Self-efficacy or collective efficacy within the cognitive theory of stress model: Which more effectively explains people's self-reported proenvironmental behavior?

Journal of Environmental Psychology

Volumn 42, Issue , 2015, Pages 66-75

  Chen, Mei Fang ^a  

^a TATUNG UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Cognitive theory of stress model; Collective efficacy; Problem focused coping; Proenvironmental behaviors; Self efficacy

Indexed keywords

EID: 84924612046     PISSN: 02724944     EISSN: 15229610     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.02.002     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Aldwin C., Folkman S., Schaefer C., Coyne J.C., Lazarus R.S. Ways of coping: A process measure 1980, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Montreal.
2. Anderson J.C., Gerbing D.W. Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin 1988, 103:411-423.
3. Axelrod L.J., Lehman D.R. Responding to environmental concerns: what factors guide individual action?. Journal of Environmental Psychology 1993, 13:149-159.
4. Bachrach K.M., Zautra A.J. Coping with a community stressor: the threat of a hazardous waste facility. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 1985, 26:127-141.
5. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review 1977, 84:191-215.
6. Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory 1986, PrenticeHall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
7. Bandura A. Exercise of personal and collective efficacy in changing societies. Self-efficacy in changing societies 1995, 1-45. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. A. Bandura (Ed.).
8. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control 1997, WH Freeman and Company, New York.
9. Bandura A. Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2000, 9:75-78.
10. Bandura A. Social cognitive theory in cultural context. Applied Psychology 2002, 51:269-290.
11. Baum A. Toxins, technology, and natural disasters. Stress and coping: An anthology 1991, 97-139. Columbia University Press, New York. 3rd ed. A. Monat & R Lazarus (Ed.).
12. Baum A., Singer J.E., Baum C.S. Stress and the environment. Journal of Social Issues 1981, 37:4-35.
13. Bentler P.M. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin 1990, 107:238-246.
14. Bentler, P.M. & Bonnet, D.C. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.
15. Blake J. Overcoming the 'value-action gap' in environmental policy: tensions between national policy and local experience. Local Environment 1999, 4:257-278.
16. Dunlap R.E. Public opinion in the 1980s: clear consensus, ambiguous commitment. Environment 1991, 33:10-15.
17. Dunlap R.E., Gallup G.H., Gallup A.M. Health of the planet: a George H. Gallup memorial survey. Results of a 1992 international environmental opinion survey of citizens in 24 Nations 1993, George H. Gallup International Institute, Princeton, NJ.
18. Earley P.C. Self or group? Cultural effects of training on self-efficacy and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly 1994, 39:89-117.
19. Ehrlich P.R., Holdren J.P. Impact of population growth. Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science) 1971, 171(3977):1212-1217.
20. Fernandez-Ballesteros R., Diez-Nicolas J., Caprara G.V., Barbaranelli C., Bandura A. Determinants and structural relation of perceived personal efficacy to perceived collective efficacy. Applied Psychology: An International Review 2002, 51:107-125.
21. Floyd D.L., Prentice-Dunn S., Rogers R.W. Ameta-analysis of research on protection motivation theory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 2000, 30:407-429.
22. Folkman S., Lazarus R.S., Dunkel-Schetter C., DeLongis A., Gruen R. The dynamics of a stressful encounter cognitive appraisal, coping, and encounter outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 50:992-1003.
23. Gardner G.T., Stern P.C. Environmental problems and human behaviour 1996, Allyn and Bacon, Boston.
24. Hanss D., Böhm G. Can I make a difference? the role of general and domain-specific self-efficacy in sustainable consumption decisions. Umweltpsychologie 2010, 14:46-74.
25. Hofstede G. Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values 1989, Sage Publications, New York, NY.
26. Homburg A., Stolberg A. Entwicklung und erste Validierung der Skalen zur Erfassung von Bewältigungsversuchen im Zusammenhang mit dem Umweltstressor "Schadstoffbelastungen". Zeitschrift für Diagnostische und Differentielle Psychologie 2004, 4:199-211.
27. Homburg A., Stolberg A. Explaining pro-environmental behavior with a cognitive theory of stress. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2006, 26:1-14.
28. Homburg A., Stolberg A., Wagner U. Coping with global environmental problems: development and first validation of scales. Environment and Behavior 2007, 39:754-778.
29. Huffman A.H., Van Der Werff B.R., Henning J.B., Watrous-Rodriguez K. When do recycling attitudes predict recycling? An investigation of self-reported versus observed behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2014, 38:262-270.
30. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Climate change 2001: Synthesis report 2001, Retrieved August 26, 2013, from. http://ipcc.ch/meetings/session18/doc3b.pdf.
31. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change 2007, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K. M. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden, C.E. Handson (Eds.).
32. Iwata O. Coping style and three psychological measures associated with environmentally responsible behavior. Social Behavior and Personality 2002, 30:661-670.
33. James L.R., Mulaik S.A., Brett J.M. Causal analysis: Assumptions, models, and data 1982, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.
34. Joreskog K., Sorbom D. LISREL 8: User's reference guide 1996, Scientific Software International, Chicago, IL.
35. Kollmuss A., Agyeman J. Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behaviour?. Environmental Education Research 2002, 8:239-260.
36. Lai J.C.L., Brennan A., Chan H.-M., Tao J. Disposition toward environmental hazards in Hong Kong Chinese: validation of a Chinese version of the environmental appraisal inventory (EAI-C). Journal of Environmental Psychology 2003, 23:366-381.
37. Lazarus R.S. Psychological stress and the coping process 1966, McGraw-Hill, New York.
38. Lazarus R.S. Theory-based stress measurement. Psychological Inquiry 1990, 1:3-13.
39. Lazarus R.S. Emotion and adaption 1991, Oxford University Press, Oxford, England.
40. Lazarus R.S., Folkman S. Stress, appraisal, and coping 1984, Springer, New York.
41. Lepore S., Evans G. Coping with multiple stressors in the environment. Handbook of coping: Theory, research, applications 1996, 350-377. John Wiley & Sons, New York. M. Zeidner, N.S. Endler (Eds.).
42. Lorenzoni I., Pidgeon N.F. Public views on climate change: European and USA perspectives. Climate Change 2006, 77:73-95.
43. Maddux J.E. Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application 1995, Plenum, New York.
44. Manzo L.C., Weinstein N.D. Behavioral commitment to environmental protection: a study of active and nonactive members of the Sierra Club. Environment and Behavior 1987, 19:673-694.
45. Marcoulides G.A., Schumacker R.E. Advanced structural equation modeling 1996, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
46. Nunnally J.C. Psychometric theory 1978, McGraw-Hill, New York. 2nd ed.
47. Oskamp S. Environmentally responsible behavior: teaching and promoting it effectively. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy 2002, 1:173-182.
48. Schahn J., Damian M., Schurig U., Füchsle C. Konstruktion und Evaluation der dritten Version des Skalensystems zur Erfassung des Umweltbewusstseins (SEU-3). Diagnostica 2000, 6:84-92.
49. Schwarzer R. Self-Efficacy: Thought control of action 1992, Hemisphere, Washington, DC.
50. Schwarzer R. Measurement of perceived self-efficacy. Psychometric scales for cross-cultural research 1993, Freie Universitat Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
51. Scales for the assessment of students' personal and environmental characteristics 1999, Freie Universitat Berlin, Berlin. R. Schwarzer, M. Jerusalem (Eds.).
52. Schwarzer R., Schmitz G.S. Kollektive Selbstwirksamkeitserwartung von Lehrern. Eine Längsschnittstudie in zehn Bundesländern. Zeitschrift fur Sozialpsychologie 1999, 30:262-274.
53. Scott D., Willits F.K. Environmental attitudes and behavior: a Pennsylvania survey. Environment and Behavior 1994, 26:239-260.
54. Smythe P.C., Brook R.C. Environmental concerns and actions: a social-psychological investigation. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science 1980, 12:175-186.
55. Stern P.C. Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behaviour. Journal of Social Issues 2000, 56:407-424.
56. Stern N. The economics of climate change: The Stern review 2007, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
57. Stern P.C., Dietz T., Abel T., Guagnano G.A., Kalof L. Avalue-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: the case of environmentalism. Human Ecology Review 1999, 6:81-97.
58. Tajfel H., Turner J.C. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. The social psychology of intergroup relations 1979, Brooks/Cole, Monterey. W.G. Austin, S. Worchel (Eds.).
59. Taylor S., Todd P. An integrated model of waste management behavior: a test of household recycling and composting intentions. Environment and Behavior 1995, 27:603-630.
60. United Nations Environment Programme Synthesis global environment outlook 3 Retrieved August, 26, 2013, from. http://www.grida.no/geo/geo3/english/pdfs/synthesis.pdf.
61. Yu-Long C., San-Pui L. Measuring responsible environmental behavior: self-reported and other-reported measures and their differences in testing a behavioral model. Environment and Behavior 2011, 43:53-71.
62. van Zomeren M., Postmes T., Spears R. Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: a quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin 2008, 134:504-535.