Alim Nayum
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Alim Nayum has a total of 7 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Christian Andreas Klöckner
Department of Psychology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway
7 shared publications Mehmet Mehmetoglu
2 shared publications- Monika Tobolova
Department of Psychology, NTNU—Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway
1 shared publication Sunita Ofstad
Department of Psychology, NTNU—Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway
1 shared publicationSunita Prugsamatz
1 shared publication- Trond Nordfjærn
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 1 January 2021
- Published by Elsevier in Travel Behaviour and Society
- Vol. 22, 236-243
Predictors of public transport use among university students during the winter: A MIMIC modelling approach
- 1 January 2021
- Published by Elsevier in Travel Behaviour and Society
- Vol. 22, 236-243
Open AccessPredictors of public transport use among university students during the winter: A MIMIC modelling approach
- 1 January 2019
- Published by Elsevier in Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour
- Vol. 60, 1-10
Predictors of intention to buy a battery electric vehicle among conventional car drivers
- 1 January 2019
- Published by Elsevier in Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour
- Vol. 60, 1-10
Predictors of intention to buy a battery electric vehicle among conventional car drivers
- Open Access
- 2 February 2017
- Published by MDPI AG in Sustainability
- Vol. 9 (2)
Understanding the Mechanisms behind Changing People’s Recycling Behavior at Work by Applying a Comprehensive Action Determination Model
This study moves toward a better understanding of the mechanisms behind changing people’s recycling behavior at work by mapping out which pathways and variables change in recycling behavior as triggered by interventions. A questionnaire was designed based on the theory of planned behaviour, the norm-activation model, habits, and a comprehensive action determination model (CADM). The data was collected in two rounds: before the intervention and after a three-month pilot period with implemented interventions using a sample of n = 1269 students and employees. The CADM model appears to be a good fit with the data. The results from the structural equation modelling indicate the pathways to influencing behavioural change. The most important psychological variables accounting for waste separation behaviour are intentions, perceived behavioural control, personal norms, social norms and habits. No difference in waste separation behaviour was observed in the control building. Interventions targeting the increase in waste separation raised participants’ intentions to engage in such behaviour. Results indicate that waste separation at work must go beyond technical aspects to include various key elements of sustainability to ensure success. Furthermore, understanding human behavior is key in determining the performance and success of an integrated and effective recycling intervention strategy.
- 2 February 2017
- Published by MDPI AG in Sustainability
- Vol. 9 (2)
Open AccessUnderstanding the Mechanisms behind Changing People’s Recycling Behavior at Work by Applying a Comprehensive Action Determination Model
This study moves toward a better understanding of the mechanisms behind changing people’s recycling behavior at work by mapping out which pathways and variables change in recycling behavior as triggered by interventions. A questionnaire was designed based on the theory of planned behaviour, the norm-activation model, habits, and a comprehensive action determination model (CADM). The data was collected in two rounds: before the intervention and after a three-month pilot period with implemented interventions using a sample of n = 1269 students and employees. The CADM model appears to be a good fit with the data. The results from the structural equation modelling indicate the pathways to influencing behavioural change. The most important psychological variables accounting for waste separation behaviour are intentions, perceived behavioural control, personal norms, social norms and habits. No difference in waste separation behaviour was observed in the control building. Interventions targeting the increase in waste separation raised participants’ intentions to engage in such behaviour. Results indicate that waste separation at work must go beyond technical aspects to include various key elements of sustainability to ensure success. Furthermore, understanding human behavior is key in determining the performance and success of an integrated and effective recycling intervention strategy.
- Open Access
- 8 September 2016
- Published by Frontiers Media SA in Frontiers in Psychology
- Vol. 7, 1362
Specific Barriers and Drivers in Different Stages of Decision-Making about Energy Efficiency Upgrades in Private Homes
Energy efficiency upgrades of privately owned homes like adding to the insulation layers in the walls, roof or floor, or replacing windows with more efficiently insulated versions can contribute significantly to reducing the energy impact of the building sector and thus also the CO2 footprint of a household. However, even in countries like Norway that have a rather high rate of renovation, energy upgrades are not always integrated into such a refurbishment project. This study tests which structural and internal psychological barriers hinder and which drivers foster decision-making to implement such measures, once a renovation project is planned. With a theoretical background in stage-based models of decision-making 24 barriers and drivers were tested for their specific effect in the stages of decision-making. The four stages of decision-making assumed in this study were (1) “not being in a decision mode”, (2) “deciding what to do”, (3) “deciding how to do it”, and (4) “planning implementation”. Based on an online survey of 3,787 Norwegian households, it was found that the most important barriers towards deciding to implement energy efficiency upgrades were not owning the dwelling and feeling the right time had not come yet. The most important drivers of starting to decide were higher expected comfort levels, better expected living conditions, and an expected reduction of energy costs. For the transition from deciding what to do to how to do it, not managing to make a decision and feeling the right point in time has not come yet were the strongest barriers, easily accessible information and an expected reduction of energy costs were the most important drivers. The final transition from deciding how to do the upgrades to planning implementation was driven by expecting a payoff within a reasonable time frame and higher expected comfort levels; the most important barriers were time demands for supervising contractors and – again – a feeling that the right point in time has not come yet. Implications for policy-making and marketing are discussed.
- 8 September 2016
- Published by Frontiers Media SA in Frontiers in Psychology
- Vol. 7, 1362
Open AccessSpecific Barriers and Drivers in Different Stages of Decision-Making about Energy Efficiency Upgrades in Private Homes
Energy efficiency upgrades of privately owned homes like adding to the insulation layers in the walls, roof or floor, or replacing windows with more efficiently insulated versions can contribute significantly to reducing the energy impact of the building sector and thus also the CO2 footprint of a household. However, even in countries like Norway that have a rather high rate of renovation, energy upgrades are not always integrated into such a refurbishment project. This study tests which structural and internal psychological barriers hinder and which drivers foster decision-making to implement such measures, once a renovation project is planned. With a theoretical background in stage-based models of decision-making 24 barriers and drivers were tested for their specific effect in the stages of decision-making. The four stages of decision-making assumed in this study were (1) “not being in a decision mode”, (2) “deciding what to do”, (3) “deciding how to do it”, and (4) “planning implementation”. Based on an online survey of 3,787 Norwegian households, it was found that the most important barriers towards deciding to implement energy efficiency upgrades were not owning the dwelling and feeling the right time had not come yet. The most important drivers of starting to decide were higher expected comfort levels, better expected living conditions, and an expected reduction of energy costs. For the transition from deciding what to do to how to do it, not managing to make a decision and feeling the right point in time has not come yet were the strongest barriers, easily accessible information and an expected reduction of energy costs were the most important drivers. The final transition from deciding how to do the upgrades to planning implementation was driven by expecting a payoff within a reasonable time frame and higher expected comfort levels; the most important barriers were time demands for supervising contractors and – again – a feeling that the right point in time has not come yet. Implications for policy-making and marketing are discussed.
- 1 January 2016
- Published by Elsevier in Travel Behaviour and Society
- Vol. 3, 8-20
Comparison of socio-psychological characteristics of conventional and battery electric car buyers
- 1 January 2016
- Published by Elsevier in Travel Behaviour and Society
- Vol. 3, 8-20
Comparison of socio-psychological characteristics of conventional and battery electric car buyers
- 1 December 2014
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Environmental Psychology
- Vol. 40, 401-411
A comprehensive socio-psychological approach to car type choice
- 1 December 2014
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Environmental Psychology
- Vol. 40, 401-411
A comprehensive socio-psychological approach to car type choice
- 1 June 2013
- Published by Elsevier in Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment
- Vol. 21, 32-38
Positive and negative spillover effects from electric car purchase to car use
- 1 June 2013
- Published by Elsevier in Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment
- Vol. 21, 32-38
Positive and negative spillover effects from electric car purchase to car use