Journal of Environmental Psychology 35 (2013) 59e66

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Environmental Psychology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jep

Self-determination theory and consumer behavioural change:

Evidence from a household energy-saving behaviour study
Dave Webb*, Geoffrey N. Soutar, Tim Mazzarol, Patricia Saldaris
University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study applies self-determination theory and a modied version of the model of goal-directed
Available online 6 May 2013 behaviour (MGB) to explain self-reported household energy-saving behaviours. Online surveys were
administered to a panel of 200 consumers who were motivated to save energy in their household. A nal
Keywords: path model included positive anticipated emotions, perceived behavioural control, subjective norms,
Theory of planned behaviour (TPB) past behaviour, intentions and a combination of integrated and identied behavioural regulations
Model of goal-directed behaviour (MGB)
(autonomous motivation) to represent greater levels of self-determination as predictors of household
Intentions
energy-saving behaviours. As was expected, the effect of autonomous motivation on behaviour was
Self-determination theory (SDT)
Autonomous motivation
greater than that of other more established predictors such as intentions, subjective norms, perceived
Energy-saving behavioural control and past behaviour. Consequently, the importance of building and supporting self-
determination to achieve desired energy-saving goals is highlighted. Moreover, the results suggest the
importance of including self-determination in other behaviour-prediction contexts.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Concern over the state of the natural environment has led to
resource conservation receiving considerable attention at global,
national, social, industry and individual levels. Government-led
initiatives, such as the Kyoto Protocol, have seen organisations
across a variety of sectors respond with initiatives to design and
promote more sustainable energy consumption behaviour
(National Pollutant Inventory, 2009). The utilities sector is one in
which there have been numerous initiatives of this type. Many of
these have used extrinsic motivational strategies, such as nancial
rewards, discounts and price penalties. However, there is a down-
side to using extrinsic control strategies, as they tend to undermine
the autonomous motivation associated with sustained behavioural
change (Moller, Ryan & Deci, 2006). Energy saving behaviours need
to be internalised if they are to be sustained (Osbaldiston &
Sheldon, 2003) and internalised behaviours are usually autono-
mously motivated and, therefore, self-determined (Deci & Ryan,
2000).
Self-determined motivation inuences peoples intentions,
which are known to inuence behaviour (Osbaldiston & Sheldon,
2003). The link between intention and behaviour is central to the
theory of reasoned action (TRA; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975), the theory
of planned behaviour (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991) and the model of goal-
directed behaviour (MGB) (Perugini & Bagozzi, 2001). Building on
these theoretical models, the present study tested a simplied
model combining constructs from the MGB with self-determination
theory (SDT) to explain consumers energy conservation intentions
and behaviour. The paper begins with a review of the relevant
literature, after which the studys research design is outlined. The
results and a discussion are then presented, before the paper con-
cludes by highlighting managerial and academic implications,
noting limitations and offering suggestions for future research.
2. Conceptual background
The MGB is a social-cognitive model, based on the TPB (Ajzen,
1991). It is a well-recognised model for examining behaviour that
suggests people respond rationally in accordance with their in-
tentions to act. Intention is thought to be guided by three belief-
consideration sets:
1. Behavioural beliefs (attitude toward behaviour);
2. Normative beliefs (subjective norms);
3. Control beliefs (perceived behavioural control) (Hagger,
Chatzisarantis & Biddle, 2002).

The TPB has been used to predict pro-environmental behaviours

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 61 8 6488 7380; fax: 61 8 6488 1055. such as the adoption of water saving practises (e.g., Lynne, Casey,
E-mail address: dave.webb@uwa.edu.au (D. Webb). Hodges & Rahmani, 1995) and household recycling (e.g., Boldero,

0272-4944/$ e see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.04.003
60 D. Webb et al. / Journal of Environmental Psychology 35 (2013) 59e66
1995; Mannetti, Pierro & Livi, 2004). It assumes intentions mediate
the relationship between these predictors and behaviour. However,
the TPB is not free from criticism because of its limited ability to
directly account for the inuence of more superordinate, general
cognitive inuences on attitudes, subjective norms and perceived
behavioural control (Hagger et al., 2002; p. 284) and because it
fails to account for more global goal-directed motives (Bagozzi,
1982; Hagger et al., 2002).
These concerns led to the development of the MGB (Perugini &
Bagozzi, 2001), which has been used to examine goal-directed
behaviours such as exercise, dieting (Perugini & Bagozzi, 2001),
computing (Leone, Perugini & Ercolani, 2004) and the regulation of
hypertension (Taylor, Bagozzi & Gaither, 2005). Household energy-
saving is a goal-directed behaviour, which suggests the relevance of
MGB to this context. Beyond the constructs included in the TPB, the
MGB includes desires, anticipated emotions and past behaviour
and has been found to predict intentions and behaviour better than
the TPB. For example, Perugini and Bagozzi (2001) found the MGB
explained more of the variance in physical activity intentions (78%
vs. 58%) and physical activity behaviour (46% vs. 38%), while Leone
et al. (2004) found the MGB explained more of the variance in in-
tentions (48% vs. 18%) and behaviour (18% vs. 11%) in a computer
software training context.
Beyond the renements that led to the MGB, other additions to
the TPB have been suggested. For example, Hagger et al. (2002)
added SDT constructs, as they felt people base their intentions to
act on general motives that are caused by their psychological need
for self-determination. SDT is a psychological needs-based moti-
vational theory (Sheldon, Ryan, Deci & Kasser, 2003) based on Deci
and Ryans (1985) self-determined behavioural regulations con-
tinuum, which is represented by intrinsic, extrinsic and amotiva-
tion dimensions.
According to SDT, intrinsically motivated people have the
highest level of self-determination; undertaking behaviours for
reasons of interest and inherent satisfaction (Ryan & Deci, 2000). In
respect to extrinsic regulations, Deci and Ryan (2000) suggest
the existence of four types of behavioural regulation ordered from
the least to the most autonomous, namely external (controlled),
introjected (to avoid guilt or shame), identied (personally
endorsed) and integrated regulation (congruent with values, goals
Fig. 1. Model of self-determined goal-directed behaviour (SDGB).
and needs that are part of self). Finally, amotivation lies outside this
continuum and reects non-behaviour or passive behaviour,
because the target behaviour or its outcome is not valued.
Activities that would be difcult to describe in terms of interest
and inherent satisfaction (e.g. closing curtains and doors to control
internal room temperature), but which nonetheless are important
and congruent with personally endorsed values, goals and sense of
self (Ryan & Deci, 2000), are likely representative not of intrinsic
motivations, but of other more autonomous forms of extrinsic
motivation such as the integrated and identied motivation
orientation styles. Indeed, the appropriateness of motivation type
has been demonstrated by Losier and Koestners (1999) study
during a political campaign in Canada, in which they found iden-
tied motivation was a better predictor of voting behaviour than
intrinsic motivations. Similarly, in an energy saving context, the
integrated and identied regulations are likely to be the most
relevant and self-determined of the motivation types.
Many studies have found self-determined motivation to be a
good predictor of behaviour (e.g. Hagger & Chatzisarantis 2009;
Moller, Ryan & Deci, 2006; Ryan, Rigby & Przybylski, 2006;
Weinstein & Ryan 2010). Further, studies that combined constructs
from the TPB and SDT (e.g., Chatzisarantis & Biddle 1998; Hagger &
Chatzisarantis 2009; Hagger, Chatzisarantis & Harris, 2006) have
supported the integration of self-determination, particularly for
frequently practiced goal-directed behaviours. There is also sub-
stantial evidence that self-determination has an indirect effect on
behaviour through intentions (e.g. Chatzisarantis & Biddle 1998;
Hagger & Chatzisarantis 2009; Hagger et al. 2002; Standage, Duda
&Ntoumanis, 2003), as well as a direct effect on behaviour, (e.g.,
Green-Demers, Pelletier & Menard, 1997; Grolnick & Ryan 1987;
Lavergne, Sharp, Pelletier & Holtby, 2010; Sheldon et al. 2003). A
further reason for examining self-determined motivation in a more
extensive model is because behaviours that are autonomously
motivated are more likely to be sustained in the long-term
(Coleman & Eso-Ahola 1993; Moller et al. 2006). This is important
because non-prompted behaviours can reduce prompt costs, such
as those incurred in behavioural change directed campaigns.
For these reasons, an integrated model that explores self-
determination with goal oriented behaviour seems appropriate
when studying household energy saving. Fig. 1 illustrates the
 D. Webb et al. / Journal of Environmental Psychology 35 (2013) 59e66 61

conceptual model used in this study. It was developed from the Table 1
prior research outlined previously and can be termed a model of The measures used to represent the constructs.

self-determined goal-directed behaviour (SDGB). The structure of Scale Number Example item Sources
the original MGB (Perugini & Bagozzi 2001) is contained within the of items
dashed line area. Self-determination, including autonomous and Attitude 5 Saving energy is useless e Perugini & Bagozzi
controlled motivation styles, is added as a predictor of intentions useful 2001; Leone et al.
and behaviour. Consistent with prior studies (e.g., Hagger & 2004; Taylor et al.
2005
Chatzisarantis 2009; Hagger et al. 2002), a positive relationship is
Positive emotion 6 If I achieve my goal of Perugini & Bagozzi
hypothesized between higher levels of self-determined motivation saving energy over the 2001; Leone et al.
and consumer energy-saving intentions (H1). Further, following next four weeks, I will 2004; Taylor et al.
(Green-Demers et al. 1997; Lavergne et al. 2010), a direct relation- feel excited 2005
Negative emotion 6 If I do not achieve my Perugini & Bagozzi
ship is also hypothesized between self-determined motivation and
goal of saving energy 2001; Leone et al.
household energy-saving behaviour (H2). Finally, the model as- over the next four weeks, 2004; Taylor et al.
sumes the inclusion of self-determined motivation will signi- I will feel angry 2005
cantly enhance the predictive ability of the model (H3). The study Subjective norms 2 Most people who are Perugini & Bagozzi
undertaken to test these hypotheses and the results obtained are important to my life 2001; Leone et al.
think I should save 2004; Taylor et al.
discussed in subsequent sections.
energy over the next 2005
four weeks
3. The present study Perceived 3 How much personal Perugini & Bagozzi
behavioural control do you feel you 2001; Leone et al.
3.1. Procedure control have over keeping to 2004; Taylor et al.
your plan to save energy 2005
during the next four
A sample of 200 respondents was recruited from an online panel weeks?
of 35,000 people living in a major Australian city. Responses were Desires 6 Perugini & Bagozzi
provided by a professional research agency. The nal sample, which I want to reduce the 2001; Leone et al.
amount of energy I 2004; Taylor et al.
was representative of the wider population, included males (49%)
use in the next four 2005
and females (51%) between the ages of 18 and 70 years (18e20 weeks
years 2%; 21e30 years 26%; 31e40 years 18.5%; 41e50 Intentions 3 I intend to reduce the Perugini & Bagozzi
years 19%; 51e60 years 16%; 61 years 18.5%) who indicated amount of energy I 2001; Leone et al.
they were at the time, and for a range of reasons, making a use over the next four 2004; Taylor et al.
weeks 2005
conscious effort to reduce their energy for economic (n 167) and Self-determined 12 Saving energy Pelletier et al., 1998
environmental reasons (n 120). Forty-eight percent of the re- motivation interests me
spondents were living on a single income (n 96), 37% of re- (behavioural
spondents were supported by dual-incomes (n 73) and 15% were regulations)
Past behaviour 2 My energy consumption Perugini & Bagozzi
unemployed (n 31).
(frequency) has fallen a lot over the 2001; Leone et al.
Participants completed a 15 min online survey for a small past year 2004; Taylor et al.
nancial incentive, which is consistent with the management of 2005
online research panels. One question was displayed on the screen at Past behaviour 2 My energy consumption Perugini & Bagozzi
a time and respondents proceeded when responses were provided (recency) has fallen a lot over the 2001; Leone et al.
past four weeks 2004; Taylor et al.
to each item. In accordance with human research ethics protocol, a 2005
letter explaining the purpose of the study and that participation Behaviour 8 How often do you. Synergy 2010
was condential and voluntary was seen by participants prior to turn off the lights when
them commencing the questionnaire. not in the room?

3.2. The measures

All of the measures used in the questionnaire had demonstrated
validity and reliability previously, although the wording of some
items was amended to ensure their meaning in the presented
context was clear. As can be seen in Table 1, most of the items were
adapted from Perugini and Bagozzi (2001), although some items
came from more recent studies (e.g. Leone et al. 2004; Taylor et al.
2005). The self-determined motivation orientation style measure
was adapted from Pelletier, Tuson, Beaton, Green-Demers & Noelss
(1998) Motivation toward the Environment Scale (MTES), while the
measure of behaviour reected specic activity suggestions high-
lighted by a local energy utility provider as being important to
reduce household energy consumption (Synergy 2010). The full list
of items is provided in Appendix A.
3.3. Data analysis procedures
The analysis began with an exploration of the data. Conrma-
tory factor analysis (CFA) procedures were used to examine each
constructs measurement properties. This was followed by the
estimation of the SDGB model. The CFAs and the structural model
were estimated using the AMOS 18.0 structural equation modelling
(SEM) software program. The results obtained are discussed in the
following section.
4. The results
4.1. The models constructs measurement properties
According to SDT, the motivation orientation continuum can be
represented as a simplex-ordered correlation structure, such that
theoretically adjacent orientations are expected to correlate more
highly than those more distant on the continuum (Li & Harmer,
1996). However, the simplex structure did not t the present
studys data (CFI 0.93, AGFI 0.84, SMRM 0.14). Consequently,
the approach adopted by many SDT scholars (e.g., Patrick, Skinner &
Connell 1993; Villacorta, Koestner & Lekes 2003) of calculating a
relative autonomy index (RAI) was deemed inappropriate. How-
ever, consistent with the conceptualisation of the self-determined
62 D. Webb et al. / Journal of Environmental Psychology 35 (2013) 59e66

continuum (Deci & Ryan 1985), the identication of appropriate Table 2

motivational orientations to our context, other SDT scholars The constructs measurement properties.

(e.g.,Vansteenkiste, Soenens, Sierens, Luyckx & Lens 2009) and the Construct Number Goodness Range of Construct AVE
results of our simplex-ordered analysis, the integrated and identi- of items of ta the reliability score
ed motivational orientations were combined to form a second- loadings

order factor measure of autonomous motivation and external Attitude 4 5.46 (0.07) 0.66e0.98 0.93 0.77
regulation and amotivation were combined to form a second-order Positive anticipated 3 1.47 (0.23) 0.94e0.96 0.97 0.93
emotions
factor measure of controlled motivation. Both measures were
Negative 3 3.34 (0.07) 0.71e0.90 0.92 0.79
included in the nal model. anticipated
As was noted in the previous section, prior to estimating the emotions
suggested models, all of the included constructs measurement Subjective norms 2 0.94 (0.33) 0.51e0.86 0.84 0.72
Perceived 3 0.19 (0.66) 0.59e0.81 0.85 0.66
properties were examined. Following Fornell and Larckers (1981)
behavioural
suggestion, the constructs unidimensionality, reliability, conver- control
gent validity and discriminant validity were assessed through CFA Desires 4 3.00 (0.22) 0.73e0.96 0.94 0.79
procedures. Unidimensionality was assessed through the con- Autonomous 4 0.74 (0.39) 0.61e0.80 0.85 0.74
structs goodness of t and the strength of the loadings, while in- motivation
Controlled 4 0.00 (0.98) 0.57e0.85 0.87 0.77
ternal consistency was assessed by computing construct reliability
motivation
scores. Convergent and discriminant validity were assessed by Intentions 3 3.27 (0.07) 0.85e0.95 0.95 0.86
computing average variance extracted (AVE) scores for each Past behaviour 2 3.27 (0.07) 0.52e0.83 0.91 0.84
construct. An AVE score of 0.50 or greater suggests a construct has (frequency &
convergent validity, while a squared correlation between two recency)
Behaviour 3 0.01 (0.97) 0.58e0.74 0.84 0.63
constructs that is less than the constructs AVE scores suggests
a
discriminant validity can be assumed between those constructs Goodness of t was assessed through the constructs chi-square statistic. The
signicance of the chi-square statistic is shown in the brackets.
(Fornell & Larcker 1981). During the CFA testing stage some items
were removed from several scales in order to obtain a set of mea-
sures with acceptable measurement properties. The nal items household energy-saving behaviour. Consequently, the reduced
included in the survey are indicated by an asterisk in Appendix A. MGB framework was estimated rst and the results obtained can
However, the correlation between desires and intentions (0.86) be seen in Fig. 3, in which only signicant paths are shown. The
(Appendix B) indicated a discriminant validity problem between revised model tted the data well (chi-square 6.60, p 0.08;
these constructs. Consequently, desires was excluded and the CFI 0.99; RMSEA 0.08), explaining 59 percent of the variation
reduced model shown in Fig. 2 was estimated. As can be seen in in intentions and 16 percent of the variation in behaviour. While
Table 2, all of the retained constructs had good measurement all of the paths in the MGB were expected to be signicant, this
properties, which was not surprising as they were based on well- was not the case, as attitude and negative anticipated emotions
established scales. were not signicantly related to intentions. Positive anticipated
emotions, subjective norms (SN) and perceived behavioural
4.2. The structural model control (PBC) were signicant predictors of intentions, but a
signicant path between perceived behavioural control and
The main purpose of the present study was to explore the behaviour was not found. For the most part, the results were
additional impact autonomous motivation had on consumer consistent with those reported elsewhere (e.g., Hagger &

Fig. 2. A modied SDGB model.

 D. Webb et al. / Journal of Environmental Psychology 35 (2013) 59e66 63

Fig. 3. The modied MGB model (without self-determined motivation).

Chatzisarantis 2009; Perugini & Bagozzi 2001), although the
estimated model did not include the desires construct due to a
lack of discriminant validity.
A second model, shown in Fig. 4, which included autonomous
motivation and controlled motivation was also estimated. This
augmented model also tted the data well (chi-square 1.08,
p 0.78; CFI 1.00, RMSEA 0.00), although only the paths be-
tween autonomous motivations and intentions and behaviour
contributed signicantly to the model, increasing the explained
variance of intentions to 60 percent and behaviour to 23 percent.
Consequently, H1 and H2 are accepted.
Hypothesis 3, which suggested the inclusion of self-determined
motivations (in this case autonomous motivations) would enhance
the predictive ability of the model, was tested by comparing the
two models. F-tests, which were used to assess the signicance of
the change in R-squared values when autonomous motivation was
added, found no signicant increase in the variance explained in
intentions (59%e60%). However, the shift in behaviours explained
variance (16%e23%) was signicant (F 17.91, P <0.01), which
led to H3 being accepted.
5. Discussion
The present study examined a model of household energy-saving
by merging constructs from the MGB and SDT. Not only did the
ndings highlight the relevance of integrating self-determined

Fig. 4. The SDGB model.

64 D. Webb et al. / Journal of Environmental Psychology 35 (2013) 59e66
motivations, or more autonomous forms of behavioural regulation,
as predictors of behaviour, they also suggested the intentions as a
predictor of behaviour relationship deserves further consideration.
Figs. 3 and 4 suggested adding autonomous motivation reduced
the role of intentions as a predictor of behaviour. Indeed, the in-
clusion of autonomous motivation led to the path from intentions
to behaviour becoming non-signicant (0.03, P 0.74). This high-
lights the important role autonomous motivations play in pre-
dicting consumer energy-saving behaviour, at least in the present
context. How do we explain this nding?
Drawing on Vallerands (1997) hierarchical model about inte-
grating regulations at three levels of generality (global, contextual
and situational), Hagger et al. (2006) highlighted the decreasing
stability and enduring qualities of behavioural regulations from
global to situational levels. In other words, more autonomous forms
of motivation (in our case, a combination of integrated and iden-
tied motivations) are likely to be more stable and enduring than
are intentions that reect plans to engage in behaviour at a situa-
tional level.
Because the behavioural regulations items are more reective of
motivation at a contextual level, it may be autonomous motivations
predict behaviour more directly because intentions capture situa-
tional rather than contextual level motives. Consequently, research
exploring the conceptual and empirical relationship between
behavioural regulations and intentions would make a valuable
addition to knowledge.
6. Implications for management, theory and future research
As anticipated, this study found an increase in autonomous
motivation was associated with an increase in consumer energy-
saving behaviour. Consequently, organisations that want to reduce
household energy consumption should explore ways in which more
autonomously motivated behaviours can be enhanced. Here, the
self-determination theory literature provides evidence of a positive
relationship between meeting and supporting a persons basic
psychological needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness and
motivations. Indeed, the important role psychological need satis-
faction plays as a nutriment for autonomous motivation is central to
SDT (Ryan & Deci 2000). This is consistent with earlier research that
pointed to the importance of internalised norms or self-expectations
and self-efcacy on energy saving by households (Thgersen &
Grnhj 2010). This highlights the need for utility companies and
government agencies seeking to reduce household energy con-
sumption to focus on socio-structural environmental factors and to
empower consumers with knowledge and information about how to
affect such change (Gadenne, Sharma, Kerr, & Smith, 2011).
Public information and education campaigns targeting house-
hold energy consumption have often adopted a market-based
methodology in which energy pricing has played a key role
(Perrels, Ostertag & Henderson 2006). This approach is undoubt-
edly an important factor. However households with higher incomes
may tend to save less energy than their lower income counterparts
simply because they can afford to absorb higher energy costs
(Martinsson, Lundqvist & Sundstrm 2011). For this reason the
longer term effectiveness of public information and education
campaigns needs to target attitudes and self-determined behaviour
as a complementary strategy to pricing.
Thus, the focus of attention turns to identifying ways in which
autonomy, competence and relatedness can be satised and sup-
ported. As can be seen from the present results, more controlling
approaches, which might take the form of nancial incentives and/
or the threat of punishment for non-compliance, are not only non-
signicantly associated with intentions and behaviour but, more-
over, may even hinder the extent to which a person feels their needs
for autonomy, competence and relatedness are being supported. An
exploration of this issue would also improve our knowledge in this
area and would be a fruitful avenue for further exploration. From an
organisation point of view it is worth remembering that controlling
approaches, such as those mentioned, are not only potentially more
costly to run but are also less likely to be successful in bringing
about a sustained change in behaviour (Moller et al., 2006).
This research suggests organisations may benet from exploring
ways in which an individuals needs for autonomy, competence and
relatedness can be supported. For public utilities and similar or-
ganisations, modern information and communications technolo-
gies (ICT) provide a potential solution. ICT, such as websites and
other social media forums, offer people a useful means to achieving
desired autonomy, competence and relatedness outcomes. For
example, people engaging in a purpose-built online site with
carefully designed and placed material could become more
knowledgeable about the what and how of various behaviours
(competence), such as the pro-environmental behaviours included
in this study. Similarly, engaging with others online may provide a
forum through which a persons needs not only for competence but
also for relatedness can be met and supported. Together, these are
likely to reinforce a persons volitional (autonomous) decision-
making in regard to the desired focal behaviour (i.e., energy-
saving). Consequently, we suggest this is also an area worthy of
future research attention. Questions driving such research might
include the extent to which ICT should or can be used to enhance
self-determined decision making and whether some ICT ap-
proaches are more effective than others in achieving such goals.
The usefulness of integrating self-determination theory con-
structs with other models to explain behaviours across various
contexts is growing. Indeed, Hagger and Chatzisarantis (2009)
recent meta-analysis provides empirical support for the theoret-
ical integration of SDT with TPB. While their study did not reveal
direct effects of self-determined forms of motivation on intentions,
others have found this to be the case (e.g., Hagger et al., 2009). The
present study adds to this literature by revealing direct and indirect
intentions and behaviour paths. Clearly there is room for further
development, taking in to account the limitations of the present
study that are discussed in the next section.
7. Limitations
The study was cross-sectional, limiting the extent to which
the impact motivation and intentions had on behaviour could
be explored. Second, the study was limited to a specic pro-
environmental context (household energy-saving). A study
including a range of behavioural settings would strengthen theory
development and a longitudinal design across a range of settings
would also be benecial. Third, as was highlighted, a number of
measurement issues were found that impacted on the extent to
which a more comprehensive MGB framework could be examined,
suggesting the need for a revised desires scale that is operationally
differentiated from intentions (see Perugini & Bagozzi 2004).
Fourth, the study used self-report data that may suffer social-
desirability bias. Future studies would benet from incorporating
actual consumption data. Fifth, the study estimated a simplied
model with a small number of paths. More elaborate model
structures (e.g., Hagger & Chatzisarantis 2009) that investigate
alternative mediating and moderating relationships should also be
examined.
8. Conclusions
It is important to reduce the amount of energy consumed by
households, not only because of the potential environmental
 D. Webb et al. / Journal of Environmental Psychology 35 (2013) 59e66
benets this would bring about, but also because of the escalating
price of energy in many areas, as such savings would reduce
household energy bills. Utility providers have trialled a range of
initiatives to change consumer energy consumption behaviour. In
Western Australia, these have included mass media campaigns in
print and on radio and TV. One key focus of these has been to get
consumers to move consumption away from peak periods. In
addition, energy-saving tips have been promoted on a dedicated
web site (Synergy 2010) and school visits have been undertaken as
part of a wider education program. Other initiatives geared toward
shifting behaviour include the promotion of more sustainable
products, such as solar power systems and an associated energy
buy-back scheme supported by the government. From these few
examples it is clear steps have been taken to reduce energy con-
sumption. However, the effectiveness of these initiatives in
bringing about sustained behavioural change is uncertain (Steg
2008).
The present study suggests one approach would be to meet and
support a persons needs for self-determined action. Not only
would this reduce the burden placed on organisations to maintain
strategies that promote compliance (i.e., reward incentives), but,
according to SDT, autonomously motivated behaviours are more
likely to be sustained over the long-term (Moller et al. 2006). We
have suggested the possibility of exploring how ICT, as one rela-
tively low-cost solution, can be used to promote greater self-
determination. Many other factors may need to be considered,
including the persons socio-economic status, type of housing,
existing knowledge and motivation to conserve energy and their
ability to engage in energy conservation programs (see: Steg 2008;
Martinsson et al. 2011; Gadenne et al. 2011). However, the effec-
tiveness of ICT approaches would seem to be an important area of
study for researchers interested in identifying potentially success-
ful long-term sustainable energy reduction strategies.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge with gratitude the assistance of
Pureprole with the collection of data and anonymous reviewers
for their suggestions which helped improve earlier versions of this
paper.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data related to this article can be found at
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.04.003.
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and
Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179e211.
Bagozzi, R. P. (1982). A eld investigation of causal relationships among cognitions,
affect, intentions, and behaviour. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4), 562e584.
Boldero, J. (1995). The prediction of household recycling of news-papers: The role of
attitudes, intentions and situational factors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
25(5), 440e462.
Chatzisarantis, N. L. D., & Biddle, S. J. H. (1998). Functional signicance of psycho-
logical variables that are included in the theory of planned behaviour: A self-
determination theory approach to the study of attitudes, subjective norms,
perceptions of control and intentions. European Journal of Social Psychology,
28(3), 303e322.
Coleman, D., & Eso-Ahola, S. E. (1993). Leisure and health: The role of social support
and self-determination. Journal of Leisure Research, 25(2), 111e128.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behaviour. New York, NY: Plenum.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The What and Why of goal pursuits: Human
needs and the self-determination of behaviour. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4),
227e268.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: an intro-
duction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addition-Wesley.
65
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39e50.
Gadenne, D., Sharma, B., Kerr, D., & Smith, T. (2011). The inuence of consumers
environmental beliefs and attitudes on energy saving behaviours. Energy Policy,
39(12), 7684e7694.
Green-Demers, I., Pelletier, L. G., & Menard, S. (1997). The impact of behavioural
difculty on the saliency of the association between self-determined motiva-
tion and environmental behaviours. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science,
29(3), 157e166.
Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). Autonomy in childrens learning: An experi-
mental and individual difference investigation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 52(5), 890e898.
Hagger, M. S., & Chatzisarantis, N. L. D. (2009). Integrating the theory of planned
behaviour and self-determination theory in health behaviour: A meta-analysis.
British Journal of Health Psychology, 14(2), 275e302.
Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L. D., & Biddle, S. J. H. (2002). The inuence of
autonomous and controlling motives on physical activity intentions within the
theory of planned behaviour. British Journal of Health Psychology, 7(3), 283e297.
Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L. D., & Harris, J. (2006). From psychological need
satisfaction to intentional behaviour: Testing a motivational sequence in two
behavioural contexts. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(2), 131e148.
Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L. D., Hein, V., Soos, I., Karsai, I., Lintunen, T., et al.
(2009). Teacher, peer and parent autonomy support in physical education and
leisure-time physical activity: A trans-contextual model of motivation in four
nations. Psychology and Health, 24(6), 689e711.
Lavergne, K. J., Sharp, E. C., Pelletier, L. G., & Holtby, A. (2010). The role of perceived
government style in the facilitation of self-determined and non-self-
determined motivation for pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environ-
mental Psychology, 30(2), 169e177.
Leone, L., Perugini, M., & Ercolani, A. P. (2004). Studying, practicing and mastering:
A test of the model of goal-directed behaviour (MGB) in the software learning
domain. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(9), 1945e1973.
Li, F., & Harmer, P. (1996). Testing the simplex assumption underlying the sport
motivation scale: A structural equation modeling analysis. Research Quarterly
for Exercise and Sport, 67(4), 396e405.
Losier, G. F., & Koestner, R. (1999). Intrinsic versus identied regulation in distinct
political campaigns: The consequences of following politics for pleasure
versus personal meaningfulness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
25(3), 287e298.
Lynne, G. D., Casey, C. F., Hodges, A., & Rahmani, M. (1995). Conservation technology
adoption and the theory of planned behaviour. Journal of Economic Psychology,
16(4), 581e598.
Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., & Livi, S. (2004). Recycling: Planned and self-expressive
behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(2), 227e236.
Martinsson, J., Lundqvist, L. J., & Sundstrm, A. (2011). Energy saving in Swedish
households. The (relative) importance of environmental attitudes. Energy Policy,
39, 5182e5191.
Moller, A. C., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Self-determination theory and public
policy: Improving the quality of consumer decisions without using coercion.
Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 25(1), 104e116.
National Pollutant Inventory (NPI). (5 April 2009). Australian government sustainable
development and decreasing pollutant emissions initiatives. Department of the
Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. Available from: http://www.npi.gov.
au/about/govt-initiatives.html.
Osbaldiston, R., & Sheldon, K. M. (2003). Promoting internalized motivation for
environmentally responsible behaviour: A prospective study of environmental
goals. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23(4), 349e357.
Patrick, B. C., Skinner, E. A., & Connell, J. P. (1993). What motivates childrens
behaviour and emotion? Joint effects of perceived control and autonomy in the
academic domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 781e791.
Pelletier, L. G., Tuson, K. M., Beaton, A. M., Green-Demers, I., & Noels, K. (1998). Why
are you doing things for the environment? The motivation towards the envi-
ronment scale (MTES). Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(5), 437e468.
Perrels, A., Ostertag, K., & Henderson, G. (2006). Reshaping markets for the benet
of energy saving. Energy Policy, 34, 121e128.
Perugini, M., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2001). The role of desires and anticipated emotions in
goal-directed behaviours: Broadening and deepening the theory of planned
behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(1), 79e98.
Perugini, M., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2004). The distinction between desires and intentions.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 69e84.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of
intrinsic motivation, social development and well-being. American Psychologist,
55(1), 68e78.
Ryan, R. M., Rigby, C. S., & Przybylski, A. K. (2006). The motivational pull of video
games: A self-determination theory approach. Motivation and Emotion, 30(4),
347e364.
Sheldon, K. M., Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L., & Kasser, T. (2003). The independent effects of
goal contents and motives on well-being: Its both what you pursue and why
you pursue it. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(4), 475e486.
Standage, M., Duda, J. L., & Ntoumanis, N. (2003). A model of contextual motivation
in physical education: Using constructs from self-determination and achieve-
ment theories to predict physical activity intentions. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 95(1), 97e110.
Steg, L. (2008). Promoting household energy conservation. Energy Policy, 36(12),
4449e4453.
66 D. Webb et al. / Journal of Environmental Psychology 35 (2013) 59e66
Synergy (2010). http://www.synergy.net.au/at_home/energy%20saving%20tips.xhtml.
Taylor, S. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Gaither, C. A. (2005). Decision making and effort in the
self-regulation of hypertension: Testing two competing theories. British Journal
of Health Psychology, 10(4), 505e530.
Thgersen, J., & Grnhj, A. (2010). Electricity saving in households e A social
cognitive approach. Energy Policy, 38, 7732e7743.
Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Towards a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology
(pp. 271e359). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Vansteenkiste, M., Soenens, B., Sierens, E., Luyckx, K., & Lens, W. (2009). Motiva-
tional proles from a self-determination perspective: The quality of motivation
matters. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 671e688.
Villacorta, M., Koestner, R., & Lekes, N. (2003). Further validation of the motivation
toward environment scale. Environment & Behaviour, 35(4), 486e505.
Weinstein, N., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). When helping helps: Autonomous moti-
vation for prosocial behaviour and its inuence on well-being for the
helper and recipient. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(2),
222e244.