| Literature DB >> 36185141 |
Yixin Nong1,2,3, Minjuan Zhao4, Hsiaoping Chien2,5.
Abstract
Although the nutritional and health benefits of buckwheat foods have been widely discussed and evaluated, studies on consumer perceptions of the health benefits of buckwheat functional foods and how these perceived benefits influence their consumption are scarce. On the basis of the theory of planned behavior, this study aimed to explore consumers' purchase intention and behavior toward buckwheat functional foods while assessing the impact of their perceived susceptibility and severity of health concerns on the purchase decisions for such foods. Using data from 1077 participants collected in person from Southwest China, we compared the influencing factors between consumer groups based on whether they were aware of the nutritive and health benefits of buckwheat. The results indicated that, apart from consumers' perceived behavioral control, their perceived susceptibility and perceived severity of three selected common health problems, perceived value and efficacy of buckwheat, and subjective norms were strong predictors of consumers' purchase decisions. Moreover, perceived susceptibility and severity were effective antecedents of the perceived value and efficacy of buckwheat, respectively. Consumers aware of buckwheat's nutritive and health benefits of buckwheat were less affected by perceived efficacy. This study highlights that the higher the susceptibility to the three selected common health problems, the greater the internal and behavioral changes toward the purchase of buckwheat functional foods. These findings reveal factors affecting consumers' healthy eating beliefs, which can be beneficial for both policymakers and marketers in formulating healthy diet policies and strategies in developing countries.Entities:
Keywords: Buckwheat; Functional food; Health problem; Southwest China; Theory of planned behavior
Year: 2022 PMID: 36185141 PMCID: PMC9520211 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10671
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
Figure 1Conceptual model of consumers' purchase decisions on buckwheat.
Demographic profile of the sample (n = 1077).
| Characteristics | Frequency | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Age | ||
| 18–25 | 232 | 21.50 |
| 26–35 | 293 | 27.20 |
| 36–45 | 145 | 13.50 |
| 46–55 | 155 | 14.40 |
| 55–88 | 252 | 23.40 |
| Gender | ||
| Male | 479 | 44.50 |
| Female | 598 | 55.50 |
| Education level | ||
| Middle school and below | 274 | 25.50 |
| High school | 157 | 14.60 |
| Junior college | 215 | 20.00 |
| Bachelor | 349 | 32.40 |
| Master and above | 82 | 7.60 |
| Annual income (10,000 yuan) | ||
| Less than 1 | 68 | 6.30 |
| From 1 to 3 | 239 | 22.20 |
| From 3 to 5 | 298 | 27.70 |
| More than 5 | 472 | 43.70 |
1 US $ = 6.496 yuan.
Measurement model: Reliability and validity.
| Latent variables | Items | Factor loading | SMC | Cronbach's | C.R | AVE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perceived susceptibility (PSU) | PSU1 | 0.848 | 0.719 | 0.935 | 0.936 | 0.786 |
| PSU2 | 0.846 | 0.715 | ||||
| PSU3 | 0.917 | 0.840 | ||||
| PSU4 | 0.932 | 0.868 | ||||
| Perceived severity (PSE) | PSE1 | 0.827 | 0.684 | 0.942 | 0.942 | 0.802 |
| PSE2 | 0.876 | 0.768 | ||||
| PSE3 | 0.938 | 0.880 | ||||
| PSE4 | 0.936 | 0.876 | ||||
| Perceived value (PV) | PV1 | 0.797 | 0.633 | 0.925 | 0.929 | 0.767 |
| PV2 | 0.952 | 0.906 | ||||
| PV3 | 0.937 | 0.877 | ||||
| PV4 | 0.803 | 0.646 | ||||
| Perceived efficacy (PE) | PE1 | 0.904 | 0.812 | 0.903 | 0.908 | 0.768 |
| PE2 | 0.921 | 0.859 | ||||
| PE3 | 0.800 | 0.633 | ||||
| Perceived behavioral control (PBC) | PBC1 | 0.900 | 0.826 | 0.700 | 0.703 | 0.535 |
| PBC2 | 0.892 | 0.786 | ||||
| Subjective norms (SN) | SN1 | 0.748 | 0.599 | 0.893 | 0.900 | 0.754 |
| SN2 | 0.956 | 0.915 | ||||
| SN3 | 0.884 | 0.781 | ||||
| Purchase intention (PI) | PI1 | 0.831 | 0.691 | 0.930 | 0.914 | 0.785 |
| PI2 | 0.897 | 0.805 | ||||
| PI3 | 0.919 | 0.844 | ||||
| Purchase behavior (PB) | PB1 | 0.939 | 0.881 | 0.965 | 0.958 | 0.883 |
| PB2 | 0.941 | 0.885 | ||||
| PB3 | 0.939 | 0.909 |
Significant at р < 0.001.
Results of the discriminant validity test.
| Latent variables | PSU | PSE | PV | PE | PBC | SN | PI | PB |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PSU | ||||||||
| PSE | 0.424∗∗∗ | |||||||
| PV | 0.204∗∗ | 0.295∗∗∗ | ||||||
| PE | 0.218∗∗∗ | 0.146 | 0.058∗ | |||||
| PBC | 0.103∗∗ | 0.156∗∗∗ | 0.050 | 0.030 | ||||
| SN | 0.158∗∗∗ | 0.164∗∗∗ | 0.057 | 0.041 | 0.442∗∗∗ | |||
| PI | 0.199 | 0.188 | 0.297∗∗∗ | 0.486∗∗∗ | 0.122 | 0.341∗∗∗ | ||
| PB | 0.155 | 0.124 | 0.129 | 0.554∗∗∗ | 0.063 | 0.142 | 0.545∗∗∗ |
The square roots of the AVEs are bold elements. ∗, ∗∗, ∗∗∗ Significant at р< 5%, <1% and <0.1%, respectively.
Path relationship among the constructs.
| Hypotheses | Std β | Std. error | t-value | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | 0.360 | 0.041 | 11.285 | Supported |
| ( | 0.254 | 0.036 | 7.926 | Supported |
| ( | 0.097 | 0.022 | 2.802 | Supported |
| ( | 0.254 | 0.028 | 7.240 | Supported |
| ( | 0.190 | 0.032 | 5.284 | Supported |
| ( | 0.066 | 0.038 | 1.848 | Not supported |
| ( | 0.460 | 0.030 | 12.771 | Supported |
| ( | 0.379 | 0.040 | 10.110 | Supported |
| ( | -0.050 | 0.030 | -1.565 | Not supported |
| ( | 0.008 | 0.035 | 0.260 | Not supported |
| ( | 0.330 | 0.030 | 9.277 | Supported |
CMIN/DF = 4.186, RMSEA = 0.067, CFI = 0.949, IFI = 9.949, TLI = 0.941, NFI = 9.939, PNFI = 0.815, PGFI = 0.823.
Significant at р < 0.1%.
Figure 2Results of SEM with standardized coefficients. Note: CMIN/DF = 4.186, RMSEA = 0.067, CFI = 0.949, IFI = 9.949, TLI = 0.941, NFI = 9.939, PNFI = 0.815, PGFI = 0.823; ∗∗∗ Significant at р<0.1%.
Path relationship among two nutritive value awareness groups.
| Path relationship | Aware of nutritive value | Non-aware of nutritive value | CRD | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Std β | t-value | Std β | t-value | ||
| PI→PB | 0.345∗∗∗ | 9.586 | 0.410∗∗∗ | 5.671 | 0.521 |
| PV→PI | 0.294∗∗∗ | 7.690 | 0.150∗∗ | 2.596 | -2.213∗∗ |
| PSU→PV | 0.087∗∗∗ | 2.106 | 0.087 | 1.346 | -0.900 |
| PSE→PV | 0.286∗ | 6.741 | 0.193∗∗ | 2.957 | 0.118 |
| PE→PI | 0.353∗∗∗ | 8.420 | 0.628∗∗∗ | 9.224 | 3.583∗∗∗ |
| PE→PB | 0.393∗∗∗ | 9.445 | 0.318∗∗∗ | 3.818 | -0.994 |
| PSU→PE | 0.198∗∗∗ | 4.608 | 0.158∗ | 2.351 | 0.336 |
| PSE→PE | 0.061 | 1.440 | 0.086 | 1.288 | -0.416 |
| PBC→PI | 0.009 | 0.234 | -0.136∗ | -2.364 | -2.101∗∗ |
| PBC→PB | 0.016 | 0.472 | 0.025 | 0.486 | 0.115 |
| SN→PI | 0.353∗∗∗ | 8.198 | 0.293∗∗∗ | 4.374 | -0.355 |
CMIN/DF = 3.952, RMSEA = 0.053, CFI = 0.939, IFI = 0.939, TLI = 0.930, PNFI = 0.798, PGFI = 0.815.
∗, ∗∗, ∗∗∗ Significant at р < 5%, <1% and <0.1%, respectively.
Path relationship among two groups of health effects awareness.
| Path relationship | Aware of health effects | Non-aware of health effects | CRD | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Std β | t-value | Std β | t-value | ||
| PI→PB | 0.351∗∗∗ | 8.574 | 0.356∗∗∗ | 6.747 | -0.007 |
| PV→PI | 0.242∗∗∗ | 5.816 | 0.251∗∗∗ | 5.189 | -0.009 |
| PSU→PV | 0.050 | 1.149 | 0.137∗ | 2.442 | -1.482 |
| PSE→PV | 0.281∗∗∗ | 6.208 | 0.197∗∗∗ | 3.520 | 1.432 |
| PE→PI | 0.329∗∗∗ | 6.833 | 0.598∗∗∗ | 11.292 | 3.414∗∗∗ |
| PE→PB | 0.359∗∗∗ | 7.407 | 0.411∗∗∗ | 6.879 | 0.326 |
| PSU→PE | 0.149∗∗∗ | 3.208 | 0.220∗∗∗ | 3.843 | -0.174 |
| PSE→PE | 0.061 | 1.322 | 0.053 | 0.936 | 1.444 |
| PBC→PI | -0.005 | -0.126 | -0.096∗ | -2.087 | -1.500 |
| PBC→PB | 0.010 | 0.248 | 0.005 | 0.109 | -0.082 |
| SN→PI | 0.426∗∗∗ | 8.494 | 0.192∗∗∗ | 3.856 | -3.675∗∗∗ |
CMIN/DF = 3.826, RMSEA = 0.051, CFI = 0.940, IFI = 0.940, TLI = 0.931, PNFI = 0.799, PGFI = 0.816.
∗, ∗∗, ∗∗∗ Significant at р < 5%, <1% and <0.1%, respectively.
| Items | Description (translated from Chinese) |
|---|---|
| PSU1 | I might have the top three health problems because of personal health conditions. |
| PSU2 | Having the top three health problems will damage my health because of my health conditions. |
| PSU3 | Without adjusting my diet, I am very likely to have the top three health problems in the future. |
| PSU4 | Having the top three health problems will damage health because of inappropriate diet. |
| PSE1 | The top three health problems will increase my expenditure. |
| PSE2 | The top three health problems will influence my daily life. |
| PSE3 | The top three health problems will influence my lifespan. |
| PSE4 | The impact of the top three health problems will last for a long time. |
| PV1 | I purchase buckwheat products because it is free from agricultural pollutants and I feel safe to buy them. |
| PV2 | I purchase buckwheat products because it is beneficial for my health. |
| PV3 | I purchase buckwheat products because it is beneficial for my family's health. |
| PV4 | I purchase buckwheat products because it reduces the possibility of having the |
| PE1 | I am confident that I would purchase buckwheat products regularly while people around me buy other products. |
| PE2 | I am confident that I would purchase buckwheat products regularly even when other products are on sale. |
| PE3 | I am confident that I would purchase buckwheat products regularly even when my family does not need it. |
| PBC1 | I am confident I have enough resources (e.g. time, money, and opportunities) to purchase buckwheat products. |
| PBC2 | I am confident it is not difficult for me to purchase buckwheat products. |
| PBC3 | It is easy for me to purchase buckwheat products from convenience stores and supermarkets |
| SN1 | It is important to me that my families and friends think I should buy buckwheat products. |
| SN2 | It is important to me that more and more people purchase buckwheat products. |
| SN3 | It is important to me that the national healthy diet policy encourages purchase of buckwheat products. |
| PI1 | I will recommend to others to buy buckwheat products. |
| PI2 | I will continue to buy buckwheat products. |
| PI3 | I will buy buckwheat products more frequently. |
| PB1 | I have been purchasing more buckwheat products. |
| PB2 | I have been purchasing more varieties of buckwheat products. |
| PB3 | I have been purchasing buckwheat products more frequently. |