Sustainability 14 09566

sustainability
Article
Exploring Sustainable Fashion Consumption Behavior in the
Post-Pandemic Era: Changes in the Antecedents of
Second-Hand Clothing-Sharing in China
Jun Xu 1, *,† , Yun Zhou 1,† , Lei Jiang 1 and Lei Shen 2
1 School of Textile Science and Engineering, Tiangong University, Tianjin 300387, China
2 School of Design, Jiangnan University, Wuxi 214122, China
* Correspondence: xujun@tiangong.edu.cn
† These authors contributed equally to this work.
Abstract: Second-hand consumption of clothing plays a vital role in promoting the overall global
trend of low-carbon transition; however, the COVID-19 outbreak put this consumption model into
a development dilemma. Cultivating consumers’ sustainable behavior will be an effective way
to promote the sustainable development of the apparel industry. Based on the unified theory of
acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT), this study starts with fashion-sharing behavior and
investigates the antecedents that influence consumers’ use of second-hand clothing-sharing platforms
in the post-pandemic era. The research background involves the Chinese clothing-sharing market in
the growing period. The findings revealed that the pandemic raised people’s awareness of health and
hygiene protection. In addition, the cleaning problem of platform clothing has become the primary
reason for curbing consumers’ choice of sharing. High-cost performance, high efficiency, and conve-
Citation: Xu, J.; Zhou, Y.; Jiang, L.;
nience can stimulate consumers to use shared services. Considering that the pandemic has driven
Shen, L. Exploring Sustainable consumer economic fluctuations, perceived economic risks could widen the gap between willingness
Fashion Consumption Behavior in and behavior. In conclusion, platforms must fully realize the transparency of the clothing cleaning
the Post-Pandemic Era: Changes in and maintenance process, improve their own construction level such as ease of use, convenience, and
the Antecedents of Second-Hand safety, and incorporate functional clothing-sharing to refine people’s sustainable consumption habits.
Clothing-Sharing in China.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 9566. Keywords: fashion-sharing; second-hand clothes; UTAUT; clothing rental service; cleaning issues
https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159566
Academic Editors: José

Luis Vázquez-Burguete and
Ana Lanero Carrizo 1. Introduction
Shared consumption, also known as cooperative consumption, means that consumers
Received: 17 June 2022
Accepted: 27 July 2022
obtain the right to use and own goods through renting, exchange, gift, and other ways,
Published: 4 August 2022
which can attain efficient use of resources and have a strong economic mutual benefit [1,2].
Various industries have initiated the sharing model with their own differences. The sharing
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral model of the clothing fashion industry is primarily a “shared wardrobe” based on second-
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
hand clothing.
published maps and institutional affil-
Owing to the open consumption concept of European people and the pursuit of
iations.
diversified life, since 2009, several clothing-sharing platforms for different groups of people
and covering different categories have appeared in the European market. Most businesses
are mostly based on the provision of clothing rental services (CRS), supplemented by
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
the resale of second-hand clothing. Compared with the mature management system in
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
Europe, owing to cultural differences and different life concepts, the overall second-hand
This article is an open access article clothing-sharing market in Asian countries remains in the exploratory stage. For example,
distributed under the terms and in China, influenced by the traditional social hierarchy thinking, Chinese people focus more
conditions of the Creative Commons on identity and status, and their views on second-hand items could be more rigid [3,4].
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// For instance, in China, people are generally conservative and care more about privacy,
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ and they might exhibit a certain degree of resistance to items from strangers. But now, the
4.0/). practice of sustainable development has become a global consensus. Due to its ability to tap
Sustainability 2022, 14, 9566. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159566 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2022, 14, 9566 2 of 20
excess capacity and reduce resource costs, the sharing economy in the modern sustainable
process has become increasingly prominent. At the same time, under the guidance of the
government and the state, the awareness of sustainable consumption among social groups
has been further enhanced [5]. Consumers with stereotyped views on the sharing and
trading of second-hand products may gradually change their attitudes. The 2021 “China
Sustainable Consumption Report” showed that second-hand idle trading platforms will
become a holy place for most consumers to buy good goods [6]. China has a particularly
large population and is the world’s largest clothing consumer. As an emerging form of
consumption, clothing-sharing may be an effective solution to reduce its textile waste and
environmental pollution caused by clothing production [7].
For a growing consumer platform, combining current events to precisely detect the
factors affecting its own development will help it get closer to consumers [8]. The global
pandemic of COVID-19 has severely hit the sharing economy system [9]. According to the
WHO [10], COVID-19 primarily spreads through respiratory droplets and close contact with
the source of infection. Thus, most people believe that the use of shared objects amplifies
their risk of being infected by the virus, especially in close-fitting clothing categories. Even
if the virus can only survive on the fabric for a short time, sharing frequency should be
minimized [11]. Accordingly, the cleanliness and hygiene of second-hand clothing might
become an aspect that a platform will focus on in the post-pandemic era. Affected by the
continuation of the pandemic, consumers will choose products from a more comprehensive
perspective [12]. Thus, platforms need to assess the current consumer considerations and
determine the antecedents that affect consumption so that when the pandemic eases, and
the sharing economy picks up, they can grasp the appropriate development trend and
precisely fit the sustainable development path.
Thus, this study demonstrates how a growth clothing-sharing platform determines
the entry point of development in the post-pandemic era. Measuring the weight of factors
and determining the key influencing variables are the focus of this research. Taking
the Chinese clothing-sharing market as a representative of growth, the basic research
framework adopts the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) [13].
From the standpoint of the individual, society, cleanliness, health, the economy, and other
dimensions, theoretical expansion is performed to investigate the overall growth variables
of China’s fashion-sharing economy before and after the pandemic. At this stage, few
studies have investigated consumers’ clothing-sharing tendency in the Chinese market;
hence, this study will delve into its current situation and make up for the lack of this aspect.
Meanwhile, it can also provide some development inspiration for other countries in Asia
that are still in the initial stage of the “shared wardrobe” application model. For European
and even global clothing brands, it is expected that the sustainable development strategy
of a sharing market and platforms will be of guiding significance.
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: Section 2 summarizes the related
work on clothing-sharing; Section 3 presents the corresponding assumptions and evaluation
models; Section 4 provides an overview of sample characteristics, measurements, and a
structural model evaluation using a two-step analysis method of the partial least squares
structural equation modeling algorithm (PLS-SEM); Section 5 analyzes and discusses the
results; Section 6 presents the theoretical and practical implications of the research. Finally,
the full text is summarized by providing limitations and future research directions.
2. Literature Review, Theoretical Model, and Hypotheses Development

2.1. “Shared Wardrobe” Model under Sustainable Development
In the production process of clothing, a large amount of waste liquid, waste gas, and
solid waste are often discharged, including serious environmental pollution problems [14].
Unsustainable consumption behaviors, such as excessive or one-off clothing consumption,
exacerbate global environmental pollution. China is the largest textile manufacturing
country globally, and its textile and garment production waste has exceeded 100 million
tons [15]. Moreover, about 26 million tons of used clothes are discarded every year in China,
which is expected to reach around 50 million tons by 2030; however, the recycling rate is
<1% [16].
To alleviate the adverse impact of the clothing industry in all aspects, it is imperative
for clothing manufacturers and distributors to effectively upgrade their business models
to attain sustainable development of fashion and ecology [17]. As one of the measures
to match this viewpoint, the “shared wardrobe” model endows clothing with the value
of multiple reuse in the form of second-hand clothing resale and leasing, decreasing the
“dormancy rate” of clothing [18]. It not only fulfills the wearing needs of consumers within
a specific period but also decreases their excessive clothing consumption rate and waste
rate, which helps to promote the circular development of the clothing economy [19].
China started a fashion-sharing boom in 2015. In recent years, many online clothing
rental platforms have emerged, such as “MSPARIS”, “Le Tote”, “YCLOSET”, and so on.
However, because of the short-term nature of the trend and the peculiarity of the Chinese
market, the adaptation speed of shared clothing is slightly slow. Most sharing platforms
in China are short-lived or operate poorly. Among them, the largest sharing platform,
“YCLOSET”, completely shut down its services on 15 August 2021. The impact of the
pandemic is one aspect of the failure, and other reasons can be roughly attributed to the
neglect of consumers’ real clothing needs, small user scale, and inappropriate establishment
of a membership system. If growing fashion-sharing platforms do not have a precise
perception of consumer attitude changes and market demand positioning, then the long-
term popularity of the clothing-sharing economy in China will become a false proposition.
“YCLOSET” is a lesson from the past.
2.2. Summary of the Antecedents of Second-Hand Clothing Consumption before the Pandemic
Within the scope of traditional perception, second-hand consumption is more com-
mon among low-economic consumer groups [20]. However, with the surge of the new
generation of consumer forces, the definition of poverty in second-hand consumption has
been rewritten [21]. The second-hand clothing market is gaining momentum because of
the mounting popularity of the collaborative economy and sustainable fashion develop-
ment models, and it has also garnered widespread academic attention. Considering the
relationship between second-hand clothing consumption and consumers’ personal factors,
social environment, and ethics, a lot of studies have explored this aspect.
In Sweden, to draw attention to the residual value and environmental status of clothing,
some clothing stores have set up a recycling system, followed by professionally reorga-
nizing and reselling the collected clothing [22]. Thus, some studies claimed that people’s
willingness to consume second-hand clothing could be driven by environmental protection
awareness. Yan et al. [23] surveyed students who consumed second-hand clothing and
found that they generally believed that shopping for vintage is a better way to express their
own personality and fashion. In addition, high-frequency research perspectives included
economic interests and hedonism. When consumers think that the clothing product has
high practical value and a reasonable price, they are willing to share it. The innovation
and convenience involved in product search can attain the purpose of pleasing consump-
tion [24]. Among the hindering factors of second-hand consumption, Fisher et al. [25]
claimed that the psychological factors of consumers occupy a sufficiently large position of
influence, such as rejection because of the unclear source of clothing. As mentioned earlier,
many Chinese people have expressed their willingness to acquire second-hand clothing
from acquaintances out of trust; however, if the clothing comes from an unfamiliar group,
they might hesitate and worry about the quality and contamination of the clothing, which
eventually leads to rejection. Nevertheless, many sharing platforms have stated that they
have professional cleaning and disinfection processes to ensure the hygiene and safety of
clothing, thereby decreasing consumers’ concerns about this issue [26].
This study divides the significant factors included in the previous studies into two parts:
personal factors and external factors (Table 1). Before the pandemic and the beginning
of the pandemic, people’s weak awareness of health protection was not included in the
scope of research. Similarly, in terms of external factors, although product cleanliness has
been established to exert a negative regulating impact on clothing-sharing behavior, the
frequency of consideration is low, which also reflects that people’s hygiene consciousness
is not usually believed to hinder the generation of sharing intentions. However, in Rekhter
and Ermasova’s [27] survey on people’s health perception after the pandemic, 64% of 315
respondents stated that their health pressure has increased, and they will be cautious owing
to the likelihood of contamination. Hence, we believe that the current framework of factors
affecting consumer fashion-sharing will change, and health awareness and cleanliness will
become two critical parts of the two sectors. Furthermore, we conjecture that the influence
indicators of other factors will be changed by the interference of hotspots of the times. To
validate the conjectures mentioned above, we examined the Chinese market and explored
the changes in the antecedents of sharing behavior in the post-pandemic era.
Table 1. A sub-summary of the influencing factors of used clothing-sharing behavior in previous studies.
Personal Factors External Factors
Paper Hygiene
Fashion Environmental Convenient Bad Cleaning
Hedonism Protection Expense
Sense Awareness Condition Quality Issue
Awareness
Park and Armstrong
X X X*
[18]
Becker-Leifhold [28] X X
Lang and Joyner
X X
Armstrong [29]
Tu and Hu [30] X X
Yuan and Shen [31] X X
This factor has not
Lang et al. [32] X been studied in X X X*
these surveys on
Lee and Chow [33] X X X X
the clothing
Kim [34] X rental behavior.
Shrivastava et al. [19] X X X
Hur [35] X X X X X* X*
Morais et al. [36] X X
Park and Lin [37] X X
Lee et al. [38] X X X
Zhang and Dong [39] X X
Note: “X” represents a significant influencing factor derived from previous research. The additional “*” represents
that this factor exerts a negative regulatory impact on the purchase and renting of second-hand clothing.
2.3. Theoretical Background

The selection and birth of emerging technology is performed per understanding the
users’ needs, but how to find the exact direction of improvement of this technology still
needs to be user-centric. Accordingly, many studies have proposed theories and models
to explore user technology acceptance, such as the theory of planned behavior (TPB) [40],
theory of reasoned action (TRA) [41], and technology acceptance model (TAM) [42]. UTAUT
is integrated and evolved from the previous theoretical models, and it covers four core
variables: performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating
conditions (Figure 1). The model can better reflect the influence of an individual’s unique
knowledge, experience, and autonomy on behavior from a comprehensive perspective.
Compared with previous theoretical models such as TPB, TRA, TAM, etc., its explanatory
power for individual intention has been proven to reach 70%, which makes it regarded
as a relatively superior predictive analysis tool [13]. UTAUT provides effective help for
promoters to understand the reasons for people’s acceptance of new things and new
technologies so that they can rationally design interventions [43].
ing conditions (Figure 1). The model can better reflect the influence of an individual’s
unique knowledge, experience, and autonomy on behavior from a comprehensive per‐
spective. Compared with previous theoretical models such as TPB, TRA, TAM, etc., its
explanatory power for individual intention has been proven to reach 70%, which makes
Sustainability 2022, 14, 9566
it regarded as a relatively superior predictive analysis tool [13]. UTAUT provides effective 5 of 20
help for promoters to understand the reasons for people’s acceptance of new things and
new technologies so that they can rationally design interventions [43].

Figure 1. Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology.
Figure 1. Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology.
Based on the open structure of UTAUT, many studies expanded the model to enrich
Based on the open structure of UTAUT, many studies expanded the model to enrich
the research system. By reasonably introducing new elements related to the research ob-
the research system. By reasonably introducing new elements related to the research ob‐
ject in the original model, the behavioral laws of individuals can be better grasped [44].
ject in the original model, the behavioral laws of individuals can be better grasped [44].
Curtale et al. [8] explained consumers’ willingness to accept car-sharing by introducing
Curtale et al. [8] explained consumers’ willingness to accept car‐sharing by introducing
the psychological dimension into the UTAUT model, accurately obtaining the degree of
the psychological dimension into the UTAUT model, accurately obtaining the degree of
influence of psychological awareness. Researching consumers’ online shopping behavior,
influence of psychological awareness. Researching consumers’ online shopping behavior,
Çelik [45] claimed that the ability of the model ontology to explain behavioral intentions has
Çelik [45] claimed that the ability of the model ontology to explain behavioral intentions
reached the limit; thus, he integrated a new element component, an emotional component,
has reached the limit; thus, he integrated a new element component, an emotional com‐
into the original framework, and he drew the conclusion that anxiety negatively affects
ponent, into the original framework, and he drew the conclusion that anxiety negatively
online shopping behavior. Similarly,Similarly,
affects online shopping behavior. Jeon et al. Jeon
[46] took
et al. consumers’ individual innovation
[46] took consumers’ individual
and perceived risk level as an additional branch of the UTAUT model so that consumers’
innovation and perceived risk level as an additional branch of the UTAUT model so that
willingness
consumers’ towillingness
accept information
to accept service technology
information could
service be investigated
technology more
could be compre-
investigated
hensively. Based on the above studies, it is concluded that a reasonable
more comprehensively. Based on the above studies, it is concluded that a reasonable ex‐extension of UTAUT
istension of UTAUT is feasible and meaningful for a comprehensive understanding of con‐
feasible and meaningful for a comprehensive understanding of consumers’ behavioral
motivations. Inspiredmotivations.
sumers’ behavioral by this, our Inspired
study compounded
by this, our appropriate new variables
study compounded on the
appropriate
basis of the original model. The antecedents that influence second-hand clothing-sharing
new variables on the basis of the original model. The antecedents that influence second‐6 of 21
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW
behavior will be explored from multiple dimensions. Figure 2 provides an overview of the
hand clothing‐sharing behavior will be explored from multiple dimensions. Figure 2 pro‐
research ideas of this paper.
vides an overview of the research ideas of this paper.

Figure 2. Map of research ideas on the influencing factors of fashion‐sharing behavior in the post‐
Figure 2. Map of research ideas on the influencing factors of fashion-sharing behavior in the post-
pandemic era.
pandemic era.
2.4. Research Framework and Hypothesis
To investigate the overall changes in the influencing factors of consumers’ second‐
hand clothing‐sharing behavior in the post‐pandemic era, we selected the UTAUT model
with better comprehensive performance and superior explanatory ability as the basis for
2.4. Research Framework and Hypothesis

To investigate the overall changes in the influencing factors of consumers’ second-
hand clothing-sharing behavior in the post-pandemic era, we selected the UTAUT model
with better comprehensive performance and superior explanatory ability as the basis for
the construction of a research theory. Facilitating conditions were expanded according to a
sub-aggregation of factors from Section 2.2. We added the external factors section, product
cost performance, and cleaning issues, and expanded personal affective factors among
the antecedent variables affecting intention generation—health awareness, hedonism, and
environmental awareness.
As personal fashion style and orientation are aesthetic tastes formed after long-term
exploration and precipitation, they are not easily affected by social events [47], so we did
not include fashion perception in the research scope of influencing factors. In reality, some
intentions might not be transformed into actual behaviors after being disturbed by certain
factors. Considering this intention-behavior gap [48], we added an additional dimension of
perceived risk—perceived financial risk and perceived information risk—as moderators
between willingness and behavior.
In addition, we chose the Chinese clothing-sharing market as the research object to
identify the development issues that this type of growth platform needs to pay attention to
at present, so as to draw practical improvement strategies. Compared with the research
on platforms with mature systems, this is more meaningful and valuable. As the main
business of platforms (second-hand clothing renting and resale) is highly similar to the
affected factors, and it has been verified that the weight of rental services on a platform is
usually higher than that of resale business, this study finally researched around CRS.
2.4.1. Basic Core Variables: Performance Expectancy, Effort Expectancy, and Social Influence
In previous academic studies, positive performance expectations can improve people’s
willingness to accept and use an information application or technical service [49]. In this
study, the original intention was extended to the users’ expectation that CRS would bring
benefits and value to them. In the “P2P” sharing platform Tulerie, clothing grades range
from affordable to luxury. Users can choose fashion items for different occasions and
functional needs to obtain an extremely rich product value experience. Meanwhile, as the
product is a direct connection between members, friendship could be formed after repeated
reciprocation, helping to broaden their social circles and extend the interest chain. Notably,
the benefits obtained by consumers after choosing CRS should not be underestimated.
Effort expectancy comprises perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, the
latter of which is considered to be a critical determinant of individual satisfaction with
technology [50]. People’s physical interactions have been reduced due to the pandemic,
which has made consumers prefer online channels when shopping [51]. Su et al. [52]
assessed users’ perceptions of the e-commerce interface and demonstrated that users
are more accustomed to attaining their goals through simple and easy-to-understand
operations. To effectively decrease the cumbersome steps that consumers have to take
when purchasing products, more and more e-commerce operation systems are constantly
improving toward convenience and diversification [53]. Hence, for online clothing rental
platforms, having a minimalist clothing rental system could be a key point to increase
users’ acceptance of CRS. Besides, realizing users’ quick reservation, receipt, and return of
clothing products around perceived ease of use is an essential means to fulfill user needs.
Social influence denotes that when an individual communicates information and
emotionally interacts with the surrounding people, his/her thoughts, attitudes, and behav-
iors are influenced by others and, thus, change [54]. Luo [55] reported that the ideas and
practices of peers and family members would affect personal consumption desire to some
extent; this is because they play a vital role in consumers’ lives, and consumers consider
their opinions to be acceptable. For example, when trying on clothes, consumers might have
the impulse to spend because of their approval. For online consumption, consumers not
only listen to the opinions of acquaintances but also consider the overall online reputation
of the product to measure the consumption value [56].
Based on the above, the following hypotheses are proposed:
Hypothesis 1 (H1). Performance expectancy positively correlates with behavioral intention.
Hypothesis 2 (H2). Effort expectancy positively correlates with behavioral intention.
Hypothesis 3 (H3). Social influence is positively correlates with behavioral intention.
2.4.2. External Factor: Product Cost Performance

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the global economy. Per a survey of 500 Chi-
nese consumers by Cotton Incorporated [57], the overall clothing expenditure ratio declined
by 69% after the pandemic, but 96% of them stated that the comfort of clothing is still the
top priority when purchasing. A reduction in spending does not mean a decline in the
pursuit of quality. From a long-term perspective, the ultimate cost-effectiveness will become
the long-term pursuit of consumers in the post-pandemic era. Hence, we hypothesize the
following:
Hypothesis 4 (H4). Product cost performance exerts a positive impact on behavioral intention.
2.4.3. Personal Factors: Health and Hygiene Awareness, Hedonism, Environmental

Awareness
In the context of the pandemic, people’s views on health, consumption, and the envi-
ronment have all changed. In terms of personal health protection, COVID-19 has brought
an unprecedented psychological burden to people. According to the actual situation, a
virus-infected person will have multiple close contacts, which will cause a chain reac-
tion [58]. As a densely populated country, China attaches great importance to this type
of vicious virus. After this high-scale and persistent virus attack, people have profoundly
realized the necessity of preventive medicine, public health, and the significance of health
management. In this state, consumers will become increasingly cautious about their access
to public goods. Yang and Lee pointed out that perceived physical risks will affect consumer
trust and adoption of shared services [59]. For direct-to-skin services like clothing-sharing,
consumers will inevitably deepen their fear and resistance.
From the perspective of consumers’ needs, they will desire to obtain happiness from
the service and then create a sense of accomplishment, which is called hedonism [60].
The hedonism in this study denotes the interesting dressing experience that consumers
enjoy by renting clothes. In the fashion subscription service, most consumers unpack
the subscription package with excitement and enjoy it when trying on new clothes. This
hedonic atmosphere plays a positive role in the later subscription intention [61]. In addition,
driven by the pandemic, “pleasant” consumption is on the rise, and “living in the moment
and having fun in time” has become the main life attitude of consumers. Hence, we believe
that under the pandemic, hedonism is still an essential factor affecting the willingness to
rent clothing.
Focusing on the environmental level, studies have demonstrated that a poor ecological
environment will aggravate the threat of COVID-19 to people’s health. For example, in
areas with severe air pollution, the transmission rate of COVID-19 will increase, resulting
in increased human mortality [62]. Affected by the pandemic, people have to re-evaluate
and deeply reflect on the mode of living with nature, and environmental protection will
attract higher attention. Under this opportunity, people will be more willing to adopt a
green lifestyle, such as taking a more positive attitude toward clothing renting, which is
environment friendly.
These subjective consciousnesses of consumers inseparably correlate with the con-
sumption content they pay attention to, and they are considered to play a crucial role in
influencing consumption activities [63]. Hence, the following hypotheses are proposed:
Hypothesis 5 (H5). Health and hygiene awareness negatively affect behavioral intention.
Hypothesis 6 (H6). Hedonism positively affects behavioral intention.
Hypothesis 7 (H7). Environmental awareness positively affects behavioral intention.
2.4.4. External Factor: Cleaning Issue

As the identity of the original user of the second-hand product is unknown, some
consumers believe that the product has been contaminated, and the invisible dirty feeling
makes them feel bad [64]. Thus, it is essential for second-hand commodity operators to
have professional cleaning and disinfection measures. Clube and Tennant [65] analyzed
500 consumer reviews of two clothing rental companies and revealed that the hygiene and
safety of clothing is a key concern of consumers. If the cleaning of the platform is not in
place, causing consumers to learn that the rented clothing has serious contamination issues,
then the rental business will also be negatively affected. Hence, we hypothesize the following:
Hypothesis 8 (H8). Cleaning issue significantly negatively affects actual behavior.
2.4.5. Intention-Behavior Gap: Perceived Risk

As the conversion of intentions into behaviors encounters some hindering factors,
consumers might not be able to act according to their initial intentions [48]. To narrow the
gap between the intention and behavior of second-hand clothing-sharing, we combined
actual cases and included two moderating factors, perceived financial risk and perceived
information risk, for research.
Owing to the collaborative nature of the sharing economy, mutual trust between
merchants and users serves as the basis for promoting sharing activities [66]. However,
in the current sharing economy, an increasing number of incidents related to trust risks
have been reported (such as users suffering financial losses, users’ private lives being dis-
turbed). Regarding the financial risks in shared electronic products, the China Consumers
Association stated that unreasonable billing acts as a trigger for consumers to complain.
Given the same shared nature, if consumers perceive noticeable financial disadvantages
in the clothing-leasing process, dissatisfaction and complaints about the business will
also increase.
Similarly, violation of consumer privacy has not been unheard of in some of Airbnb’s
rental disputes. For example, when a consumer leaves negative feedback on a product, a
lessor can contact the consumer through his/her private account, which is disclosed by the
platform to persuade him/her to modify the comment, thereby disrupting the consumer’s
life. Hence, the platform’s poor protection of consumer information is also a major failure
that results in decreasing consumers’ trust.
Finally, we propose the following hypotheses regarding the perceived risk in the
intention-behavior gap and the magnitude of the effect of intention on behavior:
Hypothesis 9 (H9). Perceived financial risk exerts a negative impact on the relationship.
Hypothesis 10 (H10). Perceived information risk exerts a negative impact on the relationship.
Hypothesis 11 (H11). Behavioral intention positively correlates with actual behavior.
Considering the assumptions mentioned above, Figure 3 shows the final proposed
theoretical model framework.
Hypothesis 10 (H10). Perceived information risk exerts a negative impact on the relation
Hypothesis 11 (H11). Behavioral intention positively correlates with actual behavior.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 9566 Considering the assumptions mentioned above, Figure 3 shows the final pro

9 of 20
theoretical model framework.

Figure 3. Theoretical framework of research on second-hand clothing-sharing behavior. Note: Green
Figure 3. Theoretical framework of research on second‐hand clothing‐sharing behavior. Note
dotted lines represent positive impact. Blue realizations represent negative impact.
dotted lines represent positive impact. Blue realizations represent negative impact.
3. Methods
3. Methods
The content design of this questionnaire mainly comprised two parts. The first part
was the interviewees’ personal information, and the second part used a 5-level Likert scale
The content design of this questionnaire mainly comprised two parts. The fir
(1–5: strongly disagree to strongly agree) to index each conceptual variable.
was the interviewees’ personal information, and the second part used a 5‐level Like
In the scale, the measurement items of the three original dimensions (performance
(1–5: strongly disagree to strongly agree) to index each conceptual variable.
expectancy, effort expectancy, and social influence) were adapted from previous studies by
Venkatesh et al. [13] and Shrivastava et al. [19] applying UTAUT. The items for production
In the scale, the measurement items of the three original dimensions (perfor
cost performance were inspired by the research of Rothenberg and Matthews [67]. We set up
expectancy, effort expectancy, and social influence) were adapted from previous s
measurement items for the cleanliness dimension (personal health and hygiene awareness
by Venkatesh et al. [13] and Shrivastava et al. [19] applying UTAUT. The items fo
and platform cleanliness) based on the opinions of Lee et al. [68] and De Liberato et al. [69]
duction cost performance were inspired by the research of Rothenberg and Matthew
on the hygiene status of fashion-sharing platforms and second-hand clothing. A measure
We set up measurement items for the cleanliness dimension (personal health and h
of hedonism was formed by adapting the theory of Lo et al. [24]. According to research by
Yan et al. [23] and Borusiak et al. [70] on consumers’ perception of environmental issues,
awareness and platform cleanliness) based on the opinions of Lee et al. [68] and De
we have adapted the content of environmental awareness. Drawing on the experience of
ato et al. [69] on the hygiene status of fashion‐sharing platforms and second‐hand
Rausch and Kopplin [71] and James et al. [72], the items of perceived financial risk and
ing. A measure of hedonism was formed by adapting the theory of Lo et al. [24]. A
perceived information risk were integrated. The pre-test of the questionnaire was used
ing to research by Yan et al. [23] and Borusiak et al. [70] on consumers’ perception
to check the possible semantic and logical problems of each item. Appendix A Table A1
shows the final measurement items.
vironmental issues, we have adapted the content of environmental awareness. Dr
In this survey, we separately carried out the following work. First of all, the target
population is identified. Due to the current development of e-commerce, the new genera-
tion of young people has become the main force of consumers, so the sample group was
expected to be dominated by the younger generation. Secondly, regarding the delivery
method of questionnaires, more convenient online channels were considered to distribute
questionnaires to obtain sample data. Finally, WeChat, a multi-functional communication
program, was selected as our questionnaire distribution and collection tool. At the same
time, in order to expand the sample size, we contacted college students and young col-
leagues in other cities (Beijing, Tianjin, Suzhou, Shanghai) online to assist in distributing the
questionnaires, mainly by posting questionnaire links in their social groups and “WeChat
Moments”, to get more respondents. A total of 587 questionnaires were collected. To ensure
the objectivity and validity of the total data, 54 invalid questionnaires with inconsistent
answers, extreme values, and questionnaire filling time <90 s were excluded. Finally, 533
valid questionnaire samples were recovered. From the descriptive statistics of the sample
population (Table 2), 73.5% of all participants were female (n = 392), and most of them
were aged 18–28 years (n = 504, 94.6%). The obtained sample data were mostly from young
consumers, which matched our previous expectations. The rental channels were not limited
to online channels or offline stores. About 25% of them had experience in clothing rental,
and the clothing types were mostly concentrated in business wear and costume. Another
12.2% had thought about trying to rent clothes. The remaining 63.6% of the respondents
had never rented clothing. Based on the above data, the popularity of clothing sharing was
not high. We could not deny that respondents without rental experience do not have any
views on the sharing of second-hand clothing. Likewise, those respondents who refused to
rent because of their own prejudice against shared goods could not be excluded. It was
expected that various comments and insights about clothing-sharing platforms from people
with different experiences and attitudes could be collected. In addition, more than half of
the participants stated that the pandemic affected their attitudes toward shared goods to a
high degree.
Table 2. Descriptive statistics (n = 533).
Sample Statistics Specifications Counts Percentage

Female 392 73.5
Gender Male 133 25.5
Reluctance to disclose 8 1.5
<18 2 0.4
18–28 504 94.6
Age (in years) 29–35 14 2.6
36–45 10 1.9
46–60 3 0.6
Undergraduate 246 46.2
Postgraduate and above 266 49.9
Education
Higher vocational and other skills education 10 1.9
Other 11 2.1
Weekly 9 1.7
Monthly 229 43.
Frequency of buying clothes Quarterly 237 44.5
Half-yearly 39 7.3
Yearly 19 3.6
1–3 garments 418 78.4
4–6 garments 102 19.1
Quantity of clothing per purchase
7–10 garments 11 2.1
≥10 garments 2 0.4
Yes 129 24.2
Clothing rental experience No 339 63.6
Thought but didn’t try 65 12.2
Business wear 60 46.5
Costume 47 36.4
Types of clothing that have been rented
Fast fashion category 9 7.0
(n = 129)
Luxury/Designer category 10 7.8
Other 3 2.3
Very affected 240 45
More affected 77 14.4
Are personal attitudes toward shared
Moderately affected 112 21.0
goods affected by the pandemic?
Less affected 61 11.4
Unaffected 43 8.1
4. Results
4.1. Measurement Model Evaluation
We used the two-step analysis method in the PLS-SEM [73], combined with PLS
program (Smart-PLS) version 3.0 for analysis and measurement. PLS is an optimized
new parameter estimation method. It can fully mine data information and obtain the
best matching data by measuring the minimum sum of squares of errors. This approach
does not require a high sample size and overcomes the potential limitations of the normal
distribution [74]. PLS can effectively deal with the problem of collinearity between variables
and is suitable for robust prediction of complex causal models [75]. The first step of the
analysis was to assess the measurement model, that is, to test the reliability and validity
of each measurement variable and indexed measurement items. The indicators involved
primarily included Cronbach’s α, composite reliability (CR), average variance extraction
(AVE), and cross-loadings. The second step was the evaluation of the structural model,
which is mainly based on the R2 explanatory ability, variance inflation factor (VIF), path
coefficients, confidence interval, t-statistics, p-value, and other evaluation indicators to
judge the predictive ability of the model and the establishment of various assumptions.
The PLS algorithm was used to calculate this time. In the basic settings of the algo-
rithm, the path weighting scheme was selected, the maximum number of iterations was
300 times, and the end criterion is 107. To avoid the error of the results, the calculation
was repeated multiple times. Table 3 shows the final analysis results. The Cronbach’s α of
each variable was 0.784–0.867, and the CR and AVE values were higher than the standard
thresholds. Thus, the questionnaire passed the internal consistency test and has good
introverted validity.
Table 3. Evaluation of data reliability and convergence validity.
Latent Variable Indicators Mean (SD) Cronbach’s α (>0.7) CR (>0.7) AVE (>0.5)
PE 3 3.380 (0.693) 0.786 0.875 0.701
EE 3 3.729 (0.690) 0.793 0.878 0.707
SI 3 2.824 (0.719) 0.806 0.885 0.720
PCP 3 3.845 (0.718) 0.846 0.907 0.764
HHA 3 3.832 (0.622) 0.784 0.874 0.679
HED 3 3.364 (0.662) 0.861 0.912 0.777
EA 3 3.438 (0.678) 0.827 0.896 0.742
CI 3 3.879 (0.832) 0.875 0.923 0.800
PFR 3 3.682 (0.637) 0.829 0.898 0.746
PIR 3 3.175 (0.645) 0.831 0.899 0.747
BI 2 3.639 (0.818) 0.867 0.938 0.882
AB 2 3.343 (0.697) 0.814 0.915 0.843
Note: PE = performance expectancy, EE = effort expectancy, SI = social influence, PCP = product cost performance,
HHA = Health and hygiene awareness, HED = hedonism, EA = environmental awareness, CI = cleaning issue,
PFR = perceived financial risk, PIR = perceived information risk, BI = behavioral intention, AB = actual behavior.
Regarding discriminant validity, three methods are usually used for comprehen-
sive evaluation, which are based on cross-loadings, the Fornell-Larcker criterion, and the
heterotrait–monotrait ratio (HTMT). Appendix A Table A2 shows the cross-loadings. The
Fornell-Larcker criterion requires that the square root of the AVE to which a variable be-
longs should be greater than its correlation coefficient with other latent variables. Table 4
shows that the square roots of all AVEs on the main diagonal are much higher than the
rest of the values in the column where they are located, meeting the criteria for judgment.
Table 5 presents the analysis results of HTMT. The value between each of the two facets
was less than the conservative threshold of 0.85. Meanwhile, 5000 subsamples were set up
by the bootstrapping method, which excluded the possibility that the confidence interval
of all facets contained 1. The discriminant validity test results were good, and there was no
reliability and validity problem in general.
Table 4. Data discriminant validity assessment method 1: the Fornell-Larcker criterion.
PE EE SI PCP HHA HED EA CI PFR PIR BI AB

PE 0.837
EE 0.243 0.841
SI 0.285 0.244 0.848
PCP 0.235 0.206 0.236 0.874
HHA 0.088 0.073 0.110 0.058 0.835
HED 0.250 0.291 0.245 0.262 0.054 0.882
EA 0.258 0.272 0.228 0.231 0.116 0.306 0.862
CI −0.025 −0.121 0.007 −0.106 0.017 −0.047 −0.107 0.895
PFR −0.163 −0.179 −0.135 −0.139 −0.120 −0.219 −0.189 0.058 0.863
PIR −0.074 −0.121 −0.037 −0.035 0.001 −0.092 −0.107 −0.007 0.067 0.864
BI 0.446 0.326 0.211 0.235 −0.209 0.235 0.199 −0.115 −0.122 −0.087 0.939
AB 0.337 0.339 0.263 0.333 0.081 0.286 0.293 −0.471 −0.291 −0.109 0.405 0.918
Table 5. Data discriminant validity assessment method 2: HTMT.

PE
EE 0.308
SI 0.357 0.302
PCP 0.287 0.249 0.283
HHA 0.113 0.094 0.14 0.096
HED 0.308 0.342 0.294 0.308 0.083
EA 0.321 0.333 0.28 0.276 0.145 0.359
CI 0.056 0.142 0.049 0.119 0.034 0.06 0.128
PFR 0.200 0.224 0.168 0.165 0.149 0.267 0.229 0.07
PIR 0.109 0.149 0.045 0.044 0.056 0.103 0.128 0.028 0.095
BI 0.538 0.391 0.251 0.27 0.253 0.258 0.233 0.13 0.141 0.103
AB 0.422 0.421 0.325 0.4 0.103 0.349 0.359 0.554 0.351 0.131 0.481
4.2. Structural Model Evaluation

First, the multicollinearity test was conducted on the proposed model. The VIF of
each latent variable was 1.523–2.675 and did not exceed the threshold of 3.3, indicating that
there was no collinearity problem between the variables [76]. The multiple determination
coefficient R2 is often used to assess the predictive ability of structural models [77]. In this
study, the R2 of behavioral intention was 0.436 (0.430 after adjustment), and the R2 of actual
behavior was 0.336 (0.327 after adjustment), showing that the explanatory power of the
model proposed in this study was moderate. Finally, we derived all hypothesized path
coefficients, 95% confidence intervals, and t-statistics by bootstrapping the 5000-subsample
configuration (Table 6).
In the structural model evaluation, path analysis is the principal part, which primarily
measures the degree of influence of variables according to path coefficients [78]. Combining
the p-values of the hypotheses, except for the four hypotheses H3, H6, H7, and H10, all the
other hypotheses are valid. Figure 4 summarizes the final structural model evaluation re-
sults. The path coefficient of performance expectancy was 0.364, and its positive correlation
exerted the greatest impact, showing that for young groups, the ability to fulfill the wearing
needs of specific places and attain their expected interest value is a crucial factor for them to
choose CRS. Among all the negative impact variables, the cleaning problem of the platform
exerted the largest negative value. Its path coefficient reached 0.428, which was also greater
than all positive impact indicators; this proves that in the post-pandemic era, the sanitary
conditions of the outside world might become the primary factor influencing people to rent
second-hand clothing.
Table 6. Hypothesis test results.
Path Confidence Interval T-Statistics

Hypothesis
Coefficients (Bias Correction, 95%) (p-Value)
H1 PE → BI (+) 0.364 [0.286, 0.431] 9.835 (p < 0.001)
H2 EE → BI (+) 0.203 [0.127, 0.282] 5.079 (p < 0.001)
H3 SI → BI (+) 0.046 [−0.035, 0.130] 1.096 (p = 0.273)
H4 PCP → BI (+) 0.090 [0.020, 0.161] 2.507 (p < 0.05)
H5 HHA → BI (−) −0.273 [−0.339, −0.198] 7.552 (p < 0.001)
H6 HED → BI (+) 0.054 [−0.023, 0.133] 1.355 (p = 0.176)
H7 EA → BI (+) 0.034 [−0.047, 0.106] 0.875 (p = 0.381)
H8 CI → AB (−) −0.428 [−0.484, −0.369] 14.815 (p < 0.001)
BI → AB
H9 PFR * → −0.193 [−0.258, −0.128] 5.812 (p < 0.001)
(−)
BI → AB
H10 PIR * → −0.017 [−0.075, 0.038] 0.592 (p = 0.554)
(−)
H11 BI → AB (+) 0.342 [0.274, 0.406] 10.108 (p < 0.001)
HHA = Health and hygiene awareness, HED = hedonism, EA = environmental awareness, CI = cleaning
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 issue,
of 21
“*” indicates that the variable has moderating effect.

Figure 4. Final structural model evaluation results. Note: * p < 0.05; *** p < 0.001; n.s., not signifi‐
Figure 4. Final structural model evaluation results. Note: * p < 0.05; *** p < 0.001; n.s., not significant.
cant.
5. Discussion
5.1. Theoretical Implications
5. Discussion
This study investigates the changes in the influencing factors of China’s clothing-
5.1. Theoretical Implications
sharing economy
This before and after
study investigates the pandemic.
the changes Aiming at the
in the influencing growth
factors platform,
of China’s based
clothing‐
on the UTAUT, we expanded multiple dimension variables, such as cleanliness,
sharing economy before and after the pandemic. Aiming at the growth platform, based health,
and economy. Finally, an evaluation model of fashion-sharing influencing factors based on
on the UTAUT, we expanded multiple dimension variables, such as cleanliness, health,
the PLS-SEM was constructed, filling the gap in the research on the sharing tendency of
and economy. Finally, an evaluation model of fashion‐sharing influencing factors based
second-hand clothing in China after the pandemic.
on the PLS‐SEM was constructed, filling the gap in the research on the sharing tendency
Affected by COVID-19, people’s awareness of cleaning has deepened gradually; thus,
of second‐hand clothing in China after the pandemic.
we must consider whether people’s attitude toward the cleaning of second-hand platforms
Affected by COVID‐19, people’s awareness of cleaning has deepened gradually; thus,
has changed. Figure 4 shows that the clothing cleaning problems and the awareness of
we must consider whether people’s attitude toward the cleaning of second‐hand plat‐
personal hygiene protection have become the main negative influencing variables in the
forms has changed. Figure 4 shows that the clothing cleaning problems and the awareness
two sectors of external factors and personal factors. People’s attention to the pandemic
of personal hygiene protection have become the main negative influencing variables in
has led to a continued increase in health and hygiene concerns. People now prefer buying
the two sectors of external factors and personal factors. People’s attention to the pandemic
has led to a continued increase in health and hygiene concerns. People now prefer buying
unstained first‐hand clothing rather than renting or buying second‐hand clothing from
unclear sources. Poor hygiene in clothing can deter consumers who would otherwise be
willing to share.
unstained first-hand clothing rather than renting or buying second-hand clothing from
unclear sources. Poor hygiene in clothing can deter consumers who would otherwise be
willing to share.
Among several original basic variables of UTAUT, only social influence did not con-
tribute to behavioral intention, which could be because second-hand clothing-sharing
belongs to a niche circle in China, and consumers’ surrounding groups have a low level
of understanding of fashion-sharing. In addition, most respondents in this survey are
young people, who have independent ideas. Such people will have their own unique views
and tendencies in the face of the new era product of “shared wardrobe”. Furthermore,
supported by Medalla et al. [79] research on the antecedents of young consumers buying
second-hand clothing, high quality and affordable prices are, indeed, the main reasons for
the attention of used products. Online consumption can reduce the possibility of physical
contact with others, and simultaneously meet the different needs of consumers. Com-
pared with going to offline stores, online platforms that save time and effort will attract
consumers more.
Unexpectedly, in the personal factors section, the assumptions of hedonism and envi-
ronmental awareness did not hold. Combining the current stage of China’s clothing-sharing
market and the results of the questionnaire, clothing rental is not a rigid demand. Most
clothes that consumers rent are usually business wear and costumes, and few consumer
groups choose CRS for the pursuit of wearing clothing for fun. Considering the frequency
of wearing daily clothing, consumers are more willing to choose to obtain the independent
ownership of clothing; thus, the failure of H6 also becomes reasonable. The meaningless-
ness of H7 might imply that consumers still have a superficial view of pollution in the
clothing production process, and they cannot correctly recognize the environmental impact
brought by the clothing industry. Fashion-sharing could be just simple product recycling
for them, and they cannot autonomously link it to green sustainable development.
For moderator variables in the intention-behavior gap, only the negative moderator
of perceived financial risk was validated. One of the reasons why China’s clothing rental
platform “YCLOSET” failed is owing to its unreasonable formulation of the user payment
system and the existence of arbitrary fees (such as “malicious deductions”, “member
automatic renewal”, “difficult to refund after sales”), which has led to a large loss of
platform customers. The failure case of “YCLOSET” can be supplemented by verification
that the financial risk perceived by users will, indeed, inhibit the final formation of second-
hand clothing-sharing behavior. The negative adjustment of another variable’s perceived
information risk has not been verified. Although it is counterintuitive, it might also be
that consumers attach less importance to personally identifiable information than financial
information, and they cannot face up to the illegality of personal data and security risks
caused by loss.
Combining the above conclusions, this study can provide a strong theoretical basis
for how the growing Asian fashion-sharing platforms can iteratively update the current
market development trend. For European investment merchants trying to enter the Chinese
clothing-sharing market, it can give unique insights from a relatively relevant standpoint.
5.2. Practical Implications

This study also contributes to the actual development of the growing second-hand
clothing-sharing platforms. To promote their own upgrading and innovation, platforms
must face up to the factors that will adversely affect their development, such as the primary
cleaning issue. To convince consumers with increasing awareness of hygiene protection
in the professionalism and safety of clothing cleaning, platforms can clearly convey each
cleaning process to consumers in the form of live broadcasts. The establishment of a
professional qualification check portal for a cooperative cleaning platform on the webpage
can help to trace the source of cleaning. Furthermore, it is necessary to focus on the financial
risks that consumers think might arise during the shopping process. Reportedly, when
users shop online, they worry about shopping because of some operational obstacles (such
as bank card binding and cumbersome consumption checkout ports), which eventually lead
to resistance and the choice to refuse consumption [80]. Growing second-hand clothing-
sharing platforms need to attach great importance to the economic interests of consumers
and fortify payment security technology. In addition, users’ rights and interests should be
protected. Maliciously charging membership fees or automatically renewing membership
fees without notice will seriously damage users’ interests and the platforms. Furthermore,
a reasonable return and exchange policy is also a major measure to ensure the financial
rights and interests of users. From the standpoint of morality and ethics, the protection of
users’ personal information is the basic principle.
Regarding promoting adjustment factors, consumers attach great importance to the
performance expectancy and effort expectancy that platforms can give themselves, as
well as the high-cost performance of products. Thus, growing platforms should earnestly
explore clothing-sharing categories and adjust the rental category of second-hand clothing
in a timely manner, which can effectively satisfy the expectations of a broad range of users
for the supply of main clothing. For the resale categories of second-hand clothing, it is
possible to focus on daily clothing with a high new rate and formulate a reasonable price
concession strategy. Owing to the temporary and sudden nature of work requirements and
occasion attendance, it is essential to ensure that users can receive apparel products in a
short period. Hence, a simple system design and an efficient transportation system can
enhance ease of use and convenience, thereby decreasing user waiting time.
We should fully awaken consumers’ awareness of environmental protection. Although
this study does not prove that this factor exerts a positive impact on the willingness to
rent second-hand clothing, it could correlate with the fact that clothing-sharing is a non-
rigid demand for Chinese consumers. For non-rigid-needed commodities, consumers care
more about the short-term return ratio it brings to individuals, rather than looking at its
impact from a macro-level. For example, clothing-sharing can promote the sustainability
of the environment and the clothing industry. Platforms should follow the trend of green
development and actively launch sustainable clothing response activities to deepen consumers’
positive views on second-hand clothing, especially in a clothing-producing country like China.
5.3. Limitations and Future Research

Due to limited platform transparency, we did not conduct research on specific plat-
forms. In order to consolidate and expand our research, focusing on a specific group with
rental experience is considered as a future research concern. To broaden the development
depth of platforms, it is a good way to combine with medical, protection, and other fields.
It is conceivable that the sharing of functional clothing (such as breathing monitoring,
heart rate monitoring) might become a hotspot as health concerns continue to rise. This
shared nature will give a deeper connotation to the consumption behavior of second-hand
clothing. China’s huge clothing market space can provide fertile development soil for
fashion-sharing. The exploration of China’s sharing platforms can bring positive signifi-
cance to the sustainable development of the country. Considering the influence of the star
effect in China and the trend-following power of young groups, it can be included in the
social influence level in the future, and stronger insights into the Chinese clothing-sharing
market have been obtained.
6. Conclusions
In the cultural migration from consumerism to a sustainable lifestyle, fashion-sharing
has become an active force leading sustainable consumption in the new century owing
to its value continuity, category diversity, and model novelty. Influenced by changes in
current events, there are many variables in the development of growth platforms. A precise
analysis of the category of variables will help the sustainable progress of platforms. This
study investigates the motivation of consumers to share second-hand clothing after the
pandemic. This study reveals that due to the impact of pandemic, cleaning and washing
have become a rigid need. Meanwhile, hygienic conditions for shared clothing have
become a major concern for consumers. The standard and transparency of the platform
cleaning process will facilitate the final formation and continuation of consumer-sharing
behavior. It is a vital measure to continuously optimize the usability of the sharing system
to deepen consumers’ tendency to share clothing, as well as protect users’ property rights
and interests. Under the appeal of value expectations, high-quality second-hand clothing
and reasonable price strategies are indispensable. Briefly, we should effectively use the
sharing system of clothing to promote consumers’ recognition and respect for sustainable
consumption behavior.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.X. and L.J.; Data curation, Y.Z.; Investigation, J.X. and
Y.Z.; Methodology, J.X. and Y.Z.; Supervision, J.X., L.J. and L.S.; Validation, Y.Z.; Writing—original
draft, J.X. and Y.Z.; Writing—review and editing, J.X., L.J. and L.S. All authors have read and agreed
to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Appendix A
Table A1. Measurement items.
Construct Item Description

PE1 Renting second-hand clothing is what I need for certain occasions.
Performance expectancy PE2 I can try more different styles and styles by renting second-hand clothing.
PE3 The sharing of second-hand clothing may broaden my social circle.
EE1 Online clothing rental is easy and the rental process is simple.
Effort expectancy The interface of online clothing rental platforms is clear and concise, and the
EE2
operation is simple, allowing me to quickly select the clothing I want.
EE3 Online clothing rental is convenient to order, and delivery is fast.
SI1 Positive consumer reviews online motivate me to try CRS.
Social influence SI2 People who are important to me (family, friends) think I can use CRS.
Someone who can give me an important opinion would prefer me to choose
SI3
clothing rental.
PCP1 Platforms strictly control the quality of second-hand clothing.
Product cost performance PCP2 Second-hand clothing is more cost-effective.
PCP3 The rental platforms can meet my requirement of garment cost performance.
I think second-hand clothing that is not cleaned properly can affect
HHA1
health later.
Health and
I don’t think platforms do enough cleaning for the second-hand clothing it
hygiene awareness HHA2
takes back.
HHA3 Shared items generally lack good disinfection measures.
Renting second-hand clothes can give me a different dressing experience
HED1
and happiness.
Hedonism
HED2 Renting different styles of second-hand clothing can add color to my life.
HED3 Using CRS allows me to enjoy more novel fashion elements.
I understand the current level of pollution to the environment by the
EA1
clothing industry.
I am very concerned about the impact of the clothing industry on
Environmental awareness EA2
environmental development.
I think renting second-hand clothing can reduce the production and
EA3
consumption of clothing, thereby reducing environmental pollution.
Table A1. Cont.
Construct Item Description

Platforms don’t have high hygiene and cleanliness standards for
CI1
second-hand clothing.
Cleaning issue
CI2 The hygiene condition of the second-hand clothing is not good.
CI3 Rental clothing makes me worry about needing a second cleaning.
I’m worried that there will be malicious deductions on clothing
PFR1
rental platforms.
Perceived financial risk
I’m worried that I won’t be able to cover the cost of compensation if the
PFR2
rental clothing is damaged.
I am concerned that the product value of the rental clothing is not
PFR3
proportional to the fee paid.
PIR1 Platforms may lack a mature integrity system and supervision system.
Perceived information risk PIR2 I am concerned that my personal information will be leaked.
PIR3 I do not upload personal real information lightly.
BI1 I am willing to rent second-hand clothing if needed.
Behavioral intention
BI2 I would like to recommend friends to choose CRS.
AB1 I will choose some clothing rental platforms for clothing rental.
Actual behavior
AB2 I may become a member of the clothing rental community in the future.
Table A2. Data discriminant validity assessment method 3-Cross-loadings.

PE1 0.854 0.216 0.277 0.178 0.061 0.231 0.236 0.005 −0.163 −0.076 0.384 0.264
PE2 0.849 0.192 0.213 0.188 0.083 0.205 0.219 −0.021 −0.111 −0.012 0.376 0.273
PE3 0.808 0.203 0.224 0.227 0.078 0.191 0.192 −0.050 −0.135 −0.100 0.359 0.312
EE1 0.257 0.814 0.171 0.179 0.071 0.241 0.189 −0.066 −0.166 −0.090 0.248 0.269
EE2 0.210 0.848 0.224 0.165 0.041 0.292 0.235 −0.145 −0.129 −0.122 0.281 0.299
EE3 0.202 0.860 0.216 0.177 0.071 0.204 0.257 −0.091 −0.159 −0.092 0.290 0.288
SI1 0.279 0.204 0.846 0.217 0.097 0.270 0.260 −0.042 −0.155 −0.023 0.179 0.264
SI2 0.227 0.225 0.858 0.204 0.099 0.205 0.143 0.015 −0.087 −0.055 0.188 0.204
SI3 0.219 0.190 0.842 0.179 0.083 0.146 0.178 0.047 −0.104 −0.015 0.170 0.201
PCP1 0.228 0.195 0.206 0.903 0.055 0.217 0.203 −0.106 −0.121 −0.016 0.206 0.316
PCP2 0.215 0.194 0.228 0.885 0.002 0.243 0.209 −0.114 −0.122 −0.070 0.230 0.286
PCP3 0.169 0.145 0.179 0.832 0.111 0.226 0.193 −0.051 −0.123 0.005 0.172 0.270
HHA1 0.058 0.035 0.095 0.039 0.796 0.076 0.074 −0.005 −0.066 −0.061 −0.152 0.077
HHA2 0.043 0.037 0.051 0.007 0.860 −0.013 0.059 0.028 −0.099 0.024 −0.192 0.062
HHA3 0.120 0.109 0.134 0.101 0.848 0.083 0.159 0.016 −0.131 0.029 −0.177 0.065
HED1 0.231 0.188 0.212 0.227 0.040 0.807 0.240 −0.063 −0.217 −0.037 0.128 0.269
HED2 0.230 0.269 0.221 0.247 0.052 0.924 0.276 −0.025 −0.221 −0.084 0.233 0.250
HED3 0.213 0.291 0.220 0.224 0.050 0.909 0.288 −0.047 −0.159 −0.105 0.231 0.254
EA1 0.257 0.226 0.193 0.199 0.120 0.263 0.847 −0.116 −0.160 −0.065 0.163 0.275
EA2 0.210 0.256 0.188 0.183 0.083 0.286 0.863 −0.085 −0.157 −0.123 0.175 0.229
EA3 0.202 0.221 0.208 0.214 0.098 0.241 0.875 −0.078 −0.173 −0.087 0.176 0.257
CI1 0.030 −0.069 −0.008 −0.081 0.005 −0.062 −0.116 0.871 0.056 −0.017 −0.082 −0.379
CI2 −0.042 −0.11 0.006 −0.098 0.039 −0.049 −0.087 0.920 0.051 0.001 −0.125 −0.463
CI3 −0.049 −0.143 0.021 −0.106 −0.004 −0.017 −0.087 0.892 0.050 −0.005 −0.099 −0.414
PFR1 −0.137 −0.165 −0.121 −0.105 −0.141 −0.204 −0.147 0.069 0.822 −0.014 −0.077 −0.226
PFR2 −0.107 −0.161 −0.131 −0.106 −0.088 −0.177 −0.189 0.037 0.870 0.103 −0.092 −0.244
PFR3 −0.173 −0.142 −0.102 −0.146 −0.087 −0.190 −0.156 0.048 0.897 0.078 −0.140 −0.281
PIR1 −0.090 −0.098 −0.028 −0.031 0.035 −0.077 −0.078 0.013 0.015 0.865 −0.085 −0.087
PIR2 −0.024 −0.110 −0.021 −0.029 −0.019 −0.107 −0.105 0.009 0.087 0.889 −0.070 −0.098
PIR3 −0.081 −0.106 −0.047 −0.030 −0.010 −0.054 −0.093 −0.038 0.068 0.839 −0.071 −0.097
BI1 0.446 0.319 0.232 0.235 −0.174 0.221 0.220 −0.123 −0.110 −0.086 0.944 0.395
BI2 0.389 0.293 0.162 0.204 −0.221 0.220 0.151 −0.093 −0.119 −0.077 0.935 0.365
AB1 0.306 0.292 0.257 0.299 0.082 0.277 0.275 −0.423 −0.241 −0.082 0.364 0.912
AB2 0.313 0.330 0.226 0.312 0.067 0.250 0.264 −0.440 −0.292 −0.116 0.380 0.924
The factor loadings for each variable are shown in bold.
References
1. Belk, R. You are what you can access: Sharing and collaborative consumption online. J. Bus. Res. 2014, 67, 1595–1600. [CrossRef]
2. Hartl, B.; Hofmann, E.; Kirchler, E. Do we need rules for “what’s mine is yours”? Governance in collaborative consumption
communities. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 2756–2763. [CrossRef]
3. Faschan, M.; Chailan, C.; Huaman Ramirez, R. Emerging adults’ luxury fashion brand value perceptions: A cross-cultural
comparison between Germany and China. J. Glob. Fash. Mark. 2020, 11, 207–231. [CrossRef]
4. Ting-toomey, S.; Kurogi, A. Facework competence in intercultural conflict: An updated face-negotiation theory. Int. J. Intercult.
Relat. 1998, 22, 187–225. [CrossRef]
5. Chen, L.; Zheng, H.; Shah, V.S. Consuming to Conserve: A Multilevel Investigation of Sustainable Consumption. Sustainability
2022, 14, 223. [CrossRef]
6. SynTao—Sustainability Solutions. 2021 China Sustainable Consumption Report. Available online: http://www.syntao.com/
newsinfo/2346457.html (accessed on 18 September 2021).
7. Wang, Y.; Xiao, Z. The Dual Effects of Consumer Satisfaction on Brand Switching Intention of Sharing Apparel. Sustainability
2022, 14, 4526. [CrossRef]
8. Curtale, R.; Liao, F.; van der Waerden, P. User acceptance of electric car-sharing services: The case of the Netherlands. Transp. Res.
Part A Policy Pract. 2021, 149, 266–282. [CrossRef]
9. Hossain, M. The effect of the Covid-19 on sharing economy activities. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 280, 124782. [CrossRef]
10. Word Health Organization. Listings of WHO’s Response to COVID-19. Available online: https://www.who.int/news/item/29-0
6-2020-covidtimeline (accessed on 25 September 2021).
11. Ingrassia, P.L.; Capogna, G.; Diaz-Navarro, C.; Szyld, D.; Tomola, S.; Leon-Castelao, E. COVID-19 crisis, safe reopening of
simulation centres and the new normal: Food for thought. Adv. Simul. 2020, 5, 13. [CrossRef]
12. Degli Esposti, P.; Mortara, A.; Roberti, G. Sharing and Sustainable Consumption in the Era of COVID-19. Sustainability 2021,
13, 1903. [CrossRef]
13. Venkatesh, V.; Morris, M.; Davis, G.; Davis, F. User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Q. 2003,
27, 425–478. [CrossRef]
14. Yacout, D.M.M.; Hassouna, M.S. Identifying potential environmental impacts of waste handling strategies in textile industry.
Environ. Monit. Assess. 2016, 188, 445. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
15. Li, X.; Wang, L.; Ding, X. Textile supply chain waste management in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 289, 125147. [CrossRef]
16. China Association of Circular Economy. What to Do with the 26 Million Tons of Discarded Clothing? Available online:
https://www.chinacace.org/news/view?id=7191 (accessed on 28 September 2021).
17. Chi, T.; Gerard, J.; Dephillips, A.; Liu, H. Why U.S. Consumers Buy Sustainable Cotton Made Collegiate Apparel? A Study of the
Key Determinants. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3126. [CrossRef]
18. Park, H.; Armstrong, C. Collaborative Apparel Consumption in the Digital Sharing Economy: An Agenda for Academic Inquiry.
Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2017, 41, 465–474. [CrossRef]
19. Shrivastava, A.; Jain, G.; Kamble, S.S.; Belhadi, A. Sustainability through online renting clothing: Circular fashion fueled by
instagram micro-celebrities. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 278, 123772. [CrossRef]
20. Williams, C. Why Do People Use Alternative Retail Channels? Some Casestudy Evidence from Two English Cities. Urban Stud.
2002, 39, 1897–1910. [CrossRef]
21. Woo, H.; Kim, S. Big Data Analysis of the Second-Hand Apparel Market Trends Comparing 2014 and 2019. In International Textile
and Apparel Association Annual Conference Proceedings; Iowa State University Digital Press: Ames, IA, USA, 2020.
22. Stål, H.I.; Corvellec, H. A decoupling perspective on circular business model implementation: Illustrations from Swedish apparel.
J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 171, 630–643. [CrossRef]
23. Yan, R.N.; Bae, S.Y.; Xu, H. Second-hand clothing shopping among college students: The role of psychographic characteristics.
Young Consum. 2015, 16, 85–98. [CrossRef]
24. Lo, C.; Tsarenko, Y.; Tojib, D. To tell or not to tell? The roles of perceived norms and self-consciousness in understanding
consumers’ willingness to recommend online secondhand apparel shopping. Psychol. Mark. 2019, 36, 287–304. [CrossRef]
25. Fisher, T.; Cooper, T.; Woodward, S.; Hiller, A.; Goworek, H. Public Understanding of Sustainable Clothing: Report to the Department
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; Defra: London, UK, 2008.
26. Park, H.; Joyner Armstrong, C.M. Is money the biggest driver? Uncovering motives for engaging in online collaborative
consumption retail models for apparel. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2019, 51, 42–50. [CrossRef]
27. Rekhter, N.; Ermasova, N. Effect of the COVID-19 on Perceptions of Health, Anticipated Need for Health Services, and Cost of
Health Care. Disaster Med. Public Health Prep. 2021, 1–7. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
28. Becker-Leifhold, C.V. The role of values in collaborative fashion consumption—A critical investigation through the lenses of the
theory of planned behavior. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 199, 781–791. [CrossRef]
29. Lang, C.; Joyner Armstrong, C.M. Collaborative consumption: The influence of fashion leadership, need for uniqueness, and
materialism on female consumers’ adoption of clothing renting and swapping. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2018, 13, 37–47. [CrossRef]
30. Tu, J.C.; Hu, C.L. A Study on the Factors Affecting Consumers’ Willingness to Accept Clothing Rentals. Sustainability 2018,
10, 4139. [CrossRef]
31. Yuan, Q.; Shen, B. Renting fashion with strategic customers in the sharing economy. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2019, 218, 185–195.
[CrossRef]
32. Lang, C.; Li, M.; Zhao, L. Understanding consumers’ online fashion renting experiences: A text-mining approach. Sustain. Prod.
Consum. 2020, 21, 132–144. [CrossRef]
33. Lee, S.H.N.; Chow, P.-S. Investigating consumer attitudes and intentions toward online fashion renting retailing. J. Retail. Consum.
Serv. 2020, 52, 101892. [CrossRef]
34. Kim, J. Collaborative fashion consumption in the sharing economy: Philosophical and aesthetic perspectives. J. Glob. Fash. Mark.
2020, 11, 289–305. [CrossRef]
35. Hur, E. Rebirth fashion: Secondhand clothing consumption values and perceived risks. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 273, 122951. [CrossRef]
36. Morais, C.; Carvalho, C.; Montagna, G. Dynamic Wardrobe from a User’s Perspective—A Previous Survey Study for Female
Students. In Advances in Design for Inclusion; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 358–364.
37. Park, H.J.; Lin, L.M. Exploring attitude–behavior gap in sustainable consumption: Comparison of recycled and upcycled fashion
products. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 117, 623–628. [CrossRef]
38. Lee, S.; Jung, H.; Lee, K.H. Motivating Collaborative Consumption in Fashion: Consumer Benefits, Perceived Risks, Service Trust,
and Usage Intention of Online Fashion Rental Services. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1804. [CrossRef]
39. Zhang, X.; Dong, F. How virtual social capital affects behavioral intention of sustainable clothing consumption pattern in
developing economies? A case study of China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 170, 105616. [CrossRef]
40. Ajzen, I. The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Processes 1991, 50, 179–211. [CrossRef]
41. Ajzen, I.; Fishbein, M. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior; Prentice-Hall: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1980.
42. Davis, F. Perceived usefulness perceived ease of use, and acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 1989, 13, 340–391.
[CrossRef]
43. Venkatesh, V.; Thong, J.; Xu, X. Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: Extending the Unified Theory of
Acceptance and Use of Technology. MIS Q. 2012, 36, 157–178. [CrossRef]
44. Rizwan, R.A.; Dalia, Š.; Justas, Š. The extended UTAUT model and learning management system during COVID-19: Evidence
from pls-sem and conditional process modeling. J. Bus. Econ. Manag. 2021, 23, 82–104. [CrossRef]
45. Çelik, H. Customer online shopping anxiety within the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use Technology (UTAUT) framework.
Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist. 2016, 28, 278–307. [CrossRef]
46. Jeon, H.M.; Sung, H.J.; Kim, H.Y. Customers’ acceptance intention of self-service technology of restaurant industry: Expanding
UTAUT with perceived risk and innovativeness. Serv. Bus. 2020, 14, 533–551. [CrossRef]
47. Gupta, S.; Gwozdz, W.; Gentry, J. The Role of Style Versus Fashion Orientation on Sustainable Apparel Consumption. J.
Macromarketing 2019, 39, 188–207. [CrossRef]
48. Nguyen, H.; Nguyen, C.; Hoang, T. Green consumption: Closing the intention-behavior gap. Sustain. Dev. 2018, 27, 118–129.
[CrossRef]
49. Owusu Kwateng, K.; Osei Atiemo, K.A.; Appiah, C. Acceptance and use of mobile banking: An application of UTAUT2. J. Enterp.
Inf. Manag. 2019, 32, 118–151. [CrossRef]
50. Casaló, L.V.; Flavián, C.; Guinalíu, M. Determinants of the intention to participate in firm-hosted online travel communities and
effects on consumer behavioral intentions. Tour. Manag. 2010, 31, 898–911. [CrossRef]
51. Tyrväinen, O.; Karjaluoto, H. Online grocery shopping before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A meta-analytical review.
Telemat. Inform. 2022, 71, 101839. [CrossRef]
52. Su, K.W.; Chen, S.C.; Lin, P.H.; Hsieh, C.-I. Evaluating the user interface and experience of VR in the electronic commerce
environment: A hybrid approach. Virtual Real. 2020, 24, 241–254. [CrossRef]
53. Hu, Y.; Qu, S.; Li, G.; Sethi, S.P. Power structure and channel integration strategy for online retailers. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2021, 294,
951–964. [CrossRef]
54. Hu, X.; Chen, X.; Davison, R. Social Support, Source Credibility, Social Influence, and Impulsive Purchase Behavior in Social
Commerce. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2019, 23, 297–327. [CrossRef]
55. Luo, X. How Does Shopping With Others Influence Impulsive Purchasing? J. Consum. Psychol. 2005, 15, 288–294. [CrossRef]
56. Chen, Y.; Lu, Y.; Wang, B.; Pan, Z. How do product recommendations affect impulse buying? An empirical study on WeChat
social commerce. Inf. Manag. 2019, 56, 236–248. [CrossRef]
57. Cotton Incorporated, Things to Know About COVID-19 & Consumer Concerns in China (Wave 9). Available online: https:
//www.cottoninc.com/market-data/supply-chain-insights/covid-19-consumer-concerns-in-china-wave-9/ (accessed on 10
October 2021).
58. Liu, C.W.; Huang, J.P.; Chen, S.Y.; Wang, D.F.; Zhang, L.; Liu, X.Y.; Lian, X.B. The impact of crowd gatherings on the spread of
COVID-19. Environ. Res. 2022, 213, 113064. [CrossRef]
59. Yang, H.; Lee, H. How does the perceived physical risk of covid-19 affect sharing economy services? Curr. Issues Tour. 2022, 25,
1046–1062. [CrossRef]
60. Petrescu, M.; Kara, A. Consumer Aspirations and Subjective Well-Being. J. Int. Consum. Mark. 2018, 30, 304–316. [CrossRef]
61. Tao, Q.; Xu, Y. Consumer adoption of fashion subscription retailing: Antecedents and moderating factors. Int. J. Fash. Des. Technol.
Educ. 2020, 13, 78–88. [CrossRef]
62. Mi, L.; Zhao, J.; Xu, T.; Yang, H.; Lv, T.; Shang, K.; Qiao, Y.; Zhang, Z. How does COVID-19 emergency cognition influence public
pro-environmental behavioral intentions? An affective event perspective. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 168, 105467. [CrossRef]
63. Lim, W.M. The Antecedents and Consequences of Customer Hedonism in Hospitality Services. J. Hosp. Mark. Manag. 2014, 23,
626–651. [CrossRef]
64. Abbey, J.; Meloy, M.; Guide, D.; Atalay, S. Remanufactured Products in Closed-Loop Supply Chains for Consumer Goods. Prod.
Oper. Manag. 2015, 24, 488–503. [CrossRef]
65. Clube, R.; Tennant, M. Exploring garment rental as a sustainable business model in the fashion industry: Does contamination
impact the consumption experience? J. Consum. Behav. 2020, 19, 359–370. [CrossRef]
66. Gu, H.; Zhang, T.; Lu, C.; Song, X. Assessing Trust and Risk Perceptions in the Sharing Economy: An Empirical Study. J. Manag.
Stud. 2021, 58, 1002–1032. [CrossRef]
67. Rothenberg, L.; Matthews, D. Consumer decision making when purchasing eco-friendly apparel. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag.
2017, 45, 404–418. [CrossRef]
68. Lee, O.; Lee, Y.; Lee, H. Investigation of Fashion Sharing Platform for Sustainable Economy—Korean and International Fashion
Websites before and after COVID-19. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9782. [CrossRef]
69. De Liberato, C.; Magliano, A.; Romiti, F.; Menegon, M.; Mancini, F.; Ciervo, A.; Di Luca, M.; Toma, L. Report of the human body
louse (Pediculus humanus) from clothes sold in a market in central Italy. Parasites Vectors 2019, 12, 201. [CrossRef]
70. Borusiak, B.; Szymkowiak, A.; Horska, E.; Raszka, N.; Żelichowska, E. Towards Building Sustainable Consumption: A Study of
Second-Hand Buying Intentions. Sustainability 2020, 12, 875. [CrossRef]
71. Rausch, T.M.; Kopplin, C.S. Bridge the gap: Consumers’ purchase intention and behavior regarding sustainable clothing. J. Clean.
Prod. 2021, 278, 123882. [CrossRef]
72. James, T.L.; Wallace, L.; Warkentin, M.; Kim, B.C.; Collignon, S.E. Exposing others’ information on online social networks (OSNs):
Perceived shared risk, its determinants, and its influence on OSN privacy control use. Inf. Manag. 2017, 54, 851–865. [CrossRef]
73. Anderson, J.C.; Gerbing, W. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol.
Bull. 1988, 27, 5–24. [CrossRef]
74. Khan, G.F.; Sarstedt, M.; Shiau, W.L.; Hair, J.F.; Ringle, C.M.; Fritze, M.P. Methodological research on partial least squares
structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An analysis based on social network approaches. Internet Res. 2019, 29, 407–429.
[CrossRef]
75. Akter, S.; Wamba, S.F.; Dewan, S. Why PLS-SEM is suitable for complex modelling? An empirical illustration in big data analytics
quality. Prod. Plan. Control 2017, 28, 1011–1021. [CrossRef]
76. Kock, N.; Lynn, G. Lateral Collinearity and Misleading Results in Variance-Based SEM: An Illustration and Recommendations. J.
Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2012, 13, 546–580. [CrossRef]
77. Shmueli, G.; Ray, S.; Velasquez Estrada, J.M.; Chatla, S.B. The elephant in the room: Predictive performance of PLS models. J. Bus.
Res. 2016, 69, 4552–4564. [CrossRef]
78. Wang, Y.; Chai, J.; Zhang, M.; Zheng, S. A movie customer satisfaction index model based on structural equation model. Int. J.
Arts Technol. 2019, 11, 165. [CrossRef]
79. Medalla, M.E.F.; Yamagishi, K.D.; Tiu, A.M.C.; Tanaid, R.A.B.; Abellana, D.P.M.; Caballes, S.A.A.; Jabilles, E.M.Y.; Selerio, E.F.;
Bongo, M.F.; Ocampo, L.A. Relationship mapping of consumer buying behavior antecedents of secondhand clothing with fuzzy
DEMATEL. J. Manag. Anal. 2021, 8, 530–568. [CrossRef]
80. Celik, H. Influence of social norms, perceived playfulness and online shopping anxiety on customers’ adoption of online retail
shopping: An empirical study in the Turkish context. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 2011, 39, 390–413. [CrossRef]

Sustainability 14 09566

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Sustainability 14 09566

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sustainability 14 09566

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

sustainability

Academic Editors: José

Sustainability 2022, 14, 9566. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159566 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

2. Literature Review, Theoretical Model, and Hypotheses Development

Personal Factors External Factors

2.3. Theoretical Background

2.4. Research Framework and Hypothesis

Hypothesis 1 (H1). Performance expectancy positively correlates with behavioral intention.

Hypothesis 2 (H2). Effort expectancy positively correlates with behavioral intention.

Hypothesis 3 (H3). Social influence is positively correlates with behavioral intention.

2.4.2. External Factor: Product Cost Performance

2.4.3. Personal Factors: Health and Hygiene Awareness, Hedonism, Environmental

Hypothesis 6 (H6). Hedonism positively affects behavioral intention.

Hypothesis 7 (H7). Environmental awareness positively affects behavioral intention.

2.4.4. External Factor: Cleaning Issue

Hypothesis 8 (H8). Cleaning issue significantly negatively affects actual behavior.

2.4.5. Intention-Behavior Gap: Perceived Risk

Hypothesis 11 (H11). Behavioral intention positively correlates with actual behavior.

Sustainability 2022, 14, 9566 Considering the assumptions mentioned above, Figure 3 shows the final pro

Table 2. Descriptive statistics (n = 533).

Sample Statistics Specifications Counts Percentage

Table 3. Evaluation of data reliability and convergence validity.

Table 4. Data discriminant validity assessment method 1: the Fornell-Larcker criterion.

PE EE SI PCP HHA HED EA CI PFR PIR BI AB

Table 5. Data discriminant validity assessment method 2: HTMT.

PE EE SI PCP HHA HED EA CI PFR PIR BI AB

4.2. Structural Model Evaluation

Table 6. Hypothesis test results.

Path Confidence Interval T-Statistics

5.2. Practical Implications

5.3. Limitations and Future Research

Table A1. Measurement items.

Construct Item Description

Table A1. Cont.

Construct Item Description

Table A2. Data discriminant validity assessment method 3-Cross-loadings.

PE EE SI PCP HHA HED EA CI PFR PIR BI AB

You might also like