Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Moral extension of the protection motivation theory model to predict climate change mitigation behavioral intentions in Taiwan

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, perceived moral obligations were included in the protection motivation theory (PMT) model to explain people’s intentions to participate in climate change mitigation behaviors. Empirical data and structural equation modeling results of a nationwide cross-sectional survey in Taiwan confirmed the higher explanatory power of the moral extension PMT model than that of the original PMT model. As expected, threat and coping appraisal of climate change affect protection motivation. In addition, perceived moral obligation affects protection motivation. This protection motivation enhances the intention to participate in climate change mitigation behaviors. The mediation effect of protection motivation was also verified in the moral extension PMT model. Practical implications and suggestions are proposed for the government and related authorities as well as environmental groups to encourage people to participate in climate change mitigation behaviors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajzen I (1988) Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 50(2):179–211

    Google Scholar 

  • Allison ST, Messick DM, Goethals GR (1989) On being better but not smarter than others: the Muhammad Ali effect. Soc Cogn 7(3):275–295

    Google Scholar 

  • Almarshad SO (2017) Adopting sustainable behavior in institutions of higher education: a study on intentions of decision makers in the MENA region. Eur J Sustain Dev 6(2):89–110

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson JC, Gerbing DW (1988) Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol Bull 103:411–423

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldassare M, Katz C (1992) The personal threat of environmental problems as predictor of environmental practices. Environ Behav 24:602–616

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamberg S, Möser G (2007) Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: a new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. J Environ Psychol 27(1):14–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamberg S, Masson T, Brewitt K, Nemetschek N (2017) Threat, coping and flood prevention—a meta-analysis. J Environ Psychol 54:116–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura A (1997) Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. W. H. Freeman and Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartels DM, Bauman CW, Cushman F, Pizarro DA, McGraw AP (2014) Moral judgment and decision making. In: Keren G, Wu G (eds) The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck L, Ajzen I (1991) Predicting dishonest actions using the theory of planned behavior. J Res Pers 25:285–301

    Google Scholar 

  • Bockarjova M, Steg L (2014) Can protection motivation theory predict pro-environmental behavior? Explaining the adoption of electric vehicles in the Netherlands. Glob Environ Chang 28:276–288

    Google Scholar 

  • Brody S, Grover H, Vedlitz A (2012) Examining the willingness of Americans to alter behavior to mitigate climate change. Clim Pol 12:1–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen MF (2015) An examination of the value-belief-norm theory model in predicting pro-environmental behaviour in Taiwan. Asian J Soc Psychol 18(2):145–151

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen MF (2016a) Extending the theory of planned behavior model to explain people’s energy savings and carbon reduction behavioral intentions to mitigate change in Taiwan—moral obligation matters. J Clean Prod 112(Part 2):1746–1753

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen MF (2016b) Impact of fear appeals on pro-environmental behavior and crucial determinants. Int J Advert 35(1):74–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen F, Dai S, Zhu Y, Xu H (2019) Will concerns for ski tourism promote pro-environmental behaviour? An implication of protection motivation theory. Int J Tour Res 1:–11

  • Chu PY, Chiu JF (2003) Factors influencing household waste recycling behavior: test of an integrated model. J Appl Soc Psychol 33:604–626

    Google Scholar 

  • Cismaru M, Lavack AM (2006) Marketing communications and protection motivation theory: examining consumer decision-making. International Review on Public and Non Profit Marketing 3:9–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Cismaru M, Cismaru R, Ono T, Nelson K (2011) “Act on climate change”: an application of protection motivation theory. Soc Mark Q 17:62–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Conner M, Armitage CJ (1998) Extending the theory of planned behavior: a review and avenues for further research. J Appl Soc Psychol 28:1429–1464

    Google Scholar 

  • De Groot JI, Steg L (2009) Morality and prosocial behavior: the role of awareness, responsibility, and norms in the norm activation model. J Soc Psychol 149(4):425–449

    Google Scholar 

  • Ding Z, Jiang X, Liu Z, Long R, Xu Z, Cao Q (2018) Factors affecting low-carbon consumption behavior of urban residents: a comprehensive review. Resour Conserv Recycl 132:3–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlap RE, Van Liere KD (1978) The ‘New Environmental Paradigm’: a proposed measuring instrument and preliminary results. J Environ Educ 9:10–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Environmental Protection Administration, R.O.C. (Taiwan) (2018) EPA Announces Draft Phase 1 Greenhouse Gas Emission Control Goals https://www.epa.gov.tw/eng/F7AB26007B8FE8DF/36ddca51-8c30-4df4-97fe-d8801adbe930. Accessed 27 Nov 2019

  • Floyd DL, Prentice-Dunn S, Rogers RW (2000) A meta-analysis of research on protection motivation theory. J Appl Soc Psychol 30(2):407–429

    Google Scholar 

  • Gefen D, Rigdon EE, Straub D (2011) An update and extension to SEM guidelines for administrative and social science research. MIS Q35:iii–xiv

    Google Scholar 

  • Grothmann T, Reusswig F (2006) People at risk of flooding: why some residents take precautionary action while others do not. Nat Hazards 38:101–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair JF, Anderson RW, Tatham RL, Black WC (1998) Multivariate data analysis, 4th edn. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannigan J (2006) Environmental sociology. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2018) Global warming of 1.5° C: an IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5° C Above Pre-industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty. file:///F:/Environmental%20Science%20and%20Pollution%20Research%20PMT%2020191009/Online%20File%20Inventory%20for%20Revision%2020191125/sr15_spm_final.pdf. Accessed 27 Nov 2019

  • Johnson RJ, Scicchitano MJ (2000) Uncertainty, risk, trust, and information: public perceptions of environmental issues and willingness to take action. Policy Stud J28:633–647

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim M, Hunter JE (1993) Attitude-behavior relations: a meta-analysis of attitude relevance and topic. J Commun 43:101–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim S, Jeong SH, Hwang Y (2013) Predictors of pro-environmental behaviors of American and Korean students: the application of the theory of reasoned action and protection motivation theory. Sci Commun 35(2):168–188

    Google Scholar 

  • Klöckner CA (2013) A comprehensive model of the psychology of environmental behaviour—a meta-analysis. Glob Environ Chang 23(5):1028–1038

    Google Scholar 

  • Kollmuss A, Agyeman J (2002) Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behaviour? Environ Educ Res 8:239–260

    Google Scholar 

  • Kothe EJ, Ling M, North M, Klas A, Mullan BA, Novoradovskaya L (2019) Protection motivation theory and pro-environmental behaviour: a systematic mapping review. Aust J Psychol 71:411–432

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindenberg S, Steg L (2007) Normative, gain and hedonic goal-frames guiding environmental behavior. J Soc Issues 63(1):117–137

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon DP, Lockwood CM, Hoffman JM, West SG, Sheets V (2002) A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychol Methods 7(1):83–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Maddux J, Rogers RW (1983) Protection motivation and self-efficacy: a revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change. J Exp Soc Psychol 19:469–479

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcoulides GA, Schumacker RE (1996) Advanced structural equation modeling. Erlbaum, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  • Masud MM, Al-Amin AQ, Junsheng H, Ahmed F, Yahaya SR, Akhtar R, Banna H (2016) Climate change issue and theory of planned behaviour: relationship by empirical evidence. J Clean Prod 113:613–623

    Google Scholar 

  • Milne S, Sheeran P, Orbell S (2000) Prediction and intervention in health-related behavior: a meta-analytic review of protection motivation theory. J Appl Soc Psychol 30:106–143

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordlund AM, Garvill J (2003) Effects of values, problem awareness, and personal norm on willingness to reduce personal car use. J Environ Psychol 23:339–347

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman P, Boer H, Seydel ER (2005) Protection motivation theory. In: Conner M, Norman P (eds) Predicting health behaviour: research and practice with social cognition models. Open University Press, London, pp 81–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally JC (1978) Psychometric theory, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill S, Nicholson-Cole S (2009) “Fear won’t do it”: promoting positive engagement with climate change through visual and iconic representations. Sci Commun 30:355–379

    Google Scholar 

  • Quaglione D, Cassetta E, Crociata A, Sarra A (2017) Exploring additional determinants of energy-saving behaviour: the influence of individuals' participation in cultural activities. Energy Policy 108:503–511

    Google Scholar 

  • Rainear AM, Christensen JL (2017) Protection motivation theory as an explanatory framework for proenvironmental behavioral intentions. Commun Res Rep 34:239–248

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers RW (1975) A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Aust J Psychol 91:93–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers RW (1983) Cognitive and physiological processes in fear appeals and attitude change: a revised theory of protection motivation. In: Cacioppo J, Petty R (eds) Social psychophysiology. Guilford, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers RW, Prentice-Dunn S (1997) Protection motivation theory. In: Gochman DS (ed) Handbook of health behavior research. I: personal and social determinants. Plenum, New York, pp 113–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Sapiains R, Beeton RJ, Walker IA (2016) Individual responses to climate change: framing effects on pro-environmental behaviors. J Appl Soc Psychol 46(8):483–493

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumacker RE, Lomax RG (2004) A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz SH (1977) Normative influences on altruism. In: Berkowitz L (ed) Advances in experimental social psychology, vol 10. Academic, New York, pp 221–279

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz SH, Howard JA (1981) A normative decision-making model of altruism. In: Rushton JP, Sorrentino RM (eds) Altruism and helping behavior, pp 189–211

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwirplies C (2018) Citizens’ acceptance of climate change adaptation and mitigation: a survey in China, Germany, and the US. Ecol Econ 145:308–322

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi H, Fan J, Zhao D (2017) Predicting household PM2.5-reduction behavior in Chinese urban areas: an integrative model of theory of planned behavior and norm activation theory. J Clean Prod 145:64–73

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Steg L, Nordlund A (2012) Models to explain environmental behaviour. In: Steg L, van den Berg AE, de Groot JIM (eds) Environmental psychology: an introduction. Wiley, Oxford, pp 185–195

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinhorst J, Matthies E (2016) Monetary or environmental appeals for saving electricity?—potentials for spillover on low carbon policy acceptability. Energy Policy 93:335–344

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern PC (2000) Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behaviour. J Soc Issues 56:407–424

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern PC, Dietz T, Abel T, Guagnano GA, Kalof L (1999) A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: the case of environmentalism. Hum Ecol Rev 6(2):81–97

  • Tolppanen S, Aksela M (2018) Identifying and addressing students’ questions on climate change. J Environ Educ 49(5):375–389

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuckman BW (1999) Conducting educational research, 5th edn. Wadsworth Group, Davidson

    Google Scholar 

  • van Zomeren M, Spears R, Leach CW (2010) Experimental evidence for a dual pathway model analysis of coping with the climate crisis. J Environ Psychol 30:339–346

    Google Scholar 

  • Vining J, Ebreo A (2002) Emerging theoretical and methodological perspectives on conservation behavior. In: Bechtel RB, Churchman A (eds) Handbook of environmental psychology. Wiley, New York, pp 541–558

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang S, Lin S, Li J (2018) Exploring the effects of non-cognitive and emotional factors on household electricity saving behavior. Energy Policy 115:171–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Werner C, Schermelleh-Engel K (2010) Deciding between competing models: chi-square difference tests. In: Werner C, Schermelleh-Engel K (eds) Introduction to structural equation modeling with LISREL–version February

    Google Scholar 

  • Witte K (1992) Putting the fear back into fear appeals: the extended parallel process model. Commun Monogr 59:329–349

    Google Scholar 

  • Witte K (1998) Fear as motivator, fear as inhibitor: using the EPPM to explain fear appeal successes and failures. In: Andersen PA, Guerrero LK (eds) The handbook of communication and emotion. Academic, New York, pp 423–450

  • Witte K, Allen M (2000) A meta-analysis of fear appeals: implications for the effective public health campaigns. Health Educ Behav 27:591–615

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yadav R, Pathak GS (2017) Determinants of consumers’ green purchase behavior in a developing nation: applying and extending the theory of planned behavior. Ecol Econ 134:114–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Ybarra O, Chan E, Park D (2001) Young and old adults’ concerns about morality and competence. Motiv Emot 25(2):85–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou Y, Fang W, Li M, Liu W (2018) Exploring the impacts of a low-carbon policy instrument: a case of carbon tax on transportation in China. Resour Conserv Recycl 139:307–314

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by a grant from the National Science Council, Republic of China (NSC 100- 2410-H-036-001-MY3) and the Ministry of Science and Technology, R.O.C. (MOST 105-2410-H-036-003-MY3).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Management, Tatung University, 40 Chung-Shan N. Rd., Sec. 3, Taipei, 104, Taiwan

    Mei-Fang Chen

Authors
  1. Mei-Fang Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mei-Fang Chen.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Baojing Gu

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(TXT 62 kb)

Appendix

Appendix

Threat Appraisal (Cismaru and Lavack 2006)

  Perceived severity

Climate change is a serious issue.

  Perceived vulnerability

Considering all the factors that may influence your chances of getting harm from climate change.

Coping Appraisal (Cismaru and Lavack 2006)

  Response efficacy

By following the recommendations, I will be able to avoid the negative consequences of climate change.

  Self-efficacy

There are simple things I can do that reduce the negative consequences of the climate crisis.

I can change my daily routines to combat the climate crisis.

There are things I can do that can make a difference in reducing the negative consequences of the climate crisis.

My individual actions will contribute to a solution of the climate crisis.

Changes in my daily routines will contribute to reducing the negative consequences of the climate crisis.

Moral Obligation (Brody et al. 2012)

  I have a moral obligation to reduce my impact on climate change.

  I have an obligation to future generations to reduce my impact on climate change.

Protection Motivation (van Zomeren et al. 2010)

  I would like to do something together with others to fight the climate crisis.

  I would like to sign a petition to promote measures against the climate crisis.

  I will vote for a political party that fights against the climate crisis.

Climate Change Mitigation Behavioral Intentions (Brody et al. 2012)

  Drive less

  Replace old appliances with new energy-efficient ones

  Replace light bulbs with compact fluorescent bulbs

  Choose a fuel-efficient vehicle when I buy vehicles

  Plant trees

  Set the thermostat lower in winter and higher in summer

  Use recycled products

  Take steps to reduce my contribution to global warming and climate change

  Change my driving habits to reduce my contribution to climate change

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, MF. Moral extension of the protection motivation theory model to predict climate change mitigation behavioral intentions in Taiwan. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27, 13714–13725 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-07963-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-07963-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation