Pro-environmental behavior can be defined as “behavior that consciously seeks to minimize the negative impact of one's actions on the natural and built world” (Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002). The Pro-Environmental Behavior Scale (PEBS) was proposed by Markle (2013) after a literature review that highlight a lack of consistency among the available instruments (e.g. Dono, Webb, & Richardson, 2010). The latter often assess behavior that are the target of environmental psychologists’ interest and they were created without knowing the influence of measured behavior on ecological system. On the contrary, the PEBS was made with the aim of assess only behaviors with a documented, significant and great impact on environment. It is a self-report scale composed by 19 items based on a 5-points likert scale. An explorative factor analysis suggested that the scale assess four dimensions, called conservation, environmental citizenship, food, and transport (Markle, 2013). The aim of the present study was to verify the factorial structure of PEBS proposed by Markle (2013) via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in a sample of 253 Italian adults (75% female, mean [SD] age = 36.6 [12.2]). Data weren’t normally distributed, so we normalized them. The goodness of fit of the 4-factors structure of the English original version of PEBS was investigated with a CFA using maximum likehood estimator. CFA with 19 items fitted well (χ2(146) = 201.8; CFI = .915; RMSEA =.039; SRMR = .062; AIC = 10149) [model 1] but five items didn’t have a statistically significant factor loading on the assigned factor. Following modification indexes, we moved two items from environmental citizenship dimension: one to food dimension (“During the past year have you increased the amount of organically grown fruits and vegetables you consume?”) [model 2] and the other one to transport dimension (“Approximately how many kilometers per liter does your personal vehicle get”) [model 3]. Then we excluded three items (“How often do you turn off the TV when leaving a room?”; “At which temperature do you wash most of your clothes?”; “During the past year how often have you car-pooled?”) [model 4, 5, 6]. CFA on 16 items version revealed a better fit (χ2(98) = 126.7; CFI = .955; RMSEA =.034; SRMR = .055; AIC = 8480 [model 6] and all item had a statistically significant factor loading. Moreover, the 4-factors model resulted better than all alternative nested models obtained collapsing the four factors into one, two or three factors. The Italian version of the PEBS confirm the 4-factors structure of original English scale. Furthermore, the low correlation coefficient between different pro-environmental behavior suggests that individuals are inconsistent in their environmental behaviors, according to the literature (Steg & Vlek, 2009). Future analysis should verify invariance of the scale across gender, educational level and countries.
Factor Structure of the Italian version of Pro-Environmental Behaviour Scale (PEBS)
MENARDO, ELISA;Pasini M.;Brondino M.
2018-01-01
Abstract
Pro-environmental behavior can be defined as “behavior that consciously seeks to minimize the negative impact of one's actions on the natural and built world” (Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002). The Pro-Environmental Behavior Scale (PEBS) was proposed by Markle (2013) after a literature review that highlight a lack of consistency among the available instruments (e.g. Dono, Webb, & Richardson, 2010). The latter often assess behavior that are the target of environmental psychologists’ interest and they were created without knowing the influence of measured behavior on ecological system. On the contrary, the PEBS was made with the aim of assess only behaviors with a documented, significant and great impact on environment. It is a self-report scale composed by 19 items based on a 5-points likert scale. An explorative factor analysis suggested that the scale assess four dimensions, called conservation, environmental citizenship, food, and transport (Markle, 2013). The aim of the present study was to verify the factorial structure of PEBS proposed by Markle (2013) via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in a sample of 253 Italian adults (75% female, mean [SD] age = 36.6 [12.2]). Data weren’t normally distributed, so we normalized them. The goodness of fit of the 4-factors structure of the English original version of PEBS was investigated with a CFA using maximum likehood estimator. CFA with 19 items fitted well (χ2(146) = 201.8; CFI = .915; RMSEA =.039; SRMR = .062; AIC = 10149) [model 1] but five items didn’t have a statistically significant factor loading on the assigned factor. Following modification indexes, we moved two items from environmental citizenship dimension: one to food dimension (“During the past year have you increased the amount of organically grown fruits and vegetables you consume?”) [model 2] and the other one to transport dimension (“Approximately how many kilometers per liter does your personal vehicle get”) [model 3]. Then we excluded three items (“How often do you turn off the TV when leaving a room?”; “At which temperature do you wash most of your clothes?”; “During the past year how often have you car-pooled?”) [model 4, 5, 6]. CFA on 16 items version revealed a better fit (χ2(98) = 126.7; CFI = .955; RMSEA =.034; SRMR = .055; AIC = 8480 [model 6] and all item had a statistically significant factor loading. Moreover, the 4-factors model resulted better than all alternative nested models obtained collapsing the four factors into one, two or three factors. The Italian version of the PEBS confirm the 4-factors structure of original English scale. Furthermore, the low correlation coefficient between different pro-environmental behavior suggests that individuals are inconsistent in their environmental behaviors, according to the literature (Steg & Vlek, 2009). Future analysis should verify invariance of the scale across gender, educational level and countries.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
