See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/346125842

What you see is meaningful: Does green advertising change the intentions of
consumers to purchase eco‐labeled products?

Article in Business Strategy and the Environment · October 2020

DOI: 10.1002/bse.2648

CITATIONS READS

111 2,006

4 authors, including:

Ying Sun
University of Science and Technology of China
8 PUBLICATIONS 616 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Ying Sun on 30 August 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Received: 17 October 2019 Revised: 30 August 2020 Accepted: 13 September 2020
DOI: 10.1002/bse.2648

RESEARCH ARTICLE

What you see is meaningful: Does green advertising change

the intentions of consumers to purchase eco-labeled products?

Ying Sun1 | Biao Luo2 | Shanyong Wang3 | Wenpei Fang3

1
Beijing Technology and Business University,
Beijing, China
2
Hefei University of Technology, Hefei, Anhui
Province, China
3
University of Science and Technology of
China, Hefei, Anhui Province, China
Correspondence
Shanyong Wang, University of Science and
Technology of China, No. 96, Jinzhai Road,
Hefei, Anhui Province 230026, China.
Email: wsy1988@mail.ustc.edu.cn
Funding information
National Natural Science Foundation of China,
Grant/Award Number: 71974177
Abstract
Consumers are increasingly worried that their current consumption patterns have
negative environmental impacts, which in turn shapes their green purchase
intentions. Based on the signaling theory and stimulus–organism–response model,
the purpose of this research is to construct a theoretical framework to understand
consumer intentions to buy eco-labeled products. Empirical results from
671 questionnaires show that as expected, green advertising receptivity positively
affects intention, and the relationship between green advertising receptivity
and intention is also moderated by promotion focus and mediated by system trust
and personal trust. However, the relationship between green advertising receptivity
and purchase intention is not moderated by prevention focus. Hence, this research
suggests that stakeholders should conduct truthful green advertising campaigns to
dispel consumer suspicion and target different consumers with different green
advertising and marketing campaigns to increase sales.

KEYWORDS

eco-labeled products, green advertising receptivity, personal trust, regulatory focus, signaling
theory, system trust

1 | I N T RO DU CT I O N persuasive selling point. It includes environmentally friendly features

Individual consumption behavior destroys the natural environment,
and it is evident that the environmental damage caused by consump-
tion constitutes more than one third of total environmental impacts
(Ahmed & Zhang, 2020; Han, Wang, Zhao, & Li, 2017; Paparoidamis &
Tran, 2019). Scholars believe that environmental degradation could
worsen if nongreen consumption growth continues (Gao, Wang, Li, &
Li, 2017; Shi, Wang, & Zhao, 2017; Sun, Wang, Li, Zhao, & Fan, 2017).
The adverse effects of environmental problems have led to public
concern all over the world. Growing environmental concern has
led consumers to actively support green consumption (Lacy &
Hayward, 2011; Wang, Fan, Zhao, Yang, & Fu, 2016; Wang, Li, &
Zhao, 2017), changed the competitive landscape of the contemporary
market, and prompted companies to think in a “greener” way
(Grinstein & Nisan, 2009; Wang, Wang, Xue, Wang, & Li, 2018). Mar-
keters often use green advertising to encourage consumers to engage
in green behavior and gain green market share. Green advertising is a
and attributes, and a considerable number of consumers are willing to
buy green products; moreover, an increasing number of marketers are
eager to introduce their products and services into green areas
(Atkinson & Rosenthal, 2014; Jäger & Weber, 2020). Previous studies
have indicated that including a product selling point in green advertis-
ing will persuade consumers to purchase green products, and thus,
green advertising is important for building a green image for a firm or
product (Hartmann & Apaolaza-Ibáñez, 2012).
However, consumers' desire for green consumption is hampered
by what many believe to be a general lack of credibility and trust in
advertising, especially in regard to environmental requirements. Eco-
labels are a way for advertisers to provide precise, relevant, and signif-
icant information that enables buyers to make purchase decisions that
consider human health and environmental factors. Eco-labels are cer-
tification marks or approval stamps that remind consumers of the
environmental quality of their products or services and assure the
authenticity of green claims. They are information tools designed to

Bus Strat Env. 2020;1–11. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/bse © 2020 ERP Environment and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 1
2 SUN ET AL.
internalize the external environmental impacts of the production, con-
sumption, and disposal of products (Atkinson & Rosenthal, 2014;
Bougherara & Combris, 2009). In addition, they are a simple way for
individuals to identify green products. Eco-labels are essential for con-
sumers to understand the environmental background of eco-labeled
products or services, thus enabling them to distinguish green products
and change their preferences for eco-labeled products (Göçer & Sevil
Oflaç, 2017). Consumers can understand that purchasing eco-labeled
products has a significant environmental impact, while green
producers can improve their market share by differentiating their
products. Hence, eco-labels are important not only for protecting the
environment but also for green behavior (Gallastegui, 2002).
Although green advertising promotes green buying behavior, con-
sumers rarely make green purchases immediately when they receive
green advertising, and the receptivity to green advertising varies from
person to person. This is because individuals have two distinct orien-
tations in their pursuit of a goal, each of which has a unique impact on
information persuasion according to regulatory focus theory (Yoon,
Sarial-Abi, & Gurhan-Canli, 2012). One orientation, promotion focus,
involves promoting positive, desired outcomes to make a hit, and the
other orientation, prevention focus, involves preventing negative,
undesired outcomes to avoid failure. Hence, it is important to
understand how consumers respond to green advertising due to its
contradictory nature.
Signaling theory and the stimulus–organism–response model are
popular ways to understand the cognitive factors related to green
product purchases by consumers (Atkinson & Rosenthal, 2014). Based
on signaling theory and the stimulus–organism–response model, con-
sumers make rational decisions mainly by considering the information
they have and the degree of trust they have in choosing eco-labeled
products. When faced with an information defect, consumers assess
green products and services based on misleading or incomplete green
information or advertising (Boulding & Kirmani, 1993). Valid signals
are only credible to the extent that consumers consider them both
useful and trustworthy (Boulding & Kirmani, 1993). Misleading envi-
ronmental claims (Chen & Chang, 2013) and early business scandals
(Choi, Eldomiaty, & Kim, 2007) are undermining consumer trust in
green products, so they are afraid of being cheated by green advertis-
ing (Peattie & Crane, 2005). Therefore, this research takes consumer
trust into account.
Overall, based on signaling theory and the stimulus–
organism–response model, the objective of this research is to examine
the effect of green advertising receptivity on a consumer's intention
to purchase eco-labeled products and to explore the mediating effect
of trust and the moderating effect of regulatory focus. This study has
several theoretical contributions. First, the study contributes to the
understanding of green advertising and the influence of green
advertising receptivity on a consumer's green purchase intention.
Second, this study scrutinizes the boundary condition of the effect of
green advertising receptivity on green purchase intention and
delineates the regulating effect of regulatory focus. Finally, this study
enriches the connotation of trust, which is divided into system trust
and personal trust, based on the Chinese scenario.
2 | THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND
HY P O T H E S E S
2.1 | Signaling theory and the stimulus–
organism–response model
Signaling theory provides an interpretation mechanism for the way in
which authentication seals or eco-labels work to confirm the credibil-
ity of environmental claims by advertisers, thereby improving the
source of claims and the consumer's intention to buy eco-labeled
products (Erdem & Swait, 1998). Signaling theory holds that individ-
uals (buyers) in the market are at a disadvantage compared with man-
ufacturers (sellers) based on the research of information economics
(Spence, 1973), and consumers face information deficits and must
evaluate eco-labeled products and services based on incomplete,
misleading information. One party has more or better information
than the other, and consumers rely on cues or signals to evaluate the
quality of eco-labeled products in this asymmetric information
environment (Kirmani & Rao, 2000). For example, Atkinson and
Rosenthal (2014) used signaling theory to study the relationship
between the influence of eco-label sources and consumer trust.
In addition, the stimulus–organism–response model also shows
that green advertising can be used as an external stimulus or signal to
affect the individual's internal cognition, which in turn affects the indi-
vidual's attitude and behavioral response (Mehrabian & Russell, 1974).
A signal such as green advertising could be the actions or strategies of
the seller (Kirmani & Rao, 2000). Advertising is a signal because it min-
imizes risk and reduces consumer ignorance, but consumers are less
likely to use signals as important information libraries when their cred-
ibility is questioned (Boulding & Kirmani, 1993). Eco-labels or certifi-
cation can provide consumers with a degree of confidence in the
credibility of these claims and help build consumer trust. Finally, con-
sumers rely on signals for their internal cognition and to decide
whether to purchase eco-labeled products or services in this asym-
metric information environment.
2.2 | Green advertising receptivity and intention
Green advertising refers to the advertising that usually highlights the
overall environmental benefits associated with buying specific
products, such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions, reducing water
pollution and facilitating biological interpretation (Nyilasy,
Gangadharbatla, & Paladino, 2014). Green advertising receptivity
refers to the degree of consumer acceptance of green advertising.
When consumers are exposed to green advertising, their feelings and
judgments are formed, which affect their attitudes toward green
advertising itself and their belief in green brands or green products
(Bailey, Mishra, & Tiamiyu, 2016). According to Irwin and
Naylor (2009), when consumers form a product consideration set by
excluding alternative products, they attach more importance to green
attributes. When green advertising helps them realize green attri-
butes, they are more likely to purchase those products (Hartmann &
SUN ET AL.
Apaolaza-Ibáñez, 2013). Previous studies indicated that the goal of
green advertising is to influence consumer purchase intention by
encouraging consumers to purchase eco-labeled products and to
allow them to realize the positive impact on both themselves and the
environment (Rahbar & Abdul Wahid, 2011). Hence, green advertising
receptivity is positively related to their intention to buy green prod-
ucts (Chang, Zhang, & Xie, 2015), so we can assume that
H1 Green advertising receptivity positively affects a consumer's
intention to buy eco-labeled products.
2.3 | Trust
Green product attributes are trust attributes. Consumers cannot verify
eco-labeled products after purchase and consumption because most
of them do not have the technical expertise or other resources to dis-
tinguish green products from other products (Giannakas, 2002;
Thøgersen, de Barcellos, Perinc, & Zhou, 2015). Hence, consumer
trust is the premise for establishing such a product market. Companies
build trust in eco-labels through green advertising because it is the
main source of information affecting a consumer's intention to buy
eco-labeled products. Individuals are more likely to trust in eco-
labeled products when they have a high receptivity toward green
advertising. If companies can provide evidence of green attributes in
green advertising, such as eco-labels, it will be more credible to con-
sumers than just claims.
Trust is defined as a state of mind based on positive expectations
of the intentions or actions of others, including the willingness to
accept vulnerability (Rousseau, Sitkin, Burt, & Camerer, 1998). Previ-
ous studies have particularly emphasized that trust gives people a bet-
ter expectation of the results, which leads to a more positive intention
(Nuttavuthisit & Thøgersen, 2017). It is worth noting that Torjusen,
Sangstad, Jensen, and Kjærnes (2004) proposed a distinct concept
between “system” and “personal” trust. System trust is dislocated, per-
vasive, and rooted in institutions. Eco-labels are the most obvious
signs for consumers to purchase green products. Studies have indi-
cated that eco-labels certified by third parties are more reliable, espe-
cially those certified by a public authority (Janssen & Hamm, 2011).
Some companies use eco-labels to distinguish their products, which
certainly will make those products more desirable to consumers. Per-
sonal trust is rooted in personal relationships and localized knowledge,
such as trust in the claims of local retailers. When merchants claim
that their products are environmentally friendly and pollution free
without eco-label certification, the green credibility of their products
is not very high, and consumers will not be willing to buy. Hence,
although a consumer's trust in eco-labeled products motivates con-
sumers to buy them, the influence is greater when there is trust in the
system rather than personal trust (Nuttavuthisit & Thøgersen, 2017).
Thus, we can assume that
H2 Green advertising receptivity positively affects a consumer's
(a) trust in the system and (b) personal trust.
3
H3 A Chinese consumer's intention to purchase eco-labeled products
is more influenced by (a) trust in the system than by
(b) personal trust.
2.4 | Regulatory focus
Previous literature indicated that green advertising receptivity posi-
tively affects green purchase intention (do Paço & Reis, 2012),
whereas some scholars indicated that it has little or no effect
(do Paço, Shiel, & Alves, 2019). To explore and explain the uncertain
results of previous studies of the relationship between green advertis-
ing receptivity and green buying intentions, we investigated whether
green advertising affects green consumption in China. For any given
advertising, consumers make choices based on different factors and
have different responses. Thus, regulatory focus theory
(Higgins, 1997) has become a powerful theory to predict how adver-
tising persuasion depends on an audience characteristic known as
moderating focus. Regulatory focus theory is employed to explain
how prevention focus and promotion focus affect an individual's
information and decision-making processing in green buying.
Prevention focus refers to an individual's evasion, safety, and
responsibility and pays more attention to the existence of negative
consequences (Higgins, 1997). Several convergent results show that
consumers usually link compassion, tenderness, and safety to green
behavior intention (Bullard & Manchanda, 2013; Luchs, Walker
Naylor, Irwin, & Raghunathan, 2010). For green advertising, con-
sumers are quick to produce preventive concerns for environmental
safety, protection, and accountability when they are more prevention
focused and to easily form an intention to buy green products. The
results of the above discussion suggest a positive link from prevention
focus to the relationship between green advertising and green buying.
In this study, we believe that prevention focus has a positive moderat-
ing effect on the relationship between green advertising receptivity
and green purchase intention.
In contrast, promotion focuses on an individual's achievements,
aspirations, and hopes, with more emphasis on the existence of posi-
tive consequences (Higgins, 1997). When individuals are promotion
focused, they are more interested in maximizing positive results and a
risk orientation to seize every opportunity for achievement. The
emphasis of maximizing positive results and risk seeking are likely to
be matched by a nonenvironmental tendency because problematic
consumer practices provide an opportunity to explore diversity and
stimulation by changing stereotypes (De Bock & Van Kenhove, 2010).
In green advertising, individuals who are promotion focused are less
likely to consider the green benefit and less likely to form the inten-
tion to purchase products. Thus, this indicates that the impact of
green advertising receptivity on making green purchases was weaker
among promotion-focused individuals, so we can assume that
H4a The effect of green advertising receptivity on intention to pur-
chase eco-labeled products will be stronger when the con-
sumer is more prevention focused.
4 SUN ET AL.
H4b The effect of green advertising receptivity on intention to pur-
chase eco-labeled products will be weaker when the consumer
is more promotion focused.
The conceptual model shown in Figure 1 explains the relation-
ships among the proposed constructs.
3 | RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 | Sample and data collection
To test the research hypothesis, data were collected by a survey of
consumers in China, which mainly consisted of online and offline
questionnaires. The advantages of an online questionnaire survey are
low cost, fast feedback, wide coverage, and a lack of time and space
restrictions. Moreover, young consumers are more frequently
exposed to the Internet and pay more attention to green advertising.
Online questionnaire surveys allow researchers to use less time and
effort to reach young target groups (Sun & Wang, 2020). The offline
questionnaire survey has a high response rate and can ask open-
ended questions. The information obtained is relatively complete, but
the cost of obtaining data is relatively high. At the same time, it is easy
to convey the subjective will of the investigator to the respondent
and thus affect the survey results. This study combines the two
research collection methods and obtains scientific data in the fastest
way. The samples collected are representative, and the sample distri-
bution is similar to the sample distribution of prior green advertising
and green consumption research (Luo, Sun, Shen, & Xia, 2020).
Data were first collected from the website https://www.sojump.
com/ from mid-July to mid-August 2018, and respondents were
allowed to participate in the questionnaire only if they had some
knowledge of eco-labels. Finally, 412 e-questionnaires were received
from the website. The other data were collected via printed question-
naires outside five supermarkets in Hefei that sell eco-labeled prod-
ucts. To ensure that they are responsible for family decisions,
potential consumers were stopped outside after they bought products
from the supermarket. To obtain broader data samples, we collected
data at different times of the day, so while this is clearly a
convenience example, it ensures a broad representation of the rele-
vant target groups (Thøgersen et al., 2015). A total of 807 question-
naires were received, with 395 of them being printed questionnaires.
The researchers screened participants for basic knowledge and aware-
ness of eco-labeled products, which eliminated 136 participants. The
researchers also discarded questionnaires with missing values and dif-
ferent variables with the same answers. Finally, data from 671 valid
questionnaires were used for questionnaire analysis, with 377 females
and 294 males completing the full questionnaires, thus revealing that
there were more typical female shoppers. The demographic data of
the respondents are shown in Table 1.
A t test was conducted for the independent samples to explore
the differences among respondents because the data were collected
with two methods: online and face-to-face surveys. No significant dif-
ference was evident between the two samples at the 0.05 level, so it
was logical to combine the two samples to conduct the analysis. Com-
mon method bias is a common problem in self-reported questionnaire
measures. Researchers used Harman's one-factor test to check for
possible common method bias, and the results indicate that the items
can be classified into eight constructs with eigenvalues higher than
1, and the first construct occupied the variance less than the recom-
mend value of 50%. Hence, common method bias was not a problem
in this research.
3.2 | Measures
Multiple item scales were used to measure these constructs. All items
were based on previous literature and slightly modified to fit into the
current research background. Each item in this research was based on
a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree). Four
measurement items were used to measure promotion focus, which
were adapted from the works of Haws, Dholakia, and Bearden (2010)
and Zou and Chan (2019). Four measurement items were used to
measure prevention focus, which were adapted from the works of
Haws et al. (2010) and Zou and Chan (2019). Four measurement items
were used to measure green advertising receptivity, which were
adapted from the works of do Paço et al. (2019). Four measurement
items were used to measure system trust, which were adapted from
FIGURE 1 Conceptual model
SUN ET AL. 5

TABLE 1 Demographic profile of respondents normed CMIN/df is 3.28, and the other indicators (CFI = 0.94,

Demographics Frequency Percentage (%) IFI = 0.94, NFI = 0.92, PGFI = 0.72, and RMSEA = 0.06) are also
acceptable, indicating that the fit of the measurement model meets
Gender
the threshold value. The reliability statistics and validity statistics are
1. Male 294 43.82
shown in Tables 2 and 3. Cronbach's α value and the composite reli-
2. Female 377 56.18
ability value are generally used to evaluate the construct reliability
Age
(Fornell & Larcker, 1981). The Cronbach's α values ranged from 0.75
1. Below 20 10 1.49
to 0.87, and the composite reliability values ranged from 0.85 to 0.91,
2. 21–30 230 34.28 showing that all the constructs have sufficient reliability with a higher
3. 31–40 264 39.34 value than the recommended value of 0.70. The CFA loading and
4. 41–50 107 15.95 average variance extracted (AVE) values are used to evaluate the con-
5. 51 and over 60 8.94 vergence reliability of the constructs (Fornell & Larcker, 1981; Ru,
Education level Wang, & Yan, 2018; Xu, Wang, & Yu, 2020). The CFA loading values
1. Junior high school or below 16 2.38 were all above the benchmark value of 0.70 at the p < 0.001 signifi-

2. Senior high school 59 8.79 cance level. The AVE values ranged from 0.60 to 0.72 and were all
higher than the recommended threshold value of 0.50. These results
3. Junior college 369 54.99
show that the constructs have sufficient reliability and convergence
4. Master's degree or PhD 227 33.83
validity. Moreover, the proportion of variance explained (R2) can be
Household income
deemed as another indicator of reliability, and all the values of R2
1. Less than ¥2000 42 6.26
were higher than 0.40, which indicate that the constructs meet
2. ¥2000–¥4000 112 16.69
acceptable levels of reliability (Kristal, Huang, & Roth, 2010; Wang,
3. ¥4000–¥8000 176 26.23
Wang, Li, & Yang, 2020).
4.¥8000–¥12,000 164 24.44 All the constructs in this study showed good discrimination valid-
5. More than ¥12,000 177 26.38 ity because the squared correlation between the relationships of each
Total 671 100 pair of constructs was lower than the AVE value of these two con-
structs (Fornell & Larcker, 1981; Wang, Wang, Lin, & Li, 2019). These
results provide strong support for the adequate reliability, conver-
gence validity, and discrimination validity.
the works of Thøgersen et al. (2015) and Nuttavuthisit and
Thøgersen (2017). Three measurement items were used to measure
personal trust, which were adapted from the works of Thøgersen 4.2 | Structural model and results
et al. (2015) and Nuttavuthisit and Thøgersen (2017). Four measure-
ment items were used to measure intention, which were adapted from The goodness of fit indices of the structural model revealed that the
the works of Sun, Wang, Li, Zhao, and Fan (2017), Wang, Wang, Yang, normed CMIN/df is 3.08, and the other indicators (CFI = 0.94,
Wang, and Li (2018), and Ru, Qin, and Wang (2019). This study also IFI = 0.94, NFI = 0.92, PGFI = 0.73, and RMSEA = 0.06) were also
includes several control variables, namely, gender, age, education acceptable, indicating this study has a good fit with the structural
level, and household income, which may affect the intention to model. The collinearity test showed that all the variance expansion
buy eco-labeled products. The measurement items are given in factors (VIFs) are lower than 10.0, suggesting that multicollinearity is
Appendix A. not a major concern in this study. After obtaining a satisfactory mea-
surement model and structural model, Amos 22.0 software packages
were employed to analyze the data to verify the hypotheses.
4 | DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS All hypotheses except H4b were tested by exploring the path
coefficient in Table 4. Green advertising receptivity has a positive
We investigated the intervention variables (system trust, personal effect on system trust (β = 0.60, t = 9.56, p < 0.001), personal trust
trust, and consumer's regulatory focus) to gain insights into the medi- (β = 0.31, t = 6.31, p < 0.001), and intention to buy eco-labeled prod-
ating and moderating effects on green advertising receptivity and ucts (β = 0.64, t = 9.60, p < 0.001); thus, H1, H2a, and H2b are
intention to purchase eco-labeled products. supported. It is proven that participants reported higher system trust
than personal trust for the given green advertising. System trust
(β = 0.22, t = 6.18, p < 0.001) and personal trust (β = 0.21, t = 3.84,
4.1 | Measurement model and analysis p < 0.001) positively and significantly affect a consumer's intention to
purchase eco-labeled products, thus supporting H3a and H3b. This
Based on our confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) results, the goodness also indicates that consumer green purchase intention is more
of the fit indices of the measurement model are listed as follows: the influenced by trust in system than by personal trust.
6 SUN ET AL.

TABLE 2 Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) results for measurement model

Item Construct Loading p R2 Composite reliability Cronbach's α value AVE

GAR1 GAR 0.813 A 0.749 0.854 0.772 0.595
GAR2 0.723 * 0.768
GAR3 0.717 * 0.607
GAR4 0.827 * 0.583
PRO1 POF 0.774 A 0.702 0.870 0.801 0.626
POF2 0.830 * 0.741
POF3 0.791 * 0.734
POF4 0.770 * 0.661
PEF1 PEF 0.839 A 0.746 0.893 0.842 0.676
PEF2 0.827 * 0.792
PEF3 0.810 * 0.754
PEF4 0.813 * 0.729
ST1 ST 0.832 A 0.765 0.909 0.867 0.715
ST2 0.881 * 0.837
ST3 0.812 * 0.749
ST4 0.855 * 0.799
PT1 PT 0.829 A 0.504 0.848 0.750 0.651
PT2 0.779 * 0.798
PT3 0.812 * 0.861
INT1 INT 0.848 A 0.780 0.909 0.867 0.715
INT2 0.865 * 0.809
INT3 0.867 * 0.806
INT4 0.839 * 0.795

*p < 0.001.

TABLE 3 Means, standard deviation (SD), and correlations

Means SD GAR POF PEF ST PT INT

GAR 4.14 0.54 0.77
POF 2.99 0.48 −0.07 0.79
PEF 2.84 0.59 0.03 −0.75* 0.82
ST 3.71 0.75 0.37 *
0.16* −0.22* 0.85
PT 3.68 0.76 0.34* 0.26* −0.25* 0.27** 0.81
INT 3.87 0.65 0.57 *
0.38* −0.35* 0.46** 0.41** 0.85

Note: The bold element is the square root of each AVE value.
*p < 0.01.
**p < 0.001.

As predicted in Table 4, the interaction term between green adver-
tising receptivity and promotion focus is significantly negative
(β = −0.77, t = 2.00, p < 0.05), suggesting that promotion focus nega-
tively moderates the effect of green advertising receptivity on intention
to buy eco-labeled products. However, the interaction term between
green advertising receptivity and prevention focus is insignificant
(β = −0.43, p > 0.05), suggesting that prevention focus has no significant
effect on the relationship between green advertising receptivity and
intention to buy eco-labeled products. It is proven that participants
with higher promotion focus reported a less favorable intention toward
purchasing eco-labeled products for the given green advertising.
Specifically, disseminating green information can increase purchase
intention, especially for individuals who are less promotion focused.
Therefore, this study supports the positive impact of green advertising
receptivity on green purchase intention and the negative moderating
effect of promotion focus on the relationship between them.
SUN ET AL. 7

TABLE 4 Path coefficients of the structural model

Path Path coefficient t value Hypothesis Results

GAR ! INT 0.64 9.60** H1 Supported
GAR ! ST 0.60 9.56** H2a Supported
GAR ! PT 0.31 6.31** H2b Supported
ST ! INT 0.22 6.18* H3a Supported
PT ! INT 0.21 3.84** H3b Supported
GAR * POF ! INT −0.77 −2.00* H4a Supported
GAR * PEF ! INT −0.43 −1.36 H4b Not supported

*p < 0.01.
**p < 0.001.

TABLE 5 Result of the mediation effect analysis

IV + M ! DV

IV M DV IV ! DV IV ! M IV ! DV M ! DV Mediating
GAR ST INT 0.57* 0.37* 0.47* 0.29* Partial
GAR PT INT 0.57* 0.34* 0.49* 0.24* Partial

Abbreviations: DV, dependent variable; IV, independent variable; M, mediator.

*p < 0.001.

4.3 | Mediating effect analysis
The indirect effects of green advertising receptivity on green purchase
intention through system trust and personal trust were examined
through decomposition tests using a bootstrapping method. The
results (bootstrapping 2000 times) showed that the indirect effect of
advertising receptivity on green purchase intention via system trust
(β = 0.13, p = 0.001, 95% CI = [0.08, 0.19]) and personal trust
(β = 0.07, p = 0.001, 95% CI = [0.03, 0.13]) were significant. Thus, sys-
tem trust and personal trust mediate the relationship between green
advertising receptivity and purchase intention.
Drawing on Baron and Kenny's (1986) research, we used three
steps to test the mediating effect. First, independent variables should
significantly affect the dependent variables. Then, the independent
variables should significantly affect the mediator. Finally, we can
assume that the mediator has a partial mediating effect if both the
independent variable and the mediator have a significant influence on
the dependent variable. Table 5 reveals the results of the mediation
effect analysis. It reveals that green advertising receptivity has a par-
tial mediating effect on green purchase intention via system trust and
personal trust.
5 | CONCLUSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND
LIMITATIONS
5.1 | Conclusion and discussion
This research examined the relationship between green advertising
receptivity and consumer purchase intention. It builds on previous
research by establishing a network of jurisprudence about the cogni-
tive consequences of eco-labeled products and checking the moderat-
ing effect of a consumer's regulatory focus and the mediating effect
of trust on the relationship between green advertising receptivity and
intention (Higgins, 1997). The result indicates that green advertising
receptivity has a positive effect on intention to purchase eco-labeled
products because green advertising highlights the environmental ben-
efits. The study shows that a consumer's promotion focus on eco-
labeled products has a negative moderating effect on the relationship
between green adverting and purchase intention. The result is consis-
tent with the findings of Zhu (2012) and Juwaheer, Pudaruth, and
Noyaux (2012). As mentioned before, promotion focus is related to
the maximization of positive results and risk-seeking orientation in
order to seize every opportunity for achievement (Higgins, 1997).
Consumers are more willing to engage in morally questionable behav-
ior when they realize that performance will bring them higher net ben-
efits. This indicates that consumers with strong promotion focus are
more likely to ignore general ethical principles when making green
decisions (Forsyth, 1980). However, the study shows that a con-
sumer's prevention focus on eco-labeled products has no moderating
effect on the relationship between green adverting receptivity and
the purchase intention. It is possible that although prevention focuses
on protection, safety, and responsibility to avoid adverse conse-
quences, the adverse consequences generated by nonenvironmental
protection are too long term, and the impact on consumers is small
(Higgins, 2002). Hence, we believe that the prevention focus will not
significantly moderate the relationship between green advertising
receptivity and purchase intention.
Although many studies mentioned that consumers are skeptical
of green advertising, this study proved that green advertising
8 SUN ET AL.
receptivity has a significant positive effect on system trust and
personal trust. The results are consistent with the findings of
Nuttavuthisit and Thøgersen (2017). Green advertising plays an
important role in promoting eco-labeled products. Consumers who
are influenced by green advertising are aware of environmental prob-
lems and think their behavior has an impact on the environment.
Green advertising always contains the context about where to pur-
chase eco-labeled products and how to distinguish them from ordi-
nary products. Thus, green advertising receptivity is positively related
to consumer trust. It is also shown that participants reported higher
trust in the system than personal trust for the given green advertising.
The result indicated that system trust and personal trust are posi-
tively correlated with purchase intention. The results are consistent
with the findings of Nuttavuthisit and Thøgersen (2017). Consumer
understanding of green products is still narrow and superficial. When
faced with the actual choice of stores, lack of trust in the products
being sold and the real promise of trust attributes may decrease a
consumer's intention to buy. This distrust may be directed at the seller
or, more controversially, at the system that certifies, controls, and
labels certified green products (Castka & Corbett, 2016). Some con-
sumers are suspicious of eco-labeled products because they think
those products are not useful and see them as second-hand or just
the green wash of the company. In this case, we imagine when con-
sumers have greater trust and a deeper understanding of eco-labeled
products, especially their environmental protection advantages, their
intentions to buy these products may increase. In addition, the result
indicates that a Chinese consumer's intention to purchase eco-labeled
products is more influenced by trust in the system than by personal
trust; system trust plays a more important role in their green
purchasing.
5.2 | Implications
Green advertising receptivity significantly and positively affects a con-
sumer's system trust and personal trust. Companies should pay more
attention to educating customers about how to distinguish eco-labels
so they can distinguish the eco-labeled products from traditional
products via green advertising. More specific rather than more general
information should also be disseminated in green advertising to
enhance knowledge and skill for purchasing eco-labeled products.
Companies should understand that consumers appreciate sincere cor-
porate behavior. Companies should effectively communicate to cus-
tomers to show and convince them that their sustainability efforts are
genuine and sincere. To improve their trust, companies should pro-
mote the positive image of eco-labeled products to consumers. They
may find it advantageous to actively participate in environmental
practices that go beyond industry norms (Menguc, Auh, &
Ozanne, 2010), improve specific ratings by embracing sustainability
initiatives in general, and in particular, gradually establish a consistent
green history (Parguel, Benoît-Moreau, & Larceneux, 2011). It is
important that enterprises disclose all necessary information to sup-
port their green products' environmental benefits and performance
via existing sources (such as product packaging and promotional mate-
rials) or additional sources (such as the environment and enterprise
social media accounts) to achieve the true green positioning of their
products. It is worth noting that providing this information can ulti-
mately help truly green products to succeed.
Companies must be aware that some consumers will make
choices based on eco-labeling, so obtaining appropriate eco-labels is a
necessary business strategy for environmental enterprises. Measures
should be taken to obtain appropriate eco-labels and further encour-
age consumers to buy eco-labeled products. In this study, the average
scores of personal trust and system trust are relatively low, which
indicates that the market basis for eco-labeled product development
is fragile and severely restricted. This is consistent with previous stud-
ies (Nuttavuthisit & Thøgersen, 2017). To ensure the establishment
and further growth of the eco-labeled product market in China or
elsewhere, public trust in the system must be increased by esta-
blishing and communicating according to strict and consistent stan-
dards and controls. Therefore, a key policy recommendation is to
promote standards and controls for eco-labeled products and similar
industries so that consumers have more confidence in these products.
The result indicates that a consumer's promotion focus on eco-
labeled products negatively moderates the relationship between
green adverting and purchase intention, while a consumer's promotion
focus does not play a role. In addition, from the regulatory focus the-
ory perspective, scholars could study various aspects of consumer
behavior intentions that have not been fully discussed in the related
studies. Not all green advertising is equal, nor will it have the same
influence on consumer purchases. The regulatory focus theory offers
a bridge to how consumers view and enforce green advertising recep-
tivity that affects their decisions to buy eco-labeled products. It pro-
vides an incentive for businesses to focus their green initiatives
appropriately on consumers. Companies can use the above informa-
tion to accurately target and educate less promotion-focused cus-
tomers. Measures such as educational product displays, targeted
green advertising, and appropriately eco-labeled products should be
used so that consumers can clearly see the unique advantages of the
eco-labeled products.
The role of government is also essential to further promote
the development of eco-labeled products. First, to encourage their
development, the government should formulate more relevant poli-
cies and regulations. For example, it should give companies more
convenient access to the certification of eco-labels. As long as
companies meet the standards, they can complete the certification
efficiently. The government can offer more subsidies to companies
to encourage eco-labeled product development and give consumers
appropriate incentives to buy eco-labeled products. Second, it
should use public platforms to publicize the positive image of eco-
labeled products to potential consumers. The government can
emphasize the environmental and personal benefits of eco-labeled
products to encourage consumer purchases. It could also consider
introducing appropriate, direct, and consistent eco-labels so that
consumers have a clear reference point to understand the environ-
mental characteristics of each product. In doing so, consumers may
SUN ET AL.
start to allay some of their doubts about eco-labeled products and
trust them.
5.3 | Limitations
In this study, the data were cross-sectional and did not take time
frames into account. Future studies can test the proposed model for
different periods and compare the results of the longitudinal studies.
Meanwhile, other research methods such as respondent interviews
and quasi-natural experiment can also be used to collect data. Second,
to make the model more applicable and determine whether it can be
extended to other markets or countries, it is necessary to test external
factors such as economic and market differences and even cultural
differences. Finally, this study focuses on consumer purchase inten-
tion rather than actual behavior, and there is still a gap between inten-
tion and actual purchase behavior. Future studies can focus on actual
purchase behavior.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation
of China (Grants 71974177 and 71804174).
ORCID
Ying Sun https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1446-7125
RE FE R ENC E S
Ahmed, W., & Zhang, Q. (2020). Green purchase intention: Effects of
electronic service quality and customer green psychology. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 267, 122053.
Atkinson, L., & Rosenthal, S. (2014). Signaling the green sell: The influence
of eco-label source, argument specificity, and product involvement on
consumer trust. Journal of Advertising, 43(1), 33–45.
Bailey, A. A., Mishra, A., & Tiamiyu, M. F. (2016). Green advertising recep-
tivity: An initial scale development process. Journal of Marketing Com-
munications, 22(3), 327–345.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable dis-
tinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and sta-
tistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51
(6), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173
Bougherara, D., & Combris, P. (2009). Eco-labelled food products: What
are consumers paying for? European Review of Agricultural Economics,
36(3), 321–341. Post Print
Boulding, W., & Kirmani, A. (1993). A consumer-side experimental
examination of signaling theory: Do consumers perceive warranties as
signals of quality? Journal of Consumer Research, 20(1), 111–123.
Bullard, O., & Manchanda, R. V. (2013). Do sustainable products make us
prevention focused? Marketing Letters, 24(2), 177–189.
Castka, P., & Corbett, C. J. (2016). Governance of eco-labels: Expert opin-
ion and media coverage. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(2), 309–326.
Chang, H., Zhang, L., & Xie, G. X. (2015). Message framing in green adver-
tising: The effect of construal level and consumer environmental con-
cern. International Journal of Advertising, 34(1), 158–176.
Chen, Y. S., & Chang, C. H. (2013). Greenwash and green trust: The media-
tion effects of green consumer confusion and green perceived risk.
Journal of Business Ethics, 114(3), 489–500.
Choi, C., Eldomiaty, T., & Kim, S. (2007). Consumer trust, social marketing
and ethics of welfare exchange. Journal of Business Ethics, 74, 17–23.
9
De Bock, T., & Van Kenhove, P. (2010). Consumer ethics: The role of self-
regulatory focus. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(2), 241–255.
do Paço, A., Shiel, C., & Alves, H. (2019). A new model for testing green
consumer behavior. Journal of Cleaner Production, 207, 998–1006.
do Paço, A. M. F., & Reis, R. (2012). Factors affecting skepticism toward
green advertising. Journal of Advertising, 41(4), 147–155.
Erdem, T., & Swait, J. (1998). Brand equity as a signaling phenomenon.
Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7(2), 131–157.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models
with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Mar-
keting Research, 18(1), 39–50.
Forsyth, D. R. (1980). A taxonomy of ethical ideologies. Journal of Personal-
ity and Social Psychology, 39, 175–184.
Gallastegui, I. G. (2002). The use of eco-labels: A review of the literature.
European Environment, 12, 316–331.
Gao, L., Wang, S., Li, J., & Li, H. (2017). Application of the extended theory
of planned behavior to understand individual's energy saving behavior
in workplaces. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 127, 107–113.
Giannakas, K. (2002). Information asymmetries and consumption decisions
in organic food product markets. Canadian Journal of Agricultural
Economics/Revue comedienne d'agroeconomie, 50(1), 35–50.
Göçer, A., & Sevil Oflaç, B. (2017). Understanding young consumers' ten-
dencies regarding eco-labeled products. Asia Pacific Journal of Market-
ing and Logistics, 29(1), 80–97.
Grinstein, A., & Nisan, U. (2009). Demarketing, minorities, and national
attachment. Journal of Marketing, 73(2), 105–122.
Han, L., Wang, S., Zhao, D., & Li, J. (2017). The intention to adopt electric
vehicles: Driven by functional and non-functional values. Transporta-
tion Research Part a: Policy and Practice, 103, 185–197.
Hartmann, P., & Apaolaza-Ibáñez, V. (2012). Consumer attitude and pur-
chase intention toward green energy brands: The roles of psychologi-
cal benefits and environmental concern. Journal of Business Research,
65(9), 1254–1263.
Hartmann, P., & Apaolaza-Ibáñez, V. (2013). Desert or rain: Standardiza-
tion of green advertising versus adaptation to the target audience's
natural environment. European Journal of Marketing, 47(5/6), 917–933.
Haws, K. L., Dholakia, U. M., & Bearden, W. O. (2010). An assessment of
chronic regulatory focus measures. Journal of Marketing Research, 47,
967–982.
Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52,
1280–1300. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066x.52.12.1280
Higgins, E. T. (2002). How self-regulation creates distinct values: The case
of promotion and prevention decision making. Journal of Consumer
Psychology, 12(3), 177–191.
Irwin, J. R., & Naylor, R. W. (2009). Ethical decisions and response mode
compatibility: Weighting of ethical attributes in consideration sets
formed by excluding versus including product alternatives. Journal of
Marketing Research, 46(2), 234–246.
Jäger, A.-K., & Weber, A. (2020). Can you believe it? The effects of benefit
type versus construal level on advertisement credibility and purchase
intention for organic food. Journal of Cleaner Production, 257, 120543.
Janssen, M., & Hamm, U. (2011). Consumer perception of different organic
certification schemes in five European countries. Organic Agriculture, 1
(1), 31–43.
Juwaheer, T. D., Pudaruth, S., & Noyaux, M. M. E. (2012). Analyzing the
impact of green marketing strategies on consumer purchasing patterns
in Mauritius. World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sus-
tainable Development, 8(1), 36–59.
Kirmani, A., & Rao, A. R. (2000). No pain, no gain: A critical review of the
literature on signaling unobservable product quality. Journal of Market-
ing, 64(2), 66–79.
Kristal, M. M., Huang, X., & Roth, A. V. (2010). The effect of an ambidex-
trous supply chain strategy on combinative competitive capabilities
and business performance. Journal of Operations Management, 28(5),
415–2429.
10
Lacy, P., & Hayward, R. (2011). A new era of sustainability in emerging
markets? Insights from a global CEO study by the United Nations
Global Compact and Accenture. Corporate Governance: The interna-
tional journal of business in. Society, 11(4), 348–357.
Luchs, M. G., Walker Naylor, R., Irwin, R. R., & Raghunathan, R. (2010). The
sustainability liability: Potential negative effects of ethicality on prod-
uct preference. Journal of Marketing, 74(5), 18–31.
Luo, B., Sun, Y., Shen, J., & Xia, L. (2020). How does green advertising
skepticism on social media affect consumer intention to purchase
green products? Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 19(4), 371–381.
Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. A. (1974). An approach to environmental psy-
chology. M.I.T. Press.
Menguc, B., Auh, S., & Ozanne, L. (2010). The interactive effect of internal
and external factors on a proactive environmental strategy and its
influence on a firm's performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(2),
279–298.
Nuttavuthisit, K., & Thøgersen, J. (2017). The importance of consumer
trust for the emergence of a market for green products: The case of
organic food. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(2), 323–337.
Nyilasy, G., Gangadharbatla, H., & Paladino, A. (2014). Perceived green-
washing: The interactive effects of green advertising and corporate
environmental performance on consumer reactions. Journal of Business
Ethics, 125(4), 693–707.
Paparoidamis, N. G., & Tran, H. T. T. (2019). Making the world a better
place by making better products: Eco-friendly consumer innovative-
ness and the adoption of eco-innovations. European Journal of Market-
ing, 53(8), 1546–1584.
Parguel, B., Benoît-Moreau, F., & Larceneux, F. (2011). How sustainability
ratings might deter ‘greenwashing’: A closer look at ethical corporate
communication. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(1), 15.
Peattie, K., & Crane, A. (2005). Green marketing: legend, myth, farce or
prophesy? Qualitative. Market Research: An International Journal, 8(4),
357–370.
Rahbar, E., & Abdul Wahid, N. (2011). Investigation of green marketing
tools' effect on consumers' purchase behavior. Business Strategy Series,
12(2), 73–83.
Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so dif-
ferent after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Manage-
ment Review, 23, 393–404.
Ru, X., Qin, H., & Wang, S. (2019). Young people's behaviour intentions
towards reducing PM2.5 in China: Extending the theory of planned
behaviour. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 141, 99–108.
Ru, X., Wang, S., & Yan, S. (2018). Exploring the effects of normative fac-
tors and perceived behavioral control on individual's energy-saving
intention: An empirical study in eastern China. Resources, Conservation
and Recycling, 134, 91–99.
Shi, H., Wang, S., & Zhao, D. (2017). Exploring urban resident's vehicular
PM2.5 reduction behavior intention: An application of the extended
theory of planned behavior. Journal of Cleaner Production, 147,
603–613.
Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. The Quarterly Journal of
Economics, 87(3), 355–374.
Sun, Y., & Wang, S. (2020). Understanding consumers' intentions to
purchase green products in the social media marketing context. Asia
Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 32(4), 860–878.
SUN ET AL.
Sun, Y., Wang, S., Li, J., Zhao, D., & Fan, J. (2017). Understanding con-
sumers' intention to use plastic bags: Using an extended theory of
planned behavior model. Natural Hazards, 89(3), 1327–1342.
Thøgersen, J., de Barcellos, M. D., Perinc, M. G., & Zhou, Y. (2015). Con-
sumer buying motives and attitudes towards organic food in two
emerging markets: China and Brazil. International Marketing Review, 32,
389–413.
Torjusen, H., Sangstad, L., Jensen, K. O. D., & Kjærnes, U. (2004). European
consumers' conceptions of organic food. A review of available research.
National Institute for Consumer Research.
Wang, J., Wang, S., Xue, H., Wang, Y., & Li, J. (2018). Green image and
consumers' word-of-mouth intention in the green hotel industry: The
moderating effect of Millennials. Journal of Cleaner Production, 181,
426–436.
Wang, S., Fan, J., Zhao, D., Yang, S., & Fu, Y. (2016). Predicting consumers'
intention to adopt hybrid electric vehicles: Using an extended version
of the theory of planned behavior model. Transportation, 43(1),
123–143.
Wang, S., Li, J., & Zhao, D. (2017). The impact of policy measures on con-
sumer intention to adopt electric vehicles: Evidence from China. Trans-
portation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 105, 14–26.
Wang, S., Wang, J., Li, J., & Yang, F. (2020). Do motivations contribute to
local residents' engagement in pro-environmental behaviors?
Resident-destination relationship and pro-environmental climate per-
spective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 28(6), 834–852.
Wang, S., Wang, J., Lin, S., & Li, J. (2019). Public perceptions and accep-
tance of nuclear energy in China: The role of public knowledge, per-
ceived benefit, perceived risk and public engagement. Energy Policy,
126, 352–360.
Wang, S., Wang, J., Yang, F., Wang, Y., & Li, J. (2018). Consumer familiarity,
ambiguity tolerance, and purchase behavior toward remanufactured
products: The implications for remanufacturers. Business Strategy and
the Environment, 27(8), 1741–1750.
Xu, X., Wang, S., & Yu, Y. (2020). Consumer's intention to purchase green
furniture: Do health consciousness and environmental awareness mat-
ter? Science of the Total Environment, 704, 135275.
Yoon, Y., Sarial-Abi, G., & Gurhan-Canli, Z. (2012). Effect of regulatory
focus on selective information processing. Journal of Consumer
Research, 39(1), 93–110.
Zhu, B. (2012, October). The impact of green advertising on consumer pur-
chase intention of green products. In Proceedings of World Business
and Economics Research Conference.
Zou, L. W., & Chan, R. Y. (2019). Why and when do consumers perform
green behaviors? An examination of regulatory focus and ethical ideol-
ogy. Journal of Business Research, 94, 113–127.
How to cite this article: Sun Y, Luo B, Wang S, Fang W. What
you see is meaningful: Does green advertising change the
intentions of consumers to purchase eco-labeled products?
Bus Strat Env. 2020;1–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2648
SUN ET AL. 11

APP E NDIX A: CONSTRUCTS AND MEASUREMENT ITEMS

Construct Item Coding

Promotion focus (POF)
Prevention focus (PEF)
Green advertising receptivity (GAR)
System trust (ST)
Personal trust (PT)
Intention (INT)
I usually focus on what I want to be in the future. POF1
I often think about the success I want to achieve in the future. POF2
I work hard now just to realize my career ambition. POF3
My “ideal self” is the kind of person who can fulfill my hopes, wishes and aspirations, and I POF4
strive to be the ideal person I want.
I am very worried about the lack of obligation as well as responsibility in my life. PEF1
I usually think of the person I feared I would become. PEF2
I am usually worried that I will not achieve my career ambition. PEF3
I usually think of myself going through something bad that I'm afraid will happen to me. PEF4
I tend to focus on advertising messages that relate to the environment. GAR1
For those brands that use green messages in their advertisements, I think they are good. GAR2
I take attention to eco-labeled products through green advertising. GAR3
Green advertising is valuable in my opinion. GAR4
I trust eco-labeled products because I have confidence in Chinese government controlled ST1
eco-labeled products.
I think Chinese government is qualified to certify eco-labeled products. ST2
I trust Chinese eco-labeled products because I believe the Chinese government control is ST3
in charge.
I feel that Chinese eco-labeled products are generally reliable. TS4
I trust more green products bought directly from the producer without certification. PT1
When I purchase green products, I rely on the producers' words rather than certification. PT2
When I purchase green products, I rely on the sellers' words rather than certification. PT3
I plan to purchase eco-labeled products in the future. INT1
I am willing to purchase more eco-labeled products while shopping. INT2
From now on, I plan to purchase eco-labeled products. INT3
I intend to pay more for eco-labeled products. INT4

View publication stats