TABLE 5.
Analysis results of the direct effects.
| Path relationship | Estimate | S.E. | Est./S.E. | P-Value | Supported |
| (1)VF →TRGB | 0.544 | 0.224 | 2.427 | 0.015* | YES |
| (2)VF→EIB | 0.390 | 0.226 | 1.728 | 0.084 | NO |
| (3)VF→ECB | 0.605 | 0.226 | 2.681 | 0.007** | YES |
| (4)VF→EHB | 0.506 | 0.206 | 2.463 | 0.014* | YES |
| (5)NSF→TRGB | −0.213 | 0.212 | −1.006 | 0.314 | NO |
| (6)NSF→EIB | −0.105 | 0.212 | −0.496 | 0.620 | NO |
| (7)NSF→ECB | 0.045 | 0.208 | 0.216 | 0.829 | NO |
| (8)NSF →EHB | 0.375 | 0.19 | 1.973 | 0.049* | YES |
| (9)DAF→TRGB | 0.467 | 0.139 | 3.354 | 0.001** | YES |
| (10)DAF→EIB | 0.505 | 0.143 | 3.526 | *** | YES |
| (11)DAF→ECB | 0.129 | 0.142 | 0.911 | 0.362 | NO |
| (12)DAF→EHB | −0.082 | 0.132 | −0.625 | 0.532 | NO |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. TRGB, Task-related green behavior; EIB, Eco-initiatives behavior; ECB, Eco-civic engagement behavior; EHB, Eco-helping behavior; VF, Values fit; NSF, Needs-supplies fit; DAF, Demands-abilities fit.