Advertisement

Assessing environmental attitudes in Portugal using a new short version of the Environmental Attitudes Inventory

  • Rita B. Domingues
  • Gabriela Gonçalves
Article
  • 112 Downloads

Abstract

Most environmental problems are caused and/or enhanced by human behaviour; thus, it is crucial to understand environmental attitudes that underlie individual’s behaviour towards the environment. In Portugal, a highly vulnerable region to environmental change and serious local-scale natural hazards, environmental attitudes have never been systematically addressed. Therefore, the main goal of this study is to evaluate environmental attitudes in a Portuguese sample using the most appropriate short version of Milfont & Duckitt’s Environmental Attitudes Inventory (Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(1) 80–94, 2010). Reliability and validity analyses showed that the 36-item version of the Environmental Attitudes Inventory (EAI-36) was more adequate than the 24-item version. Using EAI-36, preservation and utilisation emerged as orthogonal dimensions, forming the vertical structure of environmental attitudes, and were negatively and moderately correlated in the Portuguese sample, expressing an ecocentric viewpoint. Mean scores for the first- and second-order factors were similar to values from other developed countries. Differences in age, gender and study area were found, with older participants, women and individuals from the natural sciences showing higher levels on preservation and lower on utilisation.

Keywords

Environmental attitudes Preservation Utilisation Psychometry Portugal 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was financially supported by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) through projects UID/MAR/00350/2013 e UID/SOC/04020/2013. FCT provided funding for R.B.D. through a postdoctoral fellowship (SFRH/BPD/108444/2015).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Rita B. Domingues declares that she has no conflict of interest. Gabriela Gonçalves declares that she has no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

12144_2018_9786_MOESM1_ESM.docx (19 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 19 kb)
12144_2018_9786_MOESM2_ESM.docx (17 kb)
ESM 2 (DOCX 17 kb)

References

  1. Albarracín, D., Zanna, M. P., Johnson, B. T., & Kumkale, G. T. (2005). Attitudes: Introduction and scope. In D. Albarracín, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 3–19). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  2. Barbaro, N., Pickett, S. M., & Parkhill, M. R. (2015). Environmental attitudes mediate the link between need for cognition and pro-environmental goal choice. Personality and Individual Differences, 75, 220–223.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.11.032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blaikie, N. W. H. (1992). The nature and origins of ecological world views: An Australian study. Social Science Quarterly, 73, 144–165.Google Scholar
  4. Boeve-de Pauw, J., & Van Petegem, P. (2011). The effect of Flemish eco-schools on student environmental knowledge, attitudes, and affect. International Journal of Science Education, 33(11), 1513–1538.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.540725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bogner, F. X., & Wiseman, M. (2006). Adolescents’ attitudes towards nature and environment: Quantifying the 2-MEV model. Environmentalist, 26(4), 247–254.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-006-8660-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brislin, R. W. (1976). Comparative research methodology: Cross-cultural studies. International Journal of Psychology, 11(3), 215–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carlson, M., & Mulaik, S. A. (1993). Trait ratings from descriptions of behavior as mediated by components of meaning. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 28(1), 111–159.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2801CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Chao, Y.-L., & Lam, S.-P. (2011). Measuring responsible environmental behavior: Self-reported and other-reported measures and their differences in testing a behavioral model. Environment and Behavior, 43(1), 53–71.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916509350849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Daniel, L., Williamson, T., Soebarto, V., & Chen, D. (2015). Learning from thermal mavericks in Australia: Comfort studies in Melbourne and Darwin. Architectural Science Review, 58(1), 57–66.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00038628.2014.976537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Delhomme, P., & Gheorghiu, A. (2016). Comparing French carpoolers and non-carpoolers: Which factors contribute the most to carpooling? Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 42, 1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2015.10.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Deng, J., Walker, G. J., & Swinnerton, G. (2006). A comparison of environmental values and attitudes between Chinese in Canada and anglo-Canadians. Environment & Behavior, 38, 22–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dietz, T., Kalof, L., & Stern, P. C. (2002). Gender, values, and environmentalism. Social Science Quarterly, 83, 353–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. do Paço, A., Alves, H., Shiel, C., & Filho, W. L. (2013). A multi-country level analysis of the environmental attitudes and behaviours among young consumers. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 56(10), 1532–1548.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2012.733310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dunlap, R. E., & Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The “new environmental paradigm”: A proposed measuring instrument and preliminary results. The Journal of Environmental Education, 9(4), 10–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 425–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ernst, J., Blood, N., & Beery, T. (2017). Environmental action and student environmental leaders: Exploring the influence of environmental attitudes, locus of control, and sense of personal responsibility. Environmental Education Research, 23(2), 149–175.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2015.1068278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Frank, F., Pintassilgo, P., & Pinto, P. (2009). Environmental awareness of surf tourists: A case study in the Algarve. Journal of Spatial and Organizational Dynamics, 3(2), 102–113 http://www.cieo.ualg.pt/discussionpapers/discussionpapers1.pdfGoogle Scholar
  19. Gifford, R. (2014a). Environmental psychology (5th ed.). Coville: Optimal Books.Google Scholar
  20. Gifford, R. (2014b). Environmental psychology matters. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 541–579.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115048CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Gifford, R., & Sussman, R. (2012). Environmental attitudes. In S. D. Clayton (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology. Oxford University Press.  https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199733026.013.0004
  22. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2005). Multivariate data analysis. Vectors. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2011.02.019Google Scholar
  23. Heyl, M., Moyano, E., & Cifuentes, L. (2013). Environmental attitudes and behaviors of college students : A case study conducted at a chilean university. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 45(3), 487–500.  https://doi.org/10.14349/rlp.v45i3.1489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hoffarth, M. R., & Hodson, G. (2016). Green on the outside, red on the inside: Perceived environmentalist threat as a factor explaining political polarization of climate change. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 45, 40–49.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.11.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. IPCC. (2014). Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (C. W. Team, R. K. Pachauri, & L. A. Meyer, Eds.). Geneva: IPCC.Google Scholar
  27. Johnson, B., & Manoli, C. C. (2010). The 2-MEV scale in the United States: A measure of Children’s environmental attitudes based on the theory of ecological attitude. The Journal of Environmental Education, 42(2), 84–97.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2010.503716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kaiser, F. G., Ranney, M., Hartig, T., & Bowler, P. A. (1999). Ecological behavior, environmental attitude, and feelings of responsibility for the environment. European Psychologist, 4(2), 59–74.  https://doi.org/10.1027//1016-9040.4.2.59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(January), 239–260.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Larsen, K. S. (1994). Attitudes toward the transportation of nuclear waste: The development of a Likert-type scale. The Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 27–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Larson, L. R., Green, G. T., & Castleberry, S. B. (2009). Construction and validation of an instrument to measure environmental orientations in a diverse group of children. Environment and Behavior, 43(1), 72–89.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916509345212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Leung, C., & Rice, J. (2002). Comparison of Chinese-Australian and Anglo-Australian environmental attitudes and behavior. Social Behavior and Personality, 30, 251–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Marôco, J., Marôco, A. L., & Campos, J. A. D. B. (2014). Student’s academic efficacy or inefficacy? An example on how to evaluate the psychometric properties of a measuring instrument and evaluate the effects of item wording. Open Journal of Statistics, 4(6), 484–493.  https://doi.org/10.4236/ojs.2014.46046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mayer, F. S., & Frantz, C. M. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(4), 503–515.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.10.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McFarlane, B. L., & Hunt, L. M. (2006). Environmental activism in the forest sector: Social psychlogical, social-cultural, and contextual effects. Environment & Behavior, 38, 266–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McIntyre, A., & Milfont, T. L. (2016). Who cares? Measuring environmental attitudes. In R. Gifford (Ed.), Research methods for environmental psychology (pp. 93–114). Wiley.  https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119162124.ch6
  37. McLachlan, G. J., & Krishnan, T. (1997). The EM algorithm and extensions (Vol. 274, 2nd ed.). New York: Wiley-Interscience.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1271189Google Scholar
  38. Milfont, T. L. (2007). Psychology of environmental attitudes: A cross-cultural study of their content and structure. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Auckland.Google Scholar
  39. Milfont, T. L., & Duckitt, J. (2004). The structure of environmental attitudes: A first-and second-order confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(3), 289–303.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.09.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Milfont, T. L., & Duckitt, J. (2010). The environmental attitudes inventory: A valid and reliable measure to assess the structure of environmental attitudes. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(1), 80–94.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.09.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Milfont, T. L., Pessoa, V. S., Belo, R. P., Gouveia, V. V., & Andrade, P. R. (2005). Inventário das Atitudes Ambientais: Validação da sua versão em Português [Environmental attitudes inventory: Its Brazilian-Portuguese validation]. In 35th Annual Meeting of the Brazilian Psychological Society. Curitiba, Brazil.Google Scholar
  42. Milfont, T. L., Duckitt, J., & Wagner, C. (2010). The higher order structure of environmental attitudes: A cross-cultural examination. Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 44(2), 263–273.Google Scholar
  43. Miller, J. D. (2004). Public understanding of, and attitudes toward, scientific research: What we know and what we need to know. Public Understanding of Science, 13(3), 273–294.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662504044908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Moussaoui, L. S., Desrichard, O., Mella, N., Blum, A., Cantarella, M., Clémence, A., & Battiaz, E. (2016). Validation française de l’Inventaire d’Attitudes Environnementales. Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée/European Review of Applied Psychology.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2016.06.006
  45. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  46. O’Callaghan, B., Green, H. J., Hyde, R. a., Wadley, D., & Upadhyay, A. (2012). Exploring the influence of housing design and occupant environmental attitudes on energy and water usage. Architectural Science Review, 55(3), 176–185.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00038628.2012.693813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ojala, M. (2008). Recycling and ambivalence: Quantitative and qualitative analyses of household recycling among young adults. Environment and Behavior, 40(6), 777–797.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916507308787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Poortinga, W., Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2003). Myths of nature and environmentalmanagement strategies. A field study on energy reductions in traffic and transport. In G. Moser, E. Pol, Y. Bernard, M. Bonnes, & J. Corraliza (Eds.), People, places, and sustainability (pp. 280–290). Ashland: Hogrefe & Huber.Google Scholar
  49. Rauwald, K. S., & Moore, C. F. (2002). Environmental attitudes as predictors of policy support across three countries. Environment and Behavior, 34(6), 709–739.  https://doi.org/10.1177/001391602237243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sarigöllü, E. (2009). A cross-country exploration of environmental attitudes. Environment and Behavior, 41(3), 365–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models:Tests of significance andDescriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23–74 http://www.dgps.de/fachgruppen/methoden/mpr-online/issue20/art2/mpr130_13.pdfGoogle Scholar
  52. Schindler, F. H. (1999). Development of the survey of environmental issue attitudes. The Journal of Environmental Education, 30, 12–16.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00958969909601872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schmidt, L., & Delicado, A. (2014). Ambiente, Alterações Climáticas, Alimentação e Energia: a Opinião dos Portugueses. 2014. Imprensa de Ciências Sociais. https://www.imprensa.ics.ul.pt/index.php?main_page=product_book_info&cPath=5&products_id=337. Accessed 8 Jan 2015.
  54. Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2010). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  55. Seebauer, S., Fleiß, J., & Schweighart, M. (2017). A household is not a person : Consistency of pro-environmental behavior in adult couples and the accuracy of proxy- reports. Environment and Behavior, 49, 603–637.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916516663796CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Sutton, S. G., & Gyuris, E. (2015). Optimizing the environmental attitudes inventory: Establishing a baseline of change in students’ attitudes. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 16(1), 16–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Theodori, G. L., & Luloff, A. E. (2002). Position on environmental issues and engagement in proenvironmental behaviors. Society & Natural Resources, 15(6), 471–482.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920290069128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. van de Vijver, F., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  59. Van Liere, K. D., & Dunlap, R. E. (1980). The social bases of environmental concern: A review of hypotheses, explanations and empirical evidence. Public Opinion Quarterly, 44, 181–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Weigel, R., & Weigel, J. (1978). Environmental concern: The development of a measure. Environment and Behavior, 10(1), 3–15.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916578101001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. West, S. G., Finch, J. F., & Curran, P. J. (1995). Structural equation models with nonnormal variables. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues, and Applications (pp. 56–75). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  62. Wiseman, M., & Bogner, F. X. (2003). A higher-order model of ecological values and its relationship to personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 783–794.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00071-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Zelezny, L. C., Chua, P.-P., & Aldrich, C. (2000). Elaborating on gender differences in environmentalism. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 443–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Marine and Environmental Research (CIMA)University of AlgarveFaroPortugal
  2. 2.Research Centre for Spatial and Organizational Dynamics (CIEO)University of AlgarveFaroPortugal

Personalised recommendations