Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Using the social identity model of pro-environmental behavior to predict support for the adoption of solar panels

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Solar panels promise to provide clean energy with much fewer environmental impacts than traditional energy sources. The adoption of solar panels may be practiced on an individual level, a community level, or even at a national level through corporate or government actions. While extant literature has observed that perceptions of monetary value, house features, and environmental benefit predict the use of solar panels, less is known about how social factors relate to the use of solar panels. The Social Identity Model of Pro-Environmental Action (SIMPEA; Fritsche et al. in Psychol Rev 125(2):245–269, 2018) hypothesizes that ingroup identification, along with collective efficacy and perceived norms of the ingroup, predict pro-environmental behavior. We applied this prediction to solar panels as a new context for SIMPEA and tested this hypothesis with a survey measuring participants’ support for the adoption of solar panels in community and national contexts. The study revealed a predicted two-way interaction between identification and norms, but there was no evidence of the three-way interaction that was predicted by SIMPEA.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
€32.70 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agley J, Xiao Y, Nolan R, Golzarri-Arroyo L (2022) Quality control questions on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (Mturk): a randomized trial of impact on the USAUDIT, PHQ-9, and GAD-7. Behav Res Methods 54:885–897

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alipour M, Salim H, Stewart RA, Sahin O (2020) Predictors, taxonomy of predictors, and correlations of predictors with the decision behaviour of residential solar photovoltaics adoption: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 123:109749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alsabbagh M (2019) Public perception toward residential solar panels in Bahrain. Energy Rep 5:253–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aydin E, Brounen D, Ergun A (2023) The rebound effect of solar panel adoption: evidence from Dutch households. Energy Econ 120:106645

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura A (1986) Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth M, Masson T, Fritsche I, Fielding K, Smith JR (2021) Collective responses to global challenges: the social psychology of pro-environmental action. J Environ Psychol 74:101562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berinsky A, Huber G, Lenz G (2012) Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon.com’s Mechanical Turk. Polit Anal 20(3):351–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollinger B, Gillingham K (2012) Peer effects in the diffusion of solar photovoltaic panels. Mark Sci 31(6):900–912

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollinger B, Gillingham K, Kirkpatrick AJ, Sexton S (2022) Visibility and peer influence in durable good adoption. Mark Sci 41(3):453–476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollinger B, Gillingham K, Ovaere M (2020) Field experiment shows that self-interest attracts more sunlight. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 117(34):20503–20510

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Boudet H, Zanocco C, Stelmach G, Muttaqee M, Flora J (2021) Public preferences for five electricity grid decarbonization policies in California. Rev Policy Res 38(5):510–528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brem A, Puente-Díaz R (2020) Are you acting sustainably in your daily practice? Introduction of the four-S model of sustainability. J Clean Prod 267:122074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brick C, Sherman D, Kim H (2017) “Green to be seen” and “brown to keep down”: Visibility moderates the effect of identity on pro-environmental behavior. J Environ Psychol 51:226–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brieger S (2019) Social identity and environmental concern: the importance of contextual effects. Environ Behav 51(7):828–855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broers W, Vasseur V, Kemp R, Abujidi N, Vroon Z (2021) Not all homeowners are alike: a segmentation model based on a quantitative analysis of Dutch adopters of residential photovoltaics. Energ Effic 14:30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buhrmeister M, Kwang T, Gosling SD (2016) Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: a new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality data? In: Khazdin AE (ed) Methodological issues and strategies in clinical research. American Psychological Association, pp 133–139

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Caird S, Roy R, Herring H (2008) Improving the energy performance of UK households: results from surveys of consumer adoption and use of low- and zero-carbon technologies. Energ Effic 1:149–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi S, Hart P (2021) The influence of different efficacy constructs on energy conservation intentions and climate change policy support. J Environ Psychol 75:101618

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cialdini RB (2003) Crafting normative messages to protect the environment. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 12(4):105–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clifford S, Jewell RM, Waggoner PD (2015) Are samples drawn from mechanical Turk valid for research on political ideology? Res Polit 2(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168015622072

  • Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS (2003) Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge

    Google Scholar 

  • Cousse J (2021) Still in love with solar energy? Installation size, affect, and the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies. Renew Sustain Energy 145:111107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Dominicis S, Sokoloski R, Jaeger C, Schultz PW (2019) Making the smart meter social promotes long-term energy conservation. Palgrave Commun 5(1):1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deng G, Newton P (2017) Assessing the impact of solar PV on domestic energy consumption: exploring the prospect of rebound effects. Energy Policy 110:313–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devine-Wright P (2009) Rethinking NIMBYism: the role of place attachment and place identity in explaining place-protective action. J Community Appl Soc Psychol 19:426–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dugstad A, Grimsrud K, Kipperberg G, Lindhjem H, Navrud S (2023) Place attachment and preferences for wind energy – a value-based approach. Energy Res Soc Sci 100:103094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlap RE, Van Liere KD, Mertig AG, Jones RE (2000) Measuring endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: a revised NEP scale. J Soc Issues 56(3):425–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fielding KS, Hornsey MJ, Thai HA, Toh LL (2020) Using ingroup messengers and ingroup values to promote climate change policy. Clim Change 158(2):181–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fritsche I, Barth M, Jugert P, Masson T, Reese G (2018) A social identity model of pro-environmental action (SIMPEA). Psychol Rev 125(2):245–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillingham K, Bollinger B (2021) Social learning and solar photovoltaic adoption. Manag Sci 67(11):7091–7112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graziano M, Gillingham K (2015) Spatial patterns of solar photovoltaic system adoption: the influence of neighbors and the built environment. J Econ Geogr 15(4):815–839

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamann KRS, Reese G (2020) My influence on the world (of others): goal efficacy beliefs and efficacy affect predict private, public, and activist pro-environmental behavior. J Soc Issues 76(1):35–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauser DJ, Schwarz N (2016) Attentive Turkers: Mturk participants perform better on online attention checks than do subject pool participants. Behav Res Methods 48:400–407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heidbreder LM, Tröger J, Schmitt M (2022) Exploring the psychological antecedents of private and public sphere behaviours to reduce household plastic consumption. Environ Dev Sustain 25:3405–3428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horne C, Mallborn S (2020) Norms: an integrated framework. Annu Rev Sociol 46:467–487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irfan M, Hao Y, Ikram M, Wu H, Akram R, Rauf A (2021) Assessment of the public acceptance and utilization of renewable energy in Pakistan. Sustain Prod Consump 27:312–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jans L (2021) Changing environmental behaviour from the bottom up: the formation of pro-environmental social identities. J Environ Psychol 73:101531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jugert P, Greenaway K, Barth M, Büchner R, Eisentraut S, Fritsche I (2016) Collective efficacy increases pro-environmental intentions through increasing self-efficacy. J Environ Psychol 48:12–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keith MG, Stevenor BA, McAbee ST (2022) Scale mean and variance differences in MTurk and non-MTurk samples. J Pers Psychol 22(1):1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Kowalska-Pyzalska A (2019) Do consumers want to pay for green electricity? A case study from Poland. Sustainability 11(5):1310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar V, Kaushik AK (2022) Solar rooftop adoption among Indian households: a structural equation modeling analysis. J Soc Mark 12(4):513–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • La Nauze A (2018) Power from the people: rooftop solar and a downward-sloping supply of electricity. J Assoc Environ Resour Econ 6(6):949–982

    Google Scholar 

  • Landmann H, Rohmann A (2020) Being moved by protest: collective efficacy beliefs and injustice appraisals enhance collective action intentions for forest protection via positive and negative emotions. J Environ Psychol 71:101491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leach CW, van Zomeren M, Zebel S, Vliek MLW, Pennekamp SF, Doosje B et al (2008) Group-level self-definition and self-investment: a hierarchical (multicomponent) model of in-group identification. J Pers Soc Psychol 95:144–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang J, Qiu Y, James T, Ruddell BL, Dalrymple M, Earl S, Castelazo A (2018) Do energy retrofits work? Evidence from commercial and residential buildings in Phoenix. J Environ Econ Manag 92:726–743

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loy LS, Reese G, Spence A (2022) Facing a common human fate: relating global identity and climate change mitigation. Polit Psychol 43(3):563–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masson T, Fristche I (2021) We need climate change mitigation and climate change mitigation needs the ‘We’: a state-of-the-art review of social identity effects motivating climate change action. Curr Opin Behav Sci 42:89–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masson T, Jugert P, Fritsche I (2016) Collective self-fulfilling prophecies: group identification biases perceptions of environmental group norms among high identifiers. Soc Influ 11(3):185–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFarland S, Webb M, Brown D (2012) All humanity is my ingroup: a measure and studies of identification with all humanity. J Pers Soc Psychol 103(5):830–853

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mertens S, Schultz P (2021) Referent group specificity: optimizing normative feedback to increase residential recycling. J Environ Psychol 73:101541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mildenberger M, Howe PD, Miljanich C (2019) Households with solar installations are ideologically diverse and more politically active than their neighbors. Nat Energy 4:1033–1039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murakami K, Ida T, Tanaka M, Friedman L (2015) Consumers’ willingness to pay for renewable and nuclear energy: a comparative analysis between the US and Japan. Energy Econ 50:178–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nilson RS, Stedman RC (2022) Are big and small solar separate things?: the importance of scale in public support for solar energy development in upstate New York. Energy Res Soc Sci 86¸:102449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nilson RS, Stedman RC (2023) Reacting to the rural burden: understanding opposition to utility-scale solar development in upstate New York. Rural Soc 88(2):578–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ntanos S, Kyriakopoulos G, Chalikias M, Arabatzis G, Skordoulis M (2018) Public perceptions and willingness to pay for renewable energy: a case study from Greece. Sustainability (Switzerland) 10(3):687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Páez D, Rimé B, Wlodarczyk A (2015) Psychosocial effects of perceived emotional synchrony in collective gatherings. Interpersonal Relat Group Processes 108(5):711–729

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabinovich A, Heath S, Zhischenko V, Mkilema F, Patrick A, Nasseri M, Wynants M, Blake WH, Mtei K, Munishi L, Ndakidemi P (2020) Protecting the commons: predictors of willingness to mitigate communal land degradation among Maasai pastoralists. J Environ Psychol 72:101504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rai V, Beck AL (2015) Public perceptions and information gaps in solar energy in Texas. Environ Res Lett 10:074011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rai V, Reeves DC, Margolis R (2016) Overcoming barriers and uncertainties in the adoption of residential solar PV. Renew Energy 89:498–505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reimer T, Banerji D, Roland C (2018) Overcoming barriers to recycling: the role of prior knowledge and social norms. Purdue Recycling Project (PURE). Communication and Cognition Lab, Purdue University: Project Report. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.27119.76968

  • Scarpa R, Willis K (2010) Willingness-to-pay for renewable energy: primary and discretionary choice of British households' for micro-generation technologies. Energy Econ 32(1):129–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulte M, Bamberg S, Rees J, Rollin P (2020) Social identity as a key concept for connecting transformative societal change with individual environmental activism. J Environ Psychol 72:101525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz PW (2022) Secret agents of influence: leveraging social norms for good. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 31(5):443–450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz PW, Messina A, Tronu G, Limas EF, Gupta R, Estrada M (2016) Personalized normative feedback and the moderating role of personal norms: a field experiment to reduce residential water consumption. Environ Behav 48(5):686–710

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson B, Willer R (2015) Beyond altruism: sociological foundations of cooperation and prosocial behavior. Annu Rev Sociol 41:43–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith JR, Louis WR, Terry DJ, Greenaway KH, Clarke MR, Cheng X (2012) Congruent or conflicted? The impact of injunctive and descriptive norms on environmental intentions. J Environ Psychol 32(4):353–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun P, Wang H, Huang H, Ho C (2020) Consumer attitude and purchase intention toward rooftop photovoltaic installation: the roles of personal trait, psychological benefit, and government incentives. Energy Environ 31(1):21–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabernero C, Hernández B (2011) Collective motivation for managing our common environment. In: Bonaiuto M, Bonnes M, Nenci AM, Carrus G (eds) Advances in people-environment studies: Vol. 2. urban diversities - Environmental and social issues (pp. 193–202). Hogrefe

    Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel H, Turner JC (2004) The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In: Jost JT, Sidanius J (eds) Political psychology. Psychology Press, pp 276–293

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas EF, McGarty C, Mavor KI (2009) Aligning identities, emotions, and beliefs to create commitment to sustainable social and political action. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 13(3):194–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toich MJ, Schutt E, Fisher DM (2022) Do you get what you pay for? Preventing insufficient effort responding in MTurk and student samples. Appl Psychol 71(2):640–661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner JC, Hodd MA, Oakes PJ, Reicher SD, Wetherell MS (1987) Rediscovering the social group: a self-categorization theory. BPS Blackwell

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Census Bureau (n.d.) Census. https://www.census.gov/en.html. Accessed June 2023

  • van der Werff E, Steg L, Ruepert A (2021) My company is green, so am I: the relationship between perceived environmental responsibility of organisations and government, environmental self-identity, and pro-environmental behaviours. Energ Effic 14:50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Zomeren M, Postmes T, Spears R (2008) Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: a quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychol Bull 134(4):504–535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallis H, Loy L (2021) What drives pro-environmental activism of young people? A survey study on the Fridays For Future movement. J Environ Psychol 74:101581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang X (2017) The role of attitudinal motivations and collective efficacy on Chinese consumers’ intentions to engage in personal behaviors to mitigate climate change. J Soc Psychol 158(1):51–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber EU, Stern PC (2011) Public understanding of climate change in the United States. Am Psychol 66(4):315–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel K, Süßbauer E (2021) Exploring domestic precycling behavior: a social identity perspective. Sustainability 13(3):1–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright J, Schmitt M, Mackay C, Neufeld S (2020) Imagining a sustainable world: measuring cognitive alternatives to the environmental status quo. J Environ Psychol 72:101523

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Preparation of this article and the remuneration of participants was supported by a grant awarded to Torsten Reimer from the National Science Foundation

(NSF1737591).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Communication and Cognition Lab, Purdue University, 100 N University Street, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA

    Nathanael Johnson & Torsten Reimer

Authors
  1. Nathanael Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Torsten Reimer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nathanael Johnson.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Johnson, N., Reimer, T. Using the social identity model of pro-environmental behavior to predict support for the adoption of solar panels. J Environ Stud Sci 13, 587–601 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-023-00850-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-023-00850-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation