The Impact of Enterprise Environmental Goal Progress Information on Green Repurchase Intention: A Chained Mediation Model

Abstract

Against the backdrop of global ecological governance and the advancing dual carbon goals, the sustainable development of green consumption hinges on consumers’ continuous repurchase. Although corporate environmental goal progress information serves as a critical external signal, its underlying mechanisms affecting green repurchase remain inadequately explored. Accordingly, this study integrates the S-O-R framework, signaling theory, and psychological reactance theory, and deconstructs such information into five dimensions: quantification, visualization, level, velocity, and stakeholder contribution. It constructs a chained mediation model, testing hypothesized relationships via structural equation modeling (SEM) with data from 594 valid questionnaires. Results show that all five dimensions exert a significant negative effect on psychological reactance, with the visualization dimension showing the strongest effect. In addition, the visualization dimension has no significant effect on green perceived value, whereas the other four dimensions have significantly positive effects, with the quantification dimension exerting the most prominent effect. Moreover, psychological reactance, green perceived value, and green brand trust constitute a full chained mediation, fully transmitting the effect of environmental information on repurchase intention. This study explains how environmental information drives sustainable green consumption and provides theoretical and managerial implications for enterprises to optimize environmental information disclosure and promote green repurchase.

1. Introduction

Amid accelerating global climate governance and the ongoing implementation of the dual carbon goals, sustainable consumption has shifted from policy advocacy to market practice, with green product consumption evolving from one-off trial purchases to routine and sustained repurchase behaviors. Green repurchase serves not only as a core indicator measuring the maturity of the green consumption market, but is also critical for firms undertaking green transformation and building long-term brand equity [1,2]. Existing studies have extensively explored the drivers of green purchase intention and identified key antecedents such as environmental attitude, social norms, perceived value, green trust, and brand identity [3,4,5]. However, the majority of these studies treat green purchasing as a one-time or initial transaction, paying insufficient attention to the sustainability motivation, psychological transmission mechanism, and external information-driven effect of green repurchases. In particular, they lack an explanation of the formation mechanism of consumers’ continuous green decision-making from the perspective of enterprise information disclosure.

Meanwhile, there are obvious differences in jurisdiction between global sustainability governance and environmental disclosure systems. From a global perspective, European countries are in the lead in sustainability performance with a mature policy framework and SDG-oriented multi-criteria assessment [6,7]. The EU has established a strict mandatory environmental disclosure system based on the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), emphasizing double materiality, full-scale quantification, third-party verification, and strong supervision to effectively curb greenwashing behavior [8,9,10]. Related standards such as ESRS, GRI, and ISO 14001 [11] have achieved high coverage, applicability, and alignment with planetary boundaries. At the same time, ESRS indicators have been systematically mapped with the SDGs [7,12].

In contrast, China’s system is not as strict as the EU’s high-standard system. With the revised Code of Corporate Governance for Listed Companies taking effect on 1 January 2026, A-share listed enterprises have entered the mandatory ESG disclosure stage, indicating that China is adopting a progressive mandatory approach, combining localization adjustment. In view of this, it is crucial to encourage enterprises to actively disclose richer and higher-quality environmental information. Enterprises’ increased voluntary environmental disclosure also helps to accumulate practical experience and improve data quality, laying a more solid foundation for the mandatory disclosure requirements that China is about to fully implement.

In the green consumption market with asymmetric information, environmental goal progress information voluntarily disclosed by enterprises is the core signal carrier that conveys the authenticity of green commitments, the effectiveness of environmental protection actions, and the fulfillment of social responsibilities to consumers. Corporate environmental goal progress information refers to a set of stage goals around emission reduction, energy conservation, resource recycling, green supply chain, and other dimensions. It is a collection of quantifiable and perceptible information that discloses goal completion progress, remaining gaps, promotion efficiency, and stakeholder contributions [13,14].

The research on goal progress information in existing literature mostly focuses on the fields of individual goal pursuit, public environmental protection actions, and social movements, exploring the impact of progress level, progress velocity, information framework, and visual presentation on motivation and behavior [15,16,17]. But it has not yet formed a unified definition, dimensional system, and standardized measurement scales for the corporate environmental goal progress information, let alone incorporated into the analytical framework of green repurchase decision-making. It remains difficult to explain how corporate environmental information drives sustained repurchase behavior by affecting the psychological state of consumers.

When receiving corporate environmental publicity information, consumers do not passively accept it, but will have psychological reactance based on the judgments of information authenticity, communication intention, and perceived decisional autonomy [18,19]. Inappropriate environmental information disclosure tends to trigger consumers’ perceived coercion, manipulative intent inferences, and resistant emotions. These outcomes weaken green perceived value, erode brand trust, and inhibit repurchase intentions [20,21,22]. Standardized, transparent, and verifiable environmental goal progress information can reduce information asymmetry, alleviate greenwashing concerns, mitigate psychological reactance, and thus strengthen green perceived value and brand trust [23,24].

It is evident that psychological reactance, green perceived value, and green brand trust may form a multi-level chained transmission pathway between corporate environmental goal progress information and green repurchase intention; however, this mechanism has not yet been empirically tested. Accordingly, this study primarily addresses the following three research questions.

RQ1: Do different dimensions of corporate environmental goal progress information (visualization, quantification, level, velocity, stakeholder contribution) differ in their effects on consumers’ psychological reactance and green perceived value? If so, what are the specific manifestations?

RQ2: Do psychological reactance, green perceived value, and green brand trust constitute a chained mediation pathway transmitting the effect of corporate environmental goal progress information on green repurchase intention? What are the directions and strengths of their respective effects?

RQ3: Through which mediating pathways do the different dimensions of corporate environmental goal progress information affect green repurchase intention? Are there differences in the effects of each dimension?

This study offers theoretical contributions by systematically revealing the multilayered psychological transmission mechanism underlying consumers’ green repurchase behavior across distinct dimensions of corporate environmental goal progress information. It also clarifies the inhibitory role of psychological reactance and the positive driving effects of green perceived value and green brand trust. The findings further provide practical implications for enterprises to formulate targeted, differentiated communication strategies regarding environmental goal progress information and to strengthen green brand trust.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Green Repurchase Intention

Repurchase intention is consumers’ psychological tendency to plan to continuously choose the same brand or product in the future after initial purchase and usage experience [25]. It serves as a key variable linking attitude with actual behavior and sustaining enterprises’ long-term market share. Green repurchase intention extends the traditional repurchase concept within the domain of sustainable consumption. It specifically refers to consumers’ psychological tendency to buy green products repeatedly, prefer green brands, and recommend such brands to others based on environmental awareness, social responsibility, and usage experience [1,2]. Compared with the initial green purchase, green repurchase has greater sustainability, stability, and value dependence. Green repurchase contains both self-interested attributes (e.g., functional satisfaction and health assurance) and altruistic attributes (e.g., environmental improvement and social contribution). Its formation not only depends on the inherent green attributes of products, but is also comprehensively influenced by corporate information disclosure, brand trust, consumption experience, and social identity [26,27].

Existing literature explores the driving factors of green repurchase from the perspective of individual cognition, emotional experience, social context, and corporate marketing. Relevant studies show that perceived value, green trust, satisfaction, brand identity, social norms, green promotion, eco-friendly packaging, and others significantly affect repurchase intention [28,29,30]. However, current research has two obvious limitations. First, it regards green purchases as a one-time behavior and ignores the motivational differences between repurchases and initial purchases. Second, scholars pay little attention to the driving role of corporate environmental goal progress information as an external signal, which makes it hard to explain how such information promotes consumers’ long-term repurchase behavior.

2.2. Corporate Environmental Goal Progress Information

Corporate environmental goal progress information applies goal progress theory to corporate social responsibility and green marketing. Goal progress refers to the actual number of tasks completed or interim achievements made in the process of pursuing a goal; it quantifies how much the goal has advanced [15]. Based on Carver and Scheier’s [15] control theory, individuals perceive goal progress by assessing the gap between their current state and the ideal goal state during pursuit. This perception then influences their motivation, emotions, and behaviors [31,32]. Corporate environmental goal progress information refers to quantifiable or perceivable information that firms convey to stakeholders. This information reflects the gap between current environmental achievements and preset goals [14,17,33]. Judging from the characteristics of the information, the goals progress information contains not only objective quantitative data (such as emission reduction ratios and resource utilization efficiency), but also includes subjective perceived progress (such as goal achievement feelings and action credibility). The essence of its disclosure is to convey to the market the signals that the enterprise’s green commitment is credible, the environmental action is true, and the sustainable development ability is reliable [34].

In the past, studies paid more attention to the progress of individual goals and collective goals, and found that the progress level, progress velocity, information framework (to data vs. to go), and visualization forms would affect the motivation and follow-up behavior of goal pursuit [31,35]. In recent years, scholars have also begun to pay attention to the environmental goal progress information at the organizational level and explore its impact on consumers’ environmental participation, brand attitude, and purchase intention. At present, there are three limitations: first, the connotation is vaguely defined, and no distinction between corporate environmental goal progress information, general environmental publicity, and ESG report information; second, the dimensional structure is fragmented, most of which focus on the progress level, velocity, or visualization, and lacks systematic dimensional deconstruction; third, the measurement tools are missing, more using experimental situation manipulation, a standardized scale has not been developed yet [13]. The lack of corporate environmental goal progress information in terms of connotation interpretation and the deconstruction of core dimensions has left room for our research to expand.

Based on the grounded theory method, we distilled the five core dimensions of corporate environmental goal progress information through in-depth interviews with consumers who have green consumption experience, and then through open coding, axial coding, and selective coding. Goal progress quantification refers to the information containing specific values, measurement standards, and accounting basis; goal progress visualization refers to the information presenting through graphics, charts, dynamic materials, and other visual forms; goal progress level refers to the gap and completion between the current progress and the preset goal; goal progress velocity refers to the goal promotion efficiency, stage rhythm, and timely completion expectations; goal progress stakeholder contribution refers to the participation and contribution of each stakeholder. The five-dimensional structure passed reliability and validity tests, and has good stability and discriminant validity, providing a measurement basis for subsequent empirical research.

2.3. Psychological Reactance

Psychological reactance is defined as a negative motivational and resistant reaction that emerges when individuals perceive a threat to their behavioral freedom or right to choose—specifically from external constraints, interference, or manipulation—with the aim of restoring this threatened freedom of choice [18]. Edwards et al. [19] divided psychological reactance into two core dimensions: perceived intrusiveness and manipulation inference. Perceived intrusiveness describes how much consumers feel information disrupts their information processing. Manipulation inference refers to consumers’ perception that the information sender tries to influence their decisions for its own benefit. Inappropriate presentation of corporate marketing information often induces perceived intrusiveness and manipulation inference among consumers, which in turn leads to the generation of psychological reactance [36]. In the field of green consumption, enterprises overemphasize environmental responsibilities, use vague publicity, or lack substantive evidence in environmental information, which are likely to trigger consumers’ psychological reactance. For one thing, given that green products usually come with a price premium, consumers often regard corporate environmental publicity as an excuse for raising prices. For another, mandatory environmental advocacy constrains consumers’ sense of choice freedom, which in turn reduces their green perceived value, weakens brand trust, and diminishes their purchase behavior [24,37]. In contrast, transparent, verifiable, and non-manipulative information about environmental goal progress can reduce consumers’ perceived intrusiveness and manipulation inference, ease psychological reactance, and lay the groundwork for the development of green perceived value and trust [21,22]. We take psychological reactance as a key mediating variable to reflect consumers’ negative psychological response after receiving environmental goal progress information.

2.4. Green Perceived Value

Green perceived value is consumers’ comprehensive evaluation of the effectiveness of green products/brands in terms of environmental benefits, functional quality, emotional satisfaction, and social identity. It is the result of the trade-off between perceived gains and perceived losses [38,39]. Unlike general perceived value, green perceived value emphasizes environmental benefits, ecological contributions, moral satisfaction, and social responsibility recognition. It includes four core dimensions: functional value, emotional value, social value, and green value [40,41]. A large body of research has confirmed that green perceived value acts as a core antecedent of both green purchase and repurchase behavior. As perceived value increases, consumers become more willing to purchase green products consistently and build brand loyalty [28,29]. When enterprises disclose authentic and specific environmental achievements, their environmental goal progress information helps consumers clearly recognize the environmental benefits and social value of green products. This, in turn, boosts perceived benefits, reduces perceived risks, and ultimately reinforces green perceived value [42,43]. Meanwhile, psychological reactance distorts consumers’ value judgments, increases perceived costs, and reduces perceived benefits, which negatively affects green perceived value [22,36].

2.5. Green Brand Trust

Green brand trust means consumers’ reliance on and confidence in a green brand’s ability to fulfill its environmental commitments, the authenticity of its environmental information, the quality of its green products, and its social responsibility. It is the psychological state in which consumers believe that the brand can fulfill its green promises and that there is no greenwashing behavior [39,44]. Establishing and maintaining consumers’ green brand trust is the core factor for enterprises to reduce information asymmetry, mitigate perceived risks, and drive long-term repurchases [4,45]. Green perceived value drives brand trust in a positive direction. The higher the perceived value, the stronger the credibility of consumers’ green commitment to the brand; psychological resistance will destroy the formation and maintenance of consumers’ trust in the brand [23,28]. Green brand trust will significantly improve repurchase intention and play a buffering role under the impact of negative information [46,47].

3. Hypotheses Development and Theoretical Model

3.1. Hypotheses Development

3.1.1. Goal Progress Information and Psychological Reactance

From the perspective of S-O-R theory, corporate environmental goal progress information is the core external stimulus (S), and the content and form of information directly affect consumers’ internal psychological states (O). Psychological reactance stems from the individual’s perception of freedom restrictions, and the effective disclosure of goal progress information is essential to reduce consumers’ perception of freedom threats by reducing information asymmetry and transmitting credible signals. According to the signal theory, enterprises take the initiative to disclose phased achievements, implementation paths, and other information about environmental goals, which is a reliable signal to convey their own environmental sincerity and ability to consumers. This signal can alleviate consumers’ doubts about enterprises’ marketing intentions and weaken the perceived manipulation [48].

Specifically, goal progress quantification can allow consumers to quickly capture core information, reduce cognitive interference, and weaken the suspicion of manipulation of cognition. Goal progress visualization reduces consumers’ cognitive burden and the difficulty of information interpretation through intuitive and easy-to-understand information transmission, and avoids consumers’ suspicion that enterprises hide their true intentions due to the ambiguity of information transmission [16,17]. Goal progress level intuitively proves the substantive results of the enterprise’s environmental actions, which shows that the enterprise’s environmental investment is not a marketing means to manipulate consumers. Goal progress velocity reflects the enterprise’s attitude of efficiently promoting environmental goals and disclosing progress on time, and the enterprise taking the initiative to fulfill its environmental responsibilities. Goal progress stakeholder contribution makes consumers perceive that the promotion of environmental goals is the result of the joint participation of multiple stakeholders, rather than the unilateral marketing packaging of enterprises, reducing consumers’ doubts about enterprises’ self-talk [20,48]. Thus, the following hypotheses are proposed:

Hypothesis 1. 

Goal Progress Information has a significantly negative effect on psychological reactance.

Hypothesis 1a. 

The higher the degree of goal progress quantification, the lower consumers’ perceived psychological reactance.

Hypothesis 1b. 

The better the effect of goal progress visualization, the lower consumers’ perceived psychological reactance.

Hypothesis 1c. 

The higher the goal progress level, the lower consumers’ perceived psychological reactance.

Hypothesis 1d. 

The higher the goal progress velocity, the lower consumers’ perceived psychological reactance.

Hypothesis 1e. 

The clearer the goal progress stakeholder contribution, the lower consumers’ perceived psychological reactance.

3.1.2. Goal Progress Information and Green Perceived Value

According to signaling theory, effective green signals from firms can help consumers accurately identify the environmental value of products, thereby enhancing their perceived benefits from the products. Corporate environmental goal progress information transmits commitments to environmental responsibility, which directly influences consumers’ perception of green value. Regarding the formation mechanism of green perceived value, its core lies in consumers’ subjective trade-off between benefits and costs of green products or brands, as well as their utility perception [38]. The various dimensions of corporate environmental goal progress information provide a key basis for this trade-off.

Goal progress quantification enables consumers to clearly know the specific investment and results of the product or brand in environmental protection, so that consumers have a more accurate reference when evaluating the income of green products. Goal progress visualization can reduce the difficulty of consumers obtaining and understanding environmental information and make it easier for consumers to evaluate the green benefits and costs. Goal progress level intuitively shows the high effectiveness of a product or brand in the environmental field, leading consumers to believe that choosing the green product can get higher environmental benefits. Goal progress velocity allows consumers to see the determination and action of the enterprise to actively fulfill the responsibility of environmental protection, and consumers will expect that the green product will continue to bring more environmental benefits in the future. Goal progress stakeholder contribution, on the one hand, can make consumers clearly perceive that the promotion of environmental goals is the result of the joint efforts of multiple stakeholders to enhance the authenticity and credibility of the information. On the other hand, when consumers understand that their own or collective participation can effectively promote the goal, they will have a strong identity and emotional resonance [14,39,49]. Thus, the following hypotheses are proposed:

Hypothesis 2. 

Corporate environmental goal progress information has a significantly positive effect on green perceived value.

Hypothesis 2a. 

The higher the degree of goal progress quantification, the stronger consumers’ green perceived value.

Hypothesis 2b. 

The better the effect of goal progress visualization, the stronger consumers’ green perceived value.

Hypothesis 2c. 

The higher the goal progress level, the stronger consumers’ green perceived value.

Hypothesis 2d. 

The higher the goal progress velocity, the stronger consumers’ green perceived value.

Hypothesis 2e. 

The clearer the goal progress stakeholder contribution, the stronger consumers’ green perceived value.

3.1.3. Psychological Reactance, Green Perceived Value, and Green Brand Trust

When faced with inappropriate marketing or demands from green brands, consumers may feel that their freedom is restricted, their choices are interfered with, and they may express doubt about the brand’s motivation and resistance to purchasing its products. This kind of reactance will make consumers prejudiced against brand information and tend to question the authenticity of green propaganda. It will also turn into a negative attitude towards the brand, making them believe that the brand only focuses on its own interests rather than truly fulfilling social responsibility [37,50]. According to the psychological reactance theory, when an individual’s perceived freedom is threatened, this sense will be restored by denying the credibility of the threat source [18]. Overall, psychological reactance reduces green brand trust by weakening the brand’s reliability and goodwill. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 3. 

Psychological reactance has a significantly negative effect on consumers’ green brand trust.

When consumers believe that the choice or use of green products is limited by external pressure or internal cognitive conflicts, their psychological reactance perception will be enhanced [51]. This cognitive bias further makes it difficult for consumers to comprehensively and objectively view their long-term interests and potential value when evaluating green products, and even filters out the positive content, such as environmental performance and product advantages, conveyed in the information [36,52]. The negative emotions brought about by psychological reactance will also affect consumers’ emotional value. Even if the product has substantial environmental results, it may not be able to produce pleasure and satisfaction due to resistance [22]. Therefore, psychological reactance will reduce consumers’ green perceived value by distorting cognition and triggering negative emotions. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 4. 

Psychological reactance has a significantly negative effect on consumers’ green perceived value.

3.1.4. Green Perceived Value, Green Brand Trust, and Green Repurchase Intention

As a comprehensive value judgment formed by consumers in the whole process of purchasing and using green products, green perceived value is the result of consumers’ subjective trade-off based on their own needs and the actual value of products. When consumers perceive that green products have high value in terms of ecological protection, resource conservation, health, and safety, this positive value perception will become an important basis for building green brand trust. From the cognitive level, high green perceived value means that consumers believe that the brand’s green advocacy and actual actions are consistent and meaningful. This recognition will reduce the perceived risk of consumers in situations of information asymmetry. At the emotional level, green perceived value can trigger consumers’ emotional resonance and enhance the brand’s emotional trust [28,39]. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 5. 

Green perceived value has a significantly positive effect on consumers’ green brand trust.

According to the customer perceived value proposed by Zeithaml [38], the essence of consumer value judgment is the subjective balance between perceived gain and perceived cost. In the green consumption situation, green perceived value, as a consumer’s exclusive value evaluation of green products, covers a multi-dimensional complex of green value, emotional value, functional value, social value, etc. When consumers perceive that the environmental benefits of green brands exceed the purchase cost, they will be less sensitive to prices [53]. Ariffin et al.’s [3] research on green products found that both green value and emotional value can directly and positively drive repurchase intention. Xu et al.’s [28] research in the field of green agricultural products further confirms that the comprehensive perception of functional value and green value is the core driving force for consumers to sustain repurchase. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 6. 

Green perceived value has a significantly positive effect on consumers’ green repurchase intention.

3.1.5. Green Brand Trust and Green Repurchase Intention

Green brand trust is based on the belief or expectation generated by the credibility, goodwill, and ability of a product’s or brand’s environmental performance. Its core value is to reduce the perceived risk and the uncertainty caused by information asymmetry in consumers’ decision-making process [54]. Specifically, this trust reflects consumers’ willingness—based on their accumulated past experiences and observations of the brand’s performance—to believe that the brand will live up to its environmental commitments, thereby transforming initial trust into a sustained willingness to repurchase [47]. Judging from the direct impact pathways, the formation of green brand trust comes from consumers’ recognition of the actual effect of brand environmental actions, rather than simple environmental propaganda [29]. This trust based on practical actions will be transformed into a positive and stable brand attitude, and then directly strengthen the tendency of continuous purchasing. Many studies have confirmed that green brand trust has a significantly positive predictive effect on repurchase intention [28,29]. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 7. 

Green brand trust has a significantly positive effect on consumers’ green repurchase intention.

3.1.6. Psychological Reactance and Green Repurchase Intention

According to psychological reactance theory [18], individuals have an instinctive tendency to maintain their behavioral freedom and right to choose. In the context of green consumption, there are several factors that may trigger this reactance. These factors include the high premiums prevalent in green products, ubiquitous environmental appeals, and marketing strategies that impose behavioral constraints. Such factors cause consumers to perceive that their autonomy is threatened, thus forming a state of psychological reactance with perceived intrusiveness and manipulation inference [22,54]. This negative psychological state will directly trigger consumers’ reactance to green brands, which will not only weaken their value recognition of the brand’s green attributes, but also trigger a severe backfire effect, that is, consumers take the initiative to give up green consumption behavior and even engage in anti-environmental behaviors to resist these perceived constraints [37,50]. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 8. 

Psychological reactance has a significantly negative effect on consumers’ green repurchase intention.

3.2. Theoretical Model

This research mainly relies on the Stimulus-Organism-Response (S-O-R) theory and signaling theory. The S-O-R theory was proposed by Mehrabian and Russell [55], which emphasizes that external environmental stimulation (S) triggers a behavioral response (R) by influencing the individual’s internal psychological state (O) [56]. In the green consumption situation, this theory is widely used to analyze the path of green information disclosure (S) driving purchase behavior (R) through consumer psychological perception (O) [57,58]. At the same time, signal theory [59] pointed out that in the market of information asymmetry, enterprises will actively release credible signals to reduce consumer doubts [34]. In view of information asymmetry in the green market, corporate environmental goal progress information disclosed by enterprises is regarded as the core signal conveying environmental sincerity and ability [24]. By displaying quantitative results and execution efficiency, this information helps consumers judge the enterprise’s true motivation and build trust [2].

Based on the above analysis, this study has built a chained mediation model with corporate environmental goal progress information as independent variables, psychological reactance, green perceived value, and green brand trust as mediating variables, and green repurchase intention as the dependent variable (see Figure 1). As an external stimulus (S), the five dimensions of goal progress information affect consumers’ psychological reactance and green perceived value (O), and then act on green brand trust, and ultimately affect green repurchase intention (R).

4. Methodology

4.1. Sample Collection

In view of the fact that corporate environmental goal progress information is an emerging research concept, and green consumption behavior has a specific situational dependence, this study uses a questionnaire survey to collect data. Data collection is carried out through a combination of online and offline surveys. Online platforms include professional research platforms such as Credamo, and offline surveys are randomly conducted in universities, communities, and commercial areas. In order to ensure the sample quality, the study has set strict screening criteria, and the respondents need to have experience in purchasing green products. In the questionnaire design, by setting a screening question, “Have you purchased green brand products?”, the respondents who selected “no” will be automatically stopped from answering the questions. At the same time, we have selected well-known green enterprises that have been recognized in recent years on the “China Green Point” list of sustainable practice case studies, organized by China Business Network (e.g., BYD, Liby, IKEA, Haier, Starbucks). The representative green brand name is integrated into the questionnaire to help the respondents quickly form a clear impression, trigger associations related to green product purchases, and ensure the accuracy of subsequent answers.

Data collection took 2 months (December 2025 to January 2026), and a total of 810 questionnaires were distributed. After recycling, strict screening was carried out to eliminate invalid questionnaires that failed the screening questions, were too short, had obvious rules in the answers, or had too many missing values. Finally, 594 valid questionnaires were obtained, and the effective recovery rate was 73.3%. The sample covers groups of different genders, age levels, education levels, occupational backgrounds, and consumption levels, and has a certain representativeness.

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the study sample (n = 594).

Variable	Category	Quantity (N)	Percentage (%)
Gender	Male	264	44.44%
	Female	330	55.56%
Age	Less than 20	94	15.82%
	21–30	183	30.81%
	31–40	148	24.92%
	44–50	103	17.34%
	51–60	66	11.11%
Education degree	High school and below	68	11.45%
	Specialist	124	20.88%
	Undergraduate	245	41.25%
	Master	102	17.17%
	doctor	55	9.26%
Monthly income (RMB)	3000 (and below)	221	37.21%
	3001–10,000	248	41.75%
	10,001–15,000	97	16.33%
	15,001(and above)	28	4.71%

presents the demographic characteristics of the study sample.

4.2. Measurement

The measurement of corporate environmental goal progress information strictly follows the eight-step method of scale development proposed by Churchill [60]. Based on the five core dimensions of grounded theory identification: goal progress quantification (GPQ), goal progress visualization (GPVI), goal progress level (GPL), goal progress velocity (GPVE), and goal progress stakeholder contribution (GPSC), combined with a literature review and enterprise environmental information disclosure practice, the initial question pool is constructed. Through semantic merging, deletion of weakly related questions, and two rounds of expert screening, it was simplified into an initial scale of 22 questions. Two questionnaire surveys were conducted. The first survey was used for reliability testing and exploratory factor analysis, and 3 inappropriate items were eliminated according to relevant standards. The second survey passed the confirmatory factor analysis and the competitive model comparison test, and finally formed a formal scale containing 5 factors and 19 items.

The measurement of psychological reactance (PR), green perceived value (GPV), green brand trust (GBT), and green repurchase intention (GRI) all refer to the mature research scale. After bidirectional translation and semantic refinement, two professors in the field of marketing management and two scholars of green consumption empirical research were invited to comprehensively and systematically evaluate the content validity of all initial items. This evaluation focused on three aspects: theoretical fit, practical relevance, and linguistic clarity, to ensure that the questionnaire items were written in plain language and could be accurately understood by respondents with different cultural backgrounds and knowledge levels. See

Table 2. Measurement Items.

Goal Progress Quantification (Adapted from Koo & Fishbach [61], Wallace & Etkin [62] and in-depth interviews)

The company’s displayed environmental goal progress information should include specific quantitative data

The company’s displayed environmental goal progress should be subject to clear measurement criteria

The company’s displayed environmental goal progress indicators should have clear measurement bases

The company intuitively displays environmental goal progress using specific values of each indicator

Goal Progress Visualization (Adapted from Cheema & Bagchi [63], He & Deng [17] and in-depth interviews)

The company intuitively displays environmental goal progress through graphics such as comparison charts and progress bars.

The company displays environmental goal progress using a combination of charts and graphs

The company displays environmental goal progress using a combination of visuals and text.

The company displays environmental goal progress through visual design elements such as colors and fonts

The company displays environmental goal progress through dynamic designs such as animations and videos

Goal Progress Level (Adapted from Liberman & Förster [64] and in-depth interviews)

The company displays the remaining gap between current and preset environmental goals to show the progress

The company displays the advancement of core environmental sub-goals to show the progress

The company’s displayed goal progress allows me to identify whether goal advancement is at a high or low level

Goal Progress Velocity (Adapted from Huang & Zhang [65], Phan et al. [66] and in-depth interviews)

The company regularly discloses milestone progress to demonstrate implementation efficiency

The company reflects advancement efficiency by disclosing whether actual goal completion is ahead of or behind schedule

The company contrasts the progress rates across different stages to show the pace (fast or slow) of goal advancement.

Goal Progress Stakeholder Contribution (Adapted from Nunes & Dre’ze [67], Kivetz et al. [68] and in-depth interviews)

The company’s displayed environmental goal progress should reflect the contributions of various participating stakeholder groups

The company should display the participation of individual consumers who endorse environmental values.

The company should display the participation of organizations or collective consumers that support environmental principles

The company should demonstrate government-led initiatives or direct contributions.

Green Perceived Value (Adapted from Tawde & Rv [69] and Hoang & Tung [70])

Purchasing and using the green product helps improve the ecological environment

Purchasing and using the green product helps reduce environmental pollution

Purchasing and using the green product is conducive to sustainable social development

Purchasing and using the green product helps raise environmental awareness

Psychological Reactance (Adapted from Edwards et al. [19])

Compared with general product advertising, I feel that the displayed environmental goal progress information is forced upon me

Compared with general product advertising, I feel that environmental goal progress information distracts me from focusing on other information

Compared with general product advertising, I feel that environmental goal progress information induces me to abandon my most appropriate decision

Compared with general product advertising, I feel that environmental goal progress information interferes with my decision-making process

Compared with general product advertising, I feel that environmental goal progress information attempts to influence my purchase decisions

Compared with general product advertising, I feel that environmental goal progress information attempts to manipulate my purchasing behavior

Compared with general product advertising, I feel that environmental goal progress information serves only marketing purposes rather than helping me make optimal decisions

Green Brand Trust (Adapted from Chen [44], Chen & Chang [39] and More [71])

I feel that the product or brand’s environmental reputation is generally reliable

I feel that the product or brand’s environmental performance is generally dependable

I feel that the product or brand’s environmental claims are generally trustworthy

I feel that the product or brand protects the environment by keeping its promises and commitments

The product or brand’s environmental concern meets my expectations

Green Repurchase Intention (Adapted from Tandon et al. [72] and Hu et al. [73])

I intend to continue buying green brand products

I intend to give preference to green brand products in my future purchases

I intend to recommend green brand products to others

for specific questions.

In the selection of scales, all items are measured using the 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). This scale can not only provide sufficient space for respondents to express their attitudes and reduce extreme answer bias, but also meet the requirements of statistical analysis, such as subsequent structural equation models for data accuracy. Before the formal survey distribution, a small-scale pre-survey was conducted on campus to ensure the reliability and validity of the collected data, as well as the objectivity and accuracy of the conclusions.

5. Empirical Analysis

5.1. Reliability, Validity, and Common Method Bias Test

To examine whether the variables follow a normal distribution and to establish a foundation for subsequent confirmatory factor analysis, descriptive statistical analyses and normality tests were conducted. Statistical indicators, including the mean, standard deviation, skewness, and kurtosis of each item, were calculated. The standard deviation value ranged from 1.445 to 1.634; the data distribution was not only different but also did not have extreme polarization. The skewness coefficient is between −0.518 and 0.173, the kurtosis coefficient is between −0.798 and −0.332, and the absolute value is less than 1. The values indicated that the data generally conformed to the characteristics of a normal distribution. The Cronbach’s α coefficient of the variable is between 0.887 and 0.955, which is much higher than the acceptable level of 0.70, indicating that each scale has a good internal consistency reliability. Convergent validity was assessed using three indicators from confirmatory factor analysis (CFA): factor loadings, average variance extracted (AVE), and composite reliability (CR). The factor loadings for all items ranged from 0.815 to 0.881, exceeding the critical value of 0.60. The AVE values for all variables ranged from 0.684 to 0.752, exceeding the acceptable standard of 0.50. The CR values of all variables ranged from 0.887 to 0.955, all above the critical value of 0.70, with most exceeding 0.90. Furthermore, the overall fit indices indicated that CMIN/DF = 1.217 (<5.0), GFI = 0.935, AGFI = 0.924 (both > 0.80), NFI = 0.957, IFI = 0.992, TLI = 0.991, CFI = 0.992 (all > 0.90), and RMSEA = 0.019 (<0.08). Discriminant validity was assessed using the square root of AVE values, which ranged from 0.825 to 0.867 and were greater than the correlation coefficients with all other latent variables, indicating that the scales have satisfactory discriminant validity. The Cronbach’s α, AVE, CR, and square root of AVE values for each variable are presented in

Table 3. Correlation coefficients, convergent validity, and discriminant validity (n = 594).

Constructs	GPQ	GPVI	GPL	GPVE	GPSC	PR	GPV	GBT	GRI
GPQ	0.862
GPVI	0.142	0.839
GPL	0.229	0.132	0.85
GPVE	0.201	0.206	0.201	0.857
GPSC	0.257	0.177	0.185	0.244	0.862
PR	−0.251	−0.304	−0.279	−0.239	−0.247	0.867
GPV	0.371	0.243	0.29	0.283	0.321	−0.504	0.848
GBT	0.264	0.165	0.319	0.183	0.246	−0.386	0.383	0.825
GRI	0.361	0.28	0.307	0.247	0.271	−0.527	0.474	0.4	0.861
Cronbach’s alpha	0.920	0.922	0.887	0.892	0.920	0.955	0.911	0.915	0.896
AVE	0.743	0.704	0.723	0.734	0.742	0.752	0.72	0.684	0.741
CR	0.920	0.922	0.887	0.892	0.920	0.955	0.911	0.915	0.896

Notes: GPQ = goal progress quantification; GPVI = goal progress visualization; GPL = goal progress level; GPVE = goal progress velocity; GPSC = goal progress stakeholder contribution; PR = psychological reactance; GPV = green perceived value; GBT = green brand trust; GRI = green repurchase intention; AVE = average variance extracted; CR = composite reliability; the diagonal value is the square root of AVE values for each dimension.

.

As all data in this study were collected via a single questionnaire, there is a potential risk of common method bias (CMB), which could compromise the validity of the results. This study adopted Harman’s single-factor test as a post hoc examination. Principal component analysis yielded multiple factors with eigenvalues greater than 1, and the first principal component accounted for 30.66% of the total variance, which is below the 40% critical threshold. This indicates that no serious CMB exists, confirming that the measures for each variable are relatively independent and reliable and will not significantly interfere with subsequent hypothesis testing and model analyses.

5.2. Structural Equation Modeling Test

Model fitting and path coefficient estimation were performed using Amos 26.0 software. The results of the initial path analysis are detailed below:

First, the impact of goal progress information on psychological reactance. All five path coefficients were significantly negative (p < 0.05), and H1 as well as H1a–H1e were supported. Specifically, goal progress visualization (β = −0.234, p < 0.001) and goal progress level (β = −0.191, p < 0.001) exerted the most prominent negative effects. Goal progress quantification (β = −0.131, p = 0.002) and goal progress stakeholder contribution (β = −0.116, p = 0.007) showed moderate negative effects, while goal progress velocity (β = −0.104, p = 0.016) had a relatively weaker impact.

Second, the impact of goal progress information on green perceived value. Except for goal progress visualization (p = 0.210), the other four dimensions exerted significant positive effects on green perceived value, and H2 was partially supported. Specifically, H2a, H2c, H2d, and H2e were all supported, while H2b was not supported. The enhancing effect of goal progress quantifiability (β = 0.220, p < 0.001) was the most pronounced.

Third, impacts among mediating variables and on the dependent variable. Psychological reactance had significant negative effects on green perceived value (β = −0.383, p < 0.001), green brand trust (β = −0.257, p < 0.001), and green repurchase intention (β = −0.357, p < 0.001), supporting H3, H4, and H8; green perceived value has significant positive effects on green brand trust (β = 0.295, p < 0.001) and green repurchase intention (β = 0.266, p < 0.001), supporting H5 and H6; green brand trust had a significant positive effect on green repurchase intention (β = 0.173, p < 0.001), supporting H7.

In summary, the path “GPVI → GPV” was insignificant (p = 0.210), while all other paths were significant. Internationally recognized methodological guidelines [74,75] clearly state that when a path is statistically non-significant and lacks strong theoretical support, it should be removed to enhance model parsimony and generalizability. Adhering to the principle of parsimony and theoretical appropriateness, this non-significant path was removed, and the model was re-estimated. The revised model demonstrated an excellent fit with the following indices: CMIN/DF = 1.303, GFI = 0.930, AGFI = 0.919, NFI = 0.954, IFI = 0.989, TLI = 0.988, CFI = 0.989, and RMSEA = 0.023. The results of the path analysis are presented in

Table 4. Path coefficients of the revised structural equation model (n = 594).

Paths	Unstd. Est.	Std. Est.	S.E.	C.R.	p
PR <--- GPQ	−0.136	−0.131	0.044	−3.066	0.002
PR <--- GPVI	−0.248	−0.234	0.044	−5.619	***
PR <--- GPL	−0.215	−0.191	0.048	−4.452	***
PR <--- GPVE	−0.113	−0.104	0.047	−2.403	0.016
PR <--- GPSC	−0.127	−0.116	0.047	−2.716	0.007
GPV <--- GPQ	0.211	0.220	0.038	5.536	***
GPV <--- GPL	0.110	0.106	0.041	2.663	0.008
GPV <--- GPVE	0.107	0.108	0.039	2.730	0.006
GPV <--- GPSC	0.141	0.141	0.04	3.566	***
GPV <--- PR	−0.352	−0.383	0.038	−9.382	***
GBT <--- PR	−0.213	−0.257	0.04	−5.266	***
GBT <--- GPV	0.267	0.295	0.045	5.888	***
GRI <--- GPV	0.273	0.266	0.048	5.661	***
GRI <--- GBT	0.196	0.173	0.048	4.075	***
GRI <--- PR	−0.336	−0.357	0.043	−7.767	***

Notes: Unstd. Est. = Unstandardized estimates; Std. Est. = Standardized estimates; S.E. = Standard Error; C.R. = Critical Ratio; *** p < 0.001.

and Figure 2.

5.3. Mediation Effect Test

The relationships among the variables in the proposed model are highly complex, with a chained mediation structure involving three mediators: the chain path goal progress information → psychological reactance → green perceived value → green brand trust → green repurchase intention. This structure includes six nested mediation paths. It is postulated that there is no direct effect between goal progress information and green repurchase intention; rather, consumer behavioral intention is entirely driven by this psychological transmission chain, as illustrated in Figure 3.

The mediation mechanism was examined using the Bootstrap sampling method [76]. During the analysis, the number of Bootstrap resamples was set to 5000, and the confidence level for interval estimation using both bias-corrected Bootstrap and percentile Bootstrap was set to 95%. The test results are presented in

Table 5. Path coefficients of multi-step chained mediation (n = 594).

Paths	Coefficient	Bias-Corrected 95%CI		Percentile 95%CI
		Lower	Upper	Lower	Upper
GPQ → PR → GRI	0.046	0.017	0.083	0.016	0.081
GPQ → GPV → GRI	0.057	0.031	0.096	0.030	0.093
GPQ → PR → GPV → GRI	0.013	0.005	0.025	0.004	0.024
GPQ → PR → GBT → GRI	0.006	0.002	0.013	0.001	0.012
GPQ → GPV → GBT → GRI	0.011	0.005	0.021	0.005	0.020
GPQ → PR → GPV → GBT → GRI	0.003	0.001	0.005	0.001	0.005
Total indirect effect (GPQ → GRI)	0.136	0.084	0.194	0.083	0.193
GPVI → PR → GRI	0.083	0.051	0.127	0.049	0.124
GPVI → PR → GPV → GRI	0.024	0.014	0.040	0.013	0.037
GPVI → PR → GBT → GRI	0.010	0.005	0.020	0.004	0.019
GPVI → PR → GPV → GBT → GRI	0.005	0.002	0.009	0.002	0.008
Total indirect effect (GPVI → GRI)	0.122	0.077	0.173	0.076	0.172
GPL → PR → GRI	0.072	0.039	0.117	0.037	0.114
GPL → GPV → GRI	0.030	0.008	0.060	0.007	0.059
GPL → PR → GPV → GRI	0.021	0.011	0.037	0.010	0.035
GPL → PR → GBT → GRI	0.009	0.003	0.019	0.003	0.018
GPL → GPV → GBT → GRI	0.006	0.002	0.014	0.001	0.013
GPL → PR → GPV → GBT → GRI	0.004	0.002	0.008	0.002	0.007
Total indirect effect (GPL → GRI)	0.142	0.088	0.202	0.087	0.200
GPVE → PR → GRI	0.038	0.007	0.074	0.005	0.072
GPVE → GPV → GRI	0.029	0.007	0.060	0.005	0.059
GPVE → PR → GPV → GRI	0.011	0.002	0.024	0.001	0.022
GPVE → PR → GBT → GRI	0.005	0.001	0.012	0.001	0.011
GPVE → GPV → GBT → GRI	0.006	0.001	0.013	0.001	0.012
GPVE → PR → GPV → GBT → GRI	0.002	0.001	0.005	0.000	0.004
Total indirect effect (GPVE → GRI)	0.090	0.035	0.146	0.034	0.146
GPSC → PR → GRI	0.043	0.012	0.080	0.011	0.079
GPSC → GPV → GRI	0.039	0.015	0.068	0.015	0.067
GPSC → PR → GPV → GRI	0.012	0.004	0.025	0.003	0.024
GPSC → PR → GBT → GRI	0.005	0.001	0.013	0.001	0.012
GPSC → GPV → GBT → GRI	0.007	0.003	0.016	0.002	0.015
GPSC → PR → GPV → GBT → GRI	0.002	0.001	0.006	0.001	0.005
Total indirect effect (GPSC → GRI)	0.109	0.053	0.165	0.054	0.166

.

First, all dimensions of green repurchase intention have a full mediation effect; that is, goal progress information does not directly affect green repurchase intention, but works through the promotion path of green perceived value and green brand trust, and the inhibition path of psychological reactance.

Second, the focus of the impact varies across different dimensions. Goal progress quantification is mediated mainly by improving green perceived value (“GPQ → GPV → GRI” path effect β = 0.057, accounting for 41.9% of the total indirect effect); goal progress visualization takes reducing psychological reactance as the core path (“GPVI → PR → GRI” path effect β = 0.083, accounting for 68.0% of the total indirect effect); goal progress level is affected by the dual path of reducing psychological reactance and improving perceived value, and the total indirect effect is the largest (β = 0.142).

Third, the coefficients of the multi-step chained mediation paths are relatively small, which is caused by the mathematical characteristics of chained effect multiplication. However, all these paths are statistically significant at the 95% confidence level and have clear theoretical explanatory power for the psychological transmission mechanism. The complete chained path of “PR → GPV → GBT → GRI” is prominent in all dimensions, reflecting the integrity of the decision-making process. However, due to the effect attenuation characteristics of chained transmission and the concentration of the core drive of the psychological mechanism in the earlier link, the contribution of this path is relatively limited.

6. Conclusions and Discussion

6.1. Discussion

This study tests the structural equation model through the collected 594 valid questionnaire data. The main findings are as follows. First, the five dimensions of corporate environmental goal progress information have significant negative effects on consumers’ psychological reactance. Among them, visualization has the strongest negative effect, whereas velocity has a relatively weak effect. Theoretically, this disparity can be traced to how each design cue activates different psychological mechanisms through the lens of psychological reactance theory. Visualization directly reduces consumers’ perceived intrusiveness and manipulation inference by presenting graphics, chart combinations, dynamic design, and other intuitive forms; it operates primarily through an information transparency pathway. In contrast, the promotion velocity reflects efficiency and rhythm; it is processed more as a performance attribute than as a diagnostic signal about intent. Consequently, velocity affects reactance more mildly.

Second, the positive impact of goal progress information on green perceived value shows dimensional differences. The visualization dimension has no direct significant impact on green perceived value. The four dimensions of quantification, level, velocity, and stakeholder contribution, can significantly improve consumers’ green perceived value, and the improvement effect of the quantification dimension is the most obvious. According to the previous point, visualization can significantly weaken psychological reactance through intuitive graphical and dynamic presentation of environmental information. However, visualization only improves the presentation of information and does not increase the substance of environmental value. Consumers’ green perceived value still depends on objective, quantifiable, and verifiable environmental performance data. Therefore, visualization cannot directly improve the green perceived value, which also reflects that consumers pay more attention to the authenticity and substance of environmental information than to the simple form of expression.

Third, psychological reactance, green perceived value, and green brand trust constitute a chained mediation path, which fully mediates the impact of goal progress information on green repurchase intention. Psychological reactance has significantly negatively affected green perceived value, green brand trust, and green repurchase intention, which is a key factor that hinders the formation of consumers’ green attitude and behavior. Green perceived value has a significant positive impact on green brand trust and green repurchase intention, and green brand trust can also drive green repurchase intention; the three form a positive relationship of layers of conduction. Among them, psychological reactance has the strongest negative impact on green repurchase intention. Green perceived value further strengthens repurchase intention by improving brand trust, which is in line with the internal logic of “value → trust → intention” in consumer behavior theory.

Fourth, psychological reactance, green perceived value, and green brand trust form a multi-level, chained, and nested mediation path. All dimensions yield significant mediation effects with heterogeneous differentiated characteristics. Specifically, the goal progress level dimension yielded the largest total indirect effect on green repurchase intention, whereas the velocity dimension had the smallest. The contribution ratios of mediating paths differed across dimensions. Quantification primarily functioned by enhancing green perceived value; visualization centered on reducing psychological reactance as its core pathway; and level operated through the dual pathways of reducing reactance and enhancing value perception, with core drivers concentrated in the earlier stages of this transmission chain.

Finally, although rooted in green consumption, the theoretical payoff extends to broader consumer behavior literature on persuasion and resistance. Our core argument is not context-bound, but rather how goal progress information alters perceived manipulative intent, thereby dampening or amplifying psychological reactance. This mechanism travels. It implies a reusable framing for any goal-related communication in which firms must prove results without triggering intrusion—for example, quality-improvement disclosures, transparency campaigns, or milestone-based philanthropy—where the same chain offers a parsimonious way to model consumer responses.

6.2. Theoretical Implications

First, this study enriches the knowledge system within the field of green consumption and extends the research scope concerning corporate environmental goal progress information and green repurchase behavior. Taking corporate environmental goal progress information as the entry point, this study explores the internal logical relationship between such information and consumers’ green repurchase behavior in response to the need for further in-depth research on green repurchase, aiming to enrich the research system of consumption continuity in sustainable consumption. Meanwhile, by incorporating the construct of corporate environmental goal progress information into the research perspective of sustainable consumption, this study aligns the research value of corporate environmental information with the practical needs of long-term corporate development and the achievement of dual carbon goals. Consequently, it expands the knowledge base at the intersection of green consumption and consumer behavior, providing new references for subsequent research.

Second, this study conducts a multi-dimensional deconstruction of corporate environmental goal progress information, thereby solidifying the empirical foundation for research on how green information influences consumption decisions. Existing studies on corporate environmental goal progress information mostly remain fragmented discussions of surface-level characteristics, lacking both a systematic deconstruction of connotations and accurate identification of core dimensions, as well as reliable measurement tools. Grounded in in-depth interviews, this study proposes a five-dimensional construct of corporate environmental goal progress information and a measurement scale with sound reliability and validity, clarifying its essential differences from general corporate performance information and personal goal information. This effectively addresses the issues of vague conceptual definitions and a lack of measurement tools in existing research on this construct. Furthermore, it reveals the psychological transmission mechanism through which corporate environmental goal progress information promotes green repurchase behavior, and provides a standardized quantitative reference for related follow-up studies.

Third, this study deepens the applied implications of multiple theories in green consumption contexts and further expands their scenario-based application boundaries. Integrating S-O-R theory, signaling theory, and psychological reactance theory, this study closely combines the attributes of green products with consumer psychological characteristics by embedding psychological reactance and customer perceived value into the research logic. The study delves into the chained mediation mechanism, moving beyond the limitations of existing research that mostly explores green consumption from singular perspectives such as moral emotions or social norms, and revealing the psychological transmission path of corporate information communication on consumers’ green repurchase decisions. Meanwhile, this study investigates the mitigating effects of different information presentation strategies on consumers’ psychological reactance.

6.3. Managerial Implications

Enterprises should build a standardized, accurate, and normalized environmental goal progress information disclosure system, reduce consumer psychological reactance with credible and transparent green signals, improve green perceived value and brand trust, and transform information advantages into sustained green repurchase motivation.

First, establish a standardized and high-quality disclosure system to ensure that the information is authentic, sensible, and traceable. Enterprises need to formulate unified disclosure standards to present environmental progress, completion level, and promotion rhythm with quantitative data, and rely on third-party authoritative certification to improve the information’s authority. Use charts, videos, and other visual formats to transform abstract environmental progress into intuitive, comprehensible content. By employing a multi-pronged approach and implementing targeted, comprehensive strategies, enterprises can use intuitive visuals to reduce psychological reactance and supplement them with specific quantitative data to enhance green perceived value. This approach maximizes its positive effect on green repurchase intention.

Second, implement a precise information transmission strategy. On social platforms, e-commerce pages, stores, and other high-reach channels, focus on putting visual practice information to quickly reduce psychological reactance; on official websites, ESG reports, product packaging, and other professional channels, systematically disclose data results to strengthen the environmental contribution of consumers’ perception of purchasing behavior.

Third, build a full-contact information matrix to achieve coverage of the whole consumption process. Integrate online and offline resources, and display them normally online through the official website, social media, and e-commerce details page; embed packaging, stores, exhibition halls, and other scenes offline; and after-sales, continuously update the environmental progress through member notifications and return visits, forming sustained cognitive enhancement.

Fourth, adhere to the concept of long-term disclosure and accumulate a green reputation with continuous action. Establish a regular release mechanism to ensure that promises and actions are consistent, and strictly avoid greenwashing. Shape a distinctive green brand label with long-term and credible information output, constantly consolidate consumer trust, and finally transform trust into sustained repurchase behavior.

6.4. Limitations and Future Research

First, the sample is limited. The data mainly comes from local Chinese consumers, and the cross-cultural applicability of the research conclusions needs to be tested. Future research can verify this research model in different cultural contexts and explore how cultural values (such as collectivism vs. individualism) affect the perception of environmental goal progress information.

Second, the static analysis is limited. In the empirical analysis, corporate environmental goal progress information is mainly analyzed as a static construct, and the timing and continuity characteristics of information disclosure are not paid attention to. Future research can adopt a longitudinal tracking research method to deeply analyze the dynamic impact of the timing characteristics of information disclosure on consumers’ psychological perception and purchase decision-making.

Third, the exploration of the moderating variable is insufficient. This study focuses on verifying the chained mediation role of psychological reactance, green perceived value, and green brand trust, and does not fully consider the moderating role of consumer characteristics, market situation, enterprise attributes, and other variables. Future research should incorporate individual traits such as consumer values, environmental awareness, and self-construal, as well as contextual factors including industry type, product category, and market competition intensity as moderators, to construct a more comprehensive theoretical model.