2019
DOI: 10.1080/09669582.2019.1663203
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Personal norms and the adoption of pro-environmental binning behaviour in national parks: an integrated structural model approach

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
89
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 134 publications
(125 citation statements)
references
References 85 publications
4
89
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The R 2 values were 0.237 (DPEB), 0.362 (TPEB), 0.195 (ID), 0.192 (ML). The assessment of the value of the R 2 is highly dependent upon the research area and Hair et al (2014) recommend that a value of 0.2 is suitable in behavior studies, so these results indicate that DPEB and TPB are appropriately explained, however, ID and ML were just at the edge but still acceptable, as indicated by others (Esfandiari et al, 2019). When EA was tested as a moderator, the R 2 of the model was improved (0.491 (TPEB), 0.244 (ID), 0.244 (ML) (see Figure 1), suggesting a better explanatory power of this model.…”
Section: Path Analysis and Hypotheses Testingmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…The R 2 values were 0.237 (DPEB), 0.362 (TPEB), 0.195 (ID), 0.192 (ML). The assessment of the value of the R 2 is highly dependent upon the research area and Hair et al (2014) recommend that a value of 0.2 is suitable in behavior studies, so these results indicate that DPEB and TPB are appropriately explained, however, ID and ML were just at the edge but still acceptable, as indicated by others (Esfandiari et al, 2019). When EA was tested as a moderator, the R 2 of the model was improved (0.491 (TPEB), 0.244 (ID), 0.244 (ML) (see Figure 1), suggesting a better explanatory power of this model.…”
Section: Path Analysis and Hypotheses Testingmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…This key finding contributed to the knowledge literature gap on behavioral beliefs, attitudes, and NEP values, where past studies have debated about the actual predictive power of NEP values in behavioral research. Even though scholars have experimented with pro-environmental values in exploring various ecological customer groups (Kiatkawsin and Han (2017), environmental reasons for traveling (Imran et al, 2014), binning behavior (Esfandiar et al, 2020) and perceptions of environmental resources (Ramkissoon et al, 2013), no study tested the predictive power of NEP toward off-trail behavior.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Prevailing circumstances, hazard consciousness, relaxed nature of leisure, and the presence of authority administration can have an impact on how visitors interpret the noncompliant situation. For instance, a higher tendency to litter in places already littered (Esfandiar, Dowling, Pearce & Goh, 2020) or participate in unauthorized swimming when other visitors are seen in restricted pool areas (Girasek, Marschall & Pope, 2016).…”
Section: Reasons For Noncompliancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Not surprisingly, the VBN model has been employed predominantly within research focusing on pro-environmental behaviors, especially concerning research on climate change (Nilsson, von Borgstede, & Biel, 2004;Sanderson & Curtis, 2016), consumers' decision making in selecting products or services (Jansson, Marell, & Nordlund, 2011;Stern, 1999), and visitors to protected areas (Esfandiar, Dowling, Pearce, & Goh, 2019;van Riper & Kyle, 2014). As of late, the VBN model has been utilized within sustainable tourism research primarily focusing on pro-sustainable tourism behaviors (Han, Hwang, & Lee, 2017;Han, Olya, Cho, & Kim, 2018;Kiatkawsin & Han, 2017;Landon, et al, 2018) and the selection of green lodging options (Choi, Jang, & Kandampully, 2015;Han, 2015;Rahman & Reynolds, 2016).…”
Section: Conceptual Orientation: the Value-belief-norm Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%