Exploring purchase intention of green skincare products using the theory of planned behavior: Testing the moderating effects of country of origin and price sensitivity
By Chia-Lin Hsu, Chi-Ya Chang, Chutinart Yansritakul. 2017
503 citations recorded by the source corpus.
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9d152571fc4c65a9298ea20a6a32d751bf0222db
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
- Leibao Zhang
- Anwar Sadat Shimul
- Yanli Fan
- Isaac Cheah
- Wenyu Zhang
- Beibei Yue
- Basheer Khan
- Shuai Zhang
Citations in the corpus
- Impact of Consumer Environmental Responsibility on Green Consumption Behavior in China: The Role of Environmental Concern and Price Sensitivity (2020, background): “[67] found that price sensitivity was an important factor affecting purchasing intentions, and consumers with lower price sensitivity are more likely to pay for electric vehicles [66].”
- Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior to Explain the Effects of Cognitive Factors across Different Kinds of Green Products (2019, methodology): “applied TPB to explore the effect of its main constructs on purchase intention for green skincare products and further measured the moderating effect of another two variables [15].”
- Green purchasing behaviour: A conceptual framework and empirical investigation of Indian consumers (2018, background): “Although such classical models have been widely used by several scholars alike or with some modifications in order to validate purchase intention and purchase behaviour for green products in the field of environmental behavioral research including India (Zhao et al., 2014; Paul et al., 2016; Yadav a”
- Investigating Female Shoppers’ Attitude and Purchase Intention toward Green Cosmetics in South Africa (2021, background): “The term “green” or “environmentally-friendly” in products denotes to attributes that are “natural,” “organic,” “sustainable,” “clean,” “eco-friendly” and “non-toxic” (Patnaik et al., 2021; Hsu et al., 2017).”