Environment and Behavior

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Free Access - Register Here

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
0013916506294594v1
39/6/731    most recent
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wall, R.
Right arrow Articles by Mill, G. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
This version was published on November 1, 2007
Environment and Behavior, Vol. 39, No. 6, 731-753 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0013916506294594

Comparing and Combining Theories to Explain Proenvironmental Intentions

The Case of Commuting-Mode Choice

Rob Wall

De Montfort University, Leicester, UK

Patrick Devine-Wright

University of Manchester, UK

Greig A. Mill

De Montfort University, Leicester, UK

This article addresses the need for systematic theory comparison and development in environmentally significant behavior (ESB) research. Using logistic regression (N = 398), models based on Schwartz's norm-activation theory (NAT) and Ajzen's theory of planned behavior (TPB) were compared as explanations of drivers' intentions to reduce or maintain their car use for commuting. NAT explained more variance (McFadden R2 = .342). A model using NAT and TPB constructs was also tested. This explained more variance than either individual theory (McFadden R2 = .379). A personal-normative variable (NAT) and perceived behavioral control (TPB) were the only statistically-significant predictors of intentions in the model derived from both theories. It is argued that combining NAT and TPB constructs accounts for a range of influences on car-use intentions that neither individual theory fully captures. A combined model may also apply to other ESBs, especially those perceived as reducing personal utility (i.e., entailing sacrifice).

Key Words: travel • commuting • norm-activation theory • theory of planned behavior


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?