# Construction of Public Energy and Environmental Protection Media Cognition and Behavior Relationship Based on CGSS2013 Data

Authors: Ruichan Fan
Journal: Mathematical Problems in Engineering
 (2022)

---

## Abstract

In recent years, the environmental conditions in China have continued to deteriorate, and the pressure of environmental pollution and ecological deterioration has also increased. To strengthen environmental protection work, we must not only pay attention to the natural causes of environmental pollution but also find the social causes of its occurrence. Only in this way can environmental protection and social construction promote each other and develop together. The relationship between the public’s environmental protection awareness (including environmental protection knowledge and environmental awareness) and environmental behavior is a research problem with important theoretical and practical significance. Based on the perspective of planned behavior theory, this paper derives the following research hypothesis: the more the public’s knowledge of environmental protection, the deeper their understanding of the importance of environmental issues, which will directly promote the public’s adoption of environmental behavior. The richer the environmental behavior, the more likely it will affect the environmental cognition that includes the two dimensions of subjective psychological will and the perception of environmental pollution, and then the environmental behavior. The state of the public’s environmental cognition will also directly affect the environmental behavior. This paper analyzes China’s CGSS2013 data, and the results show that there is a correlation between environmental protection awareness and environmental behavior. In addition, environmental protection awareness has a greater impact on private environmental behavior than on public environmental behavior.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

China’s “Global Environmental Performance Index” (EPI) ranking dropped from 94 in 2006 (133 countries in total) to 179 in 2016 (180 countries in total), indicating that the environmental conditions in China continue to deteriorate. Strengthening environmental governance and protection and promoting harmony between man and nature have become an important part of developing social undertakings and building a harmonious society. However, to strengthen environmental protection work, we must not only pay attention to the natural causes of environmental pollution but also pay attention to the social causes of its occurrence. Only in this way can environmental protection and social construction promote each other and develop together [1, 2]. Environmental sociology is a discipline that studies the interrelationships between the natural, physical, and chemical environments around mankind. Therefore, in the face of deteriorating environmental problems, environmental sociology should give full play to its advantages and conduct research on environmental problems to find out the social causes and underlying mechanisms. Since the birth of environmental sociology (1970–2005), there have been different definitions and choices regarding its research objects, mainly focusing on the relationship between the environment and society and the study of environmental issues [3, 4].Research on their methodology falls into the controversy between the “human exceptionalism paradigm” and the “new ecological paradigm,” which will cause these studies to lack the support of practical experience research and are limited to the disputes about their methodology [5]. The research on environmental issues focuses on the basic research of “interaction between environment and society” and “constructivism.” The research on the influencing factors of environmental issues focuses on the macrolevel such as social system and structure, while there is less research on the microlevel [6]. Therefore, it is necessary to strengthen the research on the microlevel of the causes of environmental problems. As the main body of society living in the natural system, human beings interact with the environment [7].Because environmental problems are not directly caused by social problems such as social systems and social structures, but through environmental behavior, which is an intermediary and root cause, to produce environmental problems. The main influencing factors of environmental behavior are psychological, social structure, social demographics, and policies [8, 9]. However, environmental protection knowledge and psychological factors are important factors that affect environmental behavior. Many researchers have combined environmental protection knowledge and environmental pollution perception as the variable of environmental cognition but regard environmental protection knowledge as environmental cognition. One aspect of knowledge is unreasonable. Environmental cognition belongs to psychological cognition and should not include environmental protection knowledge [10, 11].The subjective psychological will and perception of environmental pollution in the psychological factors play a great role in the generation of environmental behavior. Based on the data of CGSS2013, this paper uses quantitative research methods to explore the impact of environmental protection awareness on environmental behavior and analyzes the degree of impact of environmental protection awareness on environmental behavior in a more in-depth manner [12–14]. Compared with other studies that analyze the influencing factors of environmental behavior through small areas, this research is more representative and in-depth and can provide references for future environmental behavior research.


## 2. Materials and Methods

### 2.1. Research Inferences and Hypotheses

According to the theory of planned behavior, the research on environmental protection cognition and environmental behavior is inferred as follows: the more the public has more knowledge about environmental protection, the deeper their understanding of the importance of environmental issues is, which will directly promote the public to take environmental behavior [15, 16]. It may affect environmental cognition that includes subjective psychological will and environmental pollution perception and then affect environmental behavior. The public’s environmental cognition status will also directly affect environmental behavior. Based on the above inferences, the assumptions made in this article are shown in Table 1.Table 1
Assumptions.
H1There is a positive correlation between environmental protection knowledge and public environmental behaviorH2There is a positive correlation between environmental protection knowledge and private environmental behaviorH3There is a positive correlation between environmental protection knowledge and public environmental behaviorH4The cognition of the severity of environmental pollution is positively correlated with public environmental behaviorH5The cognition of the severity of environmental pollution is positively correlated with private environmental behaviorH6The cognition of the severity of environmental pollution has a positive correlation with the public’s environmental behaviorH7The cognition of the severity of environmental decline is positively correlated with public environmental behaviorH8The cognition of the severity of environmental decline is positively correlated with private environmental behaviorH9The cognition of the severity of environmental decline has a positive correlation with the public’s environmental behaviorH10Environmental pollution concerns have a positive correlation with public environmental behaviorsH11Environmental pollution concerns have a positive correlation with private environmental behaviorsH12Environmental pollution concerns have a positive correlation with public environmental behaviors


### 2.2. Research Data

This research uses CGSS2013 data to analyze the data of the urban and rural residents’ environmental module. This is a national comprehensive representative and valid questionnaire [17–19]. The survey conducts a four-level stratified sampling of adults aged 18 years and older in mainland China and obtains survey data with a sample size of 12,469. After removing the observations with missing information, the effective sample includes 4986 people.


### 2.3. Variable Analysis

#### 2.3.1. Dependent Variable

The dependent variable in this paper is the public environmental behavior, which refers to the behaviors that individuals implement in their daily lives that are conducive to the improvement of environmental conditions and the improvement of environmental quality. The environmental problems are not directly caused by social system and social structure, but by people's environmental behavior, which is the root cause of environmental problems.In the specific analysis, we assign the values of “never,” “occasionally,” and “often” as 0, 1, and 2, respectively. At the same time, we perform factor analysis on the 10 topics of environmental behavior. By using the principal component orthogonal rotation method, during the analysis operation, we select the option of canceling small coefficients and delete the coefficients less than 0.5. The result is that the measurement of environmental behavior includes 2 factors and 10 indicators. Factor 1 includes 5 indicators: 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Factor 2 includes 5 indicators: 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6. According to the results of exploratory factor analysis, related studies have added up items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 to form public and private environmental behaviors. 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10 items are added together to form the public’s public environmental behavior. Therefore, we also use this standard to divide environmental behavior into two dimensions: public environmental behavior and private environmental behavior.From the factor analysis of environmental behavior-related indicators, we see that the cumulative explanation of the selected two principal components to the variables reaches 52.103%, of which factor 1 contributes to 31.149% of the variance of each variable. We calculate the product of the weights and scores of each factor, respectively, and then add them together to obtain the target variable “public environmental behavior.”


#### 2.3.2. Independent Variable

The answer options of the environmental protection knowledge scale are “correct,” “wrong,” and “do not know.” Among them, the expressions of 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 are wrong statements, and 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 items are correct. In this article, the correct answer is coded as 1, and the wrong answer is coded as 0. After keeping the same order, we add up each item. Environmental cognition includes two dimensions: subjective psychological willingness and environmental pollution perception. Among them, subjective psychological willingness is measured by environmental pollution concerns. Environmental pollution concerns refer to the public’s personal understanding of local environmental pollution problems. The CGSS2013 questionnaire is measured by using the question “do you know the following types of environmental problems?”In terms of environmental pollution perception, the environmental module of the CGSS2013 questionnaire uses a scale containing twelve questions to ask respondents to judge the severity of environmental pollution. These twelve aspects include air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution, industry garbage pollution, domestic garbage pollution, insufficient green space, destruction of forest vegetation, degradation of cultivated land quality, shortage of fresh water resources, food pollution, desertification, and reduction of wildlife [20].The answer options are “very serious,” “relatively serious,” “not too serious,” “not serious,” “general,” “not concerned/unexplainable,” and “no such problem.” We assign it to 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1, respectively, among which, if we do not care/cannot explain and do not have the problem, it is assigned a value of 3.Through the analysis and judgment of these twelve aspects, it is found that the six environmental pollution items of air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution, industrial waste pollution, domestic waste pollution, and food pollution are obviously related to health and safety, while the lack of green space and forest vegetation, environmental degradation projects of destruction, degradation of cultivated land quality, shortage of freshwater resources, desertification, and reduction of wild animals and plants are relatively far away from daily life and are not directly related to health and safety. Based on this assumption, we conduct a confirmatory factor analysis of these 12 aspects [21, 22]. The model fits well, and the corresponding load of the two factors is relatively strong, which is between 0.51 and 0.72. The correlation between the factors is relatively strong. Therefore, these 12 projects are defined as two dimensions, including the perception of the severity of local environmental pollution and the perception of the severity of local environmental decline.


#### 2.3.3. Control Variable

Based on the existing research on environmental behaviors, this article selects nine variables including gender, age, education level, marital status, residential area, income, party membership, work status, and mass media as control variables. Among them, gender, education level, marital status, living area, party members, work status, and mass media are classified variables, and these seven classified variables are set as dummy variables.Age and income are continuous variables [23–27].


### 2.4. Research Data Model

#### 2.4.1. Factor Analysis Model

(1)Y=Σsmfm¯pn¯×100%.In this factor analysis model,Y on the left side of the equation represents the dependent variable, fm on the right side represents the score of each factor, spmn¯×100% represents the weight of each factor, sm represents the total contribution rate of variance of all principal components, and pn indicates the variance contribution rate of each factor in the principal component.


#### 2.4.2. Multiple Linear Regression Model

(2)Y=β0+∑aixi+∑ajxj.In this multiple linear regression model,Y on the left side of the equation represents the two dimensions of the environmental behavior of the dependent variable: public environmental behavior and private environmental behavior, while the right side is a linear form. β0 is a constant, ∑aixi refers to the sum of control variables in the model, and ai is the regression coefficient of each control variable. ∑ajxj is the sum of the two independent variables which are environmental protection knowledge and environmental cognition, and aj is the regression coefficient of environmental protection knowledge and environmental cognition.


## 2.1. Research Inferences and Hypotheses

According to the theory of planned behavior, the research on environmental protection cognition and environmental behavior is inferred as follows: the more the public has more knowledge about environmental protection, the deeper their understanding of the importance of environmental issues is, which will directly promote the public to take environmental behavior [15, 16]. It may affect environmental cognition that includes subjective psychological will and environmental pollution perception and then affect environmental behavior. The public’s environmental cognition status will also directly affect environmental behavior. Based on the above inferences, the assumptions made in this article are shown in Table 1.Table 1
Assumptions.
H1There is a positive correlation between environmental protection knowledge and public environmental behaviorH2There is a positive correlation between environmental protection knowledge and private environmental behaviorH3There is a positive correlation between environmental protection knowledge and public environmental behaviorH4The cognition of the severity of environmental pollution is positively correlated with public environmental behaviorH5The cognition of the severity of environmental pollution is positively correlated with private environmental behaviorH6The cognition of the severity of environmental pollution has a positive correlation with the public’s environmental behaviorH7The cognition of the severity of environmental decline is positively correlated with public environmental behaviorH8The cognition of the severity of environmental decline is positively correlated with private environmental behaviorH9The cognition of the severity of environmental decline has a positive correlation with the public’s environmental behaviorH10Environmental pollution concerns have a positive correlation with public environmental behaviorsH11Environmental pollution concerns have a positive correlation with private environmental behaviorsH12Environmental pollution concerns have a positive correlation with public environmental behaviors


## 2.2. Research Data

This research uses CGSS2013 data to analyze the data of the urban and rural residents’ environmental module. This is a national comprehensive representative and valid questionnaire [17–19]. The survey conducts a four-level stratified sampling of adults aged 18 years and older in mainland China and obtains survey data with a sample size of 12,469. After removing the observations with missing information, the effective sample includes 4986 people.


## 2.3. Variable Analysis

### 2.3.1. Dependent Variable

The dependent variable in this paper is the public environmental behavior, which refers to the behaviors that individuals implement in their daily lives that are conducive to the improvement of environmental conditions and the improvement of environmental quality. The environmental problems are not directly caused by social system and social structure, but by people's environmental behavior, which is the root cause of environmental problems.In the specific analysis, we assign the values of “never,” “occasionally,” and “often” as 0, 1, and 2, respectively. At the same time, we perform factor analysis on the 10 topics of environmental behavior. By using the principal component orthogonal rotation method, during the analysis operation, we select the option of canceling small coefficients and delete the coefficients less than 0.5. The result is that the measurement of environmental behavior includes 2 factors and 10 indicators. Factor 1 includes 5 indicators: 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Factor 2 includes 5 indicators: 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6. According to the results of exploratory factor analysis, related studies have added up items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 to form public and private environmental behaviors. 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10 items are added together to form the public’s public environmental behavior. Therefore, we also use this standard to divide environmental behavior into two dimensions: public environmental behavior and private environmental behavior.From the factor analysis of environmental behavior-related indicators, we see that the cumulative explanation of the selected two principal components to the variables reaches 52.103%, of which factor 1 contributes to 31.149% of the variance of each variable. We calculate the product of the weights and scores of each factor, respectively, and then add them together to obtain the target variable “public environmental behavior.”


### 2.3.2. Independent Variable

The answer options of the environmental protection knowledge scale are “correct,” “wrong,” and “do not know.” Among them, the expressions of 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 are wrong statements, and 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 items are correct. In this article, the correct answer is coded as 1, and the wrong answer is coded as 0. After keeping the same order, we add up each item. Environmental cognition includes two dimensions: subjective psychological willingness and environmental pollution perception. Among them, subjective psychological willingness is measured by environmental pollution concerns. Environmental pollution concerns refer to the public’s personal understanding of local environmental pollution problems. The CGSS2013 questionnaire is measured by using the question “do you know the following types of environmental problems?”In terms of environmental pollution perception, the environmental module of the CGSS2013 questionnaire uses a scale containing twelve questions to ask respondents to judge the severity of environmental pollution. These twelve aspects include air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution, industry garbage pollution, domestic garbage pollution, insufficient green space, destruction of forest vegetation, degradation of cultivated land quality, shortage of fresh water resources, food pollution, desertification, and reduction of wildlife [20].The answer options are “very serious,” “relatively serious,” “not too serious,” “not serious,” “general,” “not concerned/unexplainable,” and “no such problem.” We assign it to 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1, respectively, among which, if we do not care/cannot explain and do not have the problem, it is assigned a value of 3.Through the analysis and judgment of these twelve aspects, it is found that the six environmental pollution items of air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution, industrial waste pollution, domestic waste pollution, and food pollution are obviously related to health and safety, while the lack of green space and forest vegetation, environmental degradation projects of destruction, degradation of cultivated land quality, shortage of freshwater resources, desertification, and reduction of wild animals and plants are relatively far away from daily life and are not directly related to health and safety. Based on this assumption, we conduct a confirmatory factor analysis of these 12 aspects [21, 22]. The model fits well, and the corresponding load of the two factors is relatively strong, which is between 0.51 and 0.72. The correlation between the factors is relatively strong. Therefore, these 12 projects are defined as two dimensions, including the perception of the severity of local environmental pollution and the perception of the severity of local environmental decline.


### 2.3.3. Control Variable

Based on the existing research on environmental behaviors, this article selects nine variables including gender, age, education level, marital status, residential area, income, party membership, work status, and mass media as control variables. Among them, gender, education level, marital status, living area, party members, work status, and mass media are classified variables, and these seven classified variables are set as dummy variables.Age and income are continuous variables [23–27].


## 2.3.1. Dependent Variable

The dependent variable in this paper is the public environmental behavior, which refers to the behaviors that individuals implement in their daily lives that are conducive to the improvement of environmental conditions and the improvement of environmental quality. The environmental problems are not directly caused by social system and social structure, but by people's environmental behavior, which is the root cause of environmental problems.In the specific analysis, we assign the values of “never,” “occasionally,” and “often” as 0, 1, and 2, respectively. At the same time, we perform factor analysis on the 10 topics of environmental behavior. By using the principal component orthogonal rotation method, during the analysis operation, we select the option of canceling small coefficients and delete the coefficients less than 0.5. The result is that the measurement of environmental behavior includes 2 factors and 10 indicators. Factor 1 includes 5 indicators: 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Factor 2 includes 5 indicators: 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6. According to the results of exploratory factor analysis, related studies have added up items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 to form public and private environmental behaviors. 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10 items are added together to form the public’s public environmental behavior. Therefore, we also use this standard to divide environmental behavior into two dimensions: public environmental behavior and private environmental behavior.From the factor analysis of environmental behavior-related indicators, we see that the cumulative explanation of the selected two principal components to the variables reaches 52.103%, of which factor 1 contributes to 31.149% of the variance of each variable. We calculate the product of the weights and scores of each factor, respectively, and then add them together to obtain the target variable “public environmental behavior.”


## 2.3.2. Independent Variable

The answer options of the environmental protection knowledge scale are “correct,” “wrong,” and “do not know.” Among them, the expressions of 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 are wrong statements, and 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 items are correct. In this article, the correct answer is coded as 1, and the wrong answer is coded as 0. After keeping the same order, we add up each item. Environmental cognition includes two dimensions: subjective psychological willingness and environmental pollution perception. Among them, subjective psychological willingness is measured by environmental pollution concerns. Environmental pollution concerns refer to the public’s personal understanding of local environmental pollution problems. The CGSS2013 questionnaire is measured by using the question “do you know the following types of environmental problems?”In terms of environmental pollution perception, the environmental module of the CGSS2013 questionnaire uses a scale containing twelve questions to ask respondents to judge the severity of environmental pollution. These twelve aspects include air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution, industry garbage pollution, domestic garbage pollution, insufficient green space, destruction of forest vegetation, degradation of cultivated land quality, shortage of fresh water resources, food pollution, desertification, and reduction of wildlife [20].The answer options are “very serious,” “relatively serious,” “not too serious,” “not serious,” “general,” “not concerned/unexplainable,” and “no such problem.” We assign it to 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1, respectively, among which, if we do not care/cannot explain and do not have the problem, it is assigned a value of 3.Through the analysis and judgment of these twelve aspects, it is found that the six environmental pollution items of air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution, industrial waste pollution, domestic waste pollution, and food pollution are obviously related to health and safety, while the lack of green space and forest vegetation, environmental degradation projects of destruction, degradation of cultivated land quality, shortage of freshwater resources, desertification, and reduction of wild animals and plants are relatively far away from daily life and are not directly related to health and safety. Based on this assumption, we conduct a confirmatory factor analysis of these 12 aspects [21, 22]. The model fits well, and the corresponding load of the two factors is relatively strong, which is between 0.51 and 0.72. The correlation between the factors is relatively strong. Therefore, these 12 projects are defined as two dimensions, including the perception of the severity of local environmental pollution and the perception of the severity of local environmental decline.


## 2.3.3. Control Variable

Based on the existing research on environmental behaviors, this article selects nine variables including gender, age, education level, marital status, residential area, income, party membership, work status, and mass media as control variables. Among them, gender, education level, marital status, living area, party members, work status, and mass media are classified variables, and these seven classified variables are set as dummy variables.Age and income are continuous variables [23–27].


## 2.4. Research Data Model

### 2.4.1. Factor Analysis Model

(1)Y=Σsmfm¯pn¯×100%.In this factor analysis model,Y on the left side of the equation represents the dependent variable, fm on the right side represents the score of each factor, spmn¯×100% represents the weight of each factor, sm represents the total contribution rate of variance of all principal components, and pn indicates the variance contribution rate of each factor in the principal component.


### 2.4.2. Multiple Linear Regression Model

(2)Y=β0+∑aixi+∑ajxj.In this multiple linear regression model,Y on the left side of the equation represents the two dimensions of the environmental behavior of the dependent variable: public environmental behavior and private environmental behavior, while the right side is a linear form. β0 is a constant, ∑aixi refers to the sum of control variables in the model, and ai is the regression coefficient of each control variable. ∑ajxj is the sum of the two independent variables which are environmental protection knowledge and environmental cognition, and aj is the regression coefficient of environmental protection knowledge and environmental cognition.


## 2.4.1. Factor Analysis Model

(1)Y=Σsmfm¯pn¯×100%.In this factor analysis model,Y on the left side of the equation represents the dependent variable, fm on the right side represents the score of each factor, spmn¯×100% represents the weight of each factor, sm represents the total contribution rate of variance of all principal components, and pn indicates the variance contribution rate of each factor in the principal component.


## 2.4.2. Multiple Linear Regression Model

(2)Y=β0+∑aixi+∑ajxj.In this multiple linear regression model,Y on the left side of the equation represents the two dimensions of the environmental behavior of the dependent variable: public environmental behavior and private environmental behavior, while the right side is a linear form. β0 is a constant, ∑aixi refers to the sum of control variables in the model, and ai is the regression coefficient of each control variable. ∑ajxj is the sum of the two independent variables which are environmental protection knowledge and environmental cognition, and aj is the regression coefficient of environmental protection knowledge and environmental cognition.


## 3. Results and Discussion

### 3.1. The Impact of Public Awareness of Environmental Protection on Public Environmental Behavior

Table2 reports two models. Model 1 reports the control of age, education level, gender (male and female), marital status (married and unmarried), residential area (urban and rural), income, political outlook (multiple regression analysis results of control variables such as party members and non-CCP members), work status (employed and unemployed), and mass media (TV media and non-TV media) on public environmental behavior. Model 2 reports the result of multiple linear regression analysis of public environmental protection knowledge and environmental cognition to the public environmental behavior.Table 2
Multiple linear regression analysis of public environmental protection knowledge and environmental cognition to public environmental behavior.
ModelNon-standardized coefficientStandard coefficientBStandard errorModel 1(Constant)−0.7960.214Age00.00050.003Education level0.152∗∗∗0.0280.091Female (reference item: male)0.0030.0370.002Married (reference item: unmarried)0.0790.0580.017City (reference item: rural area)0.0340.050.02Income0.048∗∗0.0160.035Party member (reference item: non-CCP member)0.182∗∗0.0550.039Employment (reference item: not employed)−0.0490.048−0.019TV media−0.044∗∗0.013−0.025Non-television media0.111∗∗∗0.0070.289Model 2(Constant)−0.9920.534Age0.0040.0030.023Education level0.098∗∗0.0390.062Female (reference item: male)0.0270.0570.008Married (reference item: unmarried)0.1290.1010.027City (reference item: rural area)0.25∗∗∗0.0710.069Income0.0240.0370.009Party member (reference item: non-CCP member)0.285∗∗∗0.0790.068Employment (reference item: not employed)0.070.080.019TV media−0.08∗0.026−0.035Non-television media0.084∗∗∗0.0110.242Environmental protection knowledge0.058∗∗∗0.0210.062Awareness of the severity of environmental pollution0.014#0.0100.035Awareness of the severity of environmental decline−0.0020.015−0.002Environmental pollution concerns0.0250.0370.0011Note.#p<0.10; p∗<0.05; ∗∗p<0.01; ∗∗∗p<0.001.Through the analysis of variance on the two models, it can be seen from the results of the F test that the control variables in the regression model have a significant impact on public environmental behavior at the level of 0.001. After adding environmental protection knowledge and environmental awareness variables, the impact of the entire model on public environmental behavior is also significant at the level of 0.001. The adjusted R-square of model 2 is 0.095%. From the adjusted R-square, the regression model we built has a general goodness of linear fit, which can only explain 9.5% of the internal difference of the dependent variable.In model 2, it can be found that at a significance level of 0.1, the perception of environmental pollution severity has a significant impact on public environmental behavior. At a significance level of 0.05, TV media has a significant impact on public environmental behavior. At the level of significance of 0.01, education level has a significant impact on public environmental behavior. At the significance level of 0.001, the four variables of residential area, political outlook, non-TV media, and environmental protection knowledge have a significant impact on public environmental behavior.In short, from the results of multiple regression analysis, the public’s education level, residential area, political outlook, television media and non-TV media, environmental protection knowledge, and awareness of the severity of environmental pollution will all have a significant impact on public participation in public environmental behavior. Other variables, such as age, gender, marital status, income, work status, awareness of the severity of environmental decline, and environmental pollution concerns, do not produce statistically significant impacts on public environmental behavior, and the impact is not significant.


### 3.2. The Impact of Public Environmental Protection Knowledge and Environmental Awareness on Private Environmental Behavior

Table3 reports two models. Model 1 reports the control of age, education level, gender (male and female), marital status (married and unmarried), residential area (urban and rural), income, political outlook (the results of multiple regression analysis of control variables such as party members and non-CCP members), work status (employed and unemployed), and mass media (TV media and non-TV media) on private environmental behavior. Model 2 reports the result of multiple linear regression analysis of public environmental protection knowledge and environmental cognition on private environmental behavior in public environmental behavior.Table 3
Multiple linear regression analysis of public environmental protection knowledge and environmental cognition to private environmental behavior.
ModelNon-standardized coefficientStandard coefficientBStandard error(Constant)−0.0040.31Model 1Age0.009∗∗∗0.0030.0534Education level0.351∗∗∗0.050.148Female (reference item: male)0.471∗∗∗0.0490.085Married (reference item: unmarried)0.1320.0890.017City (reference item: rural area)−0.7660.058−0.162Income0.172∗∗∗0.0280.089Party member (reference item: non-CCP member)0.181∗0.0820.026Employment (reference item: not employed)−0.163∗∗0.061−0.035TV media0.091∗∗∗0.0290.038Non-television media0.15∗∗∗0.0090.241Model 2(Constant)−2.6030.672Age0.018∗∗∗0.0040.089Education level0.232∗∗∗0.0550.117Female (reference item: male)0.597∗∗∗0.0780.124Married (reference item: unmarried)0.0590.1270.009City (reference item: rural area)−0.532∗∗∗0.091−0.123Income0.110∗0.0450.049Party member0.245∗0.1030.042Employment (reference item: not employed)−0.1210.095−0.028TV media0.030.0420.009Non-television media0.109∗∗∗0.0150.197Environmental protection knowledge0.224∗∗∗0.030.172Awareness of the0.044∗∗0.0180.049Awareness of the severity of severity of environmental decline0.0250.0170.028Environmental pollution concerns0.216∗∗∗0.0480.074Note.p#<0.10; ∗p<0.05; ∗∗p<0.01; ∗∗∗p<0.001.We perform analysis of variance on the two models. The results of the F test show that the control variables in the regression model have a significant impact on private environmental behavior at the level of 0.001. After adding environmental protection knowledge and environmental awareness variables, the entire influence of the model on private environmental behavior is also significant at the level of 0.001. The adjusted R-square of model 2 is 0.215. From the adjusted R-square, the regression model we built has a good linear fit, which can only explain 21.5% of the internal difference of the dependent variable.In model 2, at the significance level of 0.05, income and political outlook have a significant impact on private environmental behavior. At the significance level of 0.01, the perception of the severity of environmental pollution has a significant impact on private environmental behavior. At the significance level of 0.001, the seven variables of age, education level, gender, residential area, non-TV media, environmental protection knowledge, and environmental pollution concern have significant effects on private environmental behavior.In short, from the results of multiple regression analysis, the public’s age, education level, gender, residential area, income, political outlook, non-TV media, knowledge of environmental protection, awareness of the severity of environmental pollution, and concern about environmental pollution will all be of concern to the public. Participation in private environmental behavior has a significant impact. Other variables, such as marriage status, employment status, television media, and perceptions of the severity of environmental decline, do not have statistically significant impacts on private environmental behavior, and the impact is not significant.


### 3.3. Multiple Regression Analysis Results of Public Environmental Protection Knowledge and Environmental Cognition on Environmental Behavior

Public environmental protection knowledge has a significant impact on public environmental behavior, private environmental behavior, and overall public environmental behavior. Public environmental protection knowledge is positively related to public environmental behavior, private environmental behavior, and overall public environmental behavior. That is, the public with richer environmental protection knowledge will engage in more public environmental behaviors, private environmental behaviors, and overall public environmental behaviors, which verifies the assumptions H1, H2, and H3.The perception of the severity of environmental pollution in the perception dimension of environmental pollution in public environmental perception has a significant impact on public environmental behavior, private environmental behavior, and overall public environmental behavior. The severity of public environmental pollution is positively correlated with public environmental behavior, private environmental behavior, and overall public environmental behavior. That is, the public with higher awareness of the severity of environmental pollution will engage in more public environmental behaviors, private environmental behaviors, and overall public environmental behaviors which verifies the assumptions H4, H5, and H6.The perception of the severity of environmental degradation in the perception dimension of environmental pollution in public environmental perception has no significant impact on public environmental behavior, private environmental behavior, and overall public environmental behavior. Hypotheses H7, H8, and H9 have not been confirmed. This is inconsistent with the research conclusions by other researchers, indicating that the national level has paid attention to the problems of serious environmental pollution and ecosystem degradation. Therefore, the whole society has also sensed the seriousness of environmental pollution and will participate more actively in environmental protection behavior.Moreover, as the quality of people's lives improves, the public pays more attention to environmental issues closely related to their own health and safety and will pay more attention to protecting the environment. As the country and society vigorously promote environmental protection measures, environmental problems are improved day by day, which has weakened the public’s perception of the severity of environmental decline. Environmental pollution concerns in the subjective psychological willingness dimension of public environmental cognition have a significant impact on private environmental behavior and overall public environmental behavior, but it has no significant impact on public environmental behavior, which verifies the hypotheses H11 and H12. Hypothesis H10 has not been verified.


## 3.1. The Impact of Public Awareness of Environmental Protection on Public Environmental Behavior

Table2 reports two models. Model 1 reports the control of age, education level, gender (male and female), marital status (married and unmarried), residential area (urban and rural), income, political outlook (multiple regression analysis results of control variables such as party members and non-CCP members), work status (employed and unemployed), and mass media (TV media and non-TV media) on public environmental behavior. Model 2 reports the result of multiple linear regression analysis of public environmental protection knowledge and environmental cognition to the public environmental behavior.Table 2
Multiple linear regression analysis of public environmental protection knowledge and environmental cognition to public environmental behavior.
ModelNon-standardized coefficientStandard coefficientBStandard errorModel 1(Constant)−0.7960.214Age00.00050.003Education level0.152∗∗∗0.0280.091Female (reference item: male)0.0030.0370.002Married (reference item: unmarried)0.0790.0580.017City (reference item: rural area)0.0340.050.02Income0.048∗∗0.0160.035Party member (reference item: non-CCP member)0.182∗∗0.0550.039Employment (reference item: not employed)−0.0490.048−0.019TV media−0.044∗∗0.013−0.025Non-television media0.111∗∗∗0.0070.289Model 2(Constant)−0.9920.534Age0.0040.0030.023Education level0.098∗∗0.0390.062Female (reference item: male)0.0270.0570.008Married (reference item: unmarried)0.1290.1010.027City (reference item: rural area)0.25∗∗∗0.0710.069Income0.0240.0370.009Party member (reference item: non-CCP member)0.285∗∗∗0.0790.068Employment (reference item: not employed)0.070.080.019TV media−0.08∗0.026−0.035Non-television media0.084∗∗∗0.0110.242Environmental protection knowledge0.058∗∗∗0.0210.062Awareness of the severity of environmental pollution0.014#0.0100.035Awareness of the severity of environmental decline−0.0020.015−0.002Environmental pollution concerns0.0250.0370.0011Note.#p<0.10; p∗<0.05; ∗∗p<0.01; ∗∗∗p<0.001.Through the analysis of variance on the two models, it can be seen from the results of the F test that the control variables in the regression model have a significant impact on public environmental behavior at the level of 0.001. After adding environmental protection knowledge and environmental awareness variables, the impact of the entire model on public environmental behavior is also significant at the level of 0.001. The adjusted R-square of model 2 is 0.095%. From the adjusted R-square, the regression model we built has a general goodness of linear fit, which can only explain 9.5% of the internal difference of the dependent variable.In model 2, it can be found that at a significance level of 0.1, the perception of environmental pollution severity has a significant impact on public environmental behavior. At a significance level of 0.05, TV media has a significant impact on public environmental behavior. At the level of significance of 0.01, education level has a significant impact on public environmental behavior. At the significance level of 0.001, the four variables of residential area, political outlook, non-TV media, and environmental protection knowledge have a significant impact on public environmental behavior.In short, from the results of multiple regression analysis, the public’s education level, residential area, political outlook, television media and non-TV media, environmental protection knowledge, and awareness of the severity of environmental pollution will all have a significant impact on public participation in public environmental behavior. Other variables, such as age, gender, marital status, income, work status, awareness of the severity of environmental decline, and environmental pollution concerns, do not produce statistically significant impacts on public environmental behavior, and the impact is not significant.


## 3.2. The Impact of Public Environmental Protection Knowledge and Environmental Awareness on Private Environmental Behavior

Table3 reports two models. Model 1 reports the control of age, education level, gender (male and female), marital status (married and unmarried), residential area (urban and rural), income, political outlook (the results of multiple regression analysis of control variables such as party members and non-CCP members), work status (employed and unemployed), and mass media (TV media and non-TV media) on private environmental behavior. Model 2 reports the result of multiple linear regression analysis of public environmental protection knowledge and environmental cognition on private environmental behavior in public environmental behavior.Table 3
Multiple linear regression analysis of public environmental protection knowledge and environmental cognition to private environmental behavior.
ModelNon-standardized coefficientStandard coefficientBStandard error(Constant)−0.0040.31Model 1Age0.009∗∗∗0.0030.0534Education level0.351∗∗∗0.050.148Female (reference item: male)0.471∗∗∗0.0490.085Married (reference item: unmarried)0.1320.0890.017City (reference item: rural area)−0.7660.058−0.162Income0.172∗∗∗0.0280.089Party member (reference item: non-CCP member)0.181∗0.0820.026Employment (reference item: not employed)−0.163∗∗0.061−0.035TV media0.091∗∗∗0.0290.038Non-television media0.15∗∗∗0.0090.241Model 2(Constant)−2.6030.672Age0.018∗∗∗0.0040.089Education level0.232∗∗∗0.0550.117Female (reference item: male)0.597∗∗∗0.0780.124Married (reference item: unmarried)0.0590.1270.009City (reference item: rural area)−0.532∗∗∗0.091−0.123Income0.110∗0.0450.049Party member0.245∗0.1030.042Employment (reference item: not employed)−0.1210.095−0.028TV media0.030.0420.009Non-television media0.109∗∗∗0.0150.197Environmental protection knowledge0.224∗∗∗0.030.172Awareness of the0.044∗∗0.0180.049Awareness of the severity of severity of environmental decline0.0250.0170.028Environmental pollution concerns0.216∗∗∗0.0480.074Note.p#<0.10; ∗p<0.05; ∗∗p<0.01; ∗∗∗p<0.001.We perform analysis of variance on the two models. The results of the F test show that the control variables in the regression model have a significant impact on private environmental behavior at the level of 0.001. After adding environmental protection knowledge and environmental awareness variables, the entire influence of the model on private environmental behavior is also significant at the level of 0.001. The adjusted R-square of model 2 is 0.215. From the adjusted R-square, the regression model we built has a good linear fit, which can only explain 21.5% of the internal difference of the dependent variable.In model 2, at the significance level of 0.05, income and political outlook have a significant impact on private environmental behavior. At the significance level of 0.01, the perception of the severity of environmental pollution has a significant impact on private environmental behavior. At the significance level of 0.001, the seven variables of age, education level, gender, residential area, non-TV media, environmental protection knowledge, and environmental pollution concern have significant effects on private environmental behavior.In short, from the results of multiple regression analysis, the public’s age, education level, gender, residential area, income, political outlook, non-TV media, knowledge of environmental protection, awareness of the severity of environmental pollution, and concern about environmental pollution will all be of concern to the public. Participation in private environmental behavior has a significant impact. Other variables, such as marriage status, employment status, television media, and perceptions of the severity of environmental decline, do not have statistically significant impacts on private environmental behavior, and the impact is not significant.


## 3.3. Multiple Regression Analysis Results of Public Environmental Protection Knowledge and Environmental Cognition on Environmental Behavior

Public environmental protection knowledge has a significant impact on public environmental behavior, private environmental behavior, and overall public environmental behavior. Public environmental protection knowledge is positively related to public environmental behavior, private environmental behavior, and overall public environmental behavior. That is, the public with richer environmental protection knowledge will engage in more public environmental behaviors, private environmental behaviors, and overall public environmental behaviors, which verifies the assumptions H1, H2, and H3.The perception of the severity of environmental pollution in the perception dimension of environmental pollution in public environmental perception has a significant impact on public environmental behavior, private environmental behavior, and overall public environmental behavior. The severity of public environmental pollution is positively correlated with public environmental behavior, private environmental behavior, and overall public environmental behavior. That is, the public with higher awareness of the severity of environmental pollution will engage in more public environmental behaviors, private environmental behaviors, and overall public environmental behaviors which verifies the assumptions H4, H5, and H6.The perception of the severity of environmental degradation in the perception dimension of environmental pollution in public environmental perception has no significant impact on public environmental behavior, private environmental behavior, and overall public environmental behavior. Hypotheses H7, H8, and H9 have not been confirmed. This is inconsistent with the research conclusions by other researchers, indicating that the national level has paid attention to the problems of serious environmental pollution and ecosystem degradation. Therefore, the whole society has also sensed the seriousness of environmental pollution and will participate more actively in environmental protection behavior.Moreover, as the quality of people's lives improves, the public pays more attention to environmental issues closely related to their own health and safety and will pay more attention to protecting the environment. As the country and society vigorously promote environmental protection measures, environmental problems are improved day by day, which has weakened the public’s perception of the severity of environmental decline. Environmental pollution concerns in the subjective psychological willingness dimension of public environmental cognition have a significant impact on private environmental behavior and overall public environmental behavior, but it has no significant impact on public environmental behavior, which verifies the hypotheses H11 and H12. Hypothesis H10 has not been verified.


## 4. Conclusion

(1)
This article extracts public environmental protection knowledge from environmental cognition and analyzes and studies it as a separate variable. Because environmental protection knowledge is related to environmental protection or environmental pollution, public environmental protection knowledge refers to people's understanding of it. It is an objective measurement index and is not suitable for a subjective environmental cognitive variable index.(2)
Through the multiple linear regression analysis of the data related to the environmental module of CGSS2013, this paper finds that there is a positive correlation between environmental protection knowledge, awareness of the severity of environmental pollution, and public environmental behavior and private environmental behavior. There is no correlation between knowledge and public environmental behaviors and private environmental behaviors. Environmental pollution concerns are only related to private environmental behaviors, not public environmental behaviors. The impact of environmental protection knowledge and environmental awareness on private environmental behavior is greater than that on public environmental behavior.(3)
Through multiple linear regression analysis, this paper finds that public environmental protection knowledge and environmental cognition will have a significant impact on different dimensions of public environmental behavior. The control variables such as age, education level, gender, residential area, political outlook, television media, non-TV media, and income have a certain impact on the different dimensions of public environmental behavior. Marital status and employment status do not have a significant impact on public environmental behavior.



---

*Source: 3302669-2022-06-23.xml*