Bridging the Green Attitude–Behavior Gap-Journal of Sustainability Research-CSCIED科技核心评价数据库

推荐文章

Soil Health as a Dynamic, Plant-Specific Attribute: Redefining Its Role Beyond Traditional Soil Quality Indicators

Bridging the Green Attitude–Behavior Gap

Bridging the Green Attitude–Behavior Gap

ES评分0 浏览量：695 下载量：0 评价量：0

全文阅读下载引用收藏评论

DOI	10.20900/jsr20250059
刊名	Journal of Sustainability Research JSR
年，卷(期)	2025, 7(3)
作者	Rosa Angela Fabio*,Alessandra Croce,Chiara Calabrese,
作者单位	Department of Biomedical, Dental and Morphological and Functional Imaging Sciences, University of Messina, Piazza Pugliatti, 1, Messina 98121, Italy ;
摘要	This study examines the relationship between pro-environmental attitudes, behavioral intentions, and sustainable consumption, addressing the persistent gap between green attitudes and actual sustainable behaviors. Building on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), the model incorporates perceived effectiveness and personal values as key predictors of intention. Study 1 involved 383 Italian adults who completed a battery of self-report measures assessing sustainable behaviors (Sustainable Behaviors Scale, SBS), intentions, personal values, attitudes, and perceived effectiveness. Study 2 included a subsample of 77 participants and examined the predictive validity of intentions using an observational behavioral measure (Behavioral Sustainability Performance Parameter, BSPP). Using a two-phase mixed-methods design, the study combines self-report measures with direct observations of purchasing behavior, offering a multi-layered view of sustainable consumption. Results show that behavioral intentions mediate the effects of attitudes, values, and perceived effectiveness on sustainable behaviors. However, while intentions strongly predict self-reported behaviors, their link to observed choices is more modest—highlighting the complexity of the attitude–behavior gap. The study emphasizes the role of perceived effectiveness in motivating action and highlights the value of combining subjective and behavioral data to enhance ecological validity. These findings offer practical insights for designing interventions that align internal motivations with supportive environmental contexts.
Abstract	This study examines the relationship between pro-environmental attitudes, behavioral intentions, and sustainable consumption, addressing the persistent gap between green attitudes and actual sustainable behaviors. Building on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), the model incorporates perceived effectiveness and personal values as key predictors of intention. Study 1 involved 383 Italian adults who completed a battery of self-report measures assessing sustainable behaviors (Sustainable Behaviors Scale, SBS), intentions, personal values, attitudes, and perceived effectiveness. Study 2 included a subsample of 77 participants and examined the predictive validity of intentions using an observational behavioral measure (Behavioral Sustainability Performance Parameter, BSPP). Using a two-phase mixed-methods design, the study combines self-report measures with direct observations of purchasing behavior, offering a multi-layered view of sustainable consumption. Results show that behavioral intentions mediate the effects of attitudes, values, and perceived effectiveness on sustainable behaviors. However, while intentions strongly predict self-reported behaviors, their link to observed choices is more modest—highlighting the complexity of the attitude–behavior gap. The study emphasizes the role of perceived effectiveness in motivating action and highlights the value of combining subjective and behavioral data to enhance ecological validity. These findings offer practical insights for designing interventions that align internal motivations with supportive environmental contexts.
关键词	attitude-behavior gap; green gap theories; sustainable consumption; perceived effectiveness; behavioral observation
KeyWord	attitude-behavior gap; green gap theories; sustainable consumption; perceived effectiveness; behavioral observation
基金项目
页码	-

参考文献
相关文献

1.Schmidt Tagomori I, Harmsen M, Awais M, Byers E, Daioglou V, Doelman J, et al. Climate policy and the SDGs agenda: How does near-term action on nexus SDGs influence the achievement of long-term climate goals? Environ Res Lett. 2024;19(5):054001.
2.Rousta A, Jafari EA. Impact of environmental knowledge, responsibility and concern on sustainable consumption behavior: does customer attitude matter? Manag Environ Qual Int J. 2024;35(8):1858-77.
3.Aazami A, Saidi-Mehrabad M. Benders decomposition algorithm for robust aggregate production planning considering pricing decisions in competitive environment: A case study. Scientia Iranica. 2019;26(5):3007-31.
4.Aazami A, Saidi-Mehrabad M. A production and distribution planning of perishable products with a fixed lifetime under vertical competition in the seller-buyer systems: A real-world application. J Manuf Syst. 2021;58:223-47.
5.Aazami A, Saidi-Mehrabad M, Seyed-Hosseini SM. A bi-objective robust optimization model for an integrated production-distribution problem of perishable goods with demand improvement strategies: A case study. Int J Eng Trans A Basics. 2021;34(7):1766-77.
6.Goli A, Aazami A, Jabbarzadeh A. Accelerated cuckoo optimization algorithm for capacitated vehicle routing problem in competitive conditions. Int J Artif Intell. 2018;16(1):88-112.
7.Ma Z, Jen CT, Aazami A. Time-dependent vehicle routing optimization incorporating pollution reduction using hybrid gray wolf optimizer and neural networks. Sustainability. 2025;17(11):4829.
8.White RL, Strubbe D, Dallimer M, Davies ZG, Davis AJS, Edelaar P, et al. Assessing the ecological and societal impacts of alien parrots in europe using a transparent and inclusive evidence-mapping scheme. NeoBiota. 2019;48:45-69. doi: 10.3390/su15021129.
9.Fabio RA, Croce A, Calabrese C. Construction and psychometric properties of the sustainable behavior questionnaire among Italian adults. Sustain Dev. 2024;32(5): 4374-84. doi: 10.1002/sd.2902.
10.Fabio RA, Marcuzzo A, Calabrese C. Cognitive load and peace attitude influence cooperative choices in the iterated prisoner’s dilemma game. Psychol Rep. 2025;128(2):986-1003. doi: 10.1177/00332941231166604.
11.Chen L, Zaharia M, Zou J. How is chatgpt’s behavior changing over time? Harvard Data Sci Rev. 2024;6(2). doi: 10.1162/99608f92.5317da47.
12.Wan S, Liu L, Chen G, Wang P, Lan Y, Zhang M. Low-carbon transformation of tourism in characteristic towns under the carbon neutral goal: A three-dimensional mechanism analysis of tourists, residents, and enterprises. Sustainability. 2025;17(11):5142.
13.Shao Q, Fu J, Huang F, Li G, Huang H, Tang Z, et al. Low-carbon territorial spatial detailed planning in the context of climate change: A case study of the wenzhou garden expo park area, china. Atmosphere. 2024;15(11):1334.
14.Gonzalez-Arcos C, Joubert A, Scaraboto D, Guesalaga R, Sandberg J. Express: How do i carry all this now? understanding consumer resistance to sustainability interventions. J Mark. 2021;85(3):1-18. doi: 10.1177/0022242921992052.
15.Zhao AL, Dermody J, Koenig‐Lewis N, Hanmer‐Lloyd S. Cultivating sustainable consumption: The role of harmonious cultural values and pro-environmental self-identity. J Consum Behav. 2023;23(2):1014-31.
16.Kara A, Min MK. Gen z consumers’ sustainable consumption behaviors: Influencers and moderators. Int J Sustain High Educ. 2023;25(1):124-42.
17.Elhaffar G, Durif F, Dubé L. Towards closing the attitude-intention-behavior gap in green consumption: A narrative review of the literature and an overview of future research directions. J Clean Prod. 2020;275:122556. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122556.
18.Venghaus S, Henseleit M, Belka M. The impact of climate change awareness on behavioral changes in germany: Changing minds or changing behavior? Energy Sustain Soc. 2022;12:10.
19.Antimova R, Nawijn J, Peeters P. The awareness/attitude-gap in sustainable tourism: A theoretical perspective. Tour Rev. 2012;67(3):7-16.
20.Moraes C, Carrigan M, Szmigin I. The coherence of inconsistencies: Attitude-behaviour gaps and new consumption communities. J Mark Manag. 2012;28(1-2):103-28.
21.White K, Habib R, Hardisty DJ. How to shift consumer behaviors to be more sustainable: A literature review and guiding framework. J Mark. 2019;83(3):22-49.
22.Kollmuss A, Agyeman J. Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environ Educ Res. 2002;8(3):239-60.
23.Liobikienė G, Poškus MS. The importance of environmental knowledge for private and public sphere pro-environmental behavior: Modifying the value-belief-norm theory. Sustainability. 2019;11(12):3324.
24.Baumeister RF, Gailliot M, DeWall CN, Oaten M. Self‐regulation and personality: How interventions increase regulatory success, and how depletion moderates the effects of traits on behavior. J Pers. 2006;74(6):1773-802.
25.Zhuo Z, Ren Z, Zhu Z. Attitude–behavior gap in green consumption behavior: A review. J Econ Manag Trade. 2022;28(12):12-28.
26.Fabio RA, Croce A. The role of peace attitudes on sustainable behaviors: An exploratory study. Behav. Sci. 2024;14:120. doi: 10.3390/ bs14020120.
27.Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1991;50(2):179-211.
28.Wang X, Peng M, Li Y, Ren M, Ma T, Zhao W, et al. How e-commerce product environmental information influences green consumption: Intention–behavior gap perspective. Sustainability. 2025;17(6):2337.
29.Fu X. The attitude–behavior gap in green travel behavior: A comprehensive perspective based on color-coded behavior and the moderating influence of motivation. Transp Res Rec. 2025. doi: 10.1177/03611981251332253.
30.Liu-Lastres B, Bao H, Cecil A. Exploring gaps in young generations’ sustainable travel behavior: A mixed-methods study. J Sustain Tour. 2025;33(6):1165-80.
31.Stern PC. New environmental theories: Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. J Soc Issues. 2000;56(3):407-24.
32.Evans JSB. Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annu Rev Psychol. 2008;59(1):255-78.
33.Fabio RA, Caprì T, Romano M. From controlled to automatic processes and back again: The role of contextual features. Eur J Psychol. 2019;15(4):773. doi: 10.5964/ejop.v15i4.1746.
34.Kahneman D. Thinking, fast and slow. New York (NY, US): Farrar, Straus and Giroux; 2011.
35.Schwartz SH. Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In: Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. London (UK): Academic Press; 1992; vol. 25, p. 1-65.
36.Deci EL, Ryan RM. The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. J Res Pers. 1985;19(2):109-34.
37.Pelletier LG, Tuson KM, Green‐Demers I, Noels K, Beaton AM. Why are you doing things for the environment? The motivation toward the environment scale (mtes) 1. J Appl Soc Psychol. 1988;28(5):437-68.
38.Steg L, Bolderdijk JW, Keizer K, Perlaviciute G. An integrated framework for encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: The role of values, situational factors and goals. J Environ Psychol. 2014;38:104-15.
39.Onwezen MC, Antonides G, Bartels J. The norm activation model: An exploration of the functions of anticipated pride and guilt in pro-environmental behaviour. J Environ Psychol. 2013;39:141-53.
40.Ajzen I. Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2002;32:665-83. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00236.x.
41.Coussy H, Guillard V, Guillaume C, Gontard N. Role of packaging in the smorgasbord of action for sustainable food consumption. Agro-food-Ind Hi Tech. 2013;24(3):15-9.
42.Mastria S, Vezzil A, De Cesarei A. Going green: A review on the role of motivation in sustainable behavior. Sustainability. 2023;15(21):15429.
43.Mastria S, Vezzil A, De Cesarei A. Switching to reuse: The impact of information on consumers’ choices for reusable food packaging. Sustainability. 2024;16(14):5937.
44.Luchs MG, Naylor RW, Rose RL. Toward a sustainable marketplace: Expanding options and benefits for consumers. J Res Consum. 2011;19:1-12.
45.Corral-Verdugo V, Frías-Armenta M, García-Cadena C. Introduction to the psychological dimensions of sustainability. In: Corral-Verdugo V, Frías-Armenta M, García-Cadena C, editors. Psychological Approaches to Sustainability. New York (NY, US): Nova Sci Publ; 2010. p. 3-18.
46.Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. New York (NY, US): Erlbaum; 1988. doi: 10.4324/9780203771587.
47.Sadiq M, Paul J, Bharti K. Dispositional traits and organic food consumption. J Clean Prod. 2020;266:121961.
48.Cappelli E, Zaghini F, Fiorini J, Sili A. Healthcare-associated infections and nursing leadership: A systematic review. J Infect Prev. 2025;26(2):78-90.
49.Hardisty DJ, Weber EU. Discounting future green: Money versus the environment. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2009;138(3):329
50.Allcott H, Rogers T. The short-run and long-run effects of behavioral interventions: Experimental evidence from energy conservation. Am Econ Rev. 2014;104(10):3003-37.
51.Thøgersen J. Unsustainable consumption: Basic causes and implications for policy. Eur Psychol. 2014;19(2):84-95.
52.Gillingham K, Rapson D, Wagner G. The rebound effect and energy efficiency policy. Rev Environ Econ Policy. 2016;10(1):68-88.
53.Tietenberg T, Lewis L. Environmental and Natural Resource Economics. 11th ed. London (UK): Routledge; 2018.
54.Verplanken B, Roy D. Empowering interventions to promote sustainable lifestyles: Testing the habit discontinuity hypothesis in a field experiment. J Environ Psychol. 2016;45:127-34.
55.Verplanken B, Wood W. Interventions to break and create consumer habits. J Public Policy Mark. 2006;25(1):90-103. doi: 10.1509/jppm.25.1.90.
56.Arman SM. A bibliometric analysis of the theory of planned behavior in the circular economy. Sci Pap Silesian Univ Technol Organ Manag/Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej Seria Organizacji i Zarządzanie. 2025;2025(216):9-25.
57.Cavarra M, Canegallo V, Santoddì E, Broccoli E, Fabio RA. Peace and personality: The relationship between the five-factor model’s personality traits and the Peace Attitude Scale. Peace Confl J Peace Psychol. 2021;27(3):508.
58.Aydin G. Thresholds of sustainability: Necessary and sufficient conditions for green buying behavior. Sustainability. 2025;17(11):4965.
59.Wardana CK, A'zizah LOF, Abas NI, Kusumawati R. Application of the extended theory of planned behavior to predict green product purchase behavior. Entrep Bisnis Manaj Akuntansi (E-BISMA). 2025;6(1):72-92.
60.Roseland M. Sustainable community development: Integrating environmental, economic, and social objectives. Prog Plan. 2000;54(2):73-132.
61.Emekci S. Green consumption behaviours of consumers within the scope of tpb. J Consum Mark. 2019;36(3):410-7. doi: 10.1108/JCM-05-2018-2694.
62.Hinterhuber A, Khan O. What drives sustainable procurement? Insights from the theory of planned behavior. Int J Oper Prod Manag. 2025;45(13):28-52.

引用本文

Rosa Angela Fabio*,Alessandra Croce,Chiara Calabrese. Bridging the Green Attitude–Behavior Gap [J]. Journal of Sustainability Research. 2025; 7; (3). - .

文献评论

相关学者

相关机构

推荐文章