 

 

 

11.13818
/ F7 l IDL‘: AQV I
. I
LJI’) ! IVIICiizgciui btate
Universﬂy

 

.—i

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

THE SPECIFICATION AND USE OF SUSTAINABLE
FLOORING MATERIALS BY INTERIOR DESIGNERS IN
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN PRACTICE

presented by

Bo Kyung Kim

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

Master degree in Interior Design and Facilities
Management

 

 

4M3. 6A

R Major‘li’rofessor’s Signature

_%_Lm

Date

MSU is an Afﬁrmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer

 

 

u-on-.—.-.- -.-

-¢-— —---o—_-----o--.-.-u- —u--. -

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5/08 KzlProleoc&Pres/CIRClDateDLn.indd

 

THE SPECIFICATION AND USE OF SUSTAINABLE FLOORING MATERIALS
BY INTERIOR DESIGNERS IN RESIDENTIAL DESIGN PRACTICE

By

Bo Kyung Kim

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulﬁllment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS
Interior Design and Facilities Management

2009

ABSTRACT

THE SPECIFICATION AND USE OF SUSTAINABLE FLOORING MATERIALS
BY INTERIOR DESIGNERS IN RESIDENTIAL DESIGN PRACTICE

By
Bo Kyung Kim

This study investigated factors inﬂuencing designers’ intentions to use ﬂooring
materials as well as specifying sustainable ﬂooring materials in residential design
practice using the theory of planned behavior (TPB) as a framework. Following TPB,
belief structures (behavioral, normative, and control beliefs), determinants (attitude,
subjective norm, and perceived behavior control) of intention, and intention were
examined. This study used quantitative methodologies through an Internet survey with a
sample selected based on the American Society of Interior Designers (ASID) practicing
interior designers in residential practice with available e-mail addresses. A total of 225
ﬁnal surveys were utilized for further analysis. Findings from statistic analyses revealed
that one factor of behavior beliefs—environment—positively inﬂuenced attitude whereas
health—~another expected outcome—was negatively inﬂuenced. Normative beliefs
positively inﬂuenced subjective norms while control beliefs positively inﬂuenced
perceived behavior control. Attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavior control
positively inﬂuenced intention. Implications of these ﬁndings for researchers and interior

designers were discussed in detail.

Copyright by
Bo Kyung Kim
2009

This thesis is dedicated to my family for their love and support.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Successful completion of my mater program was made possible by support from
many people. I would like to give my many appreciations to all these people although

words will not be enough to express my thankfulness to these people.

First, I express gratitude to my major professor, Dr. April Allen who served as
my thesis committee chair. I received invaluable support, lots of time and expertise. In
addition, I would like to gratitude to other members of my thesis committee, Dr. Eunsil
Lee, and Dr. Patricia Huddleston. This thesis could not have been written without their

critical comments and suggestions.

To my Michigan State University colleagues and friends, my many thanks.
Especially, I am grateful to Boram Cho for her help and support in my life in Michigan. I

thank Koeun Kim for the help in statistical analysis.

My study could not have been completed without support from my family. I
express deep gratitude to my father and mother for their love and support. Also, I am

grateful to my engaged person, Jae Youl Goh, who love me and gave time for my study.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT
DEDICATION ....................................................................................... iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .......................................................................... v
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................. vii
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................ viii
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 1
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................ 4
Signiﬁcance of the Study ................................................................... 4
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................... 6
Sustainability ................................................................................. 6
The Background of Sustainable Development ...................................... 6
Sustainable Design ...................................................................... 8
Environmentally Sustainable Interior Design ...................................... 10
Sustainable Floor Coverings .......................................................... 11
Theoretical Framework: Theory of planned behavior (TPB) ......................... 15
General Phases of TPB ............................................................... 15
Components of TPB .................................................................. 18
Prediction the Choice of Interior Designers on F loorings Using the TPB ......... 2O
Belief Structures and Predictor Variables .......................................... 20
Components of Behavioral Intention ............................................... 25
CHAPTER III METHODS ........................................................................ 28
Sample ........................................................................................ 28
Instruments and Measurement ............................................................ 29
Data Collection ............................................................................. 34
Data Analysis ............................................................................... 34
CHAPTER IV RESULTS .......................................................................... 36
Characteristics of Participants ............................................................ 36
Using Sustainable Flooring Materials in Residential Practices and the Theory
of Planned Behavior ........................................................................ 42
CHAPTER V DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ........................................... 49
Discussion ................................................................................... 49
Implication of the Study ................................................................... 52
Limitation and Future Research .......................................................... 53

vi

Conclusion ................................................................................... 56

APPENDIX: Questionnaire for the Study ....................................................... 57

REFERENCES ...................................................................................... 64

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Items of Behavioral Beliefs for Using Sustainable Flooring Materials .............. 30
Table 2 Items for Normative Beliefs of Using Flooring Materials ........................... 31
Table 3 Items for Control Beliefs of Using Sustainable Flooring Materials ............... 33
Table 4 Demographic Characteristics, Frequencies and Percentage of Total. . . . . . . . . .....37
Table 5 Geographical Region of Firms, Frequencies and Percentage of Total ............ 38
Table 6 Percentage Distribution of Interior Designer Characteristics ...................... 39
Table 7 Frequency and Percentage of Using Time of Sustainable Flooring Materials

in Residential Practices by Project Size .............................................. 39
Table 8 Percentage Distribution of Choice of Flooring Materials for Residential

Project .................................................................................... 41
Table 9 Sources Used to Learn about Sustainable Flooring Materials ...................... 42
Table 10 Descriptive Summary of Beliefs Items ................................................. 43

Table 11 Descriptive Analysis of Attitude, Subjective Norm, Perceived Behavioral

Control, and Behavioral Intention ..................................................... 44

Table 12 Reliability Analysis Beliefs, Attitude, Subjective Norm, Perceived Behavioral

Control, and Behavioral Intention .................................................... 45
Table 13 Results of Regression Analysis (Model 1) ........................................... 47
Table 14 Results of Regression Analysis (Model 2) .......................................... 47
Table 15 Results of Regression Analysis (Model 3) ........................................... 47
Table 16 Results of Regression Analysis (Model 4) ........................................... 47

Table 17 Correlations among Attitude, Subjective Norm, Perceived Behavioral

Intention .................................................................................. 48

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Designing Sustainability... ................................................................................. 10
Figure 2 Theory of Planned Behavior ............................................................ 18
Figure 3 Hypothesized Model ..................................................................... 27
Figure 4 Models for Analysis ...................................................................... 35
FigureS Results of Analysis ........................................................................ 48

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Americans have long been concerned with the natural environment, and many
people have a positive attitude toward environmental programs (Berger & Corbin, 1992;
Mendler, Odell & Lazarus, 2006). According to a survey of 3,600 consumers in nine
United States (US) metropolitan areas, although 93 percent of Americans worry about
their home’s environmental impact, only 18 percent are willing to pay more to reduce
such impact (Buchta, 1996).

Adler (2006) argues that the concept of sustainable design is emerging as a new
set of opportunities for the building and design industry as a result of the growing
population and the ongoing depletion of natural resources. Sustainable design refers to
the connection or interdependence between the built and natural environment; the
efﬁcient use of energy, land, and other natural and ﬁnite resources, the enhancement of
communities, and the fostering of physical and emotional well-being (McDonough &
Braungart, 2002). As such, sustainability requires a balance of environmental, economic,
and social issues considered over the long term; thus, sustainable building design focuses
on these three principles of sustainability (Dean, 2003).

Interior designers are positioned to have a major inﬂuence on sustainability.
“Interior designers who focus on environmentally responsible design plan, specify, and
execute solutions for interior environments that reﬂect concern for both the world’s
ecology and the inhabitant’s quality of life” (Guerin, 2003, p. 45). Interior designers have
been progressive creators in regard to economic and social issues; however, now they are

adding a responsibility—namely, solving environmental problems in their design

practices (Forster, Stelmack, & Hindman, 2007). To meet the growing concern related to
environmental issues, interior designers should emphasize environmental, economic, and
social sustainability. Consequently, interior designers must not only provide an improved
quality of interior environment for residential customers, but also consider the
homeowners’ economic situation. Moreover, interior designers help residential customers
enhance their quality of life and improve their productivity while protecting the health,
safety, and welfare of the general public (National Council for Interior Design
Qualiﬁcation (NCIDQ), 2004).

To provide better interior quality, it is increasingly important for interior
designers to consider incorporating sustainable design as a component of their practice.
Designers, builders, and manufacturers are becoming increasingly interested in and are
focusing on sustainable design as they reap the beneﬁts of sustainable design, including
environmental, economic, health and safety, and community beneﬁts (US Green Building
Council, 2003). Environmental advantages stem from the minimized impact of the
building’s construction on air, water, landﬁlls, and non-renewable energy resources.
Economic advantages result from reduced operation costs and developed occupant work.
Meanwhile, the health and safety advantages arise from the improved comfort and health
of the occupants as well as the use of ﬁnishing materials incorporating fewer toxins and
less pollution. Finally, community advantages emerge from minimized strain on local
organizations and the enhanced quality of human life.

To satisfy their customers, manufacturers and designers need to develop and
select building products that offer an attractive balance of environmental and economic

performance, health and safety, and community beneﬁts. Designers’ and builders’

conscientious selections of materials are often constrained by home environments
because they consider not only residential health and safety, but also beneﬁts to the
natural environment. In their book Cradle to Cradle, McDonough and Braungart (2002)
stated:

Imagine what you would come upon today at a typical landﬁll: old

furniture, upholstery, carpets, televisions. . .and plastic packaging.

Resources are extracted, shaped into products, sold, and eventually

disposed of in “graves” of some kind, usually a landﬁll or incinerator.

Cradle to grave designs dominate modern manufacturing. According to

some accounts more than 90% of materials extracted to make durable

goods in the US become waste almost immediately (p. 27).

For example, Moussatche and Languel (2001) in evaluating interior materials of Florida’s
educational facilities determined that the service life of interior ﬂooring materials
expands an otherwise limited Service Life Cycle Cost (SLCC). However, materials for all
facilities should contribute to the natural environment as well as human health and
safety—factors that eventually come into play because people spend much of their lives
in homes and educational facilities.

Interior material qualiﬁcation is one way by which interior designers can
contribute to this sustainable design attempt. Many people have been learning about the
beneﬁts of sustainable ﬂoor coverings and have become interested in the available
options. Although customers and interior designers are becoming increasingly interested
in sustainable materials, education in the ﬁeld and believable, non-prejudiced referenced
resources provide low guidelines for designers in this task (Malin & Wilson, 1997). One
area that has seen a particularly strong demand for environmentally friendly as well as

more exotic options is ﬂooring, yet limited research exists in the area of ﬂooring

materials in the residential practice of interior designers. As interest in this area is only

expected to increase, this study will evaluate appropriate choices of ﬂooring materials in
residential practice. It will also provide interior designers with a framework for the
evaluation of sustainable ﬂooring material regarding the health of the environment as

well as people.

Purpose of the Study
The current issues of sustainability, human health, and the environment make it

important not only to investigate interior designers’ current ﬂooring choices, but also to
examine core factors that inﬂuence these behaviors for future interventions. Thus, the
purpose of this study is to identify environmental factors that predict designers’ material
choices for ﬂoors. The primary purpose of the current study is to examine sustainable
interior ﬂoor coverings, incorporating as many of these factors as possible, as well as
explore the effect of such choices on residential design by applying the theory of planned
behavior (TPB) (Aj zen, 1991). TPB is considered one of the most effective frameworks

for explaining what factors affect how interior designers evaluate a behavior.

Significance of the Study
This study will address signiﬁcant effects when using sustainable ﬂooring
materials in residential design practice. Furthermore, it will provide designers with the
knowledge and behaviors, as well as helpful tools, to use for assessing future practices in
regard to ﬂooring materials in residential design or other building types in future design
projects. In particular, the present study will assess and test a conceptual model based on

the theory of planned behavior (TPB) (Ajzen 1991; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1985), considered

one of the most useful frameworks for explaining which key factors inﬂuence how
people evaluate a behavior and how compatibly they perform that behavior (Hansen,
2008; Hsu, Wang, & Wen, 2006; Lim & Dubinsky, 2005; Tan & Teo, 2000; Taylor &
Todd, 1995, 1995a).

In addition, the outcomes of this study will be invaluable for developing
approaches to assist interior designers to maximize effectiveness in ﬂooring choice
behaviors. The study is expected to contribute to interior designers’ awareness of healthy
alternatives for sustainable ﬂooring materials for residential use. Ultimately, this study is
signiﬁcant because it will begin the systematic study of the effect of using sustainable

ﬂooring materials.

CHAPTER 1]
LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter comprises two sections providing the background for the current
study. The ﬁrst section discusses the background of sustainability, followed by a
discussion on sustainable ﬂoor coverings. The second section addresses the theoretical

background for this study.

Sustainability
The Background of Sustainable Development

Sustainable development is an extremely broad concept that encompasses a
variety of critical issues related to human and ecological welfare, including climate
change mitigation, natural resource conservation, poverty reduction, and the protection of
human rights. It transcends and subsumes earlier industry practices, such as pollution
prevention and design for environment, by combining environmental stewardship with
social responsibility and wealth creation.

During the 19705 and early 19803, a number of independent people worldwide
began working on responses to problems in which environmental issues interrelated with
human development and progress. The concept of sustainable development was born as a
means for realizing the deve10pmental needs of all people without sacriﬁcing the earth’s
capacity to sustain life. The common deﬁnition of sustainable development comes from
the report Our Common Future by the World Commission in Environment and
Development (WCED, 1987). The report deﬁnes sustainable development as an approach

in which “development [. . .] meets the needs of the present without compromising the

ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (p. 43). Meanwhile, the Global
Development Research Center (GDRC, 2008) deﬁnes sustainable development as
“maintaining a delicate balance between the human need to improve lifestyles and feeling
of well-being on one hand, and preserving natural resources and ecosystems, on which
we and future generations depend” (para. 1).

Sustainability incorporates a balance that supports human needs without
diminishing the health and productivity of natural systems. According to Satterthwaite
(1999), sustainability can be used in a limited perception, as when an environmental
group is focused exclusively on environmental sustainability. This has resulted in
uncertainty or contradictions, even at the level of international sustainable development
declarations. In its fullest sense, sustainability involves a balance of environmental,
economic, and social concerns considered over the long term (Satterthwaite, 1999;
Tornan, 1994). Scholars have examined various aspects related to their particular ﬁelds.
For example, environmentalists and ecologists address sustainable interactions with
natural resources and systems. Economists emphasize the economic standard of living
and sustainable economic development, while sociologists and anthropologists give
greater emphasis to social and cultural factors and quality-of-life issues.

Meanwhile, in response to the WECD’s Our Common Future and a subsequent
charge from the United Nations, governments worldwide began to examine their
programs and policies to ﬁnd ways to promote sustainable development. Their
examination provided the basis for the United Nations (UN) Conference on Environment
and Development (UN CED) in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, also known as the Earth Summit,

which bought global attention to the understanding that environmental problems were

intimately linked to economic conditions and problems of social justice (UN, 2003). The
summit further demonstrated that three dimensions—environmental, economic, and
social development—must be in balance with each other to ensure sustainable outcomes
in the long term.

Sustainable Design

Sustainable design provides solutions to address the economic, social, and
environmental challenges of the practices simultaneously; such solutions are powered by
sustainable energies. The combined beauty and function of the design result in endurance
and beauty, which are central to sustainable thinking (Williams, 2007). A variety of
concerns, experiences, and needs have emerged related to sustainable design for the built
environment: energy efﬁciency, which gained importance during the 19703’ oil crisis; the
rapidly increasing population; recycling efforts, which became commonplace in the US in
the 19703 and came to the attention of the building industry; and the “sick building
syndrome” concept, which emerged in the 19803 amidst concerns for worker health and
productivity (Bierman—Lytle, 1995; Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2005; US
Green Building Council, 2003).

Sustainable design improves the quality of life while eliminating the need for non-
renewable energy. Although largely powered by sustainable processes that provide
essential needs, human settlements rely on fossil fuels for food, comfort, and
transportation as well as air, water, and security. Designs powered by free sustainable
energies require no fossil fuels and are capable of providing a healthier level of comfort
and a higher quality of life. In achieving this connection with local free energies,

sustainable design reduces or eliminates the daily consumption of non-renewable energy,

reduces project costs and maintenance costs and requirements, increases user approval
and user productivity, and reduces the total embodied project energy. Sustainable design
is green design powered by sustainable energies—in other words, functioning unplugged
(Williams, 2007).

Green design is one element of sustainable design. Green buildings and
communities that integrate the local climate and building resources create healthy interior
spaces with natural light; complete recycling and reuse of materials are critical to the
development of a sustainable future. However, subtle differences are evident between
green design and sustainable development. According to the Green Design Education
Initiative (GDEI) (2003), green design implies an interest in design that protects people’s
health and well-being while sustainable design also protects the global environment and
the world’s ecosystems for future generations.

According to the US Green Building Council (2007), the Leadership in Energy
and Environmental Design (LEED) green building rating system provides building design
guidelines that signiﬁcantly reduce or eliminate the negative effect of buildings on the
environment and occupants in them according to the categories of site, water, energy,
material and resources, and indoor environmental quality. Meanwhile, the Minnesota
Sustainable Design Guideline (MSDG) (University of Minnesota, 2006) provides
instructions for each phase of the building lifecycle as well as strategies for each aspect.
These systems include site, water, energy, indoor environmental quality, materials, and
innovation. The methods promote the development of a performance building to protect
healthy environments, recognizing that the integration of all the factors identiﬁed

produces the best sustainable results with a high performance building for a healthy

environment—whether it is called green or sustainable design.

Mendler, Odell, and Lazarus (2006) focused on designing and delivering the
buildings and communities of the future. They addressed the new sustainable design
process, including ecological and human health impacts of design decisions, and
enhanced the old decision model which was based on a balance of cost, schedule, and
quality. The new decision model integrates human health, safety, and comfort as well as
ecology as deliberate considerations for the decision-making process in the same way that
time, cost, and quality are integral to the project decision-making process today. The
concepts (see Figure 1) are planned to help people change the methods systematically.

Cost COSt

Human Health,

Schedule Safety and Comfort

 

Schedule Quality Quality Ecology

Figure 1. Designing sustainability ( Mendler, Odell, & Lazarus, 2006)

Environmentally Sustainable Interior Design

Environmentally sustainable interior design issues, which people deem important,
have not been considered as signiﬁcant criteria in environmental issues. Sustainable
interior design is based on the sustainable design principles and strategies common for
the built environment. It uses design strategies from environmental approaches from
MSDG, including conservation, site, water, energy, indoor environmental quality (IEQ),

materials, waste, and innovation, as well as the LEED Rating System, including site,

10

water, energy, material and resources, and IEQ. In addition, sustainable interior design
issues in MSDG include performance management, site and waste, energy and
atmosphere, IEQ, and materials and waste. Ultimately, interior materials are the primary
issues affecting human health, indoor air quality, and lifecycle design. As previously
mentioned, interior materials for making environmentally sustainable interiors are
signiﬁcant; thus, their components will be explored as they relate to the variables studied.
Sustainable Floor Coverings

For individuals with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS), Nussbaumer (2006)
identiﬁed the advantages and disadvantages of interior materials and products used to
ﬁnish a home. Floor coverings have been considered for sustainable interiors as related to
the lifecycle analysis (LCA), durability, energy use, and low- or zero- volatile organic
compounds (V 0C3) as well as to health and the environment. The analysis 'divides ﬂoor
coverings according to soft ﬂoor coverings, hard surface ﬂoor coverings, and resilient
ﬂoor coverings according to the characteristics of the materials used (N ussbaumer, 2006;
Winchip, 2007).

Soft ﬂoor coverings: Carpet. Carpet is often chosen for residential buildings for
its many health and environmental effects. Although most carpet is made with
nonrenewable petroleum and cannot be recycled, recent advances in carpet recycling
have resulted in increasing carpet recycling. yielding some of the strongest resource
savings in terms of net avoided greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of all the materials that
can be currently recycled (Carpet America Recovery Effort (CARE), 2007). According to
a 2007 CARE report, carpet diverted from landﬁlls removed 296 million pounds—an

increase of 35 million pounds or 17 percent over 2006; 275.1 million pounds of the 296

ll

million total was recycled in 2007 (CARE, 2007). In addition, the US EPA reported
waste composition data indicating that carpet comprises 1.2 percent of Americans’
generation of municipal solid waste (6 billion pounds total) (EPA, 2005). The 296 million
pounds diverted by CARE through 2007 represents only 4.9 percent of this total.

For healthy building, the carpet and rug institute (CR1) provides indoor air quality
standards and enforces the CRI Green Label program. According to these standards,
carpet often results in MCS or sick building syndrome (SBS) (Forster, Stelmack, &
Hindman, 2007). Carpet creates a texture that can collect and maintain allergens, dust,
and dust mites (Andes, 2000; Winchip, 2007). Therefore, for human environments, carpet
ﬁber choice should be natural and synthetic ﬁbers. Natural ﬁbers include wool, cotton,
hemp, linen, jute, sisal, reed, coir, seagrass, mountain grass, and rubber (Winchip, 2007),
which are much more eco-friendly choices. For example, one of the best ﬁbers for
greening a home is wool. If possible, it is made domestically and avoids transportation
and pesticides (Forster et al., 2007) because the domestic materials used are related to
reduced fuel energy.

Hard surface ﬂoor coverings: Wood. As wood is an environmentally friendly
resource, wood ﬂooring is a great sustainable resource. Several forest certiﬁcation
programs in North America, such as the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), the
Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SF 1), and the Sustainable Forest Management Program,
focus on the recycling and renewability aspects of wood products (Sullivan & Horwitz-
Bennett, 2008). The Athena Model developed by Canada’s Athena Sustainable Materials
Institute and used by Sullivan and Horwitz-Bennett (2008) suggests that wood is a more

environmentally friendly material than steel or concrete. As Sullivan and Horwitz-

l2

Bennett (2008) asserted, according to a recent national survey sponsored by the National
Wood Flooring Association (N WFA), 90 percent of real estate property agents report
houses with wood ﬂoors sell faster and for higher prices than houses without any exposed
wood ﬂooring.

Moreover, according to the EPA, 50 million Americans suffer from allergies,
which are the sixth leading cause of chronic disease in the United States. Children, in
particular, can be highly susceptible. Wood ﬂooring can protect humans from bacteria,
dust, and dirt as these cannot embed themselves in wood ﬂooring (N WFA, 2005). Wood
provides a surface that is easy to sweep and maintain, removing dirt or waste from the
ﬂoor simply. This condition promotes human health and better indoor air quality (IAQ).

For example, bamboo is the most representative resource in hard ﬂoor covering
for sustainable interiors. The amount of bamboo ﬂooring used is increasing in the US
(Winchip, 2007), making it a popular resource for a sustainable interior. Moreover, the
growth time for bamboo is more rapid than other trees used for ﬂooring (e. g., oak), and
bamboo can regenerate without replanting, so it is a low-energy, naturally renewable
material. Therefore, bamboo is aesthetically pleasing, durable, and made from a rapidly
renewable, abundant resource.

Hard surface ﬂoor coverings: Tile. Tile is used for not only ﬂooring in high-
trafﬁc and water-intensive applications such as bathrooms, kitchens, and entrances, but
also walls, ceilings, and fumiture. Tile is truly an environmental choice. To reduce waste
and energy consumption, tiles can be made from post-consumption and post-industrial
recyclable content. Tile ﬂooring is made of ceramic, porcelain, terra-cotta, or

earthenware; new or recycled glass; cement; stone; or terrazzo. Recycled-content tiles

13

include ceramic, glass, and terrazzo. Tiles can use 30 to 100 percent of recycled solid
waste, including post-consumer recycled materials such as granite dust and clear and
colored glass from window panes, bottles, Windshields, and aviation. In addition, post-
industrial recycled tile reuses plate glass and grinding paste from the computer industry.
If the tiles are demolished, the materials can be recycled again (Winchip, 2007).

Tile is also a material that is healthful and safe for interiors (N ussbaumer, 2006;
Winchip, 2007). Not only does tile not emit toxic gases into the interior, but its additional
materials—such as substrates, adhesives, grout, mortar, and sealants—also tend to be
zero- or low-VOC and do not include petroleum or plastic substances. Thus, tile and its
related products provide healthful IAQ (Winchip, 2007).

Resilient ﬂoor coverings: Linoleum and cork. Resilient ﬂooring provides
comfort and cushion to users, thereby helping people who stand for a long time in one
area or children who play on the ﬂoor (Winchip, 2007). Although resilient ﬂooring
includes vinyl, linoleum, and cork, linoleum and cork are the best choices for the
environment and IAQ. According to Walsh (2004), resilient ﬂooring made of polyvinyl
chloride (PVC) emits VOCs, affecting IAQ, although the material was a popular ﬂoor
covering in the 19603 (Winchip, 2007). Vinyl is also not biodegradable and cannot be
recycled. Therefore, the material is not designated as a sustainable interior material and
should be exchanged for the environmentally positive aspects associated with linoleum
(Winchip, 2007).

Linoleum is made from natural materials—namely, linseed oil, wood ﬂour, rosin,
jute, and limestone (EPA, 2007; Winchip, 2007)—that come primarily from natural,

renewable resources that are used without environmental risk. Thus, linoleum can be

14

recycled, is durable, and is comfortable. In 2004, a leading manufacturer reported that
linoleum sales growth outpaced the overall ﬂooring market by more than double in ﬁve
years (Walsh, 2004).

Another sustainable resilient ﬂoor covering is cork. Cork is harvested from the
bark of the cork oak tree every nine to eleven years, leaving the tree to remain living an
average of 100 to 120 years (Winchip, 2007). As such, cork is one of best examples of a
cradle-to-cradle resource (Forster et al., 2007) and a highly renewable resource, even
though it is used in limited spaces because it is sensitive to heat and cannot be used with

excessive moisture (Winchip, 2007).

Theoretical Framework: Theory of planned behavior (T PB)

This section reviews the conceptual deﬁnitions of variables and proposes the
conceptual model of the current study as well as speciﬁc research questions.
General Phases of TPB

Ajzen (1991) and Ajzen and Fishbein (1985, 1988) developed the theory of
planned behavior (TPB), extending the theory of reasoned action (TRA) (Ajzen &
Fishbein, 1980; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). TRA is a theory of attitude-behavior
relationships with attitudes, subjective norms, behavioral intentions, and behavior in a
ﬁxed causal sequence (Ajen & Fishbein, 1980; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975; Shih & Fang,
2004; Taylor & Todd, 1995). In addition, TRA has obtained broad support for predicting
behavioral intention and behavior in various disciplines, including social psychology,
communication, and consumer behavior (Davis, Bagozzi & Warshaw, 1989; Madden,

Ellen, & Ajzen, 1992; Sheppard, Hartwick, & Warshaw, 1988; Taylor & Todd, 1995).

15

However, TRA assumes that the behaviors being examined are under complete volitional
control (Madden et al., 1992); therefore, it cannot be used to explain situations in which
behaviors do not require skills or resources (Conner & Armitage, 1998).

TPB adds the prediction of consumers’ behavioral intentions and actual behaviors
with different levels of volitional control as well as an additional factor—perceived
behavioral control—to TRA (Ajzen, 1991; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1985; Ajzen & Madden,
1986; Bansal & Taylor, 2002; Madden et al., 1992). Several studies have demonstrated
that TPB is stronger than TRA (Conner & Arrnitage, 1998; Madden et al., 1992; Shih &
Fang, 2004; Tan & Teo, 2000) as including perceived behavioral control in the theory
helps increase TPB’s boundary beyond the condition of pure volitional control (Madden
et al., 1992). In the TPB model, behavior is a direct ﬁmction of behavioral intention,
which in turn is formed by attitude (which reﬂects feelings of favorableness or
unfavorableness toward a behavior), subjective norm (which reﬂects perceptions that
signiﬁcant referents desire the individual to perform and not perform a behavior), and
perceived behavioral control (which reﬂects beliefs regarding control over factors that
may facilitate or impede performance of a behavior) (Ajzen,l 991; Ajzen & Fishbein,
1985; Ajzen & Madden, 1986).

TPB is a useful theoretical framework for identifying factors that predict intention
to perform a particular behavior, which in turn is linked with the actual behavior (Bansal
& Taylor, 1999, 2002; Fortin, 2000; Taylor & Todd, 1995). TPB provides researchers
with insight into the exploration of both internal factors (e.g., consumers’ perception of
events) and external factors (e. g., social inﬂuences, resource accessibility, or availability)

that may inﬂuence consumers’ intentions to engage in a speciﬁc behavior (Lim &

l6

Dubinsky, 2005). Indeed, TPB has been applied to various ﬁelds of research, including
users’ acceptance of computer technology (Davis et al., 1989), college students’ intention
and behavior with respect to leisure time (Ajzen & Driver, 1992), and residential design
implications of consumers’ recycling behaviors (Macy & Thompson, 2003; Taylor &
Todd, 1995a,l995b).

An essential assumption of TPB is that people usually act in a practical manner,
considering both obtainable information and the internal or external suggestions of a
behavior (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1985). Ajzen (1991) and Ajzen and Fishbein (1985) asserted
that, when demonstrating a particular behavior, a primary determinant of TPB is an
individual’s intention. Intentions appear to satisfy the simulative nature that determines
human behavior. In other words, as people increase their intention to achieve a behavior,
they are more likely to act upon it. According to people’s intention extent, they
presumably refer to three considerations, conceptually divided as attitude toward the
behavior, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control. Each determinant has an
individual belief structure: behavioral beliefs, normative beliefs, and control beliefs
(Ajzen, 1991; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1985). Figure 2 illustrates the TPB model and its

components as developed bijzen (1991) and Ajzen and Fishbein (1985).

17

 

 

Behavioral Beliefs Attitude toward

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the behavior
Normative Beliefs Subjective Norm * Intention Behavior
. _ Perceived
Control Belrefs Behavioral Control

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2. Theory of Plarmed Behavior (Ajzen, 1991, 2006)

Components of T PB

Actual behavior and intention. Actual behavior in TPB refers to observable
evidence of a behavior, which is acted or not acted out with respect to a speciﬁc aim in a
given situation and at a speciﬁc time (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). Fishbein and Ajzen
(1975) proposed that the most signiﬁcant antecedent of a volitional behavior is an
individual’s intention to perform the behavior. Intention points to “how hard people are
willing to try or how much of an effort they are planning to exert” (Ajzen, 1991 , p. 181),
referring to actual behaviors that people intend to perform (Conner & Amritage, 1998).
However, this does not mean that measuring intention always results in a perfect
prediction of an actual behavior. Certain criteria must be considered in relation to
intention and actual behavior. Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) suggested three primary factors
that inﬂuence the relationship between intention and behavior: 1) the degree to which the
measure of intentions and behaviors standard correspond with respect to their levels of
speciﬁcity; 2) the stability of intentions between time of measurement and observation of

the behavior; and 3) the degree to which performance of the intention is under the

18

volitional control of the actor.

Determinants of Intention. TPB postulates three determinants of intention. The
ﬁrst determinant is attitude toward the behavior, which Ajzen (1991) described as the
degree to which an actor has a favorable or unfavorable evaluation of the given behavior.
Attitude toward the behavior is determined by the sum of achievable behavioral beliefs,
which refer to the subjective probability that the behavior will accomplish—positively or
negatively—supposed outcomes (Ajzen, 1991; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975).

The second determinant is subjective norm, which refers to the perceived social
pressure to perform or not perform a particular behavior (Ajzen, 1991; Ajzen & Fishbein,
1985). According to Ajzen (1991) and Ajzen and Fishbein (1985), subjective norm is
decided by the sum of assessable normative beliefs, which means perceived behavioral
assumptions are important referents to individuals or groups. Several referent individuals
or groups are based on demographics (e. g., family, parents, and ﬁiends) and situations
(e. g., customer, advisor, and teacher).

The third determinant of intention is the level of perceived behavior control,
which refers to the perceived ease or diﬂiculty of performing the behavior; this is
assumed to reﬂect the individual’s perception of people’s ability to perform a particular
behavior (Ajzen, 1991). Aj zen (1991) also mentions that perceived behavioral control is
determined by the addition of accessible control beliefs, which refer to the perceived
presence of requisite resources and opportunities to perform a behavior in question.
Control beliefs are produced by the past experience of the behavior, by second-hand
information of behavior, by the experience of friends and referent people, or by other

factors that facilitate or impede performance of a behavior (Ajzen, 1991; Ajzen &

19

F ishbein, 1985; D011 & Ajzen, 1992).

A major factor in TPB involves performing a given behavior of the individual’s
intention. In most cases, individuals perceive that they have more control over the
behavior as they are convinced that they have more resources and opportunities, and
fewer hindrances, in performing a behavior (Ajzen, 1991; D011 & Ajzen, 1992; Taylor &
Todd, 1995, 1995a). Thus, TBP can be used to determine how residential interior

designers make choices in the speciﬁcation and use of ﬂoor coverings.

Predicting Interior Designers’ Flooring Choice Using TPB

TPB can be considered a useful framework in understanding designers’ choice of
sustainable ﬂoorings for several reasons. First, the TPB model includes factors that
stimulate a behavior by inﬂuencing attitudes toward the behavior (i.e., attitude toward the
choice of ﬂooring materials). Second, TPB explains the inﬂuence of a subjective norm on
the intention to perform a behavior, which can beneﬁt designers who often decide on
ﬂoorings based on the opinions of important people involved in the project. Finally, TPB
can make it possible to examine the inﬂuence of interior designers’ voluntary or active
exposure to sustainable ﬂoorings according to their intention and consumption of ﬂooring
materials.
Belief Structures and Predictor Variables

Behavioral beliefs toward attitude. The behavioral beliefs make it possible to
examine the role of various characteristics and beneﬁts of a behavior in inﬂuencing
attitudes toward the behavior. Researchers have decomposed behavioral beliefs in various

ways to discover the relationship between behavioral beliefs and attitudes. Taylor and

20

Todd (1995, 1995a) decomposed behavioral beliefs for consumers’ adoption behaviors
by identifying three salient behavioral beliefs of adopting innovation based on
characteristics of innovation (Rogers, 1983): relative advantage, complexity, and
compatibility. They found signiﬁcant paths between relative advantage/compatibility and
attitude toward adopting innovation and between complexities. Similarly, Shih and Fang
(2004) examined the same behavioral beliefs to study Internet banking usage and found
signiﬁcant inﬂuences of relative advantage and complexity on attitude toward using
Internet banking. Hsu et al. (2006) decomposed behavioral beliefs, in the context of
predicting consumers’ intention to use mobile text message coupons, into compatibility,
personal innovativeness, perceived ease of use, and perceived usefuhress. Among these
beliefs, compatibility, perceived ease of use, and perceived usefulness were related to
attitude toward mobile coupon usage.

The use of sustainable or green ﬂooring materials is increasing in interior design.
In order to decompose behavioral beliefs of using sustainable ﬂooring materials in
residential design practice, it is important to refer to previous literature concerning
information related to sustainable material use. Several studies on sustainability have
suggested that characteristics indicate supposed outcomes or beneﬁts after analysis for
material impacts (Cain, 2007; Kang & Guerin, 2009). Speciﬁcally, Andes (2000)
examined the effects on people’s health in regard to carpet ﬁber as well as differences
between carpet and other ﬂooring materials for growing dust mites. Fisk and Rosenfeld
(1997) stress that buildings affect the health and welfare of their occupants through IAQ.
Indoor environments have been shown to play an important role in respiratory disease,

allergy and asthma symptoms, sick building indications, and worker performance.

21

Behavioral beliefs in the context of sustainable ﬂooring materials refer to the
subjective probability that using sustainable ﬂooring materials will achieve certain
expected outcomes. In order to examine behavioral beliefs in relation to sustainable
ﬂooring materials, it is necessary to identify what kinds of outcomes consumers or
designers can expect from using sustainable ﬂooring materials and how those expected
outcomes inﬂuence attitude toward using sustainable ﬂooring materials. Individuals may
have different assessments of each of the expected outcomes, and each expected outcome
may affect attitude toward using sustainable ﬂooring materials separately. Thus, the
behavioral beliefs can help researchers better understand the effects of the behavioral
beliefs on attitude toward using sustainable ﬂooring materials. As such, the following
hypotheses emerge:

Hla: Beliefs about improving environments will be positively associated with
attitude toward the use of sustainable ﬂooring materials.

Hlb: Beliefs about human health, safety, and comfort will be positively

associated with attitude toward the use of sustainable ﬂooring materials.

Normative beliefs and subjective norm. Subjective norm is deﬁned as a person’s
perception that most people who are important to a person think the individual should or
should not perform the behavior in question (Chang, 1998). According to TPB, the
subjective norm is a function of a set of beliefs termed “normative beliefs,” which are
concerned with the likelihood that important referent individuals, such as spouse, parents,
or colleagues, would approve or disapprove of the behavior (Aj zen & Madden, 1986). In
the context of sustainable ﬂooring materials, if an association designer believes that the
most important referents (i.e., his/her parents, ﬁends, advisers/bosses, and or colleagues)

think the designer should choose sustainable ﬂooring materials, the perceived design

22

pressure to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials will be increased along with the
motivation to comply.

Consumers’ normative beliefs will have a direct impact on subjective norm, the
perceived social pressure to comply with the important referent’s expectations of using
sustainable ﬂooring materials (Ajzen, 1991; Ajzen, & Fishbein, 1985; Madden et al.,
1992). Although the decomposition of normative beliefs based on different referent
groups may be appropriate, the current study considered referent groups as a dimension
consisting of clients and other designers, as they were supposed to be highly related with
normative beliefs (Taylor & Todd, 1995). In addition, there is discordance concerning the
use of the multidimensional normative beliefs. Although Taylor Todd (1995a) used two
groups for normative beliefs (e.g., family and people in his/her household for internal
normative beliefs, friends and neighbors), Shih and Fang (2004) did not use normative
beliefs because other researchers failed to identify individual dimensions without that
construct (e.g., Oliver & Bearden, 1985; Shimp & Kavas, 1984). Given that TPB predicts
a positive relationship between normative beliefs and subjective norm (George, 2004;
Shih & Fang, 2004; Taylor & Todd, 1995, 1995a), the current study will examine the
following related hypothesis:

H2: Normative beliefs will be positively associated with subjective norm.

Control beliefs and perceived behavioral control. Control beliefs are the
individual’s perception of the extent to which people possess internal and external factors
that may increase or decrease the perceived difﬁculty of performing the behavior (Aj zen,
1991; Park, 2003). According to Ajzen and Fishbeina (1985), internal factors include

such variables as individual differences, information, skills, abilities, and emotion, while

23

external factors involve time, ﬁnancial opportunity, and dependence on others.

As suggested in the relevant literature on sustainable ﬂooring materials’ factors,
the use of sustainable ﬂooring materials is affected by various variables. One of the most
prominent characteristics of sustainable ﬂooring materials is that interior designers have
control over their use or choice behavior. TPB makes it possible to examine the role of
interior designers’ control in predicting their intention to use sustainable ﬂooring
materials. In the current study, control beliefs refer to the perceived presence of requisite
resources (e. g., time, computer, Internet access) and opportunities to facilitate or impede
watching online video advertisement; meanwhile, perceived behavioral control refers to
the perceived ability to watch online video advertisement. According to TPB, consumers’
control beliefs affect perceived behavioral control, which in turn inﬂuences an intention
and an actual behavior (Ajzen & Madden, 1986). Empirical evidence indicates that
control beliefs have a signiﬁcant relationship with perceived behavioral control (Hsu et
al., 2006; Shih & Fang, 2004; Taylor & Todd, 1995, 1995a). As with normative beliefs,
control beliefs were also considered a ftmdamental construct in the current study. In the
context of selection of sustainable ﬂooring materials, an individual with a stronger
perception about the presence of resources (information, knowledge, money, or the
accessibility) and possibilities to use sustainable ﬂooring materials is more likely to have
a stronger perception about designers’ ability to use sustainable ﬂooring materials,
resulting in the following hypothesis:

H3: Control beliefs will be positively associated with perceived behavioral
control.

24

Components of Behavioral Intention

Attitude and intention to use sustainable ﬂooring materials. Several TPB studies
have found a signiﬁcant inﬂuence of attitude toward a given behavior on intention to
achieve the behavior (Ajzen & Driver, 1992; Gopi & Rarnayah, 2007; Mathieson, 1991;
Shih & Fang, 2004; Taylor & Todd, 1995, 1995a, 1995b). Speciﬁcally, Tarkiainen and
Sundqvist (2005) found that attitude toward buying organic food was positively
associated with intention to buy it. Taylor and Todd (1995a) demonstrated that attitude
was highly related to the intention to recycle data. Bamberg, Aj zen and Schmidt (2003)
also supported the conclusion that attitude had an effect on intention. As many studies
have demonstrated that attitude toward behavior is an important predictor of intention, it
is expected that a more favorable attitude toward using sustainable ﬂooring materials will
lead to a stronger intention to use sustainable ﬂooring materials. Thus:

H4: Attitude toward using sustainable ﬂooring materials will be positively

associated with intention to use sustainable ﬂooring materials.

Subjective norm and intention to use sustainable ﬂooring materials. Ajzen
(1991) and Ajzen and Driver (1992) deﬁned subjective norm as perceived social pressure
to perform or not perform the behavior, which implies that people have assumptions
regarding their signiﬁcant others’ perceptions of their decision to engage in the behavior.
Here, signiﬁcant others mean close people who might include family, ﬁiends, and—in
case of co-workers—supervisors and clients. According to Hansen et al. (2008) and Lim
and Dubinsky (2005), the stronger the subjective norm in the research, the stronger the
behavioral intention. For example, Taylor and Todd (1995) found a positive impact of the

subjective norm on a determinant of intention to adopt innovation. Vanucci and

25

Kerstetter (2001) revealed that the subjective norm was signiﬁcantly related to the usage
of the Internet. Furthermore, Lee (2008) discovered positive inﬂuences of subjective
norm on intention to watch online video advertisements. As prior research has supported
the signiﬁcance of subjective norm, it is predicted that interior designers’ perceived
social pressure to use sustainable ﬂooring materials will have a positive and signiﬁcant
effect on intention to use sustainable ﬂooring materials. As such:

H5: Subjective norm will be positively associated with intention to use

sustainable ﬂooring materials.

Perceived behavioral control and intention to use sustainable ﬂooring materials.
Perceived behavioral control is deﬁned as the extent that people believe that they have
control or that external factors can facilitate or constrain behavior (Ajzen, 1991). If
individuals perceive that performing the behavior is easy, they will have a stronger
intention to carry out a behavior (Ajzen, 1991; Hansen et al., 2008). This effect of
perceived behavioral control on intention is based on the concept that perceived
behavioral control motivates individuals’ assessment of the likelihood of performing a
behavior (Ajzen & Madden, 1986). Several studies have supported the positive
relationship between perceived behavioral control and intention (Aj zen, 1991; George,
2004; Madden et al., 1992; Shih & Fang, 2004). Taylor and Todd (1995) found a positive
relationship between perceived behavioral control and intention to adopt an innovation.
In addition, they demonstrated that intention to recycle was positively inﬂuenced by
perceived behavioral control (Taylor & Todd, 1995a). Cunningham and Kwon (2003)
found that perceived behavioral control (time) was positively related to intention.

Perceived behavioral control also strongly related to intention to participate in

26

environmental concern research (Barnberg et al., 2003). Therefore, with voluntary

exposure to sustainable ﬂooring materials, it is assumed that designers’ perceived ability

to use sustainable ﬂooring materials will positively affect their intention, resulting in the

following hypothesis:

H6: Perceived behavioral control will be positively associated with intention to
use sustainable ﬂooring materials.

According to TPB, this is predicted in the following hypotheses shown in Figure 3.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attitude toward
using sustainable
ﬂooring materials

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subjective Norm

H4

 

Intention

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Environment %
Health and Safety 4
Normative Beliefs

H2
Control Beliefs
H3

 

Figure 3. Hypothesized Model

 

Perceived
Behavioral Control

 

 

27

H5

 

 

H6

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODS

This chapter presents research methods. First, the sample for the proposed study is
introduced in detail. Next, methods of data collection including survey instruments are
described. Finally, methods of data analysis are presented.

Sample

In the current study, the target population consisted of interior designers who
work in residential projects in the US. Participants were recruited from the membership
list of the American Society of Interior Designers (ASID), which is the oldest and largest
professional organization of interior designers, comprising 20,000 practicing interior
designers, more than 2,500 member ﬁrms, and more than 12,000 students of interior
design (ASID, n.d.). Thus, it is possible to recruit a large number of interior designers
through this organization. ASID provides designers’ information to everyone who needs
help with their home or other interior design. The sample of this study was randomly
selected based on ASID practicing interior designers in residential practice whose e-mail
addresses were available.

This study utilized an e-mail web-based survey questionnaire for data collection.
An Internet survey offers several advantages; it is able to cover a large geographic area in
the US, can be sent faster and more easily to participants, and offers easier processing of
data and low costs (Hewson, Yule, Laurent & Vogel, 2003; Porter &Whitcomb, 2003).
However, relative return rates are lower than other competitive methods, such as mail

surveys or paper surveys.

28

This Internet survey questionnaire was e-mailed to ASID members in residential
practice. A total of 1,875 surveys were sent via SurveyMonkey. After the initial e-mail
was sent to the sample, two email reminders were sent to those who had not yet
responded. The ﬁnal survey response rate was approximately 14 percent (N = 256), with
31 cases being dropped because they were found to be inappropriate for the analysis.
Thus, a total of 225 ﬁnal surveys were utilized for further analysis.

Instrument and Measurement

The questionnaire consisted of a seven-point bipolar adjective scale and likert
scale. The survey was divided into two sections. The ﬁrst section contained questions
about demographic information and characteristics on sustainable ﬂooring materials. The
second section of the survey contained items designed to assess the major constructs
using TPB. To examine TPB in the context of the choice of sustainable ﬂoor materials,
questions were used based on the TPB questionnaire construction guidelines developed
by Ajzen (2002, 2006). The developed model of TPB was based on the original scales
created by Ajzen and F ishbein (1980, 1985) and Ajzen (1991). All statements were taken
from Ajzen (2002, 2006) and developed for this study. A seven-point scale was used for
strength of all variables. The measurement and scale for each variable are described in
the following paragraphs.

Behavioral beliefs. To measure two decomposed behavioral beliefs related to
using sustainable ﬂooring materials (i.e., environment and health), the strength of each
behavioral belief and its outcome evaluation were measured. Table 1 shows all items for

the strength of behavioral belief and outcome evaluation.

29

Table 1. Items of Behavioral Beliefs for Using Sustainable Flooring Materials

 

Behavioral Beliefs Items (Zbiei)

 

Factor 1: Environment
bl. I would help protect the environment by using sustainable ﬂooring materials
e1. Being able to protect the environment in choosing sustainable ﬂooring materials is

b2. 1 would help reduce hazardous waste by using sustainable ﬂooring materials
e2. Being able to help to reduce hazardous waste in choosing sustainable ﬂooring materials is

b3. 1 would help improve indoor air quality by using sustainable ﬂooring materials
e3. Being able to improve indoor air quality in choosing sustainable ﬂooring materials is

Factor 2 : Health
b4. 1 would help improve the health of people by using sustainable ﬂooring materials
e4. Being able to improve the health of people in choosing sustainable ﬂooring materials is

b5. I would help protect from an allergy or atopic dermatitis for people by using sustainable
ﬂooring materials

e5. Being able to protect from an allergy or atopic dermatitis for people in choosing sustainable
ﬂooring materials is

 

The strength of each behavioral belief was assessed on a seven-point scale
ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). Meanwhile, the outcome
evaluation of each expected outcome was measured on a seven-point scale ranging from

extremely unimportant (1) to extremely important (7). To measure behavioral beliefs, the

strength of each behavioral belief (bi) was multiplied by its outcome evaluation (ei); the

resulting products were summed for each outcome factor (i.e., Z biei for each outcome

factor) (Ajzen, 1991).

Normative beliefs. To measure normative beliefs, the strength of each normative

belief (ni) and motivation (mi) to comply with each referent was measured (Znimi). As

Table 2 indicates, four items assessing the strength of normative beliefs and motivation to

comply were borrowed and modrﬁed from Taylor and Todd (1995a). The strength of

30

normative beliefs (ni) was measured on a scale ranging from extremely unlikely (l) to
extremely likely ( 7). Motivation to comply (mi) was measured on a scale ranging from
not at all (1) to very much (7). To compute overall normative beliefs, the strength of each
normative belief was multiplied by motivation to comply with each referent, and the
resulting products were summed across all items of referent groups (Ajzen, 1991).

Table 2. Items for Normative Beliefs of Using Flooring Materials

 

Normative Belief Items (Normative Beliefs = Znimi)

 

n1. Clients in my practice think I should choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for residential
projects

ml. Generally speaking, I care what my clients think about my choice of sustainable ﬂooring
materials for residential use

n2. Co-workers in my company think that I should choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for
residential projects

m2. Generally speaking, I care what my co-workers in my company think about my choice of
sustainable ﬂooring materials for residential use

 

Control beliefs. The strength of each control belief (ci) was measured on a seven-
point scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). The perceived power
of each control factor (pi) was measured on a seven-point scale ranging from extremely

unimportant (1) to extremely important (7). Table 3 lists all items for control beliefs.
To compute overall control beliefs, the strength of each control belief was

multiplied by perceived power of each control factor; the resulting products were

summed across all items (Zcipi) (Ajen, 1991; Taylor & Todd, 1995).

Attitude toward using sustainable ﬂooring materials. Three items to measure
attitude toward choice of sustainable ﬂooring materials were taken from Ajzen (2002,

2006) and modiﬁed for this study. Each of the seven point scales appeared after the

31

following statement: “For me to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for clients’
residential projects is ____.” This item was measured on seven-point scales, anchored
with bad - good, harmful — beneﬁcial, or worthless — valuable.

Subjective norm. Two items were taken from Ajzen (2002, 2006) and modiﬁed
for this study to measure subjective norm. The two items (e.g., “Most people who are
important to me think that I should choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for residential
projects”) were measured using seven point bipolar scales ranging from strongly disagree
(1) to strongly agree (7).

Perceived behavioral control. Four items for measuring perceived behavioral
control was taken from Ajzen (2002, 2006) and modiﬁed for this study. First statement,
“For me, choosing sustainable ﬂooring materials for residential projects is _” was
assessed on a seven-point scale anchored with deﬁnitely impossible (1) to deﬁnitely
possible (7). The second statement, “If I wanted to, I would be able to choose sustainable
ﬂooring materials for residential projects” was assessed on a seven-point scale anchored
with deﬁnitely false (1) to deﬁnitely true (7). Other items Were measured using the
statement “I choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for residential use,” which was
measured on a seven-point scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7).
The last item was assessed using the statement, “How much control do you believe you
have over choice of sustainable ﬂooring materials?”, as measured on a seven-point scale
anchored with no control — control.

Intention. This part was measured using three items taken from Ajzen (2002,

2006) and modiﬁed for this study. All statements were assessed on a seven-point scale.

32

Table 3. Items for Control Beliefs of Using Sustainable Flooring Materials

Control Belief Items (Control Belief = Zcipi)
cl. If I want to, I could easily get information about sustainable ﬂooring materials

p1. Being able to get information about sustainable ﬂooring materials as part of my decision to
choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for residential use is

c2. I know enough about sustainable ﬂooring materials for residential use on my own
p2. Knowing enough to specify sustainable ﬂooring materials is

c3. I would be able to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials even if there is no one around to
advise me on what kinds are available

p3. Being able to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials even if no one is around to advise me
on what kinds are available is

c4. I would feel comfortable using sustainable ﬂooring materials on my own
p4. Being able to feel comfortable using sustainable ﬂooring materials is

c5. I have access to the Internet whenever I want to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials
p5. Having access to the Internet whenever I want to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials

 

c6. I ﬁnd a trade magazine whenever I want to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials
p6. Finding trade magazines whenever I want to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials

c7. Sustainable ﬂooring materials are not used on my projects
p7. Whether or not I use it personally, choosing sustainable ﬂooring materials for residential
use is

c8. For me choosing sustainable ﬂooring materials requires more money than other basic
ﬂooring materials for my clients

p8. Whether or not choosing sustainable ﬂooring materials takes more money than general
ﬂooring materials for my clients, it is

 

The ﬁrst statement, “I intend to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for
residential projects.” was measured on a scale ranging from extremely unlikely (1) to
extremely likely (7). The next statement, “I plan to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials
for residential projects,” was measured on a scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to
strongly agree (7). The ﬁnal statement, “I will make an effort to choose sustainable
ﬂooring materials for residential projects,” was assessed on a scale ranging from

deﬁnitely false (1) to deﬁnitely true (7).

33

Data Collection

To understand perception and experiences about sustainable ﬂooring materials as
well as the survey questionnaire, a pilot study was conducted to reduce obscurity. When
the pilot study was sent, the respondents were told that the questionnaire was a trial
version of the survey. They were asked to ﬁll out all questionnaires and to comment on
wording and clarity. The participants are 15 interior designers in Michigan; their opinions
helped this paper modify the survey questions, and some questions were revised in
accordance with their opinions, as shown in Appendix.

Prior to data collection, survey instruments were reviewed and approved by the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Michigan State University. Following IRB guidance,
participants were informed by the investigator that participation was completely
voluntary and that the results of the participation would remain conﬁdential and would
not be released in any individually identiﬁable form. Participants were also informed that
anonymity would be protected, as consent was established when the questionnaire was
completed and returned to the researcher.

Data Analysis

Multiple regression analysis—using the stepwise method—was utilized to test all
hypotheses. A multiple regression model was developed based on TPB’s global
constructs. Multiple regression analysis determined what constructs/beliefs were most
strongly related to intention. Statistics yielded from the regression analyses included
standardized beta weights and multiple correlations for predictor variables (Aj zen, 1991).

A total of four models were run (see Figure 4).

34

-I—-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

J

-----------------------------

 

 

Environment Attitude toward
using sustainable

ﬂooring materials

 

 

 

 

 

-\-/-

 

 

 

E Health and Safety

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. --------------------------------------------------- r ------------------------------------------------------- 1 a

M 0 d e12 Normative Beliefs i Subjective Norm Intention i

g . i Perceived I i

I Control Beliefs E Behavioral Control 5 E

Model3 .......................... ,. '
. --------------------------------------- Model4

Figure 4 Models for Analysis

35

CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
This chapter begins by describing the characteristics of participants (i.e.,
demographic characteristics and designers’ backgrounds) and their perceptions about
sustainable ﬂoor coverings. Next, descriptive ﬁndings and reliability are presented.
Finally, hypotheses tests are presented using regression analyses conducted to examine
the effects of using sustainable ﬂoor coverings in residential practice on the constructs of
TPB.

Characteristics of Participants

 

Demographic characteristics. Table 4 presents the ﬁequency and percentage
distributions for the demographic characteristics of the sample: respondent gender, age,
education level, and ethnicity. As indicated, the sample consisted of 225 individuals; 198
(88 percent) participants were female. Most participants fell within the 45 to 54 years age
range (n = 84, 37.3 percent), with 51 (22.7 percent) in the 55 to 65 years range and 44
(19.6 percent) in the 35 to 44 years range. Most respondents had college degrees: college
degree (n = 169, 75.1 percent) and graduate degree or higher (n = 42, 18.7 percent).
Almost all respondents self-identiﬁed as Caucasian (n = 209, 92.9 percent), followed by
Native American (11 = 8, 3.6 percent), Hispanic/Indian (n = 3, 1.3 percent), and Asian (n
= 2, 0.9 percent).

Table 5 presents respondents’ geographic regions of ﬁrms. Among the regions
included, a high response rate was evident in California (n = 37, 16.4 percent), Florida (n
= 30, 13.3 percent), and Texas (11 = 12, 5.3 percent). Low response regions included

Delaware, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana. and ﬁve other regions (each n = 1, 0.4 percent).

36

Table4. Demographic Characteristics, Frequencies and Percentage of total

 

 

Demographic Characteristics F requency(N ) Percentage of Total (%)
Gender
Male 27 12.0
Female 198 88.0
TOTAL 225 100
Age
25-34 years 31 13.8
35-44 years 44 19.6
45-54 years 84 37.3
55-64 years 51 22.7
65-74 years 13 5.8
75 years and over 2 0.9
TOTAL 225 100
Education Level
Some college, no degree 13 5.8
College degree 169 75.1
Graduate degree or higher 42 18.7
Missing 1 0.4
TOTAL 225 100
Ethnicity
Native-American 8 3.6
African-American 2 0.9
Caucasian 209 92.9
Asian 2 0.9
Hispanic/Indian 3 1.3
Other 1 0.4
TOTAL 225 100

 

 

Respondents ’ backgrounds. Table 6 presents the respondents’ status related to interior
designer characteristics. According to the years of practice in interior design, about half
(11 = 104, 46.2 percent) of the participants have practiced more than 20 years, which may
be reﬂected in the result that respondents (11 = 73, 32.4 percent) had chosen sustainable
ﬂooring materials two to ﬁve times during their residential practice. In addition, 55 (24.0
percent) reported using it fewer than two times, while 41 (18.2 percent) reported using it
more than 20 times in residential practices (see Table 6). More than half (n = 127, 56.4
percent) reported the size of their typical interior design project as 3,001 to 6,000 square
feet, while 30.2 percent (11 = 68) reported projects that were less than 3,000 square feet.

Table 7 presents the frequency of sustainable ﬂooring material use in residential practices

37

by project size. One respondent group that used sustainable ﬂooring the most (i.e., more

than 20 times) reported project sizes of 3,001 to 6,000 square feet (11 = 28, 68.3 percent)

while the respondent group that used it the least (i.e., fewer than two times) also reported

project sizes of 3,001 to 6,000 square feet (n = 23, 41.8 percent).

Participants ’ general knowledge, perception, and attitude. Before testing the effective

questions on the topic of using sustainable ﬂooring materials beyond the TPB,

participants were asked several questions related to the topic—namely, frequency of

using ﬂooring materials, education about sustainable ﬂooring materials, and attitude and

beliefs toward sustainable ﬂooring materials in general.

TableS. Geographical Region of Firms

 

 

 

 

Location Frequency (N) Percent (%) Location Frequency (N) Percent (%)
AL 6 2.7 MI 8 3.6
AR 4 1.8 MN 9 4.0
AZ 6 2.7 MO 3 1.3
CA 37 16.4 MS 1 0.4
CO 6 2.7 MT 1 0.4
CT 6 2.7 NC 3 1.3
DE 1 0.4 NE 2 0.9
FL 30 13.3 NJ 7 3.1
GA 13 5.8 NM 1 0.4
HI 2 0.9 NV 3 1.3
1A 1 0.4 NY 2 0.9
1D 4 1.8 OH 5 2.2
IL 11 4.9 OR 3 1.3
IN 2 0.9 PA 6 2.7
KS 1 0.4 RI 1 0.4
KY 2 0.9 TN 4 1.8
LA 1 0.4 TX 12 5.3
MA 7 3.1 UT 1 0,4
MD 5 2.2 VA 6 2.7

__ missing 2 0.9
_TOTAL 225( 1 00%)

 

38

..-I

Table 6. Interior Designer Characteristics

 

 

Frequency (N) Percentage of Total (%)
Years of Practice Interior Design
Less than 2 years 2 0.9
2-5 years 24 10.7
6-10 years 33 14.7
11-15 years 30 13.3
16-20 years 31 13.8
More than 20 years 104 46.2
Missing 1 0.4
TOTAL 225 100
Size of Interior Design Projects
Less than 3,000 Sq.ft 68 30.2
3,001 to 6,000 Sq.ﬁ 127 56.4
6,001 to 20,000 Sq.ﬁ 27 12.0
20,001 to 50,000 Sqft .. 2 0.9
Missing 1 0.4
TOTAL 225 100
Using Time of Sustainable Flooring Materials in Residential Practice
Less than 2times 55 24.0
2-5 times 73 32.4
6-10 times 34 15.1
ll-lStimes 13 5.8
16-20 times 6 2.7
More than 20 times 41 18.2
Missing 3 1.3
TOTAL 225 100

 

Table7. Frequency and Percentage of Using Time of Sustainable Flooring Materials in
Residential Practices by Project Size

 

 

Less than 3,0001 to 6,001 to 2,001 to TOTAL

3,0003q.ft. 6,0003q.ft. 20,0003q.ﬁ 50,0003q.ﬁ
N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%)
Less than 2 times 21(38.2) 23(41.8) 9(16.4) 2(3.6) 55(100)
2-5 times 24(32.9) 43(58.9) 6(8.2) 0 73( 100)
6-10 times 9(26.5) 20(58.8) 5(14.7) 0 33(100)
11-15 times 4(30.8) 8(61.5) 1(7.7) 0 13(100)
16-20 times [(16.7) 5(83.3) 0 0 6( 100)
gore than 20 times 8(19.5) 28(68.3) 5(12.2) 0 41(100)

 

39

When asked about frequency of choice of ﬂooring materials for residential
projects, 104 (46.2 percent) participants reported ceramic tile was used very frequently,
89 (39.6 percent) reported using stone very frequently, and 79 (35.1 percent) reported
using carpet very frequently. Previous research found that the rate of using sustainable
materials—namely, bamboo, cork, certiﬁed wood ﬂooring, and reclaimed wood—had
increased from 2006 to 2007 (EDC, 2007). However, participants very rarely used
bamboo (n = 63, 28 percent), certiﬁed wood (n = 40, 17.8 percent), reclaimed wood (11 =
78, 34.7 percent), cork (n = 80, 35.6 percent), linoleum (n = 108, 48.0 percent), terrazzo

(n = 100, 44.4 percent), rubber (n = 122, 54.2 percent), and vinyl (n = 103, 45.8 percent)

 

 

Fiﬁ-121’

in residential projects. Despite being sustainable materials with the exception of vinyl,
many sustainable ﬂooring materials (except for vinyl) are used very rarely. Table 8
presents the frequency and percentage distributions.

According to previous research of Environmental Design + Construction magazine which
compared learning sources between 2006 and 2007 (EDC, 2007), in 2006, trade
magazines were the most important sources of information about green ﬂooring
materials; manufacturers’ websites (66 percent) and word-of-mouth referrals (42 percent)
were also used to learn about them. In 2007, manufacturers’ websites (84 percent) were
most often used to learn about green ﬂooring materials, followed by trade magazines (72
percent) and calls to dealers or distributors (62 percent) (EDC, 2007). The current
research conﬁrmed these ﬁndings. In this study, trade magazines (n = 179, 79.6 percent)
were very important sources used to learn about sustainable ﬂooring materials, as Table 9

indicates. Participants also reported using manufacturers’ websites (n = 158, 70.2

40

percent), calls to the dealer or distributor (n = 125, 55.6 percent), and industry
associations (n = 100, 44.4 percent).

Table 8. Percentage Distribution of Choice of Flooring Materials for Residential Project

 

 

Very Some Some Very
rarely rarely rarely Neutral frequently Frequently frequently

Bamboo

Frequency(N) 63 39 22 38 31 1 1 20

Percent (%) 28.0 17.3 9.8 16.9 13.8 4.9 8.9
Certiﬁed Wood

Frequency(N) 40 23 24 29 32 34 43

Percent (%) 17.8 10.2 10.7 12.9 14.2 15.1 19.1
Reclaimed Wood

Frequency(N) 78 40 23 26 25 2 l 12

Percent (%) 34.7 17.8 10.2 11.6 11.1 9.3 5.3
Carpet

Frequency(N) l6 6 14 32 35 43 79

Percent (%) 7.1 2.7 6.2 14.2 15.6 19.1 35.1
Cork

Frequency(N) 8O 42 23 31 21 14 14

Percent (%) 35.6 18.7 10.2 13.8 9.3 6.2 6.2
Linoleum

Frequency(N) 108 38 26 17 13 13 8

Percent (%) 48.0 16.9 11.6 7.6 5.8 5.8 3.6
Ceramic Tile

Frequency(N) 8 2 1 1 2 28 5 l 104

Percent (%) 3.6 0.9 4.9 9.3 12.4 22.7 46.2
Terrazzo

Frequency(N) 1 00 44 20 22 13 l 1 14

Percent (%) 44.4 19.6 8.9 9.8 5.8 4.9 6.2
Stone

Frequency(N) 14 6 l 7 2 1 37 39 89

Percent (%) 6.2 2.7 7.6 9.3 16.4 17.3 39.6
Rubber

Frequency(N) 122 50 13 23 10 4 2 .

Percent (%) 54.2 22.2 5.8 10.2 4.4 1.8 0.9
Vinyl

Frequency(N ) 103 39 24 29 1 2 7 8

__Percent (%) 45.8 17.3 10.7 12.9 5.3 3.1 3.6

 

 

41

Table 9. Sources Used to Learn about Sustainable Flooring Materials (multiple
responses)

 

 

Responses
F requencies(N) Percent of Cases (%)

Trade magazine 179 79.6
Manufacturers websites 158 70.2
Word of Mouth referral 80 35.6
Call dealer / distributor 125 55.6
Industry association 100 44.4
Search engines 79 35.1
Dealer web 59 26.2
Other
(i.e. trade show, sales reps, 21 9.3
merchandise mart Showrooms)
TOTAL 801 356.0

 

Using Sustainable Flooring Materials in Residential Practice and the Theory of
Planned Behavior

Descriptive analyses. Table 10 presents the descriptive statistics for the
measurement of belief items for behavioral beliefs (i.e., environment and health),
normative beliefs, and control beliefs, indicating the mean value and standard deviation
of each measurement item for each construct as well as the mean value and standard
deviation of the overall beliefs.

Respondents reported their positive perceptions about behavioral beliefs of the

overall beliefs (biei) with environment with a mean ranging from 38.24 to 40.38. For

health, safety, and comfort, respondents reported overall beliefs with a mean ranging

from 39.08 to 40.81. In two measurements for normative beliefs, respondents reported

positive perceptions. Overall normative beliefs’ (nimi) mean was 24.57 for clients; the

second factor, co-workers, reported a mean of 20.96. Finally, respondents also reported

42

Table10. Descriptive Summary of Belief Items

 

 

 

Belief Items Strength Evaluation Overall Beliefs
Mean SD Mean SD. Mean SD.
Behavioral Beliefs b i e i big,-
Factor lenvironment
Protecting the 6.04 1.19 6.20 0.97 38.24 1 1.27
environment
Reducing hazardous 6.35 1.01 6.28 0.90 40.38 10.18
waste
Improving indoor air 6.36 1.03 6.26 0.97 40.29 10.29
quality
Factor 2: Health

Improving the health of 6.44 0.87 6.28 0.93 40.81 9.57
people
Protecting from an 6.25 1.05 6.20 1.02 39.08 10.27
allergy or atopic
dermatitis

Normative Beliefs

”i m,- "imi

Clients 3.93 1.59 6.08 1.20 24.57 12.11
Co-workers 4.40 1.80 4.36 2.05 20.96 14.66

Control Beliefs , _

Ci Pi CIPI

Information 6.10 1.14 6.06 1.15 37.32 10.71
Knowledge 4.79 1.44 6.26 0.97 30.32 10.94
Efﬁciency 5.12 1.46 5.79 1.28 30.31 12.07
Facilitating Condition 5.48 1.40 6.24 0.94 34.66 1 1.48
Accessibility] 6.41 1.00 6.26 1.00 40.66 10.10
Accessibility2 5.03 1.78 5.22 1.67 28.37 15.23
Self- Efficiency 5.15 1.71 5.94 1.07 30.87 12.55
Money 4.48 1.72 5.19 1.36 23.61 11.84

 

Note: b=Behavioral Beliefs, e= Behavioral Beliefs Evaluation, n= Normative Beliefs, m=
Motivation to Comply, c=Control Beliefs, p= Perceived Power

positive perceptions about control beliefs (cipi), with an overall mean ranging from 23.61

to 40.66.
Table 11 also provides a descriptive analysis of each item for attitude, subjective
norm, perceived behavioral control, and intention. Three items for attitude ranged in

mean from 6.25 to 6.44. Subjective norm was measured with means of 4.1 5 and 4.08.

43

Perceived behavior control was ranged in mean from 5.28 to 6.14, and intention ranged in
mean from 5.63 to 5.92.

Reliability tests. In preparation for further analysis, behavioral belief was measured using
a summated scale by multiplying behavioral beliefs and evaluation. Normative belief was
measured using a summated scale by multiplying normative beliefs and motive to comply.

Table 11.Descriptive Analysis of Attitude (ATT), Subjective Norm (SN), Perceived
Behavioral Control (PBC), and Behavioral Intention (BI)

 

 

Mean SD
Attitude (ATT)
ATT] For me to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for 6.32 0.99
clients’ residential projects is Extremely bad(1) /
Extremely good( 7)
ATTZ For me to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for 6.44 0.85
clients’ residential projects is Extremely harmﬁxlﬂ) /
Extremely beneﬁcial(7)
ATT3 For me to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for 6.25 1.05
clients’ residential projects is Extremely worthless/1 ) /
Extremely valuable{ 7)
Subjective Norm(SM
SNl Most people who are important to me think that I 4.15 1.73

should choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for
residential projects
SN2 Most people who inﬂuence my decisions think 4.08 1.71
that I should choose sustainable ﬂooring
materials for residential projects

Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC)

PBCl For me to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials 6.14 1.08
for residential projects is

PBC2 If I wanted to, 1 would be able to choose sustainable 6.02 1.16
ﬂooring materials for residential projects

PBC3 I chose sustainable ﬂooring materials for residential 5.34 1.52
use

PBC4 How much control do you believe you have over the choic 5.28 1.32

e of sustainable ﬂooring materials for residential

Behavioral Intention(BI)

BI] I intend to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for 5.67 1.21
residential projects

BIZ 1 plan to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for 5.63 1.26
residential projects

313 1 will make an effort to choose sustainable ﬂooring materi 5.92 1.15

als for residential projects

 

 

44

Control behavioral belief was measured using a summated scale by multiplying control
beliefs and perceived powers. The reliability of the three belief structures is listed in
Table 12; Cronbach’s alpha ranged from 0.75 to 0.94. In addition, attitude, subjective
norm, perceived behavioral control, and intention were measured using a summated scale
by assembling items. The reliability of the eight variables ranged from 0.75 to 0.95
according to Cronbach’s alpha (see Table 12). Each of these alpha levels is above the
acceptable threshold for reliability (Nunnally, 1970).

Table 12. Reliability Analysis of Beliefs, Attitude (ATT), Subjective Norm (SN),
Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC), and Behavioral Intention (BI)

 

 

Variables N of items Mean SD Cronbach’s
Alpha

Behavior Belief (Environment) 3 1 18.91 30.00 0.94

(Health) 2 79.90 1 8.44 0.84
Normative Beliefs 2 45.53 24.05 0.75
Control Beliefs 8 32.10 61.66 0.80
Attitude 3 6.336 0.882 0.90
Subjective Norm 2 4.1 16 1.676 0.95
Perceived Behavioral Control 4 5.694 1.012 0.80
Behavioral Intention 3 5.739 1 .1 55 0.95

 

Hypothesis testing. The initial results from model 1 indicated the presence among
the independent variables. Hla predicted that beliefs about environment would be
positively associated with attitude toward the use of sustainable ﬂooring materials ([3 =
0.645, R2 = 0.416, p < 0.001; see Table 13). However, Hlb predicted that beliefs about
human health, safety, and comfort would be positively associated with attitude toward the
use of sustainable ﬂooring materials. The data did not support H1 b. Beliefs about human

health, safety, and comfort were not related to attitude toward the use of sustainable

45

ﬂooring materials ([3 = -0.026, p > 0.001; see Table 13). Thus, environment was the only
assumption of attitude toward the use of sustainable ﬂooring materials.

Table 14 indicates that H2 predicted that normative beliefs (NB) would be
positively associated with subjective norm (SN), which was found to be statistically
highly signiﬁcant ([3 = .661. p < .001). H3 hypothesized that control beliefs (CB) would
be positively related to perceived behavioral control (PBC). It was found to be
statistically signiﬁcant ([3 = .554, R2 = .307, p < .001; see Table 15).

The initial results of Model 4, related to H4, H5, and H6, indicated correlated
explanatory variables. H4 hypothesized that attitude toward the use of sustainable
ﬂooring materials (ATT) would be positively associated with behavioral intention (BI);
the results demonstrated that ATT was positively related to B1 ([3 = .378, R2 = .691 , p
< .001; see Table 16). H5 predicted that SN would be associated with B1 to use
sustainable ﬂooring materials. This prediction was supported as the relationship between
SN and B1 was statistically signiﬁcant ([3 = .90, p < .001; see Table 16). H6 predicted that
PBC would be positively associated with B1 to use sustainable ﬂooring materials; this
relationship was signiﬁcant (13 = .512, p < .001; see Table 16). In addition to the predicted
relationships, several other relationships were found among the dependent TPB
variables—ATT, SN, PBC, and BI—as Table 17 indicates. The correlation for ATT and
SN was signiﬁcant (.432, p < .001). The relationship between ATT and PBC was
correlated positively (.528, p < .001). The correlation between ATT and B1 was also
signiﬁcant (.678, p < .001; see Table 17). In addition, a signiﬁcant relationship was

evident between SN and PBC (.481, p < .001; see Table 17) and SN and BI (.499, p

46

< .001; see Table 17). All hypotheses tests are shown in Figure 5. Finally, the relationship

between PBC and B1 was signiﬁcant (.755, p < .001; see Table 17).

Table 13. Results of Regression Analysis (Model 1)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Variable [3 P-value Supported
Hla Environment —>A”IT 0.645 12.616 0.000 Yes
Hlb Health —>ATT -0.026 -0.302 0.763 No
R2 0.416
Adjusted R2 0.414
F statistics ((11) (1,223)=159.151
Signiﬁcant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed)
Table 14. Results of Regression Analysis (Model 2)
Variable [3 t P-value Supported
H2 NB—>SN 0.661 13.162 .000 Yes
if 0.437
Adjusted R2 0.435
F statistics (dt) 1,233) = 73.225
Signiﬁcant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed)
Table 15. Results of Regression Analysis (Model 3)
Variable . B t P-value Supported
H3 CB—vPBC 0.554 9.93 .000 Yes
R2 0.307
Adjusted R2 0.303
F statistics (df) (1,223) = 98.6
Signiﬁcant at the 0.001 level (2-tai1ed)
Table 16. Results of Regression Analysis (Model 4)
Variable p t P-value Supported
H4 ATT—i8] 0.378 8.326 0.000" Yes
H5 SN —> B1 0090 2.044 0042* Yes
H6 PBC —-» BI 0.512 10.971 0.000" Yes
R2 0.691
Adjusted R2 0.687
F statistics (dQ (1, 221) = 4.178

 

“Signiﬁcant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed)
*Signiﬁcant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

47

Table 17. Correlations among Attitude, Subjective Norm, Perceived Behavioral Control,
and Behavioral Intention

 

 

ATT SN PBC BI
Attitude (ATT) 1.00 .432M .528“ .687"
Subjective Norm (SN) 1.00 .481 * * .499* *
Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC) l .00 .755 * *
Behavioral IntentioriBI) 1.00

 

MCorrelation is signiﬁcant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

 

 

Environment *. Attitude toward

using sustainable

° t ' 1
Health and Safety / ﬂoonng ma ma S +

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Normative Beliefs Subjective Norm Intention
+ +
- Perceived +
Control Beliefs + Behavioral Control

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 5 Results of Analysis

48

 

CHAPTER V
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
This chapter begins with a discussion of the ﬁndings, following by conclusions
and theoretical implications ﬁom the ﬁndings. Finally, limitations of the present study

and recommendations for future study are presented.

 

Discussion . r --1

This section discusses the ﬁndings regarding factors inﬂuencing the use of

 

sustainable ﬂooring materials and TPB. A conceptual ﬁ'amework for this study was iii
developed from TPB (Ajzen, 1991; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1985, 1988). Speciﬁcally, the L)
ﬁndings of this study showed that three belief structures—-behavioral beliefs, normative
beliefs, and control beliefs--——inﬂuence TPB’s ﬁtting determinant of intention, attitude,
subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control. Several ﬁndings from this study
justify further research.
According to the results related to online video advertising with TPB (Lee, 2008),
behavioral beliefs provide the basic structure for attitude, normative beliefs for subjective
norms, and control beliefs for perceived behavioral control. Previous research found
correlations between measures of these predictor structures and their individual beliefs——
namely, that attitude stemmed from a behavior’s consequences, subjective norm stemmed
from normative beliefs, and perceptions of control stemmed from control beliefs.
However, the current study provided different results related to belief structure, although
a positive relationship still existed between normative beliefs and subjective norm (H2)

and between control beliefs and perceived behavior control (H3). This study proposed

49

two hypotheses between behavioral beliefs and attitude, although one of the two factors
was not related to attitude.

Speciﬁcally, improving the environment (Hla) showed a signiﬁcant relationship
with attitude toward the use of sustainable ﬂooring materials. In contrast, human health,
safety, and comfort (Hlb) were not supported in regard to attitude toward the use of
sustainable ﬂooring materials. Although Mendler, Odell, and Lazarus (2006) included
human health, safety, and comfort in their design decision model, the current study could
not support this model. However, the LEED Rating System and MSDG design strategies
do not mention human health, safety, or comfort. Thus, when interior designers choose
ﬂooring materials in residential practice, human health, safety, and comfort did not
signiﬁcantly inﬂuence attitude. However, this result would differ if the hypothesis were
based on low-cost effects as many people regard their health, safety, and comfort when
they are economically stable.

Normative beliefs were also important determinants of subjective norm,
describing about 44 percent of the variance (see Table 14); thus, H2 was supported.
Several previous studies (Ajzen, 1991; Taylor & Todd, 1995) examined the relationship
between normative beliefs and subjective norm and found a positive relationship. As with
these results, the positive relationship between normative beliefs and subjective norm
shows that interior designers tend to feel more social pressure to use sustainable ﬂooring
materials when they believe that important referents want them to. As such, interior
designers will beneﬁt from recognizing clients’ important concerns and encouraging

them to use apprOpriate ﬂooring materials.

50

 

 

The ﬁnal belief structure, control beliefs, positively affected perceived behavioral
control, thereby supporting H3. Control beliefs reﬂect the extent of the interior designer’s
ability to operate the ﬂooring materials. Ajzen (1991) deﬁned control beliefs that
measure the presence or absence of needed resources and opportunities. Based on this
operational deﬁnition, control belief items for using sustainable ﬂooring materials were
identiﬁed to assess overall control beliefs. The results of the present study indicate that
more available accessibility allows interior designers to perceive themselves as having
the information to use sustainable ﬂooring materials or maintain control over them,
thereby conﬁrming and reinforcing the notion that control structure is multi-dimensional
and includes not only personal beliefs, but also resource constraints.

Along with ﬁndings about determinants of intention, attitude, subjective norm,
and perceived behavioral control positively inﬂuenced intention; thus, H4, H5, and H6
were supported. Most researchers (Hansen, 2008; Lim & Dubinsky, 2005) have found
that the three determinants of intention (attitude, subjective norm, and perceived
behavioral control) signiﬁcantly inﬂuence intention; the ﬁndings of the current study
supported this conclusion as well. Overall, based on the results, these variables accounted
for 69 percent of the variance in intention, meaning that they are very strong factors in
this study.

These ﬁndings suggest that, the more positive of an attitude interior designers
have toward the use of sustainable ﬂooring materials, the more conﬁdent they will be in
their ability to access resources to use sustainable ﬂooring materials. F urtherrnore, most
interior designers are concerned about social power from important referents. As such,

they have a greater intention to use sustainable flooring materials.

51

 

 

 

Implications of the Study

The current study offers both theoretical and practical implications. TPB is
usually tested using either indirect measures of salient beliefs relevant to each
determinant or direct measures of the postulated determinants of behavior in question.
The purpose of the current study was to apply TPB to a model for using sustainable
ﬂooring materials in order to develop a series of testable hypotheses. The proposed model
also incorporated certain individual difference factors that are likely to inﬂuence
intentions to use sustainable ﬂooring materials.

The original TPB model is a valuable framework; meanwhile, the decomposed
TPB model offers more signiﬁcant data to interior designers. Although interior designers
cannot control every component that affects their use of sustainable ﬂooring materials in
residential practices, they can develop their residential practices to satisfy speciﬁc
expected outcomes. This study identiﬁed the ﬁve expected outcomes that consumers
consider before actually using sustainable ﬂooring materials; interior designers can use
this information to their advantage. Another important ﬁnding of this study is that
subjective norm has no impact on attitude toward the use of sustainable ﬂooring materials.
Thus, future researchers should build a stronger and more comprehensive theoretical
model of factors inﬂuencing interior designers’ use of sustainable ﬂooring materials.

Choosing sustainable ﬂooring materials in residential practice signiﬁcantly
impacts not only designers, builders, and material industries, but also homeowners in the
US and other countries as the ﬂoor is a major element of interior design. Efforts should

be made to try to understand this phenomenon.

52

 

Limitations and Future Research
Although the present study attempted to validate the use of sustainable ﬂooring
materials, several limitations remain. This section discusses limitations of this study and

provides several suggestions for ﬁrture research.

 

First, although this study provided TPB determinants, it did not ﬁnd any
relationship between intention and actual behaviors. As a strong and signiﬁcant causal
link between behavioral intention and actual behavior has been consistently demonstrated ,1
in TPB studies (Ajzen, 2002; Armitage & Conner, 1999; Vankatesh & Morris, 2000), the

use of behavioral intention as a dependent variable to examine the use of sustainable

 

ﬂooring materials in residential practice is theoretically reasonable. In addition, in a
research design, intentions are more appropriate than actual behavior because they can be
measured contemporaneously with beliefs (Agarwal & Prasad, 1999). Thus, the choice of
intention over actual behavior as a dependent variable does not seem to reveal a serious
problem for interpreting ﬁndings of this study. However, a high correlation between
behavioral intention and actual behavior is not always obtained. Behavioral intentions
may change after they have been measured, but before the overt behavior has been
observed (Young & Kent, 1985). Therefore, it is always preferable to measure actual
behavior. Future research on the use of sustainable ﬂooring materials in residential
practice should measure actual participation behavior to resolve this concern.

Second, although the TPB model presumes direct relationships between belief
structures and determinant variables, evidence suggests the existence of crossover effects
whereby attitudinal beliefs may inﬂuence subjective norm (Oliver & Bearden, 1985;

Ryan, 1982; Taylor & Todd, 1995) or normative beliefs may inﬂuence attitude (Oliver &

53

Bearden, 1985, Shimp & Kavas, 1984). Several TPB studies found a signiﬁcant direct
effect of subjective norms on attitude (Chang, 1998; Davis et al., 1989; Park, 2003).
These results would provide important theoretical and practical implications about the
effect of social inﬂuences on attitude and the belief that most people are similar and,
therefore, probably share common beliefs (Taylor & Todd, 1995). Thus, future research
investigating the crossover effect of TPB and the use of sustainable ﬂooring materials——
particularly between the normative belief structure and attitude—will provide insights
into whether or not social inﬂuence affects association members’ attitudes toward the use
of sustainable ﬂooring materials. Examining the crossover effect between subjective
norms and attitude in the context of using sustainable ﬂooring materials would also be a
meaningful approach as it will help understand whether information secured from
referents is also used to form an interior designer’s attitude toward the use of sustainable
ﬂooring materials. Overall, comparing the original TPB with the use of sustainable
ﬂooring materials and crossover effects of TPB with the use of sustainable ﬂooring
materials can provide many implications for both researchers and practitioners.

Third, the majority of participants in this study were interior designers who are
ASID members. Thus, generalization of ﬁndings of this study to other professional
groups should be done cautiously. Future studies using different professional groups
would test the validation of the ﬁndings in this study and expand understanding of using
sustainable materials’ behaviors. Furthermore, multi-group analysis may reveal those
different groups have signiﬁcantly different path parameters across all links between
constructs in sustainable materials’ choosing group. To conduct the survey with US-

based interior designers, members of the International Interior Design Association (IIDA)

54

could be included. IIDA is a professional networking and educational association of over
13,000 members around the world, committed to facilitating a global community for
members.

Asking respondents about the homeowners’ perceptions of the importance of
using sustainable ﬂooring materials would further expand this study. Homeowners might
feel motivated or discouraged to use environmental and healthful sustainable ﬂooring
materials, although interior designers are aware of the importance of using sustainable F
ﬂooring materials in residential locations. In addition, similar studies may be conducted

with interior designers in other countries to determine if there are access countries,

 

Iii—”“-

common interests about environmentally sustainable ﬂooring materials. It could be
compared to the state of practice to ﬁnd out the differences or similarities.

Moreover, this study examined only ﬂooring materials for residential projects,
although elements of interior design are composed of ﬂoor, walls, and ceiling. These
constructs could be used with other sustainable materials for sustainable interior design.
Future study examining all interior elements could determine where to use sustainable
materials for residential settings. Similarly, this study may extend to other practices (e.g.,
commercial, hospital, hotel), as Cain (2007) researched ﬂooring materials in a LEED
registered hotel, to determine advantages and disadvantages about sustainable ﬂooring
materials, comparing the ﬁndings with studies of differences or similarities.

F inally, this study focused on environment and health and excepted cost effect
which was one of the signiﬁcant categories of many sustainable guidelines as discussed

in the literature review. If clients do not have enough money to use sustainable ﬂooring

55

materials, improving the environment or health would not result. Therefore, incorporating

cost effects will create a stronger study.

Conclusion
This study examined several factors that are signiﬁcant determinants of the intent
to use sustainable ﬂooring materials by applying factors of the theory of planned
behavior. The model developed in this study offers both researchers and interior |
designers a more complete picture of designers’ use of sustainable ﬂooring materials that

includes beliefs, perceptions, attitudes, and intention. Practically, it is helpﬁrl not only for

 

interior designers and material industries, but also for homeowners or customers in I;
developing environments and protecting health problems in general. Discovering the

critical relationship among factors that provoke intention as interior designers are

increasingly using sustainable ﬂooring materials in their residential practice will be of

beneﬁt for both the environment and humans.

56

APPENDIX

Questionnaire for the Study

Dear Interior Designer:

I am a Master’s student in Interior Design at Michigan State University. You are invited
to participate in a research study regarding the use of sustainable materials. The purpose
of this study is to investigate the perception and choices of interior designers regarding
sustainable ﬂooring materials in residential use. The questionnaire can be completed in
approximately ﬁfteen to twenty minutes.

Your answers will remain anonymous. Your privacy will be protected to the maximum
extent permitted by law. Your participation is completely voluntary and you may choose
not to participate at all, or you may refuse to answer certain questions or discontinue your
participation at any time without consequence.

If you have concerns or questions about this study, please contact Bo Kyung Kim
(kimbo8@msu.edu) or my major advisor, Dr. April Allen (W). If you
have any questions or concerns about your role and rights as a research participant, or
would like to register a complaint about this survey, you may contact, anonymously if
you wish, MSU’s Human Research Protection Program at (517) 355-2180, Fax (517) 432
—- 4503, or e-mail irl@msu.edu.

If you would like to receive information regarding the results of this study, please
indicate on the survey and results will be e-mailed to you at the completion of the study.

Thank you so much for your time and participation in this study. By completing and
submitting the questionnaire, you are‘indicating your voluntary participation.

Sincerely,

Bo Kyung Kim, MA Candidate

School of Planning, Design & Construction
Michigan State University

East Lansing, MI 48824

April D. Allen, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor M IC H I G AN STAT E

School of Planning, Design & Construction

Michigan State University U N l V E R 5 I T Y
East Lansing, MI 48824

 

 

 

 

\u'linniil
These data will be kept in the strictest conﬁdence and used for statistical purposes
only.

1. Your gender is: El Male [:1 Female

2. Your age is:

[:1 18 - 24 years C] 25 - 34 years C] 35-44 years
E] 45 - 54 years [I] 55 - 64 years C] 65-74 years
a 75 - 84 years Cl 85 years and over
3. Your highest education level completed : l ,
D Some high school, no degree [3 High school graduate (include equivalency) {3
El College degree [I] Graduate degree or higher '3

D Some college, no degree

 

1“” d: _\

4. What is your ethnicity?
E] Native - American El African-American a Caucasian
E] Asian :1 Hispanic / Indian D Other

1..

 

5. Please indicate the geographical region where you work, where your ﬁrm is located.

 

(State)
6. How long have you practiced interior design?
D Less than 2years D 2 - 5 years [3 6 - 10 years
a 11-15 years C] 16-20 years I: More than 20 years

7. What is the size of your typical! average interior design project?
El Less than 3,000 Sq.ﬁ (or less than 279 square meters)
[3 3,001 to 6,000 Sq.ﬁ (or 280 to 557 square meters)
CI 6,001 to 20,000 Sq.ﬁ (or 558 to 1,858 square meters)
[:1 20,001 to 50,000 Sq.ﬁ (or 1,859 to 4,645 square meters)
C] More than 50,000 Sq.ﬁ (or more than 4,646 square meters)

8. How often have you chosen sustainable ﬂooring materials in your residential practic
e?
[3 Less than 2 times D 2 '- 5 times Cl 6 - 10 times
[3 1 1-15 times a 16-20 times a More than 20 times

58

9. How often do you usually choose the following ﬂooring materials for residential
project? (Please circle only one number for each statement)
Very rarely Very frequently

 

Bamboo 1 7

Certiﬁed wood

ﬂooring

Reclaimed wood

Carpet

Cork

Linoleum

Ceramic tile

Terrazzo

Stone

Rubber

Vinyl

Other 1
(Please, specify )

y—d

......_.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.
NNNNNNNNNNNN
wwwwwlwwwwwww
AAAAAAAAAAAA
mmmmmmmmmmmm
O\O\O\O~O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\
\l\l\)\l\l\l\l\l\l\l\l

10. What do you usually use to learn about a sustainable ﬂooring material?
(Please check all that apply)

D Trade magazine a Manufacturer’s websites :1 Word of mouth referral
[:1 Call dealer/ distributor C] Industry association I] Search engines
[:1 Dealer websites [3 Other (Please, specify )

 

1 1. The following items assess your attitude toward sustainable flooring materials in
general. Please choose the number that best describes your opinion for each item.
Many items might seem similar; however no two items are exactly alike so be sure to
check one number for each statement.

My attitude toward sustainable ﬂooring materials in general.....

 

 

 

 

Bad 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Good
Negative 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Positive
Unfavorable l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Favorable

 

12. The following items assess your beliefs toward sustainable flooring materials in
general. Please choose the number that best describes your opinion for each item.
Many items might seem similar; however no two items are exactly alike so be sure to
circle one number for each statement.

 

 

 

 

 

Bad 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Good
Weak 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strong
Worthless l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Valuable
Unnecessary I 2 3 4 5 6 7 Necessary
Unimportant l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Important

 

59

\u‘linn II

 

Please answer each of the following questions by deciding the number that best describes

your opinion. Some of the questions may appear to be similar, but they do address
somewhat different issues.

Please remember the following points in making your ratings:
*Be sure to answer all items — do not omit anything.

*Do not circle more than one number on a single scale for each statement.

 

(13 - 26) The following items assess your Environmental and Human Health Concern.
Please choose the number that best describes your opinion for each item.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Extremely Extremely
unimportant important
13. Being able to help to protect the environment in
. . . . . l 2 3 5 6 7
choosmg sustamable ﬂoonng matenals rs
14. Being able to help to reduce hazardous waste in
. . . . . 1 2 3 5 6 7
choosrng sustainable ﬂoorrnj materials 18
15. Being able to improve indoor air quality in choosing
. . . . l 2 3 5 6 7
sustainable ﬂooring materials is
16. Being able to improve the health of people in choosing
. . . . l 2 3 5 6 7
sustainable ﬂooring materials IS
17. Being able to protect from an allergy or atopic
dermatitis for people in choosing sustainable flooring l 2 3 5 6 7
materials is
18. Whether or not using sustainable ﬂooring materials is
. . . 1 2 3 S 6 7
difﬁcult, it IS
19. Whether or not using sustainable ﬂooring materials is l 2 3 5 6 7
easy, it is
Strongly Strongly
disagree agree
20. I would help protect the environment by using
. . . 1 2 3 5 6 7
sustainable ﬂooring matenals
21. I would help reduce hazardous waste by using
. . . 1 2 3 5 6 7
sustainable ﬂooring matenals ,
22. I would help improve indoor air quality by using 1 2 3 5 6 7
sustainable flooring materials
23. I would help improve the health of people by using 1 2 3 5 6 7
sustainable ﬂoorirg materials
24. I would help protect from an allergy or atopic dermatitis for p 1 2 3 5 6 7
eople by using sustainable ﬂooring materials
25. Using sustainable ﬂooringgraterials is diﬁicult l 2 3 5 6 7
26. Using sustainable ﬂooring materials is easy 1 2 3 5 6 7

 

6O

 

.31

 

w; an

 

(27 - 30) The following items assess your Concern of Others’ Opinion. Please choose

the number that best describes your opinion for each item.

 

 

 

 

 

Not Very
at all much
27. Generally speaking, I care what my clients think about 2 3 5 6 7
my choice of sustainable flooring materials for residential use
28. Generally speaking, I care what my co-workers in my
company think about my choice of sustainable ﬂooring 1 2 3 5 6 7
materials for residential use
Extremely Extremely
unlikely likely
29. Clients in my practice think that 1 should choose 1 2 3 5 6 7
sustainable ﬂooring materials for residentialjrojects
30. Co-workers in my company think that I should choose 1 2 3 5 6 7

sustainable ﬂooring materials for residential projects

(31 — 46) The following items assess your Accessibility of Information. Please choose

the number that best describes your opinion for each item.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Strongly Strongly
digrgree agge
31. If I want to, I could easily get information about 1 2 3 5 6 7
sustainable flooring materials
32. I know enough about sustainable flooring materials for l 2 3 5 6 7
residential use on my own
33. I would be able to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials
even if there is no one around to advise me on what 1 2 3 5 6 7
kinds are available
34. Iwould feel comfortable using sustainable ﬂooring 1 2 3 5 6 7
materials on my own
35. l have access to the Internet whenever I want to choose 1 2 3 5 6 7
sustainable ﬂooring materials
36. I ﬁnd a trade magazine or trade magazines whenever I 1 2 3 5 6 7
want to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials
37. Sustainable flooring materials are not used on my 1 2 3 5 6 7
projects
38. For me choosing sustainable flooring materials requires more
money than other basic flooring materials for my 1 2 3 5 6 7
clients
Extremely Extremely
unimportant important
39. Being able to get information about sustainable ﬂooring mate
rials as part of my decision to choose sustainable l 2 3 5 6 7
ﬂooring materials for residential use is
40. Knowing enough to specify sustainable ﬂooring 1 2 3 5 6 7
materials 15
41. Being able to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials even if no
one is around to advise me on what kinds are l 2 3 5 6 7

available is

 

61

 

 

 

 

42. Being able to feel comfortable using sustainable
ﬂooring materials is

43. Having access to the Internet whenever I want to choose sust
ainable flooring materials is

44. Finding trade magazines whenever I want to choose
sustainable flooring materials is

45. Whether or not I use it personally, choosing sustainable
ﬂooring materials for residential use is

46. Whether or not choosing sustainable ﬂooring materials
takes more money than general ﬂooring materials for l 2 3 4 5 6 7
my clients, it is

47. The following items assess your Attitude. Please choose the number that best
describes your opinion for each item.

For me to choose sustainable flooring materials for clients’ residential projects is

 

 

 

Bad 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Good
Harmful 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Beneﬁcial
Worthless l 2 3 4 5 6 7' Valuable

 

(48 — 49) The following items assess Attitude of Others. Please choose the number
that best describes your opinion for each item.

 

 

Strongly Strongly
disagree agree
48. Most people who are important to me think that I should cho
ose sustainable ﬂooring materials for residential 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
projects
49. Most people who inﬂuence my decisions think that I
should choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for l 2 3 4 5 6 7
residential projects

 

62

 

(50 - 53) The following items assess your Personal Behavior. Please choose the number
that best describes your opinion for each item.

 

 

Deﬁnitely Deﬁnitely
impossible possible
50. For me to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for
. . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
resrdentral projects 18
Deﬁnitely Deﬁnitely
false true

 

51. If I wanted to, I would be able to choose sustainable

ﬂooring materials for residential projects 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

 

 

 

Strongly Strongly

disaggee agree
52. I chose sustainable ﬂooring materials for residential use 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

No control Control

 

53. How much control do you believe you'have over the

choice of sustainable ﬂooring materials for residential 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

 

(54 — 56) The following items assess your Intention. Please choose the number that best
describes your opinion for each item.

 

 

 

 

Extremely Extremely
unlikely likely
54. I intend to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for
. . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
resrdentral projects
Strongly Strongly
disagree agr_e§
55. I plan to choose sustainable ﬂooring materials for
. . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
resrdentral proyects
Deﬁnitely Deﬁnitely
false true

 

56. I will make an effort to choose sustainable ﬂooring

materials for residential projects 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

 

Results
I would like to receive information on the results of this study. [1 Yes [I] No
If “Yes”, please provide your e-mail address.

 

Thank you for your participation !

63

 

REFERENCES

Adler, J. (2006). Environment: The new greening of America. Newsweek, CXLVII (3),
42-52.

Agrarwal, R. & Prasad, J. (1999). Are individual differences germane to the acceptance
of new information technologies? Decision Science, 30(2), pp.361-391.

Aj zen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and human
Decision Processes, 50(2), pp.179-211.

Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efﬁcacy, locus of control, and the
theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), pp. 665-
683.

Ajzen, I. (2006). Constructing a TpB Questionnaire: Conceptual and Methodological
Considerations. Retrieved April 6, 2008, from
http://www.people.umass.edu/aizen/pdf/tpb.measurement.pdf

Ajzen, I. (2006). TPB Diagram. Retrieved April 6, 2008, from
http://people.umass.edu/aizen/tpb.diad.html

Ajzen, I & Driver, B. (1991). Prediction of leisure participation from behavioral,
normative, and control beliefs; an application of the theory of planned behavior,
Leisure Sciences, 13(3), pp. 185-204.

Ajzen, I. & Driver, BL. (1992). Application of the theory of planned behavior to leisure
choice. Journal of Leisure Research, 24(3), pp. 207-224.

Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (1985). From intention to actions: a theory of planned behavior,
on action control: from cognition to behavior, Julius Juhl and Jurgen Beckmann,
eds. , Heidelberg: Springer, pp.11-39.

Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (1988). Attitudes, personality. and behavior, Chicago, IL:
Dorsey Press.

Ajzen I.& Madden, T. J. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed behavior: attitudes,
intentions and perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 22(5), pp.453-474.

Andes, G.G. (2000). The effect of carpet ﬁber on the growth of derrnatophagoides farinae

in a controlled environment. Master’s thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University

64

 

Armitage, C.J. & Conner, M. (1999). Distinguishing perceptions of control from self-
efﬁcacy: predicting consumption of a low-fat diet suing theory of planned
behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, pp. 72-90.

Armitage, C.J. & Conner, M. (2001). Efﬁcacy of the theory of planned behavior: a meta-
analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, pp. 471-499.

American society of interior designers (ASID, n.d.). Where design comes to life. From
http://www.asid.org/about/default.htrn

Bamberg, S., Ajzen, I., & Schmidt, P. (2003). Choice of travel mode in the theory of
planned behavior: the roles of past behavior, habit, and reasoned action. Basic and
Applied Social Psychology, 25(2), pp.175-l 88.

Bansal, H.S. & Taylor, S. F. (1999). The service provider switching model (SPSM): A
model of consumer switching behavior in the services industry. Journal of
Services Research, 2(2), pp.200-218.

Bansal, H.S. & Taylor, S. F. (2002). Investigating interactive effects in the Theory of
Planned Behavior in a service-provi der switching context. Psychology &
Marketing, 19(5), pp.407-425.

Barr, S. (2007). Factors inﬂuencing enviromnental attitudes and behaviors. Environment
and Behavior. 39(4), pp.435-473.

Berger, 1., & Corbin, RM. (1992). Perceived consumer effectiveness and faith in others
as moderators of environmentally responsible behaviors. Journal of Public Policy
& Marketing, 11(2), pp.79-89.

Bierman-Lytle, P. (1995). Commentary: Creating a Healthy Home: Environmental
Building Materials: What Are They? Where Are They? Environmental health
Perspectives, 103(6), pp.67-70.

Buchta, J. (1996). 1995 home shoppers survey. Minneapolis Star Tribune, Nov. 16, H4.

Carpet America Recovery Effort (CARE, 2007). CARE 2007 Annual Report, from
http://www.carpetrecovery.org/pdf/annual_report/07__CARE-annual-rpt.pdf

Carpet and Rug Institute (CR1, n.d.). Helping improve indoor air quality, from
http://www.carpet-rug.org/residential-customers/selecting-the-right-carpet-or-
rug/green-label.cfrn

Cain, SC. (2007). Sustainability for interior design: rating the ﬂooring materials in a
LEED registered hotel using the BEES evaluative software for sustainable
products. Master’s thesis, University of Florida

65

 

Chang, MK. (1998). Predicting unethical behavior: a comparison of the theory of
reasoned action and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of the Business
Ethics, 17, pp.1825-1834.

Conner, M. & Armitage, C. J. (1998). Extending the theory of planned behavior: a review
and avenues for further research. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(15),
pp.1429-1464.

Costi, P., R. Minciardi, Robba M., Rovatti M. & Sacile R. (2004). An environmentally
sustainable decision model for urban solid waste management, Waste
Management, 24(3), pp. 277-295

Cunningham, G. B., & Kwon, H. (2003). The Theory of Planned Behaviour and
Intentions to Attend a Sport Event. Sport Management Review, 6, 127-145.

Davis, Fred D., Bagozzi, R. P. & Warshaw, RR. (1989). User acceptance of computer
technology: a comparison of two theoretical models,” Management Science, 35
(8), 982-1003.

Dean, A.M.(2003). Green by design: creating a home for sustainable living. Salt Lake
City, UT: Gibbs Smith.

Doll, J. and Ajzen, I. (1992). Accessibility and stability of predictors in the theory of
planned behavior. Jounal of Persinality and Social Psychology, 63(5), pp.754-
765.

Environmental Design+ Construction Editorial Staff (2007). Current trends in sustainable
ﬂooring, EDC magazine, pp.14-15.

Environmental Protection Agency (March, 2005). Program needs for indoor
environments research, Online document at: www.cpa.gov/iaq/pdfs/pnier.pdf

Environmental Protection Agency (2007). Sustainable Flooring. Online document
fromzhttp://www.epa.gov/region09/waste/p2/pdf/ﬂooring-ﬁnal-071 126.pdf

Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude. intention and behavior: an introduction
to theory and research, reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Fisk, W. & Rosenfeld, A. (1997). Estimates of improved productivity and health from
better indoor environments. Indoor Air, 7(3), pp.158-172.

Forster, K., Stelmack, A. & Hindman, D. (2007). Sustainable residential interiors. NJ :
John Wiley & Son, Inc.

Fortin, David R. (2000). Clipping coupons in cyberspace: a proposed model of behavior
for deal-prone consumers. Psychology & Marketing, 17 (6), pp.515-534.

66

 

 

Frank, D. (2002). From the ground up: ﬂoor covering recommendations from an iaq
consortium. A Council of Educational Facility Planners International Belief on
Educational Facility Issues. Scottsdale, Arizona, pp.1-4

George, Joey F. (2004). The theory of planned behavior and Internet purchasing, Internet
Research, 14(3), pp198-2 12

Global Development Research Center (GODC, 2008) Deﬁnition of sustainable
development, from http://www.gdrc.org/sustdev/deﬁnitions.htrnl

Gopi, M. & Ramayah, T. (2007). Applicability of theory of planned behavior in
prediction intention to trade online. International Journal of Emerging Markets,
2(4), pp.348-360.

Green Design Education Initative (GDEI, 2003). Green/sustainable design, from
http://www.idec.org/greendesign/home.htrnl

Guerin, D. (2003). Environmentally responsible interior design: a case study. Journal of
Interior Design, Retrieved September 2005 from http://www.ejid.org/jid-
issue.cfrn?ID=993.

Hansen, Torben, Jensen, J . M. & Sologaard, HS. (2008). Consumer values, the theory of
planned behavior and online grocery shopping. International Journal of
Consumer Studies, 32(2), pp. 128-1 37.

Haynes, D. C., Scarce, R., & Weinert, C. (2001). The impact of the green built
environment on human values: towards a values and knowledge scale. Consumer
Interests Annual, 47, pp. 1-8

Healthy Building (2006). Screening the toxics out of building materials: interior flooring
and ﬁnishes. Retrieved September, 2006. from
http://www.healthybuilding.net/healthcare/Screening-the-Toxics.pdf

Hewson, C., Yule, P., Laurent, D., & Vogel, C. (2003). Internet research methods: a
practical guide for the social and behavioral sciences. London: Sage.

Horwitz-Bennett, B. & Sullivan, C.C.(Februray,2008). Features; using for sustainable
design. Building Design & construction, 49(2), pp.61

Hsu, T., Wang, T. & Wen, S. (2006). Using the Decomposed theory of planned behavior
to analyze consumer behavioural intention towards mobile text message coupons.
Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 14(4), pp. 309-
324.

67

 

 

Kang, M. & Guerin, D. A. (2009). The characteristics of interior designers who practice
environmentally sustainable interior design. Environment and Behavior, 41 (2),
pp. 1 70-184

Lee, J. (2008). Predicting the use of online video advertising: Using the theory of
planned behavior. Master’s Thesis, Michigan State University.

Lim, H. & Dubinsky, A. J. (2005). The theory of planned behavior in E-Commerce:
making a case for interdependencies between salient beliefs, Psychology &
Marketing, 22 (10), pp.833-855.

 

Macy, S. & Thompson, J. A. Asher Paul (2003). Residential design implications of 1
consumers’ recycling behaviors. Journal of Interior Design, 29, pp. 17-31 m

Madden, Tomas J ., Pamela Scholder Ellen & Ajzen, I. (1992). A comparison of the
theory of planned behavior and the theory of reasoned action. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(1), pp.3-9.

 

Malin, N. & Wilson A. (1997). Material selection: Tools, resources, and techniques for E”
choosing green. Environmental Building News, 6(1), 1, pp.10-14.

Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting user intentions: comparing the technology acceptance
model with the theory of planned behavior, Information Systems Research, 2(3),
pp. 1 73-191 .

McDonough, W & Braungart, M. (2002). Cradle to cradle: remaking the way we make
thinks. New York: North Point Press.

Mendler, S, Odell, W. & Lazarus M. A. (2006). The HOK guidebook to sustainable
design, 2"" edition. New York: Wiley

Moussatche, H. & Languell, J. (2001). Flooring materials — life-cycle costing for
educational facilities. Facilities, 19, 10; ABI/INFORM Global pp.333-343.

National Council for Interior design Qualiﬁcation (2004). Deﬁnition of interior design.
Retrieved July 15, 2003, from http://www.ncidq.org/pdf/id_deﬁnition_07-
2004.pdf

National Wood Flooring Association (NWFA, 2005). The healthy choice. From
http://www.woodﬂoors.org/consumer/mediaReleaseDetail.aspx?id=7

Nussbaumer, L. L. (2006). MCS: interior ﬁnishes. Online document at http://agbiopubs,
sdstate.edu/articles/ExEx14098.pdf.

Nunnally, J .C.Jr. (1970). Introduction to psychological measurement. New York:
McGraw Hill.

68

 

Oliver, R. L. & Bearden, W. O.(1985). Crossover effects in the theory of reasoned action,
Journal of Consumer Research, 12(3), pp.324-340.

Park, J. (2003). Understanding consumer intention to shop online (Dissertation ed.).
Columbia, MO: University of Missouri.

Porter, S. R., & Whitcomb, ME. (2003). The impact of contact type on web survey
response rates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67(4), pp.579-588.

Rogers, E. M. (1983). Diffusion of Innovations, 3rd ed, NY; Free Press.

Ryan, M.J. (1982). Behavioral intention formation: the interdependency of attitudinal and
social inﬂuence variables. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(3), pp.263-278.

Satterthwaite, D. (1999). The earthscan reader in sustainable cities. London: Earthscan
Publications.

Sheppard, B., Hartwick,J. & Warshaw, P. R. (1988). The theory of reasoned action: a
mata-analysis of past research with recommendations for modiﬁcations and future
research. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(3), pp.325-343.

Shih, Ya-Yueh & Fang, K. (2004). The use of a decomposed theory of planned behavior
to study intemet banking in Taiwan, Internet Research, 14(3), pp.213-223.

Shimp, T.A. & Kavas, A. (1984). The theory of reasoned action applied to coupon usage,
Journal of Consumer research, 1 1(3), pp.795-809.

Sparks, P., Shepherd, R.. Wieringa, N., & Zimmermans, N. (1995). Perceived
behavioural control, unrealistic optimism and dietary change: An exploratory
study, Appetite, 24, pp. 243-255.

Sullivan, C.C., & Horwitz-Bennett, Barbara (Feb. 2008). Using wood for sustainable
design and construction, Building Design and Construction.

Tan, M. & Teo, T. (2000). Factors inﬂuencing the adoption of Internet banking. Journal
of the Associationfor Information Systems, 1 (5), pp. 1 -42.

Tarkiainen, A. & Sundqvist, A. (2005). Subjective norms, attitudes and intentions of
Finnish consumers in buying organic food. British Food Journal, 107(1 1), pp.
808-822.

Taylor, S. & Todd, P. (1995). Decomposition and crossover effects in the theory of

planned behavior: A study of consumer adoption intention, International Journal
of Research in Marketing, 12(2), pp. 137-155

69

Taylor, S. & Todd, P. (1995a). An interacted model of waste management behavior: A

test of household recycling and composting intentions. Environment and
Behavior, 27(5), pp.603-630

Taylor, S. & Todd, P. (1995b). Understanding household garbage reduction behavior: A
test of an integrated model. Jounal of Public Policy & Marketing, 14(2), pp. 1 92.

Terry, D. G. & Hogg, M.A. (1996). Group norms and the attitude-behaviour relationship:
A role for group identiﬁcation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, pp.
776-793.

Toman, M.A. (1994). Economics and sustainability: balancing trade-offs and imperatives.
Land Economics, 70(4), pp. 399-413

United Nations (UN) (2003). United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development (UNCED). Retrieved July 15, 2003, from
http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/basic_info/unced.html

University of Minnesota (2006) Minnesota Sustainable Building Design Guideline.
Version 2.0 Regents of the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities Campus,
College of Design, Retrieved July, 2007. from:
http://www.msbg.tunn.edu/downloads__v2_0/guidelines.pdf

US Green Building Council (2007). An introduction to the US Green Building Council
and the LEED Green Building Rating System. Retrieved 2007, from
http://www.usgbc.org/Resouces/research.asp

Vanucci, C.L., Kerstertter, D.L. (2001). Meeting planners’ use of the intemet to plan
group meetings. Journal of Convention and Exhibition Management, 2(4), 23-3 6.

Venkatesh, V., & Morris, M. G. (2000). Why don’t men ever stop to ask for direction?
Gender, social inﬂuence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage
behavior. MIS quarterly, 24(1), pp. 115-137.

Walsh, B. (2004). Its vinyl burned, Armstrong can make green ﬂooring become a reality.
Retrieved May 17, 2004, from http://www.healthybuilding.net/news/burned-
051704.html

Williams, DE. (2007). Sustainable design: ecology, architecture, and planning. John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ.

Winchip, S. M. (2007). Sustainable Design for Interior Environments. Fairchild
Publications, Inc.: New York.

World Commision on Environment and Development (WCED) (1987). Out common
future. The Brundtland Report. New York: Oxford University Press.

70

 

Young R. A., & Kent, A. T. (1985). Using the theory of reasoned action to improve the
understanding of recreation behavior. Journal of Leisure Research, 17(2), pp. 90-

106.

71

 

“11111111111llllllllllljlllll“

3 1293 030