The Impact of Green Perception on Pro-Greenspace Behavior of Urban Residents in Megacities: Shaped by “Good Citizen” Image
Abstract
1. Introduction
1.1. Influencing Factors of Pro-Environmental Behavior
1.2. Consideration of Face Culture
1.3. Issues to Be Addressed
2. Theoretical Framework and Research Hypotheses
2.1. C-SOR: An Extended Theoretical Model of SOR
2.2. The Impact of Green Perception on Pro-Environmental Behavior
2.3. Mediating Effect of Nature Connectedness
2.4. The Moderating Role of Face and Individual Heterogeneity
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Data Collection
3.2. Measures
3.3. Model Specification
- The OLS regression model and mediation effect model
- The moderating effect model
4. Results
4.1. Model Analysis of Residents’ Green Perception Influencing Pro-Greenspace Behavior
4.2. Test of the Mediating Effect of Nature Connectedness
4.3. Test of the Moderating Effect of the Chinese Concept of Face
4.4. Heterogeneity Analysis
4.4.1. Economic Income Differences
4.4.2. Gender Differences
4.4.3. Age Differences
5. Discussion
5.1. Green Perception, Nature Connectedness, and Pro-Greenspace Behavior
5.2. The Role of Face
5.3. Impact of Individual Heterogeneity on Research
5.4. Limitations and Future Research
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
PGB | Pro-greenspace Behavior |
GP | Green Perception |
M | Nature Connectedness |
face | Chinese concept of face |
GP × face | Interaction term of green perception and face |
domi | Household registration |
edu | Education |
old | Number of elders |
child | Number of children |
toh | Type of house |
fre | Monthly browsing frequency |
stay | Average activity time |
Civil-PGB | Civilized pro-greenspace behavior |
Promo-PGB | Promotional pro-greenspace behavior |
Contri-PGB | Contributory pro-greenspace behavior |
References
- Zhang, D.; Yu, Y.; Guo, W. When do individuals take action to protect the environment?—Exploring the mediating effects of negative impacts of environmental risk. J. Environ. Psychol. 2024, 100, 102472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.N.; Qin, C.B.; Xue, Q.; Lu, L.; Zhang, J.W.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, X.J.; Xioang, S.G.; Qiang, Y.; Xiao, Y. Research on the construction of a Beautiful China Initiative from the perspective of ecological civilization: Review and Prospect. China Environ. Sci. 2024, 45, 1136–1147. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yeh, A.G.O.; Chen, Z. From cities to super mega city regions in China in a new wave of urbanisation and economic transition: Issues and challenges. Urban Stud. 2020, 57, 636–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, J.; Maryam, S. Aesthetic Preference and Mental Restoration Prediction in Urban Parks: An Application of Environmental Modeling Approach. Urban For. Urban Green. 2020, 54, 126775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hines, J.M.; Hungerford, H.R.; Tomera, A.N. Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. J. Environ. Educ. 1987, 18, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kiatkawsin, K.; Han, H. Young travelers’ intention to behave pro-environmentally: Merging the value-belief-norm theory and the expectancy theory. Tour. Manag. 2017, 59, 76–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, A.K.; Weiler, B. Visitors’ attitudes towards responsible fossil collecting behaviour: An environmental attitude-based segmentation approach. Tour. Manag. 2013, 36, 602–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stern, P.C.; Dietz, T.; Abel, T.; Guagnano, G.A.; Kalof, L. A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Hum. Ecol. Rev. 1999, 6, 81–97. Available online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/24707060 (accessed on 14 June 2025).
- Fahlquist, J.N. Moral responsibility for environmental problems—Individual or institutional? J. Agric. Environ. Ethic. 2009, 22, 109–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, Z.; Soopramanien, D. Types of place attachment and pro-environmental behaviors of urban residents in Beijing. Cities 2019, 84, 112–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koenig-Lewis, N.; Palmer, A.; Dermody, J.; Urbye, A. Consumers’ evaluations of ecological packaging–Rational and emotional approaches. J. Environ. Psychol. 2014, 37, 94–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berenguer, J.; Corraliza, J.A.; Martin, R. Rural-urban differences in environmental concern, attitudes, and actions. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 2005, 21, 128–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalantari, K.; Fami, H.S.; Asadi, A.; Mohammadi, H.M. Investigating factors affecting environmental behavior of urban residents: A case study in Tehran City-Iran. Am. J. Environ. Sci. 2007, 3, 67–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, X.; Zhang, L. Understanding residents’ green purchasing behavior from a perspective of the ecological personality traits: The moderating role of gender. Soc. Sci. J. 2024, 61, 668–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dolnicar, S.; Leisch, F. Selective marketing for environmentally sustainable tourism. Tour. Manag. 2008, 29, 672–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fornara, F.; Molinario, E.; Scopelliti, M.; Bonnes, M.; Bonaiuto, F.; Cicero, L.; Admiraal, J.; Beringer, A.; Dedeurwaerdere, T.; de Groot, W.; et al. The extended Value-Belief-Norm theory predicts committed action for nature and biodiversity in Europe. Environ. Impact. Assess. 2020, 81, 106338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Littleford, C.; Ryley, T.J.; Firth, S.K. Context, control and the spillover of energy use behaviours between office and home settings. J. Environ. Psychol. 2014, 40, 157–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Staats, H. Understanding proenvironmental attitudes and behavior: An analysis and review of research based on the theory of planned behavior. In Psychological Theories for Environmental Issues; Ashgate: Aldershot, UK, 2003; pp. 171–201. [Google Scholar]
- Goffman, E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life; (Original work published by Doubleday); Penguin Books: Harmondsworth, UK, 1959. [Google Scholar]
- Leary, M.R.; Kowalski, R.M. Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychol. Bull. 1990, 107, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Triandis, H.C. Individualism-collectivism and personality. J. Pers. 2001, 69, 907–924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hwang, A.; Francesco, A.M.; Kessler, E. The relationship between individualism-collectivism, face, and feedback and learning processes in Hong Kong, Singapore, and the United States. J. Cross. Cult. Psychol. 2003, 34, 72–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wong, N.Y.; Ahuvia, A.C. Personal taste and family face: Luxury consumption in Confucian and Western societies. Psychol. Market. 1998, 15, 423–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Juan Li, J.; Su, C. How face influences consumption-a comparative study of American and Chinese consumers. Int. J. Market. Res. 2007, 49, 237–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.H.; Dou, L.L. The Influencing Factors of Face Awareness on the Public’s Environmental Behavior in the Public Domain. Jiangsu Soc. Sci. 2021, 90–100+243. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mehrabian, A.; Russell, J.A. An Approach to Environmental Psychology; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1974. [Google Scholar]
- Frumkin, H.; Bratman, G.N.; Breslow, S.J.; Cochran, B.; Kahn, P.H., Jr.; Lawler, J.J.; Levin, P.S.; Tandon, P.S.; Varanasi, U.; Wolf, K.L.; et al. Nature Contact and Human Health: A Research Agenda. Environ. Health Persp. 2017, 125, 075001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agarwal, J.; Malhotra, N.K. An integrated model of attitude and affect: Theoretical foundation and an empirical investigation. J. Bus. Res. 2005, 58, 483–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guagnano, G.A.; Stern, P.C.; Dietz, T. Influences on attitude-behavior relationships: A natural experiment with curbside recycling. Environ. Behav. 1995, 27, 699–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, G.G.; Hu, X.J. Favor and Face: Power Games of Chinese; Renmin University Press: Beijing, China, 2010. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Hall, G.C.; Hong, J.J.; Zane, N.W.; Meyer, O.L. Culturally competent treatments for Asian Americans: The relevance of mindfulness and acceptance-based psychotherapies. Clin. Psychol. Sci. Pract. 2011, 18, 215–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hipólito, J. The Sensorial Effect: Dynamics of Emotion in Pro-Environmental Behavior. Appl. Environ. Educ. Commun. 2011, 10, 189–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, Y.; Shao, Y.; Hao, Y.; Lu, X. Perceived Soundscape Experiences and Human Emotions in Urban Green Spaces: Application of Russell’s Circumplex Model of Affect. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 5828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dopko, R.L.; Capaldi, C.A.; Zelenski, J.M. The psychological and social benefits of a nature experience for children: A preliminary investigation. J. Environ. Psychol. 2019, 63, 134–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hartig, T.; Korpela, K.; Evans, G.W.; Gärling, T. A measure of restorativequality in environments. Scand. Hous. Plan. Res. 1997, 14, 175–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herzog, T.R.; Black, A.M.; Fountaine, K.A.; Knotts, D.J. Reflection andattentional recovery as distinctive benefits of restorative environments. J. Environ. Psychol. 1997, 17, 165–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ulrich, R.S.; Simons, R.F.; Losito, B.D.; Fiorito, E.; Miles, M.A.; Zelson, M. Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. J. Environ. Psychol. 1991, 11, 201–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beil, K.; Hanes, D. The influence of urban natural and built environments on physiological and psychological measures of stress—A pilot study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2013, 10, 1250–1267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Homburg, A.; Stolberg, A. Explaining pro-environmental behavior with a cognitive theory of stress. J. Environ. Psychol. 2006, 26, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meloni, A.; Fornara, F.; Carrus, G. Predicting pro-environmental behaviors in the urban context: The direct or moderated effect of urban stress, city identity, and worldviews. Cities 2019, 88, 83–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mathers-Jones, J.; Todd, J. Ecological anxiety and pro-environmental behaviour: The role of attention. J. Anxiety Disord. 2023, 98, 102745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guéguen, N.; Stefan, J. “Green altruism” short immersion in natural green environments and helping behavior. Environ. Behav. 2016, 48, 324–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilson, E.O. Biophilia; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1986. [Google Scholar]
- Kellert, S.R.; Wilson, E.O. The Biophilia Hypothesis; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Hosseini, F.; Sajadzadeh, H.; Aram, F.; Mosavi, A. The impact of local green spaces of historically and culturally valuable residential areas on place attachment. Land 2021, 10, 351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dasgupta, R.; Basu, M.; Hashimoto, S.; Estoque, R.C.; Kumar, P.; Johnson, B.A.; Mitra, B.K.; Mitra, P. Residents’ place attachment to urban green spaces in Greater Tokyo region: An empirical assessment of dimensionality and influencing socio-demographic factors. Urban For. Urban Green 2022, 67, 127438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mayer, F.S.; Frantz, C.M. The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. J. Environ. Psychol. 2004, 24, 503–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, J.C.H.; Monroe, M.C. Connection to nature: Children’s affective attitude toward nature. Environ. Behav. 2012, 44, 31–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Batson, C.D.; Duncan, B.D.; Ackerman, P.; Buckley, T.; Birch, K. Is empathic emotion a source of altruistic motivation? J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1981, 40, 290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tam, K.P. Dispositional empathy with nature. J. Environ. Psychol. 2013, 35, 92–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berenguer, J. The effect of empathy in pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors. Environ. Behav. 2007, 39, 269–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, L.; Sheng, G.; She, S.; Xu, J. Impact of empathy with nature on pro-environmental behaviour. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2023, 47, 652–668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, L.J. Rectifying share money: The concept of human relations and social practice of young people in the digital age. China Youth. Study 2025, 78–85. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.A.; Cao, Q.; Grigoriou, N. Consciousness of social face: The development and validation of a scale measuring desire to gain face versus fear of losing face. J. Soc. Psychol. 2011, 151, 129–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, X.R.; Ji, Q.Z.; Ye, Y.Q. Reverse intergenerational influence: Research on the factors on online consumption of middle-aged and elderly groups in urban areas. Media Observer. 2024, 99–110. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bao, Y.; Zhou, K.Z.; Su, C. Face consciousness and risk aversion: Do they affect consumer decision-making? Psychol. Market. 2003, 20, 733–755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tan, Y.P.; Zhang, N.; Huang, L.Y. Attitude is important: A Study on the influencing factors of environmental protection intention in the public sphere—Discussing the moderating role of face awareness. Chin. J. Comput.-Mediat. Commun. 2024, 135–155+284. [Google Scholar]
- Fu, W.F.; Zhai, Y.Q.; Zhang, S.C. Study on policy guidance, product supply and green consumption behavior of urban and rural residents——A moderated mediation effect model. Resour. Dev. Mark. 2025, 41, 64–71. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.H.; Zhang, J.X. Impacts of sex, gender role and gender belief on undergraduates’ personality traits. Psychol. Dev. Educ. 2007, 50–55. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- National Bureau of Statistics. Statistical tables and graphs on economic and social development: Basic information on the population of megacities and mega-cities in the Seventh National Population Census. Seek. Truth 2021, 79. [Google Scholar]
- Smith-Sebasto, N.J.; D’Costa, A. Designing a Likert-type scale to predict ERB in undergraduate students: A multistep process. J. Environ. Educ. 1995, 27, 14–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grahn, P.; Stigsdotter, U.K. The relation between perceived sensory dimensions of urban green space and stress restoration. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2010, 94, 264–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, Z.M.; Zheng, W.Y.; Kuang, Z. The difference of face measurement between reflective model and formative model and the face influence on green product preference. Chin. J. Manag. 2017, 14, 1208–1218. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baron, R.M.; Kenny, D.A. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1986, 51, 1173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martin, L.; White, M.P.; Hunt, A.; Richardson, M.; Pahl, S.; Burt, J. Nature contact, nature connectedness and associations with health, wellbeing and pro-environmental behaviours. J. Environ. Psychol. 2020, 68, 101389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- DeVille, N.V.; Tomasso, L.P.; Stoddard, O.P.; Wilt, G.E.; Horton, T.H.; Wolf, K.L.; Brymer, E.; Kahn, P.H., Jr.; James, P. Time spent in nature is associated with increased pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 7498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, W.; Chen, J. Green spaces in Chinese schools enhance children’s environmental attitudes and pro-environmental behavior. Child. Youth Environ. 2021, 31, 55–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ojala, A. The interaction between emotional connectedness to nature and leisure activities in predicting ecological worldview. Umweltpsychologie 2009, 13, 10–22. [Google Scholar]
- Klaniecki, K.; Leventon, J.; Abson, D.J. Human–nature connectedness as a ‘treatment’ for pro-environmental behavior: Making the case for spatial considerations. Sustain. Sci. 2018, 13, 1375–1388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whitburn, J.; Linklater, W.L.; Milfont, T.L. Exposure to urban nature and tree planting are related to pro-environmental behavior via connection to nature, the use of nature for psychological restoration, and environmental attitudes. Environ. Behav. 2019, 51, 787–810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, H.; Cai, L.; Bai, B.; Yang, Y.; Zhang, J. National forest park visitors’ connectedness to nature and pro-environmental behavior: The effects of cultural ecosystem service, place and event attachment. J. Outdoor. Rec. Tour. 2023, 42, 100621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berto, R.; Barbiero, G. How the psychological benefits associated with exposure to nature can affect pro-environmental behavior. Ann. Cogn. Sci. 2017, 1, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, Z.M.; Zheng, W.Y. An eye-tracking study on consumer preference for ecological products in the context of face culture [面子文化中消费者生态产品偏好的眼动研究]. J. Manag. World 2017, 129–140+169. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, W.; Wu, J.; Wu, M.Y.; Pearce, P.L. Shaping tourists’ green behavior: The hosts’ efforts at rural Chinese B&Bs. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2018, 9, 194–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, G.; Chen, Y.; Liu, Y. From inner needs to external actions: The impact of face consciousness on tourists’ pro-environmental behavior. Asia. Pac. J. Tour. Res. 2025, 30, 92–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clark, C.F.; Kotchen, M.J.; Moore, M.R. Internal and external influences on pro-environmental behavior: Participation in a green electricity program. J. Environ. Psychol. 2003, 23, 237–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gneezy, U.; Meier, S.; Rey-Biel, P. When and why incentives (don’t) work to modify behavior. J. Econ. Perspect. 2011, 25, 191–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cialdini, R.B.; Goldstein, N.J. Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2004, 55, 591–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Meyer, A. Is unemployment good for the environment? Resour. Energy Econ. 2016, 45, 18–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.A.; Tian, P.; Grigoriou, N. Gain face, but lose happiness? It depends on how much money you have. Asian. J. Soc. Psychol. 2011, 14, 112–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fu, S.C.; Gu, J.X. The Governance of High Betrothal Price. J. Guizhou Norm. Univ. (Soc. Sci. Ed.) 2024, 129–139. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Imamoğlu, E.O.; Kiliç, N. A social psychological comparison of the Turkish elderly residing at high or low quality institutions. J. Environ. Psychol. 1999, 19, 231–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, T.; Fang, M.; Fu, L.; Jin, X.Y. Relative Income and Subjective Economic Status: The Collectivist Perspective. Econ. Res. J. 2019, 54, 118–133. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, X.A.; Wang, W. Face consciousness and conspicuous luxury consumption in China. J. Contemp. Mark. Sci. 2019, 2, 63–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Z.Z. The Theoretical Analysis and Empirical Study on Face. In The Psychology of Chinese People; Yang, G., Ed.; Laurel Books Company: New Taipei City, Taiwan, China, 1998; pp. 155–238. [Google Scholar]
- Hou, B.W.; Yin, H.J. Renqing, face, and rule of law: New ideas for governance in traditional urban communities—A case study of the “moral court” in Y community of Harbin [人情、面子与法治: 传统型城市社区治理新思路——以哈尔滨市Y社区”道德法庭”为例]. Theory Mon. 2018, 161–166. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Category | Number | Proportion (%) | Category | Number | Proportion (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gender | Education level | ||||
Female | 518 | 54.01% | Below elementary school | 5 | 0.52% |
Male | 441 | 45.99% | Elementary school | 10 | 1.04% |
Household registration | Middle school | 90 | 9.38% | ||
Foreign domicile | 337 | 35.14% | High school or technical secondary school | 177 | 18.46% |
Local domicile | 622 | 64.86% | College or bachelor’s degree | 535 | 55.79% |
Age | Master’s degree or above | 142 | 14.81% | ||
18–30 years old | 458 | 47.76% | Average monthly income | ||
31–40 | 227 | 23.67% | CNY 3500 and below | 293 | 30.55% |
45–50 | 105 | 10.95% | CNY 3500–5000 | 94 | 9.80% |
51–65 | 92 | 9.59% | CNY 5000–8000 | 185 | 19.29% |
Over 65 years old | 77 | 8.03% | CNY 8000–15,000 | 227 | 23.67% |
Type of house | CNY 15,000–20,000 | 123 | 12.83% | ||
own | 645 | 67.26% | Over CNY 20,000 | 37 | 3.86% |
rental | 314 | 32.74% |
Variable | Model (1) PGB | Model (2) M | Model (3) PGB | Model (4) PGB |
---|---|---|---|---|
GP | 0.350 *** | 0.523 *** | 0.213 *** | 0.307 *** |
(12.33) | (17.00) | (6.84) | (9.75) | |
M | 0.263 *** | |||
(9.14) | ||||
face | 0.147 *** | |||
(6.31) | ||||
GP × face | −0.0733 * | |||
(−1.89) | ||||
gender | −0.045 | −0.042 | −0.034 | −0.050 |
(−1.38) | (−1.18) | (−1.09) | (−1.54) | |
domi | −0.133 *** | 0.026 | −0.140 *** | −0.134 *** |
(−3.13) | (0.57) | (−3.44) | (−3.23) | |
age | −0.025 | −0.000 | −0.025 * | −0.021 |
(−1.64) | (−0.02) | (−1.71) | (−1.39) | |
edu | −0.022 | 0.002 | −0.023 | −0.029 |
(−1.10) | (0.09) | (−1.17) | (−1.49) | |
income | 0.030 *** | 0.010 | 0.028** | 0.031 *** |
(2.70) | (0.80) | (2.57) | (2.77) | |
old | −0.006 | −0.026 | 0.001 | −0.004 |
(−0.34) | (−1.44) | (0.07) | (−0.24) | |
child | −0.009 | −0.037 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
(−0.34) | (−1.32) | (0.03) | (0.11) | |
toh | −0.125 *** | 0.0296 | −0.133 *** | −0.097 ** |
(−2.78) | (0.61) | (−3.07) | (−2.11) | |
fre | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.0006 | 0.001 |
(0.47) | (0.72) | (0.27) | (0.46) | |
stay | 0.035 ** | 0.037 ** | 0.026 * | 0.034 ** |
(2.43) | (2.33) | (1.84) | (2.47) | |
_cons | 2.871 *** | 1.851 *** | 2.384 *** | 4.243 *** |
(16.14) | (9.61) | (13.34) | (32.69) | |
N | 959 | 959 | 959 | 959 |
R2 | 0.167 | 0.243 | 0.235 | 0.207 |
High-Income Group | Low-Income Group | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model (5) | Model (6) | Model (7) | Model (8) | Model (9) | Model (10) | Model (11) | Model (12) | |
PGB | Civil- PGB | Promo- PGB | Contri- PGB | PGB | Civil- PGB | Promo- PGB | Contri- PGB | |
GP | 0.256 *** | 0.189 *** | 0.275 *** | 0.308 *** | 0.387 *** | 0.369 *** | 0.379 *** | 0.391 *** |
(7.07) | (4.89) | (5.46) | (6.39) | (8.08) | (7.09) | (5.38) | (6.27) | |
Face | 0.198 *** | 0.154 *** | 0.211 *** | 0.227 *** | 0.0833 ** | 0.0779 ** | 0.0779 ** | 0.0971 ** |
(6.63) | (4.80) | (5.05) | (5.70) | (2.43) | (2.10) | (2.10) | (2.18) | |
GP × face | −0.077 * | −0.004 | −0.095 | −0.128 ** | −0.069 | −0.032 | −0.032 | −0.014 |
(−1.67) | (−0.08) | (−1.48) | (−2.10) | (−1.10) | (−0.47) | (−0.47) | (−0.16) | |
Control | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
_cons | 4.224 *** | 4.311 *** | 3.940 *** | 4.263 *** | 4.121 *** | 4.758 *** | 4.144 *** | 4.324 *** |
(36.24) | (21.73) | (15.22) | (17.21) | (26.66) | (21.21) | (13.65) | (16.07) | |
N | 572 | 572 | 572 | 572 | 387 | 387 | 387 | 387 |
R2 | 0.212 | 0.130 | 0.144 | 0.191 | 0.214 | 0.189 | 0.131 | 0.159 |
Female | Male | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model (13) | Model (14) | Model (15) | Model (16) | Model (17) | Model (18) | Model (19) | Model (20) | |
PGB | Civil- PGB | Promo- PGB | Contri- PGB | PGB | Civil- PGB | Promo- PGB | Contri- PGB | |
GP | 0.292 *** | 0.258 *** | 0.294 *** | 0.324 *** | 0.313 *** | 0.258 *** | 0.328 *** | 0.354 *** |
(7.15) | (6.12) | (5.04) | (6.13) | (7.73) | (5.60) | (5.73) | (6.47) | |
Face | 0.112 *** | 0.112 *** | 0.099 ** | 0.124 *** | 0.195 *** | 0.131 *** | 0.228 *** | 0.227 *** |
(3.78) | (3.67) | (2.34) | (3.25) | (5.58) | (3.29) | (4.61) | (4.81) | |
GP × face | −0.151 *** | −0.0906 * | −0.188 *** | −0.175 *** | 0.0379 | 0.108 * | −0.00895 | 0.0142 |
(−3.04) | (−1.76) | (−2.65) | (−2.71) | (0.67) | (1.69) | (−0.11) | (0.19) | |
control | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
_cons | 4.383 *** | 4.594 *** | 4.236 *** | 4.320 *** | 3.959 *** | 4.310 *** | 3.594 *** | 3.973 *** |
(24.01) | (24.40) | (16.24) | (18.27) | (20.56) | (19.67) | (13.19) | (15.28) | |
N | 518 | 518 | 518 | 518 | 441 | 441 | 441 | 441 |
R2 | 0.189 | 0.150 | 0.113 | 0.164 | 0.265 | 0.154 | 0.189 | 0.199 |
Older Group | Younger Group | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model (21) | Model (22) | Model (23) | Model (24) | Model (25) | Model (26) | Model (27) | Model (28) | |
PGB | Civil- PGB | Promo- PGB | Contri- PGB | PGB | Civil- PGB | Promo- PGB | Contri- PGB | |
GP | 0.340 *** | 0.213 *** | 0.442 *** | 0.368 *** | 0.293 *** | 0.268 *** | 0.267 *** | 0.323 *** |
(5.79) | (3.39) | (5.10) | (4.27) | (8.79) | (7.46) | (5.74) | (7.65) | |
face | 0.179 *** | 0.146 *** | 0.153 ** | 0.234 *** | 0.134 *** | 0.110 *** | 0.133 *** | 0.139 *** |
(3.97) | (3.02) | (2.29) | (3.54) | (5.12) | (3.91) | (3.64) | (4.21) | |
GP × face | −0.148 * | 0.073 | −0.326 ** | −0.176 | −0.053 | −0.028 | −0.069 | −0.071 |
(−1.71) | (0.79) | (−2.56) | (−1.39) | (−1.26) | (−0.62) | (−1.20) | (−1.36) | |
control | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
_cons | 3.878 *** | 4.217 *** | 3.478 *** | 3.785 *** | 3.940 *** | 4.759 *** | 4.161 *** | 4.355 *** |
(32.33) | (18.19) | (10.89) | (11.92) | (68.12) | (28.28) | (19.11) | (22.03) | |
N | 274 | 274 | 274 | 274 | 685 | 685 | 685 | 685 |
R2 | 0.305 | 0.191 | 0.235 | 0.201 | 0.176 | 0.135 | 0.112 | 0.164 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Ju, Y.; Chen, T.; Hu, G.; Mi, F. The Impact of Green Perception on Pro-Greenspace Behavior of Urban Residents in Megacities: Shaped by “Good Citizen” Image. Forests 2025, 16, 1014. https://doi.org/10.3390/f16061014
Ju Y, Chen T, Hu G, Mi F. The Impact of Green Perception on Pro-Greenspace Behavior of Urban Residents in Megacities: Shaped by “Good Citizen” Image. Forests. 2025; 16(6):1014. https://doi.org/10.3390/f16061014
Chicago/Turabian StyleJu, Yige, Tianyu Chen, Guohua Hu, and Feng Mi. 2025. "The Impact of Green Perception on Pro-Greenspace Behavior of Urban Residents in Megacities: Shaped by “Good Citizen” Image" Forests 16, no. 6: 1014. https://doi.org/10.3390/f16061014
APA StyleJu, Y., Chen, T., Hu, G., & Mi, F. (2025). The Impact of Green Perception on Pro-Greenspace Behavior of Urban Residents in Megacities: Shaped by “Good Citizen” Image. Forests, 16(6), 1014. https://doi.org/10.3390/f16061014