Pro-environmental behavior in families: A reverse socialization perspective

Intergenerational influence on sustainable consumer attitudes and behaviors: Roles of family communication and peer influence in environmental consumer socialization

“…Common method bias can lead to Type I and II measurement errors by inflating the relationship among constructs in survey research (e.g., Podsakoff et al, 2012). Since variables were measured from parent–child dyads (i.e., different type of respondents), the possibility of a common method bias was significantly reduced in this study as in Singh et al (2020, p. 114). Nonetheless, we accounted both for the common latent factor technique and Harman's one‐factor test (Harman, 1976) by following the recommendations of MacKenzie and Podsakoff (2012) to assess if common method bias exists.…”

“…Empirical research, both quantitative and qualitative, exists on sustainable family socialization and intergenerational influence across a wide swath of environmental psychology and education literature (e.g., Ando et al, 2015; Casaló & Escario, 2016; Gentina & Muratore, 2012; Gentina & Singh, 2015; Grønhøj & Thøgersen, 2009, 2012, 2017; Grønhøj, 2007; Katz‐Gerro et al, 2020; Leppänen et al, 2012; Matthies & Wallis, 2015; Matthies et al, 2012; Meeusen, 2014; Nakamura, 2003; Singh et al, 2020). However, only a few researchers examined the topic by adapting the perspective of consumer socialization theory (e.g., Grønhøj & Thøgersen, 2009, 2012; Grønhøj, 2007; Katz‐Gerro et al, 2020; Matthies & Wallis, 2015; Singh et al, 2020). Not surprisingly, early environmental studies largely focused on developed countries, as issues related to environmental protection and resource preservation have been on the political and social agenda for many years.…”

“…However, past research points to them being important moderators of IGI (Mandrik et al, 2005, 2018; Moore et al, 2002); therefore, we include them for examination here, yet extend past research by exploring not only outcome (observed) measures of communication but self‐reported communication as well. A final gap to note is the paucity of research investigating possible reverse intergenerational influence on sustainable consumption—that is, transmission of values and attitudes from child to parent (see Singh et al, 2020 for an exception). As reverse IGI may occur in various consumption situations such as the acquisition of new technologies, visible brands, and concrete products (e.g., Mandrik et al, 2018; Moore et al, 2002; Moore‐Shay & Lutz, 1988; Obermiller & Spangenberg, 2000), it is reasonable that reverse IGI may exist for the relatively new and esoteric topic of sustainable consumption, where college‐age children may have more perceived expertise (e.g., Shah & Mittal, 1997).…”

“…Later, a qualitative study provided support for the existence of reverse socialization among young adult children in the context of everyday household activities, involving recycling, water, and electricity consumption in Denmark (Grønhøj, 2007). Most recently, Singh et al (2020) provided empirical evidence for reverse sustainable socialization among 352 parent–adolescent dyads in a non‐Western culture (India), revealing how adolescents' environmental concerns may influence parents' intentions to behave in a pro‐environmental way. In sum, these efforts provide testimony regarding the presence of reverse transmission in the domain of sustainability.…”

Shaping the Environmental Self: The Role of Childhood Experiences in Shaping Identity Standards of Environmental Behavior in Adulthood

“…This occurs over the life course, including as children in family settings. For example, research has found that parenting style is associated with environmental values in children, while parents are also socialized by children within the family (Katz-Gerro et al 2019;Queiroz et al 2020;Singh et al 2020). Research has demonstrated that social identities related to how individuals define their connections to others and empathy contain expectations for environmental behavior and concern (Brieger 2019;Brown et al 2019).…”