Reconsidering college students’ low-carbon behavior
The role of paradoxical thinking
Bibliographic Data
Purpose This study aims to investigate the mechanism of the influence of paradoxical thinking (PT), which characterizes the ability of college students to balance and integrate the conflict between hedonic and normative goals, on their campus low-carbon behaviors. Design/methodology/approach The conceptual model of “PT − Paradoxical salience (climate change concern, CCC) − Paradoxical acceptance (support for low-carbon behavioral norms, SN) − paradoxical resolution (campus low-carbon intentions and behaviors, CLCIs and CLCBs)” was developed. Then, it was tested by PLS-SEM using survey data obtained from 501 Chinese college students, and the relative importance of each factor of CLCBs was determined by the importance-performance map analysis method. Finally, a mechanistic difference analysis was conducted. Findings PT, CCC and SN have the potential to influence the CLCBs of college students, with each of the three factors showing approximately 40% room for improvement in their impact. There exists an influential pathway of “PT → CCC → SN → CLCIs → CLCBs.” Notably, PT exhibits a stronger direct influence on college students’ private-sphere CLCBs compared to the public-sphere CLCBs. Practical implications Colleges should integrate the development of PT into the foundational framework of the entire education for sustainable development curriculum, while emphasizing the provision of opportunities for training in PT through pedagogical methods, and PT training can be integrated across various social levels. Originality/value This study offers a paradox theoretical framework for comprehending and elucidating the decision-making process underlying personal low-carbon behaviors, and advances the quantitative research of microindividual paradox processing by effectively conceptualizing and measuring paradoxical salience and acceptance
Environmental education · Mathematics education · Pedagogy · Sociology · Sustainability · Climate Change Communication and Perception · Environmental Education and Sustainability · Psychology · Social Psychology · Sustainability in Higher Education · Ecology
Toward a Theory of Paradox
Organizational Change and Managerial Sensemaking
Cognitive Dissonance
Microfoundations of Organizational Paradox
Dynamic Decision Making
Gain more insight from your PLS-SEM results
The theory of planned behavior
When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM
Social Influence
Self-Reports in Organizational Research
Importance and performance of SDGs perception among college students in Taiwan
An evaluation of the environmental values, beliefs, norms, and behaviors of sport management students in higher education institutions
“Hope dies, action begins?” The role of hope for proactive sustainability engagement among university students
Do we really make a difference? A case study on the value of taught environmental sustainability postgraduate programmes within geography
Recognizing the impact of value-belief-norm theory on pro-environmental behaviors of higher education students
Detecting the historical roots of education for sustainable development (ESD)
Transformative education
A study about the impact of energy saving climate on college students’ energy saving behavior
The Psychological Distance of Climate Change
The Influence of Information Intervention Cognition on College Students’ Energy-Saving Behavior Intentions
Intention—Behavior Relations
How do higher education institutions promote sustainable development? A literature review
Global effects of progress towards Sustainable Development Goals on subjective well-being
What effective design strategies do rural, underserved students in STEM clubs value while learning about climate change
Normative, Gain and Hedonic Goal Frames Guiding Environmental Behavior
New Environmental Theories
The path or the goal? Decision vs. information focus in biased information seeking after preliminary decisions
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |