Are climate change perceptions related with plastic policy support? Effects of climate change skepticism, guilt, and efficacy on the acceptance of the plastic tax

PLOS One | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0337327 December 29, 2025 17 / 30 global warming have increased, for example, due to the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement in 2017. Many Americans believe that the problem of climate change has been exaggerated, meaning that climate change skepticism is widespread. As the study of climate change is a risk analysis based on scientific uncertainty, global warming has long been a matter of debate. Thus, the results showed that, except for emotions, value, risk perception, and planned behavior variables are all sig- nificantly associated with the support for the plastic tax. In the case of the plastic tax, risk perception and skepticism about climate change play a particularly important role. Hypothesis testing results systematically support our theoretical framework (Table 3). Value-based hypotheses were largely confirmed, validating Stern’s [14] value-belief-norm theory applications to environmental policy contexts. Environ- mentalism significantly predicted plastic tax acceptance (H1: β = .103, p < .001), consistent with previous research demon- strating environmental values’ positive impact on policy support [27,55]. This finding aligns with Mozumder’s [57] work showing environmental consciousness effects on renewable energy support and extends Kim’s [106] findings on environ- mentalist values supporting environmental protection policies to plastic taxation contexts. Altruism showed significant positive effects (H2: β = .087, p < .001), supporting VBN theory predictions that altruistic val-

ues drive pro-environmental behaviors [14]. This result resonates with Lee et al.‘s [107] demonstration that altruistic value orientation influenced eco-friendly food purchasing intentions, with altruistic values showing stronger effects than individu- alistic orientations. Our findings extend this pattern to environmental taxation acceptance. Egalitarianism positively predicted acceptance (H3: β = .093, p < .001), confirming cultural theory predictions [62] that egalitarian individuals demonstrate greater sensitivity to environmental risks and support collective action. This aligns with Kahan et al.‘s [24] findings that individuals with egalitarian values tend to accept climate change risks, while those with individualistic values remain skeptical. Materialism showed expected negative effects (H4: β = −.067, p < .01), supporting post-materialist theory [64] and extend- ing Gelissen’s [67] findings on dematerialization’s positive effects on environmentalism. This result confirms Hurst et al.’s [68] meta-analysis demonstrating materialism’s negative correlation with environmental attitudes and validates Kilbourne et al’s [70] argument that materialistic values predispose individuals toward less supportive environmental policy attitudes. Risk perception hypotheses received strong empirical support, validating psychometric paradigm applications [108]. Perceived risk emerged as the strongest predictor (H5: β = .161, p < .001), consistent with Kim et al’s [74] findings that

higher perceived climate change risk increases response behavior intensity. This supports Visschers et al’s [72] demon- stration that perceived risks significantly influence acceptance decisions across various technologies. Knowledge significantly predicted acceptance (H6: β = .098, p < .001), supporting O’Connor et al.’s [49] findings that greater knowledge associates with higher climate action intentions. However, our results acknowledge Bamberg et al’s [23] caveat that knowledge functions as necessary but insufficient condition within broader psychological processes, requiring combination with values and situational factors [77]. Trust showed substantial effects (H7: β = .113, p < .001), validating trust’s role as representative socio-cultural factor in risk research [82]. This finding extends Visschers et al’s [72] work on government trust in nuclear power operations to climate policy contexts, supporting our competence trust measurement approach [36]. Planned behavior factors demonstrated expected patterns, supporting TPB applications to environmental contexts [16]. Climate skepticism showed strong negative effects (H9: β = −.122, p < .001), consistent with environmental skepticism research showing overestimated crisis beliefs and data error concerns [74]. Guilt demonstrated positive effects (H10: β = .081, p < .01), supporting Ferguson et al’s [90] findings that collective guilt mediates climate change beliefs and mitiga- tion behaviors. Efficacy showed positive associations (H11: β = .072, p < .05), extending Bandura’s [93] self-efficacy frame-

work to environmental policy contexts and confirming Lee et al.’s [94] findings on efficacy’s positive effects on eco-friendly behaviors. The associations in this study should be interpreted as correlational relationships rather than causal effects, given our cross-sectional research design.“