ABSTRACT. The authors examined the relationships between variables included in the Norm Activation Model (NAM; S. H. Schwartz, 1977) of prosocial behavior. Specifically, they evaluated the strength of 2 commonly used interpretations of this model: the NAM as a mediator model and the NAM as a moderator model. For the most part, 5 studies focusing on a variety of prosocial intentions and behavior support the NAM as a mediator model. Furthermore, these studies validate past research by showing that variables included in the NAM are powerful in explaining a diversity of prosocial intentions and behavior in the social and environmental contexts.

In environmental literature it is argued that three different value orientations may be relevant for understanding environmental beliefs and intentions: egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric. Until now, the distinction between altruistic and biospheric value orientations has hardly been supported empirically. In this article, three studies are reported aimed to examine whether an egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric value orientation can indeed be distinguished empirically by using an adapted value instrument. Also, it is examined whether these value orientations are differently and uniquely related to general and specific beliefs and behavioral intention. Results provide support for the reliability and validity of the value instrument. All studies replicated the distinction into three value orientations, with sufficient internal consistency. Furthermore, when altruistic and biospheric goals conflict, they seem to provide a distinct basis for proenvironmental intentions. The value instrument could therefore be useful to better understand relationships between values, beliefs, and intentions related to environmentally significant behavior.

Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

Results of two studies are reported, in which we compare the predictive power of three general behavioral antecedents (i.e., values, worldviews, and environmental concern) in explaining personal norms, behavioral intentions (i.e., environmental activism), and acceptability of energy policies. Values-especially biosphericappeared to be more powerful in explaining personal norms, intentions, and policy acceptability than were worldviews and environmental concern, although these differences were in some cases not statistically significant.

Generally, a majority of consumers support the idea of purchasing green products,. However, this is often not translated in actual behaviour. We argue that there is a tradeoff between the influence of product attributes on purchasing decisions, whereby it is assumed that consumers tend to focus on egoistic product characteristics first, followed by green product characteristics. In two experimental studies (N=100 and N=107) we find support for this reasoning: if product attributes fulfil self-serving motives (low price, familiar or well-known brand) green product attributes (cruelty free and low environmental impact) influence purchasing intentions more than when self-serving motives are not fulfilled (high price, unfamiliar or unknown brand). Further, we investigated if and how values weaken or strengthen the influence of product attributes on purchasing intentions. We conclude that biospheric values steer how product attributes influence purchasing intentions stronger than egoistic values. In line with our expectations, we find that if biospheric values are weak, egoistic product attributes are more influential, whereas if biopheric values are strong green product attributes are more influential.

Various scholars argue that egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric value orientations are important for understanding environmental beliefs and behavior. However, little empirical evidence has been provided for the distinction between altruistic and biospheric values. This study examines whether this distinction is valid across different countries (i.e., Austria, Czech Republic, Italy, the Netherlands, and Sweden) by using a new value instrument. Relationships between these value orientations and behavior-specific beliefs (i.e., awareness of environmental consequences and personal norms) are investigated to further examine the validity of the value instrument. Results provide support for the generalization of the three-way distinction. Furthermore, value orientations were related to behavior-specific beliefs in all countries. The authors conclude that the distinction between the three value orientations is valid and useful for examining environmentally relevant behavior.

Values are desirable goals that serve as guiding principles in people's life. As such, values can influence multiple beliefs, attitudes, norms, and behaviors simultaneously. Values de termine what people attend to, what knowledge becomes cognitively most accessible, how people evaluate various aspects of the situation, and what alternatives are being con sidered, which in turn affects actual behavior. Different individuals may endorse the same values, but they are likely to prioritize various values differently, resulting in different preferences, beliefs, attitudes, norms, and choices. In this chapter, we discuss relevant value theories and elaborate on four types of values that are particularly relevant in the environmental domain: hedonic, egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric values. Values typical ly influence behavior indirectly, via behavior-specific beliefs, preferences, attitudes, and norms. Values are particularly influential when they are strongly endorsed, and when they are activated, cognitively supported, central to the self, and part of our self-identity.Values reflect a broad range of motivations (notably hedonic, egoistic, altruistic, and bios pheric motivations) and as such differ from ecological worldviews and environmental con cerns that focus on environmental motivations.

We examined how personal values and perceptions of risks and benefits are associated with the acceptability of nuclear energy (NE). A theoretical model is tested in which beliefs about the risks and benefits of NE mediate the relationship between values and acceptability. The results showed that egoistic values are positively related to the perceived benefits and acceptability of NE. In contrast, altruistic and biospheric values were positively related to the perceived risks of NE. Although it has been argued that NE may help to combat climate change through lower CO(2) emissions, these environmental benefits were not acknowledged by people with strong biospheric values. Furthermore, results confirmed that the more risks respondents perceived, the less they were inclined to accept NE. In contrast, the more a person believed that NE has beneficial consequences, the more acceptable NE was. Finally, as expected, perceived risks and benefits were found to partly mediate the relationship between personal values and acceptability. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings.