Employees' environmentally responsible behavior: the critical role of environmental justice perception

Figures & data

Figure 1. The framework of the study.

Table 1. Means, standard deviations, and Pearson correlation coefficients.

	Mean	Standard deviation	1	2	3	4
1. Optimism	3.088	0.832	1
2. Hope	5.267	1.541	0.148*	1
3. Resilience	2.825	0.621	0.141*	0.620**	1
4. Justice	3.867	1.698	0.224**	0.260**	0.388**	1
5. Sustainable	3.638	0.893	0.352**	0.487**	0.519**	0.404**

*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed).

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed).

Table 2. Hierarchical Regression analyses: dependent variable in all models is employees’ environmentally responsible behavior or sustainable behavior.

	M1	M2	M3	M4	M5	VIF
1. Age	−0.014†	−0.014*	−0.011	−0.007	−0.011	1.656
2. Gender	−0.109	−0.068	−0.157	−0.083	−0.096	1.067
3. Education	0.184***	0.145***	0.141***	0.149***	0.114***	1.152
4. Tenure	0.018*	0.015*	0.013	0.012	0.010	1.756
5. Income	−0.024	0.030	−0.148*	−0.087	−0.027	1.239
6. Optimism		0.272***			0.232***	1.192
7. Hope			0.254***		0.083*	1.378
8. Resilience				0.647***	0.281**	1.224
R^2	0.157	0.226	0.312	0.334	0.286
Adj. R^2	0.135	0.202	0.292	0.314	0.256
F	7.065***	9.218***	15.451***	17.053***	9.375***
Sample size	N = 196	N = 196	N = 196	N = 196	N = 196

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001; †p < 0.10.

Coefficient estimates (in bold) shows the significant effect of independent variables on dependent variable.

Figure 2. Interaction effect of employees’ hope and environmental justice perception or judgments on their sustainable behaviors.

Figure 3. Interaction effect of employees’ resilience and environmental justice perception or judgments on their sustainable behaviors.

Table 3. Results of hierarchical moderated regression analyses (dependent variable: employees’ environmentally responsible behavior or sustainable behavior).

	M1	M2	M3	M4	VIF
1. Age	−0.011	−0.007	−0.008	−0.009	1.696
2. Gender	−0.076	−0.175	−0.098	−0.131	1.080
3. Education	0.141***	0.114*	0.142***	0.106***	1.167
4. Tenure	0.013	0.013	0.012	0.005	1.787
5. Income	0.046	−0.093	−0.015	0.032	1.276
6. Optimism	0.335*			0.207***	1.294
7. Hope		0.358***		0.106**	1.437
8. Resilience			−0.209	0.256**	1.320
9. Justice	0.149	0.340***	−0.329	0.132	1.116
9. Optimism × Justice	−0.023			−0.035	1.098
10. Hope × Justice		−0.037*		−0.092***	1.198
11. Resilience × Justice			0.147*	0.191**	1.240
R^2	0.251	0.393	0.256	0.385
Adj. R^2	0.219	0.363	0.224	0.345
F	7.838***	16.352***	8.054***	9.541***
Sample size	N = 196	N = 196	N = 196	N = 196

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001; †p < 0.10.

Coefficient estimates (in bold) shows the significant interaction effect of independent variables/moderation variables on dependent variable.

Table

Items	Factor loading
Employees sustainable behavior
1. I make environmental suggestions to improve work procedures	0.575
2. I make suggestions to improve the organization’s environmental performance	0.578
3. I try to draw management’s attention to potentially environmentally unfriendly activities	0.711
4. I try to make innovative environmental suggestions to improve the organization	0.732
5. I inform management of potentially environmentally irresponsible policies and practices	0.815
6. I am willing to speak up when policy or rules do not contribute to the achievement of the organization’s environmental goals	0.725
7. I suggest revisions to work practices to achieve the organization’s environmental objectives	0.766
Optimism
1. In uncertain times, I usually expect the best	0.649
2. If something can go wrong for me, it will	0.653
3. I usually feel good when thinking about my future	0.552
4. I hardly ever expect things to go my way	0.748
5. I rarely count on good things happening to me	0.710
Hopeful thinking
1. If I should find myself in a jam, I could think of many ways to get out of it	0.652
2. At the present time, I am energetically pursuing my goals	0.620
3. There are lots of ways around any problem that I am facing now	0.775
4. Right now, I see myself as being pretty successful	0.612
5. I can think of many ways to reach my current goals	0.793
6. At this time, I am meeting the goals that I have set for myself	0.616
Resilience
1. I am generous with my friends	0.457
2. I quickly get over and recover from being startled	0.412
3. I enjoy dealing with new and unusual situations	0.541
4. I usually succeed in making a favorable impression on people	0.492
5. I enjoy trying new foods I have never tasted before	0.373
6. I am regarded as a very energetic person	0.582
7. I like to take different paths to familiar places	0.622
8. I am more curious than most people	0.763
9. Most of the people I meet are likable	0.492
10. I usually think carefully about something before acting	0.353
11. I like to do new and different things	0.742
12. My daily life is full of things that keep me interested	0.740
13. I would be willing to describe myself as a pretty "strong" personality	0.567
14. I get over my anger at someone reasonably quickly	0.406
Environmental justice perception (Ambrose and Schminke 2009)
1. Overall, I’m treated fairly by my organization	0.778
2. Usually, the way things work in this organization is not fair. (Reversed code)	0.823
3. In general, I can count on this organization to be fair	0.880
4. In general, the treatment I receive around here is fair	0.855
5. For the most part, this organization treats its employees fairly	0.817
6. Most of the people who work here would say they are often treated unfairly. (Reversed code)	0.790

Table

KMO and Bartlett’s Test
Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.	0.803
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity
Approx. Chi-Square	2978,691
df	703
Sig.	0.000

Ambrose, M., and M. Schminke. 2009. “The Role of Overall Justice Judgments in Organizational Justice Research: A Test of Mediation.” Journal of Applied Psychology 94 (2): 491–500. doi:10.1037/a0013203.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar