Let’s Be Vegan? Antecedents and Consequences of Involvement with Vegan Products: Vegan vs. Non-Vegan

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation is to understand what influences the involvement with vegan products when comparing vegan and non-vegan individuals. This study presents eco-motivated antecedents (ecological motivations, environmental concerns, animal welfare) and personal antecedents (social influence, idealism). Also, the influence of involvement with vegan products on eudemonic and hedonic happiness, purchase intention, and price sensitivity. The impact price sensitivity has on purchase intention is presented. The research uses a structured questionnaire to collect information from two cross-sectional samples, 580 vegans and 517 non-vegans, collected from four vegan groups on Facebook, for a total of 284,900 members. Structural equation modeling (SEM) is used to test the proposed hypotheses. Results show that among vegans, ecological motivations and social influence do not impact involvement with vegan products. Vegans choose this lifestyle mainly due to animal protection, environmental concerns, and ideological views. Regarding non-vegans, idealism does not impact involvement with vegan products, probably due to their moral views, since they do not stop ingesting meat. At the same time, social influence becomes a relevant predictor. A cross-sectional study does not allow inferring causality. The model could be tested by introducing variables like gender, age, personality traits, sensitivity, and religion, which could be pertinent drivers of involvement with vegan products in vegan and non-vegan groups. This investigation compares the impact of personal and eco-motivated determinants, comparing vegans and non-vegans regarding their involvement with vegan products. It also compares how involvement with vegan products predicts consumer behavior patterns among vegans and non-vegans.

1. Introduction

A vegan is someone who does not ingest or use animal products of any kind [1]. The vegan diet is centered on plants, not including animal products like meat, fish, dairy products, or even honey [2] (Piia et al., 2019). Usually, vegans follow this lifestyle because of ethical, health, and environmental motivations [3] (Fuentes, & Fuentes, 2023). Tied to animal rights movements, vegans aim to eliminate all practices of animal cruelty and abuse [4] (Harmon, 2020). According to [5] Wrenn (2019), veganism pursues to eliminate all forms of use and cruelty towards animals for food, clothing, or other purposes. So being vegan means not only abstaining from eating animals but also not using products made of animals, like clothing and make-up [6] (Dos Santos et al., 2023), and not using products that harm animals’ habitats [7] (Wescombe, 2019).

According to [8], the annual growth of vegan products was 58% between 2015 and 2019 (Market Insights, n.d.). In 2018, the Mintel Global New Products Database mentioned that the United Kingdom launched the most vegan food products in the world (Market Insights, 2018). Also, according to Mintel, during 2018 in Europe, one out of ten new food products was either vegan or had no animal product ingredients. Based on numbers published in 2019 by The Economist, it was possible to verify that the total number of vegans in the world would be approximately 79 million in January 2021 (The Economist, 2019) [9].

Academic studies have shown that some vegans choose veganism due to health reasons (Dyett et al., 2013; Goksen et al., 2023) [10,11], but animal welfare concern is the main reason to become vegan (Janssen et al., 2016; Kerschke-Risch, 2015; Radnitz et al., 2015; Wrenn, 2017; Barrett, & Raskoff, 2023) [5,12,13,14,15]. Individuals become vegan for numerous purposes, including health, food taste, and to avoid animal-driven products (Ciocchetti, 2012) [16]. Extremely motivated vegans reject all animal-based products (Janssen et al., 2016) [12]. Novoselova et al. (2005) [17] mention that animal welfare and environmental and health issues have a positive consequence on customer purchases regarding food intake. Therefore, being vegan helps to protect the environment, as non-plant-based consumptions is less harmful to the planet (Carlsson-Kanyama & González, 2009; Dixon, Michelsen, & Carpenter, 2023) [18,19]. Animal welfare is not only concerned with an animal’s health, lifespan but also with their physical and mental state (OIE—Terrestrial Animal Health Code, n.d.) [20]. Animal welfare also encompasses the avoidance of animal testing (Olsson et al., 2010) [21], used in recreational situations (Shani & Pizam, 2008; Petrie 2016; Byrd, Lee & Widmar, 2017; PETA UK Annual Review, 2018) [22,23,24,25]. Greenebaum (2012) [26] classifies vegans based on their morals, norms, and values. An ethical diet and way of life are the main principles for vegans (Grauel, 2016) [27]. Since veganism also includes products besides food, individuals can be vegan by diet or lifestyle (Grauel, 2016) [27]. According to [28], diet adoptions have three dimensions: responsibility, identity, and convenience. Although for vegans, responsibility is of great importance, identity and identification are also very important and can, sometimes, play a main part in vegan individuals (Ciocchetti, 2012; Sirieix, et al., 2023) [16,29].

Veganism is a very strict lifestyle since all animal-derived products are excluded from all life areas (Tunçay, 2016; Piia et al., 2019) [2,30]. While studies focus on the reasons why individuals become vegans, research about what veganism, as a lifestyle, entails is still limited (DaSilva, Juliette Hecquet & Katherine King, 2019) [31]. Additionally, what involves vegan choices and vegan consumption among non-vegans is yet to be deeply studied (Earle & Hodson, 2017, Bagci & Olgun, 2019) [32,33]. Research shows veganism not only as a limiting diet but also as a choice that involves a social identity, where individuals tend to join groups with other non-meat eaters (Rosenfeld, 2018) [34]. Some studies have shown what involves being vegan, but not individual differences between vegans and non-vegans regarding variables related to personal and eco-motivated issues (Pfeiler & Egloff, 2018) [35]. At the same time, research regarding the influence of the vegan lifestyle on well-being is still limited (Costa, Gill, Morda & Ali, 2019) [36] as well as on purchase intention and price sensitivity (Rex & Baumann, 2007; Ghali-Zinoubi & Toukabri, 2019) [37,38].

With regard to these gaps, this study intends to understand what influences the involvement with vegan products (DaSilva, Hecquet & King, 2019) [31] among vegans and non-vegans (Earle & Hodson, 2017, Bagci & Olgun, 2019) [32,33]. This study proposes to understand how involvement with vegan products impacts individuals’ well-being (Costa, Gill, Morda & Ali, 2019 [36], purchase intention, and price sensitivity as well (Rex & Baumann, 2007; Ghali-Zinoubi & Toukabri, 2019) [37,38].

This investigation is based on two samples, the first with 580 vegan respondents and the second with 517 non-vegan respondents, collected from four vegan groups on Facebook, totaling 284,900 members. Structural equation modeling (SEM) is used to test the proposed hypotheses. This study compares personal and eco-motivated determinants between vegans and non-vegans concerning involvement with vegan products. Additionally, a comparison on how involvement with vegan products can foresee consumer behavior amongst vegans and non-vegans.

This paper starts with an introduction that presents a brief summary of the studied topic, stating gaps and main research objectives. Subsequently, this study provides a theoretical background and develops hypotheses. Section 3 presents a conceptual model and the method used, while Section 4 shows the sample and data collection. Section 5 introduces the results. The main contributions and limitations provided by this research are in Section 6.

2. Conceptual Development and Research Hypotheses

2.1. Veganism

Veganism is more than a diet; it is a manifestation of a lifestyle through food (Mintel, 2016; Hargreaves et al., 2023) [39,40]. Veganism is a self-expression of identity and values (DaSilva et al., 2019) [31] that has gained more interest in recent years. Besides being a healthy diet choice, veganism is also a lifestyle that entails a philosophy regarding animal welfare and ecological motivations (Doyle, 2016) [41]. Cherry (2015) [42] and Greenebaum (2012) [26] have studied vegan motivations, showing that personal and moral reasons are the main issues in becoming vegan. Following an ethical diet and lifestyle are key points for vegans (Grauel, 2016; Alnasser, & Alomran, 2023) [27,43]. Continuing the vegan lifestyle is not only based on the individuals’ ethical values, but it appears that having a supportive social group and social identification is of great importance in order to keep vegans motivated. It seems that being vegan requires a social support system to maintain the lifestyle (Cherry, 2015) [42]. Beverland, Wahl, and Groot (2015) [44] reported that the close social circle of vegans sometimes felt veganism as a personal attack towards them and that being vegan created tension during social and family events. While being vegan is seen as eating healthy and showing concern about animals and the environment (Mortara, 2013) [45], being vegan can raise tension among non-vegans because of diet restrictions that need to be followed when a vegan is present (Beverland et al., 2015; Twine, 2017) [44,46]. Vegans on sharing common ideals and goals (Moutinho et al., 2007) [47] and feeling understood and welcomed (Brignall & Van Valey, 2007) [48].

Individuals defending animal welfare, environment and humankind are willing to choose a vegan lifestyle (Andersen & Tobiasen, 2004; Stolle & Micheletti, 2013; Van Deth, 2014) [49,50,51], as well as expressing moral, political, social, or ecological considerations and practices (Kalte, 2020) [52]. According to Novoselova et al. (2005) [17], animal welfare has a positive impact on consumer choice regarding food choices. Some consider themselves vegan when it comes to food, but not all follow this lifestyle strictly, as they might use products made of animals [4] (Harmon, 2020). Therefore, some consider themselves vegans just because they follow the food regime, but veganism excludes any animal product. So if palm oil destroys the Indonesian forest, this product does not follow the vegan principle, as the production of palm oil originated with the killing of hundreds of orangutans (Tunçay, 2016) [30]. But non-vegans can protect the environment if they choose locally raised meat (Roosevelt, 2006) [53]. There are strict vegans that do not consume honey and other vegans that use medications obtained from animals (Beardsworth & Keil, 2011) [54], so a stricter vegan might consider another vegan that eats honey as a non-vegan. Therefore, veganism can be seen as more than a diet; it is a complete change of lifestyle by giving up on all animal products (Francione & Charlton, 2016; Greenebaum, 2018) [55,56]. Nowadays, the consumption of vegan products is not only done by vegans but also by non-vegans since interest in healthy and environmentally friendly products is rising (Hsu & Chen, 2014; Popa et al., 2018) [57,58]. Consumers purchase products when they have considerable importance for them or/and follow their lifestyle (Rahman, 2018, Alnasser, & Alomran, 2023) [43,59].

2.1.1. Self-Determination Theory and Veganism

Self-determination theory (SDT) shows that individuals are aware that their decisions count and have an impact. SDT ties the individual’s three basic needs, ability, independence, and connection (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Garg et al., 2021) [60,61], providing a better understanding of their motivations. Every individual wishes to live successfully in their surrounding environment, control the course of his/her life, and have meaningful relationships (Deci & Ryan, 2008; Garg et al., 2021) [60,61]. SDT sustains that individuals have a set of reasons to act in a certain way and/or purchase something since they have the notion that their behavior affects the world and that it might help them feel good (Garg, Sachdeva, Singh & Goel, 2021; Khan, Hameed, & Akram, 2023) [61,62]. Furthermore, SDT helps to understand that individuals know that their behavior leads to certain results, mainly in what links their involvement with environmental issues leading therefore to happiness and well-being (Garg et al., 2021) [61]. SDT outlines intrinsic and extrinsic motivations and helps establish the links between motivations and behaviors when dealing with individual needs, environment protection, and well-being (Gilal et al., 2019) [63].

2.1.2. Vegans and Non-Vegans

The consumption of environmentally friendly products and products that take animal welfare into consideration shows the importance and willingness of vegans and non-vegans to purchase vegan products (Ghvanidze et al., 2016; Maeda- Yamamoto, 2017; Laureti & Benedetti, 2018) [64,65,66]. Vegan and vegetarian diets are growing in popularity in many countries (Janssen et al., 2016) [12]. The responsibility regarding the environment and animals is felt by a growing number of consumers, and therefore they express their concerns and ideals by purchasing environmentally and animal-friendly products (Carrington et al., 2014; Hsu & Chen, 2014; Ghvanidze et al., 2016) [57,64,67]. In general, consumers, vegans and non-vegans, are disposed to purchase products that care for the environment and animals (Ghvanidze et al., 2016; Laureti & Benedetti, 2018) [64,66]. Despite the growing interest in veganism and vegan products, there is a shortage of investigation in this field, linking veganism and consumption. Therefore, few studies investigate vegan consumer behavior as well as consumers of vegan products in general. However, according to SDT, people have three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2000) [60].

Vegans tend to demonstrate a high level of autonomy in their dietary choices, as adopting a vegan lifestyle often reflects a personal decision based on ethical, environmental, or health concerns. Autonomy is likely to be a motivating factor for vegans who feel empowered by making choices aligned with their values (Moslehpour, et al., 2023) [68]. At the same time, adopting and maintaining a vegan lifestyle requires knowledge and skills related to plant-based nutrition, cooking, and navigating social situations (Mortara, A. (2013) [45]. The decision to adopt a vegan lifestyle may be influenced by a sense of relatedness to animals, the environment, and other individuals who share similar ethical or environmental concerns. Therefore, participating in vegan communities and social networks can enhance the sense of relatedness among vegans (Costa, et al., 2019) [36]. Finally, vegans tend to develop a sense of commitment to nature and the sensation of accomplishment for providing a contribution to the safety and well-being of animals and for preserving the environment and nature (Grauel, 2016) [27], contributing to a better world.

2.1.3. Involvement with Vegan Products

Involvement with a product happens when there is a connection with it (Richins & Bloch, 1986) [69]. Involvement with a product is emotional and impacts consumers’ responsiveness towards it (Celsi & Olson, 1988; Tarkiainen & Sundqvist, 2009; Baldini & Ponchio, 2018, Zhou, & Huang, 2023) [70,71,72,73]. This involvement with a product makes the individual act, usually purchasing it, repurchasing it, talking about it to others, and recommending it (Tarkiainen & Sundqvist, 2009) [71]. Involvement goes from high to low and is linked to purchasing purposes (Park & Keil, 2019) [74]. High involvement encompasses more effort and assessment (Kim, et al., 2019; Rokonuzzaman, et al., 2020) [75,76], and low involvement occurs when there is no need to do any research (Jeseviciute-Ufartiene, 2019) [77]. High involvement happens when there are health issues, values, and desires (Strubel & Petrie, 2016) [78] or the wish to buy quality goods (Rokonuzzaman et al., 2020) [76].

When there is personal involvement, acceptance of products and services occurs (Ares et al., 2010) [79] and might end in purchase (Kim et al., 2010; Montandon, et al., 2017) [80,81]. Involvement is influenced by personality, data, and familiarity (Hoyer & MacInnis, 2001) [82] and makes individuals examine the product (Baldini & Ponchio, 2017) [72], creating a connection (Caro, et al., 2011) [83].

2.2. Drivers of Involvement with Vegan Products

2.2.1. Animal Welfare

By purchasing food of animal origin, individuals are more and more concerned about animal welfare (EU Platform on Animal Welfare, 2019) [84]. According to the Attitudes of Europeans towards Animal Welfare Report, animal welfare “refers to the duty to respect all animals” (European Commission, 2016) (p. 6, [85]). Animal welfare involves not only the physical state of animals but also their psychological state and feelings (Duncan, 2010; McDowall et al., 2023) [86,87]. In 1965, the World Organization for Animal Health developed the ‘Five Freedoms’ in order to guide individuals that take care of animals: (1) freedom from hunger, malnutrition, and thirst; (2) freedom from fear and distress; (3) freedom from heat stress or physical discomfort; (4) freedom from pain, injury, and disease; and (5) freedom to express normal patterns of behavior (OIE, 1965) [20].

Animal welfare has been cited as a significant reason for consumers to purchase organic animal products (Padilla Bravo et al., 2013; Zanoli et al., 2013) [88,89] or even become vegan (Janssen et al., 2016; Kerschke-Risch, 2015; Radnitz et al., 2015; Wrenn, 2017; Kalte, 2020) [5,12,13,14,52]. Clark et al. (2016) [90] mention that individuals project human standards regarding well-being and happiness onto animals. Francione and Charlton (2015) [55] mention that the vegan diet avoids unnecessary suffering for animals, and Kazez (2017) [91] adds that, since nutritional factors are not lost by becoming vegan, the necessity to kill animals for food can be avoided.

Individuals defending animal welfare, the environment, and humankind are more willing to choose a vegan lifestyle (Andersen & Tobiasen, 2004; Stolle & Micheletti, 2013) [49,50]. At the same time, animal welfare also expresses moral, political, social, or ecological practices (Kalte, 2020) [52], and according to Novoselova et al. (2005) [17], has a positive outcome on consumer food choices. Animal welfare is present in companies, consumers, and politicians (Hewson, 2003) [92], as individuals view animals as having feelings and rights (Greenbaum, 2015) [56]. Animal welfare represents not only the concern for animal health but also the way they live (Zapf et al., 2015) [93]. The wellbeing of animals is the main reason to become vegan (Dyett et al., 2013; Janssen et al., 2016) [10,12], influencing lifestyle, involvement, and attitudes towards vegan products (Janssen et al., 2016; Cooper, 2018) [12,94]. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H1: 

Animal welfare influences involvement with vegan products.

2.2.2. Ecological Motivation

Weather alterations and conservational questions influence lifespan, and individuals are now conscious of these matters and how changing behavior leads to a green standard of living. Ecological motivations are connected to conservational and animal worries (Campbell & Smith, 2006, Kaplan Mintz, Arazy, & Malkinson, 2023) [95,96] as well as sustainable expansion and conservational responsibilities (Faria et al., 2016) [97]. Ecological motivations are about environmental rights and concerns about animals. Decisions made by vegans are influenced by their ecological motivations, since vegan products are associated with sustainable products (Radnitz et al., 2015) [14]. Ecologically inspired people make choices that protect the environment and respect animal life (Harper & Makatouni, 2002) [98]. Ecological motivations are important in order to maintain a viable ecological lifestyle (Şimşekoğlu, et al., 2015) [99].

Extremely ecologically driven people buy eco-friendly goods (Wang et al., 2014) [100] and might follow a greener diet (Rothgerber, 2013; Radnitz et al., 2015; Janssen et al., 2016) [12,14,101]. Therefore, buying eco-friendly, whether vegetarian or vegan, can be related to ecological motivations (Majláth, 2008; Franzen & Mayer, 2010) [102,103] and also to a higher sense of environmental responsibility (Dagher & Itani, 2014) [104]. Ecological motivations impact attitudes concerning the consumption of vegan products because green products are ecological merchandise (Tobler et al., 2011; Rothgerber, 2013; Radnitz et al., 2015) [14,105,106].

Green consumption, animal well-being, ecological matters, and health apprehensions are part of a lifestyle that is the foundation of veganism (Greenebaum, 2012; Clark et al., 2019) [26,90]. Thus, it is extremely important to study the relationship between ecological motivations and willingness to be vegan in order to understand what influences somebody to become vegan (Cova, 1997; Jabar, 2003; Charrad, 2011) [107,108,109]. Therefore, the link between ecological motivations and involvement with vegan products is strengthening even amongst non-vegan individuals (Şimşekoğlu et al., 2015) [99]. Consequently, the following hypothesis is:

H2: 

Ecological motivation influences involvement with vegan products.

2.2.3. Environmental Concerns

Environmental concerns can be seen as the knowledge of environmental matters (Cruz, 2017; Chao, Yu, & Yu, 2023) [110,111], as well as the consciousness about what harms the environment and what can be carried out to protect it (Chan & Lau, 2004) [112]. Environmental concerns are a responsive approach to environmental matters (Takács-Sánta, 2007) [113]. So, environmental concern can be defined as a socially conscious behavior adopted in relation to the environment, taking into account how this behavior affects the environment (Shannon & Manata, 2020) [114].

Individuals can be categorized, according to Dietz et al. (2005) [115], into three kinds: (1) egoistically, regarding the individual, family, and friends; (2) socially or humanistic altruism, that will include the community; and (3) lastly, the biospheric altruism category, which includes concerns towards animals and ecology, where the importance of nature and the need to preserve is the main feature. Environmental concerns are essential for buyers who live according to eco-friendly conduct (Bamberg, 2003) [116] and influence consumers to purchase green goods and therefore protect the environment (Greaves et al., 2013) [117]. The more ecologically worried, the eco-friendlier products are bought (Pollard et al., 1999) [118]. When buying eco-friendly products, consciousness towards the environment is strengthened (Arisal & Atalar, 2016) [119].

Environmental concerns influence individuals to embrace a vegan lifestyle (Rothgerber, 2013) [106]. Vegans recognize their duty and need to protect the planet (Ciocchetti, 2012; Wills, 2016) [16,120]. So, in order to protect the environment, individuals look for products that fulfill their motivations and tend to be more involved with them (Cherry, 2015) [42]. Environmental concerns lead individuals to be more involved with vegan products (Ruane & Wallace, 2015) [121] and live in an eco-friendly way (Wang et al., 2017) [122]. Consequently, we propose the following hypothesis:

H3: 

Environmental concerns influence involvement with vegan products.

2.2.4. Idealism

Idealism can explain behavioral trends (Lai & Thornton, 2015) [123]. Beliefs and values are important gears of idealism (Thornton, 2005) [124], and avoiding harm is a key aspect for idealistic individuals (Cooper, 2018; Khan, & Abbas, 2023) [94,125]. Idealistic individuals believe that righteousness, integrity, and dignity should be qualities to uphold (Guyer & Horstmann, 2019) [126]. Idealism highpoints the mind, the intellectual, and the best (Sarnowski, 2018) and is a mental symbol where ideologies and morals are the individual’s sense of true self (Kivetz et al., 2007) [127]. Idealistic individuals pursue what should be the ideal, even when it seems difficult to achieve. The idealistic individual seeks human and animal rights and environmental protection (Sarnowski, 2018) [128].

Ethical values are motivated by the necessity of doing the correct thing and satisfying the individual’s ethical standards (Forsyth et al., 2008) [129]. Attitude, value, and behavior are crucial in order to understand motivation (Scholl, 2016) [130], and therefore it is important to understand the individual’s idealism. Attitudes regarding things, other individuals, or even surroundings are changeable; values, on the other hand, are unchangeable because they are inked into ideas and situations, deeply rooted in the individual’s belief system. Ethical conduct incorporates values (Scholl, 2016) [130].

Individuals act according to their ethical values, which are part of their belief system and can therefore be right or wrong. Vegans want to act accordingly to the wish not to hurt any living being (Marta et al., 2003) [131]. Vegans act according to the principle that caring for the environment, animals, and others is the only lifestyle to be followed (Kalte, 2020) [52]. Committed people, idealistic individuals, are certain that not damaging the world is the right thing to do, not just because of their ethical values, but because wanting a healthy world is the correct action to take (Guyer & Horstmann, 2019; Kalte, 2020) [52,132]. Contrarily, less idealistic individuals disbelieve in the idea that goodness prevails, and therefore, on some occasions, bad things happen (Guyer & Horstmann, 2019) [132].

Vegans have higher ethical values and are highly dedicated to their cause: protect animals and the environment and live by not destroying the planet at all (Kalte, 2020) [77]. Vegans trust that generosity is going to succeed (Guyer & Horstmann, 2018) [132], influence the attitudes and actions of others (Fortysh, 1992) [129], and stop the intake and usage of any animal products (Tobler et al., 2011) [105]. Being idealistic and believing in animal rights leads people to adopt veganism and be involved with vegan products (Guyer & Horstmann, 2019) [132]. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H4: 

Idealism influences involvement with vegan products.

2.2.5. Social Influence

The concept of social influence is part of individuals, which urges the need to be part of a group where all think and behave alike (Das, et al., 2017; Clark, et al., 2019; Simiyu, & Kariuki, 2023) [133,134,135]. Social influence might outline an individual’s attitudes, principles, activities, and behaviors and be the degree of the individual’s involvement in decision-making (Lui et al., 2020) [136]. Social influence can decline when and if experience grows (Wang et al., 2013; Goes et al., 2014) [100,137] and is influenced through different processes, such as agreement and empathy. According to Zhao et al. (2018) [138], it originates from somebody well-known, like managers, coworkers, and/or family and friends.

Lifestyle, opinions, and feelings may impact individuals socially, and therefore behaviors change (Markowski & Roxburgh, 2019; Wescombe, 2019) [7,139], so individuals can be influenced by assessments and attitudes, leading to changes in choices and attitudes (Friedkin, 2006; Cunningham, et al., 2012) [140,141]. Social influence combines countless ways individuals can be influenced (Crano, 2000) [142], directly and indirectly impacting approaches, opinions, and attitudes (Venkatesh et al., 2003) [143]. Understanding social influence helps the comprehension of social behavior, assisting in decision-making, public opinion, and leading to changes (Peng et al., 2017) [144]. Social influence alters food adoption and ingesting (Pedersen et al., 2015; Polivy & Pliner, 2015) [145,146] and can remove undesirable conduct, leading to constructive guidelines (Cialdini & Trost, 1998) [147]. Concerning veganism, people see vegans as individuals that are ethical and virtuous and lead others to seek the same lifestyle (Gavelle, et al., 2019; Rosenfeld & Reysen, 2019; Wescombe, 2019) [7,34,148]. So, according to Canavari and Olson (2007) [149], social influence changes consumers’ choices and actions. The pressure of the social context and the influence of peers are, therefore, strong reasons to get more involved with vegan products (Varshneya, Pandey & Das, 2017; Maleka et al., 2019) [133].

Therefore, the following hypothesis is presented:

H5: 

Social influence impacts involvement with vegan products.

2.3. Understanding the Consequences of Involvement with Vegan Products

2.3.1. Eudemonic and Hedonic Happiness

Aristotle’s philosophy of happiness is the basis of the eudemonic tradition of well-being. Well-being experiences are molded by the individual’s personal objectives and reasons (Sheldon & Kasser, 1995) [150]. Traditional and actual interpretations of hedonic and eudemonic well-being are sometimes seen as opposing perspectives. Hedonism is well-being based on the pleasure of the mind and body and happiness [151]. As for eudaimonism, well-being is more than happiness; it is the fulfillment of the individual’s true nature and potential (Waterman, 1993) [152]. However, hedonic and eudemonic well-being are linked since to be able to reach one’s true nature is a pleasure itself (Waterman, 1993; Bentley, 2023) [152,153]. Happiness is achieved by “the striving for perfection that represents the realization of one’s true potential” (Ryff 1995, p. 100) [154].

The hedonic and eudemonic adaptation theory outlines well-being but also happiness and the mindset. While eudemonic conceptions are related to living well, hedonic conceptions rely on the lack of pain and the existence of pleasure or positive situations (Ryan et al., 2008) [155]. According to Ryan et al. (2008) [155], pleasure or positive situations are results of living well, as are a life of dignity and, above all, meaningful features of Eudaimonia. Although the hedonic view comprises life goals and lifestyles, these lifestyles can be contrary to the features of eudaimonia, when reaching pleasure is carried out through low morals and greediness (Ryan & Deci, 2001) [60]. Hedonic well-being can be felt by treating our body, and eudaemonic well-being by treating our mind (Hall et al., 2011) [156]. SDT provides a better understanding of the linkages showing the purpose and the why, i.e., what is the goal, what motivates the individual, and why is the individual doing it? Recent studies have shown that purchasing/owning improves life satisfaction (Markus & Schwartz, 2010) [2], but the more the products are related to the individual, the more satisfied he becomes (Khan, Ghani & Aziz, 2019) [157].

Happiness is accomplished when one’s true nature and beliefs are empowered. Living the lifestyle chosen by an individual striving to live according to a philosophy results in happiness and well-being (Waterman, 1993) [152]. Veganism involves not consuming or using any animal products [4] (Harmon, 2020) [4]. Vegans’ lifestyle is led by health and environmental causes, excluding animal cruelty and exploitation, following an ethical movement in order to protect the planet. Vegans choose eco-friendly and healthy products so that their bodies are nourished accurately, leading to a healthy lifestyle but also a personal commitment to their standards (Lyubomirsky, 2011) [158]. A well-planned vegan diet can contribute to overall health by providing nutrient-rich foods such as fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. Studies suggest that a vegan diet may reduce the risk of chronic diseases, including heart disease and diabetes (Dixon et al., 2023) [19]. Additionally, it can support weight management and improve factors like blood pressure and cholesterol levels.

Consequently, involvement with vegan products is vital, as this involvement will affect the enjoyment of being vegan and doing the right thing. The personal fulfillment the pleasure and happiness that the use of vegan products that follow their philosophy brings, requires true involvement, since there are products that are not produced following the strict guidelines of veganism. Vegan individuals buy products that are made according to their lifestyle, and their involvement is shaped by values and benefits that increase their well-being and happiness (Rahman, 2018; Ghali, 2019) [38,59].

Therefore, the following hypotheses are presented:

H6: 

Involvement with vegan products impacts eudaemonic happiness.

H7: 

Involvement with vegan products impacts hedonic happiness.

2.3.2. Purchase Intention

Purchase intention is the motivation to buy a product or service (Dodds et al., 1991; Moslehpour, et al., 2023) [68,159] and happens when the product or service has characteristics that fulfill the consumers’ needs (Fournier, 1998) [160]. When there is a plan for acquiring something, there is purchase intention (Fischbein & Ajzen, 1975; Wu et al., 2011) [161], and the stronger, the motivation the bigger the possible purchase (Mello & Sauerbronn, 2014; Martins et al., 2017) [162,163]. Purchase intention is activated by attitudes, feelings, sensations, wishes, and needs (Luo et al., 2011; Gogoi, 2013) [164,165].

Highly environmentally focused individuals have the intention to buy eco-friendly products [166,167] since their consumer choices impact the environment (Hsu et al., 2017; Yadav & Pathak, 2017) [168,169]. Having sustainable motives and trust has a substantial influence on purchase intention (Garg et al., 2021) [61]. Thus, involvement with vegan products impacts purchase intention. As involvement occurs usually when there is a need or wish to be fulfilled and attitude and involvement lead to purchase and therefore happiness (Rex & Baumann, 2007; Ghali-Zinoubi & Toukabri, 2019) [37,38]. The following hypothesis is presented:

H8: 

Involvement with vegan products impacts purchase intention.

2.3.3. Price Sensitivity

Price sensitivity can be defined as a feeling that the consumer has when paying the price of an offer (Ramirez & Goldsmith, 2009; Erdmann, Mas, & de Obesso, 2023) [170,171]. Price impacts purchasers’ assessment of products and the ultimate buying decision (de Medeiros et al., 2016; Li et al., 2016; Moser, 2016) [172,173]. The price is the cost of a service/product, or the sum of the values paid by consumers for a given product/service (Kotler et al., 2005) [174]. There are individuals who, regardless of their income, refuse to spend money if the purchase may be an unfair exchange. When individuals realize that the value of a product is not worth the purchase, they can decide not to buy it (Dalli et al., 2006) [175]. The Marketing Mix can influence consumers regarding how much they are willing to pay for a specific product/service as well as product availability, advertising, and delivery time (Goldsmith et al., 2016) [176]. Price sensitivity foresees product evaluations (Insch & McBride, 2004; Manrai et al., 1998) [177,178] and purchasing (Awada & Yiannaka, 2012; Godey et al., 2012) [179,180].

The individual who searches for relevant information regarding a specific product generates involvement (Richins & Bloch, 1986; Baldini & Ponchio, 2017) [69,72]. Vegan and non-vegan consumers are concerned not only with a product’s quality but also with the environmental consequences that are associated with their purchase decision. Prices can be higher for these types of products, but concerned consumers are willing to pay more (Radman, 2005 [59]. This study intends to understand the impact of involvement with vegan products on price sensitivity. So, the following hypothesis is presented:

H9: 

Involvement with vegan products impacts price sensitivity.

Vegans have limited options regarding their diet and other consumptions, such as clothes or beauty products, in a prevailing animal intake culture (Jabs et al., 2000) [181]. So it can be assumed that consumers of vegan products are willing to pay more to purchase products that are non-animal products and that are not tested on animals (Radman, 2005) [59]. Consequently, the price individuals are willing to pay influences their purchase intention regarding green and vegan products, as people may express their concern for the environment through their purchases and consumption (Chen, 2008) [182]. Therefore, the following hypothesis is presented:

H10: 

Price sensitivity impacts the purchase intention of vegan products.

3. Method

The conceptual investigation model and the proposed relationships between the considered variables are presented in Figure 1.

4. Sample and Data Collection

4.1. Sampling

This research is based on cross-sectional data collection that used a structured questionnaire to collect two samples, presented in Figure 2.

The questionnaire was shared on Facebook among four vegan groups, with a total of 284,900 members. Facebook groups allow researchers to find specific communities of interest, such as vegan groups, rather than other social networks. Moreover, the age of Facebook participants seems more compatible with the nature of our investigation. Data collection lasted 2 months for vegans, from January to February 2019, and three recalls were made to obtain a good sample. Data from non-vegans were collected during the first trimester of 2020. Most of the respondents are female; their ages are between 18 and 33; they have a university degree; they are mostly employed and student-workers; and they have over 500 euros, presented in

Table 1. Demographic profile of the respondents.

Category	Vegans (580)	Non-Vegans (517)
Male	170	165
Female	410	352
Age
10–17	18	15
18–25	218	165
26–33	190	162
34–41	90	97
Over 41	64	78
Educational background
Until 12th grade	201	136
Higher education	379	381
Occupation
Student/Student worker	158	194
Employed	282	287
others	68	36
Household members
1–2	279	217
Over 3	301	300
Income
Less than 500 €	77	107
501 €–1499 €	278	184
Over 1500 €	225	226

. Women may, on average, express more interest or engagement in topics related to dietary habits, health, and ethical considerations. This can lead to a higher likelihood of participation in surveys or questionnaires related to veganism, namely because of the pressure to seek external sources of self-esteem (Costa et al., 2019) [36].

4.2. Measures

The questionnaire is based on tested scales, translated, and adapted from past relevant literature (Ryan & Deci, 2001; Van Boven & Gilovich, 2003) [51,60]. All the items were measured on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree). Metrics can be found on

Table 2. Results of confirmatory factor analysis.

Construct	Metrics	Vegan		Non-Vegan
		SRW	CR	SRW	CR
Animal welfare (AW) (Graaf et al., 2016) [183]	1. Animals must be kept in their natural habitat.	0.717		0.611
	2. It is important that animals can behave naturally.	0.908	25.141	0.77	18.676
	3. I care about the welfare of animals.	0.884	20.089	0.741	13.334
	4. Animals must not suffer.	0.901	20.476	0.818	14.3
	5. The idea of a “natural environment” applies to both domestic and wild animals.	0.651	15.094	0.714	13.104
	6. Companies must think about their profits, but also about animals.	0.783	18.103	0.814	14.315
	7. Companies must think about animals as well as their market value and costs.	0.702	16.252	0.761	13.693
Ecological motivations (EM) (Yadav & Pathak, 2016) [169]	1. It is very important that production of vegan products respect animal rights.	0.835		0.779
	2. It is very important that vegan products have been prepared in an ecological environment.	0.906	28.789	0.924	23.076
	3. It is very important that vegan products are packaged ecologically.	0.930	30.163	0.868	21.495
	4. It is very important that vegan products have been produced in a way that does not unbalance nature.	0.935	30.438	0.871	21.601
Environmental concerns (EC) (Yadav & Pathak, 2016) [169]	1. The balance of nature is very delicate and can be easily changed.	0.749		0.848
	2. Human beings, when they interfere with nature, often cause disastrous consequences.	0.85	21.116	0.923	29.391
	3. Human beings must live in harmony with nature to survive.	0.858	21.346	0.926	29.527
	4. Humanity is abusing the environment.	0.885	22.056	0.926	29.581
	5. Humanity was not created to dominate the rest of nature.	0.809	19.981	0.86	25.662
Idealism (ID) (Leonidou, Leonidou & Kvasova, 2013) [184]	1. I respect the principles and universal values when doing judgments.	0.782		0.785
	2. There are universal principles or ethical rules that can be applied to most parts of situations.	0.882	20.433	0.872	21.245
	3. Regardless of circumstances, there are principles and overlapping rules.	0.667	15.916	0.844	20.515
	4. We must prevent others from taking risks.	0.691	16.564	0.79	18.975
Social Influence (SI) (Varshneya, Pandey & Das, 2017) [133]	1. My friends often recommend vegan products to me.	0.931		0.938
	2. My friends usually go shopping for vegan products with me.	0.727	18.373	0.939	41.62
	3. My friends often share their experiences and knowledge about vegan products with me.	0.865	20.78	0.952	43.589
Involvement with vegan products (INV) (Teng & Lu, 2016) [173]	1. Vegan products are important to me.	0.931		0.978
	2. Vegan products remain interesting to me.	0.900	34.378	0.977	71.68
	3. I am concerned about animal issues.	0.764	24.338	0.928	49.071
	4. I am very involved in finding and reading information about vegan products.	0.630	17.771	0.882	39.000
Eudaemonic Happiness (EUD) (Ryan & Deci 2001) [60]	1. Veganism helped me become self-determining and independent.	0.864		0.817
	2. Veganism helped me have warm, satisfying, and trusting relationships with others.	0.976	38.322	0.846	44.965
	3. Veganism helped me possess a positive attitude toward myself.	0.848	27.965	0.822	22.927
	4. Veganism helped me feel there is meaning to present and past life.	0.857	28.54	0.997	32.071
	5. Veganism helped me develop a lot as a person.	0.849	27.871	0.996	29.569
	6. Veganism helped me have a sense of mastery and competence in managing the environment.	0.992	39.75	0.994	31.932
Hedonic happiness (HED) (Van Boven & Gilovich, 2003) [51]	1. Veganism increased my overall life satisfaction.	0.905		0.919
	2. Veganism contributed to my overall happiness.	0.965	40.495	0.951	38.796
	3. Veganism has improved my overall well-being.	0.908	35.276	0.901	33.712
Purchase intention (PI) (Teng & Lu, 2016) [173]	1. I am happy to buy vegan products.	0.846		0.847
	2. I hope to consume vegan products.	0.833	24.078	0.924	29.262
	3. I would buy vegan products.	0.795	22.493	0.93	29.667
	4. I plan to consume vegan products.	0.808	19.705	0.951	26.404
	5. I intend to buy vegan products in the next few days.	0.667	17.684	0.789	22.213
Price sensitivity (PS) (Ramirez & Goldsmith, 2009) [170]	1. I am willing to buy vegan products even if I think they will have a high cost.	0.798		0.822
	2. It is worth spending money on buying vegan products.	0.819	19.305	0.835	20.251
	3. I don’t mind spending money to buy vegan products.	0.809	19.164	0.83	20.138

Abbreviation: CR, critical ratio; SRW, standardized regression weights.

, identifying the origin of the metric and the standardized regression weights.

A confirmatory factor analysis was performed using AMOS 25 to measure scales’ psychometric properties and measurement model fit. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) is a statistical technique used in structural equation modeling to test and confirm the hypothesized structure of relationships among observed variables and latent constructs. The primary goal of CFA is to assess the fit between the observed data and the researcher’s a priori specified model (Podsakoff et al., 2003) [185]. The model shows a good fit for vegans (IFI = 0.958; TLI = 0.954; CFI = 0.958; RMSEA = 0.042; X²/Df = 2.039) and non-vegans (IFI = 0.967; TLI = 0.965; CFI = 0.967; RMSEA = 0.043; X²/Df = 1.933). Composite reliability (CR) and the average variance extracted (AVE) were computed. All scales presented values above 0.7 on CR and above 0.5 on AVE, as recommended (Hair et al., 2010) [186]. Discriminant validity is supported by the fact that all correlations between the constructs are smaller than 1 and the squared correlations calculated for each pair of constructs is always smaller than the variance extracted for the corresponding constructs (Shiu et al., 2011) [187], thus confirming the discriminant validity (

Table 3. Square correlations, Cronbach’s alpha composite reliabilities, and average variances extracted—Vegans.

Constructs	SD	AW	EM	EC	ID	SI	INV	EUD	HED	PI	PS	AVE	CR
AW	0.382	0.919										0.637	0.924
EM	0.531	0.13	0.943									0.814	0.946
EC	0.390	0.239	0.138	0.913								0.691	0.918
ID	1.009	0.148	0.25	0.248	0.837							0.578	0.844
SI	1.708	0.026	−0.068	0.17	0.051	0.852						0.662	0.854
INV	0.725	0.194	0.087	0.246	0.175	0.097	0.872					0.664	0.886
EUD	1.401	0.139	0.154	0.169	0.199	0.041	0.201	0.97				0.81	0.962
HED	1.005	0.138	0.06	0.164	0.175	0.275	0.384	0.22	0.947			0.858	0.948
PI	0.647	0.221	0.098	0.237	0.185	0.094	0.716	0.163	0.396	0.873		0.628	0.893
PS	1.105	0.201	0.213	0.185	0.255	0.161	0.333	0.133	0.247	0.374	0.839	0.654	0.85

Note: SD—standard deviation; diagonal in bold—Cronbach’s alpha; CR—Composite reliability; AVE—average variance extracted. AW— Animal welfare | EM—Ecological motivations | EC—Environmental concerns | ID—Idealism | SI—Social influence | INV—Involvement with vegan products | EUD—Eudemonic happiness | HED—Hedonic happiness | PI—Purchase intention | PS—Price sensitivity.

and

Table 4. Square correlations, Cronbach’s alpha composite reliabilities, and average variances extracted—Non-vegans.

Constructs	SD	AW	EM	EC	ID	SI	INV	EUD	HED	PI	PS	AVE	CR
AW	0.436	0.899										0.562	0.899
EM	0.378	0.477	0.923									0.743	0.92
EC	0.463	0.403	0.536	0.953								0.805	0.954
ID	0.916	0.326	0.3	0.429	0.892							0.678	0.894
SI	1.807	0.101	0.078	0.078	0.11	0.96						0.889	0.96
INV	1.001	0.453	0.399	0.371	0.276	0.142	0.969					0.888	0.969
EUD	1.529	0.192	0.152	0.103	0.19	0.073	0.413	0.971				0.839	0.969
HED	1.517	0.324	0.19	0.167	0.179	0.312	0.599	0.466	0.945			0.854	0.949
PI	1.008	0.497	0.451	0.41	0.248	0.141	0.719	0.411	0.596	0.942		0.793	0.95
PS	1.179	0.381	0.235	0.3	0.269	0.234	0.467	0.27	0.359	0.491	0.862	0.687	0.868

Note: SD—standard deviation; diagonal in bold—Cronbach’s alpha; CR—composite reliability; AVE—average variance extracted. AW—Animal welfare | EM—Ecological motivations | EC—Environmental concerns | ID—Idealism | SI—Social influence | INV—Involvement with vegan products | EUD—Eudemonic happiness | HED—Hedonic happiness | PI—Purchase intention | PS—Price sensitivity.

).

4.3. Common Method Bias

A Harman’s single factor test and a common latent factor analysis were performed to identify the common variance (Podsakaff et al., 2003) [185]. Harman’s single-factor test, also known as the “one-factor test,” is a statistical approach within factor analysis, a method used in multivariate statistics to identify latent variables explaining correlations among a set of variables. In this test, researchers examine whether a single dominant factor can adequately explain the correlations among the variables (Podsakaff et al., 2003) [185]. The goal is to determine if a substantial portion of the observed variance in these variables can be attributed to a common factor. If a single factor can account for most of the variance, it suggests the presence of a unidimensional underlying construct influencing the observed variables (Podsakaff et al., 2003) [185]. The Harman’s test, performed in SPSS 25.0, showed that any factor could explain for vegans more than 12.011% and for non-vegans more than 17.366% of the variance, and there were 10 factors with eigenvalues greater than one explaining for vegans 77.788% of the variance and 9 factors with eigenvalues greater than one explaining for non-vegans 80.658% of the total variance (Norman, 1988) [188]. In addition, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed, limiting all items of the model to a common single factor (Podsakoff et al., 2003) [185]. The resulting fit indices show the model did not provide an acceptable fit (vegans—X²/Df = 16.523; incremental fit index = 0.354; Tucker–Lewis index =0.315; comparative fit index 0.352; root mean square error of approximation = 0.164; non-vegans—X²/Df = 15.700; incremental fit index = 0.474; Tucker–Lewis index =0.441; comparative fit index 0.473; root mean square error of approximation = 0.169), so the common method bias does not seem to be a problem.

5. Findings and Discussion

The final model shows a good fit for vegans (IFI = 0.958; TLI = 0.954; CFI = 0.958; RMSEA = 0.042; X²/Df = 2.039) and non-vegans (IFI = 0.967; TLI = 0.965; CFI = 0.967; RMSEA = 0.043; X²/Df = 1.933). A multi-group analysis was carried out to test the effects of involvement with vegan products, considering two groups: vegans and non-vegans, with a total of 1097 respondents; the vegan group with 580 respondents and the non-vegan group with 517 respondents. Metric invariance was tested and a CFI differences below 0.01 were found in both models, supporting the expected metric invariance (Cheung & Rensvold, 2002) [189].

5.1. Determinants of Involvement with Vegan Products

Results on

Table 5. Results.

	Vegan (n = 580)		Non-Vegan (n = 517)
	srw	p	srw	p
H1: Animal Welfare → Involvement	0.145	0.001	0.299	***
H2: Ecological motivations → Involvement	0.028	0.519	0.165	0.002
H3: Environmental concerns → Involvement	0.178	***	0.131	0.010
H4: Idealism → Involvement	0.113	0.017	0.066	0.153
H5: Social influence → Involvement	0.071	0.115	0.088	0.025
H6: Involvement → Eudaemonic Happiness	0.344	***	0.420	***
H7: Involvement → Hedonic happiness	0.787	***	0.607	***
H8: Involvement → Purchase intention	0.211	***	0.472	***
H9: Involvement → Price sensitivity	0.403	***	0.787	***
H10: Price sensitivity → Purchase intention	0.103	0.002	0.119	***

Notes: two-tailed test: *** p < 0.01.

show that animal welfare and environmental concerns have a significant influence on the involvement with vegan products, therefore supporting H1 (vegans—R = 0.145; p = 0.001; non-vegans R = 0.299; p = ***) and H3 (vegans—R = 0.178; p = ***; non-vegans R = 0.131; p = 0.01) in both samples (Janssen et al., 2016; Kerschke-Risch, 2015; Radnitz et al., 2015; Wrenn, 2017) [5,12,14,96]. SDT clarified the linkage between individual motivations and the tendency to get involved (Deci & Ryan, 2000) [60]. Therefore, since the main reasons to consume vegan products are related to the environment and animal protection, the involvement with these products shows evidence of personal responsibility and fulfillment and, consequently, well-being and happiness (Carlsson-Kanyama & González, 2009; Garg et al., 2021) [18,61]. According to the results, the effects of idealism are mixed, with being H4 supported within the vegan group (R = 0.113; p = 0.017) but not in the non-vegan group (R = 0.066; p = 0.153). Veganism is mainly an ideology, a lifestyle, and a way of living, and vegans are highly motivated individuals and tend to act according to their motivations. On the contrary, among the non-vegan group, the reasons to get close to or to purchase vegan products may be sporadic, based on dietetic reasons or social motivations (Kalte, 2020) [52]. Ecological motivations (H2) (vegans R = 0.028; p = 0.519; non-vegans R = 0.165; p = 0.002) and social influence H5 (vegan—R = 0.071; p = 0.115; non-vegan—R= 0.088; p = 0.025) only have influence on the non-vegan group. In fact, the motivations for the vegan group are fundamental reasons related to animal well-being, environmental issues, and idealism because we are talking about a lifestyle based on values (Kalte, 2020) [52]. On the other hand, non-vegans begin to reveal a growing involvement with vegan products, mainly because of the daily ecological and environmental pressures that are felt (Janssen et al., 2016) [12]. For non-vegans, there are also social reasons influencing their attitudes because it starts to be highly socially regarded to have a greater environmental awareness through the acquisition of vegan products (Guyer et al., 2018) [126].

Consequences of Involvement with Vegan Products

Additionally, involvement with vegan products impacts eudaemonic happiness and hedonic happiness, therefore supporting H6 and H7 in both samples (H6: vegans R = 0.211; p = ***; non-vegans R = 0.472; p = ***; H7: vegans—R = 0.403; p = ***; non-vegans R = 0.787; p = ***). Involvement leads to greater happiness among vegans because, for them, it is a matter of lifestyle; they feel good and happy to adopt a life with these characteristics, and therefore the impact is greater (Harmon, 2020) [4]. SDT helps to understand these results once individuals feel autonomous to take their own decisions, knowing their impact on their environment and feeling happy with it (Garg et al., 2021) [61]. At the same time, non-vegans feel happy to follow a heavily stressed issue in their daily lives based on some kind of pressure (Gilal et al., 2019) [63]. Results show that H8 (vegans—R = 0.787; p = ***; non-vegans R = 0.607; p = ***), H9 (vegans—R = 0.403; p = ***; non-vegans R = 0.787; p = ***) show the influence of involvement on purchase intention and price sensitivity.

5.2. Price Sensitivity and Purchase Intention

Price sensitivity, as well as an influence on purchase intention according to H10 (vegans—R = 0.103; p = 0.002; non-vegans R = 0.119; p = ***). These results are valid in both samples, but the results are stronger among non-vegan individuals. Apparently, as veganism is a vegan lifestyle, their involvement with vegan products tends to be higher, but they have gained a current status in their daily lives (Garg et al., 2021) [61], so there is no space to pay higher prices or a special decision process when buying them; they became current and basic [166,167]. On the contrary, non-vegans may be willing to pay more and show less price sensitivity because these shopping decisions are not routine, they are not current, they are a special issue, and more involvement leads to the willingness to buy more and to pay more (Goldsmith et al., 1995; Radman, 2005; Baldini & Ponchio, 2017) [72,176].

Nowadays, food choices where animal products are abolished defy the dietary ideologies in a mainly meat-eating culture (Jabs et al., 2000) [190]. Choosing a food-intake lifestyle in a world where it is common to eat meat can also be a challenge regarding the purchase of adequate products (Beardsworth & Keil, 1992) [54]. Already in 2010, Pluhar [191] mentioned that food was considered a political topic regarding animal cruelty and environmental destruction, so it seems that not only vegans and vegetarians have ecological motivations to avoid meat intake (Jabs et al., 2000) [190]. While some individuals only follow a vegan diet in order not to harm living beings (MacNair, 1998) [192], some individuals choose eco-friendly and local products that follow rules to protect the environment (Roosevelt, 2006) [53]. Our results, based on SDT, show how the perception of control gives individuals special motivations to live and consume in a different way, protecting animals and the environment (Garg et al., 2021) [61], adopting new social standards (Jabs et al., 2000) [190], and increasing their well-being (Gilal et al., 2019) [63], changing their consumption or even their lifestyles.

6. Contributions and Limitations

6.1. Theoretical Contributions

Literature shows that there is little research regarding involvement with vegan products and the motivations to adopt a vegan lifestyle (Earle & Hodson, 2017, Bagci & Olgun, 2019) [32,33]. At the same time, the involvement with a vegan diet and with vegan products reveals a lack of investigation as well (Earle et al., 2019) [193]. Investigations of veganism remain largely connected to the diet, and other motivations like social influence or ideology remain largely uninvestigated (Greenebaum, 2018) [56]. Therefore, our investigation presents four major contributions:

(1)

Firstly, comparing ideology and individual features as antecedents of involvement with vegan products, providing the basis for further investigations on the drivers and motivations of veganism;

(2)

The second contribution concerns the impact on well-being. The investigation of a lifestyle or, at least, consumption that provides happiness and well-being, will bring a better comprehension on the future of veganism and on the growth of this market;

(3)

The third contribution is related to impact on price sensitivity, showing that prices are less relevant and that customers are willing to pay more for vegan products;

(4)

The fourth compares vegans and non-vegans concerning the involvement with vegan products, showing how social issues may lead to a greater involvement with vegan products that non-vegans may buy less of currently but are willing to pay even more for.

Earlier studies have shown that individuals are steered by ethical values when it comes to food intake (De Backer et al., 2015; Ruby et al., 2013) [101,194]. However, veganism is not only restricted to vegans but also individuals who consider themselves non-vegans who chose to partially follow this lifestyle for the rising social movement concerning animal welfare, animal rights, animal cruelty, and environment protection (Greenebaum, 2012; Rosenfeld & Burrow, 2017; Rosenfeld, 2018) [26,34,53]. This study gives additional support to past literature and advances knowledge, showing that vegan products are not only consumed by vegans but also by non-vegans; they might behave differently, contributing to the rise of a potentially huge and profitable market. The SDT outlines intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in order to explain that behavior is molded by the satisfaction of getting what is wanted (Gilal et al., 2019) [63]. Vegans and non-vegans consume products they relate to themselves (Khan, Ghani, & Aziz, 2019) [157], having a positive impact on individual wellbeing and on the overall environment. Therefore, individuals who are involved with vegan products and, consequently, the satisfaction felt by the fulfillment of their needs (Gagne & Deci, 2005) [195], tend to experience a sense of achievement, fulfillment, and well-being (Ryan, Sheldon, Kasser, & Deci, 1996) [196].

Table 6. Research Gaps and Previous Studies.

Research Gap	Previous Studies and Additional Insights	SDT and Motivations for Involvement with Vegan Products
Literature indicates limited research on involvement with vegan products and motivations for adopting a vegan lifestyle (Earle & Hodson, 2017; Bagci & Olgun, 2019) [32,33].	Ethical values steer food intake (De Backer et al., 2015; Ruby et al., 2013) [101,194].	SDT outlines intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, explaining that behavior is molded by the satisfaction of getting what is wanted (Gilal et al., 2019) [63].
Lack of investigation into the involvement with a vegan diet and vegan products (Earle et al., 2019) [193].	Veganism extends beyond vegans; non-vegans choose to partially follow this lifestyle due to the rising social movement concerning animal welfare, rights, cruelty, and environment protection.	Vegans and non-vegans consume products related to themselves, positively impacting individual well-being and the overall environment (Khan, Ghani, & Aziz, 2019) [157].
Investigation on veganism is primarily diet-focused, with other motivations such as social influence and ideology remaining largely uninvestigated (Greenebaum, 2018) [56].	Study supports past literature, showing that vegan products are consumed by both vegans and non-vegans, indicating diverse behaviors and contributing to the rise of a potentially profitable market.	Individuals involved with vegan products experience satisfaction from fulfilling their needs, leading to a sense of achievement, fulfillment, and well-being (Gagne & Deci, 2005; Ryan et al., 1996) [195,196].

and

Table 7. Major contributions of this investigation.

(1) Comparison of ideology and individual features as antecedents of involvement with vegan products, laying the basis for further investigations on drivers and motivations of veganism.

(2) Examination of impacts on well-being, exploring the relationship between a lifestyle or consumption that provides happiness and well-being and the future and growth of veganism.

(3) Analysis of impacts on price sensitivity, revealing that prices are less relevant, and customers are willing to pay more for vegan products.

(4) Comparison of vegans and non-vegans regarding involvement with vegan products, highlighting how social issues may lead to greater involvement, and non-vegans are willing to pay more.

summarize the main conclusions of this topic.

6.2. Practical Contributions

Apart from the academic contributions, this investigation shows that vegan products are not only consumed by vegans, but most of society might be pushed in the sense of greater involvement and consumption of vegan products. Although vegan values are related to restricting meat intake in order to protect animals and the environment, our study shows that non-vegans also tend to choose vegan and eco-friendly products in order to defend the planet and avoid animal harm. The vegan lifestyle and philosophy have been rising since the awareness of consequences of consumer behavior is now more visible (Kalte, 2020) [52]. The negative outcomes that eating animals and damaging the environment have on the planet and society are more recognized (Kalte, 2020) [52]. Identifying and supporting the value of a vegan lifestyle will allow a better understanding of the importance of defending animal life, the environment, and nature [197]. Therefore, a huge market of vegan products is rising, involving both vegans and non-vegans, and both of them are willing to pay for it. With the market for vegan products growing and becoming increasingly visible and imposing, it is necessary to understand that vegan individuals, who are very ideological and fighters for their convictions, are currently accompanied by non-vegans, who, due to a strong social influence, tend to become more and more involved with vegan products and consequently to buy them. With the growth of the vegan market, it appears that both vegans and non-vegans are willing to pay more, as this way their involvement and purchases contribute to greater well-being, making it a very interesting market.

This inquiry holds significant implications for policymakers, marketers, and marketing directors, offering insights into reaching a broader consumer base and adapting businesses and marketing strategies, especially in the context of promoting sustainable consumer behaviors. The research reveals that the appeal of vegan products transcends the vegan demographic, with a non-vegan population expressing interest in and actively purchasing such items. By examining the actions and reflections of both vegan and non-vegan consumers in choosing vegan products and understanding their emotional drivers, marketing strategies can be tailored to include a wider spectrum of ideological consumers. The study underscores that the consideration of respect for animals and nature extends beyond vegan consumers to include those adopting a more ethical approach to purchasing. The results provide valuable cues to brands and companies, guiding them in understanding customer behavior in the vegan market, with implications for both vegan and non-vegan consumers interested in sustainable products.

6.3. Limitations and Future Research Directions

This study is based on cross-sectional data, so it does not allow causality inferring or presenting relationships but not causality between the variables; therefore, the ability to identify causality between the variables is restricted. Therefore, it is suggested to conduct longitudinal studies to observe changes in consumer behavior over time or cross-cultural studies to examine how cultural differences affect the consumption of vegan products. At the same time, even though we may have mitigated the potential issues of the common method variance, self-reported data measured at a single point in time can introduce bias. The proposed model should be replicated amongst other online vegan groups, as well as in other countries and cultures, to understand the drivers and consequences of veganism and involvement with vegan products. The vegan movement will gain from the understanding of what drives this lifestyle. Consequently, this investigation aims to scan veganism, vegan products, and purchase behaviors of vegans and non-vegans by seeking to apprehend what influences the involvement with vegan products in both groups. As recommendations for future research, the model could be used with variables like health concerns, health awareness, gender, age, personality traits, sensitivity, and religion, which could be pertinent drivers of involvement with vegan products.