Cognitive, Affective and Conative Domains of Sustainable Consumption: Scale Development and Validation Using Confirmatory Composite Analysis
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Basis of SC Construct
2.1. Notion of “Mindfulness” and “Mindful Consumption”
The mindset matters in two important ways: attitudes and values influence the choices about consumption, and they determine how the effect from consumption is interpreted, thereby increasing or decreasing the likelihood of further consumption of a related nature. To effectively deal with the problem of overconsumption, both behaviour and mindset need to change. This change can be brought about by inculcating mindful consumption.
2.2. Theory of Mind (TOM) and Sustainable Consumption
3. Definition and Dimensionality of the SC Construct
3.1. Conceptualisation of the SC Construct
Sustainable Consumption is an individual’s cognitive, affective and conative traits in relation to avoiding extravagant purchases, and the rational use of goods and services to satisfy basic needs. SC exhibits care for the environment by managing existing resources in a way that meets current demands but does not jeopardise the needs of future generations.
3.2. Dimensionality of the SC Construct
4. Research Methodology
- Second, most prior scales viewed the construct as uni-dimensional, whereas the scale used in this study is multi-dimensional, with three facets.
- Third, many scales do not provide a proper theoretical basis (e.g., environmental knowledge scale, conscious for sustainability consumption scale), whereas some other scales focus on attitude-behaviour gap/relationship (e.g., ethically minded consumer behaviour scale, ecological behaviour scale, green purchase behaviour scale). The attitude-behaviour gap provides the understanding that a positive attitude does not always materialise in action. It is also argued that behaviour alone cannot give a proper understanding of firm commitment, psychological attachment and future motives [60]. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the mental process of observing human behaviour. This study uses the ToM and the notion of mindfulness as the basis for developing the scale.
4.1. Item Generation
4.2. Item Selection
4.3. Item Purification
4.4. Factor Structure Using EFA
4.5. Reflective and Formative Measurement Model
4.6. Item Validation
4.7. Confirmatory Composite Analysis (CCA)
4.8. Assessing Nomological and Predictive Validity
5. Discussion and Implications
5.1. Theoretical Implications
5.2. Methodological and Practical Implications
6. Limitations and Future Research Directions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Sustainable Consumption | |
---|---|
Cognitive SC | Cog1. I believe wasting food and other consumables is unethical. |
Cog2. I am aware that excess consumption can cause a shortage of natural resources. | |
Cog3. I believe that it is important to use eco-friendly products and services. | |
Cog4. I believe that individuals should care for the future generation. | |
Cog5. I believe that it is our responsibility to care for the natural environment. | |
Cog6. I know that natural resources decreasing at an alarming rate. | |
Affective SC | Affec1. I feel good when I can control my whims for buying unnecessary things. |
Aaffec2. I don’t like to waste food or beverage. | |
Affec3. I prefer to buy organic food, since it is environmentally friendly. | |
Affec4. I prefer to pay more to purchase environmentally friendly products. | |
Affec5. I prefer to use paper bags, since they are biodegradable. | |
Affec6. I like to purchase only what I need. | |
Affec7. I feel happy to give priority to environmental welfare. | |
Conative SC | Con1 I intend to reduce the misuse of goods and services (e.g., I switch off the lights and the fan when I am not in the room). |
Con2. I will continue to purchase environmentally friendly products even though they are slightly expensive. | |
Con3. I will avoid consumption activities that can lead to environmental pollution. | |
Con4. I will continue to purchase biodegradable packages (e.g., use of paper bag instead of plastic bag). | |
Con5. I will keep trying not to waste my food and beverage. | |
Con6. I will spend my money wisely in order to avoid wastage and excessive purchases. | |
Con7. I will keep contributing to environmental welfare in all respects. | |
Con8. I will not engage in any purchase that can have a negative effect on the environment. |
References
- Nkamnebe, A.D. Sustainability marketing in the emerging markets: Imperatives, challenges, and agenda setting. Int. J. Emerg. Mark. 2011, 6, 217–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kates, R.W.; Parris, T.M.; Leiserowitz, A.A. What is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, values, and practice. Environ. Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev. 2005, 47, 8–21. [Google Scholar]
- World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). Our Common Future; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Peattie, K.; Collins, A. Guest editorial: Perspectives on sustainable consumption. Int. J. Consum. 2009, 33, 107–112. [Google Scholar]
- UNEP. Education for Sustainable Consumption (ESC). Available online: https://en.unesco.org/greencitizens/stories/education-sustainable-consumption (accessed on 31 May 2019).
- Zhang, Y.; Chabay, I. How “green knowledge” influences sustainability through behavior change: Theory and policy implications. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hansen, K.V.; Derdowski, L.A. Sustainable food consumption in nursing homes: Less food waste with the right plate color? Sustainability 2020, 12, 6525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quoquab, F.; Jaini, A.; Mohammad, J. Does it matter who exhibits more green purchase behavior of cosmetic products in Asian culture? A multi-group analysis approach. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 5258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quoquab, F.; Mohammad, J. Managing sustainable consumption: Is it a problem or panacea? In Sustainable Economic Development; World Sustainability Series; Springer: Hamburg, Germany, 2017; Chapter 7; pp. 115–125. [Google Scholar]
- Black, I. Sustainability through anti-consumption. J. Consum. Behav. 2010, 9, 403–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banytė, J.; Šalčiuvienė, L.; Dovalienė, A.; Piligrimienė, Ž.; Sroka, W. Sustainable consumption behavior at home and in the workplace: Avenues for innovative solutions. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chua, K.; Quoquab, F.; Mohammad, J. Factors affecting environmental citizenship behaviour: An empirical investigation in Malaysian paddy industry. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist. 2020, 32, 86–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, K.M. Predictors of sustainable consumption among young educated consumers in Hong Kong. J. Int. Consum. Mark. 2014, 26, 217–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stern, P.C. Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. J. Soc. Issues 2000, 56, 407–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kinoti, M.W. Green marketing Intervention strategies and sustainable development: A conceptual paper. Int. J. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2011, 2, 263–273. [Google Scholar]
- Fraj, E.; Martinez, E. Ecological consumer behaviour: An empirical analysis. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2006, 3, 26–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnson, O.; Chattaraman, V. Conceptualization and measurement of millennial’s social signalling and self-signalling for socially responsible consumption. J. Consum. Behav. 2018, 18, 32–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sudbury-Riley, L.; Kohlbacher, F. Ethically minded consumer behavior: Scale review, development, and validation. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 2697–2710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Premack, D.; Woodruff’, G. Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Behav. Brain Sci. 1978, 1, 515–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Astington, J.; Edward, M. The Development of Theory of Mind in Early Childhood. Encyclopaedia on Early Childhood Development (Online). 2010. Available online: http://www.child-encyclopedia.com/social-cognition/according-experts/development-theory-mind-early-childhood (accessed on 21 October 2018).
- Barry, T.E.; Howard, D.J. A review and critique of the hierarchy of effects in advertising. Int. J. Advert. 1990, 9, 121–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kabat-Zinn, J. Wherever You Go, There You Are: Mindfulness Meditation in Everyday Life; Hyperion: New York, NY, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Langer, E.J. Mindfulness; Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA, USA, 1989. [Google Scholar]
- Amel, E.L.; Manning, C.M.; Scott, B.A. Mindfulness and sustainable behavior: Pondering attention and awareness as means for increasing green behavior. Ecopsychology 2009, 1, 14–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sheth, J.; Sethia, N.K.; Srinivas, S. Mindful consumption: A customer-centric approach to sustainability. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2011, 39, 21–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnstone, L.; Lindh, C. The sustainability-age dilemma: A theory of (un)planned behaviour via influencers. J. Consum. Behav. 2017, 17, 127–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uddin, S.M.F.; Khan, M.N. Exploring green purchasing behavior of young urban consumers: Empirical evidences from India. South Asian J. Glob. Bus. Res. 2016, 5, 2–31. [Google Scholar]
- Alisat, S.; Reimer, M. The environmental action scale: Development and psychometric evaluation. J. Environ. Psychol. 2015, 43, 13–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dono, J.; Webb, W.; Richardson, B. The relationship between environmental activism, pro-environmental behavior and social identity. J. Environ. Psychol. 2010, 30, 178–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leslie, A.M. Theory of mind. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences Pages; Elsevier: New York, NY, USA, 2010; pp. 15652–15656. [Google Scholar]
- Fischer, D.; Stanszus, L.; Geiger, S.; Grossman, P.; Schrader, U. Mindfulness and sustainable consumption: A systematic literature review of research approaches and findings. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 162, 544–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kabat-Zinn, J. Mindfulness-based interventions in context: Past, Present, Future. Clin. Psychol. 2003, 10, 144–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Langer, E.J.; Moldoveanu, M. The construct of mindfulness. J. Soc. Issues 2000, 56, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grossman, P. Mindfulness: Awareness informed by an embodied ethic. Mindfulness 2015, 6, 17–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shapiro, S.L.; Carlson, L.E.; Astin, J.A.; Freedman, B. Mechanisms of Mindfulness. J. Clin. Psychol. 2006, 62, 373–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rosenberg, E.L. Mindfulness and consumerism. In Psychology and Consumer Culture: The Struggle for a Good Life in a Materialistic World; Kasser, T., Kanner, A.D., Eds.; American Psychological Association: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Bahl, S.; Milne, G.R.; Ross, S.M.; Mick, D.G.; Grier, S.A.; Chugani, S.K.; Chan, S.; Gould, S.J.; Cho, Y.-N.; Dorsey, J.D.; et al. Mindfulness, the transformative potential for consumer, societal, and environmental well-being. J. Public Policy Mark. 2016, 35, 198–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chatzisarantis, N.L.D.; Hagger, M.S. Mindfulness and the intention-behavior relationship within the theory of planned behavior. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2007, 33, 663–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dennis, M.; Simic, N.; Bigler, E.D.; Abildskov, T.; Agostino, A.; Taylor, H.G.; Rubin, K.; Vannatta, K.; Gerhardt, C.A.; Stancin, T.; et al. Cognitive, affective, and conative theory of mind (ToM) in children with traumatic brain injury. Dev. Cogn. Neurosci. 2013, 5, 25–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Taylor, M. A theory of mind perspective on social cognitive development. In Perceptual and Cognitive Development; Gelman, R., Au, T.K.-F., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1996; Chapter 9; pp. 283–329. [Google Scholar]
- Mayer, J.D.; Chabot, H.F.; Carlsmith, K.M. Advances in Psychology; Elsevier Science: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1997; Volume 124, pp. 31–63. [Google Scholar]
- Harris, L.C.; Goode, M.H. The four levels of loyalty and the pivotal role of trust: A study of online service dynamics. J. Retail. 2004, 80, 139–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McMullan, R.; Gilmore, A. The conceptual development of customer loyalty measurement: A proposed scale. J. Target. Meas. Anal. Mark. 2003, 11, 230–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hilgard, E.R. The trilogy of mind: Cognition, affection, and conation. J. Hist. Behav. Sci. 1980, 6, 107–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leslie, A.M.; Frith, U. Autistic children’s understanding of seeing, knowing, and believing. Br. J. Dev. Psychol. 1988, 6, 315–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kurczewska, A.; Kyro, P.; Lagus, K.; Kohonen, O.; Lindh-Knuutila, T. The interplay between cognitive, conative, and affective constructs along the entrepreneurial learning process. Educ. Train. 2017, 60, 891–901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, T.; Taylor, S.F. The conceptual domain of service loyalty: How many dimensions? J. Serv. Mark. 2007, 21, 36–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliver, R. Whence consumer loyalty. J. Mark. 1999, 63, 33–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sasmita, J.; Suki, N.M. Young consumers’ insights on brand equity: Effects of brand association, brand loyalty, brand awareness, and brand image. Int. J. Retail. Distrib. Manag. 2015, 43, 276–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, Y.; Han, X.; Hu, G. Optimal production for manufacturers considering consumer environmental awareness and green subsidies. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2016, 182, 397–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rana, J.; Paul, J. Consumer behavior and purchase intention for organic food: A review and research agenda. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017, 38, 157–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Atman, K. The role of conation (striving) in the distance education enterprise. Am. J. Distance Educ. 1987, 1, 14–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holt, D.B. Constructing sustainable consumption from ethical values to the cultural transformation of unsustainable markets. Ann. Am. Acad. Political Soc. Sci. 2012, 644, 236–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oslo Symposium. Oslo Roundtable on Sustainable Production and Consumption. 1994. Available online: http://www.iisd.ca/consume/oslo004.html (accessed on 31 May 2019).
- Quoquab, F.; Sukari, N.N. Why Sustainable Consumption is not in practice? A developing country perspective. In Sustainable Economic Development; World Sustainability Series; Springer: Hamburg, Germany, 2017; Chapter 6; pp. 103–113. [Google Scholar]
- Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD). Education at a Glance 2006—Highlights. 2006. Available online: https://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/37376068.pdf (accessed on 1 November 2019).
- Stevens, C. Guest editor: Special issue on gender and sustainable development. Int. J. Innov. Sustain. Dev. 2009, 4, 2–3. [Google Scholar]
- Wolf, J.; Brown, K.; Conway, D. Ecological citizenship and climate change: Perceptions and practice. Environ. Politics 2009, 18, 503–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balderjahn, I.; Buerke, A.; Kirchgeorg, M.; Peyer, M.; Seegebarth, B.; Wiedmann, K. Consciousness for sustainable consumption: Scale development and new insights in the economic dimension of consumers’ sustainability. Acad. Mark. Sci. Rev. 2013, 3, 181–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salegna, G.J.; Goodwin, S.A. Consumer Loyalty to service providers: An integrated conceptual model. J. Consum. Satisf. Dissatisf. Complain. Behav. 2005, 18, 51–67. [Google Scholar]
- Churchill, G.A. A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. J. Mark. Res. 1979, 16, 64–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hinkin, T.R. A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations. J. Manag. 1995, 21, 967–988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zikmund, W.G. Business Research Methods, 7th ed.; Thomson/South-Western: Mason, OH, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Malhotra, N.K.; Hall, J.; Shaw, M.; Oppenheim, P. Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation; Prentice Hall, Pearson Education Frenchs Forest: Sydney, Australia, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Krueger, R.A. Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research, 2nd ed.; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Cooper, D.R.; Schindler, P.S. Business Research Methods, 8th ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Cavana, R.Y.; Delahaye, B.L.; Sekaran, U. Applied Business Research: Qualitative and Quantitative Methods; Wiley: Milton, Australia, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Martensen, A. Tweens’ satisfaction and brand loyalty in the mobile phone market. Young Consum. 2007, 8, 108–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ok, C.; Shanklin, C.W.; Back, K.J. Generalizing survey results from student samples: Implications from service recovery research. J. Qual. Assur. Hosp. Tour. 2008, 8, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lynch, J.G., Jr. Theory and external validity. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 1999, 27, 367–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sheth, J.N. Are there differences in dissonance reduction behaviour between students and housewives? J. Mark. Res. 1970, 7, 243–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F., Jr.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E.; Tatham, R.L. Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th ed.; Prentice—Hall, International Inc.: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Pallant, J. SPSS Survival Manual: A Step-By-Step Guide to Data Analysis Using Using SPSS for Windows; Open University Press: Maidenhead, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Edwards, J.R. Multidimensional constructs in organizational behaviour research: An integrative analytical framework. Organ. Res. Methods 2001, 4, 144–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yi, J. A measure of knowledge sharing behaviour: Scale development and validation. Knowl. Manag. Res. Pract. 2009, 7, 65–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jarvis, C.B.; Mackenzie, S.B.; Podaskoff, P.M. A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. J. Consum. Res. 2003, 30, 199–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faul, F.; Erdfelder, E.; Buchner, A.; Lang, A.-G. Statistical power analyses g*power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav. Res. Methods 2009, 41, 1149–1160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hair, J.F.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), 2nd ed.; Sage Publication: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Hulland, J.; Ryan, M.J.; Rayner, R.K. Modeling Customer Satisfaction: A Comparative Performance Evaluation of Covariance Structure Analysis Versus Partial Least Squares; Handbook of Partial Least Squares; Springer: New York, NJ, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Rigdon, E.E. Rethinking partial least squares path modeling: In praise of simple methods. Long Range Plan. 2012, 45, 341–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Howard, M.C.; Nitzl, C. Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 109, 101–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rigdon, E.E.; Becker, J.-M.; Sarstedt, M. Factor indeterminacy as metrological uncertainty: Implications for advancing psychological measurement. Multivar. Behav. Res. 2019, 54, 429–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M. Rethinking some of the rethinking of partial least squares. Eur. J. Mark. 2019, 53, 558–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ringle, C.M.; Wende, S.; Becker, J.M. SmartPLS 3. Boenningstedt: SmartPLS GmbH. 2015. Available online: www.smartpls.com (accessed on 15 January 2019).
- Becker, J.-M.; Klein, K.; Wetzels, M. Hierarchical latent variable models in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using reflective-formative type models. Long Range Plann. 2012, 45, 359–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M.; Straub, D.W. A critical look at the use of PLS-SEM in MIS quarterly. MIS Q. 2012, 36, 3–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M.; Mitchell, R.; Gudergan, S.P. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling in HRM Research. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2018, 46, 1–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hulland, J. Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strateg. Manag. J. 1999, 20, 195–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dijkstra, T.K.; Henseler, J. Consistent and asymptotically normal PLS estimators for linear structural equations. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 2015, 81, 10–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Henseler, J. Bridging design and behavioral research with variance-based structural equation modelling. J. Advert. 2017, 46, 178–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akter, S.; D’ambra, J.; Ray, P. Service quality of mHealth platforms: Development and validation of a hierarchical model using PLS. Electron. Mark. 2010, 20, 209–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 48, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hu, L.T.; Bentler, P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. 1999, 6, 1–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Henseler, J.; Dijkstra, T.K.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M.; Diamantopoulos, A.; Straub, D.W.; Ketchen, D.J.; Hair, J.F.; Hult, T.M.; Calantone, R.J. Common beliefs and reality about PLS: Comments on Rönkkö and Evermann (2013). Organ. Res. Methods 2014, 17, 182–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chin, W.W. Issues and opinions on structural equation modeling. MIS Q. 1998, 22, 7–26. [Google Scholar]
- Seguin, C.; Pelletier, L.G.; Hunsley, J. Toward a model of environmental activism. Environ. Behav. 1998, 30, 628–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deci, E.L.; Ryan, R.M. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior; Plenum: New York, NY, USA, 1985. [Google Scholar]
- Pelletier, L.G.; Tuson, K.M.; Green-Demers, I.; Noels, K.; Beaton, A.M. Why are you doing things for the environment? The motivation toward the environment scale (MTES). J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 1998, 28, 437–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fornell, C.; Cha, J. Partial least squares. In Advanced Methods of Marketing Research; Bagozzi, R.P., Ed.; Blackwell: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1998; pp. 52–78. [Google Scholar]
- Shmueli, G.; Ray, S.; Velasquez-Estrada, J.M.; Chatla, S.B. The elephant in the room: Predictive performance of PLS model. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 4552–4564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Dimensions | Description of the Dimensions | Keywords to Represent Mental States |
---|---|---|
Cognitive domain (Thinking) | The cognitive domain of the SC refers to an individual’s belief in sustainable consumption and its outcome. | This mental state includes awareness, perception, knowledge, reasoning and judgement. |
Affective domain (Feeling) | The affective domain of the SC represents an individual’s feeling towards the SC concept. | This mental state includes liking/disliking, feeling (e.g., excitement, pleasure, satisfaction, etc.), emotion, strength of preference, etc. |
Conative domain (Desire) | The affective domain of the SC represents the degree to which an individual exhibits conviction in purchase behaviour. | This mental state includes impulse, desire, volition and striving. |
Particulars of the Respondents | 1st Focus Group Discussion | 2nd Focus Group Discussion | In-Depth Interviews |
---|---|---|---|
No. of respondents | 8 | 9 | 15 |
Gender | |||
Male | 3 | 4 | 5 |
Female | 5 | 5 | 10 |
Average age | 29–48 | 27–43 | |
Race | |||
Malay | 3 | 4 | 7 |
Chinese | 2 | 4 | 4 |
Indian | 2 | 1 | 2 |
Foreigner | 1 | - | 1 |
Educational background | |||
DBA/PhD | 1 | 7 | 4 |
Masters | 7 | 2 | 6 |
Undergraduate | - | - | 3 |
Diploma | - | - | 1 |
High school | - | - | 1 |
Occupation | |||
Lecturer | - | - | 4 |
Administrative & Managerial | - | - | 3 |
Students | 8 | - | 3 |
Entrepreneur | - | - | 2 |
Technical | - | - | 1 |
Clerical | - | - | 1 |
House wife | - | - | 1 |
Researcher | - | 9 | - |
Kaiser Meyer Olkin | 0.938 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity | 3025.080(sig. 0.000, df. 210) | |||
Full Set of Variables | Extracted Factors | |||
Factor 1 (Cognitive) | Factor 2 (Conative) | Factor 3 (Affective) | Communalities | |
Cog2. I believe wasting food and other consumables is unethical. | 0.732 | 0.757 | ||
Cog6. I am aware that excess consumption can cause a shortage of natural resources. | 0.720 | 0.788 | ||
Cog12. I believe that it is important to use eco-friendly products and services. | 0.705 | 0.793 | ||
Cog19. I believe that individuals should care for the future generation. | 0.694 | 0.786 | ||
Cog20. I believe that it is our responsibility to care for the natural environment. | 0.687 | 0.821 | ||
Cog21. I know that the natural resources are reducing in its alarming rate. | 0.681 | 0.777 | ||
Con2. I intend to reduce the misuse of goods and services (e.g., I switch off the lights and the fan when I am not in the room) | 0.791 | 0.781 | ||
Con3. I will continue to purchase environmentally friendly products even though they are slightly expensive. | 0.748 | 0.761 | ||
Con7. I will avoid consumption activities that can lead to environmental pollution. | 0.737 | 0.742 | ||
Con8. I will continue to purchase biodegradable packages (e.g., use of paper bag instead of plastic bag). | 0.726 | 0.773 | ||
Con9. I will keep trying not to waste my food and beverage. | 0.709 | 0.760 | ||
Con20. I will spend my money wisely in order to avoid wastage and excessive purchases. | 0.707 | 0.780 | ||
Con24. I will keep contributing to environmental welfare in all respects. | 0.703 | 0.746 | ||
Con26. I will not engage in any purchase that may have negative effects on the environment. | 0.695 | 0.730 | ||
Affect1. I feel good when I can control my whims for buying unnecessary things. | 0.729 | 0.816 | ||
Affect4. I don’t like to waste food or beverage. | 0.714 | 0.841 | ||
Affect5. I prefer to buy organic food, since it is environmentally friendly. | 0.708 | 0.790 | ||
Affect6. I prefer to pay more to purchase environmentally friendly products. | 0.704 | 0.770 | ||
Affect7. I prefer to use paper bags, since they are biodegradable. | 0.700 | 0.788 | ||
Affect10. I like to purchase only what I need. | 0.664 | 0.753 | ||
Affect12. I feel happy to give priority to environmental welfare. | 0.646 | 0.827 | ||
Sum of squares (Eigenvalue) | 1.514 | 10.231 | 3.431 | |
Percentage of trace | ||||
% of Variance explained | 0.072 | 0.487 | 0.163 | |
Cumulative Variance | 0.722 | 0.487 | 0.650 | |
Cronbach alpha | 0.901 | 0.918 | 0.907 |
Demographics | Exploratory Study (N = 500) | Confirmatory Study (N = 181) |
---|---|---|
Gender | ||
i. Male | 215 | 86 |
ii. Female | 285 | 95 |
Age | ||
i. 18–24 years | 115 | 47 |
ii. 25–31 years | 165 | 68 |
iii. 32–38 years | 114 | 56 |
iv. 39–45 years | 73 | 7 |
v. 46 and above | 33 | 3 |
Ethnicity | ||
i. Malay | 301 | 93 |
ii. Chinese | 126 | 68 |
iii. Indian | 54 | 15 |
iv. Foreigner | 19 | 5 |
Marital status | ||
i. Single | 251 | 80 |
ii. Married | 231 | 96 |
iii. Others | 18 | 5 |
Highest level of education achieved | ||
i. Doctorate degree | - | 25 |
ii. Master degree/equivalent | 199 | 68 |
iii. Bachelor degree/equivalent | 178 | 54 |
iv. Diploma | 64 | 21 |
v. STPM/HSC or equivalent | 59 | 13 |
Profession | ||
i. Professional (including lecturer, professor, etc.) | - | 153 |
ii. Full-time students | 354 | 87 |
iii. Part-time students | 146 | 56 |
iv. Administrative and managerial | - | 109 |
v. Clerical | - | 38 |
vi. Technical | - | 16 |
vii. Entrepreneur | - | 21 |
viii. Housewives | - | 17 |
Monthly income | ||
i. Below RM 500 | 46 | 7 |
ii. RM 501–2000 | 134 | 52 |
iii. RM 2001–3500 | 171 | 60 |
iv. RM 2501–5000 | 58 | 33 |
v. RM 5001–6500 | 50 | 20 |
vi. Above RM 6500 | 41 | 9 |
Construct | Items | Loading | CA > 0.70 | rho_A > 0.70 | CR > 0.70 | AVE > 0.50 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Affective | Affe1. I feel good when I can control my whims for buying unnecessary things. | 0.824 | 0.919 | 0.922 | 0.933 | 0.703 |
Affe2. I don’t like to waste food or beverage. | 0.876 | |||||
Affe3. I prefer to buy organic food, since it is environmentally friendly. | 0.816 | |||||
Affe4. I prefer to pay more to purchase environmentally friendly products. | 0.849 | |||||
Affe5. I prefer to use paper bags, since they are biodegradable. | 0.788 | |||||
Affe6. I like to purchase only what I need. | 0.85 | |||||
Affe7. I feel happy to give priority to environmental welfare. | 0.863 | |||||
Cognitive | Cog1. I believe wasting food and other consumables is unethical. | 0.876 | 0.908 | 0.918 | 0.931 | 0.762 |
Cog2. I am aware that excess consumption can cause a shortage of natural resources. | 0.86 | |||||
Cog3. I believe that it is important to use eco-friendly products and services. | 0.877 | |||||
Cog4. I believe that individuals should care for the future generation. | 0.872 | |||||
Cog5. I believe that it is our responsibility to care for the natural environment. | 0.881 | |||||
Cog6. I know that the natural resources are decreasing at an alarming rate. | 0.873 | |||||
Conative | Con1. I intend to reduce the misuse of goods and services (e.g., I switch off the lights and the fan when I am not in the room). | 0.737 | 0.917 | 0.917 | 0.932 | 0.632 |
Con2. I will continue to purchase environmentally friendly products even though they are slightly expensive. | 0.776 | |||||
Con3. I will avoid consumption activities that can lead to environmental pollution. | 0.785 | |||||
Con4. I will continue to purchase biodegradable packages (e.g., use of paper bag instead of plastic bag). | 0.801 | |||||
Con5. I will keep trying not to waste my food and beverage. | 0.822 | |||||
Con6. I will spend my money wisely in order to avoid wastage and excessive purchases. | 0.829 | |||||
Con7. I will keep contributing to environmental welfare in all respects. | 0.843 | |||||
Con8. I will not engage in any purchase that can have negative effects on the environment. | 0.762 | |||||
Environmental activism | EA1. I participate in events organised by environmental groups. | 0.752 | 0.879 | 0.883 | 0.908 | 0.623 |
EA2. I give financial support to an environmental group. | 0.755 | |||||
EA3. I circulate petitions demanding an improvement of government policies regarding the environment. | 0.806 | |||||
EA4. I participate in protests against current environmental conditions- | 0.82 | |||||
EA5. I vote for a government proposing environmentally conscious policies. | 0.81 | |||||
EA6. I write letters to firms that manufacture harmful products. | 0.79 |
Affective | Cognitive | Conative | SC | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Affective | 0.83 | |||
Cognitive | 0.648 | 0.873 | ||
Conative | 0.604 | 0.679 | 0.795 | |
SC | - | - | - | - |
Affective | Cognitive | Conative | SC | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Affective | ||||
Cognitive | 0.695 CI90[0.579–0.783] | |||
Conative | 0.65 CI90[0.515–0.753] | 0.731 CI90[0.636–0.804] | ||
SC | - | - | - |
Construct | Dimension | Factor Weight | t Values | VIF |
---|---|---|---|---|
SC | Affection | 0.38 | 31.236 | 1.888 |
Cognitive | 0.368 | 23.368 | 2.251 | |
Conative | 0397 | 25.103 | 2.045 |
Indicators | PLS/MAE | Q2_predict | LM/MAE |
---|---|---|---|
EA1 | 0.954 | 0.349 | 0.957 |
EA2 | 0.947 | 0.384 | 0.984 |
EA3 | 0.831 | 0.49 | 0.842 |
EA4 | 0.845 | 0.496 | 0.852 |
EA5 | 0.792 | 0.529 | 0.797 |
EA6 | 0.801 | 0.579 | 0.807 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Quoquab, F.; Mohammad, J. Cognitive, Affective and Conative Domains of Sustainable Consumption: Scale Development and Validation Using Confirmatory Composite Analysis. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7784. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187784
Quoquab F, Mohammad J. Cognitive, Affective and Conative Domains of Sustainable Consumption: Scale Development and Validation Using Confirmatory Composite Analysis. Sustainability. 2020; 12(18):7784. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187784
Chicago/Turabian StyleQuoquab, Farzana, and Jihad Mohammad. 2020. "Cognitive, Affective and Conative Domains of Sustainable Consumption: Scale Development and Validation Using Confirmatory Composite Analysis" Sustainability 12, no. 18: 7784. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187784