CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 46Pro-Environmental Behavior and AttitudesUrban Green Space and HealthPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Pro-environmental behaviours and attitudes are associated with health, wellbeing and life satisfaction in multiple occupancy households in the UK Household Longitudinal Study

Netuveli, Gopalakrishnan, Watts, Paul·2020·Population and Environment
DOI 10.1007/s11111-020-00337-7
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11111-020-00337-7

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 7 references

Research works printed but not linked: 47

  1. Binder, M., & Blankenberg, A. K. (2017). Green lifestyles and subjective well-being: More about self-image than actual behavior? Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 137, 304–323. · DOI
  2. Bošković, G., & Šendula Jengić, V. (2008). Mental health as eudaimonic well-being? Psychiatria Danubina, 20(4), 452–455.
  3. Cheung, F., & Lucas, R. E. (2014). Assessing the validity of single-item life satisfaction measures: Results from three large samples. Quality of Life Research, 23(10), 2809–2818. · DOI · Paper page
  4. Contopoulos-Ioannidis, D. G., Karvouni, A., Kouri, I., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2009). Reporting and interpretation of SF-36 outcomes in randomised trials: Systematic review. British Medical Journal, 338, a3006. · DOI
  5. Cunsolo, A., & Landman, K. (2017). Mourning nature: Hope at the heart of ecological loss and grief. Ontario: McGill-Queen's Press. · DOI
  6. De Leeuw, A., Valois, P., Ajzen, I., & Schmidt, P. (2015). Using the theory of planned behavior to identify key beliefs underlying pro-environmental behavior in high-school students: Implications for educational interventions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 42, 128–138. · DOI
  7. Denham, S. A. (2002). Family routines: A structural perspective for viewing family health. Advances in Nursing Science, 24(4), 60–74. · DOI
  8. DeSalvo, K. B., Bloser, N., Reynolds, K., He, J., & Muntner, P. (2006). Mortality prediction with a single general self-rated health question: A meta-analysis. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 21(3), 267–275. · DOI
  9. Diener, E., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2011). Happiness: Unlocking the mysteries of psychological wealth. London: John Wiley & Sons.
  10. Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Oishi, S. (2002). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and life satisfaction. Handbook of Positive Asychology, 2, 63–73.
  11. Distefano, C., Zhu, M., & Mîndrilă, D. (2009). Understanding and using factor scores: Considerations for the applied researcher. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 14(20), 1–11.
  12. Druckman, A., & Gatersleben, B. (2019). A time-use approach: High subjective wellbeing, low carbon leisure. Journal of Public Mental Health, 18(2), 85–93. · DOI
  13. Esposito, G., Van Bavel, R., Baranowski, T., & Duch-Brown, N. (2016). Applying the model of goal-directed behavior, including descriptive norms, to physical activity intentions: A contribution to improving the theory of planned behavior. Psychological Reports, 119(1), 5–26. · DOI
  14. Farrow, K., Grolleau, G., & Ibanez, L. (2017). Social norms and pro-environmental behavior: A review of the evidence. Ecological Economics, 140, 1–13. · DOI
  15. Gallagher, M. W., & Brown, T. A. (2013). Introduction to confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling. In T. Teo (Ed.), Handbook of quantitative methods for educational research (pp. 289–323). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. · DOI
  16. Gibson, C., Head, L., Gill, N., & Waitt, G. (2011). Climate change and household dynamics: Beyond consumption, unbounding sustainability. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 36(1), 3–8. · DOI
  17. Giordano, G. N., Merlo, J., Ohlsson, H., Rosvall, M., & Lindström, M. (2013). Testing the association between social capital and health over time: A family-based design. BMC Public Health, 13(1), 665. · DOI
  18. Howell, A. J., Dopko, R. L., Passmore, H. A., & Buro, K. (2011). Nature connectedness: Associations with well-being and mindfulness. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(2), 166–171. · DOI
  19. Jackson, C. (2007). The general health questionnaire. Occupational medicine, 57(1), 79–79. · DOI
  20. Kaida, N., & Kaida, K. (2016). Pro-environmental behavior correlates with present and future subjective well-being. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 18(1), 111–127. · DOI
  21. Kasser, T. (2017). Living both well and sustainably: A review of the literature, with some reflections on future research, interventions and policy, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society a: Mathematical, physical and engineering sciences., 375(2095), 20160369. · DOI
  22. Lam, C. L. K. (2010). Subjective quality of life measures–general principles and concepts. In V. R. Preedy & R. R. Watson (Eds.), Handbook of disease burdens and quality of life measures (pp. 381–399). New York: Springer.
  23. Lapa, T. Y. (2015). Physical activity levels and psychological well-being: A case study of university students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186, 739–743. · DOI
  24. Lenzen, M., & Cummins, R. A. (2013). Happiness versus the environment—A case study of Australian lifestyles. Challenges, 4(1), 56–74. · DOI
  25. Leonidou, L. C., Leonidou, C. N., & Kvasova, O. (2010). Antecedents and outcomes of consumer environmentally friendly attitudes and behaviour. Journal of Marketing Management, 26(13–14), 1319–1344. · DOI
  26. Lins, L., & Carvalho, F. M. (2016). SF-36 total score as a single measure of health-related quality of life: Scoping review. SAGE Open Medicine, 4, 2050312116671725. · DOI
  27. Matcham, F., Scott, I. C., Rayner, L., Hotopf, M., Kingsley, G. H., Norton, S., et al. (2014). The impact of rheumatoid arthritis on quality-of-life assessed using the SF-36: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism, 44(2), 123–130. · DOI
  28. Mavaddat, N., Parker, R. A., Sanderson, S., Mant, J., & Kinmonth, A. L. (2014). Relationship of self-rated health with fatal and non-fatal outcomes in cardiovascular disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One, 9(7), e103509. · DOI
  29. McFall, S., Burton, J., Jäckle, A., Lynn, P., & Uhrig, N. (2013). Understanding society–the UK household longitudinal study, innovation panel, waves 1–5, user manual. Colchester: University of Essex.
  30. O’Connor, M. F. (2019). Grief: A brief history of research on how body, mind, and brain adapt. Psychosomatic Medicine, 81(8), 731. · DOI
  31. Ott, C. H. (2003). The impact of complicated grief on mental and physical health at various points in the bereavement process. Death Studies, 27(3), 249–272. · DOI · Paper page
  32. Poškus, M. S. (2018). Personality and pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 72(11), 969–970. · DOI
  33. Reid, L., Sutton, P., & Hunter, C. (2010). Theorizing the meso level: The household as a crucible of pro-environmental behaviour. Progress in Human Geography, 34(3), 309–327. · DOI
  34. Ryff, C. D., & Boylan, J. M. (2016). Linking happiness to health: Comparisons between hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. In L. Bruni & L. P. Porta (Eds.), Handbook of research methods and applications in happiness and quality of life (pp. 53–70). Cheltenham, UK: Elgar.
  35. Schmitt, M. T., Aknin, L. B., Axsen, J., & Shwom, R. L. (2018). Unpacking the relationships between pro-environmental behavior, life satisfaction, and perceived ecological threat. Ecological Economics, 143, 130–140. · DOI
  36. Sedgwick, P. (2012). Multiple significance tests: The Bonferroni correction. British Medical Journal, 344, e509. · DOI
  37. Smyth, R., Mishra, V., & Qian, X. (2008). The environment and well-being in urban China. Ecological Economics, 68(1–2), 547–555. · DOI
  38. Stone, A. A., & Krueger, A. B. (2018). Understanding subjective well-being. In J. E. Stiglitz, J. P. Fitoussi, & M. Durand (Eds.), For good measure: Advancing research on well-being metrics beyond GDP (pp. 163–194). Paris: OECD Publishing. · DOI
  39. Sugden R. (2000) The Motivating Power of Expectations. In J. Nida-Rümelin & W. Spohn (Eds.), Rationality, Rules, and Structure. Theory and Decision Library (Series A: Philosophy and Methodology of the Social Sciences) (pp. 103-129). Dordrecht: Springer. · DOI
  40. Tam, K. P. (2013). Concepts and measures related to connection to nature: Similarities and differences. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 64–78. · DOI
  41. Thompson, C. G., Kim, R. S., Aloe, A. M., & Becker, B. J. (2017). Extracting the variance inflation factor and other multicollinearity diagnostics from typical regression results. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 39(2), 81–90. · DOI · Paper page
  42. Toole, S., Klocker, N., & Head, L. (2016). Re-thinking climate change adaptation and capacities at the household scale. Climatic Change, 135(2), 203–209. · DOI
  43. University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research, NatCen Social Research, Kantar Public. (2018). Understanding Society: Waves 1–8, 2009–2017 and Harmonised BHPS: Waves 1–18, 1991–2009. [data collection]. 11th Edition. UK Data Service. SN: 6614. https://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-6614-13. · DOI
  44. Venhoeven, L. A., Bolderdijk, J. W., & Steg, L. (2016). Why acting environmentally-friendly feels good: Exploring the role of self-image. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1846. · DOI
  45. Verhofstadt, E., Van Ootegem, L., Defloor, B., & Bleys, B. (2016). Linking individuals' ecological footprint to their subjective well-being. Ecological Economics, 127, 80–89. · DOI
  46. Welsch, H., & Kühling, J. (2018). How green self image is related to subjective well-being: Pro-environmental values as a social norm. Ecological Economics, 149, 105–119. · DOI
  47. Whitmarsh, L. E., Haggar, P., & Thomas, M. (2018). Waste reduction behaviors at home, at work, and on holiday: What influences behavioral consistency across contexts? Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2447. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 46

Metadata

Authors
Netuveli, G., & Watts, P.
Affiliations
University of East London (GB)
Corresponding author
Watts, Paul
ORCID
Venue
Population and Environment
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2020-01-16
Volume
41
Issue
3
Pages
347-371
ISSN
  • 0199-0039 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7810
DOI
10.1007/s11111-020-00337-7
OpenAlex
W2999474865
Cited by
46
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1
FWCI
5.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Population and Environment (publishedVersion)
  • UEL Research Repository (University of East London) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Pro-Environmental Behavior and Attitudes
  • Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Urban Green Space and Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Keywords
pro-environmental behavior, pro-environmental attitudes, household effects, life satisfaction, mental health, physical health, well-being, UK Household Longitudinal Study

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pro-environmental behaviours and attitudes are associated with health, wellbeing and life satisfaction in multiple occupancy households in the UK Household Longitudinal Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11111-020-00337-7
The paper
Netuveli, G., & Watts, P. (2020). Pro-environmental behaviours and attitudes are associated with health, wellbeing and life satisfaction in multiple occupancy households in the UK Household Longitudinal Study. Population and Environment. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-020-00337-7