Perceptions Influencing Apparel Safety Sustainable Consumption Behaviour: Exploring the Contextual Relationship

• Autorzy: Chen Lihong , Qie Kexin , Yu Hong , Ding Xuemei

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5604/01.3001.0015.6454

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The purpose of this paper is to develop and test a theoretical model that explains that the impact of consumer perceptions of apparel safety on their consumption behavior is moderated by consumers’ attitude and the price in the relationship studied. A survey questionnaire was developed and conducted first in a pretest by 231 participants to initially identify possible measurement problems. Another 321 potential consumers subsequently filled in the questionnaire on our website, out of which 296 questionnaires were used to verify the validity and reliability by statistical analysis and the structural equation model. The paper identifies a set of apparel safety perception dimensions that do not drive safe consumption practices. It is further seen that price is more likely to moderate the relationship with consumer behaviors than perceptions and attitudes. Therefore, the paper significantly fills the gaps between apparel safety perceptions and apparel safety consumption behavior. The findings of the paper have significant implications for apparel companies who wish to explore the apparel market potential in China.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

consumer perception; apparel safety; consumption behaviour; perceived consumer effectiveness

• Wydawca: Sieć Badawcza Łukasiewicz - Łódzki Instytut Technologiczny
• Czasopismo: Fibres & Textiles in Eastern Europe
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: Vol. 30, no. 1 (151)
• Strony: 8--16
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 51 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Chen Lihong

• Shanghai International Fashion Innovation Center in Donghua Univeristy, Shanghai 200051, China

autor

Qie Kexin

• Shanghai International Fashion Innovation Center in Donghua Univeristy, Shanghai 200051, China

autor

Yu Hong

• Shanghai Institute of Quality Inspection and Technical Research, Shanghai 200040, China

autor

Ding Xuemei

• Key Laboratory of Clothing Design and Technology (Donghua University), Ministry of Education, Shanghai 200051, China

Bibliografia

• 1. Chen LH, Yan XF, Gao CC. Developing a Practical Evaluation Framework for Identifying Critical Factors to Achieve Apparel Safety. The Journal of The Textile Institute 2016; 107, 12: 1519-1532.
• 2. Chen L, Yan X, Gao C. Apparel Design Safety and Production Criteria and Models. FIBRES & TEXTILES in Eastern Europe 2017; 24, 6(120): 32-38. DOI: 10.5604/12303666.1221734.
• 3. Chen L, Wu X, Ding X. The Definition of the Defect for Textiles and Apparel Defect in Recall in China. International Conference on Advanced Textile Materials & Manufacturing Technology, Hangzhou, China, 15-19 October 2008.
• 4. Zhou Y, Wu X, Chen L, Ding X. Analysis of Potential Mechanical Hazards of Children’s Clothing Based on Fault Tree Method. International Conference on Textile Bioengineering and Informatics Symposium, Shanghai, China, 28-30 May 2010.
• 5. Sonnenberg N, Jacobs B, Momberg D. The Role of Information Exposure in Female University Students’ Evaluation and Selection of Eco-Friendly Apparel in the South African Emerging Economy. Clothing and Textile Research Journal 2014; 32, 4: 266-281.
• 6. Lee S. Consumers’ Value, Environmental Consciousness, and Willingness to Pay more toward Green Apparel Products. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing 2011; 2, 3: 161-169.
• 7. Stall-Meadows C, Davey A. Green Marketing of Apparel: Consumers’ Price Sensitivity to Environmental Marketing Claims. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing 2013; 4, 1: 33-43.
• 8. Eryuruk SH. Greening of the Textile and Clothing Industry. FIBRES & TEXTILES in Eastern Europe 2012; 20, 6A(95): 22-27.
• 9. Wu XY, Chen LH, Zhou Y, Ding XM. Research in Risk Assessment for Textile and Apparel and Propose a Future Research Agenda with a Conceptual Framework. International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management 2016; 17, 3: 273-288.
• 10. Chen LH, Yu H, Yan XF. Developing a Modular Apparel Safety Architecture for Supply Chain Management: the Apparel Recycle Perspective. Industria Textila, 2018, 69(1), 24-30.
• 11. Chen L, Ding X, Wu X. Comparison of Mechanical safety Requirements and Test Methods of Children’s garments in Chinese and Euramerican standards. International Conference on Textile Bioengineering and Informatics Symposium, Shanghai, China, 28-30 May 2010.
• 12. Pang S, Zhou Y, Ding X, Wu X. Application of TS Fuzzy Neural Network in Safety Risk Assessment of Textile and Apparel. Fuzzy Systems and Knowledge Discovery (FSKD) of Eighth International Conference, Shanghai, China, 26-28 July 2011.
• 13. Wu XY, Chen LH, Pang SH, Ding XM. Paratactic Subjective-Objective Weighting Methods and SVM Risk Assessment Model Applied in Textile and Apparel Safety. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 2015; 32, 5: 472-485.
• 14. Yu H, Gibson KE, Wright KG, Neal JA, Sirsat SA. Food Safety and Food Quality Perceptions of Farmers’ Market Consumers in The United States. Food Control, 201779, 266-271.
• 15. Michaelidou N, Hassan LM. The Role Of Health Consciousness, Food Safety Concern And Ethical Identity On Attitudes And Intentions Towards Organic Food. International Journal of Consumer Studies 2008; 32(2): 163-170.
• 16. Lobb AE, Mazzocchi M, Traill WB. Modelling Risk Perception and Trust in Food Safety Information within the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Food Quality and Preference 2007; 18(2): 384-395.
• 17. Roseman M, Kurzynske J. Food Safety Perceptions and Behaviors of Kentucky Consumers. Journal of Food Protection 2006; 69(6): 1412-1421.
• 18. Röhr A, Lüddecke K, Drusch S, Müller MJ, Alvensleben RV. Food Quality and Safety – Consumer Perception and Public Health Concern. Food control 2005; 16(8): 649-655.
• 19. Grunert KG. Food Quality and Safety: Consumer Perception and Demand. European Review of Agricultural Economics 2005; 32(3): 369-391.
• 20. Harper GC, Makatouni A. Consumer Perception of Organic Food Production and Farm Animal Welfare. British Food Journal 2002; 104(3/4/5): 287-299.
• 21. Mitchell VW, Greatorex M. Consumer Risk Perception in the UK Wine Market. European Journal of Marketing 1988; 22(9): 5-15.
• 22. Chang HH, Chen SW. Consumer Perception of Interface Quality, Security, and Loyalty in Electronic Commerce. Information & Management 2009; 46(7), 411-417.
• 23. Yang Z, Jun M. Consumer Perception of E-Service Quality: from Internet Purchaser and Non-Purchaser Perspectives. Journal of Business Strategies 2008; 25(2), 59.
• 24. Henning JB, Stufft CJ, Payne SC, Bergman ME, Mannan MS, Keren N. The Influence of Individual Differences on Organizational Safety Attitudes. Safety Science 2009; 47(3): 337-345.
• 25. Vermeir I, Verbeke W. Sustainable Food Consumption: Exploring The Consumer “Attitude–Behavioral Intention” Gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 2006; 19(2): 169-194.
• 26. Lu LC, Chang HH, Chang A. Consumer Personality and Green Buying Intention: The Mediate Role of Consumer Ethical Beliefs. Journal of Business Ethics 2015; 127(1): 205-219.
• 27. Henning JB, Stufft CJ, Payne SC, Bergman ME, Mannan MS, Keren N. The Influence of Individual Differences on Organizational Safety Attitudes. Safety Science 2009; 47(3): 337-345.
• 28. Sweeney JC, Soutar GN. Consumer Perceived Value: The Development of a Multiple Item Scale. Journal of retailing 2001; 77(2): 203-220.
• 29. Parasuraman A, Zeithaml VA, Berry LL. Servqual: A Multiple-Item Scale for Measuring Consumer Perc. Journal of Retailing 1988; 64(1): 12.
• 30. Liu A, Niyongira R. Chinese Consumers Food Purchasing Behaviors and Awareness of Food Safety. Food Control 2017; 79: 185-191.
• 31. Bearth A, Cousin ME, Siegrist M. Poultry Consumers’ Behaviour, Risk Perception and Knowledge Related to Campylobacteriosis and Domestic Food Safety. Food Control, 2014; 44: 166-176.
• 32. Huh KO. An analysis of consumers’ perceptions and behaviors for consumer safety of products and suggestions for improving consumer safety of products by economic agencies: focused on information, education, and policy for safety. Consume Policy and Education Review 2011; 7(3), 101-121.
• 33. Flanagin AJ, Metzger MJ, Pure R, Markov A, Hartsell E. Mitigating Risk in Ecommerce Transactions: Perceptions of Information Credibility and The Role of User-Generated Ratings in Product Quality and Purchase Intention. Electronic Commerce Research 2014; 14(1): 1-23.
• 34. Yeung RM, Morris J. Food Safety Risk: Consumer Perception and Purchase Behaviour. British Food Journal 2001; 103(3): 170-187.
• 35. Thilakarathne NT, Jayasinghe-Mudalige UK, Udagama JMM, Edirisinghe JC, Herath HMLK. Role of Information on Women Consumer Decision Making on Food Quality: An Analysis Based on Visual Presentation of Dairy Quality Attributes. Journal of Agricultural Sciences 2015; 10(2).
• 36. Jha S, Singh B, Suresh KP. Consumer Perception Scale in Store Environment (CPS-SE) for Measuring Consumer Buying Behavior. IUP Journal of Marketing Management 2014; 13(3): 48.
• 37. Onozaka Y, Nurse G, McFadden DT. Local Food Consumers: How Motivations and Perceptions Translate to Buying Behavior. Choices 2010; 25(1): 1-6.
• 38. Angulo AM, Gil JM. Risk Perception and Consumer Willingness to Pay for Certified Beef in Spain. Food Quality and Preference 2007; 18(8): 1106-1117.
• 39. Roseman M, Kurzynske J. Food Safety Perceptions and Behaviors of Kentucky Consumers. Journal of Food Protection 2006; 69(6), 1412-1421.
• 40. Lybeck A, Holmlund-Rytkönen M, Sääksjärvi M. Store Brands Vs. Manufacturer Brands: Consumer Perceptions and Buying of Chocolate Bars in Finland. Int. Rev. of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 2006; 16(4): 471-492.
• 41. Christou E, Kassianidis P. Consumer’s Perceptions and Adoption of Online Buying for Travel Products. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 2002; 12(4): 93-107.
• 42. Yeung RM, Morris J. Food Safety Risk: Consumer Perception and Purchase Behaviour. British Food Journal 2001; 103(3): 170-187.
• 43. DeGregoria B. Sex Role Attitude and Perception of Psychological Abuse. Sex Roles, 1987; 16(5): 227-235.
• 44. Kharkar M, Bowalekar S. Knowledge, Attitude and Perception/Practices (KAP) of Medical Practitioners in India Towards Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) Reporting. Perspectives In Clinical Research 2012; 3(3), 90.
• 45. Tyson EH. Rap-music Attitude and Perception Scale: A Validation Study, 2006, Research on Social Work Practice 16(2): 211-223.
• 46. Kim C, Kim S, Im S, Shin C. The Effect of Attitude and Perception on Consumer Complaint Intentions. Journal of Consumer Marketing 2003; 20(4): 352-371.
• 47. Mazer MA, Cox LA, Capon JA. The Public’s Attitude and Perception Concerning Witnessed Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation. Critical Care Medicine 2006; 34(12): 2925-2928.
• 48. Song SY, Kim YK. Law Enforcement Officers’ High-Visibility Safety Apparel: The Effect of Their Attitudes on Wearing Behavior. Journal of Textile and Apparel, Technology and Management 2015; 9(2).
• 49. Chen L, Ding X, Yu H. A Measure of Consumer Perception on Children’s Apparel Safety Following the Customer Perceived Value Paradigm[J]. The Journal of The Textile Institute 2019: 1-10.
• 50. Donald I, Canter D. Employee Attitudes and Safety in the Chemical Industry. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 1994; 7(3): 203-208.
• 51. Kim JA, Choi YS, Lee J, et al. Retraction: Reliability and Validity of the Korean Cancer Pain Assessment Tool [J]. Journal of Korean Medical Science, 2005, 20(5): 1139.