Scholarlink

<p>Drawing on data from 40 empirical studies, this meta-analysis systematically examined the association between environmental risk perception (ERP) and pro-environmental behavior (PEB). The results revealed a moderate positive correlation between ERP and PEB (effect size = 0.35, 95% CI [0.29, 0.41]), providing quantitative evidence for the overall association between environmental risk perception and pro-environmental behavior. Further analyses indicated that individuals’ emotional responses to environmental risks showed the strongest association with PEB, followed by perceived probability and perceived severity of risk. Moreover, the measurement method of PEB moderated the relationship strength: behavioral intention was more strongly correlated with ERP than actual behavioral frequency. Behavioral cost also served as a moderator, with high-cost pro-environmental behaviors showing a stronger association with ERP than low-cost or mixed-cost behaviors. Finally, private-sphere behaviors exhibited the strongest correlation with ERP, followed by public-sphere and cross-sphere behaviors. Overall, this study quantitatively synthesized the general relationship between environmental risk perception and pro-environmental behavior and identified key moderating factors—risk type, behavioral cost, behavioral domain, and measurement method—providing an integrative theoretical perspective and empirical basis for understanding variability in pro-environmental behavior.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The association between environmental risk perception and pro-environmental behavior: a meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月7日

查看全文
  • Shuo Zhang,
  • Yuan Zhang

摘要

Drawing on data from 40 empirical studies, this meta-analysis systematically examined the association between environmental risk perception (ERP) and pro-environmental behavior (PEB). The results revealed a moderate positive correlation between ERP and PEB (effect size = 0.35, 95% CI [0.29, 0.41]), providing quantitative evidence for the overall association between environmental risk perception and pro-environmental behavior. Further analyses indicated that individuals’ emotional responses to environmental risks showed the strongest association with PEB, followed by perceived probability and perceived severity of risk. Moreover, the measurement method of PEB moderated the relationship strength: behavioral intention was more strongly correlated with ERP than actual behavioral frequency. Behavioral cost also served as a moderator, with high-cost pro-environmental behaviors showing a stronger association with ERP than low-cost or mixed-cost behaviors. Finally, private-sphere behaviors exhibited the strongest correlation with ERP, followed by public-sphere and cross-sphere behaviors. Overall, this study quantitatively synthesized the general relationship between environmental risk perception and pro-environmental behavior and identified key moderating factors—risk type, behavioral cost, behavioral domain, and measurement method—providing an integrative theoretical perspective and empirical basis for understanding variability in pro-environmental behavior.