Factors Affecting Green Purchase Intention: A Perspective of Ethical Decision Making
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review and Hypothesis Development
2.1. Moral Intensity and Green Purchase Intention
2.2. Moral Judgment and Green Purchase Intention
2.3. Perceived Price, Moral Intensity and Moral Judgment
2.4. Perceived Quality, Moral Intensity and Moral Judgment
2.5. The Moderating Role of Products’ Green Degree
3. Methodology and Measurement
3.1. Measurement of Variables
3.2. The Sample and Data Collection
4. Results
4.1. Reliability and Validity Analysis
4.2. Null Model Analysis
4.3. Cross-Hierarchy Analysis Results
4.4. Results Summary of the Hypothesis Test
5. Discussion
5.1. Research Implications
5.2. Managerial Implications
5.3. Limitations and Future Research
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Constructs | Numbers | Content | Resources |
---|---|---|---|
Perceived price | PP1 | Green home appliances have economical prices compared to non-green home appliances. | Satriawan [71] |
PP2 | Green home appliances’ prices offered align with the qualities obtained. | ||
PP3 | Green home appliances have affordable prices. | ||
PP4 | The prices of the green home appliances correspond with my purchasing power. | ||
Perceived quality | PQ1 | The performances of green home appliances are very good. | Satriawan [71] |
PQ2 | Green home appliances have long use life. | ||
PQ3 | Green home appliances have specifications that fit my desires. | ||
PQ4 | Green home appliances have complete features. | ||
Moral judgment | MJ1 | I consider the purchase of green home appliances to be morally acceptable. | Martinez and Jaeger [33] |
MJ2 | The act of buying green home appliances rather than non-green home appliances is right. | ||
MJ3 | It is morally right to buy green home appliances. | ||
Moral intensity | MI1 | The possible harm resulting from the purchase decision of green home appliances is minor. | Lincoln and Holmes [60] |
MI2 | Any negative consequences of green home appliance purchase decision are likely to occur after a long time. | ||
MI 3 | Most consumers would consider green home appliance purchase decision to be appropriate. | ||
MI 4 | The green home appliance purchase decision would negatively affect people outside of my group. | ||
MI 5 | The chances of any negative consequences not likely to occur as a result of the green home appliance purchase decision. | ||
Green purchase intention | GPI1 | I intend to buy green home appliances. | Sreen et al. [81] |
GPI2 | I plan to purchase green home appliances. | ||
GPI3 | I will buy green home appliances in my next purchase. | ||
Products’ green degree | PGD1 | Green home appliances label the product ingredients clearly. | Tseng and Hung [82] |
PGD2 | Green home appliances have eco-labels. | ||
PGD3 | Green home appliances also have attractive appearances. | ||
PGD4 | The operation of green home appliances is user-friendly. | ||
PGD5 | Green home appliances are made from non-polluting materials. | ||
PGD6 | Green home appliances have a high recyclability ratio. | ||
PGD7 | Green home appliances have high energy conservation rates. | ||
PGD8 | Green home appliances use recycled packaging materials. | ||
PGD9 | Green home appliances have good functional performance. | ||
PGD10 | The design and operating characteristics of green appliances are suitable. | ||
PGD11 | Green home appliances have good durability. |
References
- Arrow, K.; Bolin, B.; Costanza, R.; Dasgupta, P.; Folke, C.; Holling, C.S.; Jansson, B.-O.; Levin, S.; Mäler, K.-G.; Perrings, C.A.; et al. Economic growth, carrying capacity, and the environment. Science 1995, 268, 520–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gruner, S.C. Everybody Seems Concerned about the Environment, but Is This Concern Reflected in (Danish) Consumers’ Food Choice? Eur. Adv. Consum. Res. 1993, 1, 428–442. [Google Scholar]
- Jing, K.; Qi, M.; Mei, Y.; Chen, L. The Impact of Empathy with Nature on Green Purchase Behavior: An ERP Study. Neurosci. Lett. 2022, 784, 136745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Y.; Li, O.; Peng, X.; Wang, L. Consumption Trends During the COVID-19 Crisis: How Awe, Coping, and Social Norms Drive Utilitarian Purchases. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 588580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jian, Y.; Yu, I.Y.; Yang, M.X.; Zeng, K.J. The Impacts of Fear and Uncertainty of COVID-19 on Environmental Concerns, Brand Trust, and Behavioral Intentions toward Green Hotels. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Ma, B.; Bai, R. How Does Green Product Knowledge Effectively Promote Green Purchase Intention? Sustainability 2019, 11, 1193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zaremohzzabieh, Z.; Ismail, N.; Ahrari, S.; Abu Samah, A. The Effects of Consumer Attitude on Green Purchase Intention: A Meta-Analytic Path Analysis. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 132, 732–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Griskevicius, V.; Tybur, J.M.; Van den Bergh, B. Going Green to Be Seen: Status, Reputation, and Conspicuous Conservation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2010, 98, 392–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arli, D.; Tan, L.P.; Tjiptono, F.; Yang, L. Exploring Consumers’ Purchase Intention towards Green Products in an Emerging Market: The Role of Consumers’ Perceived Readiness. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2018, 42, 389–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ojiaku, O.C.; Achi, B.E.; Aghara, V.O. Cognitive-Affective Predictors of Green Purchase Intentions among Health Workers in Nigeria. Manag. Sci. Lett. 2018, 8, 1027–1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choi, D.; Johnson, K.K.P. Influences of Environmental and Hedonic Motivations on Intention to Purchase Green Products: An Extension of the Theory of Planned Behavior. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2019, 18, 145–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chekima, B.; Syed Khalid Wafa, S.A.W.; Igau, O.A.; Chekima, S.; Sondoh, S.L. Examining Green Consumerism Motivational Drivers: Does Premium Price and Demographics Matter to Green Purchasing? J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 3436–3450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, Y.; Liu, N.; Zhao, M. Factors and Mechanisms Affecting Green Consumption in China: A Multilevel Analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 209, 481–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Ma, B.; Bai, R.; Zhang, L. The unexpected effect of frugality on green purchase intention. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2021, 59, 102385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Testa, F.; Pretner, G.; Iovino, R.; Bianchi, G.; Tessitore, S.; Iraldo, F. Drivers to Green Consumption: A Systematic Review. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021, 23, 4826–4880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patel, J.D.; Trivedi, R.H.; Yagnik, A. Self-Identity and Internal Environmental Locus of Control: Comparing Their Influences on Green Purchase Intentions in High-Context versus Low-Context Cultures. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2020, 53, 102003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, X.; Lin, C.A. Effects of Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Factors on College Students’ Bottled Water Purchase Intentions. Commun. Res. Rep. 2018, 35, 245–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhuang, W.; Luo, X.; Riaz, M.U. On the Factors Influencing Green Purchase Intention: A Meta-Analysis Approach. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 644020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Weisstein, F.L.; Asgari, M.; Siew, S.W. Price presentation effects on green purchase intentions. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 2014, 23, 230–239. [Google Scholar]
- Martinho, G.; Pires, A.; Portela, G.; Fonseca, M. Factors affecting consumers’ choices concerning sustainable packaging during product purchase and recycling. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2015, 103, 58–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chekima, B.; Wafa, S.A.W.S.K.; Igau, O.A.; Chekima, S. Determinant factors of consumers’ green purchase intention: The moderating role of environmental advertising. Asian Soc. Sci. 2015, 11, 318–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, K.-C.; Hsu, C.-L.; Hsu, Y.-T.; Chen, M.-C. How Green Marketing, Perceived Motives and Incentives Influence Behavioral Intentions. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2019, 49, 336–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tewari, A.; Mathur, S.; Srivastava, S.; Gangwar, D. Examining the Role of Receptivity to Green Communication, Altruism and Openness to Change on Young Consumers’ Intention to Purchase Green Apparel: A Multi-Analytical Approach. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2022, 66, 102938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yue, B.; Sheng, G.; She, S.; Xu, J. Impact of Consumer Environmental Responsibility on Green Consumption Behavior in China: The Role of Environmental Concern and Price Sensitivity. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hojnik, J.; Ruzzier, M.; Manolova, T.S. Sustainable Development: Predictors of Green Consumerism in Slovenia. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 1695–1708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, M.S.; Hampson, D.P.; Wang, Y.; Wang, H. Consumer Confidence and Green Purchase Intention: An Application of the Stimulus-Organism-Response Model. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2022, 68, 103061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turaga, R.M.R.; Howarth, R.B.; Borsuk, M.E. Pro-Environmental Behavior: Rational Choice Meets Moral Motivation. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2010, 1185, 211–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feinberg, M.; Willer, R. The Moral Roots of Environmental Attitudes. Psychol. Sci. 2013, 24, 56–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jia, F.; Soucie, K.; Alisat, S.; Curtin, D.; Pratt, M. Are Environmental Issues Moral Issues? Moral Identity in Relation to Protecting the Natural World. J. Environ. Psychol. 2017, 52, 104–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rest, J.R. Moral Development: Advance in Research and Theory; Praeger: New York, NY, USA, 1986; pp. 2–18. [Google Scholar]
- Jones, T.M. Ethical Decision Making by Individuals in Organizations: An Issue-Contingent Model. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1991, 16, 366–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tan, B. Understanding Consumer Ethical Decision Making with Respect to Purchase of Pirated Software. J. Consum. Mark. 2002, 19, 96–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martinez, L.F.; Jaeger, D.S. Ethical Decision Making in Counterfeit Purchase Situations: The Influence of Moral Awareness and Moral Emotions on Moral Judgment and Purchase Intentions. J. Consum. Mark. 2016, 33, 213–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andersch, H.; Arnold, C.; Seemann, A.-K.; Lindenmeier, J. Understanding Ethical Purchasing Behavior: Validation of an Enhanced Stage Model of Ethical Behavior. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2019, 48, 50–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zou, L.W.; Chan, R.Y.K. Why and When Do Consumers Perform Green Behaviors? An Examination of Regulatory Focus and Ethical Ideology. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 94, 113–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferrell, O.C.; Gresham, L.G. A Contingency Framework for Understanding Ethical Decision Making in Marketing. J. Mark. 1985, 49, 87–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stead, W.E.; Worrell, D.L.; Stead, J.G. An Integrative Model for Understanding and Managing Ethical Behavior in Business Organizations. J. Bus. Ethics 1990, 9, 233–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bommer, M.; Gratto, C.; Gravander, J.; Tuttle, M. A Behavioral Model of Ethical and Unethical Decision Making. J. Bus. Ethics 1987, 6, 265–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akkaya, M. Understanding the Impacts of Lifestyle Segmentation & Perceived Value on Brand Purchase Intention: An Empirical Study in Different Product Categories. Eur. Res. Manag. Bus. Econ. 2021, 27, 100155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, L.; Qie, K.; Memon, H.; Yesuf, H.M. The Empirical Analysis of Green Innovation for Fashion Brands, Perceived Value and Green Purchase Intention—Mediating and Moderating Effects. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chi, T.; Ganak, J.; Summers, L.; Adesanya, O.; McCoy, L.; Liu, H.; Tai, Y. Understanding Perceived Value and Purchase Intention toward Eco-Friendly Athleisure Apparel: Insights from U.S. Millennials. Sustainability 2021, 13, 7946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sawitri, S.; Alhasin, A. Online Music Business: The Relationship between Perceived Benefit, Perceived Sacrifice, Perceived Value, and Purchase Intention. Int. J. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2022, 11, 111–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramadhanty, A.P.; Handayani, P.W.; Pinem, A.A.; Hilman, M.H. Virtual Tour Actual Usage: The Influence of Perceived Benefits and Sacrifices. J. Sist. Inf. 2021, 17, 62–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dodds, W.B.; Monroe, K.B. The effect of brand and price information on subjective product evaluations. Adv. Consum. Res. 1985, 12, 85–90. [Google Scholar]
- Awuni, J.A.; Du, J. Sustainable Consumption in Chinese Cities: Green Purchasing Intentions of Young Adults Based on the Theory of Consumption Values. Sustain. Dev. 2016, 24, 124–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohd Suki, N. Consumption Values and Consumer Environmental Concern Regarding Green Products. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World. Eco. 2015, 22, 269–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Biswas, A.; Roy, M. Green Products: An Exploratory Study on the Consumer Behaviour in Emerging Economies of the East. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 87, 463–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, P.; Yi, S. Pricing Policies of Green Supply Chain Considering Targeted Advertising and Product Green Degree in the Big Data Environment. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 164, 1614–1622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raudenbush, S.W.; Bryk, A.S. Hierarchical linear models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Pers. Psychol. 2003, 56, 1085–1087. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, J.; Keil, M.; Wang, L. The Effect of Moral Intensity on It Employees’ Bad News Reporting. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 2015, 55, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, J.R.; Bennie, N.M. The Applicability of a Contingent Factors Model to Accounting Ethics Research. J. Bus. Ethics 2006, 68, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pauli, K.P.; May, D.R. The role of moral intensity in ethical decision making: A review and investigation of moral recognition, evaluation, and intention. Bus. Soc. 2002, 41, 84–117. [Google Scholar]
- Leitsch, D.L. Differences in the Perceptions of Moral Intensity in the Moral Decision Process: An Empirical Examination of Accounting Students. J. Bus. Ethics 2004, 53, 313–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sweeney, B.; Costello, F. Moral Intensity and Ethical Decision-Making: An Empirical Examination of Undergraduate Accounting and Business Students. Account. Educ. 2009, 18, 75–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barnett, T.; Valentine, S. Issue Contingencies and Marketers’ Recognition of Ethical Issues, Ethical Judgments and Behavioral Intentions. J. Bus. Res. 2004, 57, 338–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barnett, T. Dimensions of Moral Intensity and Ethical Decision Making: An Empirical Study. J. Appl. Soc. Pyschol. 2001, 31, 1038–1057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hong, H. The Impact of Moral Philosophy and Moral Intensity on Purchase Behavior toward Sustainable Textile and Apparel Products. Fash. Text. 2019, 6, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bray, J.; Johns, N.; Kilburn, D. An Exploratory Study into the Factors Impeding Ethical Consumption. J. Bus. Ethics 2011, 98, 597–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trevino, L.K. Ethical Decision Making in Organizations: A Person-Situation Interactionist Model. Acad. Manage. Rev. 1986, 11, 601–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lincoln, S.H.; Holmes, E.K. Ethical decision making: A process influenced by moral intensity. J. Healthc. Sci. Hum. 2011, 1, 55–69. [Google Scholar]
- Hunt, S.D.; Vitell, S. A General Theory of Marketing Ethics. J. Macromark. 1986, 6, 5–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moores, T.T.; Chang, J.C.-J. Ethical Decision Making in Software Piracy: Initial Development and Test of a Four-Component Model. MIS Q. 2006, 30, 167–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wagner, S.C.; Sanders, G.L. Considerations in Ethical Decision-Making and Software Piracy. J. Bus. Ethics 2001, 29, 161–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ha, S.; Lennon, S.J. Purchase Intent for Fashion Counterfeit Products: Ethical Ideologies, Ethical Judgments, and Perceived Risks. Cloth. Text. Res. J. 2006, 24, 297–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raab, C.; Mayer, K.; Kim, Y.-S.; Shoemaker, S. Price-Sensitivity Measurement: A Tool for Restaurant Menu Pricing. J. Hosp. Tour. Technol. 2009, 33, 93–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeithaml, V.A. Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence. J. Mark. 1988, 52, 2–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jacoby, J.; Olson, J.C. Consumer response to price: An attitudinal, information processing perspective. In Moving Ahead with Attitude Research; Wind, Y., Greenberg, P., Eds.; American Marketing Association: Chicago, IL, USA, 1977; pp. 73–86. [Google Scholar]
- Winer, R.S. A reference price model of brand choice for frequently purchased products. J. Consum. Res. 1986, 13, 250–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeithaml, V.A. Consumer response to in-store price information environments. J. Consum. Res. 1982, 8, 357–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramadhan, M.D.; Muthohar, M. The Influence of Perceived Price, Perceived Quality, Brand Image, and Store Image on the Purchase Intention of Hypermart Private Label. In Proceedings of the 16th International Symposium on Management (INSYMA 2019), Manado, Indonesia, 4–6 March 2019; Atlantis Press: Manado, Indonesia, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Satriawan, K.A. The Role of Purchase Intention in Mediating the Effect of Perceived Price and Perceived Quality on Purchase Decision. Int. Res. J. Manag. IT Soc. Sci. 2020, 7, 38–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsiotsou, R. The Role of Perceived Product Quality and Overall Satisfaction on Purchase Intentions. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2006, 30, 207–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suhud, U.; Willson, G. Low-Cost Green Car Purchase Intention: Measuring the Role of Brand Image on Perceived Price and Quality. Int. J. Econ. Bus. Adm. 2019, 7, 238–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wasaya, A.; Saleem, M.A.; Ahmad, J.; Nazam, M.; Khan, M.M.A.; Ishfaq, M. Impact of Green Trust and Green Perceived Quality on Green Purchase Intentions: A Moderation Study. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021, 23, 13418–13435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, S.; Chu, C.; Ju, M.; Shao, C. System Establishment and Method Application for Quantitatively Evaluating the Green Degree of the Products in Green Public Procurement. Sustainability 2016, 8, 941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reinhardt, F.L. Environmental Product Differentiation: Implications for Corporate Strategy. Calif. Manag. Rev. 1998, 40, 43–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teoh, C.W.; Khor, K.C.; Wider, W. Factors Influencing Consumers’ Purchase Intention Towards Green Home Appliances. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 927327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Xiao, C.; Zhou, G. Willingness to Pay a Price Premium for Energy-Saving Appliances: Role of Perceived Value and Energy Efficiency Labeling. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 242, 118555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, B.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Z. Managing a Closed-Loop Supply Chain with Take-Back Legislation and Consumer Preference for Green Design. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 282, 124481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, G.; Li, W.; Jin, Z.; Wang, Z. Influence of Environmental Concern and Knowledge on Households’ Willingness to Purchase Energy-Efficient Appliances: A Case Study in Shanxi, China. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sreen, N.; Purbey, S.; Sadarangani, P. Impact of Culture, Behavior and Gender on Green Purchase Intention. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2018, 41, 177–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tseng, S.-C.; Hung, S.-W. A Framework Identifying the Gaps between Customers’ Expectations and Their Perceptions in Green Products. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 59, 174–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: New York, NY, USA, 1998; pp. 109–143. [Google Scholar]
Constructs | Cronbach’s α | CR | AVE | GFI | NFI | AGFI | RMR |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Perceived price | 0.926 | 0.915 | 0.638 | 0.964 | 0.972 | 0.905 | 0.022 |
Perceived quality | 0.862 | 0.844 | 0.594 | 0.955 | 0.938 | 0.862 | 0.025 |
Moral judgment | 0.766 | 0.805 | 0.490 | 0.958 | 0.918 | 0.905 | 0.035 |
Moral intensity | 0.792 | 0.796 | 0.448 | 0.979 | 0.956 | 0.959 | 0.019 |
Green purchase intention | 0.869 | 0.708 | 0.496 | 0.976 | 0.928 | 0.822 | 0.021 |
Products’ green degree | 0.856 | 0.852 | 0.446 | 0.945 | 0.913 | 0.898 | 0.028 |
Variables | Mean | SD | 1. | 2. | 3. | 4. | 5. | 6. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.Perceived price | 3.548 | 0.782 | 0.799 a | |||||
2.Perceived quality | 3.985 | 0.552 | 0.458 *** | 0.771 a | ||||
3.Moral judgment | 3.983 | 0.446 | 0.420 *** | 0.319 *** | 0.700 a | |||
4.Moral intensity | 3.995 | 0.452 | 0.316 *** | 0.293 *** | 0.435 *** | 0.654 a | ||
5.Green purchase intention | 3.988 | 0.382 | 0.279 *** | 0.356 *** | 0.310 *** | 0.364 *** | 0.704 a | |
6.Products’ green degree | 3.912 | 0.465 | 0.518 *** | 0.506 *** | 0.426 *** | 0.344 *** | 0.305 *** | 0.668 a |
Within-Group Variation () | Between-Group Variation () | p-Value | ICC |
---|---|---|---|
0.195 | 0.018 | 0.022 | 0.085 |
Models | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | Model 6 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dependent Variables | GPI | MI | MJ | ||||
Independent Variables | |||||||
Individual level | |||||||
Intercept | 3.472 *** | 3.663 *** | 4.196 *** | 4.204 *** | 4.056 *** | 4.027 *** | |
Gender | 0.125 | 0.064 | −0.010 | −0.006 | 0.021 | 0.028 | |
Age | 0.038 | 0.019 | −0.009 | −0.008 | 0.003 | 0.001 | |
Education | 0.044 | 0.033 | −0.085 | −0.096 * | −0.015 | −0.005 | |
Average monthly income | 0.035 | 0.020 | 0.028 | −0.008 | 0.037 | 0.038 | |
Times of purchasing green home appliances in the past half year | −0.040 | 0.009 | −0.035 | −0.007 | −0.093 | −0.110 * | |
Average monthly expense on green home appliances | 0.012 | −0.013 | 0.031 | 0.035 | 0.027 | 0.022 | |
PP | 0.206 ** | 0.213 ** | |||||
PQ | 0.205 ** | 0.227 *** | |||||
MI | 0.324 ** | ||||||
MJ | 0.428 *** | ||||||
Group level | |||||||
PGD × PP | 0.263 | 0.336 ** | |||||
PGD × PQ | 0.167 | 0.465 *** | |||||
σ2 | 0.122 | 0.116 | 0.119 | 0.126 | 0.097 | 0.115 | |
Deviance | 287.052 | 275.608 | 268.195 | 276.904 | 273.854 | 289.657 |
Hypothesis | Content | Result |
---|---|---|
H1 | Moral intensity is positively correlated with green purchase intention. | Supported |
H2 | Moral judgment is positively correlated with green purchase intention. | Supported |
H3 | Perceived price is positively correlated with moral intensity. | Supported |
H4 | Perceived price is positively correlated with moral judgment. | Supported |
H5 | Perceived quality is positively correlated with moral intensity. | Supported |
H6 | Perceived quality is positively correlated with moral judgment. | Supported |
H7 | Products’ green degree positively moderates the relationship between perceived price and moral intensity. | Not supported |
H8 | Products’ green degree positively moderates the relationship between perceived price and moral judgment. | Supported |
H9 | Products’ green degree positively moderates the relationship between perceived quality and moral intensity. | Not supported |
H10 | Products’ green degree positively moderates the relationship between perceived quality and moral judgment. | Supported |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Tian, Z.; Sun, X.; Wang, J.; Su, W.; Li, G. Factors Affecting Green Purchase Intention: A Perspective of Ethical Decision Making. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 11151. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191811151
Tian Z, Sun X, Wang J, Su W, Li G. Factors Affecting Green Purchase Intention: A Perspective of Ethical Decision Making. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(18):11151. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191811151
Chicago/Turabian StyleTian, Ziyuan, Xixiang Sun, Jianguo Wang, Weihuan Su, and Gen Li. 2022. "Factors Affecting Green Purchase Intention: A Perspective of Ethical Decision Making" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 18: 11151. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191811151
APA StyleTian, Z., Sun, X., Wang, J., Su, W., & Li, G. (2022). Factors Affecting Green Purchase Intention: A Perspective of Ethical Decision Making. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(18), 11151. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191811151