“I should” Does Not Mean “I can.” Introducing Efficacy, Normative, and General Compensatory Green Beliefs
Compensatory green beliefs (CGBs) denote beliefs that unsustainable behaviours can be compensated for by performing other sustainable behaviours. We propose to differentiate between efficacy, normative, and general beliefs (ECGBs, NCGBs, GCGBs). ECGBs refer to effectively offsetting previous lapses....
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of consumer policy 2023-06, Vol.46 (2), p.223-251 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 251 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 223 |
| container_title | Journal of consumer policy |
| container_volume | 46 |
| creator | Penker, M. Seebauer, S. |
| description | Compensatory green beliefs (CGBs) denote beliefs that unsustainable behaviours can be compensated for by performing other sustainable behaviours. We propose to differentiate between efficacy, normative, and general beliefs (ECGBs, NCGBs, GCGBs). ECGBs refer to effectively offsetting previous lapses. NCGBs denote feeling morally obliged to make amends. GCGBs refer to trading off unspecified efforts in overall consumption. Employing survey data from
n
= 502 high school graduates and an
n
= 145 longitudinal subsample, we find a three-factor structure of CGBs. ECGBs, NCGBs, and GCGBs intercorrelate moderately, indicating their status as different constructs. NCGBs are positively associated with pro-environmental values, self-identity, and social norms, whereas GCGBs are negatively associated with these constructs. CGBs, in particular NCGBs, have unique explanatory power for sustainable behaviours. NCGBs show substantial temporal stability over one year. CGBs need not be destructive, as NCGBs may encourage sustainable action. Persuasive messages could be tailored to specific CGBs in specific behavioural domains. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10603-023-09539-6 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10158688</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2822705573</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c516t-7623ff9658c779aa2b21ead46fc8ab391c4408b79f5a875f505fe0c6da849ee43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1u1DAUhS0EokPLC7BAltiwaIrtxD9ZoTKUYaTSbmBteZzraarEntpJpdn1QeDl-iR4mtICiy4syzqfz_05CL2h5IgSIj8kSgQpC8LyqXlZF-IZmlEu81MS8hzNCBWqkKSs9tCrlC4JIbUq-Uu0V0omK6LkDF3d3vxc4nQRxq65vfmFPwdI-CwM-BsYj-9Ea_zRTlr6IYZmtK1f4xPnWmvs9jCzsTdDew2H2PgGL8BDNB2eh34DPpkhxC1eRACPP0HXgksH6IUzXYLX9_c--vHl5Pv8a3F6vljOj08Ly6kYCilY6VwtuLJS1sawFaNgmko4q8yqrKmt8gQrWTtulOSOE-6AWNEYVdUAVbmPPk6-m3HVQ2Mht286vYltb-JWB9PqfxXfXuh1uNaUUK6EUtnh_b1DDFcjpEH3bbLQdcZDGJNmijFJeF54Rt_9h16GMfo8346ilRKsopliE2VjSCmCe-iGEr2LVE-R6hypvotUi_zp7d9zPHz5k2EG8ASADb5Nj56Kc5brVrtdlBOSsujXEB_be6Lyb3Ahui8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2821486241</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>“I should” Does Not Mean “I can.” Introducing Efficacy, Normative, and General Compensatory Green Beliefs</title><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Penker, M. ; Seebauer, S.</creator><creatorcontrib>Penker, M. ; Seebauer, S.</creatorcontrib><description>Compensatory green beliefs (CGBs) denote beliefs that unsustainable behaviours can be compensated for by performing other sustainable behaviours. We propose to differentiate between efficacy, normative, and general beliefs (ECGBs, NCGBs, GCGBs). ECGBs refer to effectively offsetting previous lapses. NCGBs denote feeling morally obliged to make amends. GCGBs refer to trading off unspecified efforts in overall consumption. Employing survey data from
n
= 502 high school graduates and an
n
= 145 longitudinal subsample, we find a three-factor structure of CGBs. ECGBs, NCGBs, and GCGBs intercorrelate moderately, indicating their status as different constructs. NCGBs are positively associated with pro-environmental values, self-identity, and social norms, whereas GCGBs are negatively associated with these constructs. CGBs, in particular NCGBs, have unique explanatory power for sustainable behaviours. NCGBs show substantial temporal stability over one year. CGBs need not be destructive, as NCGBs may encourage sustainable action. Persuasive messages could be tailored to specific CGBs in specific behavioural domains.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0168-7034</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-0700</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10603-023-09539-6</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37274087</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Behavior ; Carbon ; Climate change ; Commercial Law ; Consumer behavior ; Consumers ; Economic Policy ; Efficacy ; Endorsements ; Environmental impact ; Environmental policy ; High school graduates ; Identity ; Licenses ; Marketing ; Original Paper ; Secondary schools ; Social norms ; Social Sciences ; Social values ; Sustainability ; Validity</subject><ispartof>Journal of consumer policy, 2023-06, Vol.46 (2), p.223-251</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2023</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2023.</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2023. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c516t-7623ff9658c779aa2b21ead46fc8ab391c4408b79f5a875f505fe0c6da849ee43</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0708-2614 ; 0000-0003-4592-9529</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10603-023-09539-6$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10603-023-09539-6$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,777,781,882,27847,27905,27906,41469,42538,51300</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37274087$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Penker, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seebauer, S.</creatorcontrib><title>“I should” Does Not Mean “I can.” Introducing Efficacy, Normative, and General Compensatory Green Beliefs</title><title>Journal of consumer policy</title><addtitle>J Consum Policy</addtitle><addtitle>J Consum Policy (Dordr)</addtitle><description>Compensatory green beliefs (CGBs) denote beliefs that unsustainable behaviours can be compensated for by performing other sustainable behaviours. We propose to differentiate between efficacy, normative, and general beliefs (ECGBs, NCGBs, GCGBs). ECGBs refer to effectively offsetting previous lapses. NCGBs denote feeling morally obliged to make amends. GCGBs refer to trading off unspecified efforts in overall consumption. Employing survey data from
n
= 502 high school graduates and an
n
= 145 longitudinal subsample, we find a three-factor structure of CGBs. ECGBs, NCGBs, and GCGBs intercorrelate moderately, indicating their status as different constructs. NCGBs are positively associated with pro-environmental values, self-identity, and social norms, whereas GCGBs are negatively associated with these constructs. CGBs, in particular NCGBs, have unique explanatory power for sustainable behaviours. NCGBs show substantial temporal stability over one year. CGBs need not be destructive, as NCGBs may encourage sustainable action. Persuasive messages could be tailored to specific CGBs in specific behavioural domains.</description><subject>Behavior</subject><subject>Carbon</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Commercial Law</subject><subject>Consumer behavior</subject><subject>Consumers</subject><subject>Economic Policy</subject><subject>Efficacy</subject><subject>Endorsements</subject><subject>Environmental impact</subject><subject>Environmental policy</subject><subject>High school graduates</subject><subject>Identity</subject><subject>Licenses</subject><subject>Marketing</subject><subject>Original Paper</subject><subject>Secondary schools</subject><subject>Social norms</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Social values</subject><subject>Sustainability</subject><subject>Validity</subject><issn>0168-7034</issn><issn>1573-0700</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc1u1DAUhS0EokPLC7BAltiwaIrtxD9ZoTKUYaTSbmBteZzraarEntpJpdn1QeDl-iR4mtICiy4syzqfz_05CL2h5IgSIj8kSgQpC8LyqXlZF-IZmlEu81MS8hzNCBWqkKSs9tCrlC4JIbUq-Uu0V0omK6LkDF3d3vxc4nQRxq65vfmFPwdI-CwM-BsYj-9Ea_zRTlr6IYZmtK1f4xPnWmvs9jCzsTdDew2H2PgGL8BDNB2eh34DPpkhxC1eRACPP0HXgksH6IUzXYLX9_c--vHl5Pv8a3F6vljOj08Ly6kYCilY6VwtuLJS1sawFaNgmko4q8yqrKmt8gQrWTtulOSOE-6AWNEYVdUAVbmPPk6-m3HVQ2Mht286vYltb-JWB9PqfxXfXuh1uNaUUK6EUtnh_b1DDFcjpEH3bbLQdcZDGJNmijFJeF54Rt_9h16GMfo8346ilRKsopliE2VjSCmCe-iGEr2LVE-R6hypvotUi_zp7d9zPHz5k2EG8ASADb5Nj56Kc5brVrtdlBOSsujXEB_be6Lyb3Ahui8</recordid><startdate>20230601</startdate><enddate>20230601</enddate><creator>Penker, M.</creator><creator>Seebauer, S.</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>OQ6</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0708-2614</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4592-9529</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230601</creationdate><title>“I should” Does Not Mean “I can.” Introducing Efficacy, Normative, and General Compensatory Green Beliefs</title><author>Penker, M. ; Seebauer, S.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c516t-7623ff9658c779aa2b21ead46fc8ab391c4408b79f5a875f505fe0c6da849ee43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Behavior</topic><topic>Carbon</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Commercial Law</topic><topic>Consumer behavior</topic><topic>Consumers</topic><topic>Economic Policy</topic><topic>Efficacy</topic><topic>Endorsements</topic><topic>Environmental impact</topic><topic>Environmental policy</topic><topic>High school graduates</topic><topic>Identity</topic><topic>Licenses</topic><topic>Marketing</topic><topic>Original Paper</topic><topic>Secondary schools</topic><topic>Social norms</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Social values</topic><topic>Sustainability</topic><topic>Validity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Penker, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seebauer, S.</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>ECONIS</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of consumer policy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Penker, M.</au><au>Seebauer, S.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>“I should” Does Not Mean “I can.” Introducing Efficacy, Normative, and General Compensatory Green Beliefs</atitle><jtitle>Journal of consumer policy</jtitle><stitle>J Consum Policy</stitle><addtitle>J Consum Policy (Dordr)</addtitle><date>2023-06-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>46</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>223</spage><epage>251</epage><pages>223-251</pages><issn>0168-7034</issn><eissn>1573-0700</eissn><abstract>Compensatory green beliefs (CGBs) denote beliefs that unsustainable behaviours can be compensated for by performing other sustainable behaviours. We propose to differentiate between efficacy, normative, and general beliefs (ECGBs, NCGBs, GCGBs). ECGBs refer to effectively offsetting previous lapses. NCGBs denote feeling morally obliged to make amends. GCGBs refer to trading off unspecified efforts in overall consumption. Employing survey data from
n
= 502 high school graduates and an
n
= 145 longitudinal subsample, we find a three-factor structure of CGBs. ECGBs, NCGBs, and GCGBs intercorrelate moderately, indicating their status as different constructs. NCGBs are positively associated with pro-environmental values, self-identity, and social norms, whereas GCGBs are negatively associated with these constructs. CGBs, in particular NCGBs, have unique explanatory power for sustainable behaviours. NCGBs show substantial temporal stability over one year. CGBs need not be destructive, as NCGBs may encourage sustainable action. Persuasive messages could be tailored to specific CGBs in specific behavioural domains.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>37274087</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10603-023-09539-6</doi><tpages>29</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0708-2614</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4592-9529</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0168-7034 |
| ispartof | Journal of consumer policy, 2023-06, Vol.46 (2), p.223-251 |
| issn | 0168-7034 1573-0700 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10158688 |
| source | PAIS Index; Business Source Complete; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Behavior Carbon Climate change Commercial Law Consumer behavior Consumers Economic Policy Efficacy Endorsements Environmental impact Environmental policy High school graduates Identity Licenses Marketing Original Paper Secondary schools Social norms Social Sciences Social values Sustainability Validity |
| title | “I should” Does Not Mean “I can.” Introducing Efficacy, Normative, and General Compensatory Green Beliefs |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T16%3A10%3A33IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=%E2%80%9CI%20should%E2%80%9D%20Does%20Not%20Mean%20%E2%80%9CI%20can.%E2%80%9D%20Introducing%20Efficacy,%20Normative,%20and%20General%20Compensatory%20Green%20Beliefs&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20consumer%20policy&rft.au=Penker,%20M.&rft.date=2023-06-01&rft.volume=46&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=223&rft.epage=251&rft.pages=223-251&rft.issn=0168-7034&rft.eissn=1573-0700&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10603-023-09539-6&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2822705573%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2821486241&rft_id=info:pmid/37274087&rfr_iscdi=true |