Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Positive associations of optimism–pessimism orientation with pro-environmental behavior and subjective well-being: a longitudinal study on quality of life and everyday behavior

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of the present study was to investigate associations of the balance of optimism and pessimism orientations as personal traits with pro-environmental behavior and subjective well-being, i.e., life satisfaction.

Methods

A longitudinal questionnaire survey consisting of two waves were conducted with Japanese respondents within an interval of 3 months (N = 770, mean age 49.6 ± 15.23 years). Correlation analyses and structural equation modeling were conducted to identify relationships between pro-environmental behavior and positive and negative psychological states and orientations.

Results

Results of both the two surveys indicated positive correlations of optimism–pessimism orientation (O/P ratio) and subjective well-being with pro-environmental behavior. Negative associations were also confirmed between depression, stress, and sleepiness and pro-environmental behavior. Structural equation modeling using the two-wave data revealed that O/P ratio is positively associated with pro-environmental behavior as longitudinal associations.

Conclusions

These results suggest that O/P ratio can be related to current and future engagement in pro-environmental behavior and improvement in subjective well-being which could lead to an environmentally sustainable society with enhanced quality of life.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin,131(6), 803–855. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.131.6.803.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Swenson, M. R., & Wells, W. D. (1997). Useful correlates of pro-environmental behavior. In Social marketing: Theoretical and practical perspectives (pp. 91–109).

  3. Corral-Verdugo, V., Mireles-Acosta, J., Tapia-Fonllem, C., & Fraijo-Sing, B. (2011). Happiness as correlate of sustainable behavior: A study of pro-ecological, frugal, equitable and altruistic actions that promote subjective wellbeing. Research in Human Ecology,18(2), 95–104.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Jacob, J., Jovic, E., & Brinkerhoff, M. B. (2009). Personal and planetary well-being: Mindfulness meditation, pro-environmental behavior and personal quality of life in a survey from the social justice and ecological sustainability movement. Social Indicators Research,93(2), 275–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-008-9308-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Tapia-Fonllem, C., Corral-Verdugo, V., Fraijo-Sing, B., & Durón-Ramos, M. F. (2013). Assessing sustainable behavior and its correlates: A measure of pro-ecological, frugal, altruistic and equitable actions. Sustainability,5(2), 711–723. https://doi.org/10.3390/su5020711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kaida, N., & Kaida, K. (2016). Pro-environmental behavior correlates with present and future subjective well-being. Environment, Development and Sustainability,18(1), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-015-9629-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kaida, N., & Kaida, K. (2016). Facilitating pro-environmental behavior: The role of pessimism and anthropocentric environmental values. Social Indicators Research,126(3), 1243–1260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-0943-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. De Young, R. (1985). Encouraging environmentally appropriate behavior: The role of intrinsic motivation. Journal of Environmental Systems,15(4), 281–292. https://doi.org/10.2190/3FWV-4WM0-R6MC-2URB.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Rhodes, R. E., Beauchamp, M. R., Conner, M., de Bruijn, G.-J. G.-J., Kaushal, N., & Latimer-Cheung, A. (2015). Prediction of depot-based specialty recycling behavior using an extended theory of planned behavior. Environment and Behavior,47(9), 1001–1023. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916514534066.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. van der Linden, S. (2018). Warm glow is associated with low- but not high-cost sustainable behaviour. Nature Sustainability,1(1), 28–30. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-017-0001-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Koenig-Lewis, N., Palmer, A., Dermody, J., & Urbye, A. (2013). Consumers’ evaluations of ecological packaging—Rational and emotional approaches. Journal of Environmental Psychology,37, 94–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.11.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Brown, K. W., & Kasser, T. (2005). Are psychological and ecological well-being compatible? The role of values, mindfulness, and lifestyle. Social Indicators Research,74(2), 349–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-004-8207-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Prati, G., Albanesi, C., & Pietrantoni, L. (2017). Social well-being and pro-environmental behavior: A cross-lagged panel design. Human Ecology Review,23(1), 123–140. https://doi.org/10.22459/HER.23.01.2017.07.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lee, Y.-J., & De Young, R. (1993). Intrinsic satisfaction derived from office recycling behavior: A case study in Taiwan. Social Indicators Research,31, 63–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01086514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. George, M. (1991). State or trait: Effects of positive mood on prosocial behaviors at work. Journal of Applied Psychology,76(2), 299–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Milfont, T. L., & Sibley, C. G. (2012). The big five personality traits and environmental engagement: Associations at the individual and societal level. Journal of Environmental Psychology,32(2), 187–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2011.12.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hirsh, J. B. (2010). Personality and environmental concern. Journal of Environmental Psychology,30(2), 245–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.01.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Terrier, L., Kim, S., & Fernandez, S. (2016). Who are the good organizational citizens for the environment? An examination of the predictive validity of personality traits. Journal of Environmental Psychology,48, 185–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.10.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Busic-Sontic, A., Czap, N. V., & Fuerst, F. (2017). The role of personality traits in green decision-making. Journal of Economic Psychology,62, 313–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2017.06.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Boeve-de Pauw, J., Donche, V., & Van Petegem, P. (2011). Adolescents’ environmental worldview and personality: An explorative study. Journal of Environmental Psychology,31(2), 109–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.05.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Forgeard, M. J. C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2012). Seeing the glass half full: A review of the causes and consequences of optimism. Pratiques Psychologiques,18, 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prps.2012.02.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. López-Mosquera, N., & Sánchez, M. (2011). Emotional and satisfaction benefits to visitors as explanatory factors in the monetary valuation of environmental goods. An application to periurban green spaces. Land Use Policy,28(1), 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.05.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hatfield, J., & Job, R. F. S. (2001). Optimism bias about environmental degradation: The role of the range of impact of precautions. Journal of Environmental Psychology,21(1), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2000.0190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gifford, R. (2011). The dragons of inaction: Psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. American Psychologist,66(4), 290–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023566.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Twenge, J. M., Ciarocco, N. J., Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., & Bartels, J. M. (2007). Social exclusion decreases prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,92(1), 56–66. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Vinkers, C. H., Zorn, J. V., Cornelisse, S., Koot, S., Houtepen, L. C., Olivier, B., et al. (2013). Time-dependent changes in altruistic punishment following stress. Psychoneuroendocrinology,38(9), 1467–1475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2012.12.012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. von Dawans, B., Fischbacher, U., Kirschbaum, C., Fehr, E., & Heinrichs, M. (2012). The social dimension of stress reactivity: Acute stress increases prosocial behavior in humans. Psychological Science,23(6), 651–660. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611431576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Sollberger, S., Bernauer, T., & Ehlert, U. (2016). Stress influences environmental donation behavior in men. Psychoneuroendocrinology,63, 311–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2015.10.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kaiser, F. F. G. (1998). A general measure of ecological behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,28(5), 395–422. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01712.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kaida, K., & Kaida, N. (2017). Wake up for the environment: An association between sleepiness and pro-environmental behavior. Personality and Individual Differences,104, 12–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.07.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment,49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Honold, J., Beyer, R., Lakes, T., & van der Meer, E. (2012). Multiple environmental burdens and neighborhood-related health of city residents. Journal of Environmental Psychology,32(4), 305–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2012.05.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Zelenski, J. M., & Nisbet, E. K. (2012). Happiness and feeling connected: The distinct role of nature relatedness. Environment and Behavior,46(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916512451901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Chang, E. C., Maydeu-Olivares, A., & D’Zurilla, T. J. (1997). Optimism and pessimism as partially independent constructs: Relationship to positive and negative affectivity and psychological well-being. Personality and Individual Differences,23(3), 433–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(97)80009-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. (1985). Optimism, coping, and health: Assessment and implications of generalized outcome expectancies. Health Psychology,4(3), 219–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.4.3.219.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Dember, W. N., Martin, S. H., Hummer, M. K., Howe, S. R., & Melton, R. S. (1989). The measurement of optimism and pessimism. Current Psychology,8(2), 102–119. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Inoue, A., Kawakami, N., Shimomitsu, T., & Tsutsumi, A. (2014). Development of a short questionnaire to measure an extended set of job demands, job resources, and positive health outcomes: The New Brief Job Stress Questionnaire. Industrial Health,52, 175–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement,1(3), 385–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662167700100306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Carleton, R. N., Thibodeau, M. A., Teale, M. J. N., Welch, P. G., Abrams, M. P., Robinson, T., et al. (2013). The center for epidemiologic studies depression scale: A review with a theoretical and empirical examination of item content and factor structure. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058067.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Huang, V., Beshai, S., Korol, S., & Nicholas Carleton, R. (2017). Configural and scalar invariance of the center for epidemiologic studies depression scale in Egypt and Canada: Differential symptom emphasis across cultures and genders. Psychiatry Research,250, 244–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2017.01.079.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Johns, M. W. (1991). A new method for measuring daytime sleepiness: The Epworth sleepiness scale. Sleep,14(6), 540–545. https://doi.org/10.1093/sleep/14.6.540.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods,7(2), 147–177. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.7.2.147.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Graham, J. W. (2009). Missing data analysis: making it work in the real world. Annual Review of Psychology,60, 549–576. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Kasser, T., & Sheldon, K. M. (2002). What makes for a merry Christmas? Journal of Happiness Studies,3(August), 313–329. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021516410457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. van der Werff, E., Steg, L., & Keizer, K. (2013). The value of environmental self-identity: The relationship between biospheric values, environmental self-identity and environmental preferences, intentions and behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology,34, 55–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2012.12.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Steg, L., Bolderdijk, J. W., Keizer, K., & Perlaviciute, G. (2014). An integrated framework for encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: The role of values, situational factors and goals. Journal of Environmental Psychology,38, 104–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.01.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Venhoeven, L. A., Bolderdijk, J. W., & Steg, L. (2013). Explaining the paradox: How pro-environmental behaviour can both thwart and foster well-being. Sustainability,5, 1372–1386. https://doi.org/10.3390/su5041372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Ambrey, C. L., & Daniels, P. (2016). Happiness and footprints: assessing the relationship between individual well-being and carbon footprints. Environment, Development and Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-016-9771-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. De Young, R. (2000). Expanding and evaluating motives for environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of Social Issues,56(3), 509–526. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Epstein, S., & Meier, P. (1989). Constructive thinking: A broad coping variable with specific components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,57(2), 332–350. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.2.332.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. National Research Council of the National Academies. (2014). Sustainability concepts in decision-making: Tools and approaches for the US Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18949.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  52. Diener, E. (2012). New finding and future directions for subjective well-being research. American Psychologist,37, 590–597. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. O’Brien, C. (2008). Sustainable happiness: How happiness studies can contribute to a more sustainable future. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne,49(4), 289–295. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology,88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by MEXT/JSPS KAKENHI Grant (No. 26550107).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Engineering, Information and Systems, University of Tsukuba, Tennodai 1-1-1, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 3058573, Japan

    Naoko Kaida

  2. Institute for Information Technology and Human Factors, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), Tsukuba Central 6-11, Higashi 1-1-1, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 3058566, Japan

    Kosuke Kaida

Authors
  1. Naoko Kaida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kosuke Kaida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Naoko Kaida.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the University of Tsukuba Research Ethics Committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kaida, N., Kaida, K. Positive associations of optimism–pessimism orientation with pro-environmental behavior and subjective well-being: a longitudinal study on quality of life and everyday behavior. Qual Life Res 28, 3323–3332 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-019-02273-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-019-02273-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation