The Impact of Ecological Public Art on Public Pro-Environmental Behavior: Evidence from a Serial Multiple Mediation Model
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Ecological Public Art
2.2. Environmental Psychological Ownership
2.3. Ecological Awareness
2.4. Pro-Environmental Behavior
2.5. Multiple Mediation Model
3. Research Framework and Hypothesis
3.1. Theoretical Framework and Variables
- Following multi-dimensional perceptual stimulation, such as a strong visual impact generated by ecological warnings or an immersive environmental experience, it is hypothesized that the public will develop emotional intuition, experience a sense of resonance with environmental psychological ownership, and subsequently increase their engagement in pro-environmental behavior;
- Following multi-dimensional perceptual stimulation, for example, through the reception of environmental information and ecological education, it is hypothesized that the public will engage in cognitive elaboration, which strengthens ecological awareness and encourages the voluntary adoption of pro-environmental behavior;
- Following multi-dimensional perceptual stimulation, it is hypothesized that emotional intuition and cognitive elaboration will occur in sequence, with environmental psychological ownership and ecological awareness jointly influencing subsequent pro-environmental behavior.
3.2. Hypotheses
3.2.1. Direct Relationship Between Perception of Ecological Public Art and Pro-Environmental Behavior
3.2.2. Mediating Role of Environmental Psychological Ownership
3.2.3. Mediating Role of Ecological Awareness
3.2.4. Serial Mediation of Environmental Psychological Ownership and Ecological Awareness
4. Research Case and Methods
4.1. Case Study
4.2. Methods
4.3. Data Collection
5. Empirical Results
5.1. Variable Descriptive Analysis
5.2. Reliability and Validity Testing and Factor Analysis
5.3. Correlation Analysis
5.4. Path Analysis
5.5. Mediation Effect Test
6. Discussion and Prospects
6.1. Research Findings and Reflections
6.2. Prospects and Recommendations
- Sensory synergy: Strengthening ecological perception through visual and interactive experiences. Future ecological public art should move beyond the traditional visually dominated paradigm by integrating multi-sensory elements such as sound, touch, and dynamic imagery. The incorporation of real-time environmental data and digital technologies such as AR and VR can create immersive and responsive ecological information experiences (e.g., Urban Breathing). By transforming complex ecological issues into tangible scenarios, these approaches can help the public better understand the severity of environmental problems, stimulate active reflection on ecological issues, and deepen cognition, thereby fostering the transition to pro-environmental behavior.
- Emotional storytelling: From emotional resonance to cognitive deepening. The organic integration of ecological warning and ecological education, supported by emotional storytelling techniques such as interactive participation and visual metaphors, can effectively facilitate the transformation from affective experience to rational cognition. For example, The Secret of Plants uses the ecological characteristics of plants as its narrative thread. Through participatory activities such as botanical fabric printing, the public engages in an embodied interaction that fosters an appreciation of natural esthetics and cultivates emotional resonance with nature. During this process, the artist’s interpretation of ecological information about plants transforms this emotional resonance into a rational understanding of human–nature symbiosis. Future public art projects should emphasize the combination of narrative and participation in order to realize a sequential pathway that links emotion, cognition, and behavior.
- Practice extension: Cultivating long-term pro-environmental behavior. The short-term interactions of urban space art events should be linked with the long-term development of communities. From the perspective of fostering long-term pro-environmental behavior among community residents, the Urban Space Art Season has effectively expanded the practice venues of ecological public art within communities. Through a series of offline co-creation workshops, such as Waste Transformation Workshops and Community Garden Co-building, residents were encouraged to create installation artworks using discarded clothing, thereby conveying the ecological concept of material recycling. Initiatives such as composting kitchen waste to cultivate shared green spaces and small vegetable gardens turned artistic creation into a hands-on classroom for practicing environmental responsibility, deepening residents’ sense of environmental psychological ownership. By promoting a multidimensional mode of artistic participation that facilitates the transformation from emotional resonance to cognitive engagement, the program demonstrates the potential to convert short-term interactions during the Art Season into sustained, everyday pro-environmental behaviors within the community. From the perspective of policy guidance, governmental support, and stakeholder collaboration, the ecological theme of the Urban Space Art Season serves as a platform linking urban planning departments, universities, and enterprises. The outcomes have been integrated with existing municipal policies and plans, such as the Shanghai Urban Regeneration Action Plan and the 15-Minute Community Life Circle Action Plan, to develop urban ecological education bases and spatial design guidelines that provide concrete contexts for cultivating pro-environmental behavior. In alignment with Shanghai’s 15-Minute Community Life Circle framework, the collaboration between the Art Season, community organizations, and planning authorities incorporates interactive participation models into community ecological infrastructure standards. For example, by adding ecological public art installations in neighborhood parks. This approach transforms temporary artistic practices into long-term mechanisms for nurturing public environmental awareness and action. Moreover, by leveraging the brand influence of the Urban Space Art Season to promote an integrated model that combines ecological public art with cultural and tourism development, cities can not only enhance their ecological image but also encourage green mobility, low-carbon consumption, and other forms of pro-environmental behavior through experiential and participatory cultural engagement.
7. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
| SUSAS | Shanghai Urban Space Art Season |
| SEM | Structural Equation Modeling |
| SDGs | Sustainable Development Goals |
| NAM | Norm Activation Model |
| VBN | Value-Belief-Norm |
| GEB | General Ecological Behavior |
| CEST | Cognitive-Experiential Self-Theory |
| PEPA | Ecological Public Art |
| EPO | Environmental Psychological Ownership |
| EA | Ecological Awareness |
| PEB | Pro-Environmental Behavior |
| KMO | Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin |
| AVE | Average Variance Extracted |
| CR | Composite Reliability |
| GFI | Goodness of Fit Index |
| AGFI | Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index |
| RMSEA | Root Mean Square Error of Approximation |
| RMR | Root Mean Square Residual |
| SRMR | Standardized Root Mean Square Residual |
| CFI | Comparative Fit Index |
| NFI | Normed Fit Index |
| NNFI | Non-Normed Fit Index |
| TLI | Tucker–Lewis Index |
| IFI | Incremental Fit Index |
Appendix A
| Dimensions | Codes | Statements |
|---|---|---|
| Perception of Ecological Public Art | A1 | Ecological public artworks make me directly perceive the consequences of environmental damage (e.g., climate change, species extinction). |
| A2 | Through interactive ecological artworks (e.g., touchable installations, AR experiences), I gain a deeper understanding of the necessity of environmental actions. | |
| A3 | The visual design of ecological public art (e.g., use of recycled materials, natural elements) inspires me to reflect on environmental issues. | |
| A4 | Participating in ecological art activities (e.g., community co-creation, environmental-themed exhibitions) increases my willingness to practice environmental protection in daily life. | |
| A5 | Ecological artworks in public spaces make me aware of how personal behaviors affect the environment (e.g., waste disposal, energy consumption). | |
| Environmental Psychological Ownership | B1 | When I see natural environments being damaged, I feel as if “my own home” has been harmed. |
| B2 | I believe protecting the surrounding public environment (e.g., community parks, streets) is my personal responsibility. | |
| B3 | When others damage the environment, I feel a sense of responsibility to protect it because “this is my environment.” | |
| B4 | Even without supervision, I am willing to voluntarily maintain the cleanliness of public spaces (e.g., picking up litter, preventing pollution). | |
| B5 | I have a strong sense of belonging and desire to protect the environment where I have lived for a long time (e.g., my neighborhood, frequently visited parks). | |
| Ecological Awareness | C1 | I regularly follow news reports about environmental issues. |
| C2 | I believe climate change is a serious global problem. | |
| C3 | I believe humans should respect the laws of nature rather than trying to fully control it. | |
| C4 | I believe protecting biodiversity is very important. | |
| C5 | I believe personal environmental behaviors reflect the fulfillment of ecological ethical responsibilities. | |
| Pro-Environmental Behavior | D1 | I actively choose to use energy-saving appliances. |
| D2 | I try to minimize the use of disposable plastic products. | |
| D3 | I prefer walking, cycling, or using public transportation for travel. | |
| D4 | I participate in waste sorting and recycling activities. | |
| D5 | I purchase products with eco-friendly labels. |
References
- United Nations. The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2025. Available online: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2025/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2025.pdf (accessed on 20 July 2025).
- Chapin, F.S., III; Kofinas, G.P.; Folke, C.; Chapin, M.C. Principles of Ecosystem Stewardship: Resilience-Based Natural Resource Management in a Changing World; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Belfiore, E.; Bennett, O. Rethinking the Social Impact of the Arts: A Critical-Historical Review; Centre for Cultural Policy Studies, University of Warwick: Coventry, UK, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Bonyhady, T. The Colonial Earth; Melbourne University Publishing: Melbourne, Australia, 2003; Volume 34. [Google Scholar]
- Gablik, S. Connective aesthetics: Art after individualism. In Mapping the Terrain: New Genre Public Art; Bay Press: Seattle, WA, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Blandy, D.; Congdon, K.G.; Krug, D.H. Art, Ecological Restoration, and Art Education. Stud. Art Educ. 1998, 39, 230–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lankford, E.L. Ecological Stewardship in Art Education. Art Educ. 1997, 50, 47–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neperud, R.W. Art, Ecology and Art Education: Practices & Linkages. Art Educ. 1997, 50, 14–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, Y.I.K. Exploring Connections between Environmental Education and Ecological Public Art. Child. Educ. 2008, 85, 13–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kay, A.D.; Scherber, E.; Gaitan, H.; Lovelee, A. Transitional Ecology: Embedding ecological experiments into temporary urban public art. J. Urban Ecol. 2019, 5, juz020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matilsky, B.C. Fragile Ecologies: Contemporary Artists’ Interpretations and Solutions; Rizzoli International Publications: New York, NY, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Guy, S.; Henshaw, V.; Heidrich, O. Climate change, adaptation and Eco-Art in Singapore. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2015, 58, 39–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Winderlich, K.; Johns, S. Perspektivwechsel: Mediale Bildungen digitaler Kinder- und Jugendöffentlichkeit am Beispiel des Earth Speakr von Olafur Eliasson. MedienPädagog. Z. Theor. Prax. Medienbild. 2022, 18, 393–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schwartz, S.H. Normative Influences on Altruism. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology; Berkowitz, L., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1977; Volume 10, pp. 221–279. [Google Scholar]
- Lind, H.B.; Nordfjærn, T.; Jørgensen, S.H.; Rundmo, T. The value-belief-norm theory, personal norms and sustainable travel mode choice in urban areas. J. Environ. Psychol. 2015, 44, 119–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liobikienė, G.; Poškus, M.S. The Importance of Environmental Knowledge for Private and Public Sphere Pro-Environmental Behavior: Modifying the Value-Belief-Norm Theory. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kautish, P.; Sharma, R. Determinants of pro-environmental behavior and environmentally conscious consumer behavior: An empirical investigation from emerging market. Bus. Strategy Dev. 2020, 3, 112–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, Z.; Zou, Y.; Xu, C.; Chen, J. The Effects of Environmental Education on Residents’ Ecological Security Behavior: The Mediating Role of Nature’s Psychological Ownership Perspective and The Moderating Role of Visual Fluency. Environ. Manag. 2024, 73, 338–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abbas, A.; Chengang, Y.; Zhuo, S.; Bilal; Manzoor, S.; Ullah, I.; Mughal, Y.H. Role of Responsible Leadership for Organizational Citizenship Behavior for the Environment in Light of Psychological Ownership and Employee Environmental Commitment: A Moderated Mediation Model. Front. Psychol. 2022, 12, 756570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Carrión-Bósquez, N.G.; Ortiz-Regalado, O.; Veas-González, I.; Naranjo-Armijo, F.G.; Guerra-Regalado, W.F. The mediating role of attitude and environmental awareness in the influence of green advertising and eco-labels on green purchasing behaviors. Span. J. Mark. ESIC 2025, 29, 330–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kousar, S.; Afzal, M.; Ahmed, F.; Bojnec, Š. Environmental Awareness and Air Quality: The Mediating Role of Environmental Protective Behaviors. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agrawal, M.; Kalia, P.; Nema, P.; Zia, A.; Kaur, K.; John, H.B. Evaluating the influence of government initiatives and social platforms on green practices of Gen Z: The mediating role of environmental awareness and consciousness. Clean. Responsible Consum. 2023, 8, 100109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Finley, S. Ecoaesthetics: Green Arts at the Intersection of Education and Social Transformation. Cult. Stud. ↔ Crit. Methodol. 2011, 11, 306–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Azhari, S.; Zakariya, K.; Abidin, N. Eco-public art in pursuit of a sustainable green city and public space. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Sustainable Urban Design for Liveable Cities, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 11–12 November 2014; pp. 209–413. [Google Scholar]
- Woodward, R. Environmental Public Art in New Zealand: Issues and Ethics. Public Art Dialogue 2019, 9, 219–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carson, R. Silent spring. In Thinking About the Environment; Routledge: Abingdon-on-Thames, UK, 2015; pp. 150–155. [Google Scholar]
- Wallen, R. Ecological Art: A Call for Visionary Intervention in a Time of Crisis. Leonardo 2012, 45, 234–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giannachi, G. Representing, Performing and Mitigating Climate Change in Contemporary Art Practice. Leonardo 2012, 45, 124–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mah, A.; Aragón, C.; Markowitz, E. Visualizing Hope: Investigating the Effect of Public Art on Risk Perception and Awareness of Climate Adaptation. Weather Clim. Soc. 2024, 16, 185–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, P.; Howe, N. Climate Change as Social Drama: Global Warming in the Public Sphere; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Michaels, C.F.; Carello, C. Direct Perception; Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1981. [Google Scholar]
- Pierce, J.L.; Kostova, T.; Dirks, K.T. The State of Psychological Ownership: Integrating and Extending a Century of Research. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 2003, 7, 84–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pierce, J.L.; Kostova, T.; Dirks, K.T. Toward a Theory of Psychological Ownership in Organizations. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2001, 26, 298–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matilainen, A.; Pohja-Mykrä, M.; Lähdesmäki, M.; Kurki, S. “I feel it is mine!”—Psychological ownership in relation to natural resources. J. Environ. Psychol. 2017, 51, 31–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Felix, R.; Almaguer, J. Nourish what you own: Psychological ownership, materialism and pro-environmental behavioral intentions. J. Consum. Mark. 2019, 36, 82–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dawkins, S.; Tian, A.W.; Newman, A.; Martin, A. Psychological ownership: A review and research agenda. J. Organ. Behav. 2017, 38, 163–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, X.; Fielding, K.S.; Dean, A.J. Psychological ownership of nature: A conceptual elaboration and research agenda. Biol. Conserv. 2022, 267, 109477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Preston, S.D.; Gelman, S.A. This land is my land: Psychological ownership increases willingness to protect the natural world more than legal ownership. J. Environ. Psychol. 2020, 70, 101443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Korpela, K.M. Place-identity as a product of environmental self-regulation. J. Environ. Psychol. 1989, 9, 241–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, S.-T.; Niu, H.-J. Green consumption: Environmental knowledge, environmental consciousness, social norms, and purchasing behavior. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2018, 27, 1679–1688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Sullivan, E.V.; Taylor, M.M. Glimpses of an Ecological Consciousness. In Learning Toward an Ecological Consciousness: Selected Transformative Practices; O’Sullivan, E.V., Taylor, M.M., Eds.; Palgrave Macmillan US: New York, NY, USA, 2004; pp. 5–23. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, X. On Ecological Awareness. Seeker 1994, 2, 56–61. Available online: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=2yANmoQUOTPug-JIHVzkKvxC_AgiV7Thlk6dclLmII30pNI0Np-wZWyurRiuTRERqYGFOHsO2_nz03YvxzD5g2fvqJDKi7mHGv3LA1uVq3Qrm7lj5IxeJ-sy1eiV9J9h1xMXBLCDwdtUC-NQ5HZ_tADSfIirIy88wtBaWL0Jn-2_AohUXY556A==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS (accessed on 2 November 2025).
- Zhang, Q.; Kai, K. A study on pro-environmental behavior from the perspective of social psychology. J. Guangzhou Univ. Soc. Sci. 2016, 15, 28–38. [Google Scholar]
- Sommer, L.K.; Klöckner, C.A. Does activist art have the capacity to raise awareness in audiences?—A study on climate change art at the ArtCOP21 event in Paris. Psychol. Aesth. Creat. Arts 2021, 15, 60–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, M.; Wang, J. The Impact of Pro-environmental Awareness Components on Green Consumption Behavior: The Moderation Effect of Consumer Perceived Cost, Policy Incentives, and Face Culture. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 580823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ünal, A.B.; Steg, L.; Gorsira, M. Values Versus Environmental Knowledge as Triggers of a Process of Activation of Personal Norms for Eco-Driving. Environ. Behav. 2018, 50, 1092–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, P.-C.; Yu, C.-Y. Aesthetic Experience as an Essential Factor to Trigger Positive Environmental Consciousness. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marks, M.; Chandler, L.; Baldwin, C. Re-imagining the environment: Using an environmental art festival to encourage pro-environmental behaviour and a sense of place. Local Environ. 2016, 21, 310–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prati, G.; Albanesi, C.; Pietrantoni, L. The interplay among environmental attitudes, pro-environmental behavior, social identity, and pro-environmental institutional climate. A longitudinal study. Environ. Educ. Res. 2017, 23, 176–191. [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]
- Steg, L.; Vlek, C. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. J. Environ. Psychol. 2009, 29, 309–317. [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]
- Curtis, D.J.; Reid, N.; Reeve, I. Towards ecological sustainability: Observations on the role of the arts. SAPIENS Surv. Perspect. Integr. Environ. Soc. 2014, 7. Available online: https://journals.openedition.org/sapiens/1655 (accessed on 6 February 2025).
- Sommer, L.K.; Swim, J.K.; Keller, E.; Klöckner, C.A. “Pollution Pods”: The merging of art and psychology to engage the public in climate change. Glob. Environ. Change 2019, 59, 101992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaiser, F.G.; Wilson, M. Goal-directed conservation behavior: The specific composition of a general performance. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2004, 36, 1531–1544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Preacher, K.J.; Hayes, A.F. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav. Res. Methods 2008, 40, 879–891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- MacKinnon, D.P. Contrasts in multiple mediator models. In Multivariate Applications in Substance Use Research; Psychology Press: Hove, UK, 2000; pp. 141–160. [Google Scholar]
- MacKinnon, D.P.; Cheong, J.; Pirlott, A.G. Statistical mediation analysis. In APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology, Vol. 2. Research Designs: Quantitative, Qualitative, Neuropsychological, and Biological; Cooper, H., Camic, P.M., Long, D.L., Panter, A.T., Rindskopf, D., Sher, K.J., Eds.; American Psychological Association: Washington, DC, USA, 2012; pp. 313–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baron, R.M.; Kenny, D.A. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1986, 51, 1173–1182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Tian, L.; Guo, L.; Huebner, E.S. Family dysfunction and Adolescents’ anxiety and depression: A multiple mediation model. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 2020, 66, 101090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Habib, A.M. Do business strategies and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance mitigate the likelihood of financial distress? A multiple mediation model. Heliyon 2023, 9, e17847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bouraoui, K.; Bensemmane, S.; Ohana, M.; Russo, M. Corporate social responsibility and employees’ affective commitment: A multiple mediation model. Manag. Decis. 2018, 57, 152–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Epstein, S. Cognitive-Experiential Self-Theory of Personality. In Handbook of Psychology; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2003; pp. 159–184. [Google Scholar]
- Bourriaud, N. Relational Aesthetics; Les Presses du Réel: Dijon, France, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Wen, S. Sustainable development examples in the “Shanghai Manual”. Hum. Habitat 2023, 4, 26–27. Available online: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=2yANmoQUOTPp0jCUB5Fip0Wk9ZboiTEpDUuoEC65DFjH8kjGdsvoyp7TFvOR6bJxcBmA47hGlADeJlqNstL2wxk4GFoWwLdfbI5rlvFpzx1-NIDFon5qFb538LcU63hk93qUcFrjDgBmXpv2gdaub6_NYcqKQVGWL-conDA3R6nrVVulMncswA==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS (accessed on 2 November 2025).
- SUSAS 2023. Available online: https://www.susas.com.cn/2023susas/ (accessed on 7 August 2024).
- Soper, D.S. A-Priori Sample Size Calculator for Structural Equation Models. Available online: https://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc (accessed on 12 April 2025).
- Peterson, R.A. A Meta-Analysis of Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha. J. Consum. Res. 1994, 21, 381–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shrestha, N. Factor analysis as a tool for survey analysis. Am. J. Appl. Math. Stat. 2021, 9, 4–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ab Hamid, M.R.; Sami, W.; Mohmad Sidek, M.H. Discriminant Validity Assessment: Use of Fornell & Larcker criterion versus HTMT Criterion. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2017, 890, 012163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Curtis, D.J. Using the Arts to Raise Awareness and Communicate Environmental Information in the Extension Context. J. Agric. Educ. Ext. 2011, 17, 181–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Curtis, D.J. Creating inspiration: The role of the arts in creating empathy for ecological restoration. Ecol. Manag. Restor. 2009, 10, 174–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Curtis, D.J.; Reid, N.; Ballard, G. Communicating Ecology Through Art: What Scientists Think. Ecol. Soc. 2012, 17, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]






| Category | Option | Frequency | Percentage (%) | Cumulative Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | <18 yrs | 11 | 3.37 | 3.37 |
| 18–30 yrs | 109 | 33.44 | 36.81 | |
| 31–50 yrs | 139 | 42.64 | 79.45 | |
| ≥51 yrs | 67 | 20.55 | 100.00 | |
| Gender | Male | 147 | 45.09 | 45.09 |
| Female | 179 | 54.91 | 100.00 | |
| Occupation | Financial industry professional | 18 | 5.52 | 5.52 |
| Arts professional | 12 | 3.68 | 9.20 | |
| Entrepreneur | 9 | 2.76 | 11.96 | |
| Teacher | 35 | 10.74 | 22.70 | |
| Student | 51 | 15.64 | 38.34 | |
| Journalist | 1 | 0.31 | 38.65 | |
| Government employee | 11 | 3.37 | 42.02 | |
| Freelancer | 63 | 19.33 | 61.35 | |
| Company employee | 98 | 30.06 | 91.41 | |
| Other | 28 | 8.59 | 100.00 | |
| Education level | Primary school or below | 8 | 2.45 | 2.45 |
| Junior high school | 15 | 4.60 | 7.06 | |
| Senior high school | 61 | 18.71 | 25.76 | |
| Bachelor’s degree | 139 | 42.64 | 68.40 | |
| Master’s degree or above | 103 | 31.60 | 100.00 | |
| Familiarity with Ecological Public Art | Very familiar | 30 | 9.20 | 9.20 |
| Relatively familiar | 79 | 24.23 | 33.43 | |
| Generally familiar | 126 | 38.65 | 72.08 | |
| Not very familiar | 73 | 22.39 | 94.48 | |
| Not familiar at all | 18 | 5.52 | 100.00 | |
| Familiarity with Ecological Public Art | Yes | 177 | 54.29 | 54.29 |
| No | 149 | 45.71 | 100.00 | |
| Total | — | 326 | 100.00 | 100.00 |
| Dimensions | Mini | Max | Mean | SD | MD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perception of Ecological Public Art (PEPA) | 4.000 | 19.000 | 11.302 | 3.746 | 11.000 |
| Environmental Psychological Ownership (EPO) | 10.000 | 45.000 | 25.438 | 7.724 | 26.000 |
| Ecological Awareness (EA) | 3.000 | 15.000 | 8.689 | 3.125 | 9.000 |
| Pro-Environmental Behavior (PEB) | 4.000 | 20.000 | 11.216 | 3.749 | 11.000 |
| Dimensions | Number of Items | Sample Size | Cronbach α |
|---|---|---|---|
| PEPA | 5 | 326 | 0.878 |
| EPO | 5 | 326 | 0.890 |
| EA | 5 | 326 | 0.871 |
| PEB | 5 | 326 | 0.911 |
| Test | Statistic | Value |
|---|---|---|
| KMO Measure of Sampling Adequacy | — | 0.912 |
| Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity | χ2 | 3955.138 |
| df | 190 | |
| p | 0.000 |
| Factor | Eigenvalue | Eigenvalue (Before Rotation) | Eigenvalue (After Rotation) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eigenvalue | Variance Explained (%) | Cumulative (%) | Eigenvalue | Variance Explained (%) | Cumulative (%) | Eigenvalue | Variance Explained (%) | Cumulative (%) | |
| 1 | 7.346 | 36.728 | 36.728 | 7.346 | 36.728 | 36.728 | 3.666 | 18.329 | 18.329 |
| 2 | 2.607 | 13.036 | 49.764 | 2.607 | 13.036 | 49.764 | 3.534 | 17.669 | 35.998 |
| 3 | 2.193 | 10.967 | 60.731 | 2.193 | 10.967 | 60.731 | 3.467 | 17.337 | 53.335 |
| 4 | 1.876 | 9.382 | 70.113 | 1.876 | 9.382 | 70.113 | 3.356 | 16.778 | 70.113 |
| 5 | 0.696 | 3.482 | 73.595 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 6 | 0.604 | 3.019 | 76.614 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 7 | 0.519 | 2.594 | 79.209 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 8 | 0.469 | 2.344 | 81.552 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 9 | 0.452 | 2.260 | 83.812 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 10 | 0.423 | 2.117 | 85.929 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 11 | 0.396 | 1.979 | 87.908 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 12 | 0.348 | 1.738 | 89.646 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 13 | 0.330 | 1.649 | 91.296 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 14 | 0.298 | 1.489 | 92.785 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 15 | 0.278 | 1.389 | 94.174 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 16 | 0.268 | 1.338 | 95.512 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 17 | 0.246 | 1.228 | 96.740 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 18 | 0.235 | 1.176 | 97.916 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 19 | 0.210 | 1.049 | 98.965 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 20 | 0.207 | 1.035 | 100.000 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Factor (Latent Variable) | Item | Std. Estimate | Std. Error | z | p | AVE | CR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PEPA | A1 | 0.571 | - | - | - | 0.614 | 0.886 |
| A2 | 0.777 | 0.13 | 10.33 | 0 | |||
| A3 | 0.835 | 0.122 | 10.754 | 0 | |||
| A4 | 0.85 | 0.121 | 10.851 | 0 | |||
| A5 | 0.849 | 0.117 | 10.845 | 0 | |||
| EPO | B1 | 0.707 | - | - | - | 0.621 | 0.891 |
| B2 | 0.817 | 0.088 | 13.72 | 0 | |||
| B3 | 0.859 | 0.093 | 14.338 | 0 | |||
| B4 | 0.74 | 0.09 | 12.495 | 0 | |||
| B5 | 0.808 | 0.089 | 13.578 | 0 | |||
| EA | C1 | 0.56 | - | - | - | 0.586 | 0.874 |
| C2 | 0.809 | 0.148 | 10.259 | 0 | |||
| C3 | 0.86 | 0.153 | 10.566 | 0 | |||
| C4 | 0.779 | 0.137 | 10.047 | 0 | |||
| C5 | 0.783 | 0.14 | 10.08 | 0 | |||
| PEB | D1 | 0.845 | - | - | - | 0.678 | 0.913 |
| D2 | 0.867 | 0.05 | 19.652 | 0 | |||
| D3 | 0.727 | 0.062 | 15.042 | 0 | |||
| D4 | 0.809 | 0.055 | 17.629 | 0 | |||
| D5 | 0.862 | 0.053 | 19.484 | 0 |
| PEPA | EPO | EA | PEB | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PEPA | 0.783 | |||
| EPO | 0.250 | 0.788 | ||
| EA | 0.331 | 0.329 | 0.765 | |
| PEB | 0.417 | 0.423 | 0.420 | 0.824 |
| PEPA | EPO | EA | PEB | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PEPA | 1 | |||
| EPO | 0.250 ** | 1 | ||
| EA | 0.331 ** | 0.329 ** | 1 | |
| PEB | 0.417 ** | 0.423 ** | 0.420 ** | 1 |
| CI | χ2 | df | p | χ2/df | GFI | RMSEA | RMR | CFI | NFI | NNFI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CR | - | - | >0.05 | <3 | >0.9 | <0.10 | <0.05 | >0.9 | >0.9 | >0.9 |
| Val | 209.135 | 164 | 0.010 | 1.275 | 0.941 | 0.029 | 0.031 | 0.988 | 0.949 | 0.986 |
| OI | TLI | AGFI | IFI | PGFI | PNFI | PCFI | SRMR | RMSEA 90% CI | ||
| CR | >0.9 | >0.9 | >0.9 | >0.5 | >0.5 | >0.5 | <0.1 | - | ||
| Val | 0.986 | 0.925 | 0.988 | 0.735 | 0.819 | 0.853 | 0.038 | 0.015~0.040 |
| X | → | Y | B | SE | CR | p | β |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PEPA | → | EPO | 0.290 | 0.068 | 4.274 | 0.000 | 0.281 |
| PEPA | → | EA | 0.233 | 0.056 | 4.145 | 0.000 | 0.281 |
| PEPA | → | PEB | 0.359 | 0.076 | 4.693 | 0.000 | 0.281 |
| EPO | → | EA | 0.224 | 0.053 | 4.256 | 0.000 | 0.280 |
| EPO | → | PEB | 0.352 | 0.071 | 4.942 | 0.000 | 0.285 |
| EA | → | PEB | 0.434 | 0.096 | 4.519 | 0.000 | 0.281 |
| Pathway | Effect | Boot SE | BootLLCI | BootULCI | z | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PEPA ⇒ EPO ⇒ PEB | 0.068 | 0.024 | 0.028 | 0.121 | 2.885 | 0.004 |
| PEPA ⇒ EA ⇒ PEB | 0.063 | 0.023 | 0.026 | 0.114 | 2.775 | 0.006 |
| PEPA ⇒ EPO ⇒ EA ⇒ PEB | 0.016 | 0.006 | 0.006 | 0.030 | 2.542 | 0.011 |
| EPO | EA | PEB | PEB | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constant | 3.143 ** (15.335) | 2.133 ** (8.834) | 2.421 ** (12.286) | 0.776 ** (2.978) |
| PEPA | 0.241 ** (4.647) | 0.245 ** (5.092) | 0.411 ** (8.247) | 0.264 ** (5.464) |
| EPO | 0.250 ** (5.023) | 0.284 ** (5.660) | ||
| EA | 0.258 ** (4.791) | |||
| Sample Size | 326 | 326 | 326 | 326 |
| R2 | 0.062 | 0.174 | 0.174 | 0.330 |
| Adjusted R2 | 0.060 | 0.169 | 0.171 | 0.323 |
| F-value | F (1324) = 21.597 | F (2323) = 34.101 | F (1324) = 68.020 | F (3322) = 52.787 |
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
Zhang, S.; Tan, R.; Shen, Y.; Wu, D. The Impact of Ecological Public Art on Public Pro-Environmental Behavior: Evidence from a Serial Multiple Mediation Model. Sustainability 2025, 17, 10125. https://doi.org/10.3390/su172210125
Zhang S, Tan R, Shen Y, Wu D. The Impact of Ecological Public Art on Public Pro-Environmental Behavior: Evidence from a Serial Multiple Mediation Model. Sustainability. 2025; 17(22):10125. https://doi.org/10.3390/su172210125
Chicago/Turabian StyleZhang, Suhui, Ran Tan, Yitong Shen, and Dan Wu. 2025. "The Impact of Ecological Public Art on Public Pro-Environmental Behavior: Evidence from a Serial Multiple Mediation Model" Sustainability 17, no. 22: 10125. https://doi.org/10.3390/su172210125
APA StyleZhang, S., Tan, R., Shen, Y., & Wu, D. (2025). The Impact of Ecological Public Art on Public Pro-Environmental Behavior: Evidence from a Serial Multiple Mediation Model. Sustainability, 17(22), 10125. https://doi.org/10.3390/su172210125

