Food Quality and Preference 91 (2021) 104191

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Food Quality and Preference

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/foodqual

Extending the theory of planned behavior to understand consumer

purchase behavior for organic vegetables in Brazil: The role of perceived
health benefits, perceived sustainability benefits and perceived price
Lethicia Camila Dorce , Marcelo Corrêa da Silva , Juliana Rosa Carrijo Mauad , Carla Heloisa de
Faria Domingues , João Augusto Rossi Borges *
Federal University of Grande Dourados – Agribusiness Program, Rodovia Dourados – Itahum, Km 12, Dourados, MS, Brazil

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This study explores the factors that influence consumer purchase intention and behavior for organic vegetables in
Organic food Brazil. A conceptual model based on the theory of planned behavior (TPB) was developed. In addition to all
Reasoned action approach standard relationships in the TPB, the candidate variables of perceived health benefits, perceived sustainability
Sustainable consumption
benefits, and perceived price were added to the TPB-based model. Attitude was expected to mediate the relation
Structural equation modeling
Mediator variables
between perceived health benefits and intention and the relation between perceived sustainability benefits and
Moderator variables intention. Perceived price was expected to moderate the relation between intention and behavior. An online
survey was conducted, resulting in a sample size of 504 participants. Data were analyzed by partial-least squares
structural equation modeling. The results indicate that intention and perceived behavioral control influence the
purchase behavior for organic vegetables, with intention presenting the strongest impact on behavior. Attitude
has the strongest impact on consumer intention to purchase organic vegetables, followed by perceived behavioral
control and subjective norms. The results also indicate that attitude mediates the relations between perceived
health benefits and intention and perceived sustainability benefits and intention. Perceived price moderates the
relationship between intention and behavior. Based on the results, managerial implications are presented.

1. Introduction
The consumption of organic food has been proposed as a path to a
more sustainable society. Accordingly, the purchase and consumption of
organic food has been increasing worldwide. The global sales of organic
food increased from approximately US$16.5 billion in 2001 to more
than US$100 billion in 2017 (Willer & Lernoud, 2019). However, the
demand for and sales of organic food are concentrated in North America
and Europe. In 2017, the US held 47% of the total global organic food
market, and European Union countries held 37% (Willer & Lernoud,
2019). In Brazil, the total sales of organic food was approximately US
$0.9 billion in 2017, which is far less than in the US and in European
countries (Lima, Galiza, Valadares & Alves, 2020). The annual average
organic food consumption in Brazil was US$4.5 per person in 2016,
which is also low compared to the annual average of more than US$100
per person in the US and in several European countries (Willer & Ler­
noud, 2019). Despite the relatively low sales and small annual con­
sumption per person, Brazil has the largest market for organic food in
Latin America (Willer & Lernoud, 2019), and the domestic market is
expected to rapidly grow, particularly because middle-class consumers
have started to demand organic food (Lima et al., 2020). To stimulate
consumption, it is paramount to understand the factors behind con­
sumers’ motivations to purchase organic food (Rana & Paul, 2017), but
to date, these factors remain poorly understood in Brazil (Watanabe,
Alfinito, Curvelo, & Hamza, 2020). Based on the understanding of these
factors, business and policy makers can develop private and public
strategies aimed at increasing the consumption of organic food in Brazil.
The theory of planned behavior (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991) has been
extensively used as a framework for understanding the purchase and
consumption of organic food (see Scalco, Noventa, Sartori, & Ceschi,
2017 for a comprehensive review). The TPB postulates that the intention
to perform a given behavior is the best predictor of actual behavior
performance (Ajzen, 1991). Intention, in turn, is determined by three
sociopsychological constructs: attitude, subjective norms, and perceived
behavioral control. Accordingly, people have a higher intention to
perform a certain behavior when they evaluate the outcomes of the

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: julianacarrijo@ufgd.edu.br (J.R.C. Mauad), joaoborges@ufgd.edu.br (J.A.R. Borges).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104191
Received 4 July 2020; Received in revised form 31 December 2020; Accepted 17 January 2021
Available online 23 January 2021
0950-3293/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L.C. Dorce et al.
behavior as favorable (attitude), when they perceive social pressure to
perform the behavior (subjective norms), and when they feel that they
are capable of performing the behavior (perceived behavioral control).
Although the TPB assumes that intention is explained by attitude,
subjective norms and perceived behavioral control, other variables,
called background factors, can and should be considered because they
can enrich the understanding of people’s behavior (Fishbein & Ajzen,
2010). The relevant background factors to be included in TPB models
depend on the behavior and population under study, but their influence
on intention is expected to be mediated by attitude, subjective norms,
and perceived behavioral control (Ajzen, 2011). Several reviews have
consistently found that consumers’ perceptions that organic food is
healthy and is less harmful to the environment than conventional food
and promotes support for the local economy and community are the
main drivers of the purchase and consumption of organic food (Kush­
waha, Dhir, Sagar, Gupta, & 2019; Massey, O’ Cass, & Otahal, 2018;
Rana & Paul, 2017, 2020). Henceforth, these two factors are referred to
as perceived health benefits and perceived sustainability benefits (i.e.,
environmental and social factors). Despite evidence that perceived
health benefits and perceived sustainability benefits influence consumer
purchase intention and purchase behavior for organic food, there is
limited evidence of how to integrate them into a TPB-based model.
Despite the abovementioned issues, some empirical studies have
found that health and sustainability motives (environmental and social
factors) impact consumers’ attitudes towards organic food (Çabuk,
Tanrikulu, & Gelibolu, 2014; Magnusson, Arvola, Hursti, Åberg, &
Sjödén, 2001; Honkanen, Verplanken, & Olsen, 2006; Kumar & Smith,
2018; Michaelidou & Hassan, 2008; Pham, Nguyen, Phan, & Nguyen,
2019; Rana & Paul, 2017). These studies, however, omit other standard
TPB relationships. Hence, research explaining the role of perceived
health benefits and perceived sustainability benefits using the full TPB
model is lacking at present. To fill this gap in the literature, this study
proposes a full TPB model in which attitude mediates the relationship
between perceived health benefits and intention and the relationship
between perceived sustainability benefits and intention. The mediating
effect of attitude might provide a comprehensive explanation of why
there is a relationship between consumer purchase intention and the
perceived benefits of organic food (health and sustainability benefits).
Empirical studies in the field of pro-environmental and ethical pur­
chase behavior have found that even strong intentions might not result
in purchase behavior (Auger & Devinney, 2007; Carrigan & Attalla,
2001). This is often called the intention-behavior gap. To better explain
this relationship and lessen this gap, scholars have suggested moderator
variables (Carrington, Neville, & Whitwell, 2010; Grimmer & Miles,
2017). However, specifically in the context of purchase behavior for
organic food, this gap is overlooked. An exception is the study of Sultan,
Tarafder, Pearson, & Henryks (2020), who found that perceived
communication, satisfaction, and trust in organic food moderate the
relationship between intention and consumer purchase behavior. To
complement this literature, this study proposes perceived price as a
moderator variable. Because a high price might prevent consumers with
a high intention to actually purchase organic food (Yadav & Pathak,
2016), it is proposed that perceived price will moderate the relationship
between intention and behavior. The moderating effect of perceived
price might provide insights into the strength of the relationship be­
tween intention and behavior. It is reasonable to assume that the rela­
tionship between intention and behavior will be stronger when
consumers perceive the price as low.
With this in mind, this paper aimed to explore the factors that in­
fluence consumer purchase intention and behavior for organic vegeta­
bles. This study specifically examines the purchase behavior for organic
vegetables because at the time of data collection, they were the most
commercially available type of organic food in Brazil (Organis, 2017).
Consistent with the TPB, this study investigates the relationships among
intention, attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control and
purchase behavior for organic vegetables. This study also explores
2
Food Quality and Preference 91 (2021) 104191
whether attitude mediates the relationship between perceived health
benefits and intention and between perceived sustainability benefits and
intention in a full TPB model, which is a novel contribution. Lastly, this
study also pioneers the investigation of perceived price as a moderator
variable for the relation intention-behavior.
Unlike many published studies in the context of the purchase and
consumption of organic food, this study focuses on a sample of Brazilian
consumers, which adds another unique contribution to the literature.
Prior research was predominantly conducted in the US (Kumar & Smith,
2018), Europe (Carfora, Cavallo, Caso, Del Giudice, De Devitiis, Vis­
cecchia, Nardone, & Cicia, 2019; Koklic, Golob, Podnar, & Zabkar, 2019;
Zagata, 2012), Asia (Asif, Xuhui, Nasiri, & Ayyub, 2018; Basha & Lal,
2019; Chekima, Chekima, & Chekima, 2019; Yadav & Pathak, 2016),
and Oceania (Aitken, Watkins, Williams, & Kean, 2020; Sultan et al.,
2020). While this large body of literature has supported the efficacy of
the TPB for understanding consumer purchase intention and behavior
for organic food, it has been shown that individuals across different
cultures may have different motivations for purchasing organic food
(Rana & Paul, 2017, 2020). Therefore, it can be important for re­
searchers and managers to determine whether these previous TPB
findings can be applied with equal validity to other national or cultural
settings. Despite the presumed high importance of the perceived benefits
of organic and perceived price in shaping consumer purchase behavior,
there is no research evidence to support these findings in the Brazilian
context; this study pioneers the investigation of how the health and
sustainability benefits of organic vegetables in influence Brazilian con­
sumers’ purchase behavior.
2. Conceptual model
2.1. The theory of planned behavior (TPB)
The conceptual model of this study is based on the theory of planned
behavior. As briefly explained in the Introduction, the TPB postulates
that the intention to perform a given behavior is the most immediate
antecedent and best predictor of actual behavior performance (Ajzen,
1991). Intention captures people’s motivation to perform the behavior
and indicates their likelihood of following through with it (Honkanen, &
Young, 2015). According to the TPB, the stronger the intention is, the
more likely it is that the behavior will follow (Ajzen & Schmidt, 2020).
In a meta-analytical study on the efficacy of the TPB in the context of the
purchase and consumption of organic food, Scalco et al. (2017) found
support for the relationship between intention and behavior, but few
studies have reported this correlation, likely because few of them have
measured actual behavior. Therefore, the following hypothesis is
proposed:
H1: Intention has a positive and significant effect on behavior.
In the TPB, the degree to which people have control over a behavior
depends on their ability to overcome barriers and on the presence of
facilitating factors (Ajzen, 2011). Hence, the TPB postulates that the
degree of actual behavioral control moderates the effect of intention on
behavior (Ajzen & Schmidt, 2020). Because in empirical investigations,
it is difficult to determine how much actual control a person has over the
performance of a given behavior, perceived behavioral control is typi­
cally used as a proxy for actual control (Ajzen, 2011). According to Ajzen
(1991), perceived behavioral control relates to people’s perception that
the behavior is under their control and to their perceptions about their
own capacity to perform the behavior. Commonly, perceived behavioral
control has been associated with external barriers to the consumption of
organic food, such as a lack of availability of organic products (Zagata,
2012). Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H2: Perceived behavioral control has a positive and significant effect
on behavior.
In the TPB, three latent constructs explain intention: attitude, sub­
jective norms and perceived behavioral control. Intention, in turn, me­
diates the impact of these three constructs on behavior (Ajzen, 1991).
L.C. Dorce et al.
Attitude (ATT)
H9
Perceived health benefits
(HB)
H4
Subjective norms (SN)
H10
Perceived sustainability
H5
benefits (SB)
Perceived behavioral
control (PBC)
Fig. 1. Proposed model. Note: Direct effects are marked with bold arrows, and moderating effects are marked with dotted-line arrows. To avoid congestion,
mediation hypotheses are not shown in the figure.
The TPB defines attitude as a person’s positive or negative evaluation of
the behavior (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010). In general, attitude has a
stronger impact on intention than subjective norms and perceived
behavioral control do (Armitage & Conner, 2001; Fishbein & Ajzen,
2010), including in the context of the purchase and consumption of
organic food (Scalco et al., 2017). Subjective norms are defined as the
person’s perception of social pressure to engage or not engage in the
behavior (Ajzen, 1991). Previous research has found that some cultures
exert a higher social pressure on the consumption of organic food than
others, which is reflected in the high importance of subjective norms
(Asif et al., 2018). Moreover, perceived behavioral control is expected to
have a direct impact on intention (Ajzen, 1991). Scalco et al. (2017), in a
meta-analytical study, found that perceived behavioral control usually
plays a minor role in the intention to purchase and to consume organic
food; however, these authors argue that a potential explanation for the
low effect of perceived behavioral control is that there are incon­
gruencies in how this construct is measured among different studies.
Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H3: Attitude has a positive and significant effect on intention.
H4: Subjective norms have a positive and significant effect on
intention.
H5: Perceived behavioral control has a positive and significant effect
on intention.
H6: Intention mediates the attitude-behavior relationship.
H7: Intention mediates the subjective norms-behavior relationship.
H8: Intention mediates the perceived behavioral control-behavior
relationship.
2.2. Perceived health benefits and perceived sustainability benefits
In principle, the TPB is open to the inclusion of other constructs
(Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010). Hence, there is a growing body of literature
that uses models based on the TPB and adds constructs associated with
health and sustainability motives to explain and predict the purchase
and consumption of organic food. Some of these studies conceptualize
these constructs as health consciousness and environmental conscious­
ness (Asif et al., 2018; Pham et al., 2019; Yadav & Pathak, 2016).
Despite their contributions, such studies have three drawbacks. First, the
items used to measure health consciousness and environmental con­
sciousness deviate from the TPB principle of compatibility, in which
constructs added to TPB models should be defined and assessed in terms
of the same behavior elements (Ajzen, 2011; Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010).
3
Food Quality and Preference 91 (2021) 104191
H3
H1
Intention (INT) Behavior (BEH)
H13
H2
Perceived price (PP)
Second, some studies propose a direct impact of health consciousness
and environmental consciousness on intention/behavior to purchase or
consume organic food (Asif et al., 2018; Basha & Lal, 2019; Yadav &
Pathak, 2016). This impact challenges the TPB’s assumption that no
other factors should have a direct impact on intention; this principle is
known as the sufficiency assumption (Ajzen, 2011). In fact, in a standard
TPB model, health consciousness and environmental consciousness
should be included as background factors, and their impacts on intention
are expected to be mediated by attitude, subjective norms, and
perceived behavioral control. Third, it is unclear whether consumers
who have high health consciousness and high environmental con­
sciousness actually believe that the purchase and consumption of
organic food contribute to improving their health and to a more eco­
friendly world.
Alternatively, health and sustainability motives can be conceptual­
ized as perceived benefits of purchase and consumption of organic food
(Lea & Worsley, 2005; Magnusson, Arvola, Hursti, Åberg, & Sjödén,
2003; Yazdanpanah, Forouzani, & Hojjati, 2015). In this case, it is ex­
pected that consumers who believe that the purchase and consumption
of organic food contribute to improving their health and to a more
sustainable world will have a higher probability of engaging with
organic food. Hence, this study conceptualizes perceived health benefits
as consumers’ perceptions that the purchase and consumption of organic
vegetables contribute to their health. This study also conceptualizes
perceived sustainability benefits as consumers’ perceptions that the
purchase of organic vegetables contributes to the environment and
supports the local economy and community. Although evidence is
limited, scholars have proposed that perceived health benefits and
perceived sustainability benefits impact consumers’ attitudes towards
organic food (Honkanen et al., 2006; Kumar & Smith, 2018; Pham et al.,
2019). According to this line of literature, the impact of perceived
benefits of organic food on attitude is expected to be positive: the more
strongly consumers perceive that the purchase and consumption of
organic food contribute to their health and to a more sustainable world,
the more positive their attitudes is regarding purchase behavior. Pre­
vious literature has also suggested that attitude mediates the impact of
the perceived benefits of organic food on purchase intention (Singh &
Verma, 2017). Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H9: Perceived health benefits have a positive and significant effect on
attitude.
H10: Perceived sustainability benefits have a positive and significant
effect on attitude.
L.C. Dorce et al.
H11: Attitude mediates the perceived health benefits-intention
relationship.
H12: Attitude mediates the perceived sustainability benefits-
intention relationship.
2.3. Perceived price
The relatively high price of organic food compared to conventional
food is usually considered an important barrier for the purchase and
consumption of organic food (Aschemann-Witzel & Zielke, 2017; Bryła,
2016; Kushwah et al., 2019; Lea & Worsley, 2005; Magnusson et al.,
2001). Nevertheless, the relationship between perceived price and
intention/behavior is not well defined. Some studies have found that
consumers’ perception that organic food is expensive has a negative
impact on intention and purchase behavior (Briz & Ward, 2009; Ver­
hoef, 2005); other studies have found the opposite (Marian & Thøgersen,
2013; Massey et al., 2018). Scholars have also suggested that a moderate
actual premium price might increase the purchase behavior for organic
food because consumers might consider price an indicator of quality,
and hence, a higher price increases the desirability of organic products
(Ngobo, 2011; Marian, Chrysochou, Krystallis, & Thøgersen, 2014).
This study contributes to the topic of perceived price in the context of
organic food by specifically investigating the role of perceived price in
reducing the intention-behavior gap. In TPB studies, perceived price is
sometimes associated with the construct of attitude (Al-Swidi, Huque,
Hafeez, & Shariff, 2014; Guido, Prete, Peluso, Maloumby-Baka, & Buffa,
2010), while in other studies, it is related to the construct of perceived
behavioral control (Zagata, 2012). In this study, perceived price is not
added as part of a TPB construct. Instead, it is added as an independent
variable, and it is expected that it will moderate the intention-behavior
relationship. This is because a high price might prevent consumers with
a high purchase intention to actually follow through with the purchase
(Aschemann-Witzel & Zielke, 2017; Yadav & Pathak, 2016). Perceived
price is conceptualized as consumers’ perceptions that organic vegeta­
bles are cheap. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H13: The positive relationship between intention and behavior will
be stronger when the perceived price is lower.
The proposed final model is presented in Fig. 1.
3. Research methods
3.1. Data collection and questionnaire
An online survey was conducted among Brazilian consumers from
June 2019 to July 2019. The questionnaire was supplied by a company
specializing in market research. Because online responses may not fully
represent the whole population, official data were used to compare the
demographic characteristics of the sample with those of the Brazilian
population (see section 4.1).
The survey questionnaire was divided into two sections. The first
section included demographic characteristics: age (16–24 years, 25–29
years, 30–39 years, 40–49 years, 50–59 years, > 60 years), gender (fe­
male or male), educational attainment (incomplete elementary school,
complete elementary school, incomplete high school, complete high
school, incomplete bachelor’s degree, complete bachelor’s degree,
postgraduate studies), monthly income (up to US$259.22; up to US
$388.83; up to US$518.44; up to US$595.84;up to US$1.036.88; from
US$1.296.36 to US$2.592.20; above US$2.592.46)1 and living region in
Brazil (South, Southeast, Center West, Northeast, North).
The second section of the questionnaire included a series of state­
ments used to measure behavior (BEH), intention (INT), attitude (ATT),
subjective norms (SN), perceived behavioral control (PBC), perceived
price (PP), perceived health benefits (HB) and perceived sustainability
1
Exchange rate at the time of the study US$1.00 ≈ R$3.85.
4
Food Quality and Preference 91 (2021) 104191
benefits (SB). According to available guidelines for correctly construct­
ing a questionnaire based on the TPB (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010; Francis,
Eccles, Johnston, Walker, Grimshaw, Foy, Kaner, Smith, & Bonetti,
2004), the first step is to define the behavior under study in terms of its
target, action, context, and time elements (TACT principle). The idea for
this study was to specifically examine the purchase behavior for organic
vegetables. Hence, the word “purchase” was chosen to represent the
action, and “organic vegetables” was chosen to represent the target.
Since not all consumers follow through with purchase behavior for
organic vegetables under the same circumstances (e.g., the purchase
behavior might occur at supermarkets, groceries stores, local farmer’s
market), it seemed prudent to ask broadly about the purchase behavior
in general (i.e., the criterion involved generalized contexts). Because the
frequency of purchase behavior for organic vegetables might vary
among consumers (e.g., daily, weekly, monthly), the time frame was set
as “regularly”. Therefore, the behavior under study was defined as “the
regular purchase of organic vegetables”.
Following the TPB guidelines, the other TPB constructs should be
assessed in terms of the same TACT elements. This is known as the
principle of construct compatibility. If the principle of construct
compatibility is not followed, weaker and less-robust correlations
among constructs are expected (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010). Therefore, in
this study, all statements used to measure intention, attitude, subjective
norms, and perceived behavioral control comply with this principle and
with the TPB questionnaire construction guidelines (Fishbein & Ajzen,
2010; Francis et al., 2004). The statements used to measure additional
constructs were adapted from previous literature and addressed
perceived health benefits (Yazdanpanah et al., 2015) and perceived
sustainability benefits (Basha & Lal, 2019; Magnusson et al., 2003;
Molinillo, Vidal-Branco, & Japutra, 2020; Hansen, Sørensen, & Eriksen,
2018). For these additional constructs, adaptations were also made to
comply with the principle of construct compatibility. All statements
were measured using a five-point scale anchored at the extreme points,
with one being the most negative answer and five the most positive one.
All statements are presented in Appendix A.
When longitudinal data are not collected, past behavior might be
used as a proxy for future behavior, particularly when the behavior in
question has a high degree of temporal stability (Ajzen, 2011). It is
reasonable to assume that consumers who have regularly purchased
organic vegetables will repeat this behavior; hence, past purchase
behavior for organic vegetables was used in this study as a proxy for
future behavior. Past behavior was also used as a proxy for future
behavior in other studies that analyzed the purchase and consumption of
organic food (Dean, Raats, & Shepherd, 2012; Onwezen, Bartels, &
Antonides, 2014; Vassallo, Scalvedi, & Saba, 2016).
The statements were translated into Portuguese. This project
received research ethics board approval from the Federal University of
Grande Dourados/Faculty of Management, Accounting and Economics.
3.2. Statistical analyses
Statistical analyses were performed in three steps. First, descriptive
statistics were used to characterize the sample and the main features of
the measures.
Second, partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-
SEM) was used to test the direct effects of the proposed model. PLS-SEM
offers some advantages over covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM). First,
most empirical data do not meet the requirement of multivariate
normality, which is an assumption in estimating models via CB-SEM;
conversely, estimating models via PLS-SEM relaxes this assumption
(Fornell & Bookstein, 1982; Hair, Sarstedt, Ringle, & Mena, 2012).
Second, PLS-SEM has lower demands regarding sample size than CB-
SEM, which generally leads to high levels of statistical power (Rein­
artz, Haenlein, & Henseler, 2009). Third, PLS-SEM is not constrained by
identification problems, even if models become complex, a situation that
typically restricts the use of CB-SEM (Hair, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2011).
L.C. Dorce et al. Food Quality and Preference 91 (2021) 104191

Table 1 4. Results
Demographic characteristics of the sample.
Variable Cases % 4.1. Descriptive statistics
Age 16–24 years 30.8
25–29 years 18.1 The demographic characteristics of the 504 participants are reported
30–39 years 24.4 in Table 1. Nearly half of the participants were younger than 30 years
40–49 years 15.1 old. The sample was unbalanced in terms of gender. Nearly sixty percent
50–59 years 8.3 of the participants had at least completed high school. The sample was
> 60 years 3.4
Gender Male 43.7
dominated by participants who lived in the Southeast region. Nearly
Female 56.3 sixty percent of the sample earned a monthly income below US$390.62.
Educational attainment Incomplete elementary school 4.6 According to demographic data reported by the Brazilian Institute of
Complete elementary school 4.8 Geography and Statistics (IBGE, 2020), the study sample over­
Incomplete high school 8.7
represented younger people and underrepresented elderly people. In
Complete high school 41.7
Incomplete bachelor’s degree 17.9 Brazil, approximately 16.4% of people are between 14 and 24 years of
Complete bachelor’s degree 14.5 age (varying from 14.9% to 19.7% in all twenty-seven federal units of
Postgraduate studies 8.0 the country). Over 16.5% of Brazilians are at least sixty years old. This
Living region South 16.7 condition contrasts with the sample features (Table 1). Furthermore,
Southeast 46.1
Center West 8.1
there were some mismatches between the sample and official de­
Northeast 22.2 mographic data regarding education levels. Participants with a complete
North 7.1 high school education and an incomplete bachelor’s degree seem over­
Monthly income Up to US$259.22 37.1 represented. In Brazil, only 25.2% of citizens have completed high
Up to US$388.83 24.6
school (49.8% have not), and only 4.8% have incomplete bachelor’s
Up to US$518.44 14.7
Up to US$595.84 9.9 degrees. On the other hand, quite notably, there was underrepresenta­
Up to US$1.036.88 6.3 tion of participants with low levels of education (up to elementary
From US$1.296.36 to US$2.592.20 6.0 school). In Brazil, 35.3% of people have incomplete elementary school,
Above US$2.592.46 1.4 and 25.2% stop studying after completing elementary school (IBGE,
2020). Nevertheless, the study sample resembles the proportions of
The use of PLS-SEM is also recommended when the research explores people with incomplete high school and completed bachelor’s degrees in
theoretical extensions of established theories (Hair, Risher, Sarstedt, & the Brazilian population. The proportion of people who participated in
Ringle, 2019). Hence, the use of PLS-SEM is appropriate for this the survey also resembles the estimated resident population in each
research. region of Brazil (IBGE, 2020). The per capita monthly nominal household
To run the PLS-SEM, items presented in Appendix A were used as earnings of the resident population in Brazil in 2019 was US$313.71.
reflective indicators of their respective constructs. A satisfactory mea­ Among all 26 federal units, it varied from US$189.81 and US$505.37.
surement model was first confirmed by checking indicator reliability The Federal District is an outlier in the national household survey. In this
(factor loadings > 0.5; Cronbach’s alpha > 0.7; and rho A > 0.7), particular administrative region of Brazil, the per capita monthly nom­
convergent validity (average variance extracted (AVE) > 0.5), internal inal household earnings reached US$697.6. The average salary in Brazil
consistency (composite reliability (CR) > 0.7), and discriminant validity is US$607.79. The class intervals used to measure income in the study do
(a factor loading on the assigned construct higher than all loadings of not perfectly overlap with the income categories used in government
other constructs, Fornell-Lacker criterion square root of each construct’s surveys (IBGE, 2020). Nevertheless, income in the study sample seemed
AVE greater than the correlations with other latent constructs, and more balanced with the IBGE numbers than with age and education
heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) < 0.90). All thresholds presented be­ levels. In this sense, readers are encouraged to interpret the results
tween brackets were stipulated prior to data analysis based on Hair, assuming that the sample probably more closely mirrors the purchase
Sarstedt, Hopkins, & Kuppelwieser (2014). Structural model assessment behavior of citizens with younger ages and higher education levels than
was based on the variance inflation factor (VIF) (<3.00), R2 (using the that of the general Brazilian population.
blindfolding method) and path coefficient values (Hair et al., 2014). To The results in Appendix B show the percentage of participants who
assess the significance of each path coefficient, a bootstrapping pro­ responded with each score (1 to 5) for each item. In general, the results
cedure with 5000 subsamples was used (Hair et al., 2014). In this same indicated a slightly high tendency towards purchase intention, a positive
model, we tested whether attitude mediated the impact of perceived attitude, encouraging subjective norms and slightly high control
health benefits and perceived sustainability benefits on intention. In the regarding the purchase of organic vegetables. This was because at least
third step, the moderating effect of perceived price was assessed using 60% of participants chose responses of 4 or higher for the majority of the
the product indicator method (Kenny & Judd, 1984). statements used to measure these constructs (with the exception of SN3,
Before the PLS-SEM model was run, univariate and multivariate PBC1 and PBC3). The results also revealed that the purchase of organic
normality were checked. In general, the data were skewed. Skewness vegetables is relatively common because nearly 60% of the participants
was not expected to be an issue because PLS-SEM is robust to nonnormal chose responses of 4 or higher for the two statements used to measure
data (Hair et al., 2014). In addition, the VIF results indicated no mul­ this behavior. Overall, perceived health benefits and perceived sus­
ticollinearity among constructs. To test the severity of common method tainability benefits were quite high, as >75% of participants chose re­
bias, the Harmon one-factor test was used (Podsakoff & Organ, 1986). sponses of 4 or higher for the majority of the statements used to measure
The results of this test showed that the most covariance explained by one these two constructs. Finally, the results indicated that the participants
factor was 37%, which is fairly below the threshold of 50%. Therefore, varied notably regarding their perception of the price of organic vege­
common bias is also not expected to be an issue. The software SmartPLS tables, with nearly 35% of participants perceiving organic vegetables as
3 was used for analysis. expensive (i.e. selecting scores of 1 and 2) and nearly 40% perceiving
them as inexpensive (i.e., selecting scores of 4 and 5).

4.2. Measurement model

The evaluation of the measurement model resulted in

5
L.C. Dorce et al. Food Quality and Preference 91 (2021) 104191

Table 2 Table 5
Standardized factor loadings, Cronbach’s alpha, rho A, average variance Results of the indirect mediation analysis.
extracted (AVE), and construct reliability (CR) of the measurement model. Hypotheses Direct effect Indirect effect Result
BEH INT ATT SN PBC HB SB
H6 ATT->INT-> Std β − 0.11 t Std β 0.26 t value Partial mediating
Factor BEH1 INT2 ATT1 SN2 PBC1 HB1 SB1 BEH value 2.47* 7.31* effect
loadings 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 H7 SN->INT-> Std β 0.19 t value Std β 0.13 t value Partial mediating
BEH2 INT3 ATT2 SN3 PBC2 HB2 SB2 BEH 4.61* 4.52* effect
0.9 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.8 H8 PBC->INT-> Std β 0.21 t value Std β 0.16 t value Partial mediating
INT4 ATT3 SN4 PBC4 HB3 SB3 BEH 4.12* 4.91* effect
0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 H11 HB->ATT-> Std β 0.07 Std β 0.17 t value Full mediating
ATT5 HB4 SB4 INT t value 1.41 5.25* effect
0.9 0.8 0.8 H12 SB-> ATT-> Std β − 0.07 Std β 0.16 t value Full mediating
ATT6 SB5 INT t value 1.69 5.70* effect
0.8 0.7
*p < 0.05.
SB6
0.8
SB7 4.3. Structural model
0.7
Cronbach’s α 0.81 0.85 0.87 0.64 0.71 0.73 0.86
Rho A 0.81 0.85 0.88 0.65 0.72 0.76 0.86
After a suitable measurement model was obtained, a structural
CR 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.80 0.83 0.83 0.89 model was estimated. The results presented in Table 4 show that all
AVE 0.84 0.77 0.66 0.58 0.63 0.55 0.54 hypotheses related to the direct effects were supported. This is because
all path coefficients were significant and in the expected direction.
Together, intention and perceived behavioral control explained 57%
Table 3 (R2 = 0.57) of the variance in consumer purchase behavior for organic
Fornell-Lacker and heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) criterion. vegetables. Together, attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behav­
Fornell-Lacker ioral control explained 63% (R2 = 0.63) of the variance in consumer
intention to purchase organic vegetables. Together, perceived health
BEH INT ATT SN PBC HB SB
benefits and perceived sustainability benefits explained 44% (R2 = 0.44)
BEH 0.92 of the variance in attitude.
INT 0.73 0.88
The results in Table 5 show the mediation effects. All meditation
ATT 0.45 0.69 0.82
SN 0.59 0.61 0.60 0.76 hypotheses were supported. Intention had a partial mediating effect on
PBC 0.61 0.47 0.40 0.57 0.79 the relationships between attitude, subjective norms, perceived behav­
HB 0.37 0.53 0.61 0.51 0.40 0.74 ioral control and behavior. Attitude had a full mediating effect on the
SB 0.40 0.51 0.47 0.55 0.47 0.68 0.74 relationship between perceived health benefits and intention and the
Heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT)
BEH INT ATT SN PBC HB
relationship between perceived sustainability benefits and intention.
INT 0.87 The results of the moderating effect of perceived price are presented
ATT 0.53 0.80 in Table 6. The results support the hypothesis that perceived price
SN 0.83 0.83 0.62 moderates the intention-behavior relationship. According to Cohen
PBC 0.79 0.76 0.51 0.86
(1988), f2 measures the extent to which the endogenous construct is
HB 0.46 0.63 0.73 0.69 0.52
SB 0.47 0.60 0.69 0.72 0.59 0.82 explained by the moderator variable; f2 effect sizes of 0.02, 0.15 and
0.35 suggest a small, medium and large effect, respectively. Hence, the
moderating effect of perceived price was interpreted as being low.
Fig. 2 shows the interaction graph for the moderating effect of
Table 4
perceived price on the relationship between intention and behavior. A
Results of the structural model.
similar approach was used by Sultan et al. (2020) to represent the
Hypotheses Std β Std. error |t valueˆ| Result
moderating effect of communication, satisfaction, and trust on the
H1 INT -> BEH 0.57 0.05 11.4* Accepted relationship between intention and purchase behavior. The green, red,
H2 PBC -> BEH 0.26 0.05 5.18* Accepted and blue lines represent the high (+1 SD above the mean), average, and
H3 ATT -> INT 0.46 0.04 12.6* Accepted
H4 SN -> INT 0.23 0.04 5.5* Accepted
low (− 1 SD below the mean) effect of the moderator, respectively. The
H5 PBC -> INT 0.28 0.04 6.8* Accepted results demonstrate that a low perceived price (− 1 SD) results in both
H9 HB -> ATT 0.36 0.06 6.4* Accepted lower intention and behavior compared to a high perceived price (+1
H10 SB -> ATT 0.36 0.06 6.2* Accepted SD), which results in both a higher intention and behavior. The inter­
*p < 0.05. pretation is that the relationship between intention and purchase
behavior for organic vegetables is stronger when the perceived price is
respecification. Items INT1, SN1, and PBC3 were removed from the lower.
model because of high cross-loadings. ATT4 was removed because of its
high VIF. The results of the final assessment of the model for indicator 5. Discussion and concluding comments
reliability, convergent reliability, and internal consistency are presented
in Table 2. Cronbach’s alpha and rho A for subjective norms were below The aim of this study was to explore the factors that influence con­
the threshold value of 0.7. However, this was accepted for the sake of sumer purchase intention and behavior for organic vegetables. A con­
model fit. According to Kline (2015), values between 0.6 and 0.7 can be ceptual model based on the TPB was developed. The proposed model
considered adequate. The results of the assessment of discriminant included all TPB standard relationships and further incorporated the
validity are presented in Table 3. Overall, these results were considered candidate variables of perceived health benefits, perceived sustainabil­
suitable for validating the measurement model. ity benefits, and perceived price. The model was tested among Brazilian
organic vegetable consumers. The results confirmed all the relationships
proposed in the model. Five key findings and theoretical and managerial
implications are further discussed. Finally, the study’s limitations are

6
L.C. Dorce et al. Food Quality and Preference 91 (2021) 104191

Table 6
Results of the moderation analysis.
Hypothesis Std β Std error t valueˆ f2 R2 without moderator R2 with moderator Δ R2 Result

H13 PP*INT-> BEH − 0.09 0.02 3.73* 0.03 0.57 0.61 0.4 accepted

*p < 0.05.

explained by attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioral con­

trol was 63%, and the total amount of variance in behavior explained by
intention and perceived behavioral control was 57%. According to re­
views, these are reasonably good fits in TPB studies (Armitage & Conner,
2001; Sutton, 1998).
The fourth key finding is the positive and significant relationship of
perceived health benefits and perceived sustainability benefits with
attitude. Previous research has extensively suggested that perceived
health benefits and perceived sustainability benefits play an important
role in the purchase and consumption of organic food (Kushwaha et al.,
2019; Massey et al., 2018; Rana & Paul, 2017, 2020), but the integration
of these constructs into a full TPB model had not been established. The
results of this study suggest that perceived health benefits and perceived
sustainability benefits should be added as background factors in TPB
models, as their impacts on intention are fully mediated by attitude. It is
suggested that future studies test these relations in other contexts and for
Fig. 2. Moderating effect of perceived price (PP) on the relationship between
intention (INT) and behavior (BEH). different behaviors (e.g. actual consumption).
The fifth key finding is the impact of perceived price as a moderator
variable in the relationship between intention and behavior. The results
presented.
indicate that perceived price increases the explanation of behavior by
Regarding the use of the TPB, there are three key findings. First, the
4% through the relationship between intention and behavior. Despite
results confirmed that the three TPB predictors influence consumer
the low effect, perceived price adds a additional percentage of expla­
purchase intention for organic vegetables. Previous literature that used
nation for behavior similar to that of other suggested moderator vari­
the TPB as the underlying theory found that attitude consistently
ables (Sultan et al., 2020). Interestingly, in a review study, Massey et al.
influenced intentions regarding the purchase and consumption of
(2018) found that when consumers perceive organic food to be expen­
organic food (Aitken et al., 2020; Asif et al., 2018; Basha & Lal, 2019;
sive, their intention to purchase is higher, which is inconsistent with the
Sultan et al., 2020; Yadav & Pathak, 2016; Zagata, 2012). The influence
result of the proposed model. This contradictory result might be
of subjective norms and perceived behavioral control, however, vary
explained by consumer income. It is reasonable to assume that con­
among studies. For instance, Chekima et al. (2019) and Yadav & Pathak
sumers with a satisfactory income that enables them to purchase organic
(2016) did not find a significant effect of subjective norms on the con­
food will perceive the price of such foods as less expensive than con­
sumption of organic food in Malaysia and India, respectively. Asif et al.
sumers with an unsatisfactory income do; it is also reasonable that when
(2018), in a cross-country study (Iran, Pakistan, and Turkey) found that
consumers have a satisfactory income and a high intention to purchase
attitude and subjective norms influenced intention to purchase organic
organic food, purchase behavior will follow. This might not happen for
food, but the influence of perceived behavioral control on intention was
consumers with an unsatisfactory income and high intention. Hence,
country dependent. The relative impact of attitude, subjective norms,
one could presume that consumers with satisfactory income will
and perceived behavioral control on intention also varied among
perceive organic food as inexpensive, and if they have the intention to
studies. While some confirmed this study’s finding that attitude is the
purchase it, the purchase behavior will follow. Hence, it is suggested
TPB construct with the strongest influence on intentions in the context of
that future studies test income as a moderator variable in the relation­
the purchase and consumption of organic food (Aitken et al., 2020;
ship between intention and behavior.
Basha & Lal, 2019; Sultan et al., 2020), others found that perceived
This study provides some theoretical contributions to the existing
behavioral control or subjective norms had the strongest influence (Asif
TPB literature in the context of the purchase and consumption of organic
et al., 2018; Carfora, et al., 2019; Yadav & Pathak, 2016; Zagata, 2012).
food. First, this study confirms that the TPB provides a solid framework
The mixed results for the influence and the relative impact of the three
for understanding the factors that influence consumer purchase
main TPB predictors on intention are not surprising because these fac­
behavior for organic food in Brazil, which has a different cultural setting
tors may vary across behaviors (e.g., purchase or consumption), pop­
than the US, Europe, Asia, and Oceania, where most previous studies
ulations (i.e., where the study is conducted), and time periods (Ajzen,
were conducted. Second, this study confirms the mediation effect of
1991). Another possible explanation for the mixed results is that studies
intention in TPB models. Previous studies have usually overlooked the
use different items to measure the three TPB predictors, particularly
mediating effect of intention, likely because most of them did not
perceived behavioral control (Scalco et al., 2017), and these differences
measure behavior (Sultan et al., 2020). Third, although the TPB has been
certainly impact the correlations among constructs. The results also
widely applied in the context of the purchase and consumption of
confirm the mediating effect of intention in the TPB model, which is in
organic food, a more robust exploration of the constructs was necessary
line with the results of a previous study (Sultan et al., 2020).
(Scalco et al., 2017). In this study, the measures of TPB constructs were
The second key finding is the confirmation that intention and
based on available guidelines for correctly constructing a TPB ques­
perceived behavioral control influence consumer purchase behavior for
tionnaire. Empirical studies do not always follow these guidelines,
organic vegetables, with intention presenting the strongest impact on
which might result in weak correlations among constructs. This study
behavior. These relationships were also significant in explaining the
also found that attitude mediated the impact of perceived organic food
consumption of organic food in other contexts, and the relative impact
benefits on intention, favoring the TPB sufficiency assumption (Ajzen,
varied across studies (Sultan et al., 2020; Zagata, 2012).
2011). Fourth, this study shows that perceived price reduced the
The third key finding is that the total amount of variance in intention
intention-behavior gap.

7
L.C. Dorce et al. Food Quality and Preference 91 (2021) 104191

Based on the results, several managerial implications are presented. Table A

First, business and policy makers must take any opportunity to Statements and scales used to measure the sociopsychological constructs.
communicate the benefits of purchasing organic vegetables to improve Item Statement Scale (1–5)
consumer health and promote sustainability (environmental and social),
BEH1 I have the habit of regularly purchasing strongly disagree –
as consumers who perceive higher health benefits and higher sustain­ organic vegetables. strongly agree
ability benefits will have a more favorable attitude towards purchase BEH2 I have regularly bought organic vegetables. strongly disagree –
behavior. The benefits of organic vegetables could be communicated to strongly agree
consumers, e.g., in-store, on labels, and via social media. Second, busi­ INT1 I plan to purchase organic vegetables strongly disagree –
regularly. strongly agree
nesses could consider offering free samples of organic vegetables INT2 My intention to regular purchase organic very weak – very strong
because by interacting with the product, consumers develop a more vegetables is:
positive attitude (Koklic et al., 2019), which was the strongest predictor INT3 I will regularly purchase organic vegetables. strongly disagree –
of intention. Third, because perceived behavioral control influences strongly agree
INT4 What is the probability that you will regularly unlikely – likely
intention, business and policy makers may seek to increase consumers’
purchase organic vegetables?
perceived capability to purchase organic vegetables. One route to ATT1 For me, regularly purchasing organic very bad – very good
strengthening perceived capability is improving the distribution channel vegetables is:
of organic vegetables so consumers can easily purchase them (Yadav & ATT2 For me, regularly purchasing organic unnecessary – necessary
Pathak, 2016). In doing so, business might deliver organic vegetables to vegetables is:
ATT3 For me, regularly purchasing organic disadvantageous–
consumers’ place of residence, and government agencies might support vegetables is: advantageous
the development of local organic markets. Fourth, it was found that ATT4 For me, regularly purchasing organic unsatisfactory –
subjective norms influence intention. This implies that business might vegetables is: satisfactory
target not only final consumers but also other important actors that may ATT5 For me, regularly purchasing organic not acceptable –
vegetables is: acceptable
exert social pressure to purchase (e.g., friends, family members). Lastly,
ATT6 For me, regularly purchasing organic unimportant - important
businesses could launch a second brand strategy to access consumers vegetables is:
who have a high intention to purchase but perceive prices as high. This SN1 Most people whose opinion I value approve strongly disagree –
strategy is based on the finding that the relationship between intention that I regularly purchase organic vegetables. strongly agree
and behavior is stronger when the perceived price is lower. SN2 Most people who are important to me think strongly disagree –
that I should regularly purchase organic strongly agree
This study has some limitations that should be considered in future
vegetables.
research. First, a measure of self-reported past behavior was used as a SN3 Most consumers like me regularly purchase strongly disagree –
proxy for future purchase behavior, which does not assure a reliable organic vegetables. strongly agree
measure of actual behavior. This study tried to minimize this potential SN4 These days, more and more people regularly strongly disagree –
purchase organic vegetables. strongly agree
shortcoming by using more than one item to measure past behavior and
PBC1 If I want to regularly purchase organic strongly disagree –
by using a uniform scale to measure all constructs (Scalco et al., 2017; vegetables, I have enough income. strongly agree
Sultan et al., 2020). Given the cross-sectional nature of this study, PBC2 The regular purchase of organic vegetables is strongly disagree –
however, it was not possible to test whether past behavior was a reliable up to me. strongly agree
proxy for future behavior. Future studies might use the actual purchase PBC3 It is very easy to me to regularly purchase strongly disagree –
organic vegetables. strongly agree
of organic vegetables to increase measurement reliability. Although the
PBC4 The regular purchase of organic vegetables is strongly disagree –
participants in the study sample reported a modest income, which under my control. strongly agree
probably resulted in a restricted budget, the majority of the participants HB1 I believe that the regular purchase and strongly disagree –
also reported the frequent purchase of organic vegetables. This might consumption of organic vegetables help me to strongly agree
take care of my health.
have occurred because of social desirability. A measure of actual pur­
HB2 I believe that the regular purchase and strongly disagree –
chases would also help to understand whether consumers with a modest consumption of organic vegetables help me to strongly agree
income, who probably struggle to pay for value-added products such as keep healthy.
organic food, would actually make these purchases. Second, the items HB3 I believe that the regular purchase and strongly disagree –
used to measure the TPB constructs were based on generalized context consumption of organic vegetables helps me strongly agree
lose weight.
and time elements. Future studies might use more robust measures
HB4 I believe that the regular purchase and strongly disagree –
based on a specific context (for instance, purchase behavior at super­ consumption of organic vegetables help me to strongly agree
markets) and a specific time period. Third, compared to the Brazilian prevent diseases.
population, the sample was younger and more educated. Hence, the SB1 I believe that the regular purchase of organic strongly disagree –
vegetables contributes to rural development. strongly agree
features of the sample probably include several sources of variation that
SB2 I believe that the regular purchase of organic strongly disagree –
limit the generalizability of the results. Overall, mismatches between vegetables contributes to organic farmers strongly agree
sample demographic characteristics and official demographic data are having a higher income.
probably related to the use of an online survey (e.g., elderly people may SB3 I believe that the regular purchase of organic strongly disagree –
not access the internet and respond digital surveys as much as younger vegetables contributes to organic farmers strongly agree
having a better health by not being constantly
people do). In future studies, the use of random sampling procedures is
exposed to pesticides.
recommended. This would improve the representativeness of the sample SB4 I believe that the regular purchase of organic strongly disagree –
and hence provide a more complete scenario for understanding con­ vegetables contributes to organic farmers strongly agree
sumer behavioral trends in Brazil and elsewhere. Finally, it would be having a better quality of life.
convenient to replicate the study over time using longitudinal data SB5 I believe that the regular purchase of organic strongly disagree –
vegetables contributes to a more ecofriendly strongly agree
panels to understand variations in consumer purchase behavior for world.
organic food. SB6 I believe that the regular purchase of organic strongly disagree –
vegetables reduces the amount of chemicals in strongly agree
Funding sources lakes and waterways.
SB7 I believe that the regular purchase of organic strongly disagree –
vegetables helps to preserve the environment. strongly agree
The last author thanks the National Council for Scientific and PP I think the price of organic vegetables is low. strongly disagree –
Technological Development (CNPq), Brazil, for research grant number strongly agree
305082/2018-3.

8
L.C. Dorce et al. Food Quality and Preference 91 (2021) 104191

Table B Ajzen, I. (2011). The theory of planned behaviour: Reactions and reflections. Psychology
Percentage of participants who responded with each score (1 to 5 - most negative & Health, 26(9), 1113–1127.
Ajzen, I., & Schmidt, P. (2020). Changing behavior using the theory of planned behavior.
to most positive) for each item. In M. Hagger (Ed.), Oxford handbook of behavior change (chapter 2).
Item 1 2 3 4 5 Al-Swidi, A., Huque, S. M. R., Hafeez, M. H., & Shariff, M. N. M. (2014). The role of
subjective norms in theory of planned behavior in the context of organic food
BEH1 6.9 10.5 20.4 20.2 41.9 consumption. British Food Journal, 16(10), 1561–1580.
BEH2 12.1 11.9 18.1 19.8 38.1 Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A
INT1 3.8 4.2 20.2 21.8 50.0 meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(4), 471–499.
INT2 3.0 3.2 16.5 26.0 51.4 Aschemann-Witzel, J., & Zielke, S. (2017). Can’t buy me green? A review of consumer
INT3 4.2 8.5 23.2 21.6 42.5 perceptions of and behavior toward the price of organic food. Journal of Consumer
INT4 5.2 5.4 20.8 20.8 47.8 Affairs, 51(1), 211–251.
ATT1 1.6 3.0 12.5 13.5 69.4 Asif, M., Xuhui, W., Nasiri, A., & Ayyub, S. (2018). Determinant factors influencing
ATT2 1.8 2.4 14.5 18.7 62.7 organic food purchase intention and the moderating role of awareness: A
comparative analysis. Food Quality and Preference, 63, 144–150.
ATT3 1.8 1.6 15.9 16.9 63.9
Auger, P., & Devinney, T. M. (2007). Do what consumers say matter? The misalignment
ATT4 1.2 1.8 14.5 17.1 65.5
of preferences with unconstrained ethical intentions. Journal of Business Ethics, 76(4),
ATT5 0.8 1.6 13.5 14.3 69.8 361–383.
ATT6 1.0 1.0 11.5 15.5 71.0 Basha, M. B., & Lal, D. (2019). Indian consumers’ attitudes towards purchasing
SN1 3.6 2.4 16.1 19.0 58.9 organically produced foods: An empirical study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 215,
SN2 4.4 4.8 20.4 22.0 48.4 99–111.
SN3 9.3 12.7 31.3 17.5 29.2 Briz, T., & Ward, R. W. (2009). Consumer awareness of organic products in Spain: An
SN4 2.4 5.6 22.8 29.2 40.1 application of multinominal logit models. Food Policy, 34(3), 295–304.
PBC1 6.7 12.1 23.6 19.0 38.5 Bryła, P. (2016). Organic food consumption in Poland: Motives and barriers. Appetite,
PBC2 9.3 8.3 20.8 17.3 44.2 105, 737–746.
PBC3 8.1 11.1 25.0 19.4 36.3 Carfora, V., Cavallo, C., Caso, D., Del Giudice, T., De Devitiis, B., Viscecchia, R., et al.
PBC4 5.6 6.2 23.8 20.2 44.2 (2019). Explaining consumer purchase behavior for organic milk: Including trust and
HB1 2.0 0.6 6.9 13.7 76.8 green self-identity within the theory of planned behavior. Food Quality and
Preference, 76, 1–9.
HB2 1.6 1.0 4.2 12.3 81.0
Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A. (2001). The myth of the ethical consumer–do ethics matter in
HB3 3.2 4.8 16.1 21.2 54.8
purchase behaviour? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 560–578.
HB4 1.2 2.4 10.9 19.2 66.3
Carrington, M. J., Neville, B. A., & Whitwell, G. J. (2010). Why ethical consumers don’t
SB1 2.2 1.4 12.5 22.0 61.9 walk their talk: Towards a framework for understanding the gap between the ethical
SB2 1.0 3.4 10.1 22.2 63.3 purchase intentions and actual buying behaviour of ethically minded consumers.
SB3 4.2 2.8 14.9 17.9 60.3 Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 139–158.
SB4 2.6 2.8 13.3 21.0 60.3 Chekima, B., Chekima, K., & Chekima, K. (2019). Understanding factors underlying
SB5 1.6 2.8 11.3 17.7 66.7 actual consumption of organic food: The moderating effect of future orientation.
SB6 2.4 2.4 15.7 18.1 61.5 Food Quality and Preference, 74, 49–58.
SB7 3.2 2.4 14.9 17.7 61.9 Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Mahwah: Lawrence
PP 18.6 16.3 25.8 15.3 24.6 Erlbaum Associates.
Dean, M., Raats, M. M., & Shepherd, R. (2012). The role of self-identity, past behavior,
and their interaction in predicting intention to purchase fresh and processed organic
food. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(3), 669–688.
CRediT authorship contribution statement Çabuk, S., Tanrikulu, C., & Gelibolu, L. (2014). Understanding organic food
consumption: Attitude as a mediator. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 38(4),
Lethicia Camila Dorce: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal 337–345.
Francis, J., Eccles, M. P., Johnston, M., Walker, A. E., Grimshaw, J. M., Foy, R., et al.
analysis, Investigation, Writing - original draft, Visualization, Project (2004). Constructing questionnaires based on the theory of planned behaviour: A manual
administration. Marcelo Corrêa da Silva: Conceptualization, Method­ for health services researchers. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Centre for Health Services
ology, Formal analysis, Writing - original draft, Visualization. Juliana Research, University of Newcastle upon Tyne.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior: the reasoned action
Rosa Carrijo Mauad: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation,
approach. New York: Psychology Press.
Resources, Funding acquisition. Carla Heloisa de Faria Domingues: Fornell, C., & Bookstein, F. L. (1982). Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS
Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Resources, Funding applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4),
acquisition. João Augusto Rossi Borges: Conceptualization, Method­ 440–452.
Grimmer, M., & Miles, M. P. (2017). With the best of intentions: A large sample test of the
ology, Formal analysis, Writing - original draft, Visualization, Supervi­ intention-behaviour gap in pro-environmental consumer behaviour. International
sion, Project administration. Journal of Consumer Studies, 41(1), 2–10.
Guido, G., Prete, M. I., Peluso, A. M., Maloumby-Baka, R. C., & Buffa, C. (2010). The role
of ethics and product personality in the intention to purchase organic food products:
Declaration of Competing Interest A structural equation modeling approach. International Review of Economics, 57(1),
79–102.
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal
of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152.
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of
the work reported in this paper. partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(3), 414–433.
Hair, J. F., Jr, Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., & Kuppelwieser, V. G. (2014). Partial least
Appendix A squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerging tool in business
research. European Business Review, 26, 106–121.
Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to
report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24.
Hansen, T., Sørensen, M. I., & Eriksen, M.-L. (2018). How the interplay between
Appendix B consumer motivations and values influences organic food identity and behavior.
Food Policy, 74, 39–52.
Honkanen, P., Verplanken, B., & Olsen, S. O. (2006). Ethical values and motives driving
organic food choice. Journal of Consumer Behaviour: An International Research Review,
5(5), 420–430.
References Honkanen, P., & Young, J. A. (2015). What determines British consumers’ motivation to
buy sustainable seafood? British Food Journal, 117(4), 1289–1302.
IBGE: Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Statistics report for Brazilian
Aitken, R., Watkins, L., Williams, J., & Kean, A. (2020). The positive role of labelling on
population. (2020). https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas/sociais/populacao/9171-
consumers’ perceived behavioural control and intention to purchase organic food.
pesquisa-nacional-por-amostra-de-domicilios-continua-mensal.html?=&t=series-
Journal of Cleaner Production, 255, 120334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
historicas Accessed 03 June 2020.
jclepro.2020.120334
Kenny, D. A., & Judd, C. M. (1984). Estimating the nonlinear and interactive effects of
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human
latent variables. Psychological Bulletin, 96(1), 201–210.
Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.

9
L.C. Dorce et al.
Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New
York: Guilford publications.
Koklic, M. K., Golob, U., Podnar, K., & Zabkar, V. (2019). The interplay of past
consumption, attitudes and personal norms in organic food buying. Appetite, 137,
27–34.
Kumar, A., & Smith, S. (2018). Understanding local food consumers: Theory of planned
behavior and segmentation approach. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 24(2),
196–215.
Kushwah, S., Dhir, A., Sagar, M., & Gupta, B. (2019). Determinants of organic food
consumption. A systematic literature review on motives and barriers. Appetite, 143,
Article 104402.
Lea, E., & Worsley, T. (2005). Australians’ organic food beliefs, demographics and
values. British Food Journal, 107(11), 855–869.
Lima, S. K., Galiza, M., Valadares, A., & Alves, F. (2020). Produção e consumo de produtos
orgânicos no mundo e no Brasil. Brasília: Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada.
Magnusson, M. K., Arvola, A., Koivisto Hursti, U.-K., Åberg, L., & Sjödén, P.-O. (2001).
Attitudes towards organic foods among Swedish consumers. British Food Journal, 103
(3), 209–227.
Magnusson, M. K., Arvola, A., Hursti, U.-K., Åberg, L., & Sjödén, P.-O. (2003). Choice of
organic foods is related to perceived consequences for human health and to
environmentally friendly behaviour. Appetite, 40(2), 109–117.
Marian, L., & Thøgersen, J. (2013). Direct and mediated impacts of product and process
characteristics on consumers’ choice of organic vs. conventional chicken. Food
Quality and Preference, 29(2), 106–112.
Marian, L., Chrysochou, P., Krystallis, A., & Thøgersen, J. (2014). The role of price as a
product attribute in the organic food context: An exploration based on actual
purchase data. Food Quality and Preference, 37, 52–60.
Massey, M., O’Cass, A., & Otahal, P. (2018). A meta-analytic study of the factors driving
the purchase of organic food. Appetite, 125, 418–427.
Michaelidou, N., & Hassan, L. M. (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.
Molinillo, S., Vidal-Branco, M., & Japutra, A. (2020). Understanding the drivers of
organic foods purchasing of millennials: Evidence from Brazil and Spain. Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, 52, 101926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jretconser.2019.101926
Ngobo, P. V. (2011). What drives household choice of organic products in grocery stores?
Journal of Retailing, 87(1), 90–100.
Onwezen, M. C., Bartels, J., & Antonides, G. (2014). The self-regulatory function of
anticipated pride and guilt in a sustainable and healthy consumption context.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 44(1), 53–68.
ORGANIS. Conselho Brasileiro da Produção Orgânica e Sustentável. (2017). Available at
https://www.organicsnewsbrasil.com.br/wpcontent/uploads/2017/06/Pesquisa-
Consumo-de-Produtos-Organicos-no-Brasil-Palestra-07Jun-1.pdf / Accessed: 13 abr
2019.
10
Food Quality and Preference 91 (2021) 104191
Pham, T. H., Nguyen, T. N., Phan, T. T. H., & Nguyen, N. T. (2019). Evaluating the
purchase behaviour of organic food by young consumers in an emerging market
economy. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 27(6), 540–556.
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research:
Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531–544.
Rana, J., & Paul, J. (2017). Consumer behavior and purchase intention for organic food:
A review and research agenda. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 38,
157–165.
Rana, J., & Paul, J. (2020). Health motive and the purchase of organic food: A meta-
analytic review. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 44(2), 162–171.
Reinartz, W., Haenlein, M., & Henseler, J. (2009). An empirical comparison of the
efficacy of covariance-based and variance-based SEM. International Journal of Market
Research, 26(4), 332–344.
Scalco, A., Noventa, S., Sartori, R., & Ceschi, A. (2017). Predicting organic food
consumption: A meta-analytic structural equation model based on the theory of
planned behavior. Appetite, 112, 235–248.
Singh, A., & Verma, P. (2017). Factors influencing Indian consumers’ actual buying
behaviour towards organic food products. Journal of Cleaner Production, 167,
473–483.
Sultan, P., Tarafder, T., Pearson, D., & Henryks, J. (2020). Intention-behaviour gap and
perceived behavioural control-behaviour gap in theory of planned behaviour:
Moderating roles of communication, satisfaction and trust in organic food
consumption. Food Quality and Preference, 81, 103838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodqual.2019.103838
Sutton, S. (1998). Predicting and explaining intentions and behavior: How well are we
doing? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(15), 1317–1338.
Vassallo, M., Scalvedi, M. L., & Saba, A. (2016). Investigating psychosocial determinants
in influencing sustainable food consumption in Italy. International Journal of
Consumer Studies, 40(4), 422–434.
Verhoef, P. C. (2005). Explaining purchases of organic meat by Dutch consumers.
European Review of Agricultural Economics, 32(2), 245–267.
Watanabe, E. A. M., Alfinito, S., Curvelo, I. C. G., & Hamza, K. M. (2020). Perceived
value, trust and purchase intention of organic food: a study with Brazilian
consumers. British Food Journal, 122(1), 1170–1184.
Willer, H., & Lernoud, J. (2019). The world of organic agriculture. Statistics and emerging
trends 2019. Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL and IFOAM Organics
International.
Yadav, R., & Pathak, G. S. (2016). Intention to purchase organic food among young
consumers: Evidences from a developing nation. Appetite, 96, 122–128.
Yazdanpanah, M., Forouzani, M., & Hojjati, M. (2015). Willingness of Iranian young
adults to eat organic foods: Application of the Health Belief Model. Food Quality and
Preference, 41, 75–83.
Zagata, L. (2012). Consumers’ beliefs and behavioural intentions towards organic food.
Evidence from the Czech Republic. Appetite, 59(1), 81–89.