Journal of International Consumer Marketing

ISSN: 0896-1530 (Print) 1528-7068 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wicm20

Explaining Socially Responsible Consumer

Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Review of Theory of
Planned Behavior

Tae-Im Han & Leslie Stoel

To cite this article: Tae-Im Han & Leslie Stoel (2016): Explaining Socially Responsible Consumer
Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Review of Theory of Planned Behavior, Journal of International
Consumer Marketing, DOI: 10.1080/08961530.2016.1251870

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2016.1251870

Published online: 02 Dec 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 10

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wicm20

Download by: [University of Leeds] Date: 10 December 2016, At: 04:33

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2016.1251870

Explaining Socially Responsible Consumer Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Review of

Theory of Planned Behavior
Tae-Im Hana and Leslie Stoelb
a
Department of STEM Education and Professional Studies, Darden College of Education, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia, USA;
b
Department of Marketing, Farmer School of Business, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio, USA

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
This study reviews previous studies on socially responsible consumers and identifies major Consumer behavior; fair
antecedents of behavioral intentions to contribute to the theoretical understanding of their trade; meta-analysis; organic;
purchase behaviors. Meta-analytic procedures were used to (1) quantify the relationship between sustainability
theory of planned behavior (TPB) constructs, (2) examine the contribution of additional predictors
to explain behavioral intention, and (3) identify moderators that influence the strength of the
relationships between TPB constructs. The results reveal key factors underlying the consumer
decision-making process and provide useful information for marketers in developing strategies that
can increase acceptance and purchase of products/services that address consumers’ ethical
concerns.

Introduction
A large consumer survey conducted by Cone Inc.
(2013) indicated that social features associated with
products (e.g., environmental protection, support for
human rights) are becoming important criteria in
consumers’ shopping strategies; 54% of consumers
had bought an ethical product over the last 12 months,
which was 170% increased from 1993. These statistics
suggest that ethical consumerism, the practice of
purchasing products or services that are produced in a
way that reduces social and/or environmental damage
(Roberts 1993), has gained attention in recent years.
Previous literature has also confirmed the existence
and continuous growth of a consumer segment whose
purchase behaviors are driven by ethical concerns
(e.g., Goldstein, Cialdini, and Griskevicius 2008; Kim,
Lee, and Hur 2012; Manget, Roche, and M€ unnich
2009). Furthermore, some studies have examined
intentions of marketing managers to practice
sustainability marketing (e.g., Ferdous 2010). Despite
the growing interest in ethical consumerism, prior
research provides limited knowledge about purchase
behaviors of such consumers. Are there particular
social responsibility issues that are more important to
ethical consumers? Are certain types of goods/services
more susceptible to ethical scrutiny of consumers?
What characteristics make consumers more or less
concerned with ethical consumption? Answering these
questions can provide useful information to marketers
in regards to the provision of socially responsible
goods/services.
Limited knowledge about ethical consumers may be
a result of several characteristics of prior research.
First, the use of key terms in this scholarly domain is
inconsistent across studies in the literature. For exam-
ple, while many studies apply a broad definition for
describing socially responsible consumers, which takes
into account diverse ethical matters such as environ-
mental protection, employment and human rights
support, and community support, a number of studies
apply a much narrower definition, which involves a
relatively smaller number of ethical matters.
A second issue is that these studies report varying
results, particularly regarding the effect of consumer
demographics and attitudinal variables such as liberal-
ism and perceived consumer effectiveness on purchase
behaviors (e.g., Antil 1984; Roberts 1995). For example,
Roberts (1995) reviewed previous studies and clearly

CONTACT Tae-Im Han than@odu.edu Department of STEM Education and Professional Studies, Darden College of Education, Old Dominion University,
218 Education Building, Norfolk, VA 23529, USA.
© 2016 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 T.-I. HAN AND L. STOEL
illustrated the large variance across studies in the
impact of demographic variables (e.g., age, income,
education, occupation, place of residence) on socially
responsible consumer behaviors (SRCBs). He stated
that the inconsistent results may derive from the over-
use of borrowed measurements from other disciplines.
Thus, clarifying whether SRCBs are the same or differ-
ent across various ethical interests, examining relation-
ships among the factors influencing behavioral
intention to specify general or unique relationships,
and assessing the influence of factors unique to the
socially responsible consumption context will contrib-
ute to the research literature regarding SRCB and will
provide practical implications to marketers that seek to
serve such consumers.
There are a few studies that systematically review
literature on socially responsible human behaviors,
but they are mostly limited to pro-environmental
behaviors (e.g., Aertsens et al. 2009; Bamberg and
Moser 2007; Kl€ ockner 2013) and not specifically
focused on consumer purchase behaviors (e.g., Bam-
berg and Moser 2007; Kl€ ockner 2013). For example,
in a recent meta-analysis, Kl€ockner (2013) examined a
wide range of pro-environmental behaviors including
waste behaviors, water usage, energy saving, food con-
sumption, and environmental activism. A part of its
data did include consumer purchase behaviors; how-
ever, this study did not conduct separate analysis for
different types of behaviors. Furthermore, gaps exist
in the literature regarding product types and behaviors
examined; no prior work has aggregated and com-
pared results from consumer studies regarding differ-
ent types of products associated with ethical issues,
such as food (grocery) versus apparel versus service
goods.
In addition to the aforementioned gaps in the liter-
ature, some researchers call for an examination of the
theoretical foundations of SRCB studies. The theory of
planned behavior (TPB) (Ajzen 1991) has been widely
applied to predict various consumer behaviors, includ-
ing SRCB. Despite its extensive application in previous
studies, some researchers question TPB’s assumption
that the theory will sufficiently capture theoretical
determinants of behaviors or intentions (e.g., Ogden
2003; O’Keefe 2002). The explanatory value of the
subjective norms concept in the TPB, in particular,
has been a subject of controversy in the literature
(Sheppard, Hartwick, and Warshaw 1988; Van den
Putte 1991).
Therefore, the purpose of this study is to systemati-
cally review previous studies of SRCB that apply TPB
or TRA (theory of reasoned action, TPB is an
extended version of TRA) to examine the predictive
validity of the model and to identify major determi-
nants of consumers’ socially responsible purchase
behaviors. Using meta-analysis, the present study
combined previous study results associated with com-
mon consumer goods and services and across multiple
ethical issues. That is, apparel, food, and hotel/tourism
products/services involving ethical issues related to
environmental protection and human rights support,
conducted in a TPB or TRA framework were exam-
ined in this study.
This research is important because it aggregates and
compares results across diverse studies investigating
SRCB, providing marketers with context relevant
information that will enable them to better serve ethi-
cal consumers. Factors underlying SRCBs are likely to
differ from those underlying conventional consumer
purchase behavior due to the moral issues involved.
Therefore, to enable marketers to help consumers
who seek to make socially responsible purchases,
greater clarity is needed regarding how the ethical
context in SRCB affects the development of purchase
intention.
Literature review
Theory of planned behavior
The TPB (Ajzen 1991) is one of the most influential
social-psychological models for explaining human
behavior (Armitage and Conner 2001). According to
TPB, the most powerful determinant of the actual
behavior is individual’s intentions to perform the
behavior. Behavioral intention is a function of the fol-
lowing three factors: attitude toward the behavior,
subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control
(PBC).
TPB has been successfully applied to enhance the
predictive power of socially responsible behaviors in
diverse settings: software copying (e.g., Chang 1998),
retail employee theft (e.g., Bailey 2006), and ethical
purchase behaviors such as pro-environmental con-
sumption (e.g., Han, Hsu, and Sheu 2010; Han and
Kim 2010; Ko 2012; Sparks and Shepherd 1992), pur-
chase of fair-trade products (e.g., Ma, Littrell, and
Niehm 2012; Shaw and Shiu 2002), and approach/

avoidance behaviors toward counterfeit products (e.g.,
Kim and Karpova, 2010; Penz and St€ ottinger 2005).
Although TPB is generally considered to be an
effective tool in behavioral studies, many researchers
have mentioned the limitations of TPB in that it does
not provide sufficient accuracy toward the prediction
(e.g., Ogden 2003; O’Keefe 2002). Ogden (2003) criti-
cized its conceptual bases by pointing out that some
studies that use TPB showed no effect of attitude, sub-
jective norms, or PBC. However, Ajzen and Fishbein
(2004) clarified that the comparative importance of
the three antecedents could vary depending on the
type of behavior and population. Ajzen (1991) addi-
tionally stated that TPB allows adding other predictors
besides those in the TPB framework if they enhance
the predictive power of the model. He suggested that
TPB is “open to the inclusion of additional predictors
if it can be shown that they capture a significant pro-
portion of the variance in intention or behavior after
the theory’s current variables have been taken into
account” (p. 199).
Socially responsible consumers
Webster (1975) defined the socially responsible con-
sumer as one “who takes into account the public con-
sequences of his or her private consumption or who
attempts to use his or her purchasing power to bring
about social change” (p. 188). Roberts (1993) assumed
that two elements operate in the definition of a socially
responsible consumer: environmental concern and
general social concern. He described this consumer as
“one who purchases products and services perceived
to have a positive (or less negative) influence on the
environment or who patronizes businesses that
attempt to affect related positive social change”
(p. 140).
In spite of the current increase in the number of
socially responsible consumers, extant literature offers
limited knowledge about them due to the multifaceted
nature of the term and varying results in previously
reported studies. One major problem in this scholarly
domain is the use of some of the key terms as they
seem to be inconsistent across studies in the previous
literature. For example, some studies define the term
socially responsible consumer broadly involving a
wide range of social issues, such as of environmental
protection, improvement of human rights, and com-
munity support. (e.g., Mohr and Webb 2005; Roberts
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING 3
1995), whereas others define it more narrowly. A good
example of this latter case would be Antil (1984)
study, which only considered environmental matters
when profiling socially responsible consumers. Thus,
clarifying the nature of socially responsible consumers
by examining their purchase behaviors in a more
detailed manner is necessary to provide a comprehen-
sive understanding of this topic.
Research questions
Based on the literature review, three research ques-
tions were developed. Previous findings in the litera-
ture related to each question are stated below.
Research question 1
Which TPB predictors have a stronger relationship
with behavioral intention in the context of SRCB?
The three predictors in the TPB model, attitude,
subjective norms, and PBC usually do not have equal
power when explaining one’s intention to perform a
behavior. Similar to previous meta-analytic studies on
pro-environmental behaviors (Bamberg and Moser
2007; Kl€ockner 2013), the first goal of this research
was to determine quantitatively the strengths of these
relationships, particularly in the context of SRCB.
Ajzen (1991), the initial developer of the theory, states
that “The relative importance of attitude, subjective
norms, and PBC in the prediction of intention is
expected to vary across behaviors and situations” (p.
188). However, in general, the strength of the impact
of subjective norms on intention is found to be less
significant than attitude and PBC. Several broad meta-
analytic studies of TRA or TPB suggested that subjec-
tive norms are the weakest antecedent of behavioral
intention (e.g., Sheppard et al. 1988; Van den Putte
1991).
The first research question of this study examines
the SRCB literature to see whether the strength of rela-
tionships between TPB predictors and behavioral
intention varies relative to prior research in other con-
texts. The relative magnitudes of the relationships
between variables are closely examined. Although
prior studies suggest that the subjective norms compo-
nent is a rather weak predictor of intention, the pres-
ent study presumed that it will have an especially
strong association with behavioral intention when
investigating SRCB compared to other human behav-
iors. Chang (1998) mentioned that one’s ethical
4 T.-I. HAN AND L. STOEL
behavior is greatly affected by the social pressure of
significant others. Furthermore, a body of research on
SRCB highlights the influence of others’ behaviors in
effectively changing one’s own behavior; many of
these studies emphasize the role of social norms in
promoting socially responsible purchase behaviors
(Goldstein, Cialdini, and Griskevicius 2008; Kim, Lee,
and Hur 2012).
Research question 2
What other constructs significantly contribute to the
prediction of behavioral intention in the context of
SRCB?
Based on previous research on SRCB and meta-
analytic studies on pro-environmental behaviors
(Bamberg and Moser 2006; Kl€ ockner 2013), this study
presumed that moral norms, self-identity, and envi-
ronmental consciousness will help improve the pre-
dictive power of TPB in explaining purchase intention
of socially responsible products. First, moral norms
are known to add power to the prediction of both
behavioral intention and behavior (Bamberg and
Moser 2006; Beck and Ajzen 1991; Conner and Armit-
age 1998; Kl€ockner 2013). Norm-activation model
(NAM, Schwartz 1977) illustrates that moral norms
are direct determinants of socially responsible behav-
iors. Moral norms could be described as the awareness
of the moral correctness/incorrectness associated with
performing the behavior and takes into consideration
“personal feelings of … responsibility to perform, or
to refuse to perform, a certain behavior” (Ajzen 1991,
p.199). Therefore, this construct is considered to be
distinct from subjective norms because it is a feeling
related to personal norms, rather than to the social
pressure that is associated with subjective norms. Con-
sistent with NAM, studies suggest that moral norms
are especially useful when examining behaviors with
an ethical or moral dimension (e.g., Bamberg and
Moser 2006; Conner and Armitage 1998).
Self-identity has also been frequently incorporated
into the TPB model as studies suggest that it is a useful
predictor of a particular behavior (Bamberg and
Moser 2006; Conner and Armitage 1998; Kl€ ockner
2013). It can be defined as “the salient part of an
actor’s self which relates to a particular behavior” and
indicates the extent to which an individual sees him/
herself as satisfying the criteria of any societal role
(Conner and Armitage 1998, p. 1444). Sparks and
Shepherd (1992) study on organic food suggested that
the more likely consumers think of themselves as
green consumers, the more positive their attitude and
the stronger their purchase intention with regard to
organic foods.
Another variable of interest is environmental con-
sciousness. A large number of studies on SRCB are
dedicated to finding determinants of consumers’ green
purchase behaviors and in such particular cases, envi-
ronmental consciousness is known to be a driving
force for performing the behavior (Hustvedt and
Dickson 2009; Kl€ockner 2013). Many people think it
is worth buying or paying extra for green products
because their production process has a less negative
impact on the environment.
Research question 3
What moderators influence the relationships between
TPB constructs?
Product type, ethical issue type, and study location
are expected to have moderating effects on the relation-
ships between TPB constructs, in accordance with pre-
vious studies. Consumers’ purchase behaviors are
greatly influenced by product categories because prod-
uct attributes, outcome benefits, and purchase experi-
ences vary across these categories (Carlson et al. 2009;
Low and Lamb 2000). The concept of ethical consump-
tion involves a wide range of products, which include
tangible goods such as foods and apparel products as
well as intangible goods such as services provided in
the hotel and tourism industry. Because consumer
behavior in the context of a certain product cannot be
generalized to other cases, it would be important to see
how strengths of relationships between TPB constructs
differ across product categories.
Roberts (1995) criticized research in the marketing
domain for treating SRCB as equivalent to eco-friendly
consumer behavior and developing consumer profiles
and marketing strategies solely based on environmen-
tal matters. He further suggested that we need to take
into account the two domains of ethical issues (i.e.,
environmental and general social matters) to represent
a full description of SRCB. In Mohr and Webb (2005)
experimental study, scenarios were created to manipu-
late the two ethical domains of environmental protec-
tion and support for human rights. According to the
results, significant differences were found between con-
sumer behaviors regarding these two matters. For

example, corporate social responsibility activities had a
much stronger effect on consumers’ evaluation of a
company when the ethical domain was environmental
protection than when it was support for human rights.
Finally, the location of the study needs to be exam-
ined to see whether culture has an impact on SRCB. It
is commonly accepted that people from distinctive
cultural backgrounds respond differently to various
types of social matters. For example, people from a
collectivistic culture generally put more emphasis on
group cohesiveness than those from individualistic
culture and thus are highly influenced by subjective
norms (Lee and Green 1991). In this sense, social
influence may play a stronger role during the purchase
process of socially responsible products in collectivis-
tic cultures relative to individualistic cultures. There is
a need for addressing this type of problem because in
recent years, marketers are increasingly focusing on
the role of ethnicity and culture in determining con-
sumer behavior (Holland and Gentry 1999).
Methods
Meta-analysis
Sample of studies
In order to retrieve studies for the review, the present
study:
 Used the Internet search engine “Google
Scholar” and electronic databases: ISI Web of
Knowledge and EBSCO. Keywords that were
used for the search were TPB (theory of planned
behavior) and TRA (theory of reasoned action)
plus the terms related to the scope of the study
(e.g., socially responsible consumers, ethical con-
sumers, pro-social consumers, green consumers,
fair-trade consumers).
 Examined citations in the located studies.
In the next step, the abstract and method section of
each relevant, identified paper were carefully read.
Because TPB provides clear definitions of the theoretical
constructs, studies applying this framework needed to
use items that properly reflect such definitions to mea-
sure the constructs. To further delimit studies for inclu-
sion, the data for this study were limited to those that
contain information on consumers’ purchase behavior
toward products associated with two types of social issues
(i.e., environmental protection and support for human
rights) within the domain of apparel, food, and hotel/
tourism industry. A growing number of SRCB studies
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING 5
are being published in these industry domains, and previ-
ous literature suggest that apparel, food, and hotel/tour-
ism products/services that have less negative impact on
our environment or society are increasingly sought by
consumers (Kim and Han 2010; Manget et al. 2009).
The effect size selected for the present meta-analysis
was r, the Pearson product-moment correlation coeffi-
cient. Therefore, for the remaining studies, a correla-
tion coefficient between at least two TPB constructs
and the sample size needed to be reported. In the pres-
ent study, the unit of analysis was an independent sam-
ple. Accordingly, one study that used an identical
sample with another study written by the same authors
was deleted for the statistical analysis. As a result, a
total of 30 studies reporting results of 33 independent
data sets met the selection criteria (Table 1). Descrip-
tive statistics of the studies are presented in Table 2.
Data coding and data retrieval
Correlation coefficients involving behavioral inten-
tion, attitude, subjective norms, PBC, and additional
predictors were retrieved from the studies. When a
study included more than one behavioral intention
(e.g., purchase intention of organic pizza and purchase
intention of organic tomato) and reported separate
correlation coefficient for each behavioral intention,
the average of the coefficients was used for the analy-
sis. This process avoids the violation of the indepen-
dence assumption underlying the validity of meta-
analytic studies. Data retrieval was conducted by two
independently working coders, and the obtained data
were checked several times. Disagreement between the
coders was resolved after consultation.
Meta-analytic strategy
The correlations from each study were first converted
using Fisher’s Zr -transformation (Hedges and Olkin
2014). The Zr -transformed correlations were used to
calculate an average in which each correlation value is
weighted by the inverse of the within-study variance.
Then, the average Zr value is back-transformed to give
rC for interpretation purposes. Further, to examine
the homogeneity in the study outcomes, Cochran
(1954)’s Q statistics were computed. The Q value fol-
lows the X 2 distribution with k-1 degrees of freedom
(k D the number of studies), under the hypothesis of
homogeneity in the effect sizes. Comprehensive Meta-
Analysis Software (CMA) was used to compute the
weighted mean effect sizes and Q statistics.
6 T.-I. HAN AND L. STOEL

Table 1. Description of the sample of studies and data sets.

Author(s) Sample Behavior N Country

Arvola et al. (2008) Adults aged 18 and over Purchase organic apples and ready-to-cook organic 202 Italy
pizza
Arvola et al. (2008) Adults aged 18 and over Purchase organic apples and ready-to-cook organic 270 Finland
pizza
Arvola et al. (2008) Adults aged 18 and over Purchase organic apples and ready-to-cook organic 200 UK
pizza
Anuwichanont et al. Tourists who have experiences staying in Visit hotels holding environmental concern 400 Thailand
(2011) hotels in Koh Samet, Thailand
Bissonnette and Seniors from high schools in New York City Purchase organic food 651 USA
Contento (2001)
Chen and Tung (2014) Taiwanese consumers Stay at a green hotel 559 Taiwan
Dean et al. (2008) Adults aged 18 and over Purchase fresh and processed organic foods 281 UK
Dowd and Burke (2013) Grocery buyers aged 18 and over Purchase sustainably sourced food 137 Australia
Han and Chung (2014) Female consumers over 18 years Purchase organic cotton apparel 200 South Korea
Han and Kim (2010) Consumers who had stayed at a green hotel Revisit a green hotel 434 USA
within the last 6 months
Han et al. (2010) Adults 18 years or older Stay at a green hotel 428 USA
Hauser et al. (2013) Grocery buyers aged 18 and over Purchase different food products (e.g., organic, fair 851 Switzerland
trade,
functional foods, fruits, vegetables, etc.)
Honkanen et al. (2006) Adults Purchase organic food 1,283 Norway
Hustvedt (2006) Adults 25 years or older Purchase organic cotton apparel 422 USA
Kang et al. (2013) University students Purchase organic cotton apparel 701 USA, South Korea,
and China
Kim and Han (2010) Adults 20 years or older Pay conventional-hotel prices at a green hotel 389 USA
Kim et al. (2012) Adults 19 years or older Purchase environmentally friendly apparel 332 USA
Ko (2012) Young female consumers of 18–36 years old Purchase environmentally friendly apparel 234 USA
Ko (2012) Young female consumers of 17–38 years old Purchase environmentally friendly apparel 194 China
Lodorfos and Dennis UK residents Purchase organic food 144 UK
(2008)
Ma et al. (2012) 18- to 28-year old female university students Purchase non-food fair-trade products (e.g., apparel, 810 USA
accessories)
Michaelidou and Hassan Consumers from the Island of Arran in Purchase organic food 222 UK
(2008) Scotland
Robinson and Smith Grocery buyers aged 18 and over Purchase sustainably produced foods 550 USA
(2002)
Shaw et al. (2006) Subscribers to the UK magazine “Ethical Avoid sweatshop clothing 794 UK
Consumer”
Shaw and Shiu (2002) Subscribers to the UK Ethical Consumer Purchase fair-trade grocery products 1,472 UK
magazine
Shaw et al. (2000) Subscribers to the UK Ethical Consumer Purchase fair-trade grocery products 736 UK
magazine
Song et al. (2012) Visitors who attended the Festival in 2010 Visit environmentally friendly local festival 400 South Korea
Sparks and Shepard UK residents Purchase organically produced vegetables 261 UK
(1992)
Tarkiainen and Sundqvist Adults aged 18 and over Purchase organic bread and flour 200 Finland
(2005)
Teng et al. (2015) Adults aged 20 years or older who were Stay at a green hotel 258 Taiwan
willing to stay in a green hotel
Umberson (2008) Adults aged 18 years or older Purchase environmentally friendly apparel 213 USA
Vermeira and Verbeke Young adults (19–22 years) Purchase sustainable dairy products 456 Belgium
(2008)
Zagata (2012) Consumers who purchase organic food on Purchase organic food 1054 Czech Republic
regular basis

Results
Research question 1. The relative strength of
relationship between TPB predictors (i.e., attitude,
subjective norms, and PBC) and behavioral intention
Cohen (1988) suggests the following guidelines for
interpreting the magnitudes of correlation coefficients:
r D 0.10 (small effect), r D 0.30 (medium effect) and r
D 0.50 (large effect). The mean correlations obtained
in the present study indicate that the relationships had
medium to large effect sizes. The values for all rela-
tionships were highly significant and produced narrow
95% confidence intervals. Particularly, purchase inten-
tion correlated most strongly with attitude (r C D
0.53, p < 0.0001). Subjective norms (r C D 0.50, p <
0.0001) also had a strong association with purchase
intention, and the strength of association was much
stronger than the PBC-purchase intention relationship
(r C D 0.39, p < 0.0001). The difference in the magni-
tude between the attitude-intention and subjective
 JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING 7

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of the studies. entered into the equation. Beta coefficients and the
Variable Value change in R2 value in behavioral intention are obtained
Median year of report 2009.50 to assess the contribution of the variable, above and
Median sample size 400 beyond the effects of the TPB predictors.
Location of the study
USA 10 (30.3%)
Europe 15 (45.5%)
Asia 6 (18.2%) Moral norms
USA and Asia combined 1 (3%) There were 11 independent data sets (k D 11, n D
Australia 1 (3%)
Type of product/service 6,935) that included moral norms in the TPB/TRA
Apparel 9 (27.3%) model. The hierarchical multiple regression revealed
Hotel/tourism 7 (21.2%)
Food 17 (51.5%) that in the first step, all TPB variables had significant
Ethical issue beta coefficients accounting for 39.7% of the variance
Environmental protection 28 (84.8%)
Support for human rights 4 (12.1%) in purchase intention. When adding moral norms,
Combined 1 (3%)
there was a significant increase in the variance
explained in purchase intention (R2 change D 0.02,
norms-intention relationships was minimal, which Fchange D 188.63, p < 0.001). The percentage of vari-
was in contrast to many meta-analytic study results ability accounted for by the predictor variables went
on TPB or TRA (e.g., Kl€ ockner 2013; Sheppard et al. up from 39.7% to 41.3% after adding moral norms.
1988; Van den Putte 1991). In addition to the strong
correlation of subjective norms and purchase inten- Self-identity
tion, subjective norms also correlated moderately A total of 9 studies, each reporting the result of an inde-
strongly with attitude (r C D 0.44, p < 0.0001). The pendent data set (k D 9, n D 5,946), included self-identity
fail-safe N of all relationships exceeded the recom- in the TPB/TRA model. In the first step, all TPB variables
mended tolerance level of 5 k C 10 (where k is the had significant beta coefficients accounting for 32% of
number of tests), meaning that the obtained mean the variance in purchase intention. When adding self-
correlations shown in Table 3 can be considered to be identity, there was a significant increase in the variance
robust. The homogeneity statistics indicated a large explained in purchase intention (R2 change D 0.03,
variation in the correlations reported in the data sets Fchange D 266.38, p < 0.001). The percentage of variabil-
(Q values were all significant, p < 0.001) which ity accounted for by the predictor variables went up
encouraged a search for potential moderators. The from 32.0% to 34.9% after adding self-identity.
results of moderator analyses are addressed below in
the section of the third research question. Environmental consciousness
There were 7 studies, each reporting results of an inde-
Research question 2. Contribution of other pendent data set (k D 7, n D 3,604) that included
constructs to predict intention environmental consciousness in the TPB/TRA model.
In the first step, all TPB variables had significant beta
A two-step hierarchical regression was performed using coefficients accounting for 48.8% of variance in
the mean correlation matrix as the input. In the first step, purchase intention. When adding environmental con-
attitude, subjective norms, and PBC are entered, and in sciousness, there was a significant increase in the vari-
the second step, the additional predictor variable is ance explained in purchase intention (R2 change D
0.02, Fchange D 145.56, p < 0.001). The percentage of
Table 3. Meta-analysis of the TPB components.
variability accounted for by the predictor variables
Relationship k rC 95% CI Fail-safe N Q
went up from 48.8% to 50.7% after adding environ-
Attitude-intention 30 0.53 0.52–0.54 35,971 486.58 mental consciousness.
Subjective norm-intention 28 0.50 0.48–0.51 23,550 525.89
PBC-intention 21 0.39 0.37–0.41 7,367 207.36
Attitude-subjective norm 23 0.44 0.43–0.46 13,048 355.61
Attitude-PBC 20 0.27 0.25–0.29 3,195 309.63
Research question 3. Moderators that influence the
Subjective norm-PBC 20 0.30 0.29–0.32 4,557 271.86 relationships between TPB constructs
Note. k D number of tests. rCD correlation weighted by number of subjects. Several different correlation matrices were produced
Q values are all significant (p < 0.001) rejecting the homogeneity
assumption. by categorizing the data into specific subsets based on
8 T.-I. HAN AND L. STOEL

Table 4. Meta-analysis of moderators.

A–I SN–I PBC–I

Sample size Sample size Sample size

Classification k N rC k N rC k N rC

Product/service type
Apparel 7 2,774 0.58 8 3,106 0.59 5 2,152 0.34
Hotel/tourism 7 2,868 0.61 7 2,868 0.54 6 2,468 0.48
Food 16 7,498 0.48 13 5,142 0.40 10 3,835 0.36
Ethical issue
Environmental protection 28 11,594 0.54 26 9,570 0.51 19 6,909 0.38
Support for human rights 3 2,397 0.39 2 1,546 0.37 2 1,546 0.43
Study location
USA 9 4,131 0.56 10 4,463 0.51 7 3,058 0.42
Europe 13 6,160 0.48 10 3,804 0.42 8 3,148 0.36
Asia 6 2,011 0.56 6 1,611 0.57 4 1,411 0.52

Note. A D Attitude. SN D Subjective norms. PBC D Perceived behavioral control. I D Intention. rCD correlation weighted by number of subjects. k D number of
tests. N D number of subjects.

the potential moderators. Table 4 shows the values
along with the number of data sets and participants
for each relationship within the category. Q statistics
comparing correlation coefficients between groups
were used to test the significance of the difference
(Borenstein et al. 2009).
Product/service type
First, the relationships between TPB constructs are
compared across product types (i.e., apparel, food,
and hotel/tourism). As expected, the strength of rela-
tionship between purchase intention and the predictor
variables (i.e., attitude, subjective norms and PBC)
was dependent on product/service types. Q statistics
show that the differences in effect size were significant
for all three relationships (A-I: Q D 93.07, df D 2, p <
0.001; SN-I: Q D 135.64, df D 2, p < 0.001; PBC-I:
Q D 38.59, df D 2, p < 0.001). For instance, subjective
norms were most strongly correlated with purchase
intention when the study involved consumers’ pur-
chase of apparel products (r C D 0.59). This effect size
was stronger than that of foods (r C D 0.40) and
hotel/tourism (r C D 0.54). In addition, attitude was
most strongly correlated with purchase intention in
the hotel/tourism domain (r C D 0.61).
Ethical issue type
TPB results between two ethical domains (i.e., envi-
ronmental protection and support for human rights)
are compared. The majority of the data were from
studies that examined consumer response toward
products associated with environmental protection,
and very few involved products associated with sup-
port for human rights. Considering the small number
of data sets used for products associated with support
for human rights, the findings need to be interpreted
with caution. However, Q statistics revealed that the
differences in effect sizes between subgroups were sig-
nificant in the attitude-intention and subjective norm-
intention relationships (A–I: Q D 73.72, df D 1, p <
0.001; SN-I: Q D 41.03, df D 1, p < 0.001) and insig-
nificant in PBC-I relationship (Q D 3.42, df D 1, p D
0.07). Attitude (r C D 0.54) and subjective norms
(r C D 0.51) had much stronger associations with pur-
chase intention when the product contributed to envi-
ronmental protection than when it involved support
for human rights (attitude: r C D 0.39; subjective
norms: r C D 0.37).
Study location
The study location is examined as a moderator to see
whether culture has an effect on the SRCB. This study
presumed that people from different cultural back-
grounds will possess distinct viewpoints regarding a
wide range of social behaviors, which may also include
SRCB. The between-group homogeneity statistic result
showed that the difference in effect size of the attitude-
intention correlation is significant (Q D 41.78, df D 2,
p < 0.001). While the mean correlation values were
identical for the two locations of the United States and
Asia (U.S.A.: r C D 0.58; Asia: r C D 0.58), the strength
of the attitude-intention correlation was found to be
weaker for European countries (Europe: r C D 0.48).
However, the magnitude of these values were all rela-
tively strong based on Cohen (1998)’s guidelines.
The differences in effect sizes were also significant
for subjective norms-intention and PBC-intention
relationships (SN-I: Q D 61.04, df D 2, p < 0.001;

PBC-I: Q D 40.28, df D 2, p < 0.001). Subjective
norms (r C D 57) and PBC (r C D 0.52) correlated
with purchase intention most strongly in Asia. In the
United States and Europe, the effect sizes were higher
for the attitude-purchase intention relationship than
the subjective norms-purchase intention relationship,
consistent with previous meta-analytic studies on
TRA or TPB (e.g., Sheppard et al. 1988; Van den Putte
1991).
Discussion
This study used meta-analysis procedures to (a) quan-
tify the relationship between TPB constructs, (b)
examine the contribution of additional predictors to
explain behavioral intention, and (c) identify modera-
tors that influence the strength of the relationships
between TPB constructs, in the specific context of
SRCB. It is among the first to quantitatively aggregate
and compare the results from SRCB studies involving
a broad range of product types and ethical issues.
First, the strength of association between behavioral
intention and the three predictor variables of TPB (i.e.,
attitude, subjective norms, and PBC) was examined by
reviewing SRCB studies. In accordance with the
theory’s assumption that the relative importance of
TPB constructs varies with the context of the behavior
and situation (Ajzen 1991), this study determined
which variables have stronger associations with con-
sumers’ intention to purchase socially responsible
products/services. First of all, the results of this meta-
analysis provide evidence that TPB provides a good
framework for explaining SRCB. Overall, medium to
strong sample-weighted mean correlations were found
between purchase intention and predictor variables.
Previous meta-analytic studies produced similar effect
size values in terms of attitude-intention and PBC-
intention relationships. For example, Armitage and
Conner (2001) conducted a meta-analysis of 185 TPB
studies, examining a wide range of human behaviors.
In their study, the effect size for attitude-intention was
r C D 0.49 (present study: r C D 0.53) and for PBC-
intention, it was r C D 0.43 (present study: r C D
0.39), which are only slightly different from the values
obtained in this study. However, the correlation for
subjective norms-intention was r C D 0.34, which is
much lower than r C D 0.50 of this study. This is in
contrast to many meta-analytic studies on TPB that
suggest that the magnitude of subjective norms is
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING 9
much smaller than the other two constructs in
explaining behavioral intention; Sheppard et al. (1988)
and Van den Putte (1991) have commonly illustrated
that subjective norm is the weakest determinant of
behavioral intention in the TPB model (Both meta-
analyses examined general human behavior, not
focused on socially responsible behaviors.) This find-
ing implies that SRCB may be considerably affected by
the social pressure of significant others. In addition to
its direct relationship with intention, subjective norms
were also indirectly associated with intention via atti-
tude; the magnitude of the attitude-subjective norms
relationship was moderately strong (r C D 0.44). Such
a finding is in line with previous research that empiri-
cally supports the importance of social norms in the
socially responsible consumption context (e.g., Kim
et al. 2012; Schultz, Khazian and Zaleski 2008). Thus,
appealing to social norms could be an effective way to
motivate SRCB. For instance, retailers may consider
adopting marketing campaigns that implement nor-
mative messages as a means for promoting socially
responsible behaviors such as purchasing eco-friendly
products or engaging in fair-trade consumption.
Next, this study examined the extent to which addi-
tional predictor variables enhance the prediction of
intention. The independent effects of moral norms,
self-identity, and environmental consciousness on
intention were tested after effects of the TPB variables
had been statistically controlled. Findings show that
the three variables captured similar amounts of addi-
tional variance: moral norms explained an increment
of 2%, 3% self-identity, and 2% environmental con-
cern of additional variance in intention above and
beyond the effect of attitude, subjective norms, and
PBC. Our findings were consistent with those of previ-
ous meta-analytic studies on TPB that suggested
strong effects of these constructs on behavioral inten-
tions (Bamberg and Moser 2006; Conner and Armit-
age 1998; Kl€ ockner 2013). Overall, it can be suggested
that moral norms, self-identity, and environmental
consciousness display good predictive validity in
explaining socially responsible buying behaviors. The
results further imply that SRCB is determined by the
interplay of personal and social motives. Moral norms
and self-identity were both strong predictors of pur-
chase intention; these variables are conceptually dis-
tinct from subjective norms as they are closely related
to personal norms, which can be described as one’s
own values involved in a particular behavior (Conner
10 T.-I. HAN AND L. STOEL
and Armitage 1998). In addition, personal concerns
regarding the environment had strong influences on
purchase intention. These findings suggest that mar-
keters of socially responsible goods and services can
appeal to consumers who identify as environmentally
conscious or as socially responsible. In addition,
stressing the moral imperative for SRCB may be useful
as well, to appeal to these identities.
Finally, this study found moderating roles for prod-
uct type, ethical issue, and location with regard to the
TPB component relationships. There has been a con-
siderable amount of inconsistency reported in previ-
ous SRCB literature regarding the relationship
between TPB constructs and the strength of their
effects. Identification of these moderators offers a valid
explanation about the differences across study results.
The subjective norms-purchase intention relationship
was stronger among those who were shopping for
apparel products. A body of literature addresses the
role of apparel products as nonverbal modes of com-
munication and socially significant symbols. They are
often used as tools for judgments of social appropri-
ateness affecting perceptions of the wearer’s societal
roles (Lapitsky and Smith 1981; O’Neal and Lapitsky
1991). Hence, consumers may rely greatly on group
norms during the purchase process of apparel prod-
ucts as they would be credible indicators of determin-
ing which products are socially acceptable or
unacceptable. Marketing efforts that promote group
norms regarding SRCB could help apparel retailers
appeal to these shoppers and influence purchase
intention.
The subjective norms-purchase intention relation-
ship was also stronger for Asian consumers. Collectiv-
ism, which is prominent in many Asian countries,
places a strong emphasis on cohesion within social
groups. Asian consumers have greater awareness of
social aspects related to purchases and thus would be
more influenced by social pressure when making
socially responsible buying decisions, relative to West-
ern consumers. Approval from their social groups will
be an important consideration for them. Given that
TPB results vary across countries, international mar-
keters should pay close attention to cultural factors
that may significantly affect their marketing activities.
Furthermore, the PBC-purchase intention relation-
ship was stronger for hotel/tourism services and for
Asian consumers. In general, people are more dis-
posed (i.e., intend) to perform behaviors that are
considered to be achievable (Bandura 1977). In other
words, resources and opportunities must exist before
the behavior can be performed. The PBC-purchase
intention relationship in this study may be linked with
product availability. In the case of SRCB, products/
services must be available to consumers before they
make the purchase decision. Otherwise, their intention
to purchase will be lower, although they have favor-
able attitudes toward the purchase and feel strong
social pressure to purchase. It is plausible that in situa-
tions in which consumers perceive limited accessibility
of the products, PBC exerts a stronger impact on their
purchase intentions. For instance, Asia is reported to
have a relatively smaller market for organic products
compared to the United States and Europe (FiBl and
IFOAM 2011). This may explain the result of the
strong positive association between PBC and purchase
intention in Asia: Asian consumers’ perceptions about
the difficulty of buying socially responsible products
may have strongly influenced them to have lower
intentions to purchase. This is in line with the theory’s
assumption that PBC becomes a more salient factor
particularly when there is less control over the behav-
ior (Ajzen 1991). Therefore, in order to motivate the
purchase of socially responsible products/services, it is
essential that marketers acknowledge the importance
of providing consumers with more opportunities for
purchasing and removing barriers that may curtail
their approach behaviors.
By combining and contrasting results from previ-
ous studies, the present study aimed to clarify the
nature of SRCB. While it revealed some interesting
findings, the study also bears limitations. One major
limitation of this study is the small sample sizes in sev-
eral parts of the meta-analysis. Most representatively,
there were only two or three data sets that reported
TPB relationships associated with products supporting
human rights. This was in stark contrast to the
reported relationships associated with products sup-
porting environmental protection, which involved an
average of 24 data sets. Thus, further comparison
between consumers’ purchase behavior toward these
two products would be necessary to verify the findings
from the current meta-analysis. Because only a limited
number of studies have examined the latter ethical
issue (i.e., support for human rights), meta-analysis
may not be a successful procedure for the comparison.
Future studies may assess consumer behaviors toward
the two types of issues by testing an identical model

and directly comparing how the results differ in order
to provide a clearer idea.
Another limitation of this study involves the fact
that differences may exist across domains. More
focused work within domains could identify differen-
ces related to the types of consumption, especially
when comparing green attributes of services (tour-
ism), foods, and general goods.
Additionally, while this study revealed several con-
structs that contribute to the prediction of consumers’
purchase intention, they do not offer a complete pic-
ture of SRCB. There are many other constructs that
could be incorporated to explain consumer behavior
as employed in many TPB studies of SRCB. Future
studies may consider closely examining additional
constructs that can help improve the predictive power
of TPB and better understand consumer behavior in
this context.
References
Aertsens, J., W. Verbeke, K. Mondelaars, and G. van Huylen-
broeck. 2009. Personal determinants of organic food con-
sumption: a review. British Food Journal 111:1140–1167.
Ajzen, I. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50(2):179–211.
Ajzen, I., and M. Fishbein. 2004. Questions raised by a rea-
soned action approach: comment on Ogden (2003). Health
Psychology 23(4):431–434.
Antil, J. H. 1984. Socially responsible consumers: profile and
implications for public policy. Journal of Macromarketing
4(2):18–39.
Anuwichanont, J., P. Mechinda, S. Serirat, A. Lertwannawit,
and N. Popaijit. 2011. Environmental sustainability in the
Thai hotel industry. International Business and Economics
Research Journal (IBER) 10(11):91–100.
Armitage, C. J., and M. Conner. 2001. Efficacy of the theory of
planned behaviour: A meta analytic review. British Journal
of Social Psychology 40:471–499.
Arvola, A., M. Vassallo, M. Dean, P. Lampila, A. Saba, L.
L€ahteenm€aki, and R. Shepherd. 2008. Predicting inten-
tions to purchase organic food: The role of affective and
moral attitudes in the Theory of Planned Behaviour.
Appetite 50(2–3):443–454.
Bailey, A. A. 2006. Retail employee theft: A theory of planned
behavior perspective. International Journal of Retail and
Distribution Management 34(11):802–816.
Bamberg, S., and G. M€oser. 2007. Twenty years after Hines,
Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-
social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. Jour-
nal of Environmental Psychology 27(1):14–25.
Bandura, A. 1977. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of
behavioral change. Psychological Review 84:191.
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING 11
Beck, L., and I. Ajzen. 1991. Predicting dishonest actions using
the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Research in Per-
sonality 25:285–301.
Bissonnette, M., M. Contento, and R. Isobel. 2001. Adolescents’
perspectives and food choice behaviours in terms of the
environmental impacts of food. Journal of Nutrition Educa-
tion 33(2):72–83.
Borenstein, M., L. V. Hedges, J. P. T. Higgins, and H. R. Roth-
stein. 2009. Fixed-effect versus random-effects models. In
Introduction to Meta-Analysis 77–86. Chichester, UK: John
Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Carlson, J. P., L. H. Vincent, D. M. Hardesty, and W. O.
Bearden. 2009. Objective and subjective knowledge rela-
tionships: A quantitative analysis of consumer research
findings. Journal of Consumer Research 35(5):864–876.
Chang, M. K. 1998. Predicting unethical behavior: a comparison
of the theory of reasoned action and the theory of planned
behavior. Journal of Business Ethics 17(16):1825–1834.
Chen, M. F., and P. J. Tung. 2014. Developing an extended
Theory of Planned Behavior model to predict consumers’
intention to visit green hotels. International Journal of Hos-
pitality Management 36:221–230.
Cochran, W. G. 1954. The combination of estimates from dif-
ferent experiments. Biometrics 10:101–129.
Cohen, S. 1988. Psychosocial models of the role of social sup-
port in the etiology of physical disease. Health psychology
7:269–297.
Cone Inc. 2013. 2013 Cone Communications social impact study.
http://www.conecomm.com/stuff/contentmgr/files/0/e3d2eec1
e15e858867a5c2b1a22c4cfb/files/2013_cone_comm_social_im
pact_study.pdf. (accessed January 26, 2014)
Conner, M., and C. J. Armitage. 1998. Extending the theory of
planned behavior: A review and avenues for further research.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology 28:1429–1464.
Dean, M., M. M. Raats, and R. Shepherd. 2008. Moral concerns
and consumer choice of fresh and processed organic foods.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology 38(8):2088–2107.
Dowd, K., and K. J. Burke. 2013. The influence of ethical values
and food choice motivations on intentions to purchase sus-
tainably sourced foods. Appetite 69:137–144.
Ferdous, A. S. 2010. Applying the theory of planned ehavior to
explain marketing managers’ perspectives on sustainable
marketing. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 22
(4):313–325.
FiBl & IFOAM. 2011. The world of organic agriculture
2011. Statistics and emerging trends. https://www.fibl.
org/fileadmin/documents/shop/1546-organic-world-
2011.pdf. (accessed January 15, 2014)
Goldstein, N. J., R. B. Cialdini, and V. Griskevicius. 2008. A
room with a viewpoint: Using social norms to motivate
environmental conservation in hotels. Journal of Consumer
Research 35(3):472–482.
Han, T. I., and J. E. Chung. 2014. Korean consumers’ motivations
and perceived risks toward the purchase of organic cotton
apparel. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 32(4):235–250.
Han, H., L. T. Hsu, and C. Sheu. 2010. Application of the the-
ory of planned behavior to green hotel choice: Testing the
12 T.-I. HAN AND L. STOEL
effect of environmental friendly activities. Tourism Manage-
ment 31(3):325–334.
Han, H., and Y. Kim. 2010. An investigation of green hotel cus-
tomers’ decision formation: Developing an extended model
of the theory of planned behavior. International Journal of
Hospitality Management 29(4):659–668.
Hauser, M., F. W. Nussbeck, and K. Jonas. 2013. The Impact of
Food Related values on food purchase behavior and the
mediating role of attitudes: A Swiss study. Psychology and
Marketing 30(9):765–778.
Hedges, L. V., and I. Olkin. 2014. Statistical methods for Meta-
Analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Holland, J., and J. W. Gentry. 1999. Ethnic consumer reaction
to targeted marketing: A theory of intercultural accommo-
dation. Journal of Advertising 28(1):65–77.
Honkanen, P., B. Verplanken, and S. O. Olsen. 2006. Ethical
values and motives driving organic food choice. Journal of
Consumer Behaviour 5(5):420–430.
Hustvedt, G. 2006. Consumer preferences for blended organic cot-
ton apparel. PhD. diss., Kansas State University.
Hustvedt, G., and M. A. Dickson. 2009. Consumer likelihood
of purchasing organic cotton apparel: influence of attitudes
and self-identity. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Man-
agement: An International Journal 13(1):49–65.
Kang, J., C. Liu, and S. H. Kim. 2013. Environmentally sustain-
able textile and apparel consumption: the role of consumer
knowledge, perceived consumer effectiveness and perceived
personal relevance. International Journal of Consumer Stud-
ies 37(4):442–452.
Kim, Y., and H. Han. 2010. Intention to pay conventional-hotel
prices at a green hotel—a modification of the theory of planned
behavior. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 18(8):997–1014.
Kim, H., and E. Karpova. 2010. Consumer attitudes toward fashion
counterfeits: Application of the theory of planned behavior.
Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 28(2):79–94.
Kim, H., E. J. Lee, and W. M. Hur. 2012. The normative social
influence on eco-friendly consumer behavior: The moderat-
ing effect of environmental marketing claims. Clothing and
Textiles Research Journal 30(1):4–18.
Kl€
ockner, C. A. 2013. A comprehensive model of the psychol-
ogy of environmental behaviour—A meta-analysis. Global
Environmental Change 23(5):1028–1038.
Ko, S. B. 2012. Predictors of purchase intention toward green
apparel products in the US and China. PhD. diss.,
Oklahoma State University.
Lapitsky, M., and C. M. Smith. 1981. Impact of clothing on
impressions of personal characteristics and writing ability.
Home Economics Research Journal 9(4):327–335.
Lee, C., and R. T. Green. 1991. Cross-cultural examination of
the Fishbein behavioral intentions model. Journal of Inter-
national Business Studies 22(2):289–305.
Lodorfos, G. N., and J. Dennis. 2008. Consumers’ intent: In the
organic food market. Journal of Food Products Marketing
14(2):17–38.
Low, G. S., and C. W. Lamb Jr. 2000. The measurement and
dimensionality of brand associations. Journal of Product
and Brand Management 9(6):350–370.
Ma, Y. J., M. A. Littrell, and L. Niehm. 2012. Young female
consumers’ intentions toward fair trade consumption.
International Journal of Retail and Distribution Manage-
ment 40(1):41–63.
Manget, J., C. Roche, and F. M€ unnich. 2009. Capturing the
green advantage for consumer companies. Boston, MA: The
Boston Consulting Group.
Michaelidou, N., and L. M. Hassan. 2008. The role of health
consciousness, food safety concern and ethical identity on
attitudes and intentions towards organic food. International
Journal of Consumer Studies 32(2):163–170.
Mohr, L. A., and D. J. Webb. 2005. The effects of corporate
social responsibility and price on consumer responses. Jour-
nal of Consumer Affairs 39(1):121–147.
Ogden, J. 2003. Some problems with social cognition models: a
pragmatic and conceptual analysis. Health Psychology 22
(4):424.
O’Keefe, D. J. 2002. Persuasion: Theory and research. 2nd ed.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
O’Neal, G. S., and M. Lapitsky. 1991. Effects of clothing as
nonverbal communication on credibility of the message
source. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 9(3):28–34.
Penz, E., and B. St€ottinger. 2005. Forget the “real” thing-take
the copy! An explanatory model for the volitional purchase
of counterfeit products. Advances in Consumer Research 32
(1):568–575.
Roberts, J. A. 1993. Sex differences in socially responsible con-
sumers’ behavior. Psychological Reports 73(1):139–148.
Roberts, J. A. 1995. Profiling levels of socially responsible con-
sumer behavior: a cluster analytic approach and its implica-
tions for marketing. Journal of Marketing Theory and
Practice 3(4):97–117.
Robinson, R., and C. Smith. 2002. Psychology and demo-
graphic variables associated with consumer intention to
purchase sustainable produced foods as defined by the Mid-
west Food Alliance. Journal of Nutrition Education and
Behaviour 34(6):316–325.
Schultz, W. P., A. M. Khazian, and A. C. Zaleski. 2008. Using
normative social influence to promote conservation among
hotel guests. Social Influence 3(1):4–23.
Schwartz, S. H. 1977. Normative influences on altruism.
Advances in experimental social psychology 10:221–279.
Shaw, D., C. Bekin, E. Shiu, L. Hassan, G. Hogg, and E. Wilson.
2006. An examination of the volitional stages in consumer
decisions to avoid sweatshop clothing. Presentation at the
35th European Marketing Academy Conference (EMAC),
Athens, Greece.
Shaw, D., and E. Shiu. 2002. An assessment of ethical obligation
and self identity in ethical consumer decision making: a
structural equation modelling approach. International Journal
of Consumer Studies 26(4):286–293.
Shaw, D., E. Shiu, and I. Clarke. 2000. The contribution of ethi-
cal obligation and self-identity to the theory of planned
behaviour: An exploration of ethical consumers. Journal of
Marketing Management 16(8):879–894.
Sheppard, B. H., J. Hartwick, and P. R. Warshaw. 1988. The
theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past research

with recommendations for modifications and future
research. Journal of Consumer Research 15(3):325–343.
Song, H. J., C. K. Lee, S. K. Kang, and S. J. Boo. 2012. The effect
of environmentally friendly perceptions on festival visitors’
decision-making process using an extended model of goal-
directed behavior. Tourism Management 33(6):1417–1428.
Sparks, P., and R. Shepherd. 1992. Self-identity and the the-
ory of planned behavior: assesing the role of identifica-
tion with“ Green consumerism”. Social Psychology
Quarterly 55(4):388–399.
Tarkiainen, A., and S. Sundqvist. 2005. Subjective norms, atti-
tudes and intentions of Finnish consumers in buying
organic food. British Food Journal 107(11):808–822.
Teng, Y. M., K. S. Wu, and H. H. Liu. 2015. Integrating altru-
ism and the theory of planned behavior to predict patron-
age intention of a green hotel. Journal of Hospitality and
Tourism Research 39(3):299–315.
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING 13
Umberson, K. 2008. Environmentally-friendly purchase
intentions: Debunking the misconception behind apathetic
consumer attitudes. Master’s thesis, University of North
Texas.
Van den Putte, B. 1991. 20 years of the theory of reasoned
action of Fishbein and Ajzen: A meta-analysis. PhD. diss.,
University of Amsterdam.
Vermeir, I., and W. Verbeke. 2008. Sustainable food consump-
tion among young adults in Belgium: Theory of planned
behaviour and the role of confidence and values. Ecological
Economics 64:542–553.
Webster Jr, F. E. 1975. Determining the characteristics of the
socially conscious consumer. Journal of Consumer Research
2:188–196.
Zagata, L. 2012. Consumers’ beliefs and behavioural intentions
towards organic food. Evidence from the Czech Republic.
Appetite 59:81–89.