain Pro-Environmental Behaviors. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2020, 24, 169–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leonard, M.; Graham, S.; Bonacum, D. The Human Factor: The Critical Importance of Effective Teamwork and Communication in Providing Safe Care. BMJ Qual. Saf. 2004, 13, i85–i90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bamberg, S. How Does Environmental Concern Influence Specific Environmentally Related Behaviors? A New Answer to an Old Question. J. Environ. Psychol. 2003, 23, 21–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yadav, R.; Pathak, G.S. Young Consumers’ Intention towards Buying Green Products in a Developing Nation: Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 135, 732–739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paul, J.; Modi, A.; Patel, J. Predicting Green Product Consumption Using Theory of Planned Behavior and Reasoned Action. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2016, 29, 123–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choi, D.; Johnson, K.K. Influences of Environmental and Hedonic Motivations on Intention to Purchase Green Products: An Extension of the Theory of Planned Behavior. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2019, 18, 145–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, Y.; Thøgersen, J.; Ruan, Y.; Huang, G. The Moderating Role of Human Values in Planned Behavior: The Case of Chinese Consumers’ Intention to Buy Organic Food. J. Consum. Mark. 2013, 30, 335–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ajzen, I. Perceived Behavioral Control, Self-Efficacy, Locus of Control, and the Theory of Planned Behavior 1. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2002, 32, 665–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yuen, K.F.; Huyen, D.T.K.; Wang, X.; Qi, G. Factors Influencing the Adoption of Shared Autonomous Vehicles. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 4868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, M.-F.; Tung, P.-J. Developing an Extended Theory of Planned Behavior Model to Predict Consumers’ Intention to Visit Green Hotels. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2014, 36, 221–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barbarossa, C.; Pastore, A. Why Environmentally Conscious Consumers Do Not Purchase Green Products: A Cognitive Mapping Approach. Qual. Mark. Res. Int. J. 2015, 18, 188–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jordan, A.; Wurzel, R.K.; Zito, A.R. ’New’instruments of Environmental Governance: Patterns and Pathways of Change. Environ. Polit. 2003, 12, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, T.; Yao, H. The Improvement on the Implementation Level of Environmental Policies Is Demanded in China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 36035–36038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, C.; Xu, X.; Frey, S. Who Wants Solar Water Heaters and Alternative Fuel Vehicles? Assessing Social–Psychological Predictors of Adoption Intention and Policy Support in China. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2016, 15, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wan, C.; Shen, G.Q. Perceived Policy Effectiveness and Recycling Behaviour: The Missing Link. Waste Manag. 2013, 33, 783–784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wan, C.; Shen, G.Q.; Yu, A. The Role of Perceived Effectiveness of Policy Measures in Predicting Recycling Behaviour in Hong Kong. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2014, 83, 141–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharpe, E.J.; Perlaviciute, G.; Steg, L. Pro-Environmental Behaviour and Support for Environmental Policy as Expressions of pro-Environmental Motivation. J. Environ. Psychol. 2021, 76, 101650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borek, E.; Bohon, S.A. Policy Climates and Reductions in Automobile Use. Soc. Sci. Q. 2008, 89, 1293–1311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steg, L.; Vlek, C. Encouraging Pro-Environmental Behaviour: An Integrative Review and Research Agenda. J. Environ. Psychol. 2009, 29, 309–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olli, E.; Grendstad, G.; Wollebaek, D. Correlates of Environmental Behaviors: Bringing Back Social Context. Environ. Behav. 2001, 33, 181–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scott, W.R. The Adolescence of Institutional Theory. Adm. Sci. Q. 1987, 32, 493–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ertz, M.; Huang, R.; Jo, M.-S.; Karakas, F.; Sarigöllü, E. From Single-Use to Multi-Use: Study of Consumers’ Behavior toward Consumption of Reusable Containers. J. Environ. Manag. 2017, 193, 334–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nasri, W.; Charfeddine, L. Factors Affecting the Adoption of Internet Banking in Tunisia: An Integration Theory of Acceptance Model and Theory of Planned Behavior. J. High Technol. Manag. Res. 2012, 23, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, P.; Van Fan, Y.; Klemeš, J.J. Data Analytics of Social Media Publicity to Enhance Household Waste Management. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 164, 105146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bruns, A.; Highfield, T.; Lind, R.A. Blogs, Twitter, and Breaking News: The Produsage of Citizen Journalism. Prod. Theory A Digit. World Intersect. Audiences Prod. Contemp. Theory 2012, 80, 15–32. [Google Scholar]
- Kalogeropoulos, A.; Negredo, S.; Picone, I.; Nielsen, R.K. Who Shares and Comments on News?: A Cross-National Comparative Analysis of Online and Social Media Participation. Soc. Media+ Soc. 2017, 3, 2056305117735754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ho, S.S.; Yang, X. Communication, Cognitive Processing, and Public Knowledge about Climate Change. Asian J. Commun. 2018, 28, 449–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, J.; Cho, M. The Effects of Consumers’ Media Exposure, Attention, and Credibility on pro-Environmental Behaviors. J. Promot. Manag. 2020, 26, 434–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McClain, C.R. Likes, Comments, and Shares of Marine Organism Imagery on Facebook. PeerJ 2019, 7, e6795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wu, Y.; Xie, L.; Huang, S.-L.; Li, P.; Yuan, Z.; Liu, W. Using Social Media to Strengthen Public Awareness of Wildlife Conservation. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2018, 153, 76–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shah, Z.; Wei, L.; Ghani, U. The Use of Social Networking Sites and Pro-Environmental Behaviors: A Mediation and Moderation Model. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yang, X.; Chen, L.; Ho, S.S. Does Media Exposure Relate to the Illusion of Knowing in the Public Understanding of Climate Change? Public Underst. Sci. 2020, 29, 94–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zafar, A.U.; Qiu, J.; Shahzad, M. Do Digital Celebrities’ Relationships and Social Climate Matter? Impulse Buying in f-Commerce. Internet Res. 2020, 30, 1731–1762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, S.; Jung, J. The Interplay between Social Media Virality Metrics and Message Framing in Influence Perception of Pro-Environmental Messages and Behavioral Intentions. Telemat. Inform. 2023, 78, 101947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiménez-Castillo, D.; Ortega-Egea, J.M. Too Positive to Change? Examining Optimism Bias as a Barrier to Media Effects on Environmental Activism. J. Environ. Psychol. 2015, 43, 216–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stavrositu, C.D.; Kim, J. Social Media Metrics: Third-Person Perceptions of Health Information. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 35, 61–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trivedi, R.H.; Patel, J.D.; Acharya, N. Causality Analysis of Media Influence on Environmental Attitude, Intention and Behaviors Leading to Green Purchasing. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 196, 11–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Awan, T.M.; Zhang, X.; Zhou, Y.; Zhou, Z. Does Media Usage Affect Pro-Environmental Attitudes and Behaviors? Evidence from China. Int. Rev. Econ. Financ. 2022, 82, 307–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, K. Mass Communication and Pro-Environmental Behaviour: Waste Recycling in Hong Kong. J. Environ. Manag. 1998, 52, 317–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chu, S.-C.; Kim, Y. Determinants of Consumer Engagement in Electronic Word-of-Mouth (eWOM) in Social Networking Sites. Int. J. Advert. 2011, 30, 47–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brailovskaia, J.; Schillack, H.; Margraf, J. Tell Me Why Are You Using Social Media (SM)! Relationship between Reasons for Use of SM, SM Flow, Daily Stress, Depression, Anxiety, and Addictive SM Use–An Exploratory Investigation of Young Adults in Germany. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2020, 113, 106511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Westerman, D.; Spence, P.R.; Van Der Heide, B. Social Media as Information Source: Recency of Updates and Credibility of Information. J. Comput.-Mediat. Commun. 2014, 19, 171–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shahin, S.; Saldaña, M.; Gil de Zuniga, H. Peripheral Elaboration Model: The Impact of Incidental News Exposure on Political Participation. J. Inf. Technol. Politics 2021, 18, 148–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eveland, W.P., Jr. The Cognitive Mediation Model of Learning from the News: Evidence from Nonelection, off-Year Election, and Presidential Election Contexts. Commun. Res. 2001, 28, 571–601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heiss, R.; Matthes, J. Funny Cats and Politics: Do Humorous Context Posts Impede or Foster the Elaboration of News Posts on Social Media? Commun. Res. 2021, 48, 100–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, W.; McCabe, S.; Wang, Y.; Chong, A.Y.L. Evaluating User-Generated Content in Social Media: An Effective Approach to Encourage Greater pro-Environmental Behavior in Tourism? J. Sustain. Tour. 2018, 26, 600–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, H.; Sakamoto, Y. Social Impacts in Social Media: An Examination of Perceived Truthfulness and Sharing of Information. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 41, 278–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, F.; Zhou, A.; Zhang, X.; Xu, X.; Liu, X. Fighting Rumors to Fight COVID-19: Investigating Rumor Belief and Sharing on Social Media during the Pandemic. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2023, 139, 107521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chung, M. Not Just Numbers: The Role of Social Media Metrics in Online News Evaluations. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 75, 949–957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rimé, B. Emotion Elicits the Social Sharing of Emotion: Theory and Empirical Review. Emot. Rev. 2009, 1, 60–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gong, X.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, H.; Cheng, M.; Wang, F.; Yu, N. Internet Use Encourages Pro-Environmental Behavior: Evidence from China. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 256, 120725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leftheriotis, I.; Giannakos, M.N. Using Social Media for Work: Losing Your Time or Improving Your Work? Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 31, 134–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fleming, C.M.; Bowden, M. Web-Based Surveys as an Alternative to Traditional Mail Methods. J. Environ. Manag. 2009, 90, 284–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Podsakoff, N. Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 885, 10–1037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harman, H.H. Modern Factor Analysis; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1976. [Google Scholar]
- Anderson, J.C.; Gerbing, D.W. Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach. Psychol. Bull. 1988, 103, 411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed.; Pearson: London, UK, 2009; ISBN 978-0-13-813263-7. [Google Scholar]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error: Algebra and Statistics; Sage Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 1981. [Google Scholar]
- Iacobucci, D.; Saldanha, N.; Deng, X. A Meditation on Mediation: Evidence That Structural Equations Models Perform Better than Regressions. J. Consum. Psychol. 2007, 17, 139–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baron, R.M.; Kenny, D.A. The Moderator–Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1986, 51, 1173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hayes, A.F. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis, First Edition: A Regression-Based Approach; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2013; ISBN 978-1-60918-230-4. [Google Scholar]
- Karimi, S.; Liobikienė, G.; Saadi, H.; Sepahvand, F. The Influence of Media Usage on Iranian Students’ pro-Environmental Behaviors: An Application of the Extended Theory of Planned Behavior. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lichtenthaler, U.; Ernst, H. Attitudes to Externally Organising Knowledge Management Tasks: A Review, Reconsideration and Extension of the NIH Syndrome. R & D Manag. 2006, 36, 367–386. [Google Scholar]
- Li, W.; Jin, Z.; Liu, X.; Li, G.; Wang, L. The Impact of Mandatory Policies on Residents’ Willingness to Separate Household Waste: A Moderated Mediation Model. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 275, 111226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, S.; Zhang, M.; Yu, X.; Ren, H. What Keeps Chinese from Recycling: Accessibility of Recycling Facilities and the Behavior. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2016, 109, 176–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, Z.; Ma, J.; Liu, Y.; He, J.; Guo, Z. New Pathway Exploring the Effectiveness of Waste Recycling Policy: A Quasi-Experiment on the Effects of Perceived Policy Effectiveness. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 363, 132569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, T.; De Grave, W.; Ganjiwale, J.; Muijtjens, A.; van der Vleuten, C. Paying Attention to Intention to Transfer in Faculty Development Using the Theory of Planned Behavior. Am. J. Educ. Res. 2014, 2, 361–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, H.; Long, R.; Chen, H.; Sun, K.; Sun, Q.; Li, Q. Examining Public Attitudes and Perceptions of Waste Sorting in China through an Urban Heterogeneity Lens: A Social Media Analysis. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2023, 199, 107233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ojeda, C.; Bernardi, L.; Landwehr, C. Depression and the Gender Gap in Political Interest. Elect. Stud. 2023, 82, 102598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brailovskaia, J.; Ozimek, P.; Rohmann, E.; Bierhoff, H.-W. Vulnerable Narcissism, Fear of Missing out (FoMO) and Addictive Social Media Use: A Gender Comparison from Germany. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2023, 144, 107725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, Z.; Gong, Y.; Li, Y.; Zhang, L.; Sun, Y. Gender-Related Beliefs, Norms, and the Link with Green Consumption. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 710239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alzahrani, L.; Al-Karaghouli, W.; Weerakkody, V. Investigating the Impact of Citizens’ Trust toward the Successful Adoption of e-Government: A Multigroup Analysis of Gender, Age, and Internet Experience. Inf. Syst. Manag. 2018, 35, 124–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Hao, F.; Liu, Y. Pro-Environmental Behavior in an Aging World: Evidence from 31 Countries. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
DIM | Composite Reliability | Convergence Validity | Discriminant Validity | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CR | AVE | EPP | SMU | ATT | SN | PBC | PEI | PEB | |
EPP | 0.844 | 0.523 | 0.723 | ||||||
SMU | 0.842 | 0.640 | 0.390 *** | 0.800 | |||||
ATT | 0.842 | 0.646 | 0.383 *** | 0.307 *** | 0.804 | ||||
SN | 0.888 | 0.727 | 0.400 *** | 0.287 *** | 0.478 *** | 0.853 | |||
PBC | 0.762 | 0.518 | 0.341 *** | 0.254 *** | 0.531 *** | 0.582 *** | 0.720 | ||
PEI | 0.920 | 0.793 | 0.228 *** | 0.300 *** | 0.401 *** | 0.428 *** | 0.558 *** | 0.891 | |
PEB | 0.786 | 0.489 | 0.417 *** | 0.386 *** | 0.319 *** | 0.479 *** | 0.469 *** | 0.544 *** | 0.699 |
Models | Adj. R2 | χ2 | df | χ2/df | RMSEA | CFI | TLI | SRMR |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model 1 | 0.454 | 618.455 | 181 | 3.417 | 0.077 | 0.906 | 0.891 | 0.117 |
Model 2 | 0.518 | 585.621 | 180 | 3.253 | 0.074 | 0.913 | 0.898 | 0.110 |
Model 3 | 0.530 | 676.398 | 241 | 2.807 | 0.067 | 0.917 | 0.905 | 0.099 |
Model 4 | 0.535 | 657.865 | 238 | 2.764 | 0.066 | 0.920 | 0.908 | 0.096 |
Indirect Paths | E | SE | Bias-Corrected 90% CI | Hypothesis | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lower Limit | Upper Limit | ||||
EPP→ATT→PEI→PEB | 0.011 | 0.008 | 0.002 | 0.030 | H5a supported |
EPP→SN→PEI→PEB | 0.016 | 0.014 | 0.000 | 0.044 | H5b not supported |
EPP→PBC→PEI→PEB | 0.070 | 0.028 | 0.035 | 0.133 | H5c supported |
EPP→PBC→PEB | 0.059 | 0.041 | 0.005 | 0.138 | H5d supported |
SMU→ATT→PEI→PEB | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.001 | 0.017 | H8a supported |
SMU→SN→PEI→PEB | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.000 | 0.021 | H8b not supported |
SMU→PBC→PEI→PEB | 0.026 | 0.017 | 0.005 | 0.063 | H8c supported |
SMU→PBC→PEB | 0.022 | 0.020 | 0.001 | 0.071 | H8d supported |
EPP→SMU→PEB | 0.079 | 0.031 | 0.035 | 0.139 | H10 supported |
EPP→SMU→ATT→PEI→PEB | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.000 | 0.011 | H11a not upported |
EPP→SMU→SN→PEI→PEB | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.000 | 0.013 | H11b not upported |
EPP→SMU→PBC→PEI→PEB | 0.016 | 0.011 | 0.005 | 0.042 | H11c supported |
EPP→SMU→PBC→PEB | 0.014 | 0.013 | 0.001 | 0.045 | H11d supported |
Panel A | Path Coefficients | Results | |||
The Paths | Male | Female | Difference | p-Value | |
EPP→PEB | 0.318 *** | 0.189 *** | −0.129 | 0.286 | male = female |
EPP→SMU | 0.790 *** | 0.504 *** | −0.287 * | 0.055 | male > female |
SMU→PEB | 0.039 | 0.178 *** | 0.139 * | 0.089 | male < female |
EPP→ATT | 0.475 *** | 0.241 *** | −0.234 * | 0.061 | male > female |
EPP→SN | 0.795 *** | 0.410 *** | −0.385 ** | 0.021 | male > female |
EPP→PBC | 0.378 *** | 0.345 *** | −0.033 | 0.791 | male = female |
Panel B | Path Coefficients | Results | |||
The Paths | Youth | Elderly | Difference | p-Value | |
EPP→PEB | 0.220 *** | 0.224 * | 0.005 | 0.971 | youth = elderly |
EPP→SMU | 0.539 *** | 0.741 *** | 0.202 | 0.201 | youth = elderly |
SMU→PEB | 0.076 | 0.205 *** | 0.130 * | 0.088 | youth < elderly |
EPP→ATT | 0.162 ** | 0.675 *** | 0.512 *** | 0.000 | youth < elderly |
EPP→SN | 0.315 *** | 0.945 *** | 0.630 *** | 0.000 | youth < elderly |
EPP→PBC | 0.219 *** | 0.491 *** | 0.272 ** | 0.027 | youth < elderly |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Liu, M.; Shi, Z.; Zhang, Z. How Environmental Policy Perception and Social Media Use Impact Pro-Environmental Behavior: A Moderated Mediation Model Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior. Sustainability 2024, 16, 7587. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177587
Liu M, Shi Z, Zhang Z. How Environmental Policy Perception and Social Media Use Impact Pro-Environmental Behavior: A Moderated Mediation Model Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior. Sustainability. 2024; 16(17):7587. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177587
Chicago/Turabian StyleLiu, Meng, Ze Shi, and Zaisheng Zhang. 2024. "How Environmental Policy Perception and Social Media Use Impact Pro-Environmental Behavior: A Moderated Mediation Model Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior" Sustainability 16, no. 17: 7587. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177587