In proposing that value endorsement level is dynamic rather than static, this study investigated how value importance judgments would vary with situation. Questionnaires were mailed to community residents (N = 276), using a scenario that described a realistic value conflict in an environmental issue. The results demonstrated that value importance judgments varied with situation, but the degree to which the situation influenced the judgment was moderated by the preexisting value endorsement level. Moreover, the study suggests that when 2 values are in conflict, the degree of difference in preexisting level of endorsement of the 2 values may be a better predictor of the judgments than the endorsement level of a single value.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.
2.
Ajzen, I., & Driver, B.L. (1991). Prediction of leisure participation from behavioral, normative, and control beliefs: An application of the theory of planned behavior . Leisure Sciences, 13, 185-204.
3.
Backlund, L., Skanuer, Y., Montgomery, H., Bring, J., & Strender, L.-E. (2003). Doctors' decision processes in a drug-prescription task: The validity of rating scales and think-aloud reports. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes , 91, 108-117.
4.
Baker, C.W., Little, T.D., & Brownell, K.D. (2003). Predicting adolescent eating and activity behaviors: The role of social norms and personal agency. Health Psychology, 22, 189-198.
5.
Baron, J., & Spranca, M. (1997). Protected values. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 70, 1-16.
6.
Braithwaite, V. (1998). The value balance model of political evaluations . British Journal of Psychology, 89, 223-247.
7.
Brown, T.C. (1984). The concept of value in resource allocation. Land Economics, 60, 231-246.
8.
Bryan, A., Fisher, J.D., & Fisher, W.A. (2002). Tests of the mediational role of preparatory safer sexual behavior in the context of the theory of planned behavior. Health Psychology, 21, 71-80.
Dietz, T., Stern, P.C., & Rycroft, R.W. (1989). Definitions of conflict and the legitimation of resources: The case of environmental risk. Sociological Forum, 47-70.
11.
Ditto, P.H., Munro, G.D., Apanovitch, A.M., Scepansky, J.A., & Lockhart, L.K. (2003). Spontaneous skepticism: The interplay of motivation and expectation in responses to favorable and unfavorable medical diagnoses. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1120-1132.
12.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
13.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
14.
Grube, J.W., Mayton, D.M., & Ball-Rokeach, S.J. (1994). Inducing change in values, attitudes, and behaviors: Belief system theory and the method of value self-confrontation. Journal of Social Issues, 50, 153-173.
15.
Heath, Y. & Gifford, R. (2006). Free-market ideology and environmental degradation: The case of beliefs in global climate change. Environment & Behavior, 38, 48-71.
16.
Johnston, K.L., & White, K.M. (2003). Binge-drinking: A test of the role of group norms in the theory of planned behaviour. Psychology & Health , 18, 63-77.
17.
Kaiser, F.G., & Gutscher, H. (2003). The proposition of a general version of the theory of planned behavior: Predicting ecological behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33, 586-603.
18.
Kaplan, S. (2000). Human nature and environmentally responsible behavior . Journal of Social Issues, 56, 491-508.
19.
Kemmelmeier, M., Wieczorkowska, G., Erb, H.P., & Burnstein, E. (2002). Individualism, authoritarianism, and attitudes toward assisted death: Cross-cultural, cross-regional, and experimental evidence . Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 60-85.
20.
Kristiansen, C.M., & Hotte, A.M. (1996). Morality and the self: Implications for the when and how of value-attitude-behavior relations. In C. Seligman, J. M. Olson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The psychology of values: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 8, pp. 77-105). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
21.
Lavallee, L., & Suedfeld, P. (1997). Conflict in Clayoquot Sound: Using thematic content analysis to understand psychological aspects of environmental controversy . Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science-Revue Canadienne Des Sciences Du Comportement, 29, 195-210.
22.
Lockwood, M. (1999). Humans valuing nature. Environmental Values, 8, 381-401.
23.
Maio, G.R., & Olson, J.M. (1998). Values as truisms: Evidence and implications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 294-311.
24.
Nordlund, A.M., & Garvill, J. (2002). Value structures behind proenvironmental behavior . Environment and Behavior, 34, 740-756.
25.
Redlawsk, D.P. (2002). Hot cognition or cool consideration? Testing the effects of motivated reasoning on political decision making. Journal of Politics, 64, 1021-1044.
26.
Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.
27.
Schroeder, H.R. (1981). The effect of perceived conflict on evaluations of natural resource management goals. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1, 61-72.
28.
Schultz, P.W. (2000). Empathizing with nature: The effects of perspective taking on concern for environmental issues. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 391-406.
29.
Schultz, P.W., & Zelezny, L.C. (1998). Values and proenvironmental behavior: A five-country survey. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29, 540-558.
30.
Schultz, P.W., & Zelezny, L. (1999). Values as predictors of environmental attitudes: Evidence for consistency across 14 countries. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19, 255-265.
31.
Schwartz, S.H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1-65.
32.
Seligman, C., & Katz, A. (1996). The dynamics of value systems. In C. Seligman, J. M. Olson , & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The psychology of values: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 8, pp. 53-75). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
33.
Seligman, C., Syme, G.J., & Gilchrist, R. (1994). The role of values and ethical principles in judgment of environmental dilemmas. Journal of Social Issues, 50, 105-119.
34.
Sheeran, P., & Taylor, S. (1999). Predicting intentions to use condoms: A meta-analysis and comparison of the theories of reasoned action and planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 1624-1675.
35.
Slovic, P. (1997). Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: Surveying the risk-assessment battlefield. In M. H. Bazerman & D. M. Messick (Eds.), Environment, ethics, and behavior: The psychology of environmental valuation and degradation (pp. 277-313): San Francisco: New Lexington Press.
36.
Stern, P.C., & Dietz, T. (1994). The value basis of environmental concern. Journal of Social Issues, 50, 65-84.
37.
Stern, P.C., Dietz, T., & Kalof, L. (1993). Value orientations, gender, and environmental concern. Environment & Behavior, 25, 322-348.
38.
Stern, P.C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G.A., & Kalof, L. (1999). A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Human Ecology Review , 6, 81-97.
39.
Suedfeld, P., Bluck, S., Loewen, L.J., & Elkins, D.J. (1994). Sociopolitical values and integrative complexity of members of student political groups. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 26, 121-141.
40.
Suedfeld, P., & Wallbaum, A.B. (1992). Modifying integrative complexity in political thought: Value conflict and audience disagreement. Revista Interamericana de Psicologia, 26, 19-36.
41.
Syme, G.J., Nancarrow, B.E., & McCreddin, J.A. (1999). Defining the components of fairness in the allocation of water to environmental and human uses. Journal of Environmental Management, 57, 51-70.
42.
Tetlock, P.E. (1986). A value pluralism model of ideological reasoning . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 819-827.
43.
Tetlock, P.E. (1999). Coping with trade-offs: Psychological constraints and political implications. In S. Lupia , M. McCubbins, & S. Popkin (Eds.), Elements of reason: Cognition, choice and the bounds of rationality (Cambridge Studies of Public Opinion and Political Psychology, pp. 239-263). Berkeley: University of California Press.
44.
Tetlock, P.E., Kristel, O.V., Elson, S.B., Green, M.C., & Lerner, J.S. (2000). The psychology of the unthinkable: Taboo trade-offs, forbidden base rates, and heretical counterfactuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 853-870.
45.
Tetlock, P.E., Peterson, R., & Lerner, J. (1996). Revising the value pluralism model: Incorporating social content and context postulates. In C. Seligman, J. Olson, & M. Zanna (Eds.), The psychology of values: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 8, pp. 25-51). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
46.
Verplanken, B., & Holland, R.W. (2002). Motivated decision-making: Effects of activation and self-centrality of values on choices and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 434-447.
47.
Vining, J., & Schroeder, H.W. (1989). The effects of perceived conflict, resource scarcity, and information bias on emotions and environmental decisions. Environment and Management, 13, 199-206.
48.
Wade-Benzoni, K.A., Hoffman, A.J., Thompson, L.L., Moore, D.A., Gillespie, J.J., & Bazerman, M.H. (2002). Barriers to resolution in ideologically based negotiations: The role of values and institutions. Academy of Management Review, 27, 41-57.
