Journal of Environmental Psychology 45 (2016) 1e10

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Environmental Psychology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jep

Predicting intention to improve household energy efciency: The role

of value-belief-norm theory, normative and informational inuence,
and specic attitude
Ferdinando Fornara a, d, *, Piermario Pattitoni b, Marina Mura c, d, Elisabetta Strazzera c
a
University of Cagliari, Department of Education, Psychology, Philosophy, Italy
b
Sapienza University of Rome, Department of Psychology of Developmental and Socialization Processes, Italy
c
University of Cagliari, Department of Social Sciences and Institutions, Italy
d
CIRPA, Centro Interuniversitario di Ricerca in Psicologia Ambientale, Interuniversity Research Center in Environmental Psychology, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The study tested a model on the intention to use renewable energy sources at the household level. The
Received 20 October 2014 model focuses on the value-belief-norm (VBN) theory and includes different kinds of social inuence
Received in revised form (normative and informational) and attitude towards the target behaviour.
27 October 2015
Participants (N 432) were homeowners who lled in a self-report questionnaire, which measured
Accepted 14 November 2015
Available online 2 December 2015
the intention to use green energy devices and a set of social-psychological dimensions included in the
model.
Results of structural equation modelling showed the adequacy of the VBN theory in predicting the
Keywords:
Efciency behaviour
target efciency behavioural intention. Moreover, moral norms and informational inuence (i.e., trust in
Value-belief-norm (VBN) friends/relatives and neighbours) emerged as the most powerful predictors of the intention to use
Informational social inuence renewable energy devices. These variables also mediated the effects of social norms, both injunctive and
Injunctive and descriptive norms descriptive, which showed only an indirect inuence on the intention.
Biospheric value 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The choice to invest in green energy and energy reduction
represents a specic decision pattern that can be included in the
domain of proenvironmental behaviours. In this regard, Stern and
Gardner (1981) distinguished between 1) curtailment behaviour,
that is, reducing an activity that causes harm to the environment
and/or choosing and repeating a proenvironmental behaviour (e.g.,
turning off the light when one leaves a room), and 2) efciency
behaviour, that is, reducing the environmental impact by adopting
a more efcient technology (e.g., using ecosave light bulbs). Thus,
the use of sustainable technologies can be regarded as efciency
behaviour related to the adoption of a specic technology, a one-
shot proenvironmental behaviour (Abrahamse, Steg, Vlek, &
Rothengatter, 2005), which is connected to the choice of a more
efcient technology. The distinction between curtailment and
* Corresponding author. Department of Education, Psychology, Philosophy, Uni-
versity of Cagliari, Via Is Mirrionis, 1 09123, Cagliari, Italy.
E-mail address: ffornara@unica.it (F. Fornara).
efciency behaviours includes not only different actions but also
different antecedents. Urban and S

casn (2012) showed that envi-
ronmental concern inuenced both curtailment and efciency ac-
tions; nevertheless, sociodemographic differences emerged about
who did what. In fact, older people are more likely to perform both
types of environmental actions; high-income individuals tend to
invest in efciency behaviours, but at the same time, they curtail
less. Other studies showed that policy and behavioural strategies
that promoted efciency behaviours would likely be more suc-
cessful than those strategies focussing on curtailment behaviours
(Poortinga, Steg, Vlek, & Wiersma, 2003; Steg, Dreijerink, &
Abrahamse, 2006).
The development and deployment of efcient technologies are
not only related to technological and economic factors, but it is also
important to consider the psychosocial aspects connected to the
presence and use of these technologies. Following this line, the
present study analysed the psychosocial drivers of an energy ef-
ciency pattern, i.e. the intention to invest for implementing thermal
isolation, photovoltaic (PV) systems, and solar thermal systems at
the household level. Thus, the study focused on the psychosocial
antecedents of such an intention rather than on the economic

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.11.001
0272-4944/ 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 F. Fornara et al. / Journal of Environmental Psychology 45 (2016) 1e10
perspective that is mostly used for analysing this pattern. More
specically, we tested a prediction model, including the value-
belief-norm (VBN) theory (Stern, 2000), attitude towards the spe-
cic target behaviour, different kinds of norms, and informational
social inuence. The following section addresses the models and
constructs used for predicting the target behavioural intention.
2. Theoretical framework
The VBN theory (Stern, 2000) states that moral norms are direct
antecedents of behaviours and are linked to values and a series of
beliefs that activate them (Stern, 2000; Stern, Dietz, Abel,
Guagnano, & Kalof, 1999; Stern, Dietz, Kalof, & Guagnano, 1995).
Moral norms are related to the individual's belief about what is
right to do for a positive self-evaluation (Fransson & Biel, 1997) and
are formed by interiorised values (Thgersen, 2006). According to
Bamberg and colleagues (Bamberg, Hunecke, & Blo baum, 2007;
Bamberg & Mo ser, 2007), moral norms are developed on the ba-
sis of social norms, since the latter delivers the standards of
behaviour that a social reference group views as appropriate in a
specic context, that is, what the group considers right or wrong. If
an individual internalises these standards, they provide the content
of his or her moral norms. This kind of norms proved to inuence
the acceptability of policies regarding the reduction of carbon di-
oxide (Steg, Dreijerink, & Abrahamse, 2005) and energy savings at
the household level (Abrahamse & Steg, 2009).
According to the VBN framework, individuals engage in a given
proenvironmental behaviour because they feel the moral obligation
to behave properly (moral norm) when they feel responsible
(ascription of responsibility, AR) for the consequences of their ac-
tions on the environment (awareness of consequences, AC). AC is
supported by general proenvironmental beliefs (e.g., the new
ecological paradigm [NEP]) (Dunlap & Van Liere, 1978), which in
turn are inuenced by specic values (i.e., biospheric, altruistic or
egoistic). Stern (2008, p. 366) summarised this process by claiming
that engaging in the behaviour occurred when an individual
comes to believe that a personal value is threatened and that he or
she can relieve that threat by appropriate action.
Following Schwartz's well-known denition, personal values
are here intended as the criteria that people use to select and
justify actions and to evaluate people (including the self) and
events (Schwartz, 1992, p. 1). Such criteria are general, transcend
the specic situation and serve as a guide for proper behaviour.
Schwartz identied a set of ten higher-order universal values, put
along two bipolar axes (i.e., self-transcendence vs. self-
enhancement, and openness to change vs. conservation), which
were detected in various cross-cultural studies (Schwartz, 1992,
1994; Schwartz & Bardi, 2001). Particularly, empirical evidence
indicates that both self-transcendence (connected to altruistic and
biospheric values) and self-enhancement (underlying a more
egoistic view) values are related to proenvironmental behaviours in
a positive (regarding the former) or negative (concerning the latter)
way (Steg et al., 2005). Through the mediation of norms, general
beliefs and intentions, values have been shown to inuence indi-
vidual engagement in proenvironmental action on energy issues
(Nordlund & Garvill, 2002; Poortinga, Steg, & Vlek, 2004).
In the VBN framework, besides values, general beliefs are also
considered a key predictor of behaviours. Referring to the rst
conceptualisation of the VBN theory (Stern, 2000), the NEP mirrors
a set of beliefs (which are congured as a worldview) about in-
teractions between human beings and the natural environment
(Dunlap & Van Liere, 1978; Hawcroft & Milfont, 2010). The NEP
view is considered the opposite of the dominant social paradigm
(DSP) view; the former represents an ecocentric perspective and
regards humans as part of the natural environment, whereas, in the
latter, human beings have the right to use and exploit the envi-
ronment and other living creatures. Building on this dichotomy,
Corral-Verdugo and colleagues (Corral-Verdugo, Carrus, Bonnes,
Moser, & Sinha, 2008) proposed an integrative perspective of
interdependence between human needs and the environment, that
is, the new human interdependence paradigm (NHIP). Specically,
these scholars showed that even utilitarian beliefs related to
environmental conservation could be signicant predictors of
ecological behaviours, since people might also have a utilitarian
drive to behave in an ecological way (Stern, 2008). Thus, in our
model, we chose to integrate the NHIP construct, as a measure of
general belief, into the VBN.
The choice of whether or not to adopt proenvironmental be-
haviours, such as investing in household energy efciency, involves
a rational process, as postulated in the theory of planned behaviour
(TPB) (Ajzen, 1991). The TPB considers behavioural intention the
only direct antecedent of behavioural choice, whereas the
perceived behavioural control, attitude towards the specic
behaviour, and subjective norm (i.e., conformity to signicant
others expectations) are antecedents of the intention. In turn, the
attitude towards the behaviour derives from the beliefs about that
behaviour (weighted by the evaluation of the outcomes), whilst the
subjective norm stems from the normative beliefs (weighted by the
motivation to comply). The TPB was also used to explain the
intention of generating household energy (Leenheer, de Nooij, &
Sheikh, 2011). In our prediction model, besides the outcome vari-
able (i.e., the behavioural intention), both the attitude towards the
specic behaviour and the subjective norm were taken into
account.
Enlarging the view on the normative social inuence on
behaviour, various types of norms have been distinguished, which
can be related to the perception about what other people think or
do (Cialdini, Kallgren, & Reno, 1991; Thgersen, 2006). Specically,
a distinction has been made between the injunctive norm (i.e., the
individual's perception of the social rules about what is right or
should be done in a certain context or situation) and the descriptive
norm (i.e., the perception about what the majority of people
actually do in that context or situation) (Cialdini et al., 1991;
Schultz, Khazian, & Zaleski, 2008). As also reported by Ohtomo
and Hirose (2007), the injunctive norm is conceptually similar to
the subjective norm included in the TPB, since both patterns
concern others' expectations about an individual's behaviour (i.e.,
perception of what other people think one should do). A further
specication can be made on the basis of the target reference group,
which represents the source of the normative pressure; when such
reference is related to a specic local place, where a given pro-
environmental behaviour should occur (e.g., separation of waste
and recycling at the neighbourhood level), a provincial
(Goldstein, Cialdini, & Griskevicius, 2008) or local (Fornara,
Carrus, Passafaro, & Bonnes, 2011) norm is supposed to function.
Social norms have been shown to play a role in inuencing be-
haviours, such as saving energy (Ferguson, Branscombe, &
Reynolds, 2011; Schultz, Nolan, Cialdini, Goldstein, & Griskevicius,
2007), recycling (Carrus, Bonnes, Fornara, Passafaro, & Tronu,
2009; Fornara et al., 2011), littering (Kallgren, Reno, & Cialdini,
2000) and adoption of PV systems, particularly among people
who are socially informed by discussions with neighbours and
acquaintances who have already adopted PV systems (Jager, 2006).
Evaluating the possible outcomes of a given behaviour requires
a signicant cognitive effort, as postulated by expectancy-value
theories, such as the TPB (Ajzen, 1991). In this regard, consulta-
tion with experts may help in both reducing cognitive load and
complexity and collecting correct information on various aspects
connected with the adoption of renewable energy sources (i.e. laws,
tariffs, costs, services, etc.). On the other hand, social inuence by
 F. Fornara et al. / Journal of Environmental Psychology 45 (2016) 1e10
signicant others and neighbours may facilitate the formation of
beliefs about possible outcomes, as well as reduce the cognitive
fatigue related to the decision-making process (Jager, 2006). It
seems that the lack of information not only negatively inuences
the general understanding of the possible outcomes of a behaviour
(Steg, 2008), but it may also be a barrier to investing in household
efciency improvement (Ban, Farsi, Filippini, & Jakob, 2008). In
this regard, it is important to recall Deutsch and Gerard (1955)
classic distinction between normative social inuence (i.e.,
derived from the desire for others' approval and rejection avoid-
ance) and informational social inuence (i.e., reliance on others'
responses, e.g., beliefs and opinions) as cues for decision-making
choices. Normative social inuence should occur mainly in unam-
biguous situations, where people are expected to conform to group
pressure to obtain extrinsic rewards or avoid costs. On the other
hand, informational social inuence is likely to happen in ambig-
uous situations, in which the information provided by others serves
to reduce uncertainty (Turner & Oakes, 1986). Following this line, in
those cases where individuals have poor knowledge of the issue,
such as in the possible adoption of new technological devices, with
generally unclear consequences (i.e., they have to cope with an
ambiguous situation), trusted others could likely serve as the
informational anchor for orienting their decisions.
Information sources also play an important role in the devel-
opment of beliefs about the consequences of human activities on
the environment. Different sources of information may inuence
individuals belonging to groups that share a given vision of nature
(Lima & Castro, 2005). In fact, consistent with the conceptualisation
of informational social inuence, the trustworthiness of social ac-
tors in a given community can affect the formation of a set of be-
liefs, which in turn may represent a driver for or a barrier to a given
behavioural choice. Particularly, neighbours and relatives should
have a prominent inuence in this sense. As revealed in Jager
(2006) study, people involved in social networks where many
homeowners have decided to adopt PV systems are more
persuaded in choosing this technology, since they perceive the
installation as less difcult. The important role of signicant others
as sources of informational inuence for environmental issues also
emerged in Leiserowitz and colleagues' study (Leiserowitz,
Maibach, & Roser-Renouf, 2009), where one's own family and
friends were the second most trusted sources of information about
climate change, after scientists. Regarding the informational in-
uence of mass media, the quality of their information (e.g.,
consistent or contradictory, complete or incomplete, etc., see
Zoellner, Schweizer-Ries, & Wemheuer, 2008) seems particularly
important for removing uncertainty (Schultz & Kaiser, 2012).
The present study includes the VBN theory, normative (both
injunctive and descriptive) and informational social inuence, and
attitude towards a specic proenvironmental behaviour (derived
from the TPB) in the prediction model of the intention to invest in
energy efciency at the household level. In this regard, the litera-
ture provides examples of the conjoint use of VBN and TPB as the
reference framework for addressing different proenvironmental
behaviours. More specically, Bamberg et al. (2007) used a model
that applied both TPB and the norm activation theory (NAM, a
precursor of VBN, see Schwartz, 1977) in explaining public trans-
port use. Lopez-Mosquera and Sa nchez (2012) compared TPB to
VBN to predict the willingness to pay for the conservation of an
urban park in Spain. Finally, Han (2015) merged TPB and VBN to
predict the intention to stay in a green lodge instead of a common
hotel.
Regarding the proenvironmental target of the present study,
scientic literature reported recent studies on the intention to
invest in PV household plants/energy improvements, which
focused respectively on socioeconomic aspects (Sovacool,
3
D'Agostino, & Jain Bambawale, 2011), characteristics of early
adopters (Schelly, 2014), the interface between innovativeness and
environmental values (Chen, 2014), the development of sustain-
able energy communities (Schweizer-Ries, 2008), and TPB and
environmental concerns (Leenheer et al., 2011).
In sum, there is a substantial lack of published studies that used
a VBN-based theoretical lens to address an efciency pattern, such
as the intention to buy/use PV/solar panels. Moreover, in the pre-
sent study, we considered further dimensions that were expected
to play signicant roles: normative (injunctive and descriptive) and
informational social inuence, and a specic attitude towards the
target behaviour.
3. Objective and hypotheses
The general aim of this study was to test the predictive power of
a model e framed on the VBN theory, a specic attitude and social
inuence patterns e on the intention to choose specic energy-
efcient devices at the household level, such as PV systems, solar
thermal systems and a house's cohibentation/isolation. Following
the relationships expected on the basis of the considered theoret-
ical models and previous research outcomes, both direct and in-
direct (i.e., mediated) associations were tested among the included
constructs.
Given that the research literature on psychological drivers of
green actions mostly focused on curtailment behaviours, one of the
innovation points of this study concerned the investigation of a
psychosocial model's role in an efciency behaviour, whose eco-
nomic and structural determinants were usually analysed.
The tested model (see Fig. 1) is rooted in the VBN theory, which
postulates a sequence of unidirectional paths among the consid-
ered variables. Nevertheless, Stern et al. (1999) stated that on one
hand, VBN variables might also have direct effects (not shown in
Fig. 1) on variables more than one level downstream; on the other
hand, each variable in the model might be affected by variables not
shown, which were not elements of the VBN theory. Following the
latter point, we expected that some TPB dimensions (e.g., attitude
towards the target behaviour and injunctive norm, which covers
others' expectations for one's behaviour as the subjective norm
included in the TPB, see Ohtomo & Hirose, 2007) and other social
inuence patterns (descriptive norms and informational inuence)
would play additional roles in the target behavioural intention.
Specically, the following paths were hypothesised in the model
predicting the intention to choose green energy devices at the
household level:
H1). the paths expected in the VBN e the intention is predicted by
the moral norm, which in turn is predicted by the ascription of
responsibility, which is predicted by the awareness of conse-
quences, which is predicted by general proenvironmental beliefs
(within the NHIP paradigm), which are predicted by the values;
H2). the paths consistent with the TPB framework e the intention
is predicted by both the specic attitude towards green energy and
the injunctive norm (which mirrors the subjective norm of TPB);
moreover, the attitude is inuenced by the awareness of conse-
quences, the latter being a kind of behavioural belief;
H3). the paths connecting the two kinds of normative social in-
uence (injunctive and subjective norms) to the intention and the
moral norm, respectively, which emerged in studies on other pro-
environmental behaviours (e.g., regarding intention or behaviour,
see Fornara et al., 2011; Schultz et al., 2008; concerning moral
norm, see Bamberg & Mo ser, 2007; Bamberg et al., 2007);
H4). the path connecting the informational social inuence
4 F. Fornara et al. / Journal of Environmental Psychology 45 (2016) 1e10
General
Proenv Beliefs
Awareness of
Consequences
Values
Injunctive
Norm
Descriptive
Norm
Trust in info
sources
Note: Continuous lines refer to the paths included in the VBN, broken lines refer to the paths included in the TPB, and dotted lines refer to the hypothesized paths linking
Injunctive and Descriptive Social Norm with Behavioural Intention, Moral Norm, and Trust, and Behavioural Intention with Trust.
Fig. 1. Expected relationships among the constructs.
(represented by the trust in the informative sources of the com-
munity) to the intention.
Fig. 1 provides a graphic picture of the hypothesised model,
including both the constructs and expected unidirectional
relationships.
4. Method
4.1. Participants
The participants (N 432) were homeowners, recruited
through a quota sampling procedure for gender and age, who lived
in two cities of South Sardinia e Cagliari (about 150,000 in-
habitants) and Quartu SantElena (about 70,000 inhabitants). The
sample included 262 females (60.65%) and 160 males (39.35%),
from 23 to 86 years old (M 53.5, SD 11.8). Their educational
levels were as follows: primary school (5.6%), junior high school
(26.4%), senior high school (42.4%), master's or bachelor's degree
(21.1%) and PhD or equivalent title (3.5%). Regarding their profes-
sional status, the breakdown was as follows: employed (50%),
retired (22.5%), housewives (15%), unemployed (8.6%) and no stable
job (3.9%). Only 1.6% had installed PV devices. The participants were
recruited by three trained interviewers, who approached them in
various places (e.g., urban parks, public gardens and shopping
malls) located in the two sampled cities.
4.2. Research context
The issue concerning renewable energies is a particular topic of
the current policy debate in Italy. As stated in the statistical report
of the GSE - Gestore Servizi Energetici, the national agency that
manages the energy services, Italy ranked 4th among the EU
countries in the production of energy from renewable sources and,
more specically, it ranked 2nd in the world for the PV plant ca-
pacity nationwide (see GSE, 2011). The same report indicated a
national annual growth of new PV installations in 2011 three times
larger than in 2010 (taking Italy to the top of the world rankings for
annual growth of these plants). It is also worth mentioning the
widespread diffusion of these systems across the nation: 95% of
Italian municipalities include at least one plant, and most of them
are connected to low voltage (including domestic systems for
Ascription of
Responsibility
Moral
Norm
Intention to use
green energy
Attitude toward
green energy
energy production). To gain a better understanding of the study
context, it should be pointed out that the national government had
set up various types of economic incentives (e.g., feed-in tariff/feed-
in premium) over the last decade for those (individuals or com-
panies) who wanted to invest in PV (see the statistical report of GSE
& Terna, 2011).
As for this study's local context, the Sardinia Region occupies an
intermediate position among the Italian regions for the installed
capacity (200e300 W per capita), but it also receives one of the
highest amounts of annual solar radiation per square meter in the
country. This consistently helps its performance in solar energy
production (GSE, & Terna, 2011). In this regard, the city of Cagliari
was selected as a proper prototype in the Mediterranean context
(for climate conditions, insulation rate and building characteristics)
in a comparative analysis among Southern European, Middle East
and North African countries about preferences for solar PV tech-
nologies (Strazzera & Statzu, 2015).
4.3. Tools and procedures
The participants lled in a self-report questionnaire, including
the following measures:
4.3.1. Intention to choose green energy devices
Three items concerned the likelihood of investment in
improving the household efciency (It is likely that I might inter-
vene in the thermal isolation of walls or windows in my home in the
near future ; It is likely that I might install a photovoltaic system in
my home in the near future; and It is likely that I might install a solar
thermal system associated with a gas boiler in my home in the near
future ). Responses were given on a 5-step Likert-type scale (from
1 unlikely to 5 likely).
4.3.2. Universal values
Eight items referred to self-enhancement and self-transcen-
dence values (Schwartz, 1992). The respondents had to express
their opinions about how important they considered a set of values
(environmental protection, unity with nature, equality, social jus-
tice, authority, social power, success and ambition) as guiding
principles of their lives. The rst two items, involving the concept of
nature, represent the biospheric values (Stern, Dietz, Abel, &
Guagnano, 1998). Responses were given on a 5-step Likert-type
 F. Fornara et al. / Journal of Environmental Psychology 45 (2016) 1e10
scale (from 1 unimportant to 5 totally important).
4.3.3. General proenvironmental beliefs
Three items selected from the NHIP scale (Corral-Verdugo et al.,
2008) concerned the degree of agreement with a set of statements
about general environmental attitudes (Human progress can be
achieved only by maintaining ecological balance; Preserving nature
now means ensuring the future for human beings; and Human be-
ings can progress only by conserving nature's resources). Responses
were given on a 5-step Likert-type scale (from 1 completely
disagree to 5 completely agree).
4.3.4. Attitude towards the use of green energies
Three items (adapted from Fornara et al., 2011) covered the
same three household energy efciency patterns addressed in the
behavioural intention (An investment on the thermal isolation of
walls or windows in my home is important to me; An investment on
a photovoltaic system in my home is important to me; An investment
on a solar thermal system associated with a gas boiler in my home is
important to me). Responses were given on a 5-step Likert-type
scale (from 1 not at all to 5 completely).
4.3.5. Awareness of consequences (AC) of using green energy
sources
Two items involved the positive consequences of green energies
for human health and the environment (The use of renewable en-
ergies will greatly improve our health and The use of renewable
energies will greatly benet the environment). Responses were given
on a 5-step Likert-type scale (from 1 not at all to
5 completely).
4.3.6. Ascription of responsibility (AR) for using green energy
resources
This was measured by a single item (The choice to invest in
energy improvements for my house depends on me, for example, on my
capacities and knowledge ). Responses were given on a 5-step
Likert-type scale (from 1 totally disagree to 5 totally agree).
4.3.7. Moral norm
Three items (adapted from Abrahamse & Steg, 2009) concerned
the strength of the moral obligations/constraints in investing in
green energy ( I feel morally obligated to invest in energy improve-
ments, regardless of what others are doing ; I feel guilty if I don't
invest in improving energy in my home ; and I feel good about myself
if I invest in improving energy in my home ). Responses were given
on a 5-step Likert-type scale (from 1 totally disagree to
5 totally agree).
4.3.8. Descriptive social norm
Two items (adapted from Fornara et al., 2011) pertained to
whether or not friends, relatives and neighbours did (or would do)
something to improve their household energy efciency (Many of
my relatives or friends would adopt or have already adopted solutions
for improving the energy efciency of their homes and Many of my
neighbours would adopt or have already adopted solutions for
improving the energy efciency of their home s). Responses were
given on a 5-step Likert-type scale (from 1 totally false to
5 totally true).
4.3.9. Injunctive social norm
Two items involved signicant others' and neighbours' approval
of one's concerns about household energy efciency ( Most of the
people important to me would approve if I improve the energy ef-
ciency of my home and Most of my neighbours would approve if I
improve the energy efciency of my home). Responses were given on
5
a 5-step Likert-type scale (from 1 totally false to 5 totally
true).
4.3.10. Trust in information sources
Six items referred to the degree of reliability of various sources
of information about household energy efciency (How much do
you trust the following information sources on the issue of the energy
efciency of your house?). The six information sources included
neighbours, relatives and friends, the Internet and media, in-
stitutions, companies and technicians. For each source, responses
were given on a 5-step Likert-type scale (from 1 no trust to
5 full trust).
The questionnaire also included socio-demographic indicators
(age, gender, education, profession, context of living and family
composition), information about energy consumption bills, infor-
mation on existing renewable energy devices at home, and stated
preference exercises, which are not addressed in this paper.
The data were collected from July to September 2012.
4.4. Data analysis
Structural equation modelling was performed by means of the
LISREL 8.51 software (Jo reskog & So rbom, 2001). The starting
model included the hypothesised unidirectional paths among the
latent variables, as reported in Fig. 1.
After preliminary data analyses, we decided to insert only the
two items concerning biospheric values into the modelling phase,
since self-enhancement did not show the hypothesised correlation
with general proenvironmental beliefs, and the insertion of the
whole four-item set of self-transcendence values worsened the t
indices. Nevertheless, it is not surprising (and not contradicting the
VBN theory) that biospheric values were more closely related to
general proenvironmental beliefs than the other values (see Steg &
De Groot, 2012 and the discussion section of the present paper).
Concerning trust in information sources, only the two items
referring to friends/relatives and neighbours were selected for the
modelling phase, since they were the only highly correlated ones
(statistically and conceptually) in the pool (as well as the only ones
that improved the model t).
To improve the t during the step-by-step model improvement
process, non-signicant paths were eliminated, and new paths
were added by taking into account the modication indexes, based
on the Lagrange Multiplier Test (Chou & Bentler, 1990), which were
justiable for literature-based conceptual reasons.
In assessing the overall t of the models, we did not rely on the
signicance of the c2 value, since the high sensitivity of these
statistics to the sample size might produce an over-estimation of
even small differences between the observed and predicted
matrices. Given that the latter event could lead to the rejection of
acceptable solutions (Marsh, Balla, & McDonald, 1988), we counted
on the more reliable ratio between c2 and degrees of freedom,
indicating a good t if it fell below 3 (Carmines & McIver, 1981).
Thus, for testing the models' t, we relied on the c2/df ratio, and in
line with Hu and Bentler (1999) suggestions, we considered the
root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), the stand-
ardised root mean square residual (SRMR), the comparative t in-
dex (CFI) and the non-normed t index (NNFI).
5. Results
Table 1 reports the intercorrelation matrix among the observed
variables that were inserted into the modelling phase.
Fig. 2 shows the nal model predicting the intention to choose
green energy devices.
The goodness-of-t of the chosen solution is satisfactory
6 F. Fornara et al. / Journal of Environmental Psychology 45 (2016) 1e10

23
(c2208 373.11, p < .001; c2/df ratio 1.79; RMSEA .043, 90%
condence interval for RMSEA .036e.050, test of close t

1
RMSEA < .05: p ns; SRMR .045; NNFI .94; CFI .95). The

.01
model accounts for an acceptable proportion of variance of the
22

1
outcome (latent) variable e intention to choose green energy de-

.09
.45
vices (30%) and globally for good proportions of variance of the
21

1
direct antecedents of the outcome variable e moral norm (57%),
trust in friends/relatives and neighbours (42%), and attitude to-

.02

.10
.05
20

wards the use of green energies (36%).

1
The analysis of the structural coefcients linking the latent

.53
.07
.13
.13
factors reveals that the strongest predictor of the intention to
19

1
choose green energy devices is moral norm (b .24), followed by
trust in friends/relatives and neighbours (b .21), attitude towards

.28
.46
.03
.08
.06
18

the use of green energies (b .18), and ascription of responsibility

1
(g .15). Moral norm also shows a strong indirect link with
.59
.35
.25
.05
.12
.02
intention via attitude towards the use of green energies (b .34).
17

Besides the direct link between moral norm and intention, the
.26
.17
.38
.19
.11
.24
.19
rest of the causal chain hypothesised in the VBN is also substantially
16

supported by our data, since (biospheric) values predict general

proenvironmental beliefs (g .73), which in turn predict aware-
.42
.23
.25
.29
.18
.03
.13
.27
15

ness of consequences (b .27). Moral norm is predicted by both

1

ascription of responsibility (g .34) and awareness of conse-

.48
.40
.26
.31
.34
.30
.07
.14
.31

quences (b .15), whilst there is no relationship between the latter

14

two. Specically, the estimation of this parameter as a unidirec-

.28
.17
.24
.17
.14
.18
.18
.19
.19
.06

tional path (as hypothesised) produces a signicant (though low,

13

b .11) positive relationship, but it lowers the overall model t. A

further direct antecedent of moral norm is represented by
.85
.26
.13
.24
.16
.11
.16
.16
.16
.18
.14
12

biospheric values (g .21).

1

Those links consistent with the TPB framework show a signi-

.15
.20
.16
.11
.18
.05
.04
.17
.04
.27
.35
.02
11

cant path between awareness of consequences (which mirrors a

1

specic belief) and attitude towards the use of green energies

.53

.42
.04
.19
.21
.14
.11
.25
.07
.02
.16
.03
.38

(b .15). Different from what we expected, there is no direct arrow

10

toward intention from injunctive norm, which covers aspects that

are similar to the TPB's subjective norm.
.57
.53
.15
.16
.19
.15
.20
.14
.07
.15
.01
.29
.34
.00

The absence of the expected connection with the outcome

9

variable also applies to the other normative inuence of a social

.05
.10
.01
.09
.11
.07
.11
.22
.35
.26
.33
.20
.04
.08
.02

nature, since no direct link emerges between descriptive norm and

1
8

intention. Nevertheless, both kinds of social norms show (as ex-

.49

.00
.10
.15
.12
.06
.12
.16
.14
.19
.13
.30
.42
.26
.32

.07

pected) an important indirect link with the criterion via both trust
7

in friends/relatives and neighbours and moral norm. Particularly,

trust is affected more by descriptive norm (g .45) than by
.14
.08
.18
.11
.23
.15
.10
.23
.22
.28
.26
.23
.15
.15
.23
.22

.23

injunctive norm (g .29), whereas moral norm is inuenced more

6

by injunctive norm (g .33) than by descriptive norm (g .24).

.08
.09
.56
.20
.24
.17
.13
.14
.28
.27
.27
.25
.30
.20
.14
.33
.25

.16

Injunctive norm is indirectly connected to intention, even via atti-

Correlation matrix of the observed variables used in the modelling phase.

tude towards the use of green energies (g .24), and also presents a
signicant link with awareness of consequences (g .24).
.22
.20
.52
.43
.13
.12
.15
.12
.14
.20
.18
.25
.14
.24
.14
.08
.27
.19

.18
4

6. Discussion and conclusion

.05
.07
.17
.23
.33
.20
.23
.09
.13
.03
.23
.22
.26
.26
.21
.18
.28
.21
.26

.25
3

Overall, the results substantially support the model framed on

.03
.09
.71
.18
.33
.23
.16
.26
.12
.12
.04
.23
.21
.28
.25
.24
.16
.20
.20
.25

.24

the VBN theory, normative and informational social inuence, and

2

attitude towards the target behaviour, in explaining an efciency

.03
.09
.56
.56
.20
.18
.17
.13
.20
.08
.10
.06
.22
.19
.27
.20
.23
.14
.17
.20
.16

.25

behavioural intention as the adoption of renewable energy devices

1

at the household level.

The test of the VBN theory (H1) shows the expected chain
12. Awareness of Consequences 1
13. Awareness of Consequences 2

connecting (in this order) values, beliefs, awareness of conse-

23. Ascription of Responsibility

quences (AC), ascription of responsibility (AR), moral norm and

nally, behavioural intention. The exception is the weak (not sig-
21. Biospheric Values 1
22. Biospheric Values 2
17. Descriptive Norm 1
18. Descriptive Norm 2
19. Injunctive Norm 1
20. Injunctive Norm 2

nicant) link between AC and AR, whereas a direct link emerges

14. Moral Norm 1
15. Moral Norm 2
16. Moral Norm 3

between AC and moral norm. Nevertheless, the indirect effect of AC

and AR on intention and behaviour via moral norm also emerged in
1. Intention 1
2. Intention 2
3. Intention 3
4. Attitude 1
5. Attitude 2
6. Attitude 3

previous studies (Black, Stern, & Elworth, 1985; Steg et al., 2005;
10. NHIP 2
11. NHIP 3
7. Trust 1
8. Trust 2
9. NHIP 1

Stern & Dietz, 1994).

Table 1

Another distinctive VBN-related feature of the outcome model

concerns the issue of values. In fact, the model only includes the
 F. Fornara et al. / Journal of Environmental Psychology 45 (2016) 1e10
Fig. 2. Structural equation model predicting intention to use renewable energy.
measure of biospheric values, whereas the broader dimension of
self-transcendence, as well as self-enhancement, are excluded for
either being not signicantly associated with the general pro-
environmental beliefs (in the case of self-enhancement) or wors-
ening the model t (in the case of self-transcendence, which
includes biospheric values). Anyway, when dealing with pro-
environmental behaviours, the prominence of biospheric values in
the value set also emerged in previous research, since individuals
would more likely act in a proenvironmental way, whether or not
they would endorse biospheric values (De Groot & Steg, 2008;
Honkanen & Verplanken, 2004; Steg & De Groot, 2012). The
direct association between biospheric values and moral norm is
consistent with what was postulated by Schwartz (1977), who
argued that moral norms were rooted in internalised values. In the
study led by Steg and colleagues (Steg, De Groot, Dreijerink,
Abrahamse, & Siero, 2011), biospheric values emerged as a signif-
icant antecedent of moral norm. Analogously, Nordlund and Garvill
(2002) found that ecocentric values predicted moral norms; in this
case, moral norms mediated the effects of general values, ecocen-
tric values and problem awareness on proenvironmental behaviour.
As for the predictive role of moral norm, it emerges in the
outcome model as the most powerful direct antecedent of the
intention to use renewable energy at the household level. This
result supports the evidence that individuals who perceive the
moral imperative to act in a proenvironmental way feel morally
obliged to behave consistently (Van der Werff, Steg, & Keizer, 2013).
Such a pattern is found for the prediction of both specic pro-
environmental choices (e.g., car use reduction, see Nordlund &
7
Garvill, 2003; proenvironmental activism, see Steg et al., 2011)
and general proenvironmental behaviour (e.g., see Nordlund &
Garvill, 2002). About the relationship between moral norm and
behavioural intention, it also appears an indirect path via the
specic attitude towards the renewable energy devices at the
household level. In other words, the sense of moral obligation to
invest in renewable energy elicits a positive attitude towards it,
which in turn increases the likelihood of acting in this direction.
Concerning the paths expected on the basis of the TPB frame-
work (H2), the direct connection between the attitude towards the
specic behaviour and the behavioural intention is revealed. On the
contrary, there is no direct association between the subjective
norm (reected by the injunctive norm) and the outcome variable
but indirect inuences via both the attitude and the behavioural
belief (mirrored by the awareness of consequences), which in turn
are associated with the attitude. In other words, others' expecta-
tions about one's household energy choices should promote the
belief in the important consequences of such choices, which in turn
would promote a positive attitude towards these choices and
nally, increase the likelihood of acting accordingly. It is worth
noting that the emergence of behavioural belief as an antecedent of
the attitude is postulated by the TPB itself (see Ajzen, 1991).
In terms of the role of normative social inuence in predicting
both the intention to invest in renewable energy and moral norm
(H3), the hypothesised direct association between both kinds of
social norms (injunctive and descriptive) and behavioural intention
(supporting the ndings of Bamberg et al., 2007) is not supported,
whereas an indirect inuence emerges via moral norm, trust in
8 F. Fornara et al. / Journal of Environmental Psychology 45 (2016) 1e10
information sources, and attitude towards the use of green energy
(the latter one only for injunctive norm). In other words, the ex-
pectations of neighbours and signicant others, as well as what one
observes (or believes) they actually do (with reference to using
household renewable energy) should increase the moral obligation
to behave consistently, trust in them as information sources and
(only for others' expectations) the positive attitude towards green
energy, which in turn should promote the intention to act
accordingly. Thus, H3 is only partially corroborated, with reference
to the association between social norms and moral norm. This
result is in line with the ndings of a previous study (Bamberg &
Mo ser, 2007), where social norms directly contributed to the
development of moral norms. According to Bamberg and Mo ser
(2007), given that the social descriptive norm concerns the stan-
dards of behaviour that a reference group considers appropriate in
a specic context, if an individual internalises these standards, they
provide the content of his or her moral norms. Bamberg et al.
(2007) stressed the informational function of social norms, since
people would use them as easily accessible information on what
behaviour most people would deem right or wrong in a given
context. Concerning the relationship between social norms and
proenvironmental attitude, it supports the ndings in Bamberg
et al. (2007) study on transport-related choices. A further associa-
tion appears between injunctive norm and awareness of conse-
quences; the stronger the expectations of neighbours and relatives/
friends about one's use of renewable energy sources at the
household level, the higher will be one's awareness about the
consequences of such behaviour.
Regarding the hypothesised role of trust in the information
sources of the community (neighbours and relatives/friends, H4),
which mirrors a pattern of informational social inuence
(Deutsch & Gerard, 1955), both the signicant weight of this
dimension as a direct predictor of the intention of acting green and
its mediating role between social norms and such an intention
emerge as expected. Interestingly, the general trust in such infor-
mation sources is not detected; rather, the specic trust concerning
the household's energy issues emerges. Taking this into account, it
is not surprising that if an individual observes (or believes) that the
others surrounding him or her have made green choices for their
homes (and consistently, expect the person to make the same
choice), the person tends to seek information from them since he or
she nds it reliable. The trustworthiness of the information pro-
vided by neighbours and/or friends/relatives who have made green
choices in turn increases the likelihood of a person's intention to act
in the same direction. The reliance on neighbours as sources of
information recalls the kind of social inuence (labelled as pro-
vincial norm [see Goldstein et al., 2008] or local norm [see Fornara
et al., 2011]) that stems from sharing the specic place where a
given proenvironmental behaviour occurs. In this case, neighbours
seem to act indirectly as sources of normative inuence and directly
as sources of informational inuence.
In fact, the role of informational social inuence appears as
more important than those of different kinds of normative social
inuence in predicting the intention to invest in household
renewable energy devices. This result is not surprising if we
consider the average residents (at least in the Italian cities) poor
knowledge and uncertainty about the characteristics and conse-
quences (in economic and practical terms) of adopting such de-
vices. In other words, the presence of an ambiguous situation
promotes the search for informational cues (Turner & Oakes, 1986)
that are considered trustworthy. This is in line with the pivotal role
played by informational social inuence in ambiguous situations,
whereas conformity to normative social inuence is more powerful
in clearly interpretable situations (Deutsch & Gerard, 1955).
Concerning the expected relationships that emerge as
insignicant in the model (or worsening its goodness-of-t),
consider that we handle a conspicuous number of variables, most
of them conceptually more or less related. Hence, the high pro-
portion of shared variance among them may explain the apparent
lack of some hypothesised associations in some cases.
To summarise, these results provide some evidence for the
goodness of the model (tailored on an enriched version of the VBN
theory, including informational and normative social inuence and
a specic attitude) in predicting the proenvironmental choice
investigated e the intention to use renewable energy devices at the
household level. In this regard, the sense of moral obligation to
behave appropriately, trust in neighbours and friends/relatives as
informed sources on this issues, and a positive attitude towards
green energy all play direct relevant roles, whereas the function of
social norms appears only indirectly via these three dimensions.
To foster individual behaviours that improve their households'
energy efciency and lower their energy consumption level, it is
important to increase the gure in terms of the number of persons
adopting green energy devices at home. In this regard, Bollinger
and Gillingham (2012) showed that the higher the number of
existing solar PV panels, the higher the increment rate of new in-
stallations in different zones of California. It is likely that the
perspective of others making that choice would not only represent
a cue of behavioural appropriateness, as suggested by the denition
of descriptive social norm (see Schultz et al., 2008), but it would
also serve the function of making these others reliable sources of
information for adopting the same behaviour, triggering a virtuous
circle. This speculation is consistent with Rai and Robinson (2013)
ndings about the impact of communication among neighbours
on adopting solar PV panels. Besides, both the views and expecta-
tions of persons surrounding an individual e in physical (neigh-
bours) and/or relational (friends and relatives) terms e and who are
making green choices for their homes make salient one's moral
imperative to follow this direction. These aspects should be
considered in campaigns aiming at increasing the energy efciency
of households and reducing the consumption rate at the commu-
nity level.
Finally, we need to consider some limitations of this study. We
should be cautious about generalising some of the relationships
found in the specic context of this study to other contexts. In fact,
there are distinctive features of our research context at both na-
tional (e.g., state incentives for investing in household renewable
energy sources) and regional (e.g., high solar radiation) levels, as
highlighted in this paper. Thus, we cannot exclude that political,
economic and geographic issues have affected the outcome, and
further research should investigate other geo-cultural contexts to
test the degree of generalisability of these ndings. Nevertheless,
the conrmation of theoretically based empirical links found in
previous studies (addressing similar or different proenvironmental
behaviours) is a valuable proof in this sense.
Another issue involves the low number of items (two or three
and a single-item measure) representing the latent measures. This
choice fulls the goal of handling a manageable case, including both
the measurement and structural models, stemming from the
original observed variables (and not from aggregated parcels).
Nevertheless, the items included in each latent measure are all
signicantly correlated. As for the outcome variable, it is repre-
sented by the behavioural intention, which is just a proxy of action.
The low proportion of the population experiencing the target
behaviour has driven this choice. Future studies testing this model
(or similar ones) on actual behaviour are thus needed. A nal
limitation concerns the correlational nature of the design used in
this study, which does not allow for strong conclusions in causal
terms about the unidirectional relationships emerging in our
model. To rule out the possibility of alternative causal paths,
 F. Fornara et al. / Journal of Environmental Psychology 45 (2016) 1e10
experimental and/or longitudinal designs should be developed.
In conclusion, this study suggests to policymakers that pro-
moting the energetic transformation at the household level e that
is, moving from more polluting (but also well-known) to more
green (but usually less common) devices e should emphasise the
diffusion of accurate information at the community level. This focus
will both reduce residents uncertainty about the green choice (and
its consequences) and enhance awareness of their responsibility
(thus triggering their sense of moral obligation) in the shift towards
a greener community.
Acknowledgements
This study is part of a research project titled Demand analysis
and social acceptability of technologies for the production of en-
ergy from renewable sources in Sardinia, funded by the Autono-
mous Region of Sardinia (Italy), Law n. 7 (07-08-2007).
References
Abrahamse, W., & Steg, L. (2009). How do socio-demographic and psychological
factors relate to households' direct and indirect energy use and savings? A
review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. Journal
of Economic Psychology, 30, 711e720.
Abrahamse, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C., & Rothengatter, T. (2005). A review of intervention
studies aimed at household energy conservation. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 25, 273e291.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 50, 179e211.
Bamberg, S., Hunecke, M., & Blo baum, A. (2007). Social context, personal norms and
the use of public transportation: two eld studies. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 27, 190e203.
Bamberg, S., & Mo ser, G. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera:
a new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of proenvironmental
behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27, 14e25.
Ban, S., Farsi, M., Filippini, M., & Jakob, M. (2008). Willingness to pay for energy-
saving measures in residential buildings. Energy Economics, 30, 503e516.
Black, J. S., Stern, P. C., & Elworth, J. T. (1985). Personal and contextual in-
uences on household energy adaptations. Journal of Applied Psychology,
70, 3e21.
Bollinger, B., & Gillingham, K. (2012). Peer effects in the diffusion of solar photo-
voltaic panels. Marketing Research, 31, 900e912.
Carmines, E., & McIver, J. (1981). Analysing models with unobserved variables:
analysis of covariance structures. In G. Bohrnstedt, & E. Borgatta (Eds.), Social
measurement (pp. 65e115). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Carrus, G., Bonnes, M., Fornara, F., Passafaro, P., & Tronu, G. (2009). Planned behavior
and local norms: an analysis of the space-based aspects of normative
ecological behavior. Cognitive Processing, 10, 198e200.
Chen, K. K. (2014). Assessing the effects of customer innovativeness, environmental
value and ecological lifestyles on residential solar power systems install
intention. Energy Policy, 67, 951e961.
Chou, C., & Bentler, P. M. (1990). Model modication in covariance structure
modeling behaviour: a comparison among likelihood ratio, Lagrange multiplier,
and Wald tests. Multivariate Behavioural Research, 25, 115e136.
Cialdini, R. B., Kallgren, C. A., & Reno, R. R. (1991). A focus theory of normative
conduct: a theoretical renement and revaluation of the role of norms in hu-
man behaviour. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances experimental social psychology
(pp. 201e234). New York: Academic Press.
Corral-Verdugo, V., Carrus, G., Bonnes, M., Moser, G., & Sinha, J. (2008). Environ-
mental beliefs and endorsement of sustainable development principles in water
conservation: towards a new human interdependence paradigm scale. Envi-
ronment and Behavior, 40, 703e725.
De Groot, J. I. M., & Steg, L. (2008). Value orientations to explain beliefs related to
environmental signicant behavior. How to measure egoistic, altruistic, and
biospheric value orientations. Environment and Behavior, 40, 330e354.
Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social
inuences upon individual judgment. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psy-
chology, 51, 629e636.
Dunlap, R. E., & Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The new environmental paradigm. Journal of
Environmental Education, 9, 10e19.
Ferguson, M. A., Branscombe, N. R., & Reynolds, K. J. (2011). The effect of intergroup
comparison on willingness to perform sustainable behavior. Journal of Envi-
ronmental Psychology, 31, 275e281.
Fornara, F., Carrus, G., Passafaro, P., & Bonnes, M. (2011). Distinguishing the sources
of normative inuence on pro -environmental behaviours: the role of local
norms in household waste recycling. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14,
623e635.
Fransson, N., & Biel, A. (1997). Morality and norm violation. Go teborg Psychological
Reports, 27(3), 1e10.
9
Goldstein, N. J., Cialdini, R. B., & Griskevicius, V. (2008). A room with a viewpoint:
using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. Journal of
Consumer Research, 35, 472e482.
GSE (Gestore Servizi Energetici). (2011). Rapporto statistico 2011: Solare fotovoltaico
[[Statistical Report 2011: Photovoltaic solar systems]]. http://www.gse.it. Released
on the 13th December 2013.
GSE (Gestore Servizi Energetici), & Terna (Trasmissione elettrica rete nazionale).
(2011). Rapporto statistico 2011: Impianti a fonti rinnovabili [[Statistical Report
2011: Renewable sources installations]]. http://www.gse.it. Released on the 13th
December 2013.
Han, H. (2015). Travelers' pro-environmental behavior in a green lodging context:
converging value-belief-norm theory and the theory of planned behavior.
Tourism Management, 47, 164e177.
Hawcroft, L. J., & Milfont, T. L. (2010). The use (and abuse) of the new environmental
paradigm scale over the last 30 years: a meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 30, 143e158.
Honkanen, P., & Verplanken, B. (2004). Understanding attitudes towards genetically
modied food: the role of values and attitude strength. Journal of Consumer
Policy, 27, 401e420.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for t indexes in covariance structure
analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation
Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1e55.
Jager, W. (2006). Stimulating the diffusion of photovoltaic systems: a behavioural
perspective. Energy Policy, 34, 1935e1943.
reskog, K., & So
Jo rbom, D. (2001). LISREL 8.51. Chicago: Scientic Software
International.
Kallgren, C. A., Reno, R. R., & Cialdini, R. B. (2000). A focus theory of normative
conduct: when norms do and do not affect behaviour. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1002e1012.
Leenheer, J., de Nooij, M., & Sheikh, O. (2011). Own power: motives of having
electricity without the energy company. Energy Policy, 39, 5621e5629.
Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., & Roser-Renouf, C. (2009). Climate change in the
American mind: Americans' climate change beliefs, attitudes, policy preferences,
and actions. New Haven, CT: Yale University and George Mason University.
Lima, M. L., & Castro, P. (2005). Cultural theory meets the community: worldviews
and local issues. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25, 23e35.
pez-Mosquera, N., & Sa
Lo nchez, M. (2012). Theory of planned behavior and the
value-belief-norm theory explaining willingness to pay for a suburban park.
Journal of Environmental Management, 113, 251e262.
Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-t indices in
conrmatory factor analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 391e410.
Nordlund, A. M., & Garvill, J. (2002). Value structures behind environmental
behavior. Environment and Behavior, 34, 740e756.
Nordlund, A. M., & Garvill, J. (2003). Effects of values, problem awareness, and
personal norm on willingness to reduce personal car use. Journal of Environ-
mental Psychology, 23, 339e347.
Ohtomo, S., & Hirose, Y. (2007). The dual-process of reactive and intentional
decision-making involved in eco-friendly behavior. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 27, 117e125.
Poortinga, W., Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2004). Values, environmental concern, and
environmental behavior: a study into household energy use. Environment and
Behavior, 36, 70e93.
Poortinga, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C., & Wiersma, G. (2003). Household preferences for
energy saving measures. A conjoint analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology, 24,
49e64.
Rai, V., & Robinson, S. A. (2013). Effective information channels for reducing costs of
environmentally-friendly technologies: evidence from residential PV markets.
Environmental Research Letters, 8, 1e8.
Schelly, C. (2014). Residential solar electricity adoption: what motivates, and what
matters? A case study of early adopters. Energy Research & Social Science, 2,
183e191.
Schultz, P. W., & Kaiser, F. G. (2012). Promoting pro-environmental behavior. In
S. D. Clayton (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation
psychology (pp. 556e580). New York: Oxford University Press.
Schultz, W. P., Khazian, A. M., & Zaleski, A. C. (2008). Using normative social in-
uence to promote conservation among hotel guests. Social Inuence, 3, 4e23.
Schultz, P. W., Nolan, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Goldstein, N. J., & Griskevicius, V. (2007).
The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psy-
chological Science, 18, 429e434.
Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative inuences on altruism. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),
Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 221e279). New York:
Academic Press.
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: theory and
empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1e65). New York: Academic Press.
Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the content and structure of
values? Journal of Social Issues, 50, 19e45.
Schwartz, S. H., & Bardi, A. (2001). Value hierarchies across cultures: taking a
similarities perspective. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 268e290.
Schweizer-Ries, P. (2008). Energy sustainable communities: environmental psy-
chological investigations. Energy Policy, 36, 4126e4135.
Sovacool, B. K., D'Agostino, A. L., & Jain Bambawale, M. (2011). The socio-technical
barriers to solar home systems (SHS) in Papua New Guinea: Choosing pigs,
prostitutes, and poker chips over panels. Energy Policy, 39, 1532e1542.
Steg, L. (2008). Promoting energy conservation. Energy Policy, 36, 4449e4453.
10 F. Fornara et al. / Journal of Environmental Psychology 45 (2016) 1e10
Steg, L., & De Groot, J. I. M. (2012). Environmental values. In S. Clayton (Ed.), The
Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (pp. 81e92). New
York: Oxford University Press.
Steg, L., De Groot, J. I. M., Dreijerink, L., Abrahamse, W., & Siero, F. (2011). General
antecedents of personal norms, policy acceptability, and intentions: the role of
values, worldviews, and environmental concern. Society and Natural Resources,
24, 349e367.
Steg, L., Dreijerink, L., & Abrahamse, W. (2005). Factors inuencing the acceptability
of energy policies: a test of VBN theory. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25,
415e425.
Steg, L., Dreijerink, L., & Abrahamse, W. (2006). Why are energy policies acceptable
and effective? Environment and Behavior, 38, 92e111.
Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally signicant
behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 407e424.
Stern, P. C. (2008). Environmentally signicant behavior in the home. In A. Lewis
(Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of psychology and economic behaviour (pp.
363e382). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stern, P. C., & Dietz, T. (1994). The value basis of environmental concern. Journal of
Social Issues, 50, 65e84.
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., & Guagnano, G. (1998). A brief inventory of values.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58, 984e1001.
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L. (1999). A value-belief-norm
theory of support for social movements: the case of environmental concern.
Human Ecology Review, 6, 81e97.
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Kalof, L., & Guagnano, G. A. (1995). Values, beliefs, and pro-
environmental action: attitude formation toward emergent attitude objects.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 1611e1636.
Stern, P. C., & Gardner, G. T. (1981). Psychological research and energy policy.
American Psychologist, 36, 329e342.
Strazzera, E., & Statzu, V. (2015). Fostering photovoltaic technologies in mediter-
ranean cities: consumers' demand and social acceptance. In Presentation at the
34th International energy workshop. Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 3e5 June
2015.
Thgersen, J. (2006). Norms for environmentally responsible behavior: an extended
taxonomy. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 26, 247e261.
Turner, J. C., & Oakes, P. (1986). The signicance of the social identity concept for
social psychology with reference to individualism, interactionism and social
inuence. British Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 237e252.
Urban, J., & S


casn, M. (2012). Exploring domestic energy-saving: the role of
environmental concern and background variables. Energy Policy, 47, 69e80.
Van der Werff, E., Steg, L., & Keizer, K. E. (2013). It is a moral issue: the relationship
between environmental self-identity, obligation-based intrinsic motivation and
pro-environmental behaviour. Global Environmental Change, 23, 1258e1265.
Zoellner, J., Schweizer-Ries, P., & Wemheuer, C. (2008). Public acceptance of
renewable energies: results from case studies in Germany. Energy Policy, 36,
4136e4141.