Investigation of the relationships between pro-environmental behaviour, individual differences, and psychological factors
The context for the research
Climate change is arguably the most serious and urgent threat to ecological stability and the survival of humankind. Since records began, Australia’s land climate has warmed 1.47 °C, and sea levels have warmed 1.05°C (Climate Change Authority, 2023). Changes in rainfall patterns, sea-level rise, and an increase in the intensity and frequency of fire season all indicate Australia’s vulnerability to climate change (State of the Climate, 2022). This significant impact, coupled with a lack of consistent political climate legislation, highlights the urgency for individual action (Crowley, 2021; Tangney, 2019). Fortunately, the growing urgency to address climate change is not lost on the Australian public, even amidst complex global and national challenges. For instance, during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, Australians consistently reported a higher level of concern about climate change than the pandemic (Patrick et al., 2021). Yet, many Australians despite their concerns, engage in multiple energy-intensive behaviours that could be substituted for more alternative ones. This “gap” between concern and action is often referred to as the “attitude-behaviour gap”. Evidently, there are variables other than concern, which predict pro-environmental behaviour. Some researchers have become keenly interested in what exactly these other factors are. The primary motivation behind identifying key predictors of pro-environmental behaviour is so that researchers can subsequently design interventions that help enhance these predictors. However, much of the current literature looking at predictors of pro- environmental behaviour is characterized by a reliance on correlational studies. For example, researchers have found factors such as egoistic values, risk perception, and having a green self- identity are associated with pro-environmental behaviour. More specifically, there is evidence suggesting that those high in egoistic values are less likely to engage in sustainable behaviours.
This suggests that those who value material success and power over others engage in pro-environmental behaviours less frequently (de Groot & Steg, 2008; Lai et al., 2020). On the other hand, risk perception and a green self-identity have both shown to be positively related to pro-environmental behaviour. That is, those who perceive the risk of climate change as great (i.e., risk perception), and those who perceive themselves as the type of person who acts in an environmentally friendly way (i.e., green self- identity) engage in sustainable behaviours more frequently (Bradley et al., 2020; Whitmarsh & O’Neill, 2010). Of course, contextual factors also play a role. For example, someone could not be expected to perform a certain behaviour if they do not have access to the resources (ATR; Grilli & Curtis, 2019). To illustrate, if someone wanted to switch to public transport but the bus/train stop was very far from their home, then utilising this resource (opposed to their car) would be less likely.
Demographic factors have also garnered considerable interest, one of such is level of educational attainment. Generally, research shows that those who completed some form of tertiary education are more likely to engage in sustainable behaviours (Meyer, 2015). This positive relationship suggests that those with more education have greater awareness, interest, and knowledge of environmental issues and therefore behave accordingly.
Question
1. What are the constructs of interest in the RQ 3
2. How are each construct operationalized?
3. Based on the information provided on Page 1, state the hypothesized associations for your model
4. What are the internal reliabilities (Cronbach Alphas) of the scale scores?
5. Do the scales have acceptable reliability?
6. Write a brief statement describing each of the measures used
This is effectively a measures section of a research report and is to be presented in sentence/paragraph format
Report each measure in your data set that is associated with the variables of interest, ensure you cover:
7. Report the following information in an appropriate table:
8. What were the variances explained?
9. Write a paragraph interpreting your results in the context of the RQ Were the hypotheses supported?
Egoistic Values Scale
The 5-item subscale that assessed egoism in the Values Orientation Scale was used. Individuals are asked how strongly the values act as a guiding principle in their lives. Participants respond on a 9-point Likert scale where 1 = Opposed to my values,
Risk Perception
Perceived risk severity was measured on a 8-item scale. These items ask respondents to rate the severity they perceive climate change will have on nature and humans’ standards of living both locally and globally, as well as in the present and future.
This 3003PSY – Arts and Humanities has been solved by our PHD Experts at UnilearnO. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+ Students in Australia, UK and US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our Experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics and referencing style.
Be it a used or new solution, the quality of the work submitted by our assignment experts remains unhampered. You may continue to expect the same or even better quality with the used and new assignment solution files respectively. There’s one thing to be noticed that you could choose one between the two and acquire an HD either way. You could choose a new assignment solution file to get yourself an exclusive, plagiarism (with free Turnitin file), expert quality assignment or order an old solution file that was considered worthy of the highest distinction.
