Variables que afectan la relación entre las conductas sustentables y sus repercusiones psicológicas positivas: rasgos de personalidad y costos conductuales
pdf
XML

Palabras clave

Mediación, moderación, conducta sustentable, costos, beneficios

Cómo citar

Corral Verdugo, V. ., Robles Pacheco, K. ., Corral-Frías, N. S., Hernández Ruiz, B., & Suárez Rodríguez, E. J. (2020). Variables que afectan la relación entre las conductas sustentables y sus repercusiones psicológicas positivas: rasgos de personalidad y costos conductuales . Psicumex, 10(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.36793/psicumex.v10i1.336

Licencia

Creative Commons License

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.

Derechos de autor 2020

Resumen

Las conductas sustentables (CS) pueden producir tanto repercusiones psicológicas positivas (bienestar, satisfacción, felicidad) como negativas (costos y sacrificios) en las personas que las practican. El presente estudio investigó la posible influencia de variables como los rasgos de personalidad y los costos conductuales en la relación entre CS y sus consecuencias positivas. Empleando ecuaciones estructurales, un estudio de 100 estudiantes universitarios en una ciudad del norte de México encontró mayores niveles de beneficios psicológicos que de costos conductuales asociados a las conductas sustentables. El estudio también reveló que los rasgos de personalidad no afectan la relación CS-consecuencias positivas, mientras que los costos conductuales sí la influyen, de manera negativa y en una función híbrida, fungiendo tanto como mediadores y como moderadores de la relación.

https://doi.org/10.36793/psicumex.v10i1.336
pdf
XML

Citas

Baron, R. & Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.

Bechtel, R., & Corral-Verdugo, V. (2010). Happiness and sustainable behavior. In V. Corral-Verdugo, C. García-Cadena, & M. Frías-Armenta (Eds.), Psychological approaches to sustainability. Current trends in theory, research and applications (pp. 433–450). New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers.

Brown, B. B. & Werner, C. M. (2012). Healthy physical environment and eating: Environmental supports for health. En S. Clayton (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Environmental and Conservation Psychology (pp 459-484). New York: Oxford Press.

Corral, V. (2012). The positive Psychology of Sustainability. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 14, 651-666.

Corral, V., Caso, J., & Frías, M. (2017). Psicología del Cambio Climático. México: Pearson.

Corral, V., González, D., Rascón, M. & Corral-Frías, V. (2016). Intrinsic motives of autonomy, self efficacy, and satisfaction associated with two instances of sustainable behavior: frugality and equity. Psychology, 7, 662-671.

Corral, V., Montiel, M., Sotomayor, M., Frías, M., Tapia, C. & Fraijo, B. (2011). Psychological wellbeing as correlate of sustainable behaviors. International Journal of Hispanic psychology, 4, 31-44.

De Young, R. (1996). Some Psychological Aspects of a Reduced Consumption Lifestyle: The Role of Intrinsic Satisfaction and Competence Motivation. Environment & Behavior, 28, 358-409.

Diekmann, A., & Preisendörfer, P. (2003). Green and greenback: The behavioral effects of environmental attitudes in low-cost and high-cost situations. Rationality and Society, 15, 441–472.

Diener, E., Emmons, R., Larsen, R., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75.

Donnellan, M. B., Oswald, F. L., Baird, B. M., & Lucas, R. E. (2006). The Mini-IPIP Scales: Tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five Factors of Personality. Psychological Assessment, 18, 192–203.

Green-Demers, I., Pelletier, L., & Ménard, S. (1997). The impact of behavioural difficulty on the saliency of the association between self-determined motivation and environmental behaviours. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne des Sciences du Comportement, 29, 157–166.

Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public-domain, personalityinventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. En I. Mervielde, I. J. Deary, F. De Fruyt, and F. Ostendorf (Eds.), Personality Psychology in Europe (Vol. 7, pp. 7–28). Tilburg, Holanda: Tilburg University Press.

Hirsh, J. B. (2010). Personality and environmental concern. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 245–248.

Hirsh, J. B. & Dolderman, D. (2007). Personality predictors of consumerism and environmentalism: A preliminary study. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1583-1593.

Huta, V. (2013). Pursuing Eudaimonia versus Hedonia: Distinctions, similarities, and relationships. In A. S. Waterman (Ed.), The best within us: Positive psychology perspectives on eudaimonia (pp. 139–158). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Iwata, O. (2002). Coping Style and Three Psychological Measures Associated with Environmentally Responsible Behavior. Social Behavior and Personality, 30, 661-669.

Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46, 137-155.

Manríquez, J.C., Corral, V. & Vanegas, C. (2016). Positive (gratitude, eudaimonia) and negative (scarcity, costs) determinants of water conservation behavior. Psyecology, 7, 178-200.

Markowitz, E., Goldberg, L., Ashton, M. & Lee, K. (2012). Profiling the ‘proenvironmental individual’: A personality perspective. Journal of Personality, 80, 81-111.

Moll, J., Krueger, F., Zahn, R., Pardini, M., Oliveira, R., & Grafman, J. (2006). Human fronto-mesolimbic networks guide decisions about charitable donation. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103, 15623–15628.

Moore, H., & Boldero, J. (2017). Designing interventions that last: a classification of environmental behaviors in relation to the activities, costs, and effort involved for adoption and maintenance. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1874.

Peterson, C., Park, N., & Seligman, M. E. (2005). Orientations to happiness and life satisfaction: The full life versus the empty life. Journal of Happiness Studies, 6, 25–41.

Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069–1081.

Sauer, P., & Dick, A. (1993). Using moderator variables in structural equation models. Advances in Consumer Research, 20, 636-640.

Steg, L., Perlaviciute, G., van der Werff, E., & Lurvink, J. (2014). The significance of hedonic values for environmentally relevant attitudes, preferences, and actions. Environment and Behavior, 46, 163–192.

Swim, J., Clayton, S. & Howard, G. (2011). Human behavioral contributions to climate change. Psychological and contextual drivers. American Psychologist, 66, 251-264.

Tapia, C., Corral, V., Fraijo, B., & Durón, F. (2013). Assessing sustainable behavior and its correlates: a measure of pro-ecological, frugal, altruistic and equitable actions. Sustainability, 5, 711-723.

Toegel, G. & Barsoux, J. L. (2012). How to become a better leader. MIT Sloan Management Review, 53, 51-60.

Vanegas-Rico, M.C. & Bustos, M. (2019). Relación del costo personal y creencias ambientales con compras verdes. Nthe, 26, 1-6.

Vanegas-Rico, M. C., & Corral-Verdugo, V. (2015). La percepción del costo conductual en el comportamiento proambiental. Memorias del XXIII Congreso Mexicano de Psicología. (pp. 1616–1617). México: Sociedad Mexicana de Psicología.

Verhallen, T. M. M., & Pieters, R. (1984). Attitude theory and behavioral costs. Journal of Economic Psychology, 5, 223–249.

Waterman, A. S., Schwartz, S., & Conti, R. (2008). The implications of two conceptions of happiness (hedonic enjoyment and eudaimonia) for the understanding of intrinsic motivation. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, 41-79.