农户参与农村生活垃圾治理的行为机制——基于大五人格特质的调节效应

doi:10.18402/resci.2021.11.08

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to regulate farmers’ littering behavior, and improve the effect of rural environmental governance, this study combined the theory of planned behavior and the big five framework from the perspective of psychology, adopted structural equation modeling (SEM), latent cluster analysis, and multiple-group generalized SEM, and conducted an empirical analysis based on the sample of 1779 households in Handan City, Hebei Province. The results indicated that (1) Attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavior control significantly increased farmers’ waste disposal intention, and therefore their waste disposal behavior. Farmers who have a more positive attitude, have more willingness to follow the environmental expectations of family and friends, and feel less difficulty properly disposing of household waste will have a higher intention to achieve household waste disposal behavior properly. (2) Farmers’ personalities significantly moderate the psychological mechanism, and the moderating effect is mainly generated by the stability meta-trait. Agreeableness and conscientiousness increased the positive effect of subjective norms on intention, but decreased the positive effect of perceived behavior control on intention. Neuroticism increased the positive effect of perceived behavior control on intention. Therefore, it is necessary not only to encourage the government to increase the financial investment and optimize the spatial layout of infrastructure but also consider the local custom civilization and develop more personalized programs to guide and motivate farmers’ participation in rural domestic waste management by taking most use of their personality traits.

Key words: rural domestic waste disposal, farmer participation, big five personality traits, latent cluster analysis, multiple-group generalized structural equation modeling, moderating effect, Handan in Hebei Province

SU Min, FENG Shuyi, LU Hualiang, FAN Pengfei. Farmers’ domestic waste disposal behavior: Moderating effects based on big five personality traits[J].Resources Science, 2021, 43(11): 2236-2250.

Figures/Tables 10

Figure 1

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

Table 7

Path analysis of benchmark regression model

路径关系	路径系数	Z值	研究假说的检验结果
态度→行为意向	0.13***	5.44	H1得到验证
主观规范→行为意向	0.25***	10.27	H2得到验证
知觉行为控制→行为意向	0.41***	20.28	H3得到验证
知觉行为控制→行为	0.22***	8.14	H4得到验证
行为意向→行为	0.17***	6.43	H5得到验证
多元相关系数的平方一	var(e.I)=0.57	-	-
多元相关系数的平方二	var(e.B)=0.88	-	-
态度↔主观规范	0.67***	23.48	-
态度↔知觉行为控制	0.41***	15.85	-
主观规范↔知觉行为控制	0.41***	16.14	-
模型拟合优度指标	实际拟合值	适配的标准或临界值	模型拟合结果
$χ 2$	14.34（p=0.001）	显著性概率值p>0.05^(e)	-
SRMR^(a)	0.021	<0.05	理想
RMSEA^(b)	0.059	<0.08^(f)	通过
TLI^(c)	0.965	>0.90	理想
CFI^(d)	0.990	>0.90	理想

Table 7

Table 8

Table 9

References 47

[1]	Han Z Y, Ye C W, Zhang Y, et al. Characteristics and management modes of domestic waste in rural areas of developing countries: A case study of China[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2019, 26:8485-8501. doi: 10.1007/s11356-019-04289-w
[2]	郑淋议, 杨芳, 洪名勇. 农户生活垃圾治理的支付意愿及其影响因素研究: 来自中国三省的实证[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2019, 33(5):14-18.
	[ Zheng L Y, Yang F, Hong M Y. The willingness to pay and for rural household domestic waste governance its determinants: Empirical evidence from three provinces in China[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2019, 33(5):14-18.]
[3]	李玉敏, 白军飞, 王金霞, 等. 农村居民生活固体垃圾排放及影响因素[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2012, 22(10):63-68.
	[ Li Y M, Bai J F, Wang J X, et al. Disposal of domestic solid wastes and determinants in rural China[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2012, 22(10):63-68.]
[4]	搜狐网. 既有困境又有前景农村垃圾处理提振乡村振兴[N/OL]. (2018-10-19) [2020-10-23].https://www.sohu.com/a/270022172_233642.
	[Sohu Net. Both Plight and Prospects of Rural Garbage Treatment to Boost Rural Revitalization[N/OL]. (2018-10-19) [2020-10-23]. https://www.sohu.com/a/270022172_233642.]
[5]	王金霞, 李玉敏, 黄开兴, 等. 农村生活固体垃圾的处理现状及影响因素[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2011, 21(6):74-78.
	[ Wang J X, Li Y M, Huang K X, et al. Treatment situation and determinants of rural domestic waste[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2011, 21(6):74-78.]
[6]	贾亚娟, 赵敏娟. 环境关心和制度信任对农户参与农村生活垃圾治理意愿的影响[J]. 资源科学, 2019, 41(8):1500-1512.
	[ Jia Y J, Zhao M J. The influence of environmental concern and institutional trust on farmers’ willingness to participate in rural domestic waste treatment[J]. Resources Science, 2019, 41(8):1500-1512.]
[7]	唐林, 罗小锋, 张俊飚. 社会监督、群体认同与农户生活垃圾集中处理行为: 基于面子观念的中介和调节作用[J]. 中国农村观察, 2019, (2):18-33.
	[ Tang L, Luo X F, Zhang J B. Social supervision, group identity and farmers’ domestic waste centralized disposal behavior: An analysis based on mediation effect and regulating effect of the face concept[J]. China Rural Survey, 2019, (2):18-33.]
[8]	贾亚娟, 赵敏娟, 夏显力, 等. 农村生活垃圾分类处理模式与建议[J]. 资源科学, 2019, 41(2):338-351.
	[ Jia Y J, Zhao M J, Xia X L, et al. Mode of classified treatment of rural domestic wastes and suggestions[J]. Resources Science, 2019, 41(2):338-351.]
[9]	Ma J, Hipel K, Hanson M L, et al. An analysis of influencing factors on municipal solid waste source-separated collection behavior in Guilin, China by using the theory of planned behavior[J]. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2017, 37:336-343. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2017.11.037
[10]	Razali F, Daud D, Weng-Wai C, et al. Waste separation at source behaviour among Malaysian households: The theory of planned behaviour with moral norm[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122025. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122025
[11]	Oztekin C, Teksöz G, Pamuk S, et al. Gender perspective on the factors predicting recycling behavior: Implications from the theory of planned behavior[J]. Waste Management, 2017, 62:290-302. doi: S0956-053X(16)30763-2 pmid: 28223075
[12]	Kesenheimer J, Greitemeyer T. Going green (and not being just more pro-social): Do attitude and personality specifically influence pro-environmental behavior?[J]. Sustainability, 2021, DOI: 10.3390/su13063560. doi: 10.3390/su13063560
[13]	Gibbon E, Douglas H. Personality and the pro-environmental individual: Unpacking the interplay between attitudes, behaviour and climate change denial[J]. Personality and Individual Differences, 2021, DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2021.111031. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2021.111031
[14]	Milfont T L, Sibley C. The big five personality traits and environmental engagement: Associations at the individual and societal level[J]. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2012, 32(2):187-195. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2011.12.006
[15]	Wut T M, Ng P M L, Hing-Ki M K, et al. Does gender matter? Attitude towards waste charging policy and pro-environmental behaviours[J]. Social Responsibility Journal, DOI: 10.1108/SRJ-03-2020-0102. doi: 10.1108/SRJ-03-2020-0102
[16]	Taylor S, Todd P. Understanding household garbage reduction behavior: A test of an integrated model[J]. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 1995, 14(2):192-204.
[17]	Chu P Y, Chiu J F. Factors influencing household waste recycling behavior: Test of an integrated model[J]. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2003, 33(3):604-626. doi: 10.1111/jasp.2003.33.issue-3
[18]	Swami V, Chamorro-premuzic T, Snelgar R, et al. Personality, individual differences, and demographic antecedents of self-reported household waste management behaviours[J]. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2011, 31(1):21-26. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.08.001
[19]	Ari E, Yilmaz V. A proposed structural model for housewives’ recycling behavior: A case study from Turkey[J]. Ecological Economics, 2016, 129:132-142. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.06.002
[20]	Poškus M S, Žukauskienė R. Predicting adolescents’ recycling behavior among different big five personality types[J]. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2017, 54:57-64. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.10.003
[21]	孙前路, 房可欣, 刘天平. 社会规范、社会监督对农村人居环境整治参与意愿与行为的影响: 基于广义连续比模型的实证分析[J]. 资源科学, 2020, 42(12):2354-2369.
	[ Sun Q L, Fang K X, Liu T P. Impact of social norms and public supervision on the willingness and behavior of farming households to participate in rural living environment improvement: Empirical analysis based on generalized continuous ratio model[J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(12):2354-2369.]
[22]	王学婷, 张俊飚, 童庆蒙. 地方依恋有助于提高农户村庄环境治理参与意愿吗: 基于湖北省调查数据的分析[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2020, 30(4):136-148.
	[ Wang X T, Zhang J B, Tong Q M. Does place attachment help to enhance farmers’ willingness to participate in rural environment governance: Based on the survey data of Hubei Province[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2020, 30(4):136-148.]
[23]	王建华, 沈旻旻, 朱淀. 环境综合治理背景下农村居民亲环境行为研究[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2020, 30(7):128-139.
	[ Wang J H, Shen M M, Zhu D. Research on the pro-environmental behaviors of rural residents under the background of comprehensive environmental governance[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2020, 30(7):128-139.]
[24]	崔亚飞, Bluemling B. 农户生活垃圾处理行为的影响因素及其效应研究: 基于拓展的计划行为理论框架[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2018, 32(4):37-42.
	[ Cui Y F, Bluemling B. Research on the influencing factors and effects of household waste disposal behavior: Based on the theory of planned behavior[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2018, 32(4):37-42.]
[25]	贾亚娟, 赵敏娟. 生活垃圾污染感知、社会资本对农户垃圾分类水平的影响: 基于陕西1374份农户调查数据[J]. 资源科学, 2020, 42(12):2370-2381.
	[ Jia Y J, Zhao M J. Impact of domestic waste pollution perception and social capital on the farming households’ sorting of waste: Based on the survey of 1374 farming households in Shaanxi Province[J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(12):2370-2381.]
[26]	Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior, organizational behavior and human decision processes[J]. Journal of Leisure Research. 1991, 50(2):176-211.
[27]	周密, 康壮. 村级公共产品筹资方式异质性: 基于村干部人格特征的视角[J]. 中国农村观察, 2019, (2):78-92.
	[ Zhou M, Kang Z. The heterogeneity of financing structure of village-level public goods supply: A perspective based on the personality characteristics of village cadres[J]. China Rural Survey, 2019, (2):78-92.]
[28]	赵宇晗, 余林. 人格特质与认知能力的关系及其年龄差异[J]. 心理科学进展, 2014, 22(12):1924-1934.
	[ Zhao Y H, Yu L. Personality traits and cognitive ability: Age differences in their relations[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2014, 22(12):1924-1934.]
[29]	Ajzen I. The theory of planned behaviour: Reactions and reflections[J]. Psychology & Health, 2011, 26(9):1113-1127.
[30]	Cialdini R B, Reno R R, Kallgren C A. A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places[J]. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 1990, 58(6):1015-1026.
[31]	Wang Q C, Wang Y X, Jian I Y, et al. Exploring the “energy-saving personality traits” in the office and household situation: An empirical study[J]. Energies, 2020, DOI: 10.3390/en13143535. doi: 10.3390/en13143535
[32]	Soutter A R B, Bates T C, Mõttus R. Big five and hexaco personality traits, proenvironmental attitudes, and behaviors: A meta-analysis[J]. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2020, 15(4):913-941. doi: 10.1177/1745691620903019
[33]	Liem G A D, Martin A J. Young people’s responses to environmental issues: Exploring the roles of adaptability and personality[J]. Personality & Individual Differences, 2015, 79:91-97.
[34]	Busic-Sontic A, Brick C. Personality trait effects on green household installations[J]. Collabra: Psychology, 2018, 4(1):8. doi: 10.1525/collabra.120
[35]	河北省生态环境厅. 关于印发《河北省农村环境整治工作方案(2016-2020年)》的通知[EB/OL]. (2016-10-11) [2022-1-5]. http://hbepb.hebei.gov.cn/hbhjt/zwgk/fdzdgknr/guihuazongjie/guihua/101594305446325.html.
	[Department of Ecology and Environment of Heibei Province. Plan for Hebei Province Rural Environmental Improvement during 2016-2020[EB/OL]. (2016-10-11) [2022-1-5]. http://hbepb.hebei.gov.cn/hbhjt/zwgk/fdzdgknr/guihuazongjie/guihua/101594305446325.html.]
[36]	Gosling S D, Rentfrow P J, Swann Jr. W B. A very brief measure of the big-five personality domains[J]. Journal of Research in Personality, 2003, 37(6):504-528. doi: 10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1
[37]	Lazarsfeld P F, Henry N W. Latent Structure Analysis[M]. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1968.
[38]	Zhou H, Yin H T, Yuan F, et al. Social relationships, public media, and pro-environmental behaviors[J]. Empirical Economics, 2018, (2):569-588.
[39]	温忠麟, 侯杰泰, 张雷. 调节效应与中介效应的比较和应用[J]. 心理学报, 2005, 37(2):268-274.
	[ Wen Z L, Hou J T, Zhang L. A comparison of moderator and mediator and their applications[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2005, 37(2):268-274.]
[40]	Svetina D, Rutkowski L, Rutkowski D. Multiple-group invariance with categorical outcomes using updated guidelines: An illustration using mplus and the lavaan/semtools packages[J]. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 2020, 27(1):111-130. doi: 10.1080/10705511.2019.1602776
[41]	温忠麟, 侯杰泰, 马什赫伯特. 结构方程模型中调节效应的标准化估计[J]. 心理学报, 2008, 40(6):729-736.
	[ Wen Z L, Hou J T, Herbert W M. Appropriate standardized estimates for moderating effects in structural equation models[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2008, 40(6):729-736.]
[42]	吴明隆. 结构方程模型-Amos的操作与应用. 2版[M]. 重庆: 重庆大学出版社, 2010.
	[ Wu M L. Structural Equation Model: Operation and Application of AMOS. 2nd ed[M]. Chongqing: Chongqing University Press, 2010.]
[43]	温忠麟, 侯杰泰, 马什赫伯特. 结构方程模型检验: 拟合指数与卡方准则[J]. 心理学报, 2004, 36(2):186-194.
	[ Wen Z L, Hou J T, Herbert W M. Structural equation model testing: Cutoff criteria for goodness of fit indices and chi-square test[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2004, 36(2):186-194.]
[44]	Holmström S. The Influence of Neuroticism on Pro-environmental Behavior[D]. Swedish: Örebro University, 2015.
[45]	Cheung F, Cheung S, Zhang J, et al. Relevance of openness as a personality dimension in Chinese culture: Aspects of its cultural relevance[J]. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 2008, 39(1):81-108. doi: 10.1177/0022022107311968
[46]	Mccrae R, Greenberg D. Openness to Experience[A]. Simonton D K. The Wiley Handbook of Genius[C]. New Jersey: Wiley Blackwell, 2014.
[47]	孟小燕. 基于结构方程的居民生活垃圾分类行为研究[J]. 资源科学, 2019, 41(6):1111-1119.
	[ Meng X Y. Analysis on residents’ behavior of domestic solid waste source separation based on structural equation[J]. Resources Science, 2019, 41(6):1111-1119.]

名称	乡镇/个	乡村/个	农户/户
曲周县	6	28	342
邱县	6	22	278
鸡泽县	7	37	498
肥乡区	9	48	661
总计	28	135	1779

	固定垃圾池		移动垃圾桶		非正规垃圾堆放点		清运主体		处理方式
	有	无	有	无	有	无	村民	村集体/镇政府/第三方保洁公司	填埋	其他
村数量/个	80	55	83	52	95	40	24	111	115	20
比例/%	59.26	40.74	61.48	38.52	70.37	29.63	17.78	82.22	85.19	14.81

	村庄卫生条件感知			乱扔生活垃圾的频率			乱扔生活垃圾的原因
	干净	一般	脏	较高	一般	较低	没有装垃圾的设施	环保意识差	习惯乱扔	看见别人乱扔,自己也乱扔
户数量/户	391	1122	266	217	660	902	372	662	659	86
比例/%	21.98	63.07	14.95	12.20	37.10	50.70	20.91	37.21	37.04	4.84

变量	变量含义	变量参考来源		均值	标准差
态度（AT）			Oztekin等^[10];Chu等^[17]	5.32	0.75
AT1	乱扔垃圾会引起环境污染			5.38	0.94
AT2	乱扔垃圾会引起健康问题			5.37	0.90
AT3	乱扔垃圾会加重政府财政压力			5.09	1.03
AT4	乱扔垃圾会给孩子树立坏榜样			5.44	0.78
主观规范（SN）			Oztekin等^[10];Chu等^[17]	5.32	0.68
SN1	家人认为你不应该乱扔垃圾			5.37	0.74
SN2	朋友认为你不应该乱扔垃圾			5.32	0.77
SN3	邻居认为你不应该乱扔垃圾			5.28	0.80
SN4	政府环保机构认为你不应该乱扔垃圾			5.31	0.78
知觉行为控制（PBC）			Taylor等^[15];Chu等^[17]	5.25	0.86
PBC1	你有时间将垃圾扔到垃圾箱（池）			5.33	0.83
PBC2	将垃圾扔到垃圾池或垃圾箱很方便			5.17	1.10
行为意向（I）			Taylor等^[15];Chu等^[17]	5.23	0.77
I1	未来一段时间,你愿意将垃圾扔到垃圾池或垃圾箱等指定地点			5.45	0.68
I2	未来一段时间,你将不会乱扔垃圾			5.01	1.15
行为（B）	最近一段时间,你是否把垃圾扔到了垃圾箱（池）	Oztekin等^[10]		0.89	0.31

变量	变量含义	均值	标准差
外倾性（E）		1.23^(a)	0.61
E1	我认为自己保守,安静	1.15	0.95
E2	我认为自己外向,热情	1.46	0.85
随和性（A）		1.71^(a)	0.46
A1	我认为自己有同情心,温暖	1.76	0.58
A2	我认为自己挑剔,爱争吵	0.34	0.70
责任性（C）		1.56^(a)	0.54
C1	我认为自己杂乱无章,粗心大意	0.59	0.87
C2	我认为自己可靠,自律	1.67	0.67
神经质（N）		1.33^(a)	0.57
N1	我认为自己平静放松,情绪稳定	1.60	0.72
N2	我认为自己紧张焦虑,容易沮丧	1.00	0.93
开放性（O）		1.94^(a)	0.67
O1	我认为我自己传统,没有创造性	1.33	0.89
O2	我认为我自己好奇,有艺术细胞	1.15	0.90

Farmers’ domestic waste disposal behavior: Moderating effects based on big five personality traits

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 10

References 47

Related Articles 7

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

测量指标	非标准化系数估计	标准误	Z值	因素负荷量	信度系数	组合信度^(b)	平均变异量抽取值^(c)
态度（AT）
AT1	1	-	-	0.80***	0.64	0.8366	0.5744
AT2	1.048	0.027	38.21	0.84***	0.70
AT3	0.775	0.030	25.97	0.62***	0.38
AT4	0.946	0.029	32.88	0.76***	0.57
主观规范（SN）
SN1	1	-	-	0.86***	0.74	0.9086	0.7193
SN2	1.059	0.020	52.76	0.91***	0.84
SN3	0.991	0.021	46.15	0.86***	0.73
SN4	0.873	0.023	37.87	0.75***	0.57
知觉行为控制（PBC）
PBC1	1	-	-	0.91***	0.83	0.7417	0.6251
PBC2	0.708	0.030	23.31	0.65***	0.42	0.7417	0.6251
行为意向（I）
I1	1	-	-	0.75***	0.56	0.5471	0.4057
I2	1.137	0.057	19.95	0.50***	0.25	0.5471	0.4057

人格特质元	人格特质	先验概率/%	均值	后验概率/%	分组描述
稳定性人格特质元	神经质	61.96	0.960	64.98	低神经质组
	神经质	38.04	1.942	35.02	高神经质组
	随和性和责任性	41.68	1.611和1.002	40.36	随和和责任双低组
	随和性和责任性	58.32	1.786和1.964	59.64	随和和责任双高组
可塑性人格特质元	开放性	40.54	1.262	38.00	低开放性组
	开放性	59.46	2.395	62.00	高开放性组
	外倾性	22.42	0.419	21.19	低外倾组
	外倾性	77.58	1.470	78.81	高外倾组

[1]	LI Hongwei, ZHONG Zhangbao. Impact of confirmation of land right on farmers’ willingness to transfer land: The moderating effect based on institutional credibility of land confirmation system [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(9): 1657-1667.
[2]	LI Ying, HUANG Dan, ZHU Ying, HE Wenhua, LI Jie. Economic efficiency of farmer participation in tourism-led village poverty alleviation：A case study of key poverty-stricken villages in the Qinling-Daba Mountains [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(9): 1827-1836.
[3]	SHE Qunzhi, WU Xiaoli, PAN An. Effects of climate finance on carbon emissions in recipient countries [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(6): 1015-1026.
[4]	WEI Hao, XIA Ying, LI Yun, LV Kaiyu, WANG Haiying. Effects of farmers’ credit demand rationing on the adoption of agricultural technologies that improve cultivated land quality：An analysis based on the moderating effect of farmer differentiation [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(2): 217-231.
[5]	SUN Qianlu, FANG Kexin, LIU Tianping. Impact of social norms and public supervision on the willingness and behavior of farming households to participate in rural living environment improvement: Empirical analysis based on generalized continuous ratio model [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(12): 2354-2369.
[6]	Yajuan JIA,Minjuan ZHAO. The influence of environmental concern and institutional trust on farmers’ willingness to participate in rural domestic waste treatment [J]. Resources Science, 2019, 41(8): 1500-1512.
[7]	YU Yanli, LI Hua, XUE Caixia. Influence of government regulation and community governance on tea farmers’ behavior of reducing pesticide use [J]. Resources Science, 2019, 41(12): 2227-2236.

人格特质元	人格特质	路径关系	低组路径系数	高组路径系数	低组到高组路径系数的变化	受限模型的拟合优度指标	未受限模型的拟合优度指标	△Chi²对应的P值	研究假说的检验结果
稳定性人格特质元	随和性和责任性	主观规范→行为意向	0.181***	0.321***	0.141** (T=1.966)	均通过	均通过	0.013**	H2a验证
		知觉行为控制→行为意向	0.503***	0.380***	-0.123* (T=1.859)	均通过	均通过	0.000***	意外发现
	神经质	态度→行为意向	0.196***	0.070***	-0.125 (T=1.637)	均通过	均通过	0.253	H1b未验证
		知觉行为控制→行为意向	0.381***	0.543***	0.162** (T=2.361)	均通过	均通过	0.072*	意外发现
可塑性人格特质元	外倾性	态度→行为意向	0.132***	0.178***	0.046 (T=0.519)	均通过	均通过	0.435	H6验证
		主观规范→行为意向	0.205***	0.283***	0.079 (T=1.018)	均通过	均通过	0.091*	H6验证
		知觉行为控制→行为意向	0.479***	0.413***	0.066 (T=0.974)	均通过	均通过	0.517	H6验证
		行为意向→行为	0.109***	0.138***	0.029 (T=0.429)	均通过	均通过	0.689	H6验证
		知觉行为控制→行为	0.321***	0.209***	0.111 (T=1.287)	均通过	均通过	0.138	H6验证
	开放性	态度→行为意向	0.133***	0.188***	0.055 (T=0.753)	均通过	均通过	0.182	H1a未验证