IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v239y2026ics0921800925001223.html

Going green for Eco or Ego? A meta-analysis of the comparative effects of environmental appeals and personal appeals on pro-environmental outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Sheng, Xushan
  • Zhang, Xiaoling
  • Huang, Yali
  • Zhou, Xinyue

Abstract

Informational appeals often draw on environmental or personal reasons to elicit sustainable behavioral change. Research on this topic has flourished in the past decade, yet there is no consensus regarding which appeal performs best and when one outperforms another. To this end, we conducted a meta-analytic review to compare the effectiveness of environmental and personal appeals in promoting pro-environmental outcomes based on 215 effect sizes extracted from 194 independent samples across 101 articles. Our findings showed that both environmental and personal appeals effectively stimulated pro-environmental outcomes, with environmental appeals holding a small advantage over personal appeals in encouraging pro-environmental intentions (but not actual behaviors). Moderator analyses showed that (a) the comparative advantage of environmental over personal appeals, especially monetary appeals, was more pronounced in studies measuring intentions than those measuring behaviors; and (b) in more individualistic countries, the comparative effects of environmental appeals were weaker against monetary appeals. Furthermore, combined appeals were as effective as environmental appeals alone but more effective than personal appeals. These findings provide avenues and directions for future research, as well as practical implications for developing effective pro-environmental messaging interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Sheng, Xushan & Zhang, Xiaoling & Huang, Yali & Zhou, Xinyue, 2026. "Going green for Eco or Ego? A meta-analysis of the comparative effects of environmental appeals and personal appeals on pro-environmental outcomes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 239(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:239:y:2026:i:c:s0921800925001223
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108639
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800925001223
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108639?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hofstede, Geert, 1994. "The business of international business is culture," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 1-14, March.
    2. Mi, Lingyun & Gan, Xiaoli & Sun, Yuhuan & Lv, Tao & Qiao, Lijie & Xu, Ting, 2021. "Effects of monetary and nonmonetary interventions on energy conservation: A meta-analysis of experimental studies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    3. Jiatong Dai & Guanghua Sheng, 2022. "Advertising strategies and sustainable development: The effects of green advertising appeals and subjective busyness on green purchase intention," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(7), pages 3421-3436, November.
    4. Henriette Rau & Susanne Nicolai & Philipp Franikowski & Susanne Stoll-Kleemann, 2024. "Distinguishing between Low- and High-Cost Pro-Environmental Behavior: Empirical Evidence from Two Complementary Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-16, March.
    5. Anne M. Valkengoed & Wokje Abrahamse & Linda Steg, 2022. "To select effective interventions for pro-environmental behaviour change, we need to consider determinants of behaviour," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(11), pages 1482-1492, November.
    6. Laurel Evans & Gregory R. Maio & Adam Corner & Carl J. Hodgetts & Sameera Ahmed & Ulrike Hahn, 2013. "Self-interest and pro-environmental behaviour," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(2), pages 122-125, February.
    7. Kimberlee Weaver & Stephen M. Garcia & Norbert Schwarz, 2012. "The Presenter's Paradox," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(3), pages 445-460.
    8. Cordts, Anette & Nitzko, Sina & Spiller, Achim, . "Consumer Response to Negative Information on Meat Consumption in Germany," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 17(A), pages 1-24.
    9. Felix Creutzig & Joyashree Roy & William F. Lamb & Inês M. L. Azevedo & Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Holger Dalkmann & Oreane Y. Edelenbosch & Frank W. Geels & Arnulf Grubler & Cameron Hepburn & Edgar G. H, 2018. "Towards demand-side solutions for mitigating climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 8(4), pages 260-263, April.
    10. Moon, Sangkil & Bergey, Paul K. & Bove, Liliana L. & Robinson, Stefanie, 2016. "Message framing and individual traits in adopting innovative, sustainable products (ISPs): Evidence from biofuel adoption," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 3553-3560.
    11. Orset, Caroline, 2021. "Is information a good policy instrument to influence the energy behaviour of households?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    12. Muriel C. D. Verain & Siet J. Sijtsema & Hans Dagevos & Gerrit Antonides, 2017. "Attribute Segmentation and Communication Effects on Healthy and Sustainable Consumer Diet Intentions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-19, May.
    13. Steinhorst, Julia & Matthies, Ellen, 2016. "Monetary or environmental appeals for saving electricity? –Potentials for spillover on low carbon policy acceptability," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 335-344.
    14. Brooks, Jeremy S. & Wilson, Charlie, 2015. "The influence of contextual cues on the perceived status of consumption-reducing behavior," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 108-117.
    15. Viechtbauer, Wolfgang, 2010. "Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 36(i03).
    16. Ropret Homar, Aja & Knežević Cvelbar, Ljubica, 2021. "The effects of framing on environmental decisions: A systematic literature review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    17. Delmas, Magali A. & Fischlein, Miriam & Asensio, Omar I., 2013. "Information strategies and energy conservation behavior: A meta-analysis of experimental studies from 1975 to 2012," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 729-739.
    18. Ebru Dogan & Jan Bolderdijk & Linda Steg, 2014. "Making Small Numbers Count: Environmental and Financial Feedback in Promoting Eco-driving Behaviours," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 413-422, September.
    19. Heinz, Nicolai & Koessler, Ann-Kathrin, 2021. "Other-regarding preferences and pro-environmental behaviour: An interdisciplinary review of experimental studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    20. Abel Gustafson & Matthew H. Goldberg & Parrish Bergquist & Karine Lacroix & Seth A. Rosenthal & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2022. "The durable, bipartisan effects of emphasizing the cost savings of renewable energy," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 7(11), pages 1023-1030, November.
    21. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    22. Kelly Goldsmith & George E. Newman & Ravi Dhar, 2016. "Mental representation changes the evaluation of green product benefits," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(9), pages 847-850, September.
    23. J. W. Bolderdijk & L. Steg & E. S. Geller & P. K. Lehman & T. Postmes, 2013. "Comparing the effectiveness of monetary versus moral motives in environmental campaigning," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(4), pages 413-416, April.
    24. Fisher, Robert J, 1993. "Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(2), pages 303-315, September.
    25. Septianto, Felix & Kemper, Joya A., 2021. "The effects of age cues on preferences for organic food: The moderating role of message claim," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    26. Jana Sophie Kesenheimer & Tobias Greitemeyer, 2020. "Ego or Eco? Neither Ecological nor Egoistic Appeals of Persuasive Climate Change Messages Impacted Pro-Environmental Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-15, December.
    27. Alexander Maki & Amanda R. Carrico & Kaitlin T. Raimi & Heather Barnes Truelove & Brandon Araujo & Kam Leung Yeung, 2019. "Meta-analysis of pro-environmental behaviour spillover," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 2(4), pages 307-315, April.
    28. Daniel Sloot & Lise Jans & Linda Steg, 2021. "Is an Appeal Enough? The Limited Impact of Financial, Environmental, and Communal Appeals in Promoting Involvement in Community Environmental Initiatives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-28, January.
    29. Mirjam Visser & Valentin Gattol & Rosan Van der Helm, 2015. "Communicating Sustainable Shoes to Mainstream Consumers: The Impact of Advertisement Design on Buying Intention," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-17, June.
    30. Levin, Irwin P. & Schneider, Sandra L. & Gaeth, Gary J., 1998. "All Frames Are Not Created Equal: A Typology and Critical Analysis of Framing Effects," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 149-188, November.
    31. Jeff Tollefson, 2018. "IPCC says limiting global warming to 1.5 °C will require drastic action," Nature, Nature, vol. 562(7726), pages 172-173, October.
    32. Yang Li & Dandan Yang & Yingying Liu, 2021. "The Effect of Message Framing on Consumers’ Intentions to Purchase Recycling-Aiding Products in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-17, June.
    33. Georgia Salanti & Cinzia Del Giovane & Anna Chaimani & Deborah M Caldwell & Julian P T Higgins, 2014. "Evaluating the Quality of Evidence from a Network Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(7), pages 1-14, July.
    34. Valentin Amrhein & Sander Greenland & Blake McShane, 2019. "Scientists rise up against statistical significance," Nature, Nature, vol. 567(7748), pages 305-307, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shimpei Iwasaki & Samuel Franssens & Siegfried Dewitte & Florian Lange, 2021. "Evaluating the Effect of Framing Energy Consumption in Terms of Losses versus Gains on Air-Conditioner Use: A Field Experiment in a Student Dormitory in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-9, April.
    2. Sloot, Daniel & Scheibehenne, Benjamin, 2022. "Understanding the financial incentive conundrum: A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of financial incentive interventions in promoting energy conservation behavior," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    3. Lange, Florian & Van Asbroeck, Ranja & Van Baelen, Dimitri & Dewitte, Siegfried, 2024. "For cash, the planet, or for both: Evaluating an informational intervention for energy consumption reduction," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    4. Yang, Xisi & Thøgersen, John, 2022. "When people are green and greedy: A new perspective of recycling rewards and crowding-out in Germany, the USA and China," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 217-235.
    5. Dominik Bär & Stefan Feuerriegel & Ting Li & Markus Weinmann, 2023. "Message framing to promote solar panels," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-9, December.
    6. Hilary Byerly Flint & Paul Cada & Patricia A. Champ & Jamie Gomez & Danny Margoles & James R. Meldrum & Hannah Brenkert-Smith, 2022. "You vs. us: framing adaptation behavior in terms of private or social benefits," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 174(1), pages 1-17, September.
    7. Andor, Mark A. & Gerster, Andreas & Peters, Jörg, 2022. "Information campaigns for residential energy conservation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    8. Wang, Jianming & Li, Yongqiang & He, Zhengxia & Gao, Jian & Wang, Jianguo, 2022. "Scale framing, benefit framing and their interaction effects on energy-saving behaviors: Evidence from urban residents of China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    9. Ikonen, Iina & Aydinli, Aylin & Verlegh, Peeter, 2025. "Adding good or removing bad: Consumer response to nutrition claims," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 101(4), pages 659-678.
    10. Phu Nguyen-Van & Anne Stenger & Tuyen Tiet, 2021. "Social incentive factors in interventions promoting sustainable behaviors: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-27, December.
    11. Lingyun Mi & Jiali Han & Ting Xu & Xuejiao Wang & Lijie Qiao & Tianwen Jia & Xiaoli Gan, 2023. "Evaluating Whether and How Public Health Event Information Frameworks Promote Pro-Environmental Behavior," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-20, February.
    12. Collet, Charles & Gastineau, Pascal & Chèze, Benoît & Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre & Martinez, Frédéric, 2023. "Combining economics and psychology: Does CO2 framing strengthen pro-environmental behaviors?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    13. Florian Lange & Cameron Brick, 2021. "Changing Pro-Environmental Behavior: Evidence from (Un)Successful Intervention Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-5, July.
    14. Anouk M Griffioen & Michel J J Handgraaf & Gerrit Antonides, 2019. "Which construal level combinations generate the most effective interventions? A field experiment on energy conservation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-24, January.
    15. Griffioen, Anouk M. & van Beek, Jannette & N. Lindhout, Simone & J. J. Handgraaf, Michel, 2016. "Distance Makes The Mind Grow Broader: An Overview Of Psychological Distance Studies In The Environmental And Health Domains," APSTRACT: Applied Studies in Agribusiness and Commerce, AGRIMBA, vol. 10(2-3), pages 1-14, October.
    16. Vesely, Stepan & Klöckner, Christian A. & Carrus, Giuseppe & Chokrai, Parissa & Fritsche, Immo & Masson, Torsten & Panno, Angelo & Tiberio, Lorenza & Udall, Alina M., 2022. "Donations to renewable energy projects: The role of social norms and donor anonymity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    17. Chien-shih Huang & Ruowen Shen, 2020. "Does city or state make a difference? The effects of policy framing on public attitude toward a solar energy program," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(2).
    18. Mi, Lingyun & Gan, Xiaoli & Sun, Yuhuan & Lv, Tao & Qiao, Lijie & Xu, Ting, 2021. "Effects of monetary and nonmonetary interventions on energy conservation: A meta-analysis of experimental studies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    19. Jia Wang & Yangli Gu & Haohang Xin & Xiaomei Wang, 2022. "Influence of Appeal Type and Message Framing on Residents’ Intent to Engage in Pro-Environmental Behavior," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-27, November.
    20. Daniel Sloot & Lise Jans & Linda Steg, 2021. "Is an Appeal Enough? The Limited Impact of Financial, Environmental, and Communal Appeals in Promoting Involvement in Community Environmental Initiatives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-28, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:239:y:2026:i:c:s0921800925001223. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.