Next Article in Journal
Improved Drought Resilience Through Continuous Water Service Monitoring and Specialized Institutions—A Longitudinal Analysis of Water Service Delivery Across Motorized Boreholes in Northern Kenya
Next Article in Special Issue
The Anthropological Analysis of the Key Determinants on the Purchase Decision Taken by the Romanian Consumers Regarding the Ecological Agroalimentary Products
Previous Article in Journal
Environmental Efficiency of Organic and Conventional Cotton in Benin
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 11
Issue 11
10.3390/su11113045
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Understanding the Antecedents of Organic Food Purchases: The Important Roles of Beliefs, Subjective Norms, and Identity Expressiveness

by
Li Bai
1,2,
Mingliang Wang
1 and
Shunlong Gong
3,*
1
School of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, Jilin University, 5988 Renmin Street, Changchun 130022, China
2
Key Laboratory of Bionic Engineering, Ministry of Education, Jilin University, 5988 Renmin Street, Changchun 130022, China
3
School of Management, Jilin University, 5988 Renmin Street, Changchun 130022, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2019, 11(11), 3045; https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113045
Submission received: 27 February 2019 / Revised: 19 May 2019 / Accepted: 21 May 2019 / Published: 29 May 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Consumer Behaviour regarding Organic Food)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
China is expected to become an increasingly important market for global organic food producers. This study aims to obtain a new and deeper understanding of how various antecedents affect organic food purchase behavior. Here, a survey based on validated measures is designed, and a total of 1750 consumers are interviewed. In addition to traditionally held beliefs concerning organic food, three unique perspectives, i.e., that organic foods are “luxuries for the rich”, “upscale”, and the objects of “marketing hype”, are confirmed for the first time. Furthermore, the influence of subjective norms on purchase intention is verified to be completely mediated by purchase attitude, suggesting that up to now, the role of social norms may have been simplified, and even underestimated by marketing researchers. Additionally, for the first time, identity expressiveness is confirmed to play a minor but significant role in purchase intention. Perceived trustworthiness is also confirmed to be the important predictor of purchase intention. Finally, household income is not only the second most important predicator of purchase intention, but it is also the most important predictor of actual purchase. These findings will be valuable for marketing scholars and all stakeholders in the organic food industry, particularly international agribusinesses that are wishing to enter the Chinese market.

1. Introduction

The abuse of chemicals and pesticides in agricultural production has caused environmental deterioration, including soil degradation, greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity loss, pesticide-borne damage [1,2,3], and human health problems, such as cancer and endocrine disruption [3]. Organic food, which is alleged to be free from chemicals and pesticides, and which have lower impacts on the environment [4], is considered by many to be a healthier and more environmentally friendly type of food [5,6,7]. The organic food market in China has grown rapidly in recent years [8,9]. In 2014, the Chinese domestic organic market was estimated to be worth US$4.9 billion, boasting 9990 organic producers, 2707 processors, 66 importers, and 1198 exporters [10], representing the third largest organic market in the world and occupying 6% of the global market [11]. Food safety scandals in recent years have contributed to the accelerated growth of the Chinese organic food market [12]. For example, the demand for organic dairy products (especially infant formula) has skyrocketed since the melamine scandal in 2008 [13]. Furthermore, due to distrust in domestic food, many Chinese consumers prefer to purchase foreign organic food. For example, in China, the willingness to pay (WTP) for infant milk formula (IMF) with American or European organic certification labels was found to be much higher than that for IMF with a Chinese label [14]. Moreover, in China, purchasing expensive health products, such as organic food, Cordyceps sinensis, and Ganoderma, has become fashionable among the rich [15]. Young households with a single child were found to be strongly motivated to purchase certified green or organic foods, due to personal and family health concerns [12].
However, the per-capita consumption of organic food in China was estimated to be merely €3 (Euro) in 2014, whereas in Switzerland, it was €221 [10]. Although more than 50% of Chinese respondents in a recent survey indicated positive perceptions of organic food, only 10% of them stated that they regularly purchase such food [16], suggesting that the Chinese organic food market still has enormous growth potential. Thus, determining the factors that will stimulate Chinese consumers to purchase organic food is of great interest to stakeholders in this industry. Previous studies on this issue, of which there are not many, have indicated that the theory of planned behavior (TPB) demonstrates strong robustness in predicting purchase behaviors toward organic food [17]. The current study aims to obtain a new and deeper understanding of how various antecedents affect organic purchases, based on TPB. In addition, although some researchers have analyzed salient behavioral beliefs to explain consumers’ attitudes toward organic food [18,19,20], they did not consider how Chinese culture affects such consumer perspectives. Thus, as will be elaborated below, the important role of emerging beliefs, associating organic food with “marketing hype” and “luxuries for the rich”, is discussed here for the first time. Moreover, the influence of a new variable, i.e., identity expressiveness, which is similar to the western concept of dignity or prestige [21,22], is analyzed in this study. Additionally, previous studies revealed that subjective norms, which play a key role in TPB, have few links with organic food purchase intention [17], whereas subjective norms play a much more significant role in the context of organic food purchases [23]. Our study thus confirms a new path that directly connects subjective norms with purchase attitude. Furthermore, considering the higher price of organic food in China, and the distrust of many Chinese consumers with respect to the domestic organic food supply system [7], the impacts of perceived trustworthiness and household income are also analyzed in the current study. It is also worth noting that most of the previous studies have only discussed the predictors of organic food purchase intention [24,25], but they did not analyze the relationship between purchase intentions and purchase behaviors—a gap in the literature that is explored in the current study.
To address the abovementioned research gaps, we first confirm the salient behavioral beliefs that contribute to Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward organic food. Second, the antecedents of purchase attitude and purchase intention, and the mediation role of purchase attitude in the path between subjective norms and purchase intentions are tested and verified. Third, the predictors of purchase behavior are identified, and their influences are analyzed. Lastly, based on these research results, the theoretical contributions and marketing implications of this study are synthesized and discussed. The new insights derived from the current study will provide valuable contributions to the literature and stakeholders in the organic food industry, and specifically, to foreign agribusinesses that intend to export organic food to China.

2. Literature Review and Theoretical Framework

2.1. New Beliefs Regarding Organic Foods

Different theoretical frameworks make different predictions about purchase attitudes. Expectancy–value attitude theories, as proposed by Fishbein and Ajzen, assume that salient behavioral beliefs, in combination with outcome evaluations, lead to purchase attitudes [26]. Following this theory, some studies have successfully applied salient behavioral beliefs to explain consumers’ attitudes toward organic food [18,19,20]. For example, some studies have reported that because organic food is alleged to be free from chemicals and pesticides, and because they have lower impacts on the environment [4], purchasing organic food is considered to be a matter of healthcare, environmental protection, and moral responsibility, and has become fashionable among many consumers [27,28]. Similarly, early studies regarding the attitudes of Chinese consumers toward organic food found that they held positive beliefs about its safety, healthiness, taste, and environmental friendliness [5,6,7,19,29]. A summary of the state of the literature on beliefs relating to organic food is provided in Table 1.
However, based on a survey by Consumption Daily, which is the only newspaper in the field of consumer economics in China, the perceptions of some Chinese consumers regarding organic food relate not only to its health or safety, but also to its luxury status. As Fu points out, the expensive price of organic food plays into the consumption psychology of some Chinese consumers, making them feel as if they are purchasing high-end products or luxuries [30]. In contrast, quite a few Chinese consumers regard organic food as the object of marketing hype—products that are labeled with sky-high prices in order to increase demand, and to attract high-end customers [31]. Based on all these research results, we proposed the following hypothesis.
Hypothesis (H1).
In addition to beliefs that associate organic foods with safety, health, and sustainability, the idea that organic foods are “more upscale”, “luxuries for the rich”, and the objects of “a marketing hype” contribute to consumer attitudes toward organic foods, and the perception that organic foods are safer than non-organic foods is the single most important factor that impacts on consumer attitudes.

2.2. Attitude, Purchase Attitude, and Purchase Intention

Attitude refers to the extent to which an individual has a good or bad evaluation of the behavior at issue [32]. The theory of planned behavior states that knowing how individuals feel about buying or using an object is more telling than merely knowing their evaluation of the object [33]. However, many studies do not distinguish between the attitude toward an object and attitude toward purchasing it, equating these two concepts [7,34]. In fact, the influences of these two kinds of attitudes are different. An attitude toward an object is an important predictor of the attitude toward purchasing it, whereas the latter is an important predictor of purchase intention. For example, Chen found that the attitude toward organic food predicted 37% of the variation in purchase attitude, while purchase attitude is the most important antecedent of purchase intention [18]. In addition, many studies have confirmed that consumers who have positive attitudes toward organic food are more likely to form stronger purchase intentions [7,19,23,29]. The attitude–behavior relationship for organic vegetables was also found to be significant, accordingly in a recent study [35]. Meanwhile, in the field of safe and nourishing food, many studies, such as those of Thøgersen and Zhou [19], and Patch et al. [36], found that purchase attitude is more predictive of purchase intention than other factor. A summary of the state of the literature on attitude and purchase attitude is provided in Table 1.
Based on TPB, a central factor is the individual’s intention to perform a given behavior [33]. Normally, the stronger the intention to engage in a behavior, the more likely its performance will be realized. Intention has been successfully shown to explain a wide variety of behaviors [37,38,39]. In the field of organic food purchase, Maichum et al. surveyed consumers in Thailand, and verified that purchase intention has a positive influence on the purchase behavior toward organic food [40]. The results of a meta-analytic study also confirmed that intention leads to behavior with respect to the consumption of organic food [17]. A summary of the state of the literature on purchase intention is provided in Table 1. Based on these findings, we proposed the following hypotheses.
Hypothesis (H2).
When a person’s attitude toward organic food is positive, his or her attitude toward purchasing organic food is more likely to be positive.
Hypothesis (H3).
Purchase attitude is the most important and positive predictor of purchase intention.

2.3. Identity Expressiveness

Identity expressiveness is an operational concept applied to the use of technologies, products, or services that are important to both social identity and role-oriented self-identity [41]. Today, many young Chinese people seek the positive recognition of their peers. They are motivated to be labeled as being part of a group of stylish people, which is a type of expression of identityexpressiveness. Based on social identity theory, group members of an in-group will seek to define appropriate behaviors by reference to the norms of the group to which they belong [42]. Terry, Hogg, and White found that self-identity, group norms, and group identification significantly influence behavioral intention, and they highlighted the need to consider the roles of social and self-identity constructs in the context of the relationship between attitude and behavior [43]. Thus, we proposed the following hypothesis.
Hypothesis (H4).
Identity expressiveness positively influences the intention to purchase organic food.

2.4. A New Path from Subjective Norms to Purchase Attitude

Subjective norms reflect the degree of perceived social pressure to engage or to not engage in a behavior. Interestingly, despite Chinese culture being characterized as being collectivist, Thøgersen and Zhou found that social norms play only a minor role in Chinese consumers’ intentions to buy organic food [19]. However, many empirical studies in the field of food purchase have found that purchase attitude is developed in social networks and it is affected by social norms, suggesting that there is a direct path between subjective norms and purchase attitude [17,23,44]. Specifically, Abdullah Al-Swidi et al. found that subjective norms play a significant role in consumerism, and they not only influence purchase intention, but also purchase attitude [23]. Additionally, a mediation analysis of a meta-analytical structural equation model demonstrated significant support for the assertion that subjective norms not only shape the intention to buy organic food, but they also directly influence purchase attitude [17]. A summary of the state of the literature on subjective norms is provided in Table 1. Based on these studies, and considering that organic food is relatively new to many Chinese consumers, who have had little experience with these products, and thus they are more likely to accept an attitude that is in line with the opinion of the majority reference group, we expected that there is a direct path between the subjective norms and the purchase attitude, and we developed the following hypothesis.
Hypothesis (H5).
There is a positive relation between the subjective norms and the purchase attitude toward organic food.

2.5. Perceived Trustworthiness

Trust is considered to be a factor that influences the formation of purchase attitude and intention. Lobb, Mazzocchi, and Traill argued for the inclusion of trust in the TPB model when addressing food safety-related issues [45]. Chinese consumers’ purchase intentions toward organic food were found to be hindered by their distrust in the organic food system, including certification agencies, producers, manufacturers, and regulators, and by the continuous presence of fake organic goods in the market [7,29,46,47].
However, much less attention has been paid to the influence of perceived trustworthiness. In particular, the relationship between perceived trustworthiness and purchase behavior toward organic food is yet to be truly tested in mainland China. Yin et al. found that Chinese consumers’ purchase intention toward organic food is significantly affected by the degree of trust in organic food [29]. Tung et al. found that trust in organic agricultural practice and product labeling is a key factor in determining the buying behaviors of Taiwanese consumers [48]. Nuttavuthisit and Thøgersen suggest that mistrust in Thai organic institutions makes it less likely that the buying intentions of Thai consumers will become realized in the form of actual buying [49]. A summary of the state of the literature on perceived trustworthiness is provided in Table 1. Based on these studies, the following hypothesis was offered.
Hypothesis (H6).
Perceived trustworthiness has a positive influence on purchase attitude (H6a), purchase intention (H6b), and purchase behavior (H6c) toward organic food.

2.6. Household Income

In Western countries, the price of organic food is 50–200% higher than that of non-organic food. However, in China the price is 2–5-fold higher than that of non-organic food [19,29]. A high price is undoubtedly a barrier to purchase [50]. Chinese consumers’ purchase intention and purchase behavior toward organic food are influenced by their income level [29]. For example, Thøgersen and Zhou found that the higher the family income, the more likely consumers will take the last step of actual buying the product, given the same levels of purchase intention and perceived behavioral control [19]. A summary of the state of the literature on income is provided in Table 1. Therefore, we proposed the following hypothesis.
Hypothesis (H7).
Household income level positively influences purchase intention (H7a), and household income is the most important predicator of purchase behavior (H7b).

2.7. Conceptual Model

As shown in Figure 1, we proposed a conceptual model based on these hypotheses. The current study is one of the few studies that uses extended TPB as a basic framework, and that discusses the entire decision-making process from initial beliefs to purchase behavior. In particular, three new beliefs were included in this model, and a new path from subjective norms to purchase attitude was tested; meanwhile, the influences of perceived behavior control, identity expressiveness, household income, and perceived trustworthiness on purchase attitude, purchase intention, or purchase behavior, were verified.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Measurements of the Constructs

The constructs were assessed based on Ajzen’s recommendations and the existing literature in their related fields [18,19,29,41,43,50,51,52,53,54].
In order to estimate the content validity, an expert panel, including one professor, two associate professors, three Ph.D. candidates, and two masters candidates, was developed. First, we explained the study objective, the concepts regarding the instrument, and the contents of the assessment. Second, a focus group discussion with the experts was organized. Third, at their suggestion, two scales that were used to measure beliefs relating to “animal concern” and “religion” were removed from the survey. Finally, a pilot test was conducted among 31 consumers from Changchun city in northeast China. Except for the construct of perceived behavior control (PBC), the reliability of each construct was satisfactory, with a Cronbach’s value of above 0.7 [55]. Similar to many other studies, such as those of Urban et al. [56] and Bai et al. [57], the Cronbach’s value of PBC, measured as a combination of perceived easiness (PE) and perceived control (PC), was lower, and two dimensions had eigenvalues over 1 when using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to examine its structure. Thus, the two latent variables of PE and PC, which were respectively loaded on the two observed variables, were incorporated into the structural model independently.
The final questionnaire included two sections. The first section included 30 items to assess 10 constructs. The second section collected information about demographic characteristics. Detailed items are provided in Appendix A.
Common method bias (CMB) is considered to be a potential problem in behavioral research, which may compromise the credibility of the data analysis results [58,59]. There was concern that CMB may have inflated the results here, i.e., the relationships between the variables, because this study used self-reported data and the participants responded to the items in a single questionnaire at the same point in time. Harman’s single factor test and the unmeasured latent marker construct (ULMC) are widely used to address this question [58,60,61,62,63]. In the current study, the variance that was explained by the first principal component was only 29.55%. The ULMC method compared the coefficient of determination (R2) with a CMB variable to the R2 without a CMB variable, and revealed that 60% of the average variance of the measures was explained by their associated construct, and only 7.5% was explained by ULMC. This result also indicates that CMB was not a major problem here [64,65,66].

3.2. Data Collection and Sample

A national survey was carried out in mainland China. Participants over 18 years of age were approached by adopting a non-probability sampling method. This method does not allow each individual to have the same probability of selection, but it is widely used in social science studies [67], and it has been shown to be comparable to probability sampling [68]. A total of 17 investigators, including the corresponding author and 16 postgraduate students from Jilin University who were introduced to the objective of this study and trained in the investigation techniques, completed the interviews. In the urban areas, the interviewers visited large shopping centers and supermarkets, due to the intense circulation of consumers. The participants were asked to complete a questionnaire independently, and to return it to the interviewers. The questionnaire typically took 20–30 min to complete. In rural areas, the participants were visited and surveyed in their households or on farms. A large percentage of the rural population interviewed was illiterate or semiliterate, so the interviewers read each question and response aloud, and helped the participants to complete the questionnaire. The face-to-face interview in rural areas usually took 40–60 min. Previous studies have found that female Chinese consumers living in urban areas and with higher educational levels are more likely to purchase organic food [69,70]. Thus, although we used a convenience sampling method, we increased the quotas for female consumers with high education levels living in urban areas, in order to gain a sample composition that resembled the population of reference.
A total of 1750 respondents were interviewed. Of them, 1162 (66.4%) indicated that they knew about organic food, and that they could correctly identify organic food labels from among four labels, i.e., organic, green, conversion to organic, and pollution-free food. To guarantee data quality, the objective of the survey was explained, and anonymity and confidentiality were assured. A USB flash drive was given to each urban participant, and a thermal travel mug to each rural participant after survey completion.
Any missing responses, whether in the scale section or the demographic section, were excluded from the results. After sorting, 1033 questionnaires were confirmed to be valid, with a completion rate of 88.9% (1033 out of 1162). However, only 29 of them were completed by consumers who were over 55 years of age. One major reason for this is that many older interviewees did not know about organic food, and therefore, they could not complete the questionnaire. These 29 responses were not included in the following analysis, because such a sample size was too small to be representative of that particular demographic.
As shown in Table 2, 68.3% of the respondents were between 18 and 35 years of age, 53.9% were female, 46.5% graduated from college or higher, 57.9% were married, 54.9% claimed a monthly income of less than 3000 Chinese Yuan, 76.7% resided in urban areas, and 75.6% lived either with elders of 60+ years of age, or with kids below 12 years of age.

3.3. Data Analysis

Because the attitude toward organic food is influenced by many behavioral beliefs, we first used stepwise regression to test the influences of eight candidate beliefs, to identify the significant beliefs that contribute to the attitudes of Chinese consumers. The final model only included the beliefs that significantly contributed to Chinese consumer attitudes.
Second, because structural equation modeling (SEM) allows researchers to test a measurement model and a structural model simultaneously [71], the antecedents of purchase attitude and purchase intention were tested based on SEM analysis. Fit indices and goodness-of-fit (GFI) criteria together, as recommended and used by many researchers, were utilized to determine whether the hypothesized models gave an acceptable representation of the data. The predictors represented by one item, such as income, were fixed to 20% of the item’s total variance, which is typical for survey measures [72,73,74].
Finally, because there are only two possible dependent variables of purchasing behavior (“purchase” or “not purchase”), binary logistic regression and moderated regression analysis (MRA) were used to confirm the antecedents, and to test the moderating effects of household income.
LISREL 8.70 was used for the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and SEM analysis. SPSS 22.0 was used to perform all of the other analyses.

4. Results

4.1. From Belief to Attitude

Considering “Tolerance” > 0.1, the “Variance Inflation Factor (VIF)” < 10 of each variable, and an examination of the correlation matrix suggested that any two variables had a bivariate correlation <0.7, and there was no existence of multicollinearity. The three new beliefs significantly predicted the attitude toward organic food, and the belief that organic food is “safer” alone made the biggest contribution (37.8%); thus, H1 was validated. The results are shown in Table 3.

4.2. From Attitude to Purchase Intention

The EFA revealed that each construct was one-dimensional, and that over 50% of the variance could be explained by a single factor. The CFA model provided a good fit: χ2 (df = 120) = 863.05 with p = 0.00, the goodness-of-fit index (GFI) = 0.917, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.968, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.079, non-normed fit index (NNFI) = 0.954, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) = 0.044. Although χ2 was significant and the ratio of χ2/df = 7.19 was slightly higher than recommended (≤5), these results might have been caused by the large sample size. All of the standardized loadings were over 0.6 and significantly related to their underlying factors. The composite reliability (CRs) for all of the constructs ranged from 0.73 to 0.87, the average variances extracted (AVEs) ranged from 0.55 to 0.73, and their square roots were higher than the squared correlation between each pair of constructs, as shown in Table 4. Therefore, as suggested by Hair et al., convergent and discriminant validity were supported [75].
SEM offered an acceptable representation of the data. These antecedents predicted the purchase attitude (R2 = 0.70) and purchase intention (R2 = 0.58) to a higher extent, respectively. The attitude was positively related with purchase attitude, and the purchase attitude made the largest contribution to the purchase intention, which was consistent with H2 and H3. Identity expressiveness significantly and positively influenced purchase intention, and thus, H4 was confirmed. Furthermore, after including it, the model explanatory power increased by 0.7%. Subjective norms were the most important influencers of purchase attitude, and H5 was supported. Perceived trustworthiness contributed nothing to the prediction of purchase attitude, and H6a was not supported, but it was consistent with H6b, and it significantly influenced purchase intention. Household income, following purchase attitude, made the second-largest contribution to purchase intention, consistent with H7a. Finally, perceived easiness made the fourth largest contribution, meaning that perceived obstacles or difficulties would hinder consumers from turning purchase attitudes into intentions. The results are shown in Figure 2.

4.3. The Mediation Function of Purchase Attitude

The mediation function of purchase attitude revealed the generative influence mechanism from subjective norms to purchase intention [76]. All of the items that were used to measure the variables of subjective norms, purchase attitude, and purchase intention were normally distributed (with a skewness index range < |3.00| and a kurtosis index < |7.00| [77]). The procedures proposed by Baron and Kenny, which were often used to verify the mediation function of a variable [78,79,80], were used to test the mediation role of purchase attitude [76]. According to Baron and Kenny‘s method, three models were built and analyzed, as shown in Figure 3. All of the coefficients in model 1 and model 2 were significant. However, in model 3, the coefficients from purchase norm to purchase attitude, and from purchase attitude to purchase intention were significant, but the coefficient from subjective norms to purchase intention was not significant, indicating that purchase attitude fully mediated the relationship between subjective norms and purchase intention. In addition, as shown in Table 5, all of the models provided acceptable representations of the data.

4.4. From Purchase Intention to Purchase Behavior

If the i-th respondents had once purchased organic food before the survey, we defined yi = 1; otherwise, yi = 0. First, the main effects were tested in model 1, and then, an MRA was conducted to test the moderating effects of household income (model 2). From here, the indicators that were used to measure the constructs of purchase intention and perceived trustworthiness were summed up and divided by the number of indicators, and the results were then used for the data input. An exception was made for the construct of purchase behavior, where the data were standardized before the analysis. The standard score was calculated by determining the difference between the original score and the mean score, and then dividing it by the standard deviation.
Table 6 summarizes the logistic regression results. The HL test indicated that the goodness-of-fit for either one was satisfactory. Household income (standard β = 0.502, p < 0.001) was found to be the most important predicator of purchase behavior, and therefore, H7b was supported. Perceived easiness (standard β = 0.371, p < 0.001) and purchase intention (standard β = 0.363, p < 0.001) were the second- and third most important and positive predictors, respectively. Thus, organic food purchasers in China are those with higher household incomes and stronger purchase intentions, who perceive organic food as being easier to purchase. Moreover, the interaction of income and purchase intention was positively related, meaning that the higher the household income, the stronger the relationship between purchase intention and purchase behavior. Surprisingly, perceived control significantly but negatively correlated with purchase behavior, and the possible reasons for this result are discussed in the next section.

5. Discussion

5.1. Outcomes of the Classical TPB Variables

The important role of the individual purchase attitude in shaping a potential purchase was proven, because it was not only the strongest predictor of purchase intention, but it also completely mediated the relationship between subjective norms and purchase intention, consistent with the results of a recent meta-analysis [17].
Perceived easiness had a significant and positive influence on both purchase intention and behavior, in the current study. Additionally, perceived control significantly influenced the purchase behavior, but the influence was negatively correlated, which was not in line with the general expectations of TPB [26] and the findings of a recent meta-analytical study [17]; however, these results were consistent with the study of Urban et al., who found a negative effect of the controllability facet of PBC on Czech consumers’ organic food purchase intention [56]. As discussed by Urban et al., one possible explanation is that those who purchase organic foods are more aware of the obstacles to buying them [56]. Other possible explanations include the following. First, individuals might underestimate the impact of external factors, e.g., stress from families or peers regarding their purchases. Second, it is possible that people are more accurate in their perceptions of perceived easiness, relative to their perceptions of the perceived level of control [81]. Third, some respondents might have misinterpreted the item used to measure perceived control, and believed that it was measuring whether they were a person of authority. Under the influence of face consciousness, they inaccurately overestimated the extent to which organic food purchase is volitional.

5.2. Outcomes of the New Variables Identified by the Authors

Beliefs concerning safety and environmental friendliness still occupy the top two consumer considerations, consistent with Thøgersen and Zhou [79], and Chen [82]. However, although previous studies, such as that of Loebnitz and Aschemann-Witzel [83], have suggested that the existence and content of Chinese consumers’ beliefs toward organic food were similar to those of Western consumers, the current study found three unique beliefs—that organic foods are “luxuries for the rich”, “upscale”, and the objects of “marketing hype”—for the first time. Some Chinese consumers are concerned not only with purchasing the best product, but also the most upscale, and purchasing organic products has become a symbol of a consumption upgrade [30]. Additionally, considering that most respondents purchase organic food as gifts, for example, 71.5% of families and 11.4% of other respondents in our survey, the influence of social pressure, or the desire for improved social standing may also influence this trend.
Taste was proven to have no significant influence. Based on its low mean score (3.51 out of 5), it is safe to conclude that many Chinese consumers do not believe that organic food tastes superior, which is similar to the findings of Chen [82], who reported that Taiwanese consumers consider the taste of organic food to be poor, as well as the conclusions of Loebnitz and Aschemann-Witzel [83], who indicated that Chinese consumers’ taste expectations for organic foods are not significantly different from their expectations regarding non-organic foods.
Another key finding is the crucial role of subjective norms, whose influences on purchase intention were totally mediated by purchase attitude, and which might be underestimated and simplified in previous studies. Previous studies reported that despite Chinese culture being characterized by collectivism, Chinese consumers’ intention to buy organic food seems to depend primarily on purchase attitude, whereas social norms play no role [19,20]. The current study, however, provides a new understanding, where perceived social pressure indirectly affects purchase intention by exerting an influence on the purchase attitude. This finding is consistent with that of Al-Swidi et al. [23], and it tested the meta-analytic inferences of Scalco et al., who reported that subjective norms not only shape individual intention to buy organic food, but also directly influence the purchase attitude [17]. Similarly, Müller and Gaus reported that negative information about fraud, and misapprehensions regarding organic food do not affect behavioral intentions directly, but they are almost fully mediated by attitude [84]. Negative information is also a kind of social norm, i.e., influences from the mass media.
Furthermore, in the current study, household income was proven to be the second most important predicator of purchase intention, and the most important predictor of actual purchase. Meanwhile, the interaction between purchase intention and income is also positively significant. All together, these results confirm that economic status is still constraining Chinese consumers in purchasing organic food. In short, the decision to purchase organic food depends not only on an individual’s perceptions, but also on their ability to afford it. Chen et al. have reported that among demographic variables, only “income” demonstrates a weak but significant correlation with Chinese urban consumers’ purchase intentions toward organic food [42]. Yin et al. revealed that annual income has a positive effect on Chinese consumers’ willingness to purchase organic food [29]. Thøgersen and Zhou found that family income accounts for 8% of the additional explained variance of purchase behavior toward organic food [19].
Additionally, the current study suggests that perceived trustworthiness directly influences purchase intention, but it has no influence on purchase attitude and behavior. Soyez et al. found that after controlling other variables, trust influences purchase intention toward organic food in Germany and Ukraine, and it influences buying behavior in Germany, but it has no influence in the United States and Canada [85]. These results suggest that trust may influence different links in different scenarios. In China, perceived trustworthiness is an important predictor of purchase intention, indicating the intention has been hampered by distrust in the organic food system, including the regulation and certification systems, due to the presence of counterfeit organic food [7,29,47,69,86].
Finally, this study verified the influence of identity expressiveness. A recent study by Hodgins and Fraser revealed that, in Canada, one barrier faced by alternative food businesses in providing wider access to low-income consumers is “stigmas” [87]. The surveyed low-income consumers were unwilling to shopping at alternative food spaces, because they perceived these places as “elite”, “fancy place[s]”, or “for certain folks”. This perception is a type of social barrier; that is, low-income consumers do not believe that they belong to the social group that shops at such places. In the current study, however, some respondents classified themselves as being the type of people that should consume organic food. In fact, both studies confirmed the important influence of identity expressiveness. Significantly however, the impact of identity expression on purchase intention was minor, which differed from our expectations. One reason for this may be that only two items were used to evaluate this issue, and they may not have measured the constructs effectively enough. In future studies, more items expressing “personal values”, “personality”, “concern, and love to myself/my parents or children”, and “compatible with how I like to think of myself” could be used after in-depth interviews with representative consumers.

5.3. Marketing Implications

With the continued increase in the incomes and consumption levels of Chinese consumers, food nutrition and food safety have attracted increased attention, and the market for organic food has great potential for its development. When companies market organic food in China, they should focus on high-income consumers first and foremost, and launch marketing activities that are directed at consumers who are concerned with purchasing luxury and high-end products, while designing their advertising and spokespeople to appeal to this target audience.
Moreover, international marketers can tailor such media campaigns by emphasizing the qualities that differentiate organic food from non-organic food, and by inviting well-known people who have already been established as having good taste in food to act as spokespeople, in order to satisfy the demands of consumers who are hoping to demonstrate good taste and social status by buying organic food.
Furthermore, organic food companies should consider sharing the health and environmental benefits of organic food with their consumers, to generate more positive attitude toward organic food, which will thus translate into increased sales of organic food.
Moreover, international agribusinesses need to capitalize on the importance of social influence in the formation of purchase attitudes, by identifying and targeting influencers for word-of-mouth marketing, and portraying conversations between typical consumers in real-life situations in their advertising [44].
Additionally, considering that this study verified the influence of identity expressiveness on the purchasing of organic food, and also the fact that many Chinese consumers purchase organic food as gifts, organic food producers should invest in the packaging design and product imagery of organic foods, paying specific attention to the social attributes of such packaging, and advertising organic food as a means of expressing concern for and love to others.
Finally, considering the general distrust of many Chinese consumers regarding the legitimacy of food and certification labels [88,89,90], strong export opportunities exist for international agribusinesses if they can gain consumer trust. For example, marketers can demonstrate the quality of their products by being transparent about production and processing procedures, and by selling products in outlets that are trusted by Chinese consumers. Meanwhile, trust in the organic food system might begin to be restored if marketers and regulators cooperate to reduce counterfeit branding, increase transparency of information, and develop means for directly interacting with consumers. Furthermore, labels bearing the country of origin are an important basis for Chinese consumers’ food purchasing decisions, and therefore, marketers can achieve legitimacy by obtaining the approval of organic certification agencies in countries whose food safety systems are perceived to be, regulated, modern, and effective.

6. Conclusions, Limitations, and Future Research

The belief that organic food is safer than non-organic food was confirmed to still be the most important factor in predicting attitudes toward organic food. However, in addition to the traditional perceptions of organic food, the three unique viewpoints—that organic foods are “luxuries for the rich”, “upscale”, and objects of “marketing hype”—were verified for the first time here. Social influences were proven to be crucial to the formation of purchase attitude, and the latter was found to be the strongest predictor of purchase intention, totally mediating the relationship between subjective norms and purchase intentions. Perceived trustworthiness had no direct influences on purchase attitude and actual behavior, but it was determined to be an important predictor of purchase intention. Additionally, identity expressiveness was confirmed for the first time to play a minor but significant role in purchase intention. Finally, household income was found to not only be the second most important predicator of purchase intention, but also the most important predictor of purchase behavior.
This study had some limitations, however, and further research is recommended. The sample was comprised mostly of young respondents, which may have contributed to the low variation in the responses. Random sampling should be used, to avoid sampling errors in future studies. Another limitation was the lack of correspondence between the items that were used to measure purchase intention and purchase behavior. A third limitation involved the concepts of perceived easiness and perceived behavioral control, as they were each measured by only one item, respectively; the concept of identity expressiveness also needed to be measured by including more items. In future studies, these antecedents and their influences on organic purchase should be identified and verified by using quality–quantity mixed methods. Additionally, the pricing of organic food could be studied by adopting the choice experiment method. Finally, how to improve or restore the trust of Chinese consumers in the domestic organic food system remains an issue that must be resolved.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.B. and S.G.; Data curation, S.G.; Formal analysis, L.B.; Funding acquisition, L.B.; Investigation, S.G. and M.W.; Methodology, L.B. and M.W.; Project administration, L.B.; Resources, L.B.; Software, L.B. and M.W.; Supervision, S.G.; Validation, L.B. and M.W.; Visualization, L.B.; Writing—original draft, L.B.; Writing—review and editing, M.W. and S.G.

Funding

The study is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, China (71573103), and the Seed Foundation of Jilin University, China (2017zz032). However, the opinions expressed here do not reflect those of the funding agencies.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Appendix A

Table
Table A1. Measurement of constructs, item sources and descriptive statistics.
Table A1. Measurement of constructs, item sources and descriptive statistics.
Constructs (Cronbach’s Value)ItemsMeanStandard Deviation
Beliefs (Bi) [21,22,39,43]Safer4.240.97
More environmentally friendly4.141.03
More nutritious4.061.13
Luxuries for the rich3.801.25
Fewer categories3.681.07
Tastier3.51,1.19
More upscale3.471.17
Marketing hype2.961.16
Attitudes (Att) [40]Do you agree that organic foods are better than non-organic foods in general?4.100.94
Purchase attitudes (PAtt) [21]
(0.78)		Attitude toward purchasing organic foods is extremely bad—extremely good3.940.74
Extremely unpleasant—extremely pleasant3.541.08
I am strongly against–strongly for buying organic foods4.000.85
Identity expressiveness (IE) [31,44]
(0.84)		I think the people around me think purchasing organic foods conforms to my taste and identity.3.020.98
Purchasing organic foods makes me feel superior.2.841.09
Subjective norms (SN) [21,22,40]
(0.77)		Those who influence your behaviors, such as family, close friends, and partners, think purchasing organic foods is extremely bad–extremely good.3.560.72
Those who influence your behaviors, such as family, close friends, and sex partners, think you should purchase organic foods.3.760.86
Generally speaking, I do what these important others think I should do.3.771.05
Perceived easiness (PE) [21,40]I could easily buy organic foods if I wanted to.2.500.92
Perceived control (PC) [21,40]I perceive I have a total control over the purchase of organic foods.3.891.03
Perceived trustworthiness (PT) [41,42]
(0.87)		How much do you trust: Organic farmers? (totally distrust—totally trust)3.450.86
Organic processing enterprises? (totally distrust—totally trust)3.280.92
Government agencies that regulate organic foods? (totally distrust—totally trust) 3.450.94
Organic certification authorities? (totally distrust —totally trust)3.510.87
Organic foods, in general? (totally distrust—totally trust)3.550.75
Household income (Inc)Your household monthly income per capita is: no more than RMB 3000 (1); 3001–5000 (2); 5001–10,000 (3); more than 10,000 (4).1.600.76
Purchase intention (PInt) [24,40]
(0.72)		I intend to purchase organic foods during the next week.3.241.03
I intend to purchase organic foods at the next food purchase.3.690.83
Purchase behavior (PBeh) [40]During the one-month period prior to the survey, have you once purchased organic foods? “1”—Yes; “0”—No.0.260.44
Note: Responses were obtained using a five-point Likert scale, where “1” indicates strong disagreement and “5” indicates strong agreement.

References

  1. 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]
  2. Lairon, D. Nutritional quality and safety of organic food. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2009, 30, 33–41. [Google Scholar]
  3. Brzezina, N.; Kopainsky, B.; Mathijs, E. Can organic farming reduce vulnerabilities and enhance the resilience of the European food system? A critical assessment using system dynamics structural thinking tools. Sustainability 2016, 8, 971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Crandall, P.G.; Seideman, S.; Ricke, S.C.; O’Bryan, C.A.; Fanatico, A.F.; Rainey, R. Organic poultry: consumer perceptions, opportunities, and regulatory issues. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 2009, 18, 795–802. [Google Scholar]
  5. Liu, R.; PieniaK, Z.; Verbeke, W. Consumers’ attitudes and behavior towards safe food in China: A review. Food Control 2013, 33, 93–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bai, L.; Gong, S. Consumer knowledge, attitude and behavior toward food safety. In Food Safety in China: Science, Technology, Management and Regulation; Jen, J., Chen, J., Eds.; Wiley-Blackwell Inc.: Oxford, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  7. Chen, J.; Lobo, A.; Rajendran, N. Drivers of organic food purchase intentions in mainland China—Evaluating potential customers’ attitudes, demographics and segmentation. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2014, 38, 346–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ayyub, S.; Wang, X.H.; Astif, M.; Ayyub, R.M. Antecedents of Trust in Organic Foods: The Mediating Role of Food Related Personality Traits. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Wang, X.H.; Pacho, F.; Liu, J.; Kajungiro, R. Factors Influencing Organic Food Purchase Intention in Developing Countries and the Moderating Role of Knowledge. Sustainability 2019, 11, 209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Wai, O.K. Organic Asia 2015. In The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and Emerging Trends 2016; Helga, W., Lernoud, J., Eds.; Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Frick, and IFOAM—Organics International: Bonn, Germany, 2016; pp. 172–181. [Google Scholar]
  11. Lernoud, J.; Willer, H. Current statistics on organic agriculture worldwide: Area, producers, markets and selected crops. In The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and Emerging Trends 2016; Helga, W., Lernoud, J., Eds.; Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Frick, and IFOAM—Organics International: Bonn, Germany, 2016; pp. 34–116. [Google Scholar]
  12. McCarthy, B.; Liu, H.; Chen, T. Trends in organic and green food consumption in China: Opportunities and challenges for regional Australian exporters. J. Econ. Soc. Policy 2015, 17, 6–31. [Google Scholar]
  13. Sahota, A. The global market for organic food & drink. In The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and Emerging Trends 2016; Helga, W., Lernoud, J., Eds.; Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Frick, and IFOAM—Organics International: Bonn, Germany, 2016; pp. 133–138. [Google Scholar]
  14. Wu, L.; Yin, S.; Xu, Y.; Zhu, D. Effectiveness of China’s organic food certification policy: Consumer preferences for infant milk formula with different organic certification labels. Can. J. Agric. Econ. 2014, 62, 545–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Wang, C.; Lei, L. Type of Consumer Health-Enhancing Behaviors and Its Formation Mechanism. Adv. Psychol. Sci. 2015, 23, 679–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Wang, N.; He, J. Influence factors of decision on organic food purchase. Consum. Econ. 2016, 32, 73–78. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  17. Scalco, A.; Noventa, S.; Sartori, R.; Ceschi, A. Predicting organic food consumption: A meta-analytic structural equation model based on the theory of planned behavior. Appetite 2017, 112, 235–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Chen, M. Consumer attitudes and purchase intentions in relation to organic foods in Taiwan: Moderating effects of food-related personality traits. Food Qual. Prefer. 2007, 18, 1008–1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Thøgersen, J.; Zhou, Y. Chinese consumers’ adoption of a ‘green’ innovation–The case of organic food. J. Mark. Manag. 2012, 28, 313–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Zhou, Y.; Thøgersen, J.; Ruan, Y.; Huang, G. The moderating role of human values in planned behavior: The case of Chinese consumers’ intention to buy organic food. J. Consum. Mark. 2013, 30, 335–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Jin, B.; Kang, J.H. Face or subjective norm? Chinese college students’ purchase behaviors toward foreign brand jeans. Cloth. Text. Res. J. 2010, 28, 218–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Lee, C. Modifying an American Consumer Behavior Model for Consumers in Confucian Culture. J. Int. Consum. Mark. 1991, 3, 27–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Al-Swidi, A.; Sheikh, M.R.H.; Haroon Hafeez, M.; Mohd, N.M.S. The role of subjective norms in theory of planned behavior in the context of organic food consumption. Br. Food J. 2014, 116, 1561–1580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Yadav, R.; Pathak, G.S. Intention to purchase organic food among young consumers: Evidences from a developing nation. Appetite 2016, 96, 122–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Tarkiainen, A.; Sundqvist, S. Subjective norms, attitudes and intentions of Finnish consumers in buying organic food. Br. Food J. 2005, 107, 808–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Fishbein, M.; Ajzen, I. Predicting and Changing Behavior: The Reasoned Action Approach; Psychology Press: New York, NY, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  27. Guido, G.; Prete, M.I.; Pino, G. The impact of ethical self-identity and safety concerns on attitudes and purchasing intentions of organic food products. Behind Ethical Consum. 2009, 22, 73–94. [Google Scholar]
  28. Guido, G.; Tedeschi, P.; Prete, M.I.; Franceschini, L.; Buffa, C. The influence of moral norms and self-identity in the choice of organic food products. Behind Ethical Consum. 2009, 28, 15–42. [Google Scholar]
  29. Yin, S.; Wu, L.; Du, L.; Chen, M. Consumers’ purchase intention of organic food in China. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2010, 90, 1361–1367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Fu, W. Consumer psychology of organic food. Consumption Daily, 14 August 2014; A02. [Google Scholar]
  31. Ji, P. A tipping point for organic food? China Food News, 24 February 2014; 003. [Google Scholar]
  32. Irianto, H. Consumers’ attitude and intention towards organic food purchase: An extension of theory of planned behavior in gender perspective. Int. J. Manag. Econ. Soc. Sci. 2015, 4, 17–31. [Google Scholar]
  33. Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior, organizational behavior and human decision processes. J. Leis. Res. 1991, 50, 176–211. [Google Scholar]
  34. Tarigan, M.M. Consumer attitude and intention to buy organic food brand as a result of brand extension: An experimental approach. In Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Management Science & Engineering 17th Annual Conference Proceedings, Melbourne, Australia, 24–26 November 2010; Volume 3, pp. 75–85. [Google Scholar]
  35. Thøgersen, J.; Zhou, Y.; Huang, G. How stable is the value basis for organic food consumption in China? J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 134, 214–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Patch, C.S.; Tapsell, L.C.; Peter, G.W. Attitudes and intentions toward purchasing novel foods enriched with omega-3 fatty acids. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 2005, 37, 235–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Liao, C.; Chen, J.L.; Yen, D.C. Theory of planning behavior (tpb) and customer satisfaction in the continued use of e-service: An integrated model. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2007, 23, 2804–2822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Cooke, R.; Sniehotta, F.; Schuz, B. Predicting binge-drinking behaviour using an extended tpb: Examining the impact of anticipated regret and descriptive norms. Alcohol. Alcohol. 2006, 42, 84–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Habibah, U.; Hassan, I.; Iqbal, M.S.; Naintara. Household behavior in practicing mental budgeting based on the theory of planned behavior. Financ. Innov. 2018, 4, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Maichum, K.; Parichatnon, S.; Peng, K.C. Developing an extended theory of planned behavior model to investigate consumers’ consumption behavior toward organic food: A case study in Thailand. Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res. 2017, 6, 72–80. [Google Scholar]
  41. Thorbjørnsen, H.; Pedersen, P.E.; Nysveen, H. “This is who I am”: Identity expressiveness and the theory of planned behavior. Psychol. Mark. 2007, 24, 763–785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Tajfel, H.; Turner, J. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations; Austin, W.G., Worchel, S., Eds.; Brooks/Cole: Monterey, CA, USA, 1979; pp. 33–47. [Google Scholar]
  43. Terry, D.J.; Hogg, M.A.; White, K.M. The theory of planned behaviour: Self-identity, social identity and group norms. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 1999, 38, 225–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Choo, H.J.; Chung, J.; Pysarchik, D.T. Antecedents to new food product purchasing behavior among innovator groups in India. Eur. J. Mark. 2004, 38, 608–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Lobb, A.E.; Mazzocchi, M.; Traill, W.B. Modeling risk perception and trust in food safety information within the theory of planned behavior. Food Qual. Preference 2007, 18, 384–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Klein, J.A. Creating ethical food consumers? Promoting organic foods in urban Southwest China. Soc. Anthropol. 2009, 17, 74–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Wang, Z.; Mao, Y.; Gale, F. Chinese consumer demand for food safety attributes in milk products. Food Policy 2008, 33, 27–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Tung, S.; Shih, C.; Wei, S.; Chen, Y. Attitudinal inconsistency toward organic food in relation to purchasing intention and behavior: An illustration of Taiwan consumers. Br. Food J. 2012, 114, 997–1015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Nuttavuthisit, K.; Thøgersen, J. The importance of consumer trust for the emergence of a market for green products: The case of organic food. J. Bus. Ethics 2017, 140, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Chen, Y.; Zhu, H.; Le, M.; Wu, Y. The effect of face consciousness on consumption of counterfeit luxury goods. Soc. Behav. Pers. 2014, 42, 1007–1014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Ajzen, I. Constructing a TPB Questionnaire: Conceptual and Methodological Considerations. 2006. Available online: http://www.people.umass.edu/aizen/pdf/tpb.measurement.pdf (accessed on 10 July 2013).
  52. Chen, M. Segmentation of Taiwanese consumers based on trust in the food supply system. Br. Food J. 2012, 114, 70–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Chen, W. The effects of different types of trust on consumer perceptions of food safety. An empirical study of consumers in Beijing Municipality, China. China Agric. Econ. Rev. 2013, 5, 43–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Li, J.J.; Su, C. How face influences consumption—A comparative study of American and Chinese consumers. Int. J. Mark. Res. 2007, 49, 237–256. [Google Scholar]
  55. Streiner, D.L.; Norman, G.R. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use, 4th ed.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  56. Urban, J.; Zverinova, I.; Scasny, M. What motivates Czech consumers to buy organic food? Soc. Cas. 2012, 48, 509–536. [Google Scholar]
  57. Bai, L.; Tang, J.; Yang, Y.; Gong, S. Hygienic food handling intention. An application of the theory of planned behavior in the Chinese cultural context. Food Control 2014, 42, 172–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Podsakoff, P.M.; Mackenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Malhotra, N.K.; Kim, S.S.; Patil, A. Common method variance in is research: A comparison of alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Manag. Sci. 2006, 52, 1865–1883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Sun, Y.; Wang, N.; Yin, C.; Zhang, J.X. Understanding the relationships between motivators and effort in crowdsourcing marketplaces: A nonlinear analysis. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2015, 35, 267–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Liang, H.; Saraf, N.; Xue, H.Y. Assimilation of enterprise systems: The effect of institutional pressures and the mediating role of top management. MIS Q. 2007, 31, 59–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Williams, L.J. Recent advances in causal modeling methods for organizational and management research. J. Manag. 2003, 29, 903–936. [Google Scholar]
  63. Chin, W.W.; Thatcher, J.B.; Wright, R.T. Assessing common method bias: Problems with the ULMC technique. MIS Q. 2012, 36, 1003–1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Podsakoff, P.M. Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. J. Manag. 1986, 12, 531–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Doorn, S.V.; Heyden, M.; Tröster, C.; Volberda, H. Entrepreneurial orientation and performance: Investigating local requirements for entrepreneurial decision-making. Adv. Strategy Manag. 2015, 32, 211–241. [Google Scholar]
  66. Dutot, V.; Bergeron, F.; Raymond, L. Information management for the internationalization of SMES: An exploratory study based on a strategic alignment perspective. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2014, 34, 672–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Baker, R.; Brick, J.M.; Bates, N.A.; Battaglia, M.; Couper, M.P.; Dever, J.A.; Gile, K.J.; Tourangeau, R. Summary report of the AAPOR task force on non-probability sampling. J. Surv. Stat. Methodol. 2013, 1, 90–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Vavreck, L.; Rivers, D. The 2006 cooperative congressional election study. J. Elect. Public Opin. Parties 2008, 18, 355–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Thiers, P. Using global organic markets to pay for ecologically based agricultural development in China. Agric. Hum. Values 2005, 22, 3–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Xie, B.; Wang, L.; Yang, H.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, M. Consumer perceptions and attitudes of organic food products in eastern china. Br. Food J. 2015, 117, 1105–1121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Igbaria, M.; Zinatelli, N.; Cragg, P.B.; Cavaye, A. Personal computing acceptance factors in small firms: A structural equation model. MIS Q. 1997, 21, 279–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Andrews, F.M. Construct validity and error components of survey measures: A structural modeling approach. Public Opin. Q. 1984, 48, 409–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Jöreskog, K.G.; Sörbom, D. LISREL 7: A Guide to the Program and Applications; SPSS: Chicago, IL, USA, 1989. [Google Scholar]
  74. Fuchs, C.; Diamantopoulos, A. Using single-item measures for construct measurement in management research. Conceptual issues and application guidelines. Die Betr. 2009, 69, 195–210. [Google Scholar]
  75. Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E.; Tatham, R.L. Multivariate data analysis. Technometrics 1998, 15, 648–650. [Google Scholar]
  76. Baron, R.M.; Kenny, D.A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1986, 51, 1173–1182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Kline, R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 3rd ed.; Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  78. Lee, D.; Choi, Y.; Youn, S.; Chun, J.U. Ethical leadership and employee moral voice: The mediating role of moral efficacy and the moderating role of leader–follower value congruence. J. Bus. Ethics 2017, 141, 47–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Yu, T.K.; Chao, C.M. Internet misconduct impact adolescent mental health in Taiwan: The moderating roles of internet addiction. Int. J. Ment. Health Addict. 2016, 14, 921–936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Li-Ying, J.; Wang, Y.; Ning, L. How do dynamic capabilities transform external technologies into firms’ renewed technological resources?—A mediation model. Asia Pac. J. Manag. 2016, 33, 1009–1036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Cooke, R.; Dahdah, M.; Norman, P.; French, D.P. How well does the theory of planned behaviour predict alcohol consumption? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Health Psychol. Rev. 2016, 10, 148–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Chen, M. Attitude toward organic foods among Taiwanese as related to health consciousness, environmental attitudes, and the mediating effects of a healthy lifestyle. Br. Food J. 2009, 111, 165–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Loebnitz, N.; Aschemann-Witzel, J. Communicating organic food quality in china: Consumer perceptions of organic products and the effect of environmental value priming. Food Qual. Prefer. 2016, 50, 102–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Müller, C.E.; Gaus, H. Consumer response to negative media information about certified organic food products. J. Consum. Policy 2015, 38, 387–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Soyez, K.; Francis, J.N.P.; Smirnova, M.M. How individual, product and situational determinants affect the intention to buy organic food buying behavior: A cross-national comparison in five nations. Der Markt 2012, 51, 27–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Chen, J.; Lobo, A. Organic food products in china: Determinants of consumers’ purchase intentions. Int. Rev. Ret. Distrib. Consum. Res. 2012, 22, 293–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Hodgins, K.J.; Fraser, E.D.G. “we are a business, not a social service agency.” barriers to widening access for low-income shoppers in alternative food market spaces. Agric. Hum. Values 2017, 35, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Yin, S.; Gao, Y.; Wu, L. Constructing the Food Safety Co-Governance System with Chinese Characteristics; The People Press: Beijing, China, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  89. Yin, S.; Li, R.; Wu, L.; Chen, X. Introduction to 2018 China Development Report on Food Safety; Perking University Press: Beijing, China, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  90. Liu, Q.; Yan, Z.; Zhou, J. Consumer choices and motives for eco-labeled products in China: An empirical analysis based on the choice experiment. Sustainability 2017, 9, 331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 11 03045 g001 550
Figure 1. The conceptual model.
Figure 1. The conceptual model.
Sustainability 11 03045 g001
Sustainability 11 03045 g002 550
Figure 2. Antecedents of purchase attitude and purchase intention. Note: * Significant at p < 0.05 (two-tailed); ** Significant at p < 0.01 (two-tailed). The relationships between variables connected by dotted lines were not significant. Standardized solution, N = 1004. Model fit: χ2 (df = 125) = 880.12, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.967, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.078 (90% confidence interval: 0.073–0.083), the goodness-of-fit index (GFI) = 0.915, non-normed fit index (NNFI) = 0.955, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) = 0.045.
Figure 2. Antecedents of purchase attitude and purchase intention. Note: * Significant at p < 0.05 (two-tailed); ** Significant at p < 0.01 (two-tailed). The relationships between variables connected by dotted lines were not significant. Standardized solution, N = 1004. Model fit: χ2 (df = 125) = 880.12, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.967, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.078 (90% confidence interval: 0.073–0.083), the goodness-of-fit index (GFI) = 0.915, non-normed fit index (NNFI) = 0.955, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) = 0.045.
Sustainability 11 03045 g002
Sustainability 11 03045 g003 550
Figure 3. Results of the mediation effects. Note: ** Significant at p < 0.01 (two-tailed).
Figure 3. Results of the mediation effects. Note: ** Significant at p < 0.01 (two-tailed).
Sustainability 11 03045 g003
Table
Table 1. A summary of the literature on beliefs, the theory of planned behavior (TPB), and other factors affecting organic food purchase.
Table 1. A summary of the literature on beliefs, the theory of planned behavior (TPB), and other factors affecting organic food purchase.
AuthorsYearBeliefsTheory of Planned BehaviorOther Factors
HCEFTasteFSNutritiousPAttSNPBCIntAttIncPT
Tarkiainen and Sundqvist2005√(**) √(**)√(**) √(**)
Chen2007√(NS)√(**)√(NS) √(**)√(**)√(**) √(**)
Chen2009√(**)√(**)
Yin et al.2009√(NS)√(NS) √(NS) √(**)√(**)
Tarigan et al.2011 √(**)
Urban et al.2012 √(**)√(**)√(NS)
Thøgersen and Zhou2012√(**)√(**)√(**) √(**)√(NS)√(**)√(**) √(**)
Tung et al.2012 √(**)
Zhou et al.2013 √(**)√(NS)√(**)
Al-Swidi et al.2014 √(**)√(**)√(NS)
Chen et al.2014 √(**) √(**)√(**)
Irianto2015√(**)√(**) √(**)√(**)
Nuttavuthisit and Thøgersen2015 √(**)
Xie et al.2015√(**)√(**)√(**)√(**) √(**)
Thøgersen et al.2016 √(**)
Yadav and Pathak2016√(**)√(**) √(**)√(NS)√(**)
Wang and He2016√(**)√(**)√(**)√(**)√(**) √(NS)
Maichum et al.2017 √(**)√(NS)√(**)√(**)
Wang et al.2019√(**) √(**)√(**)√(**)
Note: “HC” refers to health consciousness. “EF” refers to environmentally friendly. “FS” refers to food safety. “PAtt” refers to purchase attitude. “SN” refers to subjective norms. “PBC” refers to perceived behavior control. “Int” refers to purchase intention. “Att” refers to attitude. “Inc” refers to income. “PT” refers to perceived trustworthiness. “√” means that this variable was tested. Double asterisks (**) denote statistical significance at 0.05-level, and “NS” denotes no significance at 0.05-level.
Table
Table 2. Demographic characteristics of the sample (n = 1004).
Table 2. Demographic characteristics of the sample (n = 1004).
Demographic CharacteristicsCategoryPercentage (%)
Age18–3568.3
36–5531.7
GenderMale46.1
Female53.9
Educational levelJunior high school or below13
Senior high school40.5
College and above46.5
Marital statusUnmarried41.2
Married without children22.6
Married with children35.3
Others0.9
Per capita household monthly incomeNo more than 300054.9
(Chinese Yuan)3001–500032.9
5001–10,00010
>10,0002.2
Place of residenceUrban76.7
Rural23.3
Primary food purchaser or notYes35.9
No64.1
Living with the elders of 60+ years of age or with kids below 12 years of ageYes75.6
No24.4
You buy organic foods:For yourself to eat17.1
For your family (such as the kids or elders) to eat71.5
As a gift for others11.4
Table
Table 3. Stepwise regression of beliefs and attitudes toward organic food.
Table 3. Stepwise regression of beliefs and attitudes toward organic food.
BeliefsStandard βtAdjusted R2FToleranceVariance Inflation Factor (VIF)
Safer0.37811.910 ** 0.5651.77
More environmentally friendly0.1675.478 ** 0.611.64
Luxuries for the rich0.1485.646 ** 0.8221.216
More nutritious0.1254.687 ** 0.7981.254
More upscale0.1134.154 ** 0.7631.311
Marketing hype−0.108−4.043 **0.43127.365 **0.7931.262
Note: ** p < 0.01.
Table
Table 4. Pearson correlations between the variables, square root of the average variance extracted (AVE), mean, and standard deviation.
Table 4. Pearson correlations between the variables, square root of the average variance extracted (AVE), mean, and standard deviation.
VariableAttPAttIESNPEPBCPTIncPriPintMeanS.D.
Att a 4.100.94
PAtt0.584 *0.756 3.830.75
IE0.167 *0.242 *0.857 2.930.96
SN0.505 *0.589 *0.262 *0.742 3.700.73
PE a−0.105 *−0.208 *−225 *−0.166 * 2.510.92
PBC a0.361 *0.417 *0.072 **0.504 *−0.146 * 3.891.03
PT0.419 *0.448 *0.296 *0.508 *−0.0550.375 *0.760 3.450.71
Inc a0.138 *0.252 *0.243 *0.299 *−101 *0.220 *0.259 * ————
Pri0.302 *0.261 *−0.0270.322 *−0.096 *0.354 *0.122 *0.087 * 4.460.85
Pint0.436 *0.562 *0.225 *0.436 *−0.0440.311 *0.430 *0.293 *0.179 *0.7623.460.83
Note: Constructs marked with a superscript ‘a’ include only one item. All correlations with one asterisk were significant at p < 0.01, and all correlations with two asterisks were significant at p < 0.05. Except for the single-item constructs, the bold numbers on the diagonal are the square roots of AVE.
Table
Table 5. Fit index of the mediation function analysis.
Table 5. Fit index of the mediation function analysis.
Fitχ2dfχ2/dfCFIGFINNFIRMSEASRMAAIC
Model 11072.431278.440.960.90.940.0860.0591198.43
Model 2881.9412670.970.920.960.0770.0451009.94
Model 3880.121257.040.970.920.960.0780.0451010.12
Table
Table 6. Results of the main effects and the moderating effects for income, using binary logistic regression.
Table 6. Results of the main effects and the moderating effects for income, using binary logistic regression.
Model 1Model 2
Standard βS.E.p95% C.I. for EXP (b)Standard βS.E.p95% C.I. for EXP (b)
LowerUpperLowerUpper
PInt0.3780.0940.000 *1.2121.7560.3630.0950.000 **1.1931.733
PE0.3660.0770.000 **1.2391.6780.3710.0790.000 **1.2411.691
PC−0.370.0880.000 **0.5810.82−0.3660.0890.000 **0.5830.825
Inc0.5460.0790.000 **1.4812.0150.5020.0840.000 **1.4021.946
PT0.0560.0930.5460.8811.2690.0480.0930.6020.8751.259
(Constant)−1.2030.0810.000 **
Pint *Inc 0.2060.0960.032 *1.0181.484
PE *Inc 0.0310.0820.7040.8781.212
PC *Inc −0.1480.0920.1070.721.032
PT *Inc 0.0250.0910.7850.8571.226
(Constant) −1.2170.0850
HL testχ2 = 10.70, df = 8, p = 0.219χ2 = 12.97, df = 8, p = 0.113
Nagelkerke R20.1540.163
Note: The significant variables are in bold. ** p <0.01; * p <0.05. Prediction accuracy of model 1: 76.5%; prediction accuracy of model 2: 77.4%.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bai, L.; Wang, M.; Gong, S. Understanding the Antecedents of Organic Food Purchases: The Important Roles of Beliefs, Subjective Norms, and Identity Expressiveness. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3045. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113045

AMA Style

Bai L, Wang M, Gong S. Understanding the Antecedents of Organic Food Purchases: The Important Roles of Beliefs, Subjective Norms, and Identity Expressiveness. Sustainability. 2019; 11(11):3045. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113045

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bai, Li, Mingliang Wang, and Shunlong Gong. 2019. "Understanding the Antecedents of Organic Food Purchases: The Important Roles of Beliefs, Subjective Norms, and Identity Expressiveness" Sustainability 11, no. 11: 3045. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113045

APA Style

Bai, L., Wang, M., & Gong, S. (2019). Understanding the Antecedents of Organic Food Purchases: The Important Roles of Beliefs, Subjective Norms, and Identity Expressiveness. Sustainability, 11(11), 3045. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113045

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop