• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

探索可持续性权衡的影响:产品和可持续性类型在道德规范介导的消费者购买行为中的作用。

Exploring the Impact of Sustainability Trade-Offs: The Role of Product and Sustainability Types in Consumer Purchases Mediated by Moral Regulation.

作者信息

Suh Munshik, Yoo Je Eun

机构信息

Business Administration, Pusan National University, Busan 46241, Republic of Korea.

Global Business Administration, Kyungsung University, Busan 48434, Republic of Korea.

出版信息

Behav Sci (Basel). 2024 Aug 12;14(8):702. doi: 10.3390/bs14080702.

DOI:10.3390/bs14080702
PMID:39199099
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11351839/
Abstract

The attitude-behavior gap in sustainable product purchasing persists despite prior attempts to address it, thus indicating a need for more research. This study examines contextual factors in sustainable consumption, particularly the sustainability trade-offs (STOs) faced by consumers during product purchases and the impact of conditional morality. We investigate STOs in terms of sustainability type and attribute type and indicate that moral regulation enhances the impact of sustainability trade-offs on purchase intention. Four experiments were conducted with 457 participants in South Korea, focusing on STOs in terms of sustainability type (social vs. environmental) and attribute type (utilitarian vs. hedonic). The findings indicate that attitudes towards sustainability have a positive influence on purchase intention, though sustainability- and attribute-type STOs do not significantly affect this relationship. However, the combination of STOs in environmental sustainability with utilitarian attributes does have a significant impact on the relationship between attitude and purchase intention. Furthermore, while moral regulation mediates this relationship, morality does not have an impact. This research highlights the moderating role of sustainability trade-offs in the relationship between attitudes towards sustainability and purchase intention, underscoring the importance of contextual factors in sustainable product purchasing. Firms can leverage sustainability trade-offs in their marketing strategies, incorporating product features and advertising messages.

摘要

尽管之前曾尝试解决可持续产品购买中的态度-行为差距问题,但该差距仍然存在,这表明需要进行更多研究。本研究考察了可持续消费中的情境因素,特别是消费者在产品购买过程中面临的可持续性权衡(STO)以及条件道德的影响。我们从可持续性类型和属性类型方面对STO进行了调查,并指出道德规范增强了可持续性权衡对购买意愿的影响。我们在韩国对457名参与者进行了四项实验,重点关注可持续性类型(社会型与环境型)和属性类型(功利型与享乐型)方面的STO。研究结果表明,对可持续性的态度对购买意愿有积极影响,尽管可持续性和属性类型的STO对这种关系没有显著影响。然而,环境可持续性方面的STO与功利属性的结合确实对态度与购买意愿之间的关系有显著影响。此外,虽然道德规范调节了这种关系,但道德本身并没有影响。本研究强调了可持续性权衡在对可持续性的态度与购买意愿之间关系中的调节作用,凸显了情境因素在可持续产品购买中的重要性。企业可以在其营销策略中利用可持续性权衡,融入产品特点和广告信息。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f58e/11351839/35ba59e75ad5/behavsci-14-00702-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f58e/11351839/9737d12becce/behavsci-14-00702-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f58e/11351839/de5ec5edc241/behavsci-14-00702-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f58e/11351839/35ba59e75ad5/behavsci-14-00702-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f58e/11351839/9737d12becce/behavsci-14-00702-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f58e/11351839/de5ec5edc241/behavsci-14-00702-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f58e/11351839/35ba59e75ad5/behavsci-14-00702-g003.jpg

相似文献

1
Exploring the Impact of Sustainability Trade-Offs: The Role of Product and Sustainability Types in Consumer Purchases Mediated by Moral Regulation.探索可持续性权衡的影响:产品和可持续性类型在道德规范介导的消费者购买行为中的作用。
Behav Sci (Basel). 2024 Aug 12;14(8):702. doi: 10.3390/bs14080702.
2
Environmental Consciousness, Purchase Intention, and Actual Purchase Behavior of Eco-Friendly Products: The Moderating Impact of Situational Context.环保意识、购买意向与环保产品的实际购买行为:情境语境的调节作用。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Mar 29;20(7):5312. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20075312.
3
The psychology of sustainable consumption.可持续消费心理学。
Prog Brain Res. 2020;253:283-308. doi: 10.1016/bs.pbr.2020.05.033. Epub 2020 Jul 2.
4
Assessing eco-label knowledge and sustainable consumption behavior in energy sector of Pakistan: an environmental sustainability paradigm.评估巴基斯坦能源部门的生态标签知识与可持续消费行为:一种环境可持续性范式。
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2023 Mar;30(14):41319-41332. doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-25262-8. Epub 2023 Jan 11.
5
Consumer Attitudes and Purchase Intentions in Relation to Animal Welfare-Friendly Products: Evidence from Taiwan.消费者对动物福利友好型产品的态度和购买意向:来自台湾的证据。
Nutrients. 2022 Oct 31;14(21):4571. doi: 10.3390/nu14214571.
6
How do environmental values impact green product purchase intention? The moderating role of green trust.环境价值观如何影响绿色产品购买意愿?绿色信任的调节作用。
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2021 Sep;28(33):46020-46034. doi: 10.1007/s11356-021-13946-y. Epub 2021 Apr 22.
7
The impact of an eco-score label on US consumers' perceptions of environmental sustainability and intentions to purchase food: A randomized experiment.生态评分标签对美国消费者对环境可持续性的认知和购买食品意愿的影响:一项随机实验。
PLoS One. 2024 Jun 27;19(6):e0306123. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0306123. eCollection 2024.
8
The study of female college students' consumer psychology mechanism toward male celebrity endorsed products: Tempted or coerced?女大学生对男性名人代言产品的消费心理机制研究:受诱惑还是被胁迫?
Heliyon. 2024 Apr 26;10(9):e30401. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30401. eCollection 2024 May 15.
9
How and Why Does the Attitude-Behavior Gap Differ Between Product Categories of Sustainable Food? Analysis of Organic Food Purchases Based on Household Panel Data.可持续食品不同产品类别之间的态度-行为差距如何以及为何存在差异?基于家庭面板数据的有机食品购买分析。
Front Psychol. 2021 Feb 16;12:595636. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.595636. eCollection 2021.
10
Consumer Perception of Sustainability Attributes in Organic and Local Food.消费者对有机食品和本地食品可持续性属性的认知
Recent Pat Food Nutr Agric. 2018;9(2):87-96. doi: 10.2174/2212798410666171215112058.

本文引用的文献

1
Emotional foundations of the market: Sympathy and self-interest.市场的情感基础:同情与私利。
Front Sociol. 2022 Nov 14;7:1054291. doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2022.1054291. eCollection 2022.
2
No evidence of moral licensing in a laboratory bribe-taking task.在实验室贿赂任务中没有道德许可的证据。
Sci Rep. 2022 Aug 16;12(1):13860. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-16800-4.
3
Linking Judging Moral to Acting Moral: A Relational Motivations Approach to Judging and Practicing Covid-19 Behaviors.将道德判断与道德行为联系起来:一种新冠行为判断和实践的关系动机方法。
Psychol Rep. 2023 Apr;126(2):835-855. doi: 10.1177/00332941211061077. Epub 2021 Dec 22.
4
The relative importance of ski resort- and weather-related characteristics when going alpine skiing: Data from a rating-based conjoint survey.进行高山滑雪时滑雪胜地及天气相关特征的相对重要性:基于评分的联合调查数据
Data Brief. 2021 Jun 29;37:107252. doi: 10.1016/j.dib.2021.107252. eCollection 2021 Aug.
5
Good Attitudes Are Not Good Enough: An Ethnographical Approach to Investigate Attitude-Behavior Inconsistencies in Sustainable Choice.仅有良好态度是不够的:一种用于调查可持续选择中态度与行为不一致性的人种志方法。
Foods. 2021 Jun 8;10(6):1317. doi: 10.3390/foods10061317.
6
How and Why Does the Attitude-Behavior Gap Differ Between Product Categories of Sustainable Food? Analysis of Organic Food Purchases Based on Household Panel Data.可持续食品不同产品类别之间的态度-行为差距如何以及为何存在差异?基于家庭面板数据的有机食品购买分析。
Front Psychol. 2021 Feb 16;12:595636. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.595636. eCollection 2021.
7
The Illusion of Moral Superiority.道德优越感的错觉
Soc Psychol Personal Sci. 2017 Aug;8(6):623-631. doi: 10.1177/1948550616673878. Epub 2016 Oct 19.
8
A consumption value-gap analysis for sustainable consumption.可持续消费的消费价值差距分析
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2017 Mar;24(8):7714-7725. doi: 10.1007/s11356-016-8355-9. Epub 2017 Jan 26.
9
Consistency Versus Licensing Effects of Past Moral Behavior.过去道德行为的一致性与许可效应。
Annu Rev Psychol. 2016;67:363-85. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115120. Epub 2015 Sep 17.
10
Millennials in the Workplace: A Communication Perspective on Millennials' Organizational Relationships and Performance.职场中的千禧一代:关于千禧一代组织关系与绩效的沟通视角
J Bus Psychol. 2010 Jun;25(2):225-238. doi: 10.1007/s10869-010-9172-7. Epub 2010 Mar 5.