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 27 / 30 27. Heidbreder LM, Bablok I, Drews S, Menzel C. Tackling the plastic problem: a review on perceptions, behaviors, and interventions. Sci Total Envi- ron. 2019;668:1077–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.437 PMID: 31018449 28. Hart PS, Nisbet EC. Boomerang effects in science communication: how motivated reasoning and identity cues amplify opinion polarization about climate mitigation policies. Commun Res. 2012;39(6):701–23. 29. Schwarz N, Clore GL. Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: informative and directive functions of affective states. J Pers Soc Psy- chol. 1983;45(3):513–23. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.3.513 30. Bandura A. Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2000;9(3):75–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00064 31. Chen M-F. Self-efficacy or collective efficacy within the cognitive theory of stress model: which more effectively explains people’s self-reported proenvironmental behavior? J Environ Psychol. 2015;42:66–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.02.002 32. Programme UNE. Turning off the Tap: how the world can end plastic pollution and create a circular economy. Nairobi; 2023. 33. WWF DA. No plastic in nature: assessing plastic ingestion from nature to people. Gland, Switzerland; 2019. 34. Rivers N, Schaufele B. Salience of carbon taxes in the gasoline market. J Environ Econ Manag. 2015;74:23–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jeem.2015.07.002

35. Alpizar F, Carlsson F, Lanza G, Carney B, Daniels RC, Jaime M, et al. A framework for selecting and designing policies to reduce marine plastic pollution in developing countries. Environ Sci Policy. 2020;109:25–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.04.007 36. Poortinga W, Pidgeon NF. Exploring the dimensionality of trust in risk regulation. Risk Anal. 2003;23(5):961–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/1539- 6924.00373 PMID: 12969411 37. Lee M, Kim H. COVID-19 pandemic and microplastic pollution. Nanomaterials (Basel). 2022;12(5):851. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12050851 PMID: 35269339 38. Zhang C, Liu L, Xiao Q. The influence of Taoism on employee low-carbon behavior in China: the mediating role of perceived value and guanxi. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2022;15:2169–81. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S371945 PMID: 35983021 39. Liu L, Zhang C. Linking environmental management accounting to green organisational behaviour: the mediating role of green human resource management. PLoS One. 2022;17(12):e0279568. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279568 PMID: 36576939 40. Zhang C, Ma X, Liu L. The effect of passion for outdoor activities on employee well-being using nature connectedness as the mediating variable and environmental identity as the moderating variable. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2023;16:4883–96. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S436612 PMID: 38077165 41. Dai Q, Peng S, Guo Z, Zhang C, Dai Y, Hao W, et al. Place identity as a mediator between motivation and tourist loyalty in “red tourism”. PLoS

One. 2023;18(10):e0284574. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284574 PMID: 37889893 42. Jung Y. A study on the environment-friendly clothing consumption behavior depending on consumer value orientation and clothing benefits sought [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Pusan: Kyungsung University; 2007. 43. Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: an introduction to theory and research; 1977. 44. Kim SLC. The study on negative effect of nuclear corruption scandal and the mechanism of trust. KJPA. 2014;23(3):131–59. 45. Renn O, Rohrmann B. Cross-cultural risk perception: a survey of empirical studies. Springer Science & Business Media; 2013. 46. Sjöberg L, Moen BE, Rundmo T. Explaining risk perception. an evaluation of the psychometric paradigm in risk perception research. 2004;10(2):665–72. 47. Dunlap RE. Lay perceptions of global risk: public views of global warming in cross-national context. Int Sociol. 1998;13(4):473–98. 48. Kempton W. How the public views climate change. Environment. 1997;39(9):12–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139159709604765 49. O’Connor RE, Bard RJ, Fisher A. Risk perceptions, general environmental beliefs, and willingness to address climate change. Risk Anal. 1999;19(3):461–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1999.tb00421.x 50. Heilbroner RL, Ajzen I, Fishbein M, Thurow LC. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Prentice Hall; 1980. 51. Ajzen I. From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior. In: Action control: from cognition to behavior. Springer; 1985. p. 11–39. https://doi.

org/10.1007/978-3-642-69746-3_2 52. Sutton S. Predicting and explaining intentions and behavior: how well are we doing? J Appl Soc Pyschol. 1998;28(15):1317–38. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01679.x 53. Du M, Chai CS, Di W, Wang X. What affects adolescents’ willingness to maintain climate change action participation : an extended theory of planned behavior to explore the evidence from China. J Clean Prod. 2023;422:138589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138589 54. Zhang W, Luo B. Predicting consumer intention toward eco-friendly smart home services: extending the theory of planned behavior. Econ Change Restruct. 2022;56(5):3335–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10644-022-09477-2 55. Spence A, Poortinga W, Pidgeon N, Lorenzoni I. Public perceptions of energy choices: the influence of beliefs about climate change and the envi- ronment. Energy Environ. 2010;21(5):385–407. https://doi.org/10.1260/0958-305x.21.5.385 56. Park R, Kim S, Hwang H. Searching for successful condition about new energy governance and energy transition system: analyzing the role of personal value, energy preference, and political and economic factors in acceptance of energy pricing policy. Korean J Policy Anal Eval. 2019;29(4):25–56.