Can recycling compensate for speeding on highways? Similarity and difficulty of behaviors as key characteristics of green compensatory beliefs

Byrka, Katarzyna; Kaminska, Katarzyna

doi:10.1515/ppb-2015-0054

Cited by 11 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(39 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Because cognitive dissonance is unpleasant, avoiding it could be an important driver for consistently carrying out goal-conducive behaviors (Sintov et al, 2019). Similar arguments can be made concerning theories of identity and self-perception: The more people see themselves as environmentalists or health-conscious persons, the more they are likely to experience cognitive dissonance and negative emotions such as guilt or remorse when they do not act according to their identity or self-perception (Lanzini and Thøgersen, 2014; Van der Werff et al, 2014a; Byrka and Kaminska, 2015; Lacasse, 2016). Importantly, this stabilizing effect can be expected only among people who hold relevant superordinate goals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 75%

The Role of Attitude Strength in Behavioral Spillover: Attitude Matters—But Not Necessarily as a Moderator

Brügger

Höchli

2019

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies on how one behavior affects subsequent behaviors find evidence for two opposite trends: Sometimes a first behavior increases the likelihood of engaging in additional behaviors that contribute to the same goal (positive behavioral spillover), and at other times a first behavior decreases this likelihood (negative spillover). A factor that may explain both patterns is attitude strength. A stronger (more favorable) attitude toward an issue may make the connections between related behaviors more salient and increase the motivation to work toward the underlying goal. We predicted that people with a stronger (more favorable) attitude are more likely to engage in subsequent behaviors that address an issue they care about. Two experiments tested the prediction in the contexts of pro-environmental and health behavior. Study 1 ( N = 378) provided some support for the predicted moderating role of attitude toward the environment when participants recalled either an environmentally friendly or unfriendly action: A strong attitude increased the likelihood, whereas a weak attitude decreased the likelihood of carrying out successive goal-conducive behaviors. When compared to a neutral control condition in Study 2 ( N = 929), participants with a weak environmental attitude supported pro-environmental petitions less strongly after an environmentally harmful action. Support for such petitions did not waver, however, among participants with a strong environmental attitude: They consistently acted environmentally friendly. Contrary to the hypothesis, in neither study did strength of attitude toward personal health moderate the effect of an initial behavior in the expected direction. In sum, the two studies provided only limited evidence for behavioral spillover: Participants mostly acted in accordance with their attitude but were hardly affected by recalling previous actions. When behavioral spillover did occur, however, a strong environmental attitude tended to increase the likelihood of acting in an environmentally friendly way, whereas the behavior of those with a weak attitude was less predictable. This research contributes to a more nuanced theoretical understanding of the role of attitude in spillover, but provides only limited evidence for its role as a moderator.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 75%

The Role of Attitude Strength in Behavioral Spillover: Attitude Matters—But Not Necessarily as a Moderator

Brügger

Höchli

2019

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As such, it might be expected that an item referring to compensating for buying imported food by composting would be seen as more plausible than compensating for using an oven by using a water butt – to use examples taken from the work by Kaklamanou et al (2015). Indeed, Byrka and Kaminska (2015) made the argument that across the items developed for that earlier study, the most-endorsed did indeed tend to be those that reflected within-domain trade-offs.…”

Section: Measurement and Predictive Ability Of Compensatory And Catalmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Building on this earlier work, Byrka and Kaminska (2015) argued that a useful avenue to develop an understanding of compensatory beliefs was to consider them in terms of their relative similarity and difficulty. In particular, these authors suggested that compensatory behaviors are more likely to operate as such if they fall under the same category of behavior (similarity of domain) than if they are dissimilar.…”

Section: Measurement and Predictive Ability Of Compensatory And Catalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The study by Byrka and Kaminska (2015) proposed, in addition, that behaviors which were easier than the preceding “target” behaviors would be more likely to be endorsed in terms of a compensatory process than would a more difficult choice. For example, the reuse of a carrier bag obtained from a store would be seen as a plausible compensatory act, in part due to its being a simple action to perform; in contrast to using environmentally friendly cleaning products to compensate for using an insecticide.…”

Section: Measurement and Predictive Ability Of Compensatory And Catalmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Compensatory and Catalyzing Beliefs: Their Relationship to Pro-environmental Behavior and Behavioral Spillover in Seven Countries

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is growing research interest in behavioral spillover and its potential for enabling more widespread lifestyle change than has typically been achieved through discrete behavioral interventions. There are some routes by which spillover could take place without conscious attention or explicit recognition of the connections between separate behaviors. However, in many cases there is an expectation that an individual will perceive behaviors to be conceptually related, specifically in terms of their compensatory (suppressing further action) or catalyzing (promoting further action) properties, as a prerequisite for both negative and positive spillover. Despite this, relatively little research has been carried out to assess the beliefs that may underpin spillover processes as held by individuals themselves, or to measure these directly. We develop and evaluate a survey-based instrument for this purpose, doing so in a sample of seven countries worldwide: Brazil, China, Denmark, India, Poland, South Africa, and the United Kingdom (approx. 1,000 respondents per country). This approach allows us to assess these measures and to compare findings between countries. As part of this, we consider the connections between beliefs about behavioral relationships, and other key variables such as pro-environmental identity and personal preferences. We observe higher levels of endorsement of compensatory beliefs than previous research, and even higher levels of endorsement of novel items assessing catalyzing beliefs. For the first time, we present evidence of the validity of such measures with respect to comparable constructs, and in relation to people’s consistency across different types of behaviors. We reflect on the implications of considering the relationships between behaviors in the context of people’s subjective beliefs and offer recommendations for developing this line of research in the broader context of spillover research and within a cross-cultural framework.

show abstract

“…According to findings in the health domain [ 40 – 43 ], compensatory health beliefs involve the belief that the negative effects of an unhealthy behavior can be compensated for or "neutralized" by engaging in another healthy behavior (e.g., "I can eat this piece of cake now because I will exercise this evening") [ 44 ], and the activation of these beliefs result in failure to achieve health goals (e.g., to maintain one’s figure or control body weight). In line with this definition, compensatory green beliefs, which refer to beliefs that the negative effects of energy-inefficient or unsustainable behaviors (e.g., flying abroad for vacation) can be compensated for by engaging in energy-efficient or sustainable practices (e.g., using public transport), was also scaled and documented as a significant variable for predicting environmentally important behaviors [ 45 , 46 ]. With respect to mobile phone use when driving, drivers may hold two types of behavioral beliefs (i.e., "mobile use will negatively affect driving safety" or "shortening conversations or slowing down can minimize the impairment to driving performance due to mobile phone use").…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Do Drivers Use Mobile Phones While Driving? The Contribution of Compensatory Beliefs

Zhou

Wang

2016

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study is the first to investigate the contribution of compensatory beliefs (i.e., the belief that the negative effects of an unsafe behavior can be "neutralized" by engaging in another safe behavior; e.g., "I can use a mobile phone now because I will slow down ") on drivers’ mobile phone use while driving. The effects of drivers’ personal characteristics on compensatory beliefs, mobile phone use and self-regulatory behaviors were also examined. A series of questions were administered to drivers, which included (1) personal measures, (2) scales that measured compensatory beliefs generally in substance use and with regard to driving safety, and (3) questions to measure drivers’ previous primary mobile phone usage and corresponding self-regulatory actions. Overall, drivers reported a low likelihood of compensatory beliefs, prior mobile phone use, and a strong frequency of self-regulatory behaviors. Respondents who had a higher tendency toward compensatory beliefs reported more incidents or crash involvement caused by making or answering calls and sending or reading messages. The findings provide strong support for the contribution of compensatory beliefs in predicting mobile phone usage in the context of driving. Compensatory beliefs can explain 41% and 43% of the variance in the active activities of making calls and texting/sending messages compared with 18% and 31% of the variance in the passive activities of answering calls and reading messages. Among the regression models for predicting self-regulatory behaviors at the tactical or operational level, compensatory beliefs emerge as significant predictors only in predicting shorter conversations while on a call. The findings and limitations of the current study are discussed.

show abstract

Can recycling compensate for speeding on highways? Similarity and difficulty of behaviors as key characteristics of green compensatory beliefs

Cited by 11 publications

References 27 publications

The Role of Attitude Strength in Behavioral Spillover: Attitude Matters—But Not Necessarily as a Moderator

The Role of Attitude Strength in Behavioral Spillover: Attitude Matters—But Not Necessarily as a Moderator

Compensatory and Catalyzing Beliefs: Their Relationship to Pro-environmental Behavior and Behavioral Spillover in Seven Countries

Why Do Drivers Use Mobile Phones While Driving? The Contribution of Compensatory Beliefs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About