## 5 Results and Discussion
### The Difference Analysis of Behavioral Outcome Attribution Style on the Intervention Policy Response
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**ITP**} \\ \cline{2-5}
**Category** & **Mean** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Levene Test**} \\ \cline{3-5}  & & **F** & **Sig.** \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Attributional Style} & PAS & 4.1771 & \multirow{2}{*}{36.738} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.000} \\  & IAS & 3.8001 & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{3-5}  & NAS & 3.7981 & & & \\ \hline \end{tabular} Note: *ITP* indicates the degree of understanding of energy-saving policies.  
\end{table} 
Table 11: Difference analysis of ITP on the attributional style of behavior outcome. This paper used the three-dimensional diagram to conduct the response surface analysis. Figures 3-5, respectively, show the relationship between residents' degree of understanding, support, and implementation of energy-saving policies. The \(X\)-axis represents residents' degree of understanding of related policy, the \(Y\)-axis represents residents' degree of support willingness of related policy, and the \(Z\)-axis represents residents' degree of implementation of related policy. Figure 3 shows that in the positive attribution style group, the residents' response trend to energy conservation policies is obvious, indicating that when the residents' understanding and support of the policies are consistent. Moreover, the degree of consistency is higher, and the residents' implementation degree of the policies is higher. In the intermediate attribution style group, residents' understanding, support, and implementation of the policy fluctuated significantly, as shown in Figure 4. Specifically for the economic subsidy policy, the interaction effect between the residents' understanding of the policy and the degree of support is not obvious, and the degree of implementation is more significantly affected by the degree of support. In the negative attribution style group, it is obvious that a high degree of understanding and a high degree of support cannot completely bring about a high degree of implementation, especially in the price control policy and campaign publicity policy, as shown in Figure 5. In conclusion, the results of the analysis of the different attribution style groups show that when residents attach personal positive emotions to cognition, it is easier to convert cognition into behavior, while under the influence of negative emotions, residents are less likely to convert cognition into behavior. [PERSON] et al. (2016) and [PERSON] et al. (2017) also pointed out that when individuals attach individual positive emotions cognitively, it is easier to convert cognition into the behavioral intention. Combined with psychological attribution theory, it also means that residents with a positive attribution style will have a higher willingness to implement when they understand the policy with the support of positive emotion, which will further promote the implementation effect of energy-saving policies. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Y (The Degree of Implementation)**} \\ \cline{2-5}  & **PCP** & **PCP** & **ESP** & **CPP** \\ \hline \(x_{1}\) & 0.0976 *** & \(-\)0.329 & \(-\)0.320 & 1.583 *** \\ \(x_{2}\) & \(-\)0.601 ** & \(-\)1.189 *** & 0.837 ** & \(-\)0.239 \\ \(x_{1}^{2}\) & \(-\)0.108 *** & \(-\)0.110 *** & 0.057 ** & \(-\)0.171 *** \\ \(x_{2}^{2}\) & 0.139 *** & 0.092 *** & \(-\)0.042 & 0.117 ** \\ \(x_{1}x_{2}\) & \(-\)0.025 & 0.300 *** & 0.024 & \(-\)0.095 ** \\ R\({}^{2}\) & 0.251 & 0.372 & 0.377 & 0.319 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note: \({}^{***}\)_p \(<\) 0.001; \({}^{**}\)_p \(<\) 0.01._  
\end{table} 
Table 14: Quadratic response surface regression analysis of intervention policies under negative attribution style. Figure 4: Diagram of the response of residents’ degrees of understanding and support for different types of policies to the degree of implementation under IAS. Figure 3: Diagram of the response of residents’ degrees of understanding and support for different types of policies to the degree of implementation under PAS.