Tracking the Path of the Green Consumer: Surveying the Decision-Making Process from Self-Transcendent Values to Supportive CSR Intentions - MDPI
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
sustainability
Article
Tracking the Path of the Green Consumer: Surveying the
Decision-Making Process from Self-Transcendent Values to
Supportive CSR Intentions
Nicholas Eng * , Christen Buckley and Rachel X. Peng
Donald P. Bellisario College of Communications, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park,
State College, PA 16802, USA; clb5344@psu.edu (C.B.); xup34@psu.edu (R.X.P.)
* Correspondence: nje49@psu.edu
Abstract: This paper examines the relationship between individual traits and values of consumers
and their decision-making process pertaining to purchasing green products from companies with
a strong commitment to corporate social responsibility (CSR). Guided by the theory of planned
behavior (TPB), the main goal of this online survey (N = 463) is to understand the relationship
between self-transcendent values, environmentalism, attitudes, norms, perceived behavioral control,
intentions, and purchase frequency to better understand how consumers make green purchasing
decisions. A structural equation model shows support for our predictions that self-transcendent
values significantly and positively predict environmentalism, which in turn predicted the TPB vari-
ables. Interestingly, only attitudes towards purchasing green products were significantly predictive
of purchasing products from companies with strong commitments to CSR, which subsequently
predicted actual purchase frequency. We hope that our research will benefit scholars and practitioners
by contributing to the work in CSR and environmental communication.
Citation: Eng, N.; Buckley, C.; Peng,
R.X. Tracking the Path of the Green Keywords: corporate social responsibility; self-transcendent values; theory of planned behavior; en-
Consumer: Surveying the vironmentalism
Decision-Making Process from
Self-Transcendent Values to
Supportive CSR Intentions.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 1106. 1. Introduction
https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031106
“Who Gives a Crap” is both a tagline and the name of an Australian-based, B Corp™
Academic Editors: Hyejoon Rim and toilet paper company that is certified for the highest standards of social and environmental
Holly Overton impact [1]. Similarly, Danish company Lego is consistently highly ranked in terms of their
corporate social responsibility (CSR), fostering learning through play initiatives while also
Received: 8 December 2021
pledging to make all core LEGO products from sustainable materials by 2030 [2]. According
Accepted: 13 January 2022
to the Governance and Accountability Institute, as reported by Wharton, 86% of the S&P
Published: 19 January 2022
500 Index companies published sustainability or corporate responsibility reports in 2018 [3].
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral As these examples demonstrate, CSR initiatives are becoming an integral aspect of practices
with regard to jurisdictional claims in and branding of organizations. If done strategically, an organization’s internalization of
published maps and institutional affil- environmental, ethical, or social issues strengthens the relationship-building potential
iations.
between itself and the consumer [4].
CSR is defined as “the social responsibility of business (that) encompasses the eco-
nomic, legal, and ethical expectations that society has of organizations at a given point
in time” [5] (p. 500) [6]. Despite the ubiquity of CSR initiatives in the twenty-first cen-
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
tury, studies of CSR initiatives and consumer purchase decisions provide evidence of the
This article is an open access article
complexities of such relationships [7]. For example, Bhattacharya and Sen [8] established
distributed under the terms and the important role of consumer support for issues and causes that CSR practices aim to
conditions of the Creative Commons target. Additionally, Sen et al. [9] identified variables, such as brand visibility and product
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// involvement, that modify this relationship; numerous other variables such as consumer
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ loyalty [10] or awareness [11] have been identified as being particularly critical influences
4.0/). of the effectiveness of CSR initiatives.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 1106. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031106 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Sustainability 2022, 14, 1106 2 of 16
While CSR is a broad concept that spans multiple domains (e.g., human rights and
other social issues), this study focuses on the antecedents of green purchasing from compa-
nies with a strong commitment to environmental CSR. In other words, how do individuals,
who possess certain traits and values, become consumers of green products? Past research
in public relations or consumer behavior has mostly focused on public reactions to CSR
communication [12,13] or the effectiveness of certain CSR strategies or partnerships [14]. In
this study, the individual traits that guide consumers as they make the decision to purchase
environmentally friendly products from companies with strong CSR commitments will be
explored. Past research has shown that variables such as moral values, subjective norms
and attitudes influence consumer supportive intentions of CSR initiatives [15]. However,
before deciding to support the companies with a strong commitment to CSR through
purchase intentions [15] or positive word of mouth (WOM) [16], these consumers are
still individuals that have individual traits or values that may inform their journey to
supportive actions. In examining the relationship between the traits of individuals and
their decision-making process pertaining to green products, scholars and practitioners will
be able to better situate the journey of the consumer within their understanding of CSR.
This in turn emphasizes the value of accounting for individual differences among green
consumers to more effectively segment and communicate with them.
2. Literature Review
2.1. Self-Transcendent Values and Environmentalism
According to De Moura et al. [17], while consumer behavior remains centered on
satisfying individual needs, environmental preservation has also become a primary con-
cern for consumers. This increasing awareness and interest in sustainable consumption
is reflected in growing stakeholder pressure on companies to engage in sustainable or
environmentally conscious practices [18–20]. This concern has traditionally been addressed
by companies through CSR. Consumer reactions to CSR initiatives are influenced by their
perceptions of company-centric variables such as company-issue fit [21], legitimacy, or
trust [22], to name a few. Additionally, scholars have found that personal characteristics
of consumers, such as values, lifestyles, and personality characteristics are particularly
influential in their reactions to CSR initiatives [23]. For example, Kang et al. [24] explored
hotel guests’ willingness to pay more to enable the company to implement green practices
and established that higher environmental concern leads to a greater willingness to pay.
However, scholars like Park and Lee [25] question why self-proclaimed environmentalists
who claim to value CSR in their purchasing decisions may not engage with green products
as one would expect. We argue that to answer that question, we need to look at the overall
process by which individuals become green consumers, starting with the values they hold.
Moral values in CSR are traditionally explored as a trait of the organization, which
become signals to their consumers with varying degrees of success [11,26]. However, we
are interested in the influence of the values held by individuals, defined as “a desirable
trans-situational goal varying in importance, which serves as a guiding principle in the life
of a person or other social entity” [27] (p. 21). According to Schwartz [28], there are ten
motivationally different types of values, the two that we are particularly interested in are
universalism and benevolence. Universalism refers to an “understanding, appreciation,
tolerance, and protection for the welfare of all people and for nature” while benevolence is
the “preservation and enhancement of the welfare of people with whom one is in frequent
personal contact” [27] (p. 22). Both universalism and benevolence are part of what can
be understood to be self-transcendent values [29], or social-oriented values [30]. For the
purposes of our study, we operationalize self-transcendent values in terms of moral identity
and empathy, both of which tap on universalism and benevolence. Moral identity refers to
the cognitive schema one holds about how important being moral is to one’s identity [31,32].
In other words, moral identity is how important is it to the self to “do the right thing”.
Empathy on the other hand refers to the ability to adopt the emotional state of others [33,34].Sustainability 2022, 14, 1106 3 of 16
Schultz [35] has argued that self-transcendent values reflect a greater degree of
inclusion—a valuing of goals and objects tied to unity with nature and broad-mindedness.
Additionally, self-transcendent emotions share the common characteristics of shifting atten-
tion outside of the self and promoting prosocial motivations and behaviors [36]. As such,
we would expect that there is a positive relationship between self-transcendent values
and environmentalism. Environmentalism, broadly speaking, can be understood as how
much one feels connected to their natural surroundings and how concerned one feels
about the state of the environment [37,38]. Environmental concern and connectedness to
nature are complementary in that together they shape one’s views of what needs to be done
about the climate crisis. Past research has supported the link between self-transcendent
values and environmentalism. For instance, Tam [39] found empathy to be related to
connectedness to nature, and Moreton et al. [40] similarly found that moral elevation
increased feelings of connectedness to nature. Additionally, multinational studies have
examined the relationship between values, environmental concerns and worldview in 14
countries [41,42] and their findings strongly supported the notion that self-transcendent
values underlie environmental concerns and one’s environmental worldview. Similar
results were reported by Schwartz et al. [43], where self-transcendent values correlated
positively with environmental worries. In sum, it appears that self-transcendent values
are significant and positive predictors of environmental concern [29,30,44], influence the
effect of CSR initiatives [45], and are strongly correlated to people’s attitudes towards
conservation behavior [46]. Therefore, we predict that:
Hypothesis 1. Greater self-transcendent values, such as empathy and moral identity, will be
positively associated with feeling more connected to nature and expressing greater environmental
concern.
2.2. Theory of Planned Behavior
Researchers have established that for green products to be adopted by consumers,
practitioners need to focus on consumer preferences and decision-making processes [47].
To address this call to increase attention on the consumer decision-making process, we will
apply the theory of planned behavior (TPB), which looks at the role of norms, attitudes,
and perceived behavioral controls in decision making, in a CSR context. Scholars have
broadly identified a connection between the TPB variables and consumer intention to buy
green products [48].
Since its inception, scholars have refined the theory of reasoned action (TRA) and
TPB frameworks by adding and/or altering relevant variables to enhance the explanatory
power of these models [49,50]. Fishbein and Ajzen [51] developed the TRA to explain the
behavioral intentions of individuals. However, this addresses purely volitional control and
fails to address certain non-volitional factors (e.g., owning of requisite opportunities and
resources) [52]. Thusly, non-volitional factors were incorporated into the TPB, extending
the boundaries of the TRA [52,53]. The TPB posits that the intentions and behaviors of
individuals are shaped by a combination of the individual’s attitudes, descriptive and
subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control (PBC) towards the behavior [53]. Atti-
tudes refer to how positively (or negatively) one views the behavior; descriptive norms
are perceptions of whether others are engaging the behavior; subjective norms are an indi-
vidual’s perceptions of whether others around them approve the behavior; and perceived
behavioral control is an evaluation of self-efficacy—-that is, how much one thinks they
are actually able to perform the behavior [52,54]. Since this study is set in the context of
CSR, we operationalize attitudes as a combination of both green product utility (i.e., how
effective is the use of environmentally friendly products in combating climate change) and
green consumer attitudes (i.e., how much can one’s purchasing decisions influence the envi-
ronment). Additionally, to operationalize intentions in this context, we use word-of-mouth
(WOM) and purchase intentions since these variables are often used to reflect the overall
success of communication strategies and as outcomes of the consumer decision- makingSustainability 2022, 14, 1106 4 of 16
process [14,15,55]. WOM intention refers to whether individuals intend to speak positively
about a company to others, while purchase intention refers to whether the individual
intends to make a purchase from the company. A number of scholars have examined envi-
ronmental issues using the TPB as a guiding theoretical framework [56–60]. For example,
Kalafatis et al. [56] used the TPB to identify probable influences on consumer intentions
to buy environmentally friendly products because the theory encourages the analysis of
attitudes, cultural and personal elements, as well as conscious behavioral control.
In extending the TPB, scholars included environmental concern and found that cus-
tomers who have high environmental concerns are likely to develop a positive attitude
and interest towards green products and this might influence their choice and purchase
intentions [48,61,62]. Additionally, Paul et al. [49] confirmed the extension of the TPB as a
research model that can explain the relationship between positive attitude and perceived
behavioral control on the increased likelihood of consumers to purchase green products.
A mediation analysis by Chen and Tung [63] showed that the TPB variables serve as me-
diators in environmental concern-intention relationships, which is to say that consumer
environmental concerns exert a positive influence on their attitude towards green hotels
and in turn influences their intention to visit green hotels. Following this vein of research,
we aim to test the TPB framework in the CSR context by examining the predictive ability of
environment beliefs on three assumed predictors of purchase intention. We predict that
consumer environmental beliefs (i.e., how connected one feels to nature and how concerned
one is about the environment) will be significant predictors of their attitudes, norms, and
perceived behavioral control towards green products.
Hypothesis 2. Greater connectedness to nature and environmental concern will be positively
associated with (a) higher perceived green product utility and pro-environmental consumer attitudes,
(b) more salient descriptive and subjective norms, and (c) greater perceived behavioral control.
Consumers engage in conservation behavior because they are intrinsically concerned
about the environment and society [64,65]. Extant research shows the direct effect of
environmental attitudes on green purchase intentions, in addition to the indirect effect
through the mediation of TPB predictor variables [63]. An individual’s level of concern
regarding environmental issues is therefore a useful predictor of environmentally conscious
behavior [66]. Various other studies emphasize that customers who have higher levels of
concern about the environment will be more driven to purchase environmentally friendly
products [49,67,68], even with an intention to pay a premium price [69,70], than those
who have lower environmental concerns. Due to these previously established connections
outside of the TPB decision-making process, it is also worth exploring if having a stronger
concern for the environment directly correlates with being more likely to purchase products
as a result of the environmental claims made by those products. In other words, depending
on existing levels of environmental concern, it is expected that customers would differ in
their purchase intentions for green products. Thus, we propose a competing hypothesis
predicting that:
Hypothesis 3. Greater connectedness to nature and environmental concern will be positively
associated with (a) greater intentions to purchase green products and (b) greater word-of-mouth
(WOM) intentions about green products, from companies with a strong commitment to CSR.
Factors that influence how a consumer makes purchasing decisions concerning green
products have been examined from numerous angles both within and beyond the CSR
literature. Supportive intentions and behaviors are critical measures of the efficacy of CSR
campaigns and green product promotion and adoption [71]. Scholars that have focused
on sustainability research have established connections between “green variables” and
supportive intentions from the consumer realm. For example, López-Mosquera et al. [72]
found that some socio-demographic factors, as well as environmental sensitivity and attitu-
dinal variables, significantly influenced environmental purchase frequency. Similarly, Hanliterature. Supportive intentions and behaviors are critical measures of the efficacy of CSR
campaigns and green product promotion and adoption [71]. Scholars that have focused
on sustainability research have established connections between “green variables” and
supportive intentions from the consumer realm. For example, López-Mosquera et al. [72]
Sustainability 2022, 14, 1106 found that some socio-demographic factors, as well as environmental sensitivity and5 atti- of 16
tudinal variables, significantly influenced environmental purchase frequency. Similarly,
Han et al. [50] identified a connection between attitudes toward green behaviors and pos-
et al. WOM
itive [50] identified
intentions a connection between
when accounting forattitudes toward
one’s overall green behaviors
perception andorganiza-
of a green positive
WOM
tion and intentions when accounting for one’s overall perception of a green organization and
its attributes.
its attributes.
Studies have also observed significant relationships between variables in the TPB and
theseStudies have also observed
key supportive intentionssignificant
both within relationships
and outsidebetween
of a variables in theAttitudes,
CSR context. TPB and
these key supportive intentions both within and outside of a CSR context.
norms, and perceived behavioral control have been found to be positively related to Attitudes, norms,
both
and perceived behavioral control have been found to be positively
consumer negative and positive WOM communication intentions [73,74] and perceived related to both consumer
negative
behavioral and positive
control hasWOM communication
been found intentions
to be a moderator of [73,74] and perceived
attitude-purchase behavioral
intention [75].
control has been
In a similar line offound to be aShin
research, moderator
and Hancerof attitude-purchase
[76] found support intention [75]. In a similar
that attitudes, norms,
line
and of research,behavioral
perceived Shin and Hancer [76]
control, arefound support that
all significant attitudes,
predictors ofnorms,
purchaseandintentions.
perceived
behavioral control, are all significant predictors of purchase intentions.
Purchase intentions have, in turn, been found to inform purchase behaviors like purchasePurchase intentions
have, in turn,
frequency beenBased
[72,77]. foundon to inform purchase
these findings behaviorsenvironmental-related
connecting like purchase frequency [72,77].
variables
Based on these findings connecting environmental-related variables
and the TPB variables to supportive outcomes, we propose the following hypothesis: and the TPB variables
to supportive outcomes, we propose the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 4. The TPB variables (i.e., attitudes, norms, and PBC) will be positively associated
Hypothesis 4. ThetoTPB
with (a) intentions variables
purchase (i.e.,
green attitudes,
products, (b)norms,
WOM and PBC) will
intentions be green
about positively associated
products, from
with (a) intentions to purchase green products, (b) WOM intentions about green products,
companies with a strong commitment to CSR, which in turn predicts (c) purchasing frequency. from
companies with a strong commitment to CSR, which in turn predicts (c) purchasing frequency.
In Figure 1, we present our conceptual model of the relationship between self-trans-
In Figure
cendent 1, we
values, present our conceptual
environmentalism, model
and the TPBofvariables.
the relationship between self-transcendent
values, environmentalism, and the TPB variables.
Figure 1. Conceptual Model with Hypotheses.
Figure 1. Conceptual Model with Hypotheses.
3. Method
3. Method
3.1. Design and Procedures
3.1. Design and Procedures
We recruited respondents via CloudResearch, a recruitment system run by Amazon
Mechanical Turk (Mturk).
We recruited respondents Thevia
minimum sample asize
CloudResearch, required system
recruitment for this run
study
by was
Amazon223,
computed based on a preliminary calculation (Alpha = 0.05, df = 47, desired
Mechanical Turk (Mturk). The minimum sample size required for this study was 223, power = 0.80,
null root mean
computed basedsquare error of approximation
on a preliminary calculation [RMSEA] = 0.05,
(Alpha = 0.05, df alternative
= 47, desiredRMSEA
power= = 0.08)
0.80,
using an mean
null root onlinesquare
R software developed
error of by Preacher
approximation [RMSEA]and= Coffman [78]. The
0.05, alternative survey
RMSEA was
= 0.08)
launched on 1 December 2020, and data collection concluded on the first day.
using an online R software developed by Preacher and Coffman [78]. The survey was We recruited
a total of 500 respondents. Respondents were told that they were participating in a study
about environmentalism. After completing the study, respondents received an agreed-
upon compensation via the recruitment system. All procedures were approved by the first
author’s institutional review board before the study was launched.Sustainability 2022, 14, 1106 6 of 16
3.2. Sample
A total of 518 respondents started the survey. We removed respondents who failed the
attention check (n = 12), and who straight-lined (n = 31), resulting in a final sample size of 463.
Respondents ranged in age from 20 to 83 years old (M = 42.27, SD = 12.65), with a
gender split of 230 male, 229 female, and four identifying as something else or chose not to
answer. Most respondents identified as “Caucasian or White,” (n = 362, 78.2%) with a little
over half (n = 232) of respondents reporting a yearly income between $25,000 and $74,999.
Of our sample, 48.2% had a college degree, 45.4% reported being Democrat, and more than
half reported being at least “slightly liberal”. Full sample demographics are reported in
Table 1.
Table 1. Sample characteristics (N = 463).
Demographic M (SD) or n (%)
Age M = 42.27 (SD = 12.65)
Race
Caucasian or White 362 (78.2%)
Black or African American 56 (12.1%)
Asian or Pacific Islander 36 (7.8%)
Middle Eastern 1 (0.2%)
Native American 5 (1.1%)
Hispanic/Latino 27 (5.8%)
Other 1 (0.2%)
Choose not to answer 3 (0.6%)
Gender
Male 230 (49.7%)
Female 229 (49.5%)
Something else 2 (0.4%)
Choose not to answer 2 (0.4%)
Income
Under $9999 17 (3.7%)
$10,000–$24,999 53 (11.4%)
$25,000–$49,999 114 (24.6%)
$50,000–$74,999 118 (25.5%)
$75,000–$99,999 77 (16.6%)
$100,000 or more 76 (16.4%)
Choose not to answer 8 (1.7%)
Education
11th grade 1 (0.2%)
12th grade (no diploma) 3 (0.6%)
High school graduate 40 (8.6%)
Some college 96 (20.7%)
College degree 223 (48.2%)
Graduate degree (e.g., PhD, MD) 98 (21.2%)
Choose not to answer 2 (0.4%)
Political Party Affiliation
Democrat 210 (45.4%)
Republican 119 (25.7%)
Independent 114 (24.6%)
Another party 9 (1.9%)
No preference 11 (2.4%)Sustainability 2022, 14, 1106 7 of 16
Table 1. Cont.
Demographic M (SD) or n (%)
Political Ideology
Extremely liberal 55 (11.9%)
Liberal 116 (25.1%)
Slightly liberal 56 (12.1%)
Moderate, middle of the road 85 (18.4%)
Slightly conservative 40 (8.6%)
Conservative 72 (15.6%)
Extremely conservative 37 (8.0%)
Choose not to answer 2 (0.4%)
Note. Respondents were allowed to choose more than one race.
3.3. Measures
All the variables in the study were measured on a 7-point Likert scale with anchors
of “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”, except for purchase frequency which used the
anchors of “never” to “always”. The variables were the following:
Moral Identity was assessed with five items adapted from Xie et al. [79], and averaged;
example items included “It would make me feel good to be a person who has these
characteristics” to characteristics of being “caring, compassionate, fair, friendly, generous,
hardworking, helpful, honest, and kind” (M = 6.08, SD = 0.99, α = 0.93).
Empathy was assessed with seven items adapted from Xie et al. [79], and averaged;
example items included “I often have tender, concerned feelings for people less fortunate
than me” and “I would describe myself as a pretty soft-hearted person” (M = 5.41, SD = 1.15,
α = 0.94).
Connectedness to Nature was assessed with five items adapted from Mayer and
Frantz [37], and averaged; example items included “I think of the natural world as a
community to which I belong” and “Like a tree can be part of a forest, I feel embedded
within the broader natural world” (M = 5.33, SD = 1.23, α = 0.92).
Environmental Concern was assessed with four items adapted from [38], and aver-
aged; example items included “I am concerned about the environment” and “I am worried
about the future of our planet” (M = 5.68, SD = 1.31, α = 0.95).
Perceived Green Product Utility was assessed with three items from Chang [80], and
averaged; an example item included “Green products can help slow the deterioration of
the environment” (M = 5.66, SD = 1.21, α = 0.92).
Green Consumer Attitudes was assessed with five items adapted from Cook et al. [81]
and Currás-Pérez et al. [82] and averaged; example items included “I think the way I behave
as a consumer affects the environment” and “Each consumer can have a positive influence
on society by buying products from socially responsible companies” (M = 5.05, SD = 1.36,
α = 0.93).
Descriptive Norms were assessed with three items adapted from Ajzen [54], and
averaged; an example item was “Most people who are important to me buy green products”
(M = 4.46, SD = 1.45, α = 0.93).
Subjective Norms were assessed with three items adapted from Armitage and Con-
ner [83], and averaged; an example item was “People who are important to me think that I
should buy green products” (M = 4.57, SD = 1.37, α = 0.88).
Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC) was assessed with one item from Armitage and
Conner [83] “It is entirely my decision to buy green products” (M = 5.96, SD = 1.11).
Purchase Intentions were assessed with three items adapted from Dodds et al. [84],
and averaged; an example item included “I will buy green products from companies that
have a strong commitment to corporate social responsibility as a first option” (M = 4.97,
SD = 1.39, α = 0.91).
World-of-Mouth (WOM) Intentions were assessed with four items adapted from
Ding et al. [85], and averaged’; an example sample item was “I would encourage friends toSustainability 2022, 14, 1106 8 of 16
buy green products sold by companies that have a strong commitment to corporate social
responsibility” (M = 5.06, SD = 1.46, α = 0.94).
Purchase Frequency of Green Products was assessed with one item adapted from
López-Mosquera et al. [72], “I tend to purchase green products from companies that have a
strong commitment to corporate social responsibility” (M = 4.33, SD = 1.43).
4. Results
4.1. Measurement Model Assessment
Prior to testing our structural model, we tested our measurement model using IBM’s
Amos 28. Self-transcendent values, environmentalism, norms, attitudes, and intentions
formed second-order constructs with their corresponding first-order factors. A confirmatory
factory analysis (CFA) testing the measurement model indicated satisfactory model fit
(χ2 = 157.16, df = 35, p < 0.001, CMIN = 4.49, RMSEA = 0.09, 90% CI = 0.07–0.10, CFI = 0.97,
p < 0.001, SRMR = 0.03) with all standardized factor loadings significant at p < 0.001. See
Table 2 for the results of the CFA.
Table 2. CFA Results.
Variables Factor Loading (Standardized β)
Self-Transcendent Values
Moral Identity 0.79 ***
Empathy 0.79 ***
Environmentalism
Connectedness to Nature 0.78 ***
Environmental Concern 0.86 ***
Attitudes
Perceived Green Product Utility 0.76 ***
Green Consumer Attitudes 0.93 ***
Norms
Descriptive Norms 0.90 ***
Subjective Norms 0.92 ***
Intentions
Word-of-Mouth Intentions 0.91 ***
Purchase Intentions 0.93 ***
Note: Since perceived behavioral control and purchase frequency were measured as single item variables, their
factor loadings are not reported here; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
4.2. Structural Model Assessment
The overall model fit for the entire maximum likelihood covariance-based structural
equation model was satisfactory after controlling for income, education, political affiliation,
and political ideology (χ2 = 253.45, df = 68, p < 0.001, CMIN = 3.73, RMSEA = 0.08, 90% CI
= 0.07–0.09, CFI = 0.96, p < 0.001, SRMR = 0.03). All significance tests were based on 2000
bias-corrected bootstrapped samples with a confidence interval of 0.95. The significance of
the individual paths is shown in Figure 2.Sustainability
Sustainability 2022,
2022, 14,
14, x1106
FOR PEER REVIEW 99 of
of 16
Figure 2.2. Full
FullModel
Modeltesting
testing Proposed
Proposed Hypotheses.
Hypotheses. Nonsignificant
Nonsignificant pathspaths are represented
are represented by a
by a dashed
dashed line. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. For visual clarity, income, education, political affilia-
line. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. For visual clarity, income, education, political affiliation, and
tion, andideology
political political were
ideology were as
included included
controlas control variables,
variables, but not
but not shown in shown in this figure.
this figure.
Hypotheses Testing
4.3. Hypotheses
H1 predicted that greater self-transcendent values will be positively associated with
environmentalism. Self-transcendent values were found to have a significant and positive
relationship with
relationship with environmentalism
environmentalism(β(β= =0.71, SESE
0.71, = 0.06, p < p0.001).
= 0.06, < 0.001).
Hence,Hence, we found
we found sup-
support for our first hypothesis.
port for our first hypothesis.
H2 predicted
H2 predicted that that greater
greater environmentalism
environmentalism will will be
be positively associated with
positively associated with the
the
TPB variables, while H3 predicted that environmentalism will
TPB variables, while H3 predicted that environmentalism will be positively associatedbe positively associated
with purchase
with purchase intentions.
intentions. The The direct
direct influence
influence of of environmentalism
environmentalism on on attitudes
attitudes (β
(β == 0.89,
0.89,
SE == 0.06,
SE 0.06, ppSustainability 2022, 14, 1106 10 of 16
ing a greater sense of moral identity and empathy tended to feel more connected to nature
and express concern for the environment. Our results suggest that such social-oriented
values [30] extend from the care and concern consumers have for other sentient beings
to the natural environment around them. This is supported by past research that shows
that individuals perceive there to be an interdependent, symbiotic human-nature relation-
ship [86]. This first path, from self-transcendent values to environmentalism, provides
evidence that individual traits can influence the journey of individuals in becoming green
consumers.
Continuing with our investigation of the antecedents of CSR supportive intentions
and behaviors, we found support for the extension of the TPB to include environmentalism.
In support of our predictions, we found that greater connectedness to nature and environ-
mental concern significantly and positively predicted respondent attitudes, norms, and
perceived behavioral control towards green products. Perhaps unsurprisingly, environ-
mentalism strongly predicted attitudes that the use and purchase of green products are
beneficial to the environment (β = 0.89). Due to the strong correlation between environ-
mentalism and attitudes, one might wonder if they are one and the same. We measured
environmentalism with two scales: connectedness to nature (i.e., how connected individu-
als feel to the natural world) and environmental concern (i.e., how concerned individuals
are about the state of the environment). Both scales tap on general attitudes about nature
and the environment. We also measured attitudes with two scales: perceived green product
utility (i.e., how helpful is the use of green products in protecting the environment) and
pro-environmental consumer attitudes (i.e., the influence of one’s purchasing decisions on
protecting the environment). Therefore, despite the strong correlation, environmentalism
and attitudes are conceptually different. What our data suggests is that the more individu-
als feel connected to, and are concerned about, the environment, the more likely they are to
hold positive attitudes towards the effectiveness of their purchasing decisions in helping to
combat the climate crisis. It is plausible that people who self-reported being high on the
environmentalism scale would tend to already be more environmentally conscious, and
hence already actively making green purchasing decisions. As such, their attitudes towards
the effectiveness of the purchase and use of such products should also be relatively high.
Relatedly, we found that pro-environmental attitudes of consumers were significant
and positive predictors of CSR-supportive intentions. Interestingly, contrary to the predic-
tions of the TPB that norms and PBC should predict intentions, we did not find this to be
true. Taken together, the weak and non-significant associations we find between norms
and PBC on intentions further reinforce the cultivation of positive attitudes towards the
use and purchase of green products. It may be that an individual’s attitudes towards green
products are independent of whether or not others around them share similar attitudes or
if they perceive ownership over their decision to purchase green products. This echoes our
finding that self-transcendent values can predict environmentalism since it is conceivable
that being moral and empathetic are stable traits that do not depend on norms or PBC in
motivating individuals to support companies with strong commitments to environmental
sustainability. At the end of our survey, we included an optional open-ended question
where respondents were presented with the following request: “It would also be great if
you can tell us what barriers, if any, you face from buying green products from companies
with a strong commitment to CSR”. A substantial portion of the survey-takers (over 400)
responded to this question. Out of the responses, the price of green products, availability,
and time needed to seek out these products arose as major barriers for respondents. As
such, an alternative explanation may be that while PBC could be a predictor of supportive
intentions, at present, consumers still find it difficult to connect their goal (of being envi-
ronmentally friendly) with how they feel about their own PBC. Regardless, the significant
association between intentions and actual purchase frequency of green products shows
that self-transcendent values, environmentalism, and attitudes can not only predict con-
sumer intentions, but can go one step further to predict actual behaviors. This, at the verySustainability 2022, 14, 1106 11 of 16
least, illuminates one part of the very complex decision-making process to support CSR
initiatives.
Contrary to our hypothesis, we did not find evidence that environmentalism would
circumvent the TPB process and influence intentions to support companies with strong CSR
commitments. We posited this hypothesis due to past research that indicates that there may
be a direct path from environmental concerns to purchase intentions [49,67–70]. However,
we embarked on this research to identify both antecedents and mediating variables that can
better predict supportive intentions in the context of CSR. This non-significant direct effect
suggests that environmentalism itself does not appear to predict supportive intentions,
but instead is mediated by at least some of the TPB variables. In other words, consumers
who care about protecting the environment generally go through a decision-making pro-
cess that accounts for their attitudes towards usage and purchase of green products to
ultimately become green consumers. Based on our data, merely being concerned about the
environment, or feeling connected to nature alone, does not move individuals to engage
in supportive purchase and WOM intentions. Finally, in line with the predictions of the
TPB, we found a very strong relationship between CSR supportive intentions and actual
purchasing frequency. Past meta-analyses have found that intentions and behaviors are
positively correlated (r = 0.47) [87]. In our data, the relationship between intentions and
behaviors are far stronger (β = 0.84), which may suggest that in the context of purchasing
products from companies with a strong commitment to CSR, individuals who possess high
levels of supportive intentions are more likely to follow through with actual purchasing
behaviors.
6. Theoretical and Practical Implications
This study has several important theoretical and practical implications. First, we found
support for self-transcendent values as predictors of environmentalism. By identifying
antecedent values associated with environmentalism, we contribute to the work around
climate change communication and CSR. Scholars may consider including these values
to improve the predictive power of their models that include message acceptance and
behavioral change as dependent variables. Second, we also extend the range of the TPB by
including both self-transcendent values and environmentalism as independent variables.
This follows a call from Kals and Müller [88] to include additional variables because
the parsimony of the TPB has limitations with regard to its application in the field of
environmental studies. Third, in testing the TPB in the context of CSR-supportive intentions
and behaviors, we also elucidate the boundaries of the theory since we did not find support
for the possibility of two components of the TPB, namely norms and PBC, to be predictive
of supportive intentions. We are not suggesting that norms and PBC are not important
variables to consider in the context of supportive CSR intentions, but that the effects of
these two variables may have been masked by the strong association we found between
attitudes and intentions. Future research should replicate the findings from our study, and
perhaps identify specific norms and PBC that could significantly predict CSR-supportive
intentions.
Practically, for organizations who are engaging in CSR, it is not only important to
communicate their actions to the public, but it may also be worthwhile to create messages
that appeal to the empathy and morality of individuals. Our findings echo the ideas
put forth by Kumar and Ghodeswar [89] as well as Widyastuti et al. [90], who suggest
employing communication strategies based on emotional appeals and experiences. This
follows a growing body of research that suggests that consuming self-transcendent media
messages can increase one’s perceptions of connectedness to others, and motivations to be
a better person [91,92]. Exposure to such messages has also been associated with pro-social
behavioral outcomes like donations of time, money, and other forms of assistance [93–95].
Finding ways to embed self-transcendent messages in an organization’s CSR communica-
tion efforts may serve to increase supportive behaviors. For example, Shen [96] identified a
variety of message features that have been found to evoke state empathy; such as the useSustainability 2022, 14, 1106 12 of 16
of background music that is consonant with, or highlights, the emotional experience of the
featured characters in the message, or when characters in the message look into the camera
and make eye contact with the message receiver. These are message features that can easily
be employed by organizations when designing their CSR messages. Additionally, for com-
panies, organizations, governments, and nonprofits who want to promote environmental
behaviors, it is also important to look at their target audience’s value systems. This would
allow for more effective audience segmentation, which could increase the effectiveness of its
campaigns. After all, characteristics of consumers, such as values, lifestyles, or personality
characteristics have been found to be particularly influential in their reactions to CSR initia-
tives [23], which may extend more broadly to pro-environmental initiatives as well. Apart
from aiding in audience segmentation, it may also be beneficial to frame climate change as
an issue that appeals to one’s morality or empathy. Perhaps, to encourage more supportive
pro-environmental intentions, talking about how climate change negatively impacts the
less fortunate may be a way to transcend bipartisan views of the issue. Finally, we would
also implore companies, organizations, governments, nonprofits, and even educators to
find ways to cultivate concern in individuals for the environment and connectedness to
nature. Whether it is through experiential learning, or media messages, instilling these
attitudes may help increase supportive intentions.
7. Limitations and Future Research
The potential limitations of the study should be acknowledged in light of the findings.
First, since our study was a cross-sectional survey, we are unable to make any causal claims
of the relationships between our variables. The order of the variables in our model was
constructed based on theoretical considerations, future research should consider employing
a longitudinal experiment to establish whether self-transcendent values precede environ-
mentalism, or vice versa. We did, however, compare the model fit with environmentalism
as the antecedent for self-transcendent values and the data fit this model worse than what
we had proposed. Therefore, it does not appear to be that feeling concerned about or
connected to nature influences one to believe that they are moral and empathetic. Second,
we used single-item measures for PBC and purchase frequency of green products, which
is prone to more measurement error than a multi-item measure. Future research should
consider the inclusion of multiple items to measure PBC and purchase of green products
across different product categories. Third, we conceived this study to understand green
purchasing decisions from companies with a strong commitment to environmental CSR.
While studying CSR companies so broadly increases their predictive validity, there are
many other aspects of an organization that may influence consumer intentions to pur-
chase products from them (e.g., corporate reputation). Future research should consider
conducting experiments with companies that have varying reputations.
8. Conclusions
Through an online survey, we examined how certain values influence the TPB vari-
ables, and actual purchasing frequencies. We found that self-transcendent values were
a significant predictor of environmentalism, which predicted more positive attitudes to-
wards the effectiveness of their green purchasing decisions in helping with climate action.
Attitudes, in turn, strongly predicted CSR supportive intentions, and subsequently actual
purchase frequency. We did not find support that norms and perceived behavior control
significantly predicted supportive intentions. The findings suggest that individuals do go
through a decision-making process that is guided by their pre-existing value systems when
deciding to make green purchases, which has implications for academics and practitioners.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, N.E., C.B. and R.X.P.; methodology, N.E., C.B. and R.X.P.;
formal analysis, N.E., C.B. and R.X.P.; data curation, N.E., C.B. and R.X.P.; writing—original draft
preparation, N.E., C.B. and R.X.P.; writing—review and editing, N.E., C.B. and R.X.P.; project admin-
istration, N.E., C.B. and R.X.P.; funding acquisition, N.E. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.Sustainability 2022, 14, 1106 13 of 16
Funding: This research was funded by the Donald P. Bellisario College of Communications Graduate
Research Fund at the Pennsylvania State University and the APC was funded by the Arthur W. Page
Center for Integrity in Public Communication at the Pennsylvania State University.
Institutional Review Board Statement: All respondents gave their informed consent for inclusion
before they participated in the study. The study was approved by the Pennsylvania State University’s
Institutional Review Board (STUDY00016606).
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement: The data will be made available upon request.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Who Gives a Crap—USA. Available online: https://whogivesacrap.org/ (accessed on 12 December 2020).
2. Official LEGO® Shop US. Available online: https://www.lego.com/ (accessed on 2 March 2021).
3. Is Your Company Socially Responsible? [Web Log Post]. (11 September 2019). Available online: https://knowledge.wharton.
upenn.edu/article/company-socially-responsible/ (accessed on 5 December 2020).
4. Kim, M.; Yin, X.; Lee, G. The effect of CSR on corporate image, customer citizenship behaviors, and customers’ long-term
relationship orientation. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2020, 88, 102520. [CrossRef]
5. Carroll, A.B. A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1979, 4, 497–505. [CrossRef]
6. Schwartz, M.S.; Carroll, A.B. Corporate social responsibility: A three-domain approach. Bus. Ethic Q. 2003, 13, 503–530. [CrossRef]
7. Pfau, M.; Haigh, M.M.; Sims, J.; Wigley, S. The influence of corporate social responsibility campaigns on public opinion. Corp.
Reput. Rev. 2008, 11, 145–154. [CrossRef]
8. Bhattacharya, C.B.; Sen, S. Doing Better at Doing Good: When, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives.
Calif. Manag. Rev. 2004, 47, 9–24. [CrossRef]
9. Sen, S.; Bhattacharya, C.B.; Korschun, D. The role of corporate social responsibility in strengthening multiple stakeholder
relationships: A field experiment. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2006, 34, 158–166. [CrossRef]
10. Fatma, M.; Khan, I.; Rahman, Z. CSR and consumer behavioral responses: The role of customer-company identification. Asia Pac.
J. Mark. Logist. 2018, 30, 460–477. [CrossRef]
11. Pomering, A.; Dolnicar, S. Assessing the prerequisite of successful CSR implementation: Are consumers aware of CSR initiatives?
J. Bus. Ethics 2009, 85, 285–301. [CrossRef]
12. Kim, S. Transferring Effects of CSR Strategy on Consumer Responses: The Synergistic Model of Corporate Communication
Strategy. J. Public Relat. Res. 2011, 23, 218–241. [CrossRef]
13. Kim, S. The process model of corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication: CSR communication and its relationship with
consumers’ csr knowledge, trust, and corporate reputation perception. J. Bus. Ethic 2019, 154, 1143–1159. [CrossRef]
14. Rim, H.; Yang, S.-U.; Lee, J. Strategic partnerships with nonprofits in corporate social responsibility (CSR): The mediating role of
perceived altruism and organizational identification. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 3213–3219. [CrossRef]
15. Diddi, S.; Niehm, L.S. Exploring the role of values and norms towards consumers’ intentions to patronize retail apparel brands
engaged in corporate social responsibility (CSR). Fash. Text. 2017, 4, 179. [CrossRef]
16. Hong, S.Y.; Rim, H. The influence of customer use of corporate websites: Corporate social responsibility, trust, and word-of-mouth
communication. Public Relat. Rev. 2010, 36, 389–391. [CrossRef]
17. De Moura, A.P.; Cunha, L.M.; Castro-Cunha, M.; Lima, R.C. A comparative evaluation of women’s perceptions and importance of
sustainability in fish consumption: An exploratory study among light consumers with different education levels. Manag. Environ.
Qual. Int. J. 2012, 23, 451–461. [CrossRef]
18. Huang, C.-L.; Kung, F.-H. Drivers of environmental disclosure and stakeholder expectation: Evidence from Taiwan. J. Bus. Ethic
2010, 96, 435–451. [CrossRef]
19. Kolk, A. The social responsibility of international business: From ethics and the environment to CSR and sustainable development.
J. World. Bus. 2016, 51, 23–34. [CrossRef]
20. Lee, K.H.; Shin, D. Consumers’ responses to CSR activities: The linkage between increased awareness and purchase intention.
Public Relat. Rev. 2010, 36, 193–195. [CrossRef]
21. Austin, L.; Gaither, B.M. Redefining fit: Examining CSR company-issue fit in stigmatized industries. J. Brand Manag. 2018, 26,
9–20. [CrossRef]
22. Mazutis, D.D.; Slawinski, N. Reconnecting business and society: Perceptions of authenticity in corporate social responsibility. J.
Bus. Ethic 2014, 131, 137–150. [CrossRef]
23. Bigné-Alcañize, E.; Currás-Pérez, R.; Sánchez-García, I. Brand credibility in cause-related marketing: The moderating role of
consumer values. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 2009, 18, 437–447. [CrossRef]
24. Kang, K.H.; Stein, L.; Heo, C.Y.; Lee, S. Consumers’ willingness to pay for green initiatives of the hotel industry. Int. J. Hosp.
Manag. 2012, 31, 564–572. [CrossRef]Sustainability 2022, 14, 1106 14 of 16
25. Park, J.S.; Lee, J. Segmenting green consumers in the United States: Implications for green marketing. J. Promot. Manag. 2014, 20,
571–589. [CrossRef]
26. Zhang, S.; Sun, W.; Ji, H.; Jia, J. The antecedents and outcomes of transformational leadership: Leader’s self-transcendent value,
follower’s environmental commitment and behavior. Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J. 2021, 42, 1037–1052. [CrossRef]
27. Schwartz, S.H. Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Adv.
Exp. Soc. Psychol. 1992, 25, 1–65. [CrossRef]
28. Schwartz, S.H. Are There universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values? J. Soc. Issues 1994, 50, 19–45. [CrossRef]
29. Rice, G. Pro-environmental behavior in Egypt: Is there a role for Islamic environmental ethics? J. Bus. Ethics. 2006, 65, 373–390.
[CrossRef]
30. Pinto, D.C.; Nique, W.M.; Añaña, E.D.S.; Herter, M.M. Green consumer values: How do personal values influence environmentally
responsible water consumption? Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2011, 35, 122–131. [CrossRef]
31. Aquino, K.; Freeman, D.; Reed, A., II; Lim, V.K.G.; Felps, W. Testing a social-cognitive model of moral behavior: The interactive
influence of situations and moral identity centrality. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 2009, 97, 123–141. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
32. Aquino, K.; Reed, A. The self-importance of moral identity. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 2002, 83, 1423–1440. [CrossRef]
33. Batson, C.D.; Polycarpou, M.P.; Harmon-Jones, E.; Imhoff, H.J.; Mitchener, E.C.; Bednar, L.L.; Klein, T.R.; Highberger, L. Empathy
and attitudes: Can feeling for a member of a stigmatized group improve feelings toward the group? J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1997,
72, 105–118. [CrossRef]
34. Klimecki, O.; Singer, T. Empathic distress fatigue rather than compassion fatigue? Integrating findings from empathy re-search in
psychology and social neuroscience. In Pathological Altruism; Oakley, B., Knafo, A., Madhavan, G., Wilson, D.S., Eds.; Oxford
University Press: Oxford, UK, 2012; pp. 368–383.
35. Schultz, P.W. Empathizing With Nature: The effects of perspective taking on concern for environmental issues. J. Soc. Issues 2000,
56, 391–406. [CrossRef]
36. Zelenski, J.M.; Desrochers, J.E. Can positive and self-transcendent emotions promote pro-environmental behavior? Curr. Opin.
Psychol. 2021, 42, 31–35. [CrossRef]
37. Mayer, F.S.; Frantz, C.M. The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. J.
Environ. Psychol. 2004, 24, 503–515. [CrossRef]
38. Schuhwerk, M.E.; Lefkoff-Hagius, R. Green or non-green? Does type of appeal matter when advertising a green product? J.
Advert. 1995, 24, 45–54. [CrossRef]
39. Tam, K.-P. Dispositional empathy with nature. J. Environ. Psychol. 2013, 35, 92–104. [CrossRef]
40. Moreton, S.G.; Arena, A.; Hornsey, M.J.; Crimston, C.R.; Tiliopoulos, N. Elevating nature: Moral elevation increases feelings of
connectedness to nature. J. Environ. Psychol. 2019, 65, 101332. [CrossRef]
41. Schultz, P.W. The structure of environmental concern: Concern for self, other people, and the biosphere. J. Environ. Psychol. 2001,
21, 327–339. [CrossRef]
42. Schultz, P.W.; Zelezny, L. Values as predictors of environmental attitudes: Evidence for consistency across 14 countries. J. Environ.
Psychol. 1999, 19, 255–265. [CrossRef]
43. Schwartz, S.H.; Sagiv, L.; Boehnke, K. Worries and values. J. Person. 2000, 68, 309–346. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
44. Lee, Y.-K.; Kim, S.; Kim, M.-S.; Choi, J.-G. Antecedents and interrelationships of three types of pro-environmental behavior. J. Bus.
Res. 2014, 67, 2097–2105. [CrossRef]
45. Romani, S.; Grappi, S.; Bagozzi, R.P. Explaining consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility: The role of gratitude and
altruistic values. J. Bus. Ethic 2013, 114, 193–206. [CrossRef]
46. Kaiser, F.G. A moral extension of the theory of planned behavior: Norms and anticipated feelings of regret in conservationism.
Pers. Individ. Differ. 2006, 41, 71–81. [CrossRef]
47. Cherrier, H.; Black, I.R.; Lee, M.S.W. Intentional non-consumption for sustainability: Consumer resistance and/or anti-
consumption? Eur. J. Mark. 2011, 45, 1757–1767. [CrossRef]
48. Yadav, R.; Pathak, G.S. Young consumers’ intention towards buying green products in a developing nation: Extending the theory
of planned behavior. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 135, 732–739. [CrossRef]
49. Paul, J.; Modi, A.; Patel, J. Predicting green product consumption using theory of planned behavior and reasoned action. J. Retail.
Consum. Serv. 2016, 29, 123–134. [CrossRef]
50. Han, H.; Hsu, L.-T.J.; Lee, J.-S. Empirical investigation of the roles of attitudes toward green behaviors, overall image, gender, and
age in hotel customers’ eco-friendly decision-making process. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2009, 28, 519–528. [CrossRef]
51. Fishbein, M.; Ajzen, I. Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research, Addison-Wesley,
Reading, Mass. 1975. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233897090_Belief_attitude_intention_and_
behaviour_An_introduction_to_theory_and_research (accessed on 2 March 2021).
52. Madden, T.J.; Ellen, P.S.; Ajzen, I. A comparison of the theory of planned behavior and the theory of reasoned action. Pers. Soc.
Psychol. Bull. 1992, 18, 3–9. [CrossRef]
53. Ajzen, I. From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Action Control; Kuhl, J., Beckmann, J., Eds.; Springer:
Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1985; pp. 11–39. [CrossRef]
54. Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [CrossRef]
55. Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behaviour: Reactions and reflections. Psych. Health 2011, 26, 1113–1127. [CrossRef] [PubMed]You can also read
