Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 806

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The validity of self-report measures of proenvironmental behavior: A meta-analytic review

Kormos, Christine, Gifford, Robert·2014·Journal of Environmental Psychology
DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.09.003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.09.003

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 12 references

Research works printed but not linked: 55

  1. Affuso, 2011, Validity of self-reported leisure-time sedentary behavior in adolescents, Journal of Negative Results in Biomedicine, 10, 2, 10.1186/1477-5751-10-2 · DOI
  2. Boldero, 1995, The prediction of household recycling of newspapers: The role of attitudes, intentions, and situational factors, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 440, 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1995.tb01598.x · DOI · Paper page
  3. *Bolderdijk, 2011, Effects of Pay-As-You-Drive vehicle insurance on young drivers' speed choice: Results of a Dutch field experiment, Accident Analysis & Prevention, 43, 1181, 10.1016/j.aap.2010.12.032 · DOI · Paper page
  4. *Chao, 2011, Measuring responsible environmental behavior: Self-reported and other-reported measures and their differences in testing a behavioral model, Environment & Behavior, 43, 53, 10.1177/0013916509350849 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Cohen, 1992, A power primer, Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155, 10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155 · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155 · Paper page
  6. *Corral-Verdugo, 1997, Dual “realities” of conservation behavior: Self-reports vs. observations of reuse and recycling behavior, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17, 135, 10.1006/jevp.1997.0048 · DOI · Paper page
  7. *Corral-Verdugo, 1995, A comparison of two measures of reuse and recycling behavior: Self-report and material culture, Journal of Environmental Systems, 23, 313, 10.2190/EJP5-56TU-0G9U-FUJL · DOI
  8. *Corral-Verdugo, 2003, Environmental beliefs and water conservation: An empirical study, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 247, 10.1016/S0272-4944(02)00086-5 · DOI · Paper page
  9. *Corral-Verdugo, 1999, Convergent and divergent validity of three measures of conservation behavior: The multitrait-multimethod approach, Environment & Behavior, 31, 805, 10.1177/00139169921972353 · DOI
  10. *Cote, 1984, Use of household refuse analysis to measure usual and period-specific food consumption, American Behavioral Scientist, 28, 129, 10.1177/000276484028001010 · DOI
  11. De Young, 1990, Promoting conservation behavior in shared spaces: The role of energy monitors, Journal of Environmental Systems, 19, 265, 10.2190/2N3T-WH89-B6WW-KVLH · doi:10.2190/2n3t-wh89-b6ww-kvlh
  12. Denny, 2008, Hand-held internet tablets for school-based data collection, BMC Research Notes, 1, 52, 10.1186/1756-0500-1-52 · DOI
  13. Elgar, 2008, Validity of self-report screening for overweight and obesity: Evidence from the Canadian community health survey, Canadian Journal of Public Health, 99, 423, 10.1007/BF03405254 · DOI · Paper page
  14. *Fuj, 1985, An evaluation of the validity and reliability ofsurvey response data on household electricity conservation, Evaluation Review, 9, 93, 10.1177/0193841X8500900106 · DOI
  15. Gatersleben, 2002, Measurement and determinants of environmentally significant consumer behavior, Environment and Behavior, 34, 335, 10.1177/0013916502034003004 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Geller, 1981, Evaluating energy conservation programs: Is verbal report enough?, Journal of Consumer Research, 8, 331, 10.1086/208872 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Gifford, 2006, A general model of social dilemmas, International Journal of Ecological Economics and Statistics, 5, 23
  18. *Hamilton, 1985, Self-reported and actual savings in a water conservation campaign, Environment & Behavior, 17, 315, 10.1177/0013916585173003 · DOI
  19. *Hirst, 1985, Accuracy of self-reports: Energy conservation surveys, The Social Science Journal, 22, 19
  20. Heath, 2002, Extending the theory of planned behavior: Predicting the use of public transportation, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 2154, 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb02068.x · DOI · Paper page
  21. Hurst, 2013, The relationship between materialistic values and environmental attitudes and behaviours: A meta-analysis, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 36, 257, 10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.09.003 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Kaiser, 2003, Ecological behavior and its environmental consequences: A life cycle assessment of a self-report measure, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 11, 10.1016/S0272-4944(02)00075-0 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Kaiser, 1999, Ecological behavior, environmental attitude, and feelings of responsibility for the environment, European Psychologist, 4, 59, 10.1027//1016-9040.4.2.59 · DOI · Paper page
  24. *Kaiser, 2001, Zur Angemessenheit selbstberichteten Verhaltens: Eine Validitätsuntersuchung der Skala Allgemeinen Ökologischen Verhaltens, Diagnostica, 47, 88, 10.1026//0012-1924.47.2.88 · DOI
  25. Khemlani, 2012, Theories of the syllogism: A meta-analysis, Psychological Bulletin, 138, 427, 10.1037/a0026841 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Klockars, 1988, The influence of labels and positions in rating scales, Journal of Educational Measurement, 25, 85, 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1988.tb00294.x · DOI
  27. Krosnick, 1993, Comparisons of party identification and policy preferences: The impact of survey question format, American Journal of Political Science, 37, 941, 10.2307/2111580 · DOI · Paper page
  28. *Lam, 2002, Cross-informant agreement in reports of environmental behavior and the effect of cross-questioning on report accuracy, Environment and Behavior, 34, 508, 10.1177/00116502034004006 · DOI
  29. Lee, 1993, Recycling behavior and waste management planning, Journal of Building and Planning National Taiwan University, 7, 65
  30. Luyben, 1982, Prompting thermostat setting behavior, Environment and Behavior, 14, 113, 10.1177/0013916582141007 · DOI
  31. McCormack, 2008, Objective versus perceived walking distances to destinations: Correspondence and predictive validity, Environment and Behavior, 40, 401, 10.1177/0013916507300560 · DOI · Paper page
  32. *McGuire, 1984, Recycling, great expectations and garbage outcomes, American Behavioral Scientist, 28, 71
  33. Margai, 1997, Analyzing changes in waste reduction behavior in a low-income urban community following a public outreach program, Environment and Behavior, 29, 769, 10.1177/0013916597296003 · DOI
  34. Meyer, 2001, Psychological testing and psychological assessment: A review of evidence and issues, American Psychologist, 56, 128, 10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.128 · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.56.2.128 · Paper page
  35. Milfont, 2009, The effects of social desirability on self-reported environmental attitudes and ecological behaviour, The Environmentalist, 29, 263, 10.1007/s10669-008-9192-2 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Nencyz-Thiel, 2013, Investigating the accuracy of self-reports of brand usage behavior, Journal of Business Research, 66, 224, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.07.016 · DOI
  37. Olson, 1981, Consumers attitudes toward energy conservation, Journal of Social Issues, 37, 108, 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1981.tb02628.x · DOI
  38. Peterson, 1981, The quality of self-report data: Review and synthesis, 5
  39. Porter, 1995, Solid waste recovery: A review of behavioral programs to increase recycling, Environment & Behavior, 27, 122, 10.1177/0013916595272002 · DOI
  40. Rathje, 1989, The three faces of garbage – Measurements, perceptions, behaviors, Journal of Management and Technology, 17, 61
  41. Rolnick, 2013, Self-report compared to electronic medical record across eight adult vaccines: Do results vary by demographic factors?, Vaccine, 31, 3928, 10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.06.041 · DOI · Paper page
  42. Rosenthal, 1979, A note on percent variance explained as a measure of the importance of effects, Journal of Applied Psychology, 9, 395
  43. Rosenthal, 1982, A simple general purpose display of magnitude of experimental effect, Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 166, 10.1037/0022-0663.74.2.166 · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.74.2.166 · Paper page
  44. Schahn, 2002, The role of behavioral costs and social desirability as predictors of environmental attitudes and conservation behavior: An analysis on aggregate and on individual data level, Zeitschrift fur Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 23, 45, 10.1024//0170-1789.23.1.45 · doi:10.1024//0170-1789.23.1.45
  45. Schwarz, 1988, The range of response alternatives may determine the meaning of the question: Further evidence on informative functions of response alternatives, Social Cognition, 6, 107, 10.1521/soco.1988.6.2.107 · DOI
  46. Stanton, 1997, Outcome, attrition, and family-couples treatment for drug abuse: A meta-analysis and review of the controlled, comparative studies, Psychological Bulletin, 122, 170, 10.1037/0033-2909.122.2.170 · DOI · Paper page
  47. Stern, 1995, Values, beliefs, and proenvironmental action: Attitude formation toward emergent attitude objects, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 1611, 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1995.tb02636.x · DOI · Paper page
  48. Studts, 2006, Validity of self-reported smoking status among participants in a lung cancer screening trial, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 15, 1825, 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0393 · DOI
  49. Tarrant, 1997, The effect of respondent characteristics on general environmental attitude-behavior correspondence, Environment & Behavior, 29, 618, 10.1177/0013916597295002 · DOI · Paper page
  50. *Vadez, 2003, Validity of self-reports to measure deforestation: Evidence from the Bolivian Lowlands, Field Methods, 15, 289, 10.1177/1525822X03254847 · DOI
  51. Van Liere, 1980, The social bases of environmental concern: A review of hypotheses, explanations, and empirical evidence, Public Opinion Quarterly, 44, 181, 10.1086/268583 · DOI · Paper page
  52. *Warriner, 1984, Any data or none at all? Living with inaccuracies in self-reports of residential energy consumption, Environment & Behavior, 16, 503, 10.1177/0013916584164005 · DOI
  53. Weinhardt, 1998, Reliability and validity of self-report measures of HIV-related sexual behaviour: Progress since 1990 and recommendations for research and practice, Archives of Sexual Behavior, 27, 155, 10.1023/A:1018682530519 · DOI · Paper page
  54. Winkielman, 1998, Looking back at anger: Reference periods change the interpretation of (emotion) frequency questions, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 719, 10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.719 · DOI
  55. Zelezny, 2000, Elaborating on gender differences in environmentalism, Journal of Social Issues, 56, 443, 10.1111/0022-4537.00177 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 806

Metadata

Authors
Kormos, C., & Gifford, R.
Venue
Journal of Environmental Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-12
Volume
40
Pages
359-371
ISSN
0272-4944 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.09.003
OpenAlex
W1977027027
Cited by
806
References
12
FWCI
70.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
  • www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
  • www.elsevier.com/legal/tdmrep-license (tdm)
Funders
  • Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council
  • Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions

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: The validity of self-report measures of proenvironmental behavior: A meta-analytic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.09.003
The paper
Kormos, C., & Gifford, R. (2014). The validity of self-report measures of proenvironmental behavior: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Environmental Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.09.003

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.