Abstract
The New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) scale is the most widely used instrument to assess environmental attitudes (EA). However, the validity of its use in developing countries has been overlooked. Considering the importance of Brazil for the future of the environment, we present two complementary studies to examine how the NEP scale has been used in Brazil, its validity to evaluate Brazilians’ EA, and possible ways to improve this instrument. In the first study, we present a systematic review of studies that used the NEP scale (original and revised versions) with Brazilians. In the second study, we conduct an empirical analysis using the revised NEP scale. Results from both studies show that the NEP scale’s factorial structure can be influenced by the items’ positive and negative wording, Brazilians hold medium-high pro-EA, and that the scale presents low internal consistency. Study 1 showed that the scale’s convergent, predictive, and known-group validity differs across studies. In Study 2, the revised NEP scale was significantly associated with connectedness to nature, pro-environmental behavior, gender, and political ideology. These results support its convergent, predictive, and known-group validity. We conclude that the validity of using the NEP scale with Brazilians is questionable and discuss ways of improving this instrument.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
*Studies included in the systematic review
Albrecht, D., Bultena, G., Hoiberg, E., & Nowak, P. (1982). Measuring environmental concern: The new environmental paradigm scale. The Journal of Environmental Education, 13(3), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.1982.9942647.
Amburgey, J. W., & Thoman, D. B. (2012). Dimensionality of the new ecological paradigm. Environment and Behavior, 44(2), 235–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916511402064.
Atav, E., Altunoğlu, B. D., & Sönmez, S. (2015). The determination of the environmental attitudes of secondary education students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 1391–1396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.765.
Bamberg, S., & Möser, G. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(1), 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.12.002.
*Battistella, L. F. (2012). Um Estudo sobre as Crenças, Comportamento e Consumo Ecológico em Mulheres de Diferentes Gerações no Sul do Brasil [a study on the beliefs, behavior and consumer in green women of different generations in south of Brazil]. Panorama Socioeconomico, 30(45), 94–110.
*Battistella, L. F., Velter, A. N., Grohmann, M. Z., & Casasola, F. P. (2012). Aplicação da Escala-NEP para a Mensuração da Consciência Ecológica de Professores Universitários: Perfil e Implicações para Estudos Futuros [Application of the NEP scale for the measurement of Ecological Consciousness of university professors: Profile and implications for future studies]. Desenvolvimento Em Questão, 10(19), 207–238. https://doi.org/10.21527/2237-6453.2012.19.207-238
Beavers, A. S., Lounsbury, J. W., Richards, J. K., Huck, S. W., Skolits, G. J., & Esquivel, S. L. (2013). Practical considerations for using exploratory factor analysis in educational research. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 18(6), 1–13.
*Bechtel, R. B., Corral-Verdugo, V., & Pinheiro, J. Q. (1999). Environmental belief systems: United States, Brazil, and Mexico. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30(1), 122–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022199030001008.
Broomell, S. B., Budescu, D. V., & Por, H.-H. (2015). Personal experience with climate change predicts intentions to act. Global Environmental Change, 32, 67–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.03.001.
Clayton, S., Devine-Wright, P., Swim, J., Bonnes, M., Steg, L., Whitmarsh, L., & Carrico, A. (2016). Expanding the role for psychology in addressing environmental challenges. American Psychologist, 71(3), 199–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039482.
Corraliza, J. A., Collado, S., & Bethelmy, L. (2013). Spanish version of the new ecological paradigm scale for children. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 16, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2013.46.
Damásio, B. F. (2012). Uso da análise fatorial exploratória em psicologia [uses of exploratory factorial analysis in psychology]. Avaliação psicológica, 11(2), 213–228.
Duerden, M. D., & Witt, P. A. (2010). The impact of direct and indirect experiences on the development of environmental knowledge, attitudes, and behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(4), 379–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.03.007.
Dunlap, R. E. (2008). The new environmental paradigm scale: From marginality to worldwide use. The Journal of Environmental Education, 40(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEE.40.1.3-18.
Dunlap, R. E., & Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The “new environmental paradigm”. Journal of Environmental Education, 9, 10–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.1978.10801875.
Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. (2000). New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 425–442. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00176.
Evans, G. W. (2019). Projected behavioral impacts of global climate change. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 4. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-103023.
Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272.
*Freire, O., Quevedo-Silva, F., & Frederico, E. (2013). Mensurando a consciência ambiental do consumidor: Um estudo comparativo entre as escalas NEP e ECCB [measuring the consumer environmental concern: A comparative study between the NEP and ECCB scales]. Organicom, 10(18), 244–263. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2238-2593.organicom.2013.139182
Gifford, R. (2011). The dragons of inaction: Psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. American Psychologist, 66(4), 290–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023566.
Gifford, R., & Nilsson, A. (2014). Personal and social factors that influence pro-environmental concern and behaviour: A review. International Journal of Psychology, 49(3), 141–147. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12034.
Gifford, R., & Sussman, R. (2012). Environmental attitudes. In S. D. Clayton (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (pp. 65–80). New York: Oxford University Press.
Gkargkavouzi, A., Paraskevopoulos, S., & Matsiori, S. (2018). Assessing the structure and correlations of connectedness to nature, environmental concerns and environmental behavior in a Greek context. Current Psychology, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-9912-9.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate Data Analysis (7th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Harrington, D. (2009). Confirmatory factor analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hawcroft, L. J., & Milfont, T. L. (2010). The use (and abuse) of the new environmental paradigm scale over the last 30 years: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(2), 143–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.10.003.
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X.
Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R., & Tomera, A. N. (1987). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.1987.9943482.
Hornsey, M. J., Harris, E. A., Bain, P. G., & Fielding, K. S. (2016). Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change. Nature Climate Change, 6(6), 622–626. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2943.
*Iglesias, F., Caldas, L. S., & Rabelo, L. A. T. (2014). Negando ou Subestimando Problemas Ambientais: Barreiras Psicológicas ao Consumo Responsável [denying or underestimating environmental problems: Psychological barriers to responsible consumption]. Psico, 45(3), 377–386. https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-8623.2014.3.17316
*Kim, H., Borges, M. C., & Chon, J. (2006). Impacts of environmental values on tourism motivation: The case of FICA, Brazil. Tourism Management, 27(5), 957–967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2005.09.007.
*Kruter, G. E., Barcellos, M. D. de, & Silva, V. S. da. (2012). As atitudes dos consumidores em relação ao plástico verde [attitudes of consumers towards the green plastic]. Revista de Gestão Ambiental e Sustentabilidade, 1(1), 19–46. https://doi.org/10.5585/geas.v1i1.8.
Larson, L. R., Stedman, R. C., Cooper, C., & Decker, D. J. (2015). Understanding the multi-dimensional structure of pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 43, 112–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.06.004.
Manoli, C. C., Johnson, B., & Dunlap, R. E. (2007). Assessing children’s environmental worldviews: Modifying and validating the new ecological paradigm scale for use with children. Journal of Environmental Education, 38, 3–13. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEE.38.4.3-13.
Mayer, F. S., & Frantz, C. M. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 503–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.10.001.
Milfont, T. L., & Schultz, P. W. (2016). Culture and the natural environment. Current Opinion in Psychology, 8, 194–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.09.009.
Moyano-Diaz, E., & Palomo-Vélez, G. (2014). Propriedades Psicométricas da Escala novo Paradigma Ecológico (NEP-R) em População Chilena [psychometric properties of the new ecological paradigm scale (NEP-R) in Chilean population]. Psico, 45(3), 415–423. https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-8623.2014.3.17276.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New Work: McGraw-Hill.
Ogunbode, C. A. (2013). The NEP scale: Measuring ecological attitudes/worldviews in an African context. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 15(6), 1477–1494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-013-9446-0.
Osborne, J. W. (2015). What is rotating in exploratory factor analysis? Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 20(2), 1–7.
Otto, S., Kröhne, U., & Richter, D. (2018). The dominance of introspective measures and what this implies: The example of environmental attitude. PLoS One, 13(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192907.
Overbeck, G. E., Bergallo, H. G., Grelle, C. E. V., Akama, A., Bravo, F., Colli, G. R., Magnusson, W. E., Tomas, W. M., & Fernandes, G. W. (2018). Global biodiversity threatened by science budget cuts in Brazil. BioScience, 68(1), 11–12. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/bix130.
Pasquali, L. (2007). Validade dos testes psicológicos: Será possível reencontrar o caminho? [the validity of the psychological tests: Is it possible to find the way again?]. Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa, 23(spe), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-37722007000500019.
Pessoa, V. S., Gouveia, V. V., Soares, A. K. S., Vilar, R., & Freires, L. A. (2016). Escala de conexão com a natureza: Evidências psicométricas no contexto brasileiro [Connectedness to nature scale: Psychometric evidence in Brazil]. Estudos de Psicologia (Campinas), 33, 271–282. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-02752016000200009.
*Pires, P., Ribas Junior, R. C., Hora, G., Filgueiras, A., & Lopes, D. (2016). Psychometric properties for the Brazilian version of the new ecological paradigm: Revised. Temas em Psicologia, 24(4),1407–1419. https://doi.org/10.9788/TP2016.4-12.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.
*Polli, G. M., & Camargo, B. V. (2016). Representações sociais do meio ambiente Para pessoas de diferentes faixas etárias [social representations of the environment for people of different ages]. Psicologia Em Revista, 22(2), 392–406. https://doi.org/10.5752/P.1678-9523.2016V22N2P392.
Poškus, M. S. (2018). Investigating pro-environmental behaviors of Lithuanian university students. Current Psychology, 37(1), 225–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-016-9506-3.
Reyna, C., Bressán, E., Mola, D., Belaus, A., & Ortiz, M. V. (2018). Validating the structure of the new ecological paradigm scale among argentine citizens through different approaches. Pensamiento Psicológico, 16(1), 107–118. https://doi.org/10.11144/Javerianacali.PPSI16-1.vsne.
Sakaluk, J. K., & Short, S. D. (2017). A methodological review of exploratory factor analysis in sexuality research: Used practices, best practices, and data analysis resources. The Journal of Sex Research, 54(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2015.1137538.
Schmitt, N. (1996). Uses and abuses of coefficient alpha. Psychological Assessment, 8(4), 350–353. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.8.4.350.
*Schultz, P. W., Gouveia, V. V., Cameron, L. D., Tankha, G., Schmuck, P., & Franěk, M. (2005). Values and their relationship to environmental concern and conservation behavior. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36(4), 457–475. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022105275962.
Schultz, P. W., Milfont, T. L., Chance, R. C., Tronu, G., Luís, S., Ando, K., Rasool, F., Roose, P. L., Ogunbode, C. A., Castro, J., & Gouveia, V. V. (2014). Cross-cultural evidence for spatial Bias in beliefs about the severity of environmental problems. Environment and Behavior, 46(3), 267–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916512458579.
Schutte, N. S., & Bhullar, N. (2017). Approaching environmental sustainability: Perceptions of self-efficacy and changeability. The Journal of Psychology, 151(3), 321–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2017.1289144.
*Silva-Filho, J. C. L., Tochetto, M. R. L., Gravonski, I., Torres, F. S., & Araújo, N. R. S. (2009). Análise comparativa do novo paradigma ecológico em dois estados brasileiros: A gestão ambiental além do mercado e do estado [A comparative analysis on the new ecological Paradigm in two Brazilian states: The environmental management beyond the market and state issues]. Revista Gestão.Org, 7(1), 84–101.
Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S. E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E. M., et al. (2015). Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science, 347(6223), 736–746. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259855.
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., & Guagnano, G. A. (1995). The new ecological paradigm in social-psychological context. Environment and Behavior, 27(6), 723–743. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916595276001.
Strassburg, B. B. N., Brooks, T., Feltran-Barbieri, R., Iribarrem, A., Crouzeilles, R., Loyola, R., Latawiec, A. E., Oliveira Filho, F. J. B., Scaramuzza, C. A. . M., Scarano, F. R., Soares-Filho, B., & Balmford, A. (2017). Moment of truth for the Cerrado hotspot. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 1(99), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-017-0099.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (3rd ed.). New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.
Tarrant, M. A., & Green, G. T. (1999). Outdoor recreation and the predictive validity of environmental attitudes. Leisure Sciences, 21(1), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/014904099273264.
*Teixeira, L. I. L., Silva-Filho, J. C. L., & Meireles, F. R. S. (2016). Consciência e Atitude Ambiental em Estudantes de Instituições de Ensino Técnico e Tecnológico [consciousness and environmental attitude in students of institutions of technical and technological teaching]. Electronic Journal of Management, Education and Environmental Technology (REGET), 20(1), 334–350. https://doi.org/10.5902/2236117020025.
Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D. M., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A. W. M., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., et al. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(1), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.
Thompson, B., Diamond, K. E., McWilliam, R., Snyder, P., & Snyder, S. W. (2005). Evaluating the quality of evidence from correlational research for evidence-based practice. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 181–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100204.
Tricco, A. C., Tetzlaff, J., & Moher, D. (2011). The art and science of knowledge synthesis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(1), 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.11.007.
Truelove, H. B., & Gillis, A. J. (2018). Perception of pro-environmental behavior. Global Environmental Change, 49, 175–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.02.009.
*Vikan, A., Camino, C., Biaggio, A., & Nordvik, H. (2007). Endorsement of the new environmental paradigm: A comparison of two Brazilian samples and one Norwegian sample. Environment and Behavior, 39, 217–228. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916506286946.
Whitburn, J., Linklater, W. L., & Milfont, T. L. (2018). Exposure to urban nature and tree planting are related to pro-environmental behavior via connection to nature, the use of nature for psychological restoration, and environmental attitudes. Environment and Behavior. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916517751009, 001391651775100.
World Trade Organization. (2014). World Trade Report. Retrieved from https://www.wto.org/English/res_e/publications_e/wtr14_e.htm. Accessed 12 Nov 2018.
Xiao, C., & Dunlap, R. E. (2007). Validating a comprehensive model of environmental concern cross-nationally: A U.S.-Canadian comparison. Social Science Quarterly, 88(2), 471–493. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2007.00467.x.
Xie, X., Lu, Y., & Gou, Z. (2017). Green building pro-environment behaviors: Are green users also green buyers? Sustainability, 9, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101703.
Zhu, X., & Lu, C. (2017). Re-evaluation of the new ecological paradigm scale using item response theory. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 54, 79–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.10.005.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank professor Pedro Pires for his insightful comments on the general idea of the paper, and the two anonymous reviewers for their careful and helpful suggestions.
Funding
This study was made possible by scholarship from Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado da Bahia to CR (Grant number BOL085/2016). This study was partly supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (Grant number PSI-2013-44939).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical Approval
Study 1: For this type of study formal consent is not required.
Study 2: All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Conflict of Interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rosa, C.D., Collado, S. & Profice, C.C. Measuring Brazilians’ environmental attitudes: A systematic review and empirical analysis of the NEP scale. Curr Psychol 40, 1298–1309 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-0061-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-0061-y