CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 26

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

No Evidence of Within-Domain Moral Licensing in the Environmental Domain

Urban, Jan, Braun Kohlová, Markéta, Bahník, Štěpán·2021·Environment and Behavior
DOI 10.1177/0013916520942604

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Several studies have suggested that people might be less likely to engage in proenvironmental behavior subsequent to their prior engagement in proenvironmental behavior. We have conducted a preregistered replication of one such recent study of within-domain licensing in the area of environmental protection. Our replication was extended with an analysis of self-perception as a potential mediator of licensing and environmental attitude as its moderator. The results of our web-based experiment ( N = 1,765) show that recollection of past proenvironmental behavior does not diminish subsequent support of a proenvironmental energy policy or proenvironmental intention, and that environmental attitude does not moderate licensing. We only found some evidence of an indirect effect of recollection on subsequent policy support and proenvironmental intention, mediated by self-perception; the pattern of mediation is, however, inconsistent with the licensing theory. We have not replicated the licensing effect observed in the original study.

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 · 10.1177/0013916520942604

Cites

4 of 4 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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 62

  1. Arnold O., Kaiser F. G. (2018). Understanding the foot-in-the-door effect as a pseudo-effect from the perspective of the Campbell paradigm. International Journal of Psychology, 53(2), 157–165. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12289 · DOI
  2. Arnold O., Kibbe A., Hartig T., Kaiser F. G. (2018). Capturing the environmental impact of individual lifestyles: Evidence of the criterion validity of the general ecological behavior scale. Environment and Behavior, 50(3), 350–372. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916517701796 · DOI
  3. Bem D. J. (1972). Self-perception theory. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 6, 1–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60024-6 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Blanken I., van de Ven N., Zeelenberg M. (2015). A meta-analytic review of moral licensing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(4), 540–558. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167215572134 · DOI
  5. Blanken I., van de Ven N., Zeelenberg M., Meijers M. H. C. (2014). Three attempts to replicate the moral licensing effect. Social Psychology, 45(3), 232–238. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000189 · DOI
  6. Bond T. G., 2012, Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences
  7. Brügger A., Höchli B. (2019). The role of attitude strength in behavioral spillover: Attitude matters—but not necessarily as a moderator. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01018 · DOI
  8. Byrka K., Kaiser F. G. (2013). Health performance of individuals within the Campbell paradigm. International Journal of Psychology, 48(5), 986–999. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2012.702215 · DOI
  9. Byrka K., Kaiser F. G., Olko J. (2017). Understanding the acceptance of nature-preservation-related restrictions as the result of the compensatory effects of environmental attitude and behavioral costs. Environment and Behavior, 49(5), 487–508. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916516653638 · DOI
  10. Catlin J. R., Wang Y. (2013). Recycling gone bad: When the option to recycle increases resource consumption. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(1), 122–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2012.04.001 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Conway P., Peetz J. (2012). When does feeling moral actually make you a better person? Conceptual abstraction moderates whether past moral deeds motivate consistency or compensatory behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 907–919. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212442394 · DOI
  12. Cornelissen G., Bashshur M. R., Rode J., Le Menestrel M. (2013). Rules or consequences? The role of ethical mind-sets in moral dynamics. Psychological Science, 24(4), 482–488. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612457376 · DOI
  13. Cornelissen G., Pandelaere M., Warlop L., Dewitte S. (2008). Positive cueing: Promoting sustainable consumer behavior by cueing common environmental behaviors as environmental. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25(1), 46–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2007.06.002 · DOI
  14. de la Fuente J., Santiago J., Román A., Dumitrache C., Casasanto D. (2014). When you think about it, your past is in front of you: How culture shapes spatial conceptions of time. Psychological Science, 25(9), 1682–1690. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614534695 · DOI
  15. Ebersole C. R., Atherton O. E., Belanger A. L., Skulborstad H. M., Allen J. M., Banks J. B., Baranski E., Bernstein M. J., Bonfiglio D. B. V., Boucher L., Brown E. R., Budiman N. I., Cairo A. H., Capaldi C. A., Chartier C. R., Chung J. M., Cicero D. C., Coleman J. A., Conway J. G. … Nosek B. A. (2016). Many Labs 3: Evaluating participant pool quality across the academic semester via replication. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 67, 68–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.10.012 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Fanghella V., d’Adda G., Tavoni M. (2019). On the use of nudges to affect spillovers in environmental behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 61. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00061 · DOI
  17. Fiedler K., Schott M., Meiser T. (2011). What mediation analysis can (not) do. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(6), 1231–1236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.05.007 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Garvey A. M., Bolton L. E. (2016). The licensing effect revisited: How virtuous behavior heightens the pleasure derived from subsequent hedonic consumption. Journal of Marketing Behavior, 2(4), 291–298. https://doi.org/10.1561/107.00000029 · DOI
  19. Garvey A. M., Bolton L. E. (2017). Eco-product choice cuts both ways: How proenvironmental licensing versus reinforcement is contingent on environmental consciousness. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 36(2), 284–298. https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.16.096 · DOI
  20. Geng L., Cheng X., Tang Z., Zhou K., Ye L. (2016). Can previous pro-environmental behaviours influence subsequent environmental behaviours? The licensing effect of pro-environmental behaviours. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 10, E9. https://doi.org/10.1017/prp.2016.6 · DOI
  21. Goplen J. (2014). Dedicated vs. coerced: Internal and external motivations to be proenvironmental (Unpublished dissertation). The Florida State University. Retrieved July 8, 2020, from http://fsu.digital.flvc.org/islandora/object/fsu:185252/datastream/PDF/view
  22. Hahnel U. J. J., Arnold O., Waschto M., Korcaj L., Hillmann K., Roser D., Spada H. (2015). The power of putting a label on it: Green labels weigh heavier than contradicting product information for consumers’ purchase decisions and post-purchase behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1392. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01392 · DOI
  23. Haidt J., 2013, The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion
  24. Hayes A. F., 2018, Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach
  25. Jordan J., Mullen E., Murnighan J. K. (2011). Striving for the moral self: The effects of recalling past moral actions on future moral behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(5), 701–713. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211400208 · DOI
  26. Kaida N., Kaida K. (2015). Spillover effect of congestion charging on pro-environmental behavior. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 17(3), 409–421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-014-9550-9 · DOI
  27. Kaiser F. G., Brügger A., Hartig T., Bogner F. X., Gutscher H. (2014). Appreciation of nature and appreciation of environmental protection: How stable are these attitudes and which comes first? Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée/European Review of Applied Psychology, 64(6), 269–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2014.09.001 · DOI
  28. Kaiser F. G., Byrka K., Hartig T. (2010). Reviving Campbell’s paradigm for attitude research. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(4), 351–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868310366452 · DOI
  29. Kaiser F. G., Hartig T., Brügger A., Duvier C. (2013). Environmental protection and nature as distinct attitudinal objects: An application of the Campbell paradigm. Environment and Behavior, 45(3), 369–398. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916511422444 · DOI
  30. Kaiser F. G., Wilson M. (2000). Assessing people’s general ecological behavior: A cross-cultural measure. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(5), 952–978. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02505.x · DOI
  31. Kaiser F. G., Wilson M. (2004). Goal-directed conservation behavior: The specific composition of a general performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(7), 1531–1544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2003.06.003 · DOI
  32. Kaiser F. G., Wilson M. (2019). The Campbell paradigm as a behavior-predictive reinterpretation of the classical tripartite model of attitudes. European Psychologist, 24(4), 359–374. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000364 · DOI
  33. Kenny D. A., Judd C. M. (2014). Power anomalies in testing mediation. Psychological Science, 25(2), 334–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613502676 · DOI · Paper page
  34. Khan U., Dhar R. (2006). Licensing effect in consumer choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(2), 259–266. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.43.2.259 · DOI
  35. Kouchaki M. (2011). Vicarious moral licensing: The influence of others’ past moral actions on moral behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(4), 702–715. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024552 · DOI
  36. Kruschke J. K., 2015, Doing Bayesian data analysis: A tutorial with R, JAGS, and Stan
  37. Kuper N., Bott A. (2019). Has the evidence for moral licensing been inflated by publication bias? Meta-Psychology, 3(5), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.15626/MP.2018.878 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Lacasse K. (2015). The importance of being green: The influence of green behaviors on Americans’ political attitudes toward climate change. Environment and Behavior, 47(7), 754–781. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916513520491 · DOI
  39. Lacasse K. (2016). Don’t be satisfied, identify! Strengthening positive spillover by connecting pro-environmental behaviors to an “environmentalist” label. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 48, 149–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.09.006 · DOI
  40. Mazar N., Zhong C.B. (2010). Do green products make us better people? Psychological Science, 21(4), 494–498. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610363538 · DOI
  41. McClelland G. H., Lynch J. G., Irwin J. R., Spiller S. A., Fitzsimons G. J. (2015). Median splits, Type II errors, and false–positive consumer psychology: Don’t fight the power. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25(4), 679–689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2015.05.006 · DOI
  42. Merritt A. C., Effron D. A., Monin B. (2010). Moral self-licensing: When being good frees us to be bad. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(5), 344–357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00263.x · DOI
  43. Miller D. T., Effron D. A. (2010). Psychological license: When it is needed and how it functions. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 115–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(10)43003-8 · DOI
  44. Minton A. P., Rose R. L. (1997). The effects of environmental concern on environmentally friendly consumer behavior: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Research, 40(1), 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(96)00209-3 · DOI
  45. Mullen E., Monin B. (2016). Consistency versus licensing effects of past moral behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 363–385. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115120 · DOI
  46. Nilsson A., Bergquist M., Schultz W. P. (2017). Spillover effects in environmental behaviors, across time and context: A review and research agenda. Environmental Education Research, 23(4), 573–589. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2016.1250148 · DOI
  47. Noblet C. L., McCoy S. K. (2018). Does one good turn deserve another? Evidence of domain-specific licensing in energy behavior. Environment and Behavior, 50(8), 839–863. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916517718022 · DOI
  48. Robitaille N. (2014). An investigation of consumer’s moral licensing behavior (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Toronto.
  49. Russell S., Fielding K. (2010). Water demand management research: A psychological perspective. Water Resources Research, 46(5), W05302. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009WR008408 · DOI
  50. Sachdeva S., Iliev R., Medin D. L. (2009). Sinning saints and saintly sinners: The paradox of moral self-regulation. Psychological Science, 20(4), 523–528. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02326.x · DOI
  51. Simbrunner P., Schlegelmilch B. B. (2017). Moral licensing: A culture-moderated meta-analysis. Management Review Quarterly, 67(4), 201–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-017-0128-0 · DOI
  52. Sorrell S., Dimitropoulos J. (2008). The rebound effect: Microeconomic definitions, limitations and extensions. Ecological Economics, 65(3), 636–649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.08.013 · DOI · Paper page
  53. Steinhorst J., Klöckner C. A., Matthies E. (2015). Saving electricity—For the money or the environment? Risks of limiting pro-environmental spillover when using monetary framing. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 43, 125–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.05.012 · DOI
  54. Susewind M., Hoelzl E. (2014). A matter of perspective: Why past moral behavior can sometimes encourage and other times discourage future moral striving. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 44(3), 201–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12214 · DOI
  55. Thøgersen J., Noblet C. (2012). Does green consumerism increase the acceptance of wind power? Energy Policy, 51, 854–862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.09.044 · DOI
  56. Tiefenbeck V., Staake T., Roth K., Sachs O. (2013). For better or for worse? Empirical evidence of moral licensing in a behavioral energy conservation campaign. Energy Policy, 57, 160–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.01.021 · DOI
  57. Truelove H. B., Carrico A. R., Weber E. U., Raimi K. T., Vandenbergh M. P. (2014). Positive and negative spillover of pro-environmental behavior: An integrative review and theoretical framework. Global Environmental Change, 29, 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.09.004 · DOI
  58. Urban J., Bahník Š., Kohlová M. B. (2019). Green consumption does not make people cheat: Three attempts to replicate moral licensing effect due to pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 63, 139–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2019.01.011 · DOI
  59. van der Werff E., Steg L., Keizer K. (2013b). The value of environmental self-identity: The relationship between biospheric values, environmental self-identity and environmental preferences, intentions and behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 55–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2012.12.006 · DOI
  60. van der Werff E., Steg L., Keizer K. (2014). I am what I am, by looking past the present: The influence of biospheric values and past behavior on environmental self-identity. Environment and Behavior, 46(5), 626–657. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916512475209 · DOI
  61. Vandenbergh M. P., 2008, UCLA Law Review, 55, 1701
  62. Weber E. U., 1997, Psychological perspectives to environmental and ethical issues in management, 314

Metadata

Authors
Urban, J., Braun Kohlová, M., & Bahník, Š.
Venue
Environment and Behavior
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2020-07-27
Volume
53
Issue
10
Pages
1070-1094
ISSN
  • 0013-9165
  • 1552-390X
DOI
10.1177/0013916520942604
Cited by
26
References
4
Language
en
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Funders
  • Vysoká Škola Ekonomická v Praze (Internal grant No. IP300040)
  • Grantová Agentura České Republiky (16-25440S)

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