Environmental psychology - SUM: Sustainability Management Wiki

Authors: Linda Bauck, Kai Uwe Harberts, Thies Loose, Catherina Saftig
Last updated: October 1st 2023

1. Definition and Relevance

Environmental psychology is a subfield of psychology that deals with the dynamic relationship between individuals and the built and natural environment. This means that environmental psychology studies the impact of the environment on human experience, behaviour, and well-being, as well as the influence of humans on the environment. Furthermore, environmental psychology includes factors that influence environmental behaviour and strategies to promote environmentally friendly behaviour.¹ Another aspect that environmental psychologist’s study is how individuals and groups perceive and evaluate their environment, both physically and socially. Attitudes, views, and behaviours towards the environment play a central role.²

Environmental psychology includes concepts, research and practical applications aimed at improving the humanity of the built environment and the interaction between humans and the natural environment. Natural environments such as buildings, parks, roads, air, and water are important resources influenced by society. If we don’t manage these resources properly, it can have serious consequences for nature and its resources. That’s why environmental psychology, which deals with the relationship between people and their environment, is becoming more important. It contributes to promoting the well-being of people and the health of the environment.³

Environmental psychology was first recognised as a branch of psychology in the late 1960s⁴, and Brunswik and Lewin are considered the founding fathers of environmental psychology based on their pioneering work in studying the interactions between people and their environment. ⁵ Research by environmental psychologists focuses on key psychological mechanisms such as environmental perception, cognitive spatial understanding, community spatial dynamics, human growth, and personality traits. These mechanisms play a role in shaping and organising the way individuals interact with their environment.⁶

The research field of environmental psychology is characterised by its multi-disciplinarity. Environmental psychologists engage in cooperative efforts with various other branches of psychology, including social, cognitive, and occupational psychology. They also collaborate with a range of fields and professions, such as architecture, education, environmental science, engineering, landscape architecture, and urban planning.⁷

Furthermore, unlike most other psychological disciplines that often emphasise a single dominant research paradigm, environmental psychology uses a wide range of quantitative and qualitative methods. Each method has its own advantages and limitations, and considerations of internal and external validity must usually be weighed when selecting a method. The field seeks to support findings through replication with different research methods, balancing the weaknesses of one approach with the strengths of another.⁸

Since the beginning of the 21^st century, it has become evident that environmental problems such as climate change, pollution and deforestation pose significant challenges. These threaten the health, economic prospects and food and water supplies of people worldwide.⁹ A general recognition also exists that people’s behaviour is one of the main causes behind these environmental problems. Environmental psychology is continually and increasingly concerned with identifying ways in which human behavioural adaptation can be achieved. This goal is to address environmental problems while maintaining human well-being and quality of life.¹⁰ In the first 40 years of its existence, the discipline was mainly concerned with questions of the architectural design of buildings and then transformed itself more and more into a discipline that deals with broader questions and takes particular account of the aspect of sustainability.¹¹

Today, in light of advancing climate change, research results from environmental psychology are highly significant. In addition, environmental factors have a direct and indirect influence on the quality of life. Both environmental challenges and promotion of individual well-being are addressed by the discipline of environmental psychology. Furthermore, it aids in understanding complex human-environment relationships and developing approaches to current environmental problems.¹²

2. Background and History

2.1 The Emergence of Environmental Psychology

The emergence of environmental psychology as a scientific discipline is usually dated to the 1960s.¹³ During this time, experts from various disciplines began to explore more closely the relationship between people and their physical environment, whether it be the built or natural environment. Even before the emergence of environmental psychology, there was interest in the effects of the ecological or geographical environment on people.¹⁴ In order for this discipline to emerge, a number of pioneering thinkers were needed who pursued the first approaches to environmental psychology. For example, in the 1930s, Lewin and Murray already explored the theoretical idea of person-environment fit, which emphasised the importance of the environment on the predictability of human behaviour and did not only include individual personality traits.¹⁵

Other leading psychologists also played an important role in adopting and developing ideas from neighbouring disciplines that traditionally had an interest in studying behaviour in natural contexts. Often, researchers came from the field of cultural anthropologies, which studies humans in relation to their culture and examined the spatial proximity of humans and animals, animal ethology, or micro-sociology. These scientists often resorted to alternative approaches to research, such as field experiments and observations, because they were sceptical about the prevailing method of experimental and laboratory-based psychological research. The early studies in the field of ecological psychology, which examined behavioural patterns in specific environments, as well as the studies on personal space and social behaviour, form the foundation of early environmental psychology.¹⁶

Today, Brunswik and Lewin are considered to be the founding fathers of environmental psychology. Egon Brunswik held that the physical environment can unconsciously influence psychological processes and concluded that psychology should pay as much attention to an organism’s environment as to the organism itself. Kurt Lewin held similar views to Brunswik. He introduced the term ‘social action research’ and claimed that research should be guided by real and social problems. While primarily focusing on social or interpersonal influences rather than the physical environment, he argued that behaviour is a product of the interaction between the individual and their surroundings.¹⁷ Nevertheless, his ideas inspired various students, including Barker and Bronfenbrenner, to carry forward and expand upon them. Both are considered forerunners of environmental psychology.¹⁸

2.2 Historical development

Today, environmental psychology has existed for more than 60 years and has constantly changed over time and adapted to the respective problems of the time. To understand the complex interrelationships of environmental psychology, it is important to look at its origins and its transformation from the past. The history of environmental psychology can be divided into different phases: architectural psychology, green psychology and current environmental psychology.¹⁹ ²⁰

2.2.1 Architectural Psychology

Architectural psychology is a subfield of environmental psychology and began in the late 1950s and early 1960s and ended in the late 1980s. For some years, the two terms ‘Architectural Psychology’ and ‘Environmental Psychology’ were even used as almost synonymous terms.²¹ The focus of research was on the influence that the built physical environment can have on human behaviour. The focus was on architecture, technology, or engineering.²²The emphasis on the physical environment was strongly influenced by political and social conditions. In the post-war period, modern architecture sought to address the problems of the post-war era by creating adequate housing and facilities for the general population. Most research during this period was aimed at how human performance and well-being could be enhanced by optimising the design of, for example, homes, offices, or hospitals.²³

At the end of the 1970s and beginning of the 1980s, the so-called ‘crisis of Architectural Psychology’ occurred. Architectural psychology was confronted with challenges, uncertainties, and methodological problems during this period. As a result, the credibility and effectiveness of this discipline have been questioned. This happened because simple and direct causal links between architectural aspects and human behaviour or well-being were established by some researchers. Due to the complexity of human beings and the multitude of influencing factors, researchers were not able to achieve immediate and demonstrable positive changes in people’s behaviour and well-being only with the help of specific architectural designs.²⁴

It turned out that reality was much more diverse and complex than previously assumed in architectural psychology. This led to a re-evaluation of research method. The crisis resulted in architectural elements no longer being seen as the sole cause of behavioural change, but in a more multi-layered approach to the interactions between people, their environment, and their social, cultural, and psychological contexts.²⁵

2.2.2 Green Psychology

Architectural psychology gradually evolved into green psychology. The emergence of green psychology is sometimes referred to in the literature as the ‘Two-fold shift of Environmental Psychology’. This is because two new trends emerged from the ‘crisis of Architectural Psychology’: the social shift and the environmental shift.²⁶

The environmental shift aimed to explain and change the negative impact of human activities on the environment. During this period, an increased number of studies were conducted on this topic, and awareness of environmental problems grew. People realized that the effects they had on the environment also had implications for their well-being and health. To understand these effects, more and more studies on noise, pollution, and energy supply were carried out. Since the 1980s, more studies have also been conducted on consumer behaviour and environmental friendliness.²⁷

The social shift in environmental psychology was initiated by a conference in Paris in 1981. Various authors of environmental psychology gathered at this event to discuss explanatory approaches. Social psychological theories such as social representations and other aspects of social psychology were discussed. Another indication of this shift was that some prominent authors began defining themselves as applied social psychologists.²⁸

2.2.3 Current Environmental Psychology

Over the past decades, environmental psychology has increasingly developed into a ‘psychology of sustainability’.²⁹ The comprehensive concept of sustainability has increasingly established itself as a central guiding principle and basis for research in environmental psychology and is more pronounced today than it was in the ‘Green Psychology’ phase.³⁰ This is also very different from the initial environmental psychology, which focused on traditional spatial-physical conditions. Today, the focus of environmental psychology is on behaviours that influence local and global natural resources. Aspects related to environmental interaction, such as concern, responsibility and commitment, play a central role in today’s environmental psychology.³¹

Human behaviour in recent decades is one of the main causes of growing climate change. Environmental problems such as pollution, deforestation or biodiversity loss have an impact on human well-being, and for this reason, environmental psychology is currently increasingly concerned with promoting pro-environmental behaviour (PEB) and thus reversing environmental problems. A fine balance that environmental psychology must strike is that it should not negatively affect people’s well-being and quality of life. Environmental psychology today is characterised by its interactive approach, its interdisciplinarity, its problem-oriented approach and the variety of methods it uses.³²

The concept of sustainability has increasingly become a central aspect of research in environmental psychology.³³ One of the key challenges of environmental psychology in the future will be to understand global environmental changes and to develop strategies that influence people’s behaviour. Environmental psychology should aim to understand the immediate causes that relate not only to organisations, social structures, technology, means of production, and socio-economic decisions but primarily to the attitudes and values associated with each of them.³⁴

3. Methods

Environmental psychology as a field of research is, highly heterogeneous in its methods and approaches. This stems from the fact that environmental psychology is problem-focused, meaning that researchers have to deal with the idiosyncrasies of real life and have to adjust their methods accordingly.³⁵ This means that the research topic informs the method. Typical primary research might revolve around, e.g., physiological stress responses to different environmental stimuli ³⁶ stated measures of satisfaction with a residential environment ³⁷ or patterns in environmental preferences.³⁸ In many cases, environmental psychologists rely on questionnaire studies, however, there are a number of different methods that are being employed in environmental psychology. The following figure gives an overview of different types of research approaches.

Figure 1: Overview of different research methods in environmental psychology. Own figure, based on Steg et al. (2018).³⁹

As can be seen in the graphic, there is no one-fits-all type of study that can be conducted in any context. Two key factors here are internal and external validity. Internal validity concerns factors within the study, such as control over variables and exclusion of biases. This is important to understand whether any effects measured are caused by the relationship between the variables of interest. Internal validity tends to be in laboratory experiments since they allow for control of the environment and elimination of many variables that could confound the results. External validity, on the other hand, asks whether a study’s results are applicable to other situations, such as populations with a different cultural context. External validity tends to be high in questionnaire studies since researchers can measure an arbitrary number of variables to avoid population biases. For example, in a study conducted on residents’ satisfaction with greenspaces within view of their windows, important variables to consider would be demographic information about the residence, such as age, gender, ethnicity, work status and size of household.⁴⁰ In simulation studies, given the right equipment and know-how, study participants can be immersed in complex virtual environments that enable a balance between external and internal validity.⁴¹

Finally, field studies and case studies are conducted by surveying the real world, often before and after an intervention (e.g., placing garbage bins in an office building). While field studies focus on a well-defined intervention within different environments (e.g., multiple office buildings), case studies try to obtain rich data about one specific system (e.g., a single office building). This leads to a balance between internal and external validity for field studies and high external validity for case studies.⁴²

4. The Influence of Environments on Human Well-Being and Psychology

4.1 Natural Environments

4.1.1 Natural Environments and Exposure to Them at Different Scopes

Natural environments influence a human’s psychological state, but these (positive) effects are highly dependent on a number of factors. In order to go beyond vague statements like ‘nature is good for us’, it is important to define (1) what is meant by ‘natural environments’, (2) the different scales of environments and degrees to which they are ‘natural’, and (3) the different types of ‘exposure’ to those environments.

Defining natural environments is much less trivial than might be expected. Usually, studies conducted on the benefits of experiencing nature compare a ‘more natural’ and a ‘less natural’ environment, e.g., a city street with trees vs a path through a forest⁴³ or a window in a house that permits a view on trees vs a view on other buildings.⁴⁴ Two important ideas become evident: (a) ‘Natural environments’ do not need to be completely made up of natural elements, such as trees, other plants and bodies of water. Rather, natural environments can be built-up environments that contain some of the aforementioned elements.⁴⁵ (b) The term ‘natural’ does not equate to ‘untouched by humans’. Rather, humans may create natural environments, e.g., trees that have been planted in cities are also considered ‘natural’. A possible operational, although admittedly very broad, definition of natural environments can therefore be: Physical spaces containing elements of living systems (such as plants and nonhuman animals), variable in scale, ratio between natural and built-up elements, and degree of human management.⁴⁶

To further describe natural environments, scale, ratio between natural and built-up elements and degree of human management become relevant. Each of these categories may be used to describe an environment as ‘more natural’ than another. Natural elements may make up most of or the whole space, such as in a forest with little constructed elements in it. However, for the purpose of investigating the effects of ‘more’ vs ‘less’ natural environments, even images of natural environments take on the role of a natural environment.⁴⁷ Similarly, even a city street with only a few trees might be the more natural counterpart to another environment that is completely devoid of green elements. This shows that the concept of natural environments is flexible: Depending on the context, natural environments can vary in shape, size and abundance of natural elements but have in common the comparison to a less natural counterpart.⁴⁸ This means that for applying the theory, one should never look at an environment in isolation, but always compare it with a possible, more or less natural, alternative.

Similar to the extent and make-up of the environment itself, an individual’s exposure to it may also vary greatly in factors such as duration and quality. Different types of natural environments lend themselves to different types of exposure: A backyard garden is well-suited for a break between working hours, while a mountain range is well-suited for prolonged, multiday trips away from cities. Understanding how an environment is being interacted with is key to understanding how it will affect the individual. While the experience of mountaineering might be placed at a very high scale of intensity, watching that same mountain range on a TV screen is very different, albeit still a different experience than watching a busy city on a TV screen.⁴⁹ Again, this means that the exposure to natural environments is a relative concept, and should be treated as such by practitioners.

4.1.2 Attention Restauration Theory

Attention Restauration Theory (ART) is one of the fundamental theories used to describe how exposure to natural environments benefits humans on a psychological level. First proposed by Kaplan & Kaplan ⁵⁰ ART develops the idea that exposure to natural environments has restorative effects on humans’ ability to willingly direct their attention. This is easily exemplified at the workplace: An office worker has to direct their attention to their computer, even if there might be other, more interesting stimuli present: Their phone in their pocket, the conversation between two colleagues, the thought of evening activities. The capacity to concentrate on the computer, then, is a limited resource, which, in turn, makes the work environment use up attention. If an individual takes a walk in a nearby park or forest during their break, this will restore the individual’s capacity to concentrate.⁵¹ This is caused by the nature of natural environments: There is a lack of stimuli that would require active focussing. Rather, there are things that naturally draw our attention, such as water, caves and green areas. Individuals do not actively direct their attention when in these environments and can, therefore, regenerate their ability to do so. This effect has, for example, been investigated with students on university campuses and inmates in prisons, exemplifying the application of ART to guide the design of these institutions. Access to natural areas and green spaces had positive effects on the users (students and inmates, respectively) in both facilities. Oftentimes, monetary, and spatial limitations pose challenges for the installation of green spaces able to offer a sufficient feeling of immersion. In this case, imagery of vast natural scenes can sometimes substitute for real environments, although less effectively so.⁵² ⁵³

Kaplan & Kaplan (1989)⁵⁴ describe four concepts, or conceptual measures, that are important to understanding how environments can restore directed attention. These are (1) being away, (2) extent, (3) compatibility, and (4) fascination. ‘Being away’ describes the shift in scenery that different environments provide. This can be understood both physically and mentally. ‘Extent’ is not just the size of the environment but also its complexity – an environment that is high in extent offers an escape from the real world. This means the environment can hold the individual’s attention for an extended period of time. The third component of a place being restorative is ‘compatibility’, which refers to whether the environment aligns with an individual’s inclinations and desires.⁵⁵ A very practical example of this could be the seating opportunities in an area that an individual wants to use as a resting place. Lastly, ‘fascination’ describes the ability of something to draw our attention. Here, two types of fascination are to be distinguished if one is to provide environments that offer restoration to its users: soft fascination and hard fascination. Soft fascination is provided by environments that give us some stimuli, enough to keep our thoughts away from work but leave room for other thoughts. This encourages reflection and wandering of thoughts and can, for example, be felt when taking a walk in a forest. When hard fascination is felt, on the other hand, not much room is left for other thoughts. An example here is a high-intensity sporting activity such as downhill mountain biking, during which the individual is fully concentrated on the activity, leaving no capacity for reflection.⁵⁶

4.1.3 Beyond Attention: Ulrich’s Stress Reduction Theory

A different perspective on the effect of exposition to natural environments was proposed by is known as the stress reduction theory (SRT), developed by Roger Ulrich in the 1980s.⁵⁷ Stress, in this context, is defined as the reaction to perceived as threats to an individual’s well-being. This plays out on both the physiological and psychological level, e.g., through heightened blood pressure and increased negative emotion.⁵⁸ According to SRT, the re-normalisation of these measures during and after stressful situations is facilitated by natural environments. Since the 1990s, a number of studies have shown that different measures of stress, e.g., salivatory cortisol levels, return to normal levels faster in natural settings than in urban settings.⁵⁹

Comparing Kaplan’s ART and Ulrich’s SRT, a key difference is that SRT implies that the main benefits of natural environments occur before cognition takes place. Rather, the emotional state and mood of individuals are affected, which, in turn, might effectively restore cognitive abilities. For a while, these two theories seemed contrary to one another. They were eventually partially integrated with one another⁶⁰, using a framework explaining the causal relationships between (attention-)demanding tasks, stress responses, other aversive stimuli and, finally, impaired performance.

Figure 2: Causal relationships between the important parts of the stress-attention system. Own figure, based on, and expanded upon from, Kaplan (1995).⁶¹ The solid arrows indicate causalities that lead to stress and decline in performance; The dotted arrows indicate points of impact of exposure to nature. The framework combines nature’s alleviative nature regarding both stress responses and mental resource decline.

In this framework, it can be seen that the ability to direct attention and stress are influenced by outside factors but also interact with each other. Finally, they produce measurable effects, such as a decrease in work performance or physiological indicators of stress. Both mental resource decline and stress responses can be alleviated by exposure to natural environments, and at present, both ART and SRT are being used.⁶² For example, studies on urban green space planning encourage city planners to incorporate bodies of water, non-paved walking paths and areas with a high richness of plant species into planning of residential areas.⁶³

4.1.4 Preference for Nature: Psycho-Evolutionary vs Learned-Preference Theories

While the fact that humans show aesthetic appreciation for nature and often prefer natural environments over built-up ones is well-established, the reasons for this are still subject to debate. A common view amongst environmental psychologists is that humans have an innate preference for natural environments developed through evolution. This so-called biophilia theory⁶⁴ is based on our species’ history: For most of evolution, we have relied on nature to provide us with what we need to survive and thrive. Through the millennia, humans have evolved to have emotional connections with natural environments and show clear preferences for natural environments as backdrops for restorative and fun activities.⁶⁵ Humans tend to prefer environments with natural elements that, in our evolutionary past, may have been important assets for survival, such as shelter from the elements or access to water.⁶⁶

Although intuitively appealing, empirical evidence around evolution-based preferences is mixed. Studies conducted on children and their parents seem to indicate that the preference for nature is at least partly learned behaviour. While both children and adults gained cognitive benefits from exposition to nature over exposition to urban environments, children showed a clear preference for urban environments. With increasing age, this preference lessened and eventually turns around, and adults prefer natural environments. This seems to indicate that our preference for natural environments gets passed on through generations but is not innate to us.⁶⁷ Gunnarson & Hedblom (2023)⁶⁸ propose an “updated biophilia hypothesis”, based on studies showing that many but not all people have subconscious positive feelings towards nature. Furthermore, these feelings are mediated by cultural context and specific upbringing, i.e., indicating that the cause for our preference for natural environments lies in both nature and nurture. This highlights the importance of environmental education and exposure to nature, especially for young people.⁶⁹

4.2 Built Environments

4.2.1 Definition and Scope of Built Environments

Built environments are environments that are constructed by humans for humans – material and spatial products of human labour⁷⁰ “in which people live, work, and recreate on a day-to-day basis”⁷¹^{p. 24}.

Examples of typical built environments include homes, schools, workplaces, parks, streets, buildings and transportation.⁷² ⁷³ These physical built environments are complemented by digital built environments. Smart cities, smart homes, smart devices, sharing platforms and multimodal transportation have become an integral part of everyday life for many.⁷⁴ In addition, billions worldwide spend their time playing video games and use this as a form of socialising, entertainment, and competition.⁷⁵

Built environments can be analysed on several different levels:

(1) Firstly, on an individual level, as private spaces of that individual. These spaces include a person’s home or office and are important for individual well-being and quality of life. On this individual level, constructs such as privacy, personal space and territoriality are analysed.⁷⁶

(2) Secondly, built environments can be analysed on a neighbourhood-community level within semi-public spaces. On this level, the immediate environment of the individual’s living space, such as blocks of flats, the neighbourhood, the workplace, and parks, are examined.⁷⁷ One example of a well-established construct in environmental psychology, concerning the immediate home environment, is place attachment.⁷⁸ Further extensive research has gone into analysis of the work environment. A multitude of studies has been conducted to investigate the influences of different physical features of workplaces on the well-being, stress and arousal, productivity, and performance of employees, their relationships with each other, as well as how they use, modify and adapt to their environments.⁷⁹ ⁸⁰ ⁸¹ From this research, one can conclude that workplace design for well-being is built on “the notion of fit or match between user and environment, the concept of control and managing novelty and unpredictability, the measurement of daily hassles and energy-consuming impediments to the smooth performance of tasks, as well as the importance of social support, territoriality and environmental control.”⁸²^{, p.179}

(3) Thirdly, one can analyse built environments on an individual/community level through research on public environments such as villages, towns or cities.⁸³ Research in this field ranges from the analysis of the impact of different types of buildings on the perceived quality of life in cities⁸⁴, as well as the impact of pollutants (noise, air pollution) on psychological well-being⁸⁵ ⁸⁶, to the effect of environmental stressors (crowding, crime, stimuli overload etc.) on people’s behaviour.⁸⁷ ⁸⁸

For example, research shows that residence in neighbourhoods characterised by a poor-quality built environment was associated with a greater individual likelihood of depression⁸⁹ and that noise and air pollution have negative effects on mental well-being.⁹⁰ ⁹¹

4.2.3 Newman’s Theory of Defensible Space

Developed by Oscar Newman, Defensible Space Theory describes relations between design elements and crime rates in urban environments and attempts to answer the question of why there are urban environments that show high crime rates independently of their populations.⁹² Newman (1972) defines defensible space as an environment whose physical characteristics allow residents to ensure their own security.⁹³ This defensible space is achieved through activation of three critical components: (1) territoriality (“the capacity of the physical environment to create perceived zones of territorial influences”⁹⁴^{, p.51}), (2) natural surveillance (the “capacity of physical design to provide surveillance opportunities for residents and their agents”⁹⁵^{, p.78}) and (3) image/milieu (“the capacity of design to influence the perception of a project’s uniqueness, isolation, and stigma”⁹⁶^, ^p.102). These components have had a continuous influence in the field of criminology.⁹⁷ They have also been used for urban design in several communities aiming to reduce crime rates. In addition, defensible space theory contributed to an increased interest of the British government in designing more secure and liveable public housing.⁹⁸ Nonetheless, Newman’s defensible space theory has also received a multitude of criticism due to unprecise definition of the described components and questionable methodology.⁹⁹

4.2.4 Space Syntax

Space syntax is a theory of space and a method for analysing the relationship between spatial layout and human behaviour.¹⁰⁰ It was pioneered by Bill Hillier and Julienne Hanson at The Bartlett, University College London in the 70s and 80s.¹⁰¹ Hillier (2007) theorises that space is predominantly analysed on an individual surface level (e.g., the facade of a building) instead of in a system of spatial relations. Analysing space in a system of spatial relations shows how buildings operate socially through “the social organisation of everyday life”¹⁰²^{, p.3} as spatial and physical configurations. Configuration refers to relations considering other relations and has developed to be a key concept in space syntax theory.¹⁰³

Configurational analysis allows for the modelling of a city and can be used for designing and planning cities through the space syntax method. Space syntax method measures to-movement (accessibility) and through-movement of street segments, both with respect to all other streets (configurational). These are then weighted with respect to different measures of distances. To do so, it utilises graph theory from discrete mathematics for the calculation of configurative spatial relationships.¹⁰⁴

A variety of different software has been developed (e.g., depthmapX, Qgis Space Synhax Toolkit) for spatial analysis with space syntax methods.¹⁰⁵ These tools are used by researchers and architectural and urban designers as well as for the analysis of archaeological remains.¹⁰⁶

Space syntax methods give an explanation of the physical spatial setup of buildings and urban spaces but cannot be interpreted without an understanding of human behaviour and societal processes. In addition, space syntax analysis does not incorporate 3D information.¹⁰⁷

4.2.5 Further Concepts Relevant to Built Environments

4.2.5.1 Privacy

According to Altman (1975) privacy is the “selective control of access to the self or one’s group”¹⁰⁸^, ^p.18where the degree of openness or closeness to others is a dynamic process.¹⁰⁹ Margulis (1977) defines privacy similarly to Altman but adds a motive by describing privacy as “selective control over transactions between self (or one’s group) and others, the ultimate aim of which is to enhance autonomy and/or to minimise vulnerability”¹¹⁰^{, p.10}. Thus, from increased control, individuals are able to minimise vulnerability and, therefore, experience intimacy and emotional release. This, in turn, increases well-being.¹¹¹ Privacy can be established through physical or even psychological barriers.¹¹² These barriers serve three functions: (1) social interaction management, (2) plans and strategies for interaction with others, and (3) “development and maintenance of self-identity“¹¹³^{p. 68}and involve not only visual detachment, but also auditory exclusivity.¹¹⁴ ¹¹⁵ Privacy in itself is a cultural universal.¹¹⁶ However, its form varies for each individual, depending on their different personal characteristics, sex, age, cultural, economic, educational, and social backgrounds.¹¹⁷ ¹¹⁸ ¹¹⁹

From a psychologist’s point of view, privacy can be split into solitude, reserve, anonymity, isolation, and intimacy.¹²⁰ Solitude describes being alone and unobserved by others.¹²¹ Reserve involves only psychological barriers¹²² and is the most subtle form of privacy.¹²³ Anonymity affords people the opportunity to be unrecognised¹²⁴ and plays a great role in the digital world.¹²⁵ Isolation describes the physical separation from others and intimacy is connected to the desire to promote close personal relationships.¹²⁶

From an architectural design point of view, privacy is split into conversational privacy (ability to not be overheard), acoustical privacy (isolation from noise) and visual privacy (isolation from unwanted observation).¹²⁷

As the deviation from the desired level of privacy (no matter whether defined from a psychological or an architectural point of view) results in a decline in well-being, much research has been conducted on measures to optimise privacy, especially in the workplace.¹²⁸ ¹²⁹ ¹³⁰ For example, longitudinal surveys show that open plan workspaces result in a lack of privacy and subsequently in an increase in dissatisfaction. This dissatisfaction is especially linked to the lack of acoustical privacy.¹³¹ It is consequently recommended, e.g., to install partitions in an open-plan workplace that allow workers to communicate freely but also provide visual and some acoustical privacy.¹³²

4.2.5.2 Personal Space

Personal space is described as an invisible boundary surrounding an individual¹³³ – the space that an individual places between themselves and other surrounding people.¹³⁴ This space may not be intruded without causing discomfort¹³⁵ and is used as a mechanism to assist with the regulation of privacy.¹³⁶ Thus, people uphold their invisible boundaries through distancing to avoid stress from potentially threatening social stimulation. In addition, personal space has a communication function, signalling attitudes and personal relations.¹³⁷

Personal space is measured in laboratory experiments through a person approaching an individual until some form of discomfort is expressed. However, a more realistic and representative method is used in naturalistic spatial invasion experiments. Here, an individual is approached at random until an aversive reaction is noted or that individual moves away.¹³⁸

Required personal space is individual to each person and dependent on their culture, the intruding person and overall situation. One may assume the furthest possible seating distance to a stranger on the tube, but when in a crowded situation, an individual’s personal space may be adjusted to even include body contact with strangers. In contrast to the situation on the tube, the crowded situation no longer causes stress or discomfort for said person. However, unwanted deliberate touching in such a situation still poses an invasion of privacy.¹³⁹

The study of how interpersonal space is used and structured is called proxemics.¹⁴⁰ ¹⁴¹ This insight is used for furniture design, the layout of office and living room areas, etc. Intuitively, chairs are placed at further distances in workplaces compared to living rooms. Despite intuition, it is recommendable that all spaces include variable furniture arrangements so that a person’s environment can shift with personal space requirements.¹⁴²

4.2.5.3 Territoriality

Territoriality is a mechanism to uphold privacy. It can be classified by its degree of permanency of ownership and degree of control: (1) primary, (2) secondary and (3) public territories.¹⁴³

Primary territories are spaces that are typically occupied for long periods of time and are controlled on a permanent basis. They are clearly marked to others and include homes and bedrooms.¹⁴⁴ Invasion into these spaces has a large effect on quality of life and oftentimes leaves owners with no other place to retreat to.¹⁴⁵
Secondary territories bridge the gap between primary and public territories. Secondary territories can include neighbourhoods or clubhouses. They are spaces used by groups or communities. These groups or communities can exercise control over and are psychologically attached to their secondary territories, although these factors are not as strong as for primary territories.¹⁴⁶
Public territories are only occupied for a limited time and are least central to the lives of their occupants. Examples include streets, parks and playgrounds.¹⁴⁷

Individuals or groups mark their territories to simplify social interaction and avoid conflict and intrusion.¹⁴⁸ With territoriality comes a sense of ownership and place attachment.¹⁴⁹ As this ownership is visualised, territoriality is often characterised as the absence of anonymity.¹⁵⁰

4.2.5.4 Place Attachment

Place attachment is a “cognitive-emotional bond that individuals develop towards a place”¹⁵¹^, ^p.274. Analysis of place attachment is divided into a person dimension (Who is attached?), a psychological process dimension (How are they attached?) and a place dimension (To what are they attached?). The degree of place attachment and type of place can vary depending on factors such as time, ownership, gender, personality, or social status.¹⁵²

Research has shown that time, in particular, plays a dominant role in the development of place attachment. The more time spent in a place, the likelier place attachment becomes. Ownership predicts place attachment similarly to time. Mobility, on the other hand, has a negative impact on place attachment. Furthermore, physical surroundings also have an impact on place attachment. People in single-family houses, in dwellings on quiet streets and in areas with distinctive features are more likely to develop place attachment.¹⁵³

Place attachment has positive effects on well-being. Places of attachment provide a sense of continuity, are hosts to memories and provide physical and psychological comfort. On the flip side, displacement from places of attachment has negative effects on individuals or a group’s well-being.¹⁵⁴

Place attachment can lead to community action but is also often the root of conflict in community planning and is, therefore, an important concept for understanding the “not in my backyard” response.¹⁵⁵

Further concepts that are closely related to place attachment include place identity (incorporation of a place into the larger concept of self or alternatively the distinctiveness of a place)¹⁵⁶ and place dependence (functional attachment to a place).¹⁵⁷

4.2.5.4 Crowding

“Crowding is a deviation from a desired level of interaction“¹⁵⁸^p.67 and, therefore, the desired level of privacy. It has been identified as a potential stressor and has been thoroughly researched in different settings (e.g., home environments, schools, workplaces, or public spaces). In general, two different measures are analysed: (1) social density (number of people in a space) and (2) spatial density (amount of space available to each person). However, whether an environment is perceived as crowded by an individual or not is only dependent on these two measures but also on the degree of strangers in that environment. The level of crowding in an elevator may be perceived very differently depending on whether the people in that space are strangers or family members.¹⁵⁹

For example, in an urban environment, research has shown that higher social density can be beneficial to a certain degree. Studies based on western low-density cities have shown that urban sprawl, and, therefore, low levels of crowding correlate with decreased well-being. With an increase in density, functional facilities are closer. This promotes non-motorised travel, which correlates positively with physical activity during travel. This, in turn, improves residents’ health and promotes well-being.¹⁶⁰ ¹⁶¹ ¹⁶² High levels of spatial density that can be found in some Chinese cities, on the other hand, lead to weakened neighbourhood harmony, crowded public spaces and lack of privacy. These, in turn, reduce well-being.¹⁶³

5. Environmental Behaviour

Environmental behaviour is specified by its impact, encompassing actions that influence environmental quality, either positively or negatively, regardless of whether they arise from pro-environmental intentions or not.¹⁶⁴ Pro-environmental behaviour, instead, intends to diminish the negative impact of one’s actions on the natural and built environment.¹⁶⁵

5.1 Theories of Environmental Behaviour

5.1.1 The Theory of Planned Behaviour

The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) describes a possibility of predicting and understanding behaviour that is caused by behavioural intentions. These intentions are determined by attitudes (negative or positive beliefs an individual holds towards a behaviour), subjective norms (approval or disapproval of its behaviour by a reference group) and perceived behavioural control (belief of facilitating or hindering behaviour of its interest by having it under its personal control). In turn, under specific circumstances, perceived behavioural control can also predict behaviour.¹⁶⁶ ¹⁶⁷ The focus is set on the individual as a starting point, acting in an environment in which people perform PEB waging individual costs and benefits.¹⁶⁸

Initially, the TPB was established as an extension of the Theory of Reasoned Action by Fishbein and Ajzen (1980)¹⁶⁹, which also explains the underlying processes within individuals, not just the resulting behaviour.¹⁷⁰ ¹⁷¹ Researchers have criticized that other personal and social factors must take into account, such as habit, descriptive norms, self-identity, and place attachment, to enhance the validity.¹⁷² ¹⁷³

5.1.2 The Protection Motivation Theory

The Protection Motivation Theory (PMT) by Rogers (1975)¹⁷⁴ explains people’s motivation or intention to protect themselves from perceived threats. This theory originated in the research of fear appeals and is an extension of the primary and secondary appraisal process model by Lazarus (1968)¹⁷⁵. It often finds its application in combination with health threats and describes how to develop messages that can promote adaptive behaviour more clearly.¹⁷⁶ ¹⁷⁷

There are two appraisal processes: threat appraisal consists of the evaluation of the individual and collective benefits of changed behaviour, the severity of the risks and the vulnerability to these risks arising from harmful actions. Coping appraisal evaluates the self-efficacy (belief in the capability to act in a recommended behaviour), the response efficacy (belief that the changed behaviour effectively reduces the threat) and the individual and collective costs of the changed behaviour.¹⁷⁸ In terms of PEB, people are more likely to change their behaviour when threat appraisal and coping appraisal are high. Additionally, perceived costs weaken, and perceived benefits enhance people’s intention or motivation to protect themselves.¹⁷⁹

5.1.3 The Norm Activation Model

The Norm Activation Model (NAM) developed by Schwartz in the 1970s¹⁸⁰ ¹⁸¹ as a theory of altruistic behaviour can predict pro-social behaviour, including the behaviour’s outcome for others, whereas PEB is a specific case.¹⁸²

The foundation of the NAM is based on personal norms reflected as a feeling of moral obligation. Moreover, these personal norms are influenced by two main factors: the awareness of consequences resulting from a certain behaviour and the ascription of responsibility for feeling the consequences when not acting pro-environmental.¹⁸³ ¹⁸⁴ However, the NAM as a mediator model, the individuals need to understand its consequences before assuming responsibility for a behaviour. Consequently, a sense of responsibility triggers the activation of personal norms, which, in turn, leads to individual environmental behaviour.¹⁸⁵

5.1.4 The Value-Belief-Norm Theory of Environmentalism

The Value-Belief-Norm Theory of Environmentalism (VBN) developed by Stern and his colleagues (1999)¹⁸⁶ is an extension of the NAM. It joins together with value theories and environmental beliefs like the New Environmental Paradigm.¹⁸⁷ ¹⁸⁸

In a causal chain, an individual’s values causing beliefs and turning into personal norms predicts pro-environmental behaviour. First, people’s values are differentiated between being altruist, biocentric – connoted positively – and egoistic – connoted negatively. Second, beliefs like an ecological worldview create awareness and responsibility of behavioural consequences like in the NAM, which influences norms. Finally, the effect of personal norms impacts different PEBs like environmental activism, non-activistic behaviour in the public sphere, private-sphere environmentalism, and organisational actions.¹⁸⁹ ¹⁹⁰ The chain extends from relatively stable aspects of personality and beliefs to more specific ones with a moral obligation. Each element has an immediate effect on the next or a further one or is predicted by its predecessor.¹⁹¹

5.1.5 The Goal-Framing Theory

The Goal-Framing Theory was shaped by cognitive social psychology. It posits an integrated framework to sense factors responsible for PEB. Three types of goals are determined to ‘frame’ cognitive and motivational processes of behaviour, in words, how people process information and act upon it:¹⁹² the hedonic goal (focus on pleasure and joy), the gain goal (self-interest in terms of personal resources), and the normative goal (appropriate behaviour marked by groups, e.g., society). These goals impact the selection of information by individuals, the prioritization of cognitively available knowledge, the perception of potential courses of action, and the way people will respond within a particular situation.¹⁹³ ¹⁹⁴

One goal is focal and outlines the goal-frame, while the other ones strengthen or weaken the main goal in the background. Correspondently, the normative goal is best suited for PEB. On the contrary, people with gain and normative goals change their behaviour only if it is profitable (gain) or comfortable (hedonic).¹⁹⁵ As a result, norm-guided behaviour becomes consistently unstable and dependent on external (social) support. The theory further identifies key elements crucial in encouraging the normative goal frame, including social values, the presence of other people, the behaviour of other people (especially those significant in one’s life), and self-regulatory capacity.¹⁹⁶

5.2 Factors influencing Environmental Behaviour

5.2.1 Values

According to the definition by Schwartz, values are “desirable transsituational goals, varying in importance, that serve as guiding principles in the life of a person or other social entity”¹⁹⁷^p.21. Personal values outline an individual’s perspective of the world and guide their actions, ultimately shaping their lifestyles from which one can anticipate their attitudes and (pro-environmental) behaviours. Consequently, values form the basis for people’s behaviour and attitudes, which are more content and situation-specific than values.¹⁹⁸ In detail, values are beliefs regarding the desirability or undesirability of particular final conditions, abstract and stable over time. Beliefs, norms, and attitudes are changed much easier, and these qualities and behaviour can be influenced simultaneously. In addition, values shape individuals’ focus, determine which knowledge becomes cognitively most approachable, dictate the significance of diverse action outcomes, impact their assessment of different situations, and influence the range of alternatives under consideration.¹⁹⁹ ²⁰⁰ Although the number of different values is relatively small considering the magnitude of behaviour-specific beliefs, attitudes and norms,²⁰¹ individuals can prioritize values differently even if they share the same values (e.g. cultural values). The most crucial significance is the relative importance attributed to values.²⁰²

In the catalogue of values, there are two types of self-transcendence: altruistic values (which indicate a concern for the well-being of others) and biospheric values (which highlight the intrinsic quality of nature and the environment without a concern for the well-being of others). These values mostly have a positive effect on PEB, the acceptability of climate change policies, sustainable consumption and environmental activism because they combine collective interests like the welfare of others and the biosphere²⁰³. It is to be noted, however, that there can be conflict in terms of decisions between social or ecological issues. Opposed to self-transcendence, the two types of self-enhancement are egoistic values (evaluate the costs and benefits linked to PEB from their personal view) and hedonic values (which intend to enhance personal feelings like pleasure and to reduce effort). They correlate negatively to PEB and focus on individual interests, perceiving the environment as a source of consumable resources.²⁰⁴ ²⁰⁵ ²⁰⁶

Besides, values are central elements of someone’s identity. Self-identity is a label used for self-description and is highly influenced by values.²⁰⁷ If biospheric values are part of one’s identity, it is feasible someone sees themselves as a kind of person willing to behave pro-environmental which results in an environmental self-identity.²⁰⁸ ²⁰⁹

Additionally, environmental concerns and worldviews (e.g., New Environmental Paradigm) are more narrowly targeted compared to values. They are rooted in values and concentrate on environmental issues, while values encompass broader, overarching life goals. In more recent research, the significance has grown due to the importance of the positive effect on PEB.²¹⁰ ²¹¹

5.2.2 Symbolic Aspects

Symbolic aspects are linked to people’s importance in demonstrating their social identity and status to others.²¹² Individuals have different identities depending on time, environment, or context, which can be conflicted. These identities are linked to characteristics that a person ascribe to themselves or to a specific stereotype. Therefore, if people attribute a certain self-identity to themselves or what to be perceived as the same, it influences their behaviour or attributes. Individuals attempt to reconcile any differences between their actual self and ought self (self-discrepancy theory). Furthermore, this can be a motivation to change to PEB when having an environmental self-identity (self-perception theory).²¹³

Individuals possess a psychological need to seek approval from others, which results in impression management. Henceforth, how they are perceived by others is significant, and people are trying to direct their impression towards their desired public image.²¹⁴ ²¹⁵ Particular behaviours and products are addressed to a certain symbolic meaning and emphasise the identity, social standing, and beliefs to others.²¹⁶ People’s recognition of the symbolic value is a determining factor in how environmental behaviours impact them.²¹⁷

5.2.3 Social Norms

Social norms describe shared beliefs and rules of society regarding what is appropriate behaviour in a specific situation. The approved behaviour can vary within different social groups and environments. People source their accepted social norms from different reference groups and may adapt it, e.g., regarding the level of support others placing an environmental policy. However, the norm’s power is enforced informally by the threat of sanctions or the promise of rewards by society and not by the power of the law.²¹⁸ ²¹⁹ ²²⁰ This creates a social pressure and makes norms relatively stable through the social feedback. Nevertheless, a change in norms happens abruptly, which can occur through environmental tipping points.²²¹

Moreover, social norms are distinguished into two types: injunctive or subjective norms outline behaviour generally approved or disapproved within the culture and motivate to participate or abstain from these behaviours due to the social incentives and penalties. Descriptive norms encompass the behaviour displayed by the majority of individuals within a group and motivate individuals to behave as what is commonly regarded as effective or adaptive behaviour.²²² Different situations determine which norm is focal and affects the individuals’ behaviour immediately.²²³ Both norms may contrast with each other and, on the one hand, weakens the intention to act in a pro-environmental way but can be shifted by only one person. On the other hand, the conflict can enhance the perception of environmental power if an individual possesses a favourable attitude.²²⁴

5.2.4 Social Dilemmas

Social dilemmas are situations in which individual and collective interests conflict. In general, individuals intend to maximise their benefits even at the expense of collective welfare. PEB presents such a social dilemma²²⁵ due to the common awareness of negative long-term consequences for the community and the environment. The decision-makers are coupled with their strong reluctance to modify their behaviour and to ease some of the short-term benefits. This underscores the occurrence of large-scale dilemmas.²²⁶ Likewise, the main difficulty is created by social uncertainty (about other’s behaviour) and environmental uncertainty (about the availability of resources) and often hinders people from engaging in more PEB. Solutions to this problem represent the promotion of knowledge, problem awareness and favourable attributes in the society, which mainly need to be augmented by communication (informational strategies). Social norms as a guideline can limit egoistic behaviour and enhance the cooperation.²²⁷ ²²⁸

Furthermore, there are several more distinct types of dilemmas: The public good dilemma describes the short-term perspective of an individual contributing to common goods (accessible to all) at its own expense, although it would be in the interest of everyone’s well-being in the long-term. In the case of the free-rider-problem, decision-makers have to be cautious that it is equally distributed in society. The commons or resource dilemma confronts people with the decision whether to take from a limited resource with free access or not (Hardin, 1968²²⁹) ²³⁰ ²³¹ Another variation of dilemmas arises between the behaviour of groups that appear to be the most extreme due to dynamics of group identity. The cooperation within groups tends to be stronger because the specific social identity encourages individuals towards socially acceptable behaviour but only for their own group or other groups in case of subordinate group identity.²³²

5.2.5 Habits

The majority of people’s behaviour is based on routines known as habits. They are unconscious, mindless behavioural patterns that are repeated automatically and built upon past behaviour. Habits are activated by goals to respond with an action. The formation is triggered by expectations about behaviour and the performance of an environment. The control of action is outsourced to the environment, implying environmental cues have the control to activate a specific behaviour.²³³ ²³⁴ The more frequently an action is performed in stable contexts, the stronger the habit becomes. In less stable contexts, it would involve more conscious planning.²³⁵

Habits hinder or bias behaviour change by reducing the need to seek information regarding alternative behaviours or the performance context during the decision-making process.²³⁶ This leads to potential negative judgments due to past behaviour that is not constantly evaluated. On the contrary, habits reduce stress, increase control over a situation and conserve regulatory strength for important decisions.²³⁷ Nevertheless, habits act as a barrier to PEB because intentions and norms become less important. In order to break habits, there must be a notable shift in situational conditions, along with actively motivating the target group to establish implementation intentions.²³⁸

5.2.6 Cues

Cues are signals or signs in an environment addressed to influence individuals’ (especially normative) goals and behaviour. They provide certain information and prompt a person’s reaction in the desire to enhance people’s attitudes. Cues impact the intensity of an individual’s intention to adhere to social norms or legitimate regulations, thereby contributing to keeping social order.²³⁹ In line with the Goal-Framing Theory, people have three types of overarching goals. All three goals have an impact at some point on adhering to social norms, but their degree of salience to the behaviour differentiates depending on the environmental cues. The shift in the goals is thereby most significant for the effect of cues.²⁴⁰

Cues and the violation of norms by others

The salience of hedonic or gain goals is enhanced compared to normative goals evoked by an imbalance of descriptive and injunctive norms resulting in others “not doing the right thing”. Denying the cue increases when the norm transgressor has more similarities (e.g., status) to the person observing the violation.

Cues and the respect of norms by others

It is observed that people who are obeying norms strengthen normative behaviour by weakening hedonic or gain goals. Norm support cues promote PEB more generally.²⁴¹ Correspondently, when framing past behaviour as pro-environmental by positive cues, it may increase the self-perception as an environmentally friendly person. That would result in stronger PEB, but for those methods, at least some pro-environmental attitudes must exist.²⁴²

5.2.7 Emotions

Emotions are among the most multi-faceted concepts in psychology and express complex processes. In general, they are intense, short-lived, and characterised by a specific cause and distinct cognitive content. Their origin lies in reactions to a relevant object or a behaviour to ease the coping of a particular situation. Furthermore, they are able to change motivational action tendencies, physiological expressions, subjective feeling and cognitive processing, evaluation, and judgment, and result in the variation of decision-making and behaviour.²⁴³ ²⁴⁴ ²⁴⁵ The common outdated one-dimensional perception of either positive or negative emotions in which all experiences can be measured fails empirically (based on the economic notion of utility), due to the complexity of emotion’s dimensions.²⁴⁶ ²⁴⁷

Moreover, in the case of the foundation of human evolution and how they adapt to a changing environment, emotions have played a significant role. Thus, emotions are a powerful driver as an intrinsic motivation evoked by anticipating them. Additionally, anticipated emotions can serve as a consequence and an antecedent to behaviour, which enables the prediction of a specific behaviour.²⁴⁸ ²⁴⁹ In regard of PEB, discrete emotions had a greater impact of the prediction of environmental policy support than cultural worldviews, negative affect, image associations, or sociodemographic variables.²⁵⁰ In detail, negative anticipated emotions caused by PEB could function as a barrier due to giving up privacy or social status while positive anticipated emotions can support a cue to break habits.²⁵¹ In contrast, unpleasant possible outcomes of a certain action (e.g., climate change) anticipate negative emotions but engage in PEB and positive anticipated emotions towards an object or an identifying symbol weakens PEB by avoiding the object.²⁵² Ultimately, moral emotions are important in promoting PEB, because they can be viewed as a direct response to behaviours, rules, or laws that align with it or deviate from them.²⁵³

5.3 Promote Pro-Environmental Behaviour

5.3.1 Informational Strategies

Informational Strategies are designed to increase the knowledge, awareness and concern of environmental consequences that will support PEB.²⁵⁴ These soft measures provide information about how to ease PEB or educate about possible personal benefits (e.g., media information campaigns or product advertisements²⁵⁵). Social support or the creation of role models may break antienvironmental habits and aim to influence internal psychological precursors such as individual’s attitudes, perceptions, beliefs, and motivations without changing the external context.²⁵⁶ ²⁵⁷ ²⁵⁸ Various tools within informational strategies can be distinguished:

Persuasion Strategies can be used to shape people’s attitudes by strengthening the salience of altruistic and biospheric 5.2.1 Values and making egoistic or hedonic values less incompatible. These information campaigns on specific PEB can augment normative goals and make sure people have reasons for their values.²⁵⁹ ²⁶⁰ ²⁶¹

Commitment Strategies elicit the implementation intentions, how people intend to modify their behaviour, and how they target to accomplish this change. This strategy appeared to be effective but often requires substantial time and resources, e.g., workers to contact individuals.²⁶² ²⁶³

Goal-Setting Strategies need to motivate the desire to reach attractive goals which are high but realistic enough to engage in PEB.²⁶⁴

Prompts are brief written messages or signs designed to highlight a particular behaviour in a specific context. They serve as simple reminders and have the capability to override automatic responses (habits), making it easier to engage in less complex behaviours.²⁶⁵ ²⁶⁶

Feedback is the provision of descriptive norm information, meaning to give individuals information regarding their performance. Similarly, social comparison feedback compares the own behaviour to the pro-environmental performance of a particular reference group (e.g., society). Both approaches have demonstrated effectiveness in encouraging PEB.²⁶⁷ ²⁶⁸ However, the latter can also mitigate PEB when individuals use others’ behaviour as a benchmark. This tendency can be counteracted by adding injunctive norm information to communicate societal (dis)approval.²⁶⁹

In general, informational strategies are frequently established, although they have faced criticism for their limited efficacy in changing long-term behaviour. It has been effective only if altering PEB is not accompanied by substantial costs or changes in external constraints.²⁷⁰ Nevertheless, tailored information to the needs, values, and perceived opportunities of the target group can be most effective. It can be implemented by individualised social marketing approaches using innovative communication technologies and new media.²⁷¹ Ultimately, informational strategies are only a component to promote PEB and to accept associated policies that outline a combined solution with structural strategies.²⁷² ²⁷³

5.3.2 Structural Strategies

Structural strategies intend to change behaviour by instructing hard measures like using incentives or technical alterations.²⁷⁴ Strategies that are used are financial strategies, legal regulation, or the change in the availability of products and services by variations in physical, technical, or organisational systems. The aim is to change the costs and benefits of alternative behaviour, which may result in different motivational intentions.²⁷⁵

5.3.2.1 Rewards and Penalties

Structural strategies can be categorised into those that aim to reinforce positive behaviour through rewards (incentives) or discourage negative behaviour through penalties (disincentives). While these approaches prove more effective than informational strategies, a challenge arises as people may associate their behavioural changes to the (dis)incentives rather than to their personal convictions. Consequently, the behavioural shifts could be tied to the duration of the reward or punishment and weaken the intrinsic motivation of PEB.²⁷⁶ ²⁷⁷ Therefore, a combination of different tools for tailored groups and circumstances is much stronger. Regardless, the research area has been studied less than the one of informational strategies.²⁷⁸

Penalties communicate a mandatory behaviour and generate revenue for the policy makers, which can compensate for the environmental damage caused by the polluter. Financial actions to encourage PEB by reducing the profitability of egoistic choices are subsidies, rebates, fines, and taxes. Implementing such instruments on a large scale is relatively easy.²⁷⁹ ²⁸⁰

Rewards describe a voluntary behaviour without monetary consequences and frequently indicate costs for the decision maker. Besides money, it occasionally can be praise, compliments, privileges, or public recognition, which are less powerful than monetary incentives.²⁸¹ Rewards are most impactful when incentives make the behaviour more attractive and activate goals to promote PEB.²⁸²

5.3.2.2 Policies

Policies should encompass the enforcement of relevant laws and regulations, ensuring that any violations are met with appropriate consequences. In general, individuals tend to be more responsive to potential losses (e.g., lifestyle change) than to potential gains. For instance, pricing policies target the reduction of costs for PEB.²⁸³ ²⁸⁴ However, policies that adopt efficiency over the reduction of equipment reduction appear more appealing.²⁸⁵

In comparison to rewards and penalties, policymakers must be aware to ensure that their environmental taxes and subsidies do not undermine individuals’ intrinsic moral motivation to engage in PEB.²⁸⁶ Regulations are likely to fall short when the population fails to recognise the policy’s necessity. Therefore, the integration of informational intervention is essential to understand the objectives and significance of policies. Likewise, participation of the population increases the acceptability and involvement in environmental policies programs.²⁸⁷ ²⁸⁸ Generally, the acceptability augments when price increases or restrictive changes are perceived as fair, effective, and avoiding restrictions on personal freedoms.²⁸⁹ Three different fairness principle with different policy outcomes can be compared: intrapersonal (individual policy outcome), interpersonal (between groups) and intergenerational comparisons (between generations, e.g., environmental justice).²⁹⁰

Moreover, such measures find more resonance among individuals who hold strong environmental values.²⁹¹ Political support must be developed by the necessity of environmental awareness and concern among voters and reasons for the shortcomings of personal advantages in favour of long-term collective benefits (social dilemma). Hence, it is recommended to frame financial disincentives for environmentally harmful actions as potential losses to increase the attractiveness of PEB.²⁹² ²⁹³ Studies indicate that the acceptability of policy measures is enhanced when individuals directly encounter the benefits resulting from the implementation of those policies.²⁹⁴

References

1
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
2
Moser, G. & Uzzell, D. Environmental Psychology. in Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology, Volume 5: Personality and Social Psychology (eds. Millon, T. & Lerner, M.J) 419-445 (John Wiley & Sons, 2003).
3
Gifford, R., Steg, L. & Reser, J. P., Environmental psychology. IAAP handbook of applied psychology, 440-470. (Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2011).
4
Stokols, D. Environmental Psychology. Annual Review of Psychology 29. 253-295 (1978).
5
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology and sustainable development: Expansion, maturation, and challenges. Journal of Social Issues 63(1), 199-212 (2007).
6
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
7
Moser, G. & Uzzell, D. Environmental Psychology. in Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology, Volume 5: Personality and Social Psychology (eds. Millon, T. & Lerner, M.J) 419-445 (John Wiley & Sons, 2003).
8
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
9
IPCC: Climate change 2013: The physical science basis. (2013).
10
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
11
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology and sustainable development: Expansion, maturation, and challenges. Journal of Social Issues 63(1), 199-212 (2007).
12
Fleury-Bahi, G., Pol, E. & Navarro, O. Handbook of environmental psychology and quality of life research. in Introduction: Environmental Psychology and Quality of Life (eds. Fleury-Bahi, G., Pol, E. & Navarro, O.) 1-10 (Springer International Publishing 2017).
13
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
14
Stokols, D. Environmental Psychology. Annual Review of Psychology 29, 253-295 (1978).
15
Devlin, A. S. Introduction: Rationale, Chapter Overviews, and Author Biographies. in Environmental Psychology and Human Well-Being (eds. Devlin, A. S.) xv-xxxviii (Academic Press, 2018).
16
Bonnes, M. & Bonaiuto, M. Environmental Psychology: From Spatial-Physical Environment to Sustainable Development. in Handbook of Environmental Psychology (eds. Bechtel, R. & Churchman, A.) 28-54 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002).
17
Pol, E. Blueprints for a history of Environmental Psychology (I): From First Birth to American Transition. (Universitat de Barcelona, 2006).
18
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
19
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
20
Pol, E. Blueprints for a history of Environmental Psychology (II): From architectural psychology to the challenge of sustainability. (Universitat de Barcelona, 2007).
21
Pol, E. Blueprints for a history of Environmental Psychology (II): From architectural psychology to the challenge of sustainability. (Universitat de Barcelona, 2007).
22
Bonnes, M. & Bonaiuto, M. Environmental Psychology: From Spatial-Physical Environment to Sustainable Development. in Handbook of Environmental Psychology (R. Bechtel and A. Churchman) 28-54 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002).
23
Pol, E. Blueprints for a history of Environmental Psychology (I): From First Birth to American Transition. (Universitat de Barcelona, 2006).
24
Pol, E. Blueprints for a history of Environmental Psychology (II): From architectural psychology to the challenge of sustainability. (Universitat de Barcelona, 2007).
25
Pol, E. Blueprints for a history of Environmental Psychology (II): From architectural psychology to the challenge of sustainability. (Universitat de Barcelona, 2007).
26
Pol, E. Blueprints for a history of Environmental Psychology (II): From architectural psychology to the challenge of sustainability. (Universitat de Barcelona, 2007).
27
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
28
Pol, E. Blueprints for a history of Environmental Psychology (II): From architectural psychology to the challenge of sustainability. (Universitat de Barcelona, 2007).
29
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology and sustainable development: Expansion, maturation, and challenges. Journal of Social Issues 63(1), 199-212 (2007).
30
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
31
Bonnes, M. & Bonaiuto, M. Environmental Psychology: From Spatial-Physical Environment to Sustainable Development. in Handbook of Environmental Psychology (R. Bechtel and A. Churchman) 28-54 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002).
32
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
33
Giuliani, M.V. & Scopelliti, M. Empirical research in environmental psychology: past, present, and future. Journal of Environmental Psychology 29(3), 375–386 (2009).
34
Stern, P. C. Psychological dimensions of global environment change. Annual Review of Psychology 43, 269-302 (1992).
35
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
36
Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A. & Zelson, M. Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of environmental psychology 11(3), 201-230 (1991).
37
Kaplan, R. The nature of the view from home: Psychological benefits. Environment and behavior 33(4), 507-542 (2001).
38
Meidenbauer, K. L. et al. The gradual development of the preference for natural environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology 65, 101328 (2019).
39
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
40
Kaplan, R. The nature of the view from home: Psychological benefits. Environment and behavior 33(4), 507-542 (2001).
41
Slack, M. K., & Draugalis Jr, J. R. Establishing the internal and external validity of experi-mental studies. American journal of health-system pharmacy 58(22), 2173-2181 (2001).
42
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
43
Bratman, G. N., Hamilton, J. P. & Daily, G. C. The impacts of nature experience on human cognitive function and mental health. Annals of the New York academy of sciences 1249(1), 118-136 (2012).
44
Kaplan, R. The nature of the view from home: Psychological benefits. Environment and behavior 33(4), 507-542 (2001).
45
Mausner, C. A kaleidoscope model: Defining natural environments. Journal of environmental psychology 16(4), 335-348 (1996).
46
Bratman, G. N., Hamilton, J. P. & Daily, G. C. The impacts of nature experience on human cognitive function and mental health. Annals of the New York academy of sciences 1249(1), 118-136 (2012).
47
Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A. & Zelson, M. Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of environmental psychology 11(3), 201-230 (1991).
48
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
49
Davis, J. Psychological benefits of nature experiences: An outline of research and theory. (Nuropa University and School of Lost Borders, 2004).
50
Kaplan, R. & Kaplan, S. The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. (Cambridge University Press, 1989).
51
Kaplan, S. The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of environ-mental psychology 15(3), 169-182 (1995).
52
Felsten, G. Where to take a study break on the college campus: An attention resto-ration theory perspective. Journal of environmental psychology 29(1), 160-167 (2009).
53
Moran, D. Back to nature? Attention restoration theory and the restorative effects of nature contact in prison. Health & Place 57, 35-43 (2019).
54
Kaplan, R. & Kaplan, S. The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. (Cambridge University Press, 1989).
55
Herzog, T. R., Maguire, P. & Nebel, M. B. Assessing the restorative components of environments. Journal of environmental psychology 23(2), 159-170 (2003).
56
Devlin, A. S. Concepts, theories, and research approaches. in Environmental Psychology and Human Well-Being, 1-28 (Academic Press, 2018).
57
Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A. & Zelson, M. Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of environmental psychology 11(3), 201-230 (1991).
58
Hartig, T. et al. Health benefits of nature experience: Psychological, social and cultural processes. in Forests, trees and human health (eds. Nilsson, K. et al.) 127-168 (2011).
59
Jimenez, M. P. et al. Associations between nature exposure and health: a review of the evidence. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18(9), 4790 (2021).
60
Kaplan, S. The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of environmental psychology 15(3), 169-182 (1995).
61
Kaplan, S. The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of environmental psychology 15(3), 169-182 (1995).
62
Sullivan, W. Attention restoration and stress reduction: Two mechanisms underlying the health benefits of exposure to green spaces. ACES (A Community on Ecosystem Services) Conference, Washington, DC. (2014).
63
Huang, S., Qi, J., Li, W., Dong, J. & van den Bosch, C. K. The contribution to stress recovery and attention restoration potential of exposure to urban green spaces in low-density residential areas. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18(16), 8713 (2021).
64
The biophilia hypothesis (Island press, 1993).
65
Chang, C. C. et al. Social media, nature, and life satisfaction: global evidence of the biophilia hypothesis. Scientific Reports 10(1), 4125 (2020).
66
Thake, C. L., Bambling, M., Edirippulige, S. & Marx, E. A psychoevolutionary approach to identifying preferred nature scenes with potential to provide restoration from stress. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal 10(5), 111-124 (2017).
67
Meidenbauer, K. L. et al. The gradual development of the preference for natural environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology 65, 101328 (2019).
68
Gunnarsson, B. & Hedblom, M. Biophilia revisited: nature versus nurture. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 38(9), 792-794 (2023).
69
Gunnarsson, B. & Hedblom, M. Biophilia revisited: nature versus nurture. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 38(9), 792-794 (2023).
70
Kaklauskas, A. & Gudauskas, R. Intelligent decision-support systems and the Internet of Things for the smart built environment. in Start-up creation: The Smart Eco-efficient Built Environment (eds. Pachero-Torgal, F., Rasmussen, E., Granqvist, C., Ivanov, V., Kaklauskas, A. & Makonin, S.) 411-448 (Woodhead Publishing UK and USA, 2016).
71
Roof, K. & Oleru, N. Public health: Seattle and King County’s push for the built environment. Journal of Environmental Health 71(1), 24–27 (2008).
72
Dearry A. Impacts of our built environment on public health. Environmental Health Perspectives 112(11), 600-601 (2004).
73
Roof, K. & Oleru, N. Public health: Seattle and King County’s push for the built environment. Journal of Environmental Health 71(1), 24–27 (2008).
74
Frick, V., Homburg, A., Röderer, K. & Hofmann, M. Psychology of the digital environment: digitalization, environmental protection and environmental design. Umweltpsychologie 25(1), 4-18 (2021).
75
Vuorre, M., Johannes, N., Magnusson, K. & Przybylski, A. K. Time spent playing video games is unlikely to impact well-being. Royal Society Open Science 9(7), 220411 (2022).
76
Moser, G. & Uzzell, D. Environmental Psychology. in Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology, Volume 5: Personality and Social Psychology (eds. Millon, T. & Lerner, M.J) 419-445 (John Wiley & Sons, 2003).
77
Moser, G. & Uzzell, D. Environmental Psychology. in Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology, Volume 5: Personality and Social Psychology (eds. Millon, T. & Lerner, M.J) 419-445 (John Wiley & Sons, 2003).
78
Scannell L. & Gifford R. The psychology of place attachment. In Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice (eds. Gifford R.) 272-300 (Optimal Books, 2014).
79
Vischer, J. The effects of the physical environment on job performance: Towards a theoretical model of workspace stress. Stress and Health 23, 175 – 184 (2007).
80
Kamarulzaman, N., Saleh, A. A., Hashim, S. Z., Hashim, H. & Abdul-Ghani, A. A. An Overview of the Influence of Physical Office Environments towards Employees. Procedia Engineering 20, 262-268 (2011).
81
Creating the productive workplace (E & FN Spon., 2000).
82
Vischer, J. The effects of the physical environment on job performance: Towards a theoretical model of workspace stress. Stress and Health 23, 175 – 184 (2007).
83
Moser, G. & Uzzell, D. Environmental Psychology. in Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology, Volume 5: Personality and Social Psychology (eds. Millon, T. & Lerner, M. J.) 419-445 (John Wiley & Sons, 2003).
84
Torrington J., Barnes S., McKee K., Morgan K. & Tregenza P. The Influence of Building Design on the Quality of Life of Older People. Architectural Science Review 47, 193-197 (2004).
85
Bronzaft, A. L. Noise Pollution: A Hazard to Physical and Mental Well-Being. in Handbook of Environmental Psychology (eds. Bechtel, R. B. & Churchman, A.) 499-510 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002).
86
Bekker, J. S. Outdoor Air Pollution and Psychological Well-Being: A Metanalysis (Brigham Young University, 2022).
87
Vine, I. Crowding and Stress: 1. Review of Variables and Theories, Current Psychological Reviews 1, 305-324 (1981).
88
Chu, A., Thorne, A. & Guite, H. The impact on mental well‐being of the urban and physical environment: an assessment of the evidence, Journal of Public Mental Health 3(2), 17-32 (2004).
89
Galea, S., Ahern, J., Rudenstine, S., Wallace, Z. & Vlahov, D. Urban built environment and depression: a multilevel analysis. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 59(10), 822-827 (2005).
90
Bronzaft, A. L. Noise Pollution: A Hazard to Physical and Mental Well-Being. in Handbook of Environmental Psychology (eds. Bechtel, R. B. & Churchman, A.) 499-510 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002).
91
Bekker, J. S. Outdoor Air Pollution and Psychological Well-Being: A Metanalysis (Brigham Young University, 2022).
92
Reynald, D. M. & Elffers, H. The Future of Newman’s Defensible Space Theory. European Journal of Criminology 6(1), 25-46 (2009).
93
Newman, O. Defensible space: Crime prevention through urban design. (Macmillan, 1972).
94
Newman, O. Defensible space: Crime prevention through urban design. (Macmillan, 1972).
95
Newman, O. Defensible space: Crime prevention through urban design. (Macmillan, 1972).
96
Newman, O. Defensible space: Crime prevention through urban design. (Macmillan, 1972).
97
Reynald, D. M. & Elffers, H. The Future of Newman’s Defensible Space Theory. European Journal of Criminology 6(1), 25-46 (2009).
98
Clarke, R. V. Situational Crime Prevention. Crime and Justice 19, 91–150 (1995).
99
Reynald, D. M. & Elffers, H. The Future of Newman’s Defensible Space Theory. European Journal of Criminology 6(1), 25-46 (2009).
100
Dursun, P. Space Syntax in Architectural Design. Proceedings 6 (2007).
101
Yamu, C., van Nes, A. & Garau, C. Bill Hillier’s Legacy: Space Syntax – A Synopsis of Basic Concepts, Measures, and Empirical Application. Sustainability 13, 3394 (2021).
102
Hillier, B. Space is the machine: A configurational theory of architecture (Space Syntax, 2007).
103
Hillier, B. Space is the machine: A configurational theory of architecture (Space Syntax, 2007).
104
Van Nes, A. & Yamu, C. Space Syntax: A Method to measure Urban Space related to Social, Economic and Cognitive Factors. in The Virtual and the Real in Planning and Urban Design: Perspectives, practices and applications (eds. Yamu, C., Poplin, A., Devisch, O. & de Roo, G.) 136-150 (Routledge, 2018).
105
Space syntax network, software. https://www.spacesyntax.net/software/
106
Hillier, B. Space is the machine: A configurational theory of architecture (Space Syntax, 2007).
107
Van Nes, A. & Yamu, C. Space Syntax: A Method to measure Urban Space related to Social, Economic and Cognitive Factors. in The Virtual and the Real in Planning and Urban Design: Perspectives, practices and applications (eds. Yamu, C., Poplin, A., Devisch, O. & de Roo, G.) 136-150 (Routledge, 2018).
108
Altman, I. The Environmental and Social Behavior. (Brooks/Cole, 1975).
109
Altman, I. & Chemers, M. Culture and environment. (Brooks/Cole, 1980).
110
Margulis, S. T. Conceptions of privacy: current status and next steps. Journal of Social Issues 33(3), 5– 21 (1977).
111
Westin, A. F. Privacy and Freedom. (Athenum, 1967).
112
Moser, G. & Uzzell, D. Environmental Psychology. in Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology, Volume 5: Personality and Social Psychology (eds. Millon, T. & Lerner, M.J) 419-445 (John Wiley & Sons, 2003).
113
Altman, I. Privacy Regulation: Culturally Universal or Culturally Specific?. Journal of Social Issues 33, 66-84 (1977).
114
Kupritz, V. W. Privacy in the Workplace: The Impact of Building Design, Journal of Environmental Psychology 18, 341–356 (1998).
115
Sundstrom, E., Town, J. P., Rice, R. W., Osborn, D. P. & Brill, M. Office Noise, Satisfaction, and Performance, Environment and Behavior 26(2), 195-222 (1994).
116
Westin, A. F. Privacy and Freedom. (Athenum, 1967).
117
Altman, I. The Environmental and Social Behavior. (Brooks/Cole, 1975).
118
Altman, I. Privacy Regulation: Culturally Universal or Culturally Specific?. Journal of Social Issues 33, 66-84 (1977).
119
Newell, P. B. A system model of privacy. Journal of Environmental Psychology 14, 65-78 (1994).
120
Pedersen, D. M. Dimensions of privacy. Perceptual and Motor Skills 48(3), 1291-1297 (1979).
121
Demibras, O. O. & Demirkan, H. Privacy Dimensions: A Case Study in the Interior Architecture Design Studio, Journal of Environmental Psychology 20, 53-64 (2000).
122
Altman, I. The Environmental and Social Behavior. (Brooks/Cole, 1975).
123
Demibras, O. O. & Demirkan, H. Privacy Dimensions: A Case Study in the Interior Architecture Design Studio, Journal of Environmental Psychology 20, 53-64 (2000).
124
Demibras, O. O. & Demirkan, H. Privacy Dimensions: A Case Study in the Interior Architecture Design Studio, Journal of Environmental Psychology 20, 53-64 (2000).
125
Omernick, E. & Sood, S. O. The Impact of Anonymity in Online Communities. Proceedings 526-535 (2013).
126
Demibras, O. O. & Demirkan, H. Privacy Dimensions: A Case Study in the Interior Architecture Design Studio, Journal of Environmental Psychology 20, 53-64 (2000).
127
Kupritz, V. W. Privacy in the Workplace: The Impact of Building Design, Journal of Environmental Psychology 18, 341–356 (1998).
128
Kamarulzaman, N., Saleh, A. A., Hashim, S. Z., Hashim, H. & Abdul-Ghani, A. A. An Overview of the Influence of Physical Office Environments towards Employees, Procedia Engineering 20(3/4), 262-268 (2011).
129
Demibras, O. O. & Demirkan, H. Privacy Dimensions: A Case Study in the Interior Architecture Design Studio, Journal of Environmental Psychology 20, 53-64 (2000).
130
Kupritz, V. W. Privacy in the Workplace: The Impact of Building Design, Journal of Environmental Psychology 18, 341–356 (1998).
131
Kim, J. & de Dear, R. Workspace satisfaction: The privacy-communication trade-off in open-plan offices. Journal of Environmental Psychology 36, 18-26 (2013).
132
O’Neill, M. J. Work Space Adjustability, Storage, And Enclosure As Predictors Of Employee Reactions And Performance. Environment and Behavior 26(4), 504-526 (1994).
133
Altman, I. The Environmental and Social Behavior. (Brooks/Cole, 1975).
134
Sommer, R. Studies in personal space. Sociometry 22, 247–260 (1959).
135
Hall, E. T. The hidden dimension. (Doubleday, 1966).
136
Namazian, A. & Mehdipour, A. Psychological Demands of the Built Environment, Privacy, Personal Space and Territory in Architecture. International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences 3(4), 109-113 (2013).
137
Vine, I. Crowding and Stress: 2. A Personal Space Approach. Current Psychological Reviews 2, 1-18 (1982).
138
Vine I. Crowding and Stress: 2. A Personal Space Approach. Current Psychological Reviews 2, 1-18 (1982).
139
Vine I. Crowding and Stress: 2. A Personal Space Approach. Current Psychological Reviews 2, 1-18 (1982).
140
Lewis, J .E. Sociocultural and Individual Differences. Comprehensive Clinical Psychology 10, 93-125 (1998).
141
Haddad, A., Doherty, R. & Purtilo, R. Respectful Communication in an Information Age. Health Professional and Patient Interaction 9, 141-165 (2019).
142
Namazian, A. & Mehdipour, A. Psychological Demands of the Built Environment, Privacy, Personal Space and Territory in Architecture. International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences 3(4), 109-113 (2013).
143
Altman, I. The Environmental and Social Behavior. (Brooks/Cole, 1975).
144
Altman, I. The Environmental and Social Behavior. (Brooks/Cole, 1975).
145
Abdullah, A., Marzbali, M. H., Bahauddin, A. & Maghsoodi, M. J. The Relationship between Territorial Functioning and Victimisation: A Comparative Study of High and Low Crime Rate Estates. Social and Behavioral Sciences 50, 899 – 908 (2012).
146
Bechtel, R. B. & Churchman, A. Handbook of Environmental Psychology (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002).
147
Altman, I. The Environmental and Social Behavior. (Brooks/Cole, 1975).
148
Namazian, A. & Mehdipour, A. Psychological Demands of the Built Environment, Privacy, Personal Space and Territory in Architecture. International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences 3(4), 109-113 (2013).
149
Newman, O. Defensible space: Crime prevention through urban design. (Macmillan, 1972).
150
Ley, D., & Cybriwsky, R. Urban Graffiti as Territorial Markers. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 64(4), 491–505 (1974).
151
Scannell L. & Gifford R. The psychology of place attachment. in Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice (eds. Gifford R.) 272-300 (Optimal Books, 2014).
152
Scannell L. & Gifford R. The psychology of place attachment. in Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice (eds. Gifford R.) 272-300 (Optimal Books, 2014).
153
Scannell L. & Gifford R. The psychology of place attachment. in Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice (eds. Gifford R.) 272-300 (Optimal Books, 2014).
154
Scannell L. & Gifford R. The psychology of place attachment. in Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice (eds. Gifford R.) 272-300 (Optimal Books, 2014).
155
Manzo, L. C. & Perkins, D. D. Finding Common Ground: The Importance of Place Attachment to Community Participation and Planning. Journal of Planning Literature 20(4), 335-463 (2006).
156
Devlin, A.S. Environmental Psychology and Human Well-Being: Effects of Built and Natural Settings. (Academic Press, 2018).
157
Alrobaee, T. R. & Al-Kinani, A. S. Place dependence as the physical environment role function in the place attachment. IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 698, 033014 (2019).
158
Altman, I. Privacy Regulation: Culturally Universal or Culturally Specific?. Journal of Social Issues 33, 66-84 (1977).
159
Vine, I. Crowding and Stress: 1. Review of Variables and Theories, Current Psychological Reviews 1, 305-324 (1981).
160
Lan, F., Pan, J., Zhou, Y. & Huang, X. Impact of the Built Environment on Residents’ Health: Evidence from the China Labor Dynamics Survey in 2016, Journal of Environmental and Public Health, 3414849 (2023).
161
Devlin, A. S. Environmental Psychology and Human Well-Being: Effects of Built and Natural Settings. (Academic Press, 2018).
162
Mouratidis, K. Urban planning and quality of life: A review of pathways linking the built environment to subjective well-being. Cities 115, 103229 (2021).
163
Changjuan, Z. & Guangjun, J. What urban design can do based on compact city concept. Urban Planning International 24(6), 108–117 (2009).
164
Steg, L., Bolderdijk, J. W., Keizer, K. & Perlaviciute, G. An integrated framework for encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: The role of values, situational factors and goals. Journal of Environmental Psychology 38, 104-115 (2014).
165
Gatersleben, B. (2018). Measuring environmental behaviour. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 155-166 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
166
Kan, M. P. H. & Fabrigar, L. R. (2020). Theory of Planned Behavior. in Encyclopedia of personality and individual differences (eds. Zeigler-Hill, V. & Shackelford, T. K.) 5476-5482 (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020).
167
Oreg, S. & Katz-Gerro, T. Predicting proenvironmental behavior cross-nationally: Values, the theory of planned behavior, and value-belief-norm theory. Environment and behavior 38(4), 462-483 (2006).
168
Devlin, A. S. Concepts, theories, and research approaches. in Environmental Psychology and Human Well-Being, 1-28 (Academic Press, 2018).
169
Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. (Prentice Hall, 1980).
170
Oreg, S. & Katz-Gerro, T. Predicting proenvironmental behavior cross-nationally: Values, the theory of planned behavior, and value-belief-norm theory. Environment and behavior 38(4), 462-483 (2006).
171
Barber, J. S. The Theory of Planned Behaviour: considering drives, proximity and dynamics. Vienna yearbook of population research/Vienna Institute of Demography, Austrian Academy of Sciences 9, 31-35 (2011).
172
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
173
White, K. M., Smith, J. R., Terry, D. J., Greenslade, J. H. & McKimmie, B. M. Social influence in the theory of planned behaviour: The role of descriptive, injunctive, and in‐group norms. British journal of social psychology 48(1), 135-158 (2009).
174
Rogers, R. W. A Protection Motivation Theory of Fear Appeals and Attitude Change. Journal of Psychology 91, 93-114 (1975).
175
Lazarus, R. S. Emotions and Adaptation: Conceptual and Empirical Relations. in Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (ed. Arnold, W. J.) 175-266 (University of Nebraska Press, 1968).
176
Tanner Jr, J. F., Hunt, J. B. & Eppright, D. R. The protection motivation model: A normative model of fear appeals. Journal of marketing 55(3), 36-45 (1991).
177
Encyclopedia of Public Health: Volume 1: A-H Volume 2: I-Z (ed. Kirch, W.) (Springer Science & Business Median, 2008).
178
Pechmann, C., Zhao, G., Goldberg, M. E. & Reibling, E. T. What to convey in antismoking advertisements for adolescents: The use of protection motivation theory to identify effective message themes. Journal of marketing 67(2), 1-18 (2003).
179
Steg, L. & Nordlund, A. Theories to explain environmental behaviour. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 217-227 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
180
Schwartz, S. H. Normative explanations of helping behavior: A critique, proposal, and empirical test. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 9, 349-364 (1973).
181
Schwartz, S. H. Normative Influences on Altruism. in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 10 (ed. Berkowitz, L.) 221-279 (New York: Academic Press, 1977).
182
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A. & Kalof, L. A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Human ecology review, 81-97 (1999).
183
De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L. Morality and prosocial behavior: The role of awareness, responsibility, and norms in the norm activation model. The Journal of social psychology 149(4), 425-449 (2009).
184
Udo, G., Bagchi, K. & Maity, M. Exploring factors affecting digital piracy using the norm activation and UTAUT models: the role of national culture. Journal of Business Ethics 135, 517-541 (2016).
185
Onwezen, M. C., Antonides, G. & Bartels, J. The Norm Activation Model: An exploration of the functions of anticipated pride and guilt in pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of economic psychology 39, 141-153 (2013).
186
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A. & Kalof, L. A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Human Ecology Review 6(2), 81-97 (1999).
187
Yeboah, F. K. & Kaplowitz, M. D. Explaining energy conservation and environmental citizenship behaviors using the value-belief-norm framework. Human Ecology Review 22(2) 137-159 (2016).
188
Andersson, L., Shivarajan, S. & Blau, G. Enacting ecological sustainability in the MNC: A test of an adapted value-belief-norm framework. Journal of business ethics 59, 295-305 (2005).
189
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
190
Steg, L. & Nordlund, A. Theories to explain environmental behaviour. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 217-227 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
191
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A. & Kalof, L. A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Human ecology review, 81-97 (1999).
192
Lindenberg, S. & Steg, L. Normative, gain and hedonic goal frames guiding environmental behavior. Journal of Social issues 63(1), 117-137 (2007).
193
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
194
Steg, L., Bolderdijk, J. W., Keizer, K. & Perlaviciute, G. An integrated framework for encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: The role of values, situational factors and goals. Journal of Environmental psychology 38, 104-115 (2014).
195
Steg, L. & Nordlund, A. Theories to explain environmental behaviour. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 217-227 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
196
Lindenberg, S. & Steg, L. Goal-framing theory and norm-guided environmental behavior. in Encouraging sustainable behavior (ed. van Trijp, H. C. M.) 37-54 (Psychology Press, 2013).
197
Schwartz, S. H. Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values?. Journal of social issues 50(4), 19-45 (1994).
198
Oreg, S. & Katz-Gerro, T. Predicting proenvironmental behavior cross-nationally: Values, the theory of planned behavior, and value-belief-norm theory. Environment and behavior 38(4), 462-483 (2006).
199
De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L. Environmental Values. in The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (ed. Clayton, S. D.) 81-92 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
200
Steg, L., Perlaviciute, G., Van der Werff, E. & Lurvink, J. The significance of hedonic values for environmentally relevant attitudes, preferences, and actions. Environment and behavior 46(2), 163-192 (2014).
201
De Groot, J. I. & Thøgersen, J. Values and pro‐environmental behaviour. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 167-178 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
202
De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L. Environmental Values. in The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (ed. Clayton, S. D.) 81-92 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
203
Van der Werff, E., Steg, L. & Keizer, K. 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 (2013).
204
Lindenberg, S. & Steg, L. Goal-framing theory and norm-guided environmental behavior. in Encouraging sustainable behavior (ed. van Trijp, H. C. M.) 37-54 (Psychology Press, 2013).
205
De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L. Environmental Values. in The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (ed. Clayton, S. D.) 81-92 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
206
De Groot, J. I., & Steg, L. Mean or green: which values can promote stable pro‐environmental behavior?. Conservation Letters 2(2), 61-66 (2009).
207
Van der Werff, E., Steg, L. & Keizer, K. 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 (2013).
208
De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L. Environmental Values. in The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (ed. Clayton, S. D.) 81-92 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
209
Gatersleben, B., Murtagh, N. & Abrahamse, W. Values, identity and pro-environmental behaviour. Contemporary Social Science 9(4), 374-392 (2014).
210
De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L. Environmental Values. in The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (ed. Clayton, S. D.) 81-92 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
211
De Groot, J. I. & Thøgersen, J. Values and pro‐environmental behaviour. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 167-178 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
212
Gatersleben, B. Affective and symbolic aspects of car use. in Threats from car traffic to the quality of urban life: Problems, Causes and Solutions. 219-233 (Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2007).
213
Gatersleben, B. & van der Werff, E. Symbolic aspects of environmental behaviour. in Environmental Psychology: An Introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 198-206 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
214
Leary, M. R., Impression Management. in International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, (eds. Neil J. Smelser, N. J. & Baltes P. B.) 7245-7248 (Pergamon, 2001).
215
Ziegler, M. & Hess, U. Impression Management. in Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences (eds. Zeigler-Hill, V. & Shackelford, T.K.) 2204–2207 (Springer Cham, 2020).
216
Gatersleben, B. Affective and symbolic aspects of car use. in Threats from car traffic to the quality of urban life: Problems, Causes and Solutions. 219-233 (Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2007).
217
Gatersleben, B. & van der Werff, E. Symbolic aspects of environmental behaviour. in Environmental Psychology: An Introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 198-206 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
218
Thøgersen, J. Norms for environmentally responsible behaviour: An extended taxonomy. Journal of environmental Psychology 26(4), 247-261 (2006).
219
De Groot, J. I. & Schuitema, G. How to make the unpopular popular? Policy characteristics, social norms and the acceptability of environmental policies. Environmental Science & Policy 19, 100-107 (2012).
220
Jones, F. Prompting Engagement in Pro-Environmental Behavior Through the Presentation of Social Norms (Doctoral dissertation, Muhlenberg College, 2021).
221
Nyborg, K. et al. Social norms as solutions. Science 354(6308), 42-43 (2016).
222
Smith, J. R. et al. Congruent or conflicted? The impact of injunctive and descriptive norms on environmental intentions. Journal of environmental psychology 32(4), 353-361 (2012).
223
Reno, R. R., Cialdini, R. B. & Kallgren, C. A. The transsituational influence of social norms. Journal of personality and social psychology 64(1), 104 (1993).
224
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
225
Joireman, J. A., Lasane, T. P., Bennett, J., Richards, D. & Solaimani, S. Integrating social value orientation and the consideration of future consequences within the extended norm activation model of proenvironmental behaviour. British journal of social psychology 40(1), 133-155 (2001).
226
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
227
Staats, H. J., Wit, A. P. & Midden, C. J. H. Communicating the greenhouse effect to the public: Evaluation of a mass media campaign from a social dilemma perspective. Journal of environmental management 46(2), 189-203 (1996).
228
Von Borgstede, C., Johansson, L. O. & Nilsson, A. Social dilemmas: Motivational, individual, and structural aspects influencing cooperation. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 207-216 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
229
Hardin, G. The Tragedy of the Commons. Science 162(3859), 1243–1248 (1968).
230
Staats, H. Pro-environmental attitudes and behavioral change. in Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology (ed. Spielberger, C. D.) 127-135 (Academic Press, 2004).
231
Brewer, M. B. & Kramer, R. M. Choice behavior in social dilemmas: Effects of social identity, group size, and decision framing. Journal of personality and social psychology 50(3), 543 (1986).
232
Dawes, R. M. & Messick, D. M. Social dilemmas. International journal of psychology 35(2), 111-116 (2000).
233
Aarts, H. & Dijksterhuis, A. Habits as knowledge structures: automaticity in goal-directed behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology 78(1), 53 (2000).
234
Wood, W., Tam, L. & Witt, M. G. Changing circumstances, disrupting habits. Journal of personality and social psychology 88(6), 918-933 (2005).
235
Staats, H. Pro-environmental attitudes and behavioral change. in Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology (ed. Spielberger, C. D.) 127-135 (Academic Press, 2004).
236
Verplanken, B. & Wood, W. Interventions to break and create consumer habits. Journal of public policy & marketing 25(1), 90-103 (2006).
237
Wood, W., Quinn, J. M. & Kashy, D. A. Habits in everyday life: thought, emotion, and action. Journal of personality and social psychology 83(6), 1281 (2002).
238
Klöckner, C. A. & Verplanken, B. Yesterday’s habits preventing change for tomorrow? About the influence of automaticity on environmental behaviour. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 238-250 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
239
Cornelissen, G., Pandelaere, M., Warlop, L. & Dewitte, S. Positive cueing: Promoting sustainable consumer behavior by cueing common environmental behaviors as environmental. International Journal of Research in Marketing 25(1), 46-55 (2008).
240
Lindenberg, S. How cues in the environment affect normative behaviour. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 144-153 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
241
Steg, L., Bolderdijk, J. W., Keizer, K. & Perlaviciute, G. An integrated framework for encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: The role of values, situational factors and goals. Journal of Environmental psychology 38, 104-115 (2014).
242
Cornelissen, G., Pandelaere, M., Warlop, L. & Dewitte, S. Positive cueing: Promoting sustainable consumer behavior by cueing common environmental behaviors as environmental. International Journal of Research in Marketing 25(1), 46-55 (2008).
243
Kals, E. & Müller, M. M. Emotions and Environment. in The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (ed. Clayton, S. D.) 81-92 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
244
Taufik, D. & Venhoeven, L. Emotions and Pro‐Environmental Behaviour. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 189-197 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
245
Smith, N. & Leiserowitz, A. The role of emotion in global warming policy support and opposition. Risk Analysis 34(5), 937-948 (2014).
246
Pfister, H. R. & Böhm, G. The multiplicity of emotions: A framework of emotional functions in decision making. Judgment and decision making 3(1), 5-17 (2008).
247
Kals, E. & Müller, M. M. Emotions and Environment. in The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (eds. Clayton, S. D.) 81-92 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
248
Carrus, G., Passafaro, P. & Bonnes, M. Emotions, habits and rational choices in ecological behaviours: The case of recycling and use of public transportation. Journal of environmental psychology 28(1), 51-62 (2008).
249
Brosch, T. Affect and emotions as drivers of climate change perception and action: a review. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 42, 15-21 (2021).
250
Smith, N. & Leiserowitz, A. The role of emotion in global warming policy support and opposition. Risk Analysis 34(5), 937-948 (2014).
251
Carrus, G., Passafaro, P. & Bonnes, M. Emotions, habits and rational choices in ecological behaviours: The case of recycling and use of public transportation. Journal of environmental psychology 28(1), 51-62 (2008).
252
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
253
Kals, E. & Müller, M. M. Emotions and Environment. in The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (ed. Clayton, S. D.) 81-92 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
254
Bolderdijk, J. W., Gorsira, M., Keizer, K. & Steg, L. Values determine the (in) effectiveness of informational interventions in promoting pro-environmental behavior. PloS one 8(12), e83911 (2013).
255
Verplanken, B. & Wood, W. Interventions to break and create consumer habits. Journal of public policy & marketing 25(1), 90-103 (2006).
256
Gifford, R., Steg, L. & Reser, J. P. Environmental psychology. in IAAP handbook of applied psychology (eds. Martin, P. R. et al.) 440-470 (Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2011).
257
Staats, H. Pro-environmental attitudes and behavioral change. in Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology (ed. Spielberger, C. D.) 127-135 (Academic Press, 2004).
258
Steg, L. & Vlek, C. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of environmental psychology 29(3), 309-317 (2009).
259
De Groot, J. I. & Steg, L. Mean or green: which values can promote stable pro‐environmental behavior?. Conservation Letters 2(2), 61-66 (2009).
260
Abrahamse, W. & Matthies, E. Informational strategies to promote pro‐environmental behaviour: Changing knowledge, awareness, and attitudes. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 261-272 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
261
Steg, L., Bolderdijk, J. W., Keizer, K. & Perlaviciute, G. An integrated framework for encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: The role of values, situational factors and goals. Journal of Environmental psychology 38, 104-115 (2014).
262
Abrahamse, W. & Matthies, E. Informational strategies to promote pro‐environmental behaviour: Changing knowledge, awareness, and attitudes. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 261-272 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
263
Gifford, R., Steg, L. & Reser, J. P. Environmental psychology. in IAAP handbook of applied psychology (eds. Martin, P. R. et al.) 440-470 (Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2011).
264
Abrahamse, W. & Matthies, E. Informational strategies to promote pro‐environmental behaviour: Changing knowledge, awareness, and attitudes. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 261-272 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
265
Van Valkengoed, A. M., Abrahamse, W. & Steg, L. To select effective interventions for pro-environmental behaviour change, we need to consider determinants of behaviour. Nature human behaviour 6(11), 1482-1492 (2022).
266
Abrahamse, W. & Matthies, E. Informational strategies to promote pro‐environmental behaviour: Changing knowledge, awareness, and attitudes. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 261-272 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
267
Steg, L., Lindenberg, S. & Keizer, K. Intrinsic motivation, norms and environmental behaviour: the dynamics of overarching goals. International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics 9(1-2), 179-207 (2016).
268
Van Valkengoed, A. M., Abrahamse, W. & Steg, L. To select effective interventions for pro-environmental behaviour change, we need to consider determinants of behaviour. Nature human behaviour 6(11), 1482-1492 (2022).
269
Gifford, R., Steg, L. & Reser, J. P. Environmental psychology. in IAAP handbook of applied psychology (eds. Martin, P. R. et al.) 440-470 (Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2011).
270
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
271
Steg, L., Lindenberg, S. & Keizer, K. Intrinsic motivation, norms and environmental behaviour: the dynamics of overarching goals. International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics 9(1-2), 179-207 (2016).
272
Bolderdijk, J. W., Gorsira, M., Keizer, K. & Steg, L. Values determine the (in) effectiveness of informational interventions in promoting pro-environmental behavior. PloS one 8(12), e83911 (2013).
273
Nordlund, A. M. & Garvill, J. Value structures behind proenvironmental behavior. Environment and behavior 34(6), 740-756 (2002).
274
Bolderdijk, J. W., Lehman, P. K. & Geller, E. S. Encouraging pro‐environmental behaviour with rewards and penalties. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 273-282 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
275
Gifford, R., Steg, L. & Reser, J. P. Environmental psychology. in IAAP handbook of applied psychology (eds. Martin, P. R. et al.) 440-470 (Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2011).
276
Bolderdijk, J. W., Lehman, P. K. & Geller, E. S. Encouraging pro‐environmental behaviour with rewards and penalties. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 273-282 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
277
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
278
Steg, L. & Vlek, C. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of environmental psychology 29(3), 309-317 (2009).
279
Bolderdijk, J. W., Lehman, P. K. & Geller, E. S. Encouraging pro‐environmental behaviour with rewards and penalties. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 273-282 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
280
Staats, H. Pro-environmental attitudes and behavioral change. in Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology (ed. Spielberger, C. D.) 127-135 (Academic Press, 2004).
281
Bolderdijk, J. W., Lehman, P. K. & Geller, E. S. Encouraging pro‐environmental behaviour with rewards and penalties. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 273-282 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
282
Gifford, R., Steg, L. & Reser, J. P. Environmental psychology. in IAAP handbook of applied psychology (eds. Martin, P. R. et al.) 440-470 (Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2011).
283
Steg, L. & Vlek, C. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of environmental psychology 29(3), 309-317 (2009).
284
De Groot, J. I. & Schuitema, G. How to make the unpopular popular? Policy characteristics, social norms and the acceptability of environmental policies. Environmental Science & Policy 19, 100-107 (2012).
285
Gifford, R., Steg, L. & Reser, J. P. Environmental psychology. in IAAP handbook of applied psychology (eds. Martin, P. R. et al.) 440-470 (Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2011).
286
Schuitema, G. & Bergstad, C. J. Acceptability of environmental policies. Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 295-306 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
287
Staats, H. Pro-environmental attitudes and behavioral change. in Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology (ed. Spielberger, C. D.) 127-135 (Academic Press, 2004).
288
Steg, L. & Vlek, C. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of environmental psychology 29(3), 309-317 (2009).
289
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
290
Schuitema, G., & Bergstad, C. J. Acceptability of environmental policies. Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 295-306 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
291
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
292
Staats, H. Pro-environmental attitudes and behavioral change. in Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology (ed. Spielberger, C. D.) 127-135 (Academic Press, 2004).
293
Nyborg, K. et al. Social norms as solutions. Science 354(6308), 42-43 (2016).
294
Schuitema, G., & Bergstad, C. J. Acceptability of environmental policies. Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 295-306 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).

1
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
2
Moser, G. & Uzzell, D. Environmental Psychology. in Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology, Volume 5: Personality and Social Psychology (eds. Millon, T. & Lerner, M.J) 419-445 (John Wiley & Sons, 2003).
3
Gifford, R., Steg, L. & Reser, J. P., Environmental psychology. IAAP handbook of applied psychology, 440-470. (Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2011).
4
Stokols, D. Environmental Psychology. Annual Review of Psychology 29. 253-295 (1978).
5
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology and sustainable development: Expansion, maturation, and challenges. Journal of Social Issues 63(1), 199-212 (2007).
6
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
7
Moser, G. & Uzzell, D. Environmental Psychology. in Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology, Volume 5: Personality and Social Psychology (eds. Millon, T. & Lerner, M.J) 419-445 (John Wiley & Sons, 2003).
8
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
9
IPCC: Climate change 2013: The physical science basis. (2013).
10
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
11
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology and sustainable development: Expansion, maturation, and challenges. Journal of Social Issues 63(1), 199-212 (2007).
12
Fleury-Bahi, G., Pol, E. & Navarro, O. Handbook of environmental psychology and quality of life research. in Introduction: Environmental Psychology and Quality of Life (eds. Fleury-Bahi, G., Pol, E. & Navarro, O.) 1-10 (Springer International Publishing 2017).
13
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
14
Stokols, D. Environmental Psychology. Annual Review of Psychology 29, 253-295 (1978).
15
Devlin, A. S. Introduction: Rationale, Chapter Overviews, and Author Biographies. in Environmental Psychology and Human Well-Being (eds. Devlin, A. S.) xv-xxxviii (Academic Press, 2018).
16
Bonnes, M. & Bonaiuto, M. Environmental Psychology: From Spatial-Physical Environment to Sustainable Development. in Handbook of Environmental Psychology (eds. Bechtel, R. & Churchman, A.) 28-54 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002).
17
Pol, E. Blueprints for a history of Environmental Psychology (I): From First Birth to American Transition. (Universitat de Barcelona, 2006).
18
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
19
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
20
Pol, E. Blueprints for a history of Environmental Psychology (II): From architectural psychology to the challenge of sustainability. (Universitat de Barcelona, 2007).
21
Pol, E. Blueprints for a history of Environmental Psychology (II): From architectural psychology to the challenge of sustainability. (Universitat de Barcelona, 2007).
22
Bonnes, M. & Bonaiuto, M. Environmental Psychology: From Spatial-Physical Environment to Sustainable Development. in Handbook of Environmental Psychology (R. Bechtel and A. Churchman) 28-54 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002).
23
Pol, E. Blueprints for a history of Environmental Psychology (I): From First Birth to American Transition. (Universitat de Barcelona, 2006).
24
Pol, E. Blueprints for a history of Environmental Psychology (II): From architectural psychology to the challenge of sustainability. (Universitat de Barcelona, 2007).
25
Pol, E. Blueprints for a history of Environmental Psychology (II): From architectural psychology to the challenge of sustainability. (Universitat de Barcelona, 2007).
26
Pol, E. Blueprints for a history of Environmental Psychology (II): From architectural psychology to the challenge of sustainability. (Universitat de Barcelona, 2007).
27
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
28
Pol, E. Blueprints for a history of Environmental Psychology (II): From architectural psychology to the challenge of sustainability. (Universitat de Barcelona, 2007).
29
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology and sustainable development: Expansion, maturation, and challenges. Journal of Social Issues 63(1), 199-212 (2007).
30
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
31
Bonnes, M. & Bonaiuto, M. Environmental Psychology: From Spatial-Physical Environment to Sustainable Development. in Handbook of Environmental Psychology (R. Bechtel and A. Churchman) 28-54 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002).
32
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
33
Giuliani, M.V. & Scopelliti, M. Empirical research in environmental psychology: past, present, and future. Journal of Environmental Psychology 29(3), 375–386 (2009).
34
Stern, P. C. Psychological dimensions of global environment change. Annual Review of Psychology 43, 269-302 (1992).
35
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
36
Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A. & Zelson, M. Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of environmental psychology 11(3), 201-230 (1991).
37
Kaplan, R. The nature of the view from home: Psychological benefits. Environment and behavior 33(4), 507-542 (2001).
38
Meidenbauer, K. L. et al. The gradual development of the preference for natural environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology 65, 101328 (2019).
39
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
40
Kaplan, R. The nature of the view from home: Psychological benefits. Environment and behavior 33(4), 507-542 (2001).
41
Slack, M. K., & Draugalis Jr, J. R. Establishing the internal and external validity of experi-mental studies. American journal of health-system pharmacy 58(22), 2173-2181 (2001).
42
Steg, L., van den Berg, A. & de Groot, J. Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 2-11 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
43
Bratman, G. N., Hamilton, J. P. & Daily, G. C. The impacts of nature experience on human cognitive function and mental health. Annals of the New York academy of sciences 1249(1), 118-136 (2012).
44
Kaplan, R. The nature of the view from home: Psychological benefits. Environment and behavior 33(4), 507-542 (2001).
45
Mausner, C. A kaleidoscope model: Defining natural environments. Journal of environmental psychology 16(4), 335-348 (1996).
46
Bratman, G. N., Hamilton, J. P. & Daily, G. C. The impacts of nature experience on human cognitive function and mental health. Annals of the New York academy of sciences 1249(1), 118-136 (2012).
47
Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A. & Zelson, M. Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of environmental psychology 11(3), 201-230 (1991).
48
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
49
Davis, J. Psychological benefits of nature experiences: An outline of research and theory. (Nuropa University and School of Lost Borders, 2004).
50
Kaplan, R. & Kaplan, S. The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. (Cambridge University Press, 1989).
51
Kaplan, S. The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of environ-mental psychology 15(3), 169-182 (1995).
52
Felsten, G. Where to take a study break on the college campus: An attention resto-ration theory perspective. Journal of environmental psychology 29(1), 160-167 (2009).
53
Moran, D. Back to nature? Attention restoration theory and the restorative effects of nature contact in prison. Health & Place 57, 35-43 (2019).
54
Kaplan, R. & Kaplan, S. The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. (Cambridge University Press, 1989).
55
Herzog, T. R., Maguire, P. & Nebel, M. B. Assessing the restorative components of environments. Journal of environmental psychology 23(2), 159-170 (2003).
56
Devlin, A. S. Concepts, theories, and research approaches. in Environmental Psychology and Human Well-Being, 1-28 (Academic Press, 2018).
57
Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A. & Zelson, M. Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of environmental psychology 11(3), 201-230 (1991).
58
Hartig, T. et al. Health benefits of nature experience: Psychological, social and cultural processes. in Forests, trees and human health (eds. Nilsson, K. et al.) 127-168 (2011).
59
Jimenez, M. P. et al. Associations between nature exposure and health: a review of the evidence. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18(9), 4790 (2021).
60
Kaplan, S. The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of environmental psychology 15(3), 169-182 (1995).
61
Kaplan, S. The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of environmental psychology 15(3), 169-182 (1995).
62
Sullivan, W. Attention restoration and stress reduction: Two mechanisms underlying the health benefits of exposure to green spaces. ACES (A Community on Ecosystem Services) Conference, Washington, DC. (2014).
63
Huang, S., Qi, J., Li, W., Dong, J. & van den Bosch, C. K. The contribution to stress recovery and attention restoration potential of exposure to urban green spaces in low-density residential areas. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18(16), 8713 (2021).
64
The biophilia hypothesis (Island press, 1993).
65
Chang, C. C. et al. Social media, nature, and life satisfaction: global evidence of the biophilia hypothesis. Scientific Reports 10(1), 4125 (2020).
66
Thake, C. L., Bambling, M., Edirippulige, S. & Marx, E. A psychoevolutionary approach to identifying preferred nature scenes with potential to provide restoration from stress. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal 10(5), 111-124 (2017).
67
Meidenbauer, K. L. et al. The gradual development of the preference for natural environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology 65, 101328 (2019).
68
Gunnarsson, B. & Hedblom, M. Biophilia revisited: nature versus nurture. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 38(9), 792-794 (2023).
69
Gunnarsson, B. & Hedblom, M. Biophilia revisited: nature versus nurture. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 38(9), 792-794 (2023).
70
Kaklauskas, A. & Gudauskas, R. Intelligent decision-support systems and the Internet of Things for the smart built environment. in Start-up creation: The Smart Eco-efficient Built Environment (eds. Pachero-Torgal, F., Rasmussen, E., Granqvist, C., Ivanov, V., Kaklauskas, A. & Makonin, S.) 411-448 (Woodhead Publishing UK and USA, 2016).
71
Roof, K. & Oleru, N. Public health: Seattle and King County’s push for the built environment. Journal of Environmental Health 71(1), 24–27 (2008).
72
Dearry A. Impacts of our built environment on public health. Environmental Health Perspectives 112(11), 600-601 (2004).
73
Roof, K. & Oleru, N. Public health: Seattle and King County’s push for the built environment. Journal of Environmental Health 71(1), 24–27 (2008).
74
Frick, V., Homburg, A., Röderer, K. & Hofmann, M. Psychology of the digital environment: digitalization, environmental protection and environmental design. Umweltpsychologie 25(1), 4-18 (2021).
75
Vuorre, M., Johannes, N., Magnusson, K. & Przybylski, A. K. Time spent playing video games is unlikely to impact well-being. Royal Society Open Science 9(7), 220411 (2022).
76
Moser, G. & Uzzell, D. Environmental Psychology. in Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology, Volume 5: Personality and Social Psychology (eds. Millon, T. & Lerner, M.J) 419-445 (John Wiley & Sons, 2003).
77
Moser, G. & Uzzell, D. Environmental Psychology. in Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology, Volume 5: Personality and Social Psychology (eds. Millon, T. & Lerner, M.J) 419-445 (John Wiley & Sons, 2003).
78
Scannell L. & Gifford R. The psychology of place attachment. In Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice (eds. Gifford R.) 272-300 (Optimal Books, 2014).
79
Vischer, J. The effects of the physical environment on job performance: Towards a theoretical model of workspace stress. Stress and Health 23, 175 – 184 (2007).
80
Kamarulzaman, N., Saleh, A. A., Hashim, S. Z., Hashim, H. & Abdul-Ghani, A. A. An Overview of the Influence of Physical Office Environments towards Employees. Procedia Engineering 20, 262-268 (2011).
81
Creating the productive workplace (E & FN Spon., 2000).
82
Vischer, J. The effects of the physical environment on job performance: Towards a theoretical model of workspace stress. Stress and Health 23, 175 – 184 (2007).
83
Moser, G. & Uzzell, D. Environmental Psychology. in Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology, Volume 5: Personality and Social Psychology (eds. Millon, T. & Lerner, M. J.) 419-445 (John Wiley & Sons, 2003).
84
Torrington J., Barnes S., McKee K., Morgan K. & Tregenza P. The Influence of Building Design on the Quality of Life of Older People. Architectural Science Review 47, 193-197 (2004).
85
Bronzaft, A. L. Noise Pollution: A Hazard to Physical and Mental Well-Being. in Handbook of Environmental Psychology (eds. Bechtel, R. B. & Churchman, A.) 499-510 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002).
86
Bekker, J. S. Outdoor Air Pollution and Psychological Well-Being: A Metanalysis (Brigham Young University, 2022).
87
Vine, I. Crowding and Stress: 1. Review of Variables and Theories, Current Psychological Reviews 1, 305-324 (1981).
88
Chu, A., Thorne, A. & Guite, H. The impact on mental well‐being of the urban and physical environment: an assessment of the evidence, Journal of Public Mental Health 3(2), 17-32 (2004).
89
Galea, S., Ahern, J., Rudenstine, S., Wallace, Z. & Vlahov, D. Urban built environment and depression: a multilevel analysis. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 59(10), 822-827 (2005).
90
Bronzaft, A. L. Noise Pollution: A Hazard to Physical and Mental Well-Being. in Handbook of Environmental Psychology (eds. Bechtel, R. B. & Churchman, A.) 499-510 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002).
91
Bekker, J. S. Outdoor Air Pollution and Psychological Well-Being: A Metanalysis (Brigham Young University, 2022).
92
Reynald, D. M. & Elffers, H. The Future of Newman’s Defensible Space Theory. European Journal of Criminology 6(1), 25-46 (2009).
93
Newman, O. Defensible space: Crime prevention through urban design. (Macmillan, 1972).
94
Newman, O. Defensible space: Crime prevention through urban design. (Macmillan, 1972).
95
Newman, O. Defensible space: Crime prevention through urban design. (Macmillan, 1972).
96
Newman, O. Defensible space: Crime prevention through urban design. (Macmillan, 1972).
97
Reynald, D. M. & Elffers, H. The Future of Newman’s Defensible Space Theory. European Journal of Criminology 6(1), 25-46 (2009).
98
Clarke, R. V. Situational Crime Prevention. Crime and Justice 19, 91–150 (1995).
99
Reynald, D. M. & Elffers, H. The Future of Newman’s Defensible Space Theory. European Journal of Criminology 6(1), 25-46 (2009).
100
Dursun, P. Space Syntax in Architectural Design. Proceedings 6 (2007).
101
Yamu, C., van Nes, A. & Garau, C. Bill Hillier’s Legacy: Space Syntax – A Synopsis of Basic Concepts, Measures, and Empirical Application. Sustainability 13, 3394 (2021).
102
Hillier, B. Space is the machine: A configurational theory of architecture (Space Syntax, 2007).
103
Hillier, B. Space is the machine: A configurational theory of architecture (Space Syntax, 2007).
104
Van Nes, A. & Yamu, C. Space Syntax: A Method to measure Urban Space related to Social, Economic and Cognitive Factors. in The Virtual and the Real in Planning and Urban Design: Perspectives, practices and applications (eds. Yamu, C., Poplin, A., Devisch, O. & de Roo, G.) 136-150 (Routledge, 2018).
105
Space syntax network, software. https://www.spacesyntax.net/software/
106
Hillier, B. Space is the machine: A configurational theory of architecture (Space Syntax, 2007).
107
Van Nes, A. & Yamu, C. Space Syntax: A Method to measure Urban Space related to Social, Economic and Cognitive Factors. in The Virtual and the Real in Planning and Urban Design: Perspectives, practices and applications (eds. Yamu, C., Poplin, A., Devisch, O. & de Roo, G.) 136-150 (Routledge, 2018).
108
Altman, I. The Environmental and Social Behavior. (Brooks/Cole, 1975).
109
Altman, I. & Chemers, M. Culture and environment. (Brooks/Cole, 1980).
110
Margulis, S. T. Conceptions of privacy: current status and next steps. Journal of Social Issues 33(3), 5– 21 (1977).
111
Westin, A. F. Privacy and Freedom. (Athenum, 1967).
112
Moser, G. & Uzzell, D. Environmental Psychology. in Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology, Volume 5: Personality and Social Psychology (eds. Millon, T. & Lerner, M.J) 419-445 (John Wiley & Sons, 2003).
113
Altman, I. Privacy Regulation: Culturally Universal or Culturally Specific?. Journal of Social Issues 33, 66-84 (1977).
114
Kupritz, V. W. Privacy in the Workplace: The Impact of Building Design, Journal of Environmental Psychology 18, 341–356 (1998).
115
Sundstrom, E., Town, J. P., Rice, R. W., Osborn, D. P. & Brill, M. Office Noise, Satisfaction, and Performance, Environment and Behavior 26(2), 195-222 (1994).
116
Westin, A. F. Privacy and Freedom. (Athenum, 1967).
117
Altman, I. The Environmental and Social Behavior. (Brooks/Cole, 1975).
118
Altman, I. Privacy Regulation: Culturally Universal or Culturally Specific?. Journal of Social Issues 33, 66-84 (1977).
119
Newell, P. B. A system model of privacy. Journal of Environmental Psychology 14, 65-78 (1994).
120
Pedersen, D. M. Dimensions of privacy. Perceptual and Motor Skills 48(3), 1291-1297 (1979).
121
Demibras, O. O. & Demirkan, H. Privacy Dimensions: A Case Study in the Interior Architecture Design Studio, Journal of Environmental Psychology 20, 53-64 (2000).
122
Altman, I. The Environmental and Social Behavior. (Brooks/Cole, 1975).
123
Demibras, O. O. & Demirkan, H. Privacy Dimensions: A Case Study in the Interior Architecture Design Studio, Journal of Environmental Psychology 20, 53-64 (2000).
124
Demibras, O. O. & Demirkan, H. Privacy Dimensions: A Case Study in the Interior Architecture Design Studio, Journal of Environmental Psychology 20, 53-64 (2000).
125
Omernick, E. & Sood, S. O. The Impact of Anonymity in Online Communities. Proceedings 526-535 (2013).
126
Demibras, O. O. & Demirkan, H. Privacy Dimensions: A Case Study in the Interior Architecture Design Studio, Journal of Environmental Psychology 20, 53-64 (2000).
127
Kupritz, V. W. Privacy in the Workplace: The Impact of Building Design, Journal of Environmental Psychology 18, 341–356 (1998).
128
Kamarulzaman, N., Saleh, A. A., Hashim, S. Z., Hashim, H. & Abdul-Ghani, A. A. An Overview of the Influence of Physical Office Environments towards Employees, Procedia Engineering 20(3/4), 262-268 (2011).
129
Demibras, O. O. & Demirkan, H. Privacy Dimensions: A Case Study in the Interior Architecture Design Studio, Journal of Environmental Psychology 20, 53-64 (2000).
130
Kupritz, V. W. Privacy in the Workplace: The Impact of Building Design, Journal of Environmental Psychology 18, 341–356 (1998).
131
Kim, J. & de Dear, R. Workspace satisfaction: The privacy-communication trade-off in open-plan offices. Journal of Environmental Psychology 36, 18-26 (2013).
132
O’Neill, M. J. Work Space Adjustability, Storage, And Enclosure As Predictors Of Employee Reactions And Performance. Environment and Behavior 26(4), 504-526 (1994).
133
Altman, I. The Environmental and Social Behavior. (Brooks/Cole, 1975).
134
Sommer, R. Studies in personal space. Sociometry 22, 247–260 (1959).
135
Hall, E. T. The hidden dimension. (Doubleday, 1966).
136
Namazian, A. & Mehdipour, A. Psychological Demands of the Built Environment, Privacy, Personal Space and Territory in Architecture. International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences 3(4), 109-113 (2013).
137
Vine, I. Crowding and Stress: 2. A Personal Space Approach. Current Psychological Reviews 2, 1-18 (1982).
138
Vine I. Crowding and Stress: 2. A Personal Space Approach. Current Psychological Reviews 2, 1-18 (1982).
139
Vine I. Crowding and Stress: 2. A Personal Space Approach. Current Psychological Reviews 2, 1-18 (1982).
140
Lewis, J .E. Sociocultural and Individual Differences. Comprehensive Clinical Psychology 10, 93-125 (1998).
141
Haddad, A., Doherty, R. & Purtilo, R. Respectful Communication in an Information Age. Health Professional and Patient Interaction 9, 141-165 (2019).
142
Namazian, A. & Mehdipour, A. Psychological Demands of the Built Environment, Privacy, Personal Space and Territory in Architecture. International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences 3(4), 109-113 (2013).
143
Altman, I. The Environmental and Social Behavior. (Brooks/Cole, 1975).
144
Altman, I. The Environmental and Social Behavior. (Brooks/Cole, 1975).
145
Abdullah, A., Marzbali, M. H., Bahauddin, A. & Maghsoodi, M. J. The Relationship between Territorial Functioning and Victimisation: A Comparative Study of High and Low Crime Rate Estates. Social and Behavioral Sciences 50, 899 – 908 (2012).
146
Bechtel, R. B. & Churchman, A. Handbook of Environmental Psychology (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002).
147
Altman, I. The Environmental and Social Behavior. (Brooks/Cole, 1975).
148
Namazian, A. & Mehdipour, A. Psychological Demands of the Built Environment, Privacy, Personal Space and Territory in Architecture. International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences 3(4), 109-113 (2013).
149
Newman, O. Defensible space: Crime prevention through urban design. (Macmillan, 1972).
150
Ley, D., & Cybriwsky, R. Urban Graffiti as Territorial Markers. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 64(4), 491–505 (1974).
151
Scannell L. & Gifford R. The psychology of place attachment. in Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice (eds. Gifford R.) 272-300 (Optimal Books, 2014).
152
Scannell L. & Gifford R. The psychology of place attachment. in Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice (eds. Gifford R.) 272-300 (Optimal Books, 2014).
153
Scannell L. & Gifford R. The psychology of place attachment. in Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice (eds. Gifford R.) 272-300 (Optimal Books, 2014).
154
Scannell L. & Gifford R. The psychology of place attachment. in Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice (eds. Gifford R.) 272-300 (Optimal Books, 2014).
155
Manzo, L. C. & Perkins, D. D. Finding Common Ground: The Importance of Place Attachment to Community Participation and Planning. Journal of Planning Literature 20(4), 335-463 (2006).
156
Devlin, A.S. Environmental Psychology and Human Well-Being: Effects of Built and Natural Settings. (Academic Press, 2018).
157
Alrobaee, T. R. & Al-Kinani, A. S. Place dependence as the physical environment role function in the place attachment. IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 698, 033014 (2019).
158
Altman, I. Privacy Regulation: Culturally Universal or Culturally Specific?. Journal of Social Issues 33, 66-84 (1977).
159
Vine, I. Crowding and Stress: 1. Review of Variables and Theories, Current Psychological Reviews 1, 305-324 (1981).
160
Lan, F., Pan, J., Zhou, Y. & Huang, X. Impact of the Built Environment on Residents’ Health: Evidence from the China Labor Dynamics Survey in 2016, Journal of Environmental and Public Health, 3414849 (2023).
161
Devlin, A. S. Environmental Psychology and Human Well-Being: Effects of Built and Natural Settings. (Academic Press, 2018).
162
Mouratidis, K. Urban planning and quality of life: A review of pathways linking the built environment to subjective well-being. Cities 115, 103229 (2021).
163
Changjuan, Z. & Guangjun, J. What urban design can do based on compact city concept. Urban Planning International 24(6), 108–117 (2009).
164
Steg, L., Bolderdijk, J. W., Keizer, K. & Perlaviciute, G. An integrated framework for encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: The role of values, situational factors and goals. Journal of Environmental Psychology 38, 104-115 (2014).
165
Gatersleben, B. (2018). Measuring environmental behaviour. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 155-166 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
166
Kan, M. P. H. & Fabrigar, L. R. (2020). Theory of Planned Behavior. in Encyclopedia of personality and individual differences (eds. Zeigler-Hill, V. & Shackelford, T. K.) 5476-5482 (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020).
167
Oreg, S. & Katz-Gerro, T. Predicting proenvironmental behavior cross-nationally: Values, the theory of planned behavior, and value-belief-norm theory. Environment and behavior 38(4), 462-483 (2006).
168
Devlin, A. S. Concepts, theories, and research approaches. in Environmental Psychology and Human Well-Being, 1-28 (Academic Press, 2018).
169
Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. (Prentice Hall, 1980).
170
Oreg, S. & Katz-Gerro, T. Predicting proenvironmental behavior cross-nationally: Values, the theory of planned behavior, and value-belief-norm theory. Environment and behavior 38(4), 462-483 (2006).
171
Barber, J. S. The Theory of Planned Behaviour: considering drives, proximity and dynamics. Vienna yearbook of population research/Vienna Institute of Demography, Austrian Academy of Sciences 9, 31-35 (2011).
172
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
173
White, K. M., Smith, J. R., Terry, D. J., Greenslade, J. H. & McKimmie, B. M. Social influence in the theory of planned behaviour: The role of descriptive, injunctive, and in‐group norms. British journal of social psychology 48(1), 135-158 (2009).
174
Rogers, R. W. A Protection Motivation Theory of Fear Appeals and Attitude Change. Journal of Psychology 91, 93-114 (1975).
175
Lazarus, R. S. Emotions and Adaptation: Conceptual and Empirical Relations. in Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (ed. Arnold, W. J.) 175-266 (University of Nebraska Press, 1968).
176
Tanner Jr, J. F., Hunt, J. B. & Eppright, D. R. The protection motivation model: A normative model of fear appeals. Journal of marketing 55(3), 36-45 (1991).
177
Encyclopedia of Public Health: Volume 1: A-H Volume 2: I-Z (ed. Kirch, W.) (Springer Science & Business Median, 2008).
178
Pechmann, C., Zhao, G., Goldberg, M. E. & Reibling, E. T. What to convey in antismoking advertisements for adolescents: The use of protection motivation theory to identify effective message themes. Journal of marketing 67(2), 1-18 (2003).
179
Steg, L. & Nordlund, A. Theories to explain environmental behaviour. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 217-227 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
180
Schwartz, S. H. Normative explanations of helping behavior: A critique, proposal, and empirical test. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 9, 349-364 (1973).
181
Schwartz, S. H. Normative Influences on Altruism. in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 10 (ed. Berkowitz, L.) 221-279 (New York: Academic Press, 1977).
182
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A. & Kalof, L. A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Human ecology review, 81-97 (1999).
183
De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L. Morality and prosocial behavior: The role of awareness, responsibility, and norms in the norm activation model. The Journal of social psychology 149(4), 425-449 (2009).
184
Udo, G., Bagchi, K. & Maity, M. Exploring factors affecting digital piracy using the norm activation and UTAUT models: the role of national culture. Journal of Business Ethics 135, 517-541 (2016).
185
Onwezen, M. C., Antonides, G. & Bartels, J. The Norm Activation Model: An exploration of the functions of anticipated pride and guilt in pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of economic psychology 39, 141-153 (2013).
186
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A. & Kalof, L. A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Human Ecology Review 6(2), 81-97 (1999).
187
Yeboah, F. K. & Kaplowitz, M. D. Explaining energy conservation and environmental citizenship behaviors using the value-belief-norm framework. Human Ecology Review 22(2) 137-159 (2016).
188
Andersson, L., Shivarajan, S. & Blau, G. Enacting ecological sustainability in the MNC: A test of an adapted value-belief-norm framework. Journal of business ethics 59, 295-305 (2005).
189
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
190
Steg, L. & Nordlund, A. Theories to explain environmental behaviour. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 217-227 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
191
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A. & Kalof, L. A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Human ecology review, 81-97 (1999).
192
Lindenberg, S. & Steg, L. Normative, gain and hedonic goal frames guiding environmental behavior. Journal of Social issues 63(1), 117-137 (2007).
193
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
194
Steg, L., Bolderdijk, J. W., Keizer, K. & Perlaviciute, G. An integrated framework for encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: The role of values, situational factors and goals. Journal of Environmental psychology 38, 104-115 (2014).
195
Steg, L. & Nordlund, A. Theories to explain environmental behaviour. in Environmental Psychology: an introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 217-227 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
196
Lindenberg, S. & Steg, L. Goal-framing theory and norm-guided environmental behavior. in Encouraging sustainable behavior (ed. van Trijp, H. C. M.) 37-54 (Psychology Press, 2013).
197
Schwartz, S. H. Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values?. Journal of social issues 50(4), 19-45 (1994).
198
Oreg, S. & Katz-Gerro, T. Predicting proenvironmental behavior cross-nationally: Values, the theory of planned behavior, and value-belief-norm theory. Environment and behavior 38(4), 462-483 (2006).
199
De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L. Environmental Values. in The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (ed. Clayton, S. D.) 81-92 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
200
Steg, L., Perlaviciute, G., Van der Werff, E. & Lurvink, J. The significance of hedonic values for environmentally relevant attitudes, preferences, and actions. Environment and behavior 46(2), 163-192 (2014).
201
De Groot, J. I. & Thøgersen, J. Values and pro‐environmental behaviour. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 167-178 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
202
De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L. Environmental Values. in The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (ed. Clayton, S. D.) 81-92 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
203
Van der Werff, E., Steg, L. & Keizer, K. 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 (2013).
204
Lindenberg, S. & Steg, L. Goal-framing theory and norm-guided environmental behavior. in Encouraging sustainable behavior (ed. van Trijp, H. C. M.) 37-54 (Psychology Press, 2013).
205
De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L. Environmental Values. in The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (ed. Clayton, S. D.) 81-92 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
206
De Groot, J. I., & Steg, L. Mean or green: which values can promote stable pro‐environmental behavior?. Conservation Letters 2(2), 61-66 (2009).
207
Van der Werff, E., Steg, L. & Keizer, K. 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 (2013).
208
De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L. Environmental Values. in The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (ed. Clayton, S. D.) 81-92 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
209
Gatersleben, B., Murtagh, N. & Abrahamse, W. Values, identity and pro-environmental behaviour. Contemporary Social Science 9(4), 374-392 (2014).
210
De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L. Environmental Values. in The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (ed. Clayton, S. D.) 81-92 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
211
De Groot, J. I. & Thøgersen, J. Values and pro‐environmental behaviour. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 167-178 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
212
Gatersleben, B. Affective and symbolic aspects of car use. in Threats from car traffic to the quality of urban life: Problems, Causes and Solutions. 219-233 (Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2007).
213
Gatersleben, B. & van der Werff, E. Symbolic aspects of environmental behaviour. in Environmental Psychology: An Introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 198-206 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
214
Leary, M. R., Impression Management. in International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, (eds. Neil J. Smelser, N. J. & Baltes P. B.) 7245-7248 (Pergamon, 2001).
215
Ziegler, M. & Hess, U. Impression Management. in Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences (eds. Zeigler-Hill, V. & Shackelford, T.K.) 2204–2207 (Springer Cham, 2020).
216
Gatersleben, B. Affective and symbolic aspects of car use. in Threats from car traffic to the quality of urban life: Problems, Causes and Solutions. 219-233 (Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2007).
217
Gatersleben, B. & van der Werff, E. Symbolic aspects of environmental behaviour. in Environmental Psychology: An Introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 198-206 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
218
Thøgersen, J. Norms for environmentally responsible behaviour: An extended taxonomy. Journal of environmental Psychology 26(4), 247-261 (2006).
219
De Groot, J. I. & Schuitema, G. How to make the unpopular popular? Policy characteristics, social norms and the acceptability of environmental policies. Environmental Science & Policy 19, 100-107 (2012).
220
Jones, F. Prompting Engagement in Pro-Environmental Behavior Through the Presentation of Social Norms (Doctoral dissertation, Muhlenberg College, 2021).
221
Nyborg, K. et al. Social norms as solutions. Science 354(6308), 42-43 (2016).
222
Smith, J. R. et al. Congruent or conflicted? The impact of injunctive and descriptive norms on environmental intentions. Journal of environmental psychology 32(4), 353-361 (2012).
223
Reno, R. R., Cialdini, R. B. & Kallgren, C. A. The transsituational influence of social norms. Journal of personality and social psychology 64(1), 104 (1993).
224
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
225
Joireman, J. A., Lasane, T. P., Bennett, J., Richards, D. & Solaimani, S. Integrating social value orientation and the consideration of future consequences within the extended norm activation model of proenvironmental behaviour. British journal of social psychology 40(1), 133-155 (2001).
226
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
227
Staats, H. J., Wit, A. P. & Midden, C. J. H. Communicating the greenhouse effect to the public: Evaluation of a mass media campaign from a social dilemma perspective. Journal of environmental management 46(2), 189-203 (1996).
228
Von Borgstede, C., Johansson, L. O. & Nilsson, A. Social dilemmas: Motivational, individual, and structural aspects influencing cooperation. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 207-216 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
229
Hardin, G. The Tragedy of the Commons. Science 162(3859), 1243–1248 (1968).
230
Staats, H. Pro-environmental attitudes and behavioral change. in Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology (ed. Spielberger, C. D.) 127-135 (Academic Press, 2004).
231
Brewer, M. B. & Kramer, R. M. Choice behavior in social dilemmas: Effects of social identity, group size, and decision framing. Journal of personality and social psychology 50(3), 543 (1986).
232
Dawes, R. M. & Messick, D. M. Social dilemmas. International journal of psychology 35(2), 111-116 (2000).
233
Aarts, H. & Dijksterhuis, A. Habits as knowledge structures: automaticity in goal-directed behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology 78(1), 53 (2000).
234
Wood, W., Tam, L. & Witt, M. G. Changing circumstances, disrupting habits. Journal of personality and social psychology 88(6), 918-933 (2005).
235
Staats, H. Pro-environmental attitudes and behavioral change. in Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology (ed. Spielberger, C. D.) 127-135 (Academic Press, 2004).
236
Verplanken, B. & Wood, W. Interventions to break and create consumer habits. Journal of public policy & marketing 25(1), 90-103 (2006).
237
Wood, W., Quinn, J. M. & Kashy, D. A. Habits in everyday life: thought, emotion, and action. Journal of personality and social psychology 83(6), 1281 (2002).
238
Klöckner, C. A. & Verplanken, B. Yesterday’s habits preventing change for tomorrow? About the influence of automaticity on environmental behaviour. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 238-250 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
239
Cornelissen, G., Pandelaere, M., Warlop, L. & Dewitte, S. Positive cueing: Promoting sustainable consumer behavior by cueing common environmental behaviors as environmental. International Journal of Research in Marketing 25(1), 46-55 (2008).
240
Lindenberg, S. How cues in the environment affect normative behaviour. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 144-153 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
241
Steg, L., Bolderdijk, J. W., Keizer, K. & Perlaviciute, G. An integrated framework for encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: The role of values, situational factors and goals. Journal of Environmental psychology 38, 104-115 (2014).
242
Cornelissen, G., Pandelaere, M., Warlop, L. & Dewitte, S. Positive cueing: Promoting sustainable consumer behavior by cueing common environmental behaviors as environmental. International Journal of Research in Marketing 25(1), 46-55 (2008).
243
Kals, E. & Müller, M. M. Emotions and Environment. in The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (ed. Clayton, S. D.) 81-92 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
244
Taufik, D. & Venhoeven, L. Emotions and Pro‐Environmental Behaviour. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 189-197 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
245
Smith, N. & Leiserowitz, A. The role of emotion in global warming policy support and opposition. Risk Analysis 34(5), 937-948 (2014).
246
Pfister, H. R. & Böhm, G. The multiplicity of emotions: A framework of emotional functions in decision making. Judgment and decision making 3(1), 5-17 (2008).
247
Kals, E. & Müller, M. M. Emotions and Environment. in The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (eds. Clayton, S. D.) 81-92 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
248
Carrus, G., Passafaro, P. & Bonnes, M. Emotions, habits and rational choices in ecological behaviours: The case of recycling and use of public transportation. Journal of environmental psychology 28(1), 51-62 (2008).
249
Brosch, T. Affect and emotions as drivers of climate change perception and action: a review. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 42, 15-21 (2021).
250
Smith, N. & Leiserowitz, A. The role of emotion in global warming policy support and opposition. Risk Analysis 34(5), 937-948 (2014).
251
Carrus, G., Passafaro, P. & Bonnes, M. Emotions, habits and rational choices in ecological behaviours: The case of recycling and use of public transportation. Journal of environmental psychology 28(1), 51-62 (2008).
252
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
253
Kals, E. & Müller, M. M. Emotions and Environment. in The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (ed. Clayton, S. D.) 81-92 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
254
Bolderdijk, J. W., Gorsira, M., Keizer, K. & Steg, L. Values determine the (in) effectiveness of informational interventions in promoting pro-environmental behavior. PloS one 8(12), e83911 (2013).
255
Verplanken, B. & Wood, W. Interventions to break and create consumer habits. Journal of public policy & marketing 25(1), 90-103 (2006).
256
Gifford, R., Steg, L. & Reser, J. P. Environmental psychology. in IAAP handbook of applied psychology (eds. Martin, P. R. et al.) 440-470 (Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2011).
257
Staats, H. Pro-environmental attitudes and behavioral change. in Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology (ed. Spielberger, C. D.) 127-135 (Academic Press, 2004).
258
Steg, L. & Vlek, C. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of environmental psychology 29(3), 309-317 (2009).
259
De Groot, J. I. & Steg, L. Mean or green: which values can promote stable pro‐environmental behavior?. Conservation Letters 2(2), 61-66 (2009).
260
Abrahamse, W. & Matthies, E. Informational strategies to promote pro‐environmental behaviour: Changing knowledge, awareness, and attitudes. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 261-272 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
261
Steg, L., Bolderdijk, J. W., Keizer, K. & Perlaviciute, G. An integrated framework for encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: The role of values, situational factors and goals. Journal of Environmental psychology 38, 104-115 (2014).
262
Abrahamse, W. & Matthies, E. Informational strategies to promote pro‐environmental behaviour: Changing knowledge, awareness, and attitudes. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 261-272 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
263
Gifford, R., Steg, L. & Reser, J. P. Environmental psychology. in IAAP handbook of applied psychology (eds. Martin, P. R. et al.) 440-470 (Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2011).
264
Abrahamse, W. & Matthies, E. Informational strategies to promote pro‐environmental behaviour: Changing knowledge, awareness, and attitudes. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 261-272 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
265
Van Valkengoed, A. M., Abrahamse, W. & Steg, L. To select effective interventions for pro-environmental behaviour change, we need to consider determinants of behaviour. Nature human behaviour 6(11), 1482-1492 (2022).
266
Abrahamse, W. & Matthies, E. Informational strategies to promote pro‐environmental behaviour: Changing knowledge, awareness, and attitudes. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 261-272 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
267
Steg, L., Lindenberg, S. & Keizer, K. Intrinsic motivation, norms and environmental behaviour: the dynamics of overarching goals. International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics 9(1-2), 179-207 (2016).
268
Van Valkengoed, A. M., Abrahamse, W. & Steg, L. To select effective interventions for pro-environmental behaviour change, we need to consider determinants of behaviour. Nature human behaviour 6(11), 1482-1492 (2022).
269
Gifford, R., Steg, L. & Reser, J. P. Environmental psychology. in IAAP handbook of applied psychology (eds. Martin, P. R. et al.) 440-470 (Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2011).
270
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
271
Steg, L., Lindenberg, S. & Keizer, K. Intrinsic motivation, norms and environmental behaviour: the dynamics of overarching goals. International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics 9(1-2), 179-207 (2016).
272
Bolderdijk, J. W., Gorsira, M., Keizer, K. & Steg, L. Values determine the (in) effectiveness of informational interventions in promoting pro-environmental behavior. PloS one 8(12), e83911 (2013).
273
Nordlund, A. M. & Garvill, J. Value structures behind proenvironmental behavior. Environment and behavior 34(6), 740-756 (2002).
274
Bolderdijk, J. W., Lehman, P. K. & Geller, E. S. Encouraging pro‐environmental behaviour with rewards and penalties. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 273-282 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
275
Gifford, R., Steg, L. & Reser, J. P. Environmental psychology. in IAAP handbook of applied psychology (eds. Martin, P. R. et al.) 440-470 (Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2011).
276
Bolderdijk, J. W., Lehman, P. K. & Geller, E. S. Encouraging pro‐environmental behaviour with rewards and penalties. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 273-282 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
277
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
278
Steg, L. & Vlek, C. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of environmental psychology 29(3), 309-317 (2009).
279
Bolderdijk, J. W., Lehman, P. K. & Geller, E. S. Encouraging pro‐environmental behaviour with rewards and penalties. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 273-282 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
280
Staats, H. Pro-environmental attitudes and behavioral change. in Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology (ed. Spielberger, C. D.) 127-135 (Academic Press, 2004).
281
Bolderdijk, J. W., Lehman, P. K. & Geller, E. S. Encouraging pro‐environmental behaviour with rewards and penalties. in Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 273-282 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
282
Gifford, R., Steg, L. & Reser, J. P. Environmental psychology. in IAAP handbook of applied psychology (eds. Martin, P. R. et al.) 440-470 (Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2011).
283
Steg, L. & Vlek, C. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of environmental psychology 29(3), 309-317 (2009).
284
De Groot, J. I. & Schuitema, G. How to make the unpopular popular? Policy characteristics, social norms and the acceptability of environmental policies. Environmental Science & Policy 19, 100-107 (2012).
285
Gifford, R., Steg, L. & Reser, J. P. Environmental psychology. in IAAP handbook of applied psychology (eds. Martin, P. R. et al.) 440-470 (Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2011).
286
Schuitema, G. & Bergstad, C. J. Acceptability of environmental policies. Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 295-306 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
287
Staats, H. Pro-environmental attitudes and behavioral change. in Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology (ed. Spielberger, C. D.) 127-135 (Academic Press, 2004).
288
Steg, L. & Vlek, C. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of environmental psychology 29(3), 309-317 (2009).
289
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
290
Schuitema, G., & Bergstad, C. J. Acceptability of environmental policies. Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 295-306 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).
291
Gifford, R. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology 65, 541-579 (2014).
292
Staats, H. Pro-environmental attitudes and behavioral change. in Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology (ed. Spielberger, C. D.) 127-135 (Academic Press, 2004).
293
Nyborg, K. et al. Social norms as solutions. Science 354(6308), 42-43 (2016).
294
Schuitema, G., & Bergstad, C. J. Acceptability of environmental policies. Environmental psychology: An introduction (eds. De Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L.) 295-306 (John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2018).