| Literature DB >> 35805420 |
Heather Markham Kim1, In-Hye Lee2, Kyuhyeon Joo1, JungHoon Jay Lee3, Jinsoo Hwang1.
Abstract
This study observed the relationship between psychological benefits and the theory of planned behavior (TPB) in the context of an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcasts. The theoretical framework was enhanced even further by examining the moderating role of personal norm on proenvironmental attitudes in the TV home shopping context. An online survey was conducted with Korean customers who had purchased home meal replacement (HMR) products from a TV home shopping broadcast within the past 6 months. A total of 305 samples were collected and used for the data analysis. All six of the hypotheses in the psychological benefits and TPB model were supported, meaning all constructs of psychological benefits, including warm glow, self-expressive benefits, and nature experiences, impacted TPB and behavioral intentions. Furthermore, personal norm had a moderating role in the relationship between warm glow and attitude. This research provides significant theoretical and managerial implications for the home shopping industry.Entities:
Keywords: TV home shopping broadcast; eco-friendly; home meal replacement; personal norm; psychological benefits; theory of planned behavior
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35805420 PMCID: PMC9265935 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19137759
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Figure 1The proposed conceptual model.
Profile of survey respondents (n = 305).
| Variable |
| Percentage |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Male | 154 | 50.5 |
| Female | 151 | 49.5 |
|
| ||
| 20s | 39 | 12.8 |
| 30s | 75 | 24.6 |
| 40s | 87 | 28.5 |
| Over 50s | 104 | 34.1 |
|
| ||
| $5001 and over | 48 | 15.7 |
| $4001–$5000 | 54 | 17.7 |
| $3001–$4000 | 52 | 17.0 |
| $2001–$3000 | 69 | 22.6 |
| Under $2000 | 82 | 26.8 |
|
| ||
| Single | 136 | 44.6 |
| Married | 164 | 53.8 |
| Widowed/divorced | 5 | 1.6 |
|
| ||
| Less than high school diploma | 23 | 7.5 |
| Associate degree | 44 | 14.4 |
| Bachelor’s degree | 167 | 54.8 |
| Graduate degree | 71 | 23.3 |
Confirmatory factor analysis: items and loadings.
| Construct and Scale Item | Standardized Loading a |
|---|---|
|
| |
| With an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast, I can feel good because the broadcast helps to protect the environment. | 0.899 |
| With an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast, I have the feeling of contributing to the well-being of humanity and nature. | 0.878 |
| With an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast, I can feel better because the services don’t harm the environment. | 0.941 |
|
| |
| With an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast, I can express my environmental concern. | 0.952 |
| With an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast, I can demonstrate to myself and my friends that I care about environmental conservation. | 0.816 |
| With an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast, I can demonstrate to myself and my friends that I care about environmental conservation. | 0.852 |
|
| |
| An eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast can make me feel close to nature. | 0.926 |
| An eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast can make me think of nature, fields, forests, and mountains. | 0.930 |
| An eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast can evoke the sensation of being in nature. | 0.944 |
|
| |
| Unfavorable–favorable | 0.934 |
| Bad–good | 0.962 |
| Negative–positive | 0.895 |
|
| |
| Most people who are important to me think I should use an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast. | 0.973 |
| Most people who are important to me would want me to use an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast. | 0.960 |
| People whose opinions I value would prefer that I use an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast. | 0.969 |
|
| |
| Whether or not I use an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast is completely up to me. | 0.946 |
| I am confident that if I want, I can use an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast. | 0.799 |
| I have resources, time, and opportunities to use an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast. | 0.808 |
|
| |
| Whether or not I use an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast is completely up to me. | 0.945 |
| I am confident that if I want, I can use an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast. | 0.962 |
| I have resources, time, and opportunities to use an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast. | 0.921 |
|
| |
| I feel an obligation to choose an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast. | 0.919 |
| Regardless of what other people do, because of my own values/principles I feel that I should use an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast. | 0.919 |
| I feel it is important that consumers use an eco-friendly TV home shopping broadcast. | 0.769 |
| Goodness-of-fit statistics: χ2 = 610.629, df = 224, χ2/df = 2.726, | |
Notes. a All factor loadings are significant at p < 0.001. NFI, normed fit index; CFI, comparative fit index; TLI, Tucker–Lewis index; RMSEA, root mean square error of approximation.
Descriptive statistics and associated measures.
| No. of Items | Mean (Std Dev.) | AVE | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1) Warm glow | 3 | 5.24 (1.37) | 0.822 |
| 0.705 b | 0.724 | 0.743 | 0.292 | 0.502 | 0.738 | 0.697 |
| (2) Self-expressive benefits | 3 | 4.29 (1.33) | 0.766 | 0.497 c |
| 0.772 | 0.652 | 0.365 | 0.387 | 0.617 | 0.615 |
| (3) Nature experiences | 3 | 4.46 (1.60) | 0.871 | 0.524 | 0.596 |
| 0.662 | 0.317 | 0.457 | 0.675 | 0.714 |
| (4) Attitude | 3 | 5.39 (1.45) | 0.866 | 0.552 | 0.425 | 0.438 |
| 0.234 | 0.528 | 0.772 | 0.688 |
| (5) Subjective norm | 3 | 3.83 (1.60) | 0.936 | 0.085 | 0.133 | 0.100 | 0.055 |
| 0.110 | 0.355 | 0.485 |
| (6) Perceived behavioral control | 3 | 5.19 (1.37) | 0.729 | 0.252 | 0.150 | 0.209 | 0.279 | 0.012 |
| 0.584 | 0.467 |
| (7) Behavioral intentions | 3 | 4.91 (1.39) | 0.889 | 0.545 | 0.381 | 0.456 | 0.596 | 0.126 |
|
|
|
| (8) Personal norm | 3 | 4.45 (1.38) | 0.760 | 0.486 | 0.378 | 0.510 | 0.473 | 0.235 | 0.218 |
|
|
Notes. AVE, average variance extracted; a composite reliabilities are along the diagonal; b correlations are above the diagonal; c squared correlations are below the diagonal.
Figure 2Standardized theoretical path coefficients. Goodness-of-fit statistics: χ2 = 427.079, df = 173, χ2/df = 2.469, p < 0.001, NFI = 0.945, CFI = 0.966, TLI = 0.959, and RMSEA = 0.070. Notes. * p < 0.05; S, supported; NS, not supported; path coefficient of low personal norm group; path coefficient of high personal norm group.
Moderating role of personal norm.
| Path | Unconstrained Model | Constrained Model | Tests of Moderator | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low Personal Norm | High Personal Norm | ||||||
|
|
| Δχ2 (346) = 652.843 | χ2 Difference | Hypotheses | |||
| H7a WG → A | 0.344 | 2.843 * | 0.539 | 6.483 * | Δχ2 (347) = 657.193 | Δχ2(1) = 4.350 | Supported |
| H7b SEB → A | 0.082 | 0.890 | 0.224 | 1.917 * | Δχ2 (347) = 656.445 | Δχ2(1) = 3.602 | Not supported |
| H7c NE → A | 0.153 | 1.765 | 0.278 | 2.087 * | Δχ2 (347) = 656.235 | Δχ2(1) = 3.392 | Not supported |
Notes. WG, warm glow; SEB, self-expressive benefits; NE, nature experiences; A, attitude; ns, not significant; * p < 0.05; Δχ2(1) = 3.84 and p < 0.05.