Predicting Sustainable Fashion Consumption Intentions and Practices

www.nature.
com/scientificreports
OPEN Predicting sustainable fashion

consumption intentions
and practices
Yingxiu Hong 1,2, Abdullah Al Mamun 3*, Qing Yang 3 & Mohammad Masukujjaman 4
The fashion industry has a significant impact on the environment, and sustainable fashion
consumption (SFC) has become a pressing concern. This study aimed to investigate the factors
influencing sustainable fashion consumption behavior (SCB) among Chinese adults, specifically the
role of values, attitudes, and norms in shaping such behavior, using the value-belief-norm framework.
The study used an online cross-sectional survey design to collect data from 350 participants recruited
through a convenience sampling method using social media platforms and email invitations, and the
obtained data were analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modelling. The results of
the study showed that biospheric (BV), altruistic (AV), and egoistic (EV) values significantly influenced
the New ecological paradigm (EP), which, in turn, positively affected awareness of consequences (AC).
Personal norms (PN) were positively influenced by EP, AC, and ascription of responsibility (AR). Social
norms (SN) and trust in recycling (TR) were also found to positively influence sustainable fashion
consumption intentions (SCI). Finally, the study found that SCI and TR were significant predictors of
SCB, whereas the moderating effect of TR not statistically significant. The study’s originality lies in its
comprehensive investigation of the interplay between various factors (particularly using norms in two
facets; PN and SN) in shaping SCB, using a structural equation modeling approach, and exploring the
moderating effect of TR. The findings of this study suggest that interventions aimed at promoting SFC
should focus on fostering values and beliefs that prioritize the environment, encouraging individuals
to take responsibility for their actions, creating an environment in which SFC is normalized, and
increasing TR.
The issue of global environmental pollution is exacerbated by unsustainable consumer practices, such as the
excessive or one-time acquisition of clothing i tems1. China, the world’s largest textile manufacturing nation, grap-
ples with textile and garment production waste exceeding 100 million t ons2 and an annual disposal of roughly
26 million tons of used clothing, projected to rise to around 50 million tons by 2030, with a recycling rate of less
than 1%3. In response to these challenges, China, along with other countries, has committed to achieving "net-
zero carbon emissions" by 2 0504, which necessitates collaboration between the fashion industry and the general
public. One of the key strategies in this context is the adoption of second-hand c onsumption5. Reintroducing
pre-owned items extends product lifecycles, curbing the need for new items, conserving energy and resources,
and significantly reducing the environmental impact tied to consumer behavior, emphasizing the crucial role
of sustainable c onsumption6.
Despite certain advancements in the industry, it is noteworthy that China’s volume of second-hand goods
transactions amounted to just over half of that seen in the United States1,7. Similarly, the second-hand clothing-
sharing market in China is still in an exploratory stage compared to the European m arket1. Given China’s
influence on traditional social hierarchy thinking, Chinese individuals tend to prioritize identity and status,
which may lead to more rigid perspectives on second-hand items8. Chinese people often tend to be conserva-
tive, placing a premium on privacy, and may display some reluctance towards items from unfamiliar sources1.
Nevertheless, with the global consensus on sustainable development, the sharing economy has gained increasing
prominence among Chinese y outh9. Simultaneously, government initiatives and state influence have promoted
sustainable consumption across different segments of society10, potentially leading to a shift in the attitudes of
1
Business School, Nanfang College Guangzhou, Guangzhou 510970, Guangdong, China. 2UCSI Graduate Business
School, UCSI University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 3UKM‑Graduate School of Business, Universiti Kebangsaan
Malaysia, 43600 Bangi, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia. 4Faculty of Business Management and Professional
Studies, Management and Science University, 40100 Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia. *email: almamun@
ukm.edu.my
Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 1
Vol.:(0123456789)
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
consumers with rigid views on second-hand product sharing and trading. With its vast population and status as
the world’s largest clothing consumer, it underscores the untapped opportunities within China’s second-hand
clothing market and its potential for sustained expansion11. Therefore, platforms must evaluate present con-
sumer considerations and identify the factors influencing consumption, enabling them to align with the right
developmental trajectory.
Previous research has examined how mainstream consumers feel about and choose sustainable fashions.
Environmental concerns and social norms (SN) are the main reasons why people buy sustainable f ashion12–14.
Conversely, recent research indicates an increased environmental consciousness among individuals, leading to
a greater inclination to purchase eco-friendly products, including fast fashion items15, second-hand a pparel5,
reduced clothing consumption, and clothing recycling p ractices16. Other studies17,18 have found that some eco-
conscious consumers prefer to buy sustainable fashion by purchasing eco-friendly brands or buying used cloth-
ing, and recycling, reusing, renting, or swapping clothing. Despite a link between people’s causes and ways of
throwing away clothes, practitioners and policymakers know that expectations and reality are not the same
regarding the use and disposal of fashion products19. Hur20 states that the majority of individuals are unaware
of what happens to donated used apparel when it has reached the end of its useful life. Therefore, little attention
has been paid to encouraging sustainable fashion consumption (SFC) through policy interventions or learning
about how consumers reuse second-hand clothing. Thus, it is becoming increasingly important to understand
what makes people want to buy sustainable fashion, and how they feel about reusing second-hand clothes.
Various theoretical frameworks have been used to determine sustainable behavior. Researchers have employed
the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and the Norm Activation Model (NAM) theories in various research
contexts, as demonstrated in previous studies21,22. In recent years, an increasing number of researchers have uti-
lized value-belief-norm (VBN) theory to predict environment-friendly behavior, and have validated its efficacy
in different settings, such as r ecycling23, energy c onservation24, and public support for green p olicies25. Other
scholars have proposed extended versions of these theoretical frameworks by integrating key constructs from
the TPB, VBN, and NAM into better models22,26. Yeap et al.27 studied the second-hand cloth purchase intention
in Malaysia in the perspective of the customer-to-customer (C2C) online platform based on the Integrative
Model of Behavioural Prediction. Lang and Armstrong28 focused on examining the adoption of cloth renting and
swapping among female consumers, thereby allowing space for a broader understanding applicable to both male
and female consumers overall. Recently, Zhang et al.29 utilized TAM and TPB as an integrated model to evaluate
cloth disposal behavior in China. However, although Zahid et al.30 investigated second-hand cloth purchasing
behavior in the Chinese context, they failed to establish any theoretical basis to guide readers. However, the use
of VBN in second-hand clothing is limited. Gomes et al.31 recently used VBN theory in a comparative study
between Brazil and the Netherlands, yet stressed its value and ignored the original model to a great extent. The
VBN theory provides a distinct benefit when utilizing SFC by examining green behavior from the perspective
of various essential components that are strongly linked to environmentalism, including values and ecological
worldviews. The VBN theory addresses individuals’ pro-social incentives by integrating rational-choice models
that contain self-interest motivations related to environmentally friendly behavioral intents in various c ontexts32.
Thus, the application of VBN with a couple of new variables may extend the understanding of the reuse behavior
of second-hand clothing.
Although the TPB, VBN, and NAM theories have been used to measure environmental behavior in several
studies, most have focused on single behaviors, such as recycling, household energy use, and green consumption,
rather than multidimensional measures of environmental behavior. To the best of our knowledge, few studies
have combined intentions and behaviors33. Davies and Gutsche34 suggested that little research has been conducted
on how people actually buy things, which makes people wonder how much is known about green consumption
practices. Therefore, there is a pressing need for a deeper understanding of the reasons and processes behind
distinct consumer behaviors. Consumers often experience psychological deflation that leads them to shop rec-
reationally to relieve boredom or stress, creating a psychological imbalance between their sustainability worries
and buying sustainable fashion35. Sustainable fashion consumption behavior (SCB) is further hindered by the
need to express a certain social i dentity36 and the absence of convenient and sustainable clothing options. Fast
fashion is more readily available to customers than environmentally conscious apparel options that require
more effort and time to track. Trust is also a significant factor in the transition from intention to behavior37, as
hindering factors can prevent consumers from acting according to their initial i ntentions38. To narrow the gap
between intention and behavior regarding second-hand clothing sharing, researchers should include trust issues
as a moderating factor.
While many studies have been conducted on SFC in industrialized countries such as the US, Europe, and
Asia, there is a noticeable lack of research on SFC in Asian countries13,14,39. In their comparative study, Su et al.14
conducted research in both the USA and China, utilizing the VBN framework and integrating constructs like
apparel sustainability knowledge, consumer value, attitude, and willingness to purchase. Vehmas et al.39 inter-
viewed Finnish consumers about their perceptions and attitudes towards circular clothing and the communica-
tion and marketing channels of second-hand clothing without using any behavioral frameworks. Similarly, Baier
et al.13 sought answers about the drivers of pre- and post-purchase behavior in the German apparel and sports
industry, using the segmented Kano method while excluding behavioral models. While studies such as Wang
et al.40 and Zhang et al.29 addressed the issues of SFC from Chinese perspectives, the former analyzed the moti-
vations and barriers to consumers’ purchase of second-hand clothes, along with their perceived problems with
this industry, without concentrating on adoption issues. In contrast, the latter study focused on another aspect of
SFC, specifically cloth disposal behavior, with no indication regarding the adoption of second-hand cloth from
customer perspectives. This is a significant gap, as SFC has become increasingly popular among consumers in
these markets41 especially the second-hand clothes because of their preference for fashion options with lower
environmental and social impacts. However, sustainable consumerism in developing countries may be affected
Vol:.(1234567890)
by a variety of cultural and economic factors, including, but not limited to, varied ethical ideals in relation to
environmentally friendly fashion and lower income levels14. Studies have shown that sustainability knowledge
and consumer preferences differ across countries, highlighting the importance of understanding cultural and
economic differences42. Therefore, it is crucial to investigate sustainable fashion consumption exclusively on the
Chinese setting to gain insight into consumers’ perspectives on the reuse of second-hand clothing.
To fill these knowledge gaps, current study created a theoretical model that analyzes the factors influencing
shoppers’ decisions to buy second-hand clothing in China. The VBN variables were used in these models, and
SN and trust were included. The primary goals of this research are to test whether the proposed framework,
which incorporates social norms and trust, has higher predictive power than the original VBN models; find the
most influential constructs for discussing intention and behavior; and assess whether VBN factors greatly impact
people’s ecological behavior in the setting of second-hand clothes. This research contributes to the expanding
body of literature on SFC by building upon prior studies that examine individual environmental behavior. It
incorporates the VBN framework and proposes a comprehensive model to offer a more comprehensive under-
standing of the disparity between intention and conduct in SFC. This study effectively demonstrates the predictive
effects of bi-dimensional norms, namely PN and SN, in shaping SFC, through their incorporation within the VBN
frameworks. As a result, this study substantially contributes to the current understanding of the impact of social
norms on promoting environmentally friendly behavior. From a managerial standpoint, this study offers valuable
guidance for managers, emphasizing the need to integrate environmental values, awareness, responsibility, and
trust in recycling into comprehensive strategies. Furthermore, the study underscores the managerial significance
of actively shaping social norms supportive of SFC through sustainable fashion events, collaborations, and blogs,
providing actionable guidance for managers seeking to influence consumer behavior and foster a broader culture
of sustainability within the fashion industry. However, this paper is structured as follows: within its second sec-
tion, it presents a literature review, outlines the proposed model, and presents the research hypotheses. Methods
such as sampling, data gathering, measurement, and data analysis are outlined in “Materials and methods”. The
results are presented in “Findings”, and the results, their possible effects, the study’s limitations, suggestions for
further research, and closing remarks are discussed in “Discussion”.
Theoretical background and hypotheses development

According to Pencarelli et al.43, sustainable products offer environmental, societal, and economic advantages
while safeguarding public health, welfare, and the environment throughout their entire commercial cycle, from
raw material extraction to ultimate disposal, with a focus on meeting the needs of future generations. Similarly,
Mohr et al.44 define responsible consumption as a purchasing and consumption behavior pattern that aims to
maximize long-term benefits while minimizing harmful impacts on both consumers and societies. In this study,
rice18, swapping
the term SFC indicates the reuse of clothes, such as buying or selling used clothes at a minimal p
used clothes28, or donating used clothes to others. Thus, according to Bianchi and Gonzalez45, consumers who
cannot afford high-priced fashion may choose to consume sustainably by purchasing second-hand apparel from
thrift stores or swapping clothes with their family or friends. They may sell clothes at minimum prices to stores
or donate clothes to those in need from a philanthropic viewpoint.
Theoretical foundation
VBN theory denotes that “individuals who accept a movement’s basic values, believe that valued objects are
threatened, and believe that their actions can help restore those values, experience an obligation (personal
norm) for pro-movement action”46. According to Schwartz’s47 theory, actions relevant to norms encompass three
concepts: the acceptance of an individual’s particular values, the belief that something important to those values
is under threat, and the belief that a person’s behavior can help alleviate the threat and restore value, which are
known as personal norms. S chwartz48 classifies values into three types: biospheric, altruistic, and egoistic. Beliefs
consist of new ecological paradigm (EP), awareness of consequences (AC), and ascription of responsibility (AR),
which, in combination, affect behavioral intention.
The VBN theory predicts sustainable behaviors in various settings. It has been extensively applied to explain
pro-environmental behaviors in various contexts such as residential energy s avings49, sustainable t ourism50,
climate-conserving behaviors51, environmentally friendly cruise52, sustainable tourism and hospitality53, and
reducing air pollution in road t ransportation54. Moreover, the VBN theory has been expanded by the incorpora-
tion of supplementary variables, including SN and perceived behavioral control26, emotion55, satisfaction, trust,
and frequency of prior c onduct37. The initial model encompassed a solitary dimension of norms, specifically
personal norms. Kim et al.56 argue that in order to achieve a thorough understanding of norms, it is necessary
to expand personal norms in conjunction with social norms (SN). This entails considering both internal and
exterior norms. The model proposed by Han et al.37 received empirical support for trust. In order to address the
well-recognized disparity between intentions and behaviors, the current study (Fig. 1) employed trust in recycling
(TR) as a variable associated with intentions to engage in sustainable fashion consumption (SCI) and sustainable
consumer behavior (SCB). Additionally, the study incorporated SN alongside intrinsic personal norms.
Hypothesis development
Antecedents of new ecological paradigm (EP)
Dunlap et al.57 developed the EP, which embraces the idea that humans are an integral part of nature, to explore
individuals’ environmental attitudes. Biospheric values (BV) are key factors shaping individuals’ worldviews,
particularly in relation to their interest in nature and the environment. The adoption of BV is associated with a
greater concern for the environment, emphasizing the central role of environmental values in decision-making
and shaping behavior. Similarly, Onel and M ukherjee23 found that BV positively impacted a new ecological
Vol.:(0123456789)
Figure 1. Conceptual framework.
paradigm. Ünal et al.58 explored the relationship between BV and environmental protection, demonstrating
that higher levels of BV are associated with increased concern for the environment. Finally, Ye and T kaczynski59
argued that BV is a key driver of engagement with EP, with higher levels of BV corresponding to greater involve-
ment in environmental issues. Therefore, we put forward the following hypothesis:
H1. Biosphere value is positively associated with the new ecological paradigm.
Altruistic values (AV) refer to a set of ethical principles that prioritize the well-being and interests of others.
Altruistic individuals often act in ways that benefit others without expecting anything in return, and may sacrifice
their own interests or desires for the greater good. AV are closely linked to the preservation of the social ecology,
as noted by Vuorio et al.60. By contrast, egoistic value (EV) suggests that environmental issues harm individuals,
causing them to prioritize their property, power, and status, and think more about their own resource needs.
Previous studies on the correlation between egoistic values and EP have yielded conflicting results. While some
studies suggest a negative correlation between EV and E P61, Kim’s study on effective hotel environmental manage-
ment found that only AV were significantly associated with EP, whereas other values did not show s ignificant62.
In a recent study in Malaysia, Chua et al.63 showed that all three values were significant factors of EP, with BV
having a medium effect, and EV and AV having small effects. Despite limited robust evidence of the link between
AV and EP, considering the cultural and social differences in the samples, it is expected that those values have
direct effects on EP. Therefore, the following hypotheses are formulated:
H2. Altruistic value is positively associated with the new ecological paradigm.
H3. Egoistic value is positively associated with the new ecological paradigm.
Enablers of awareness of consequences (AC)

AC refers to an individual’s understanding of the potential outcomes or effects that may result from their actions
or decisions. It involves recognizing the impact of one’s behavior on oneself, others, and the environment. In the
context of environmental issues, AC relates to an individual’s understanding of how their actions may affect the
natural world and the ecosystems that sustain it. Previous studies have established a causal relationship between
EP and AC, indicating that individuals with greater knowledge of current environmental issues tend to be more
aware of the impacts of their actions and behaviors. Campos-Soria et al.64 and Liobikien and Poškus65 supported
this correlation, highlighting its positive effect on individuals’ awareness of the consequences of their actions.
Han et al.66 suggested that an EP can increase people’s awareness of the impact of their actions, while Landon
et al.50 proposed that personal responsibility can be improved by promoting awareness of this new environmental
perspective. Thus, we propose the following hypothesis:
H4. New ecological paradigm is positively associated with the awareness of the consequences.
Enablers of ascription of responsibility (AR)

AR refers to assigning or attributing responsibility for an action or outcome to a particular person or group. This
can include both the individual responsibility of a person for their actions, and the responsibility of larger groups
or institutions for their impact on society and the environment. According to Ogiemwonyi et al.67 &Yang et al.68,
individuals perceive a feeling of involvement in the preservation of the environment and hold the conviction that
they can actively contribute to environmental well-being through the adoption of sustainable practices. When
people understand how their actions negatively affect the environment, and take steps to minimize or mitigate
that impact, they demonstrate a sense of responsibility associated with personal norms (PN) and AR, as noted
by Landon and B oley50 and Ghazali et al.69. Scholars58,70 confirmed this relationship, suggesting that awareness
of the consequences of one’s actions positively influences AR. These findings are further supported by Ghazali
Vol:.(1234567890)
et al.69, who found that awareness of consequences improves the sense of responsibility among both Malaysian
and Chinese individuals. Thus, it can be concluded that a greater awareness of the environmental impact of one’s
behavior and actions can lead to a stronger sense of responsibility. Thus, we postulated the following hypothesis:
H5. Awareness of the consequences is positively associated with AR.
Antecedents of personal norms

PN refers to internalized beliefs and expectations about how one should behave in a given situation. These norms
are self-regulatory in nature and are often shaped by personal values and moral standards. They influence behav-
ior by creating a sense of obligation or duty to act in a certain way, even when external pressures or incentives
are absent. PN is thought to be particularly important in the context of pro-environmental behaviors, as it can
motivate individuals to act in ways that align with their environmental values, even when it may not be socially
or economically advantageous to do so. According to the VBN theory, beliefs are directly linked to individual
norms. Thus, people who hold their usual beliefs about ecological well-being are more likely to develop PN for
pro-environmental behavior71. Using the VBN framework, previous research explored the direct association
between EP and PN. Chua et al.63 observed the positive effect of EP on PN in a sample of paddy farmers. Simi-
larly, Yeboah and Kaplowitz72 found a positive and significant effect of EP on PN among students, teachers, and
employees at Michigan State University. Hence, the hypothesis is as follows:
H6. New ecological paradigm is positively associated with the personal norms.
Individuals who are aware of the negative consequences of not performing altruistic acts have a stronger sense
of moral obligation, and are more likely to activate PN to engage in such behaviors. AC is responsible for P N73.
Understanding the impact of one’s actions on the environment can help individuals take steps to reduce their
negative impacts and promote a sense of responsibility, ultimately leading to an increase in P N50,67. Gkargkavouzi
et al.74 suggested that AC effectively promotes personal norms to take necessary action to safeguard the climate.
Similarly, Zhang et al.22 stated that AC significantly influenced PN engagement in environment-friendly farming
practices. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H7. Awareness of the consequences is positively associated with PN.
When individuals experience a stronger sense of personal responsibility, they feel a moral obligation to act.
AR refers to assigning responsibility to one’s behavior or a ctions69. Studies show that ascribing responsibility leads
to the development of personal norms75. If a person recognizes that they have done something wrong, they feel
a greater moral obligation to stop or reduce the harm c aused69. Pro-environmental studies have supported this
hypothesis. For instance, Ünal et al.58 found that individuals who recognize their ability to reduce the negative
consequences of their actions feel a moral obligation to support that behavior. Similarly, Bronfman et al.70 and
Rezvani et al.76 argued that greater AR increases PN. Recent studies77,78 on conservation behavior in organizations
have demonstrated that AR is the strongest predictor of PN. The hypothesis is as follows:
H8. AR is positively associated with PN.
Enablers of sustainable fashion consumption intention

Schwartz79 defines PN as the extent to which an individual feels morally obliged to perform a particular action.
Sia and J ose80 contend that PN is a key driver of norm-driven pro-environmental behavior and that a stronger
sense of personal moral norms can lead to greater engagement in environment-friendly behavior. H an81 and Yang
77
et al. found that PN predicts intentions for environmentally responsible behavior in various groups. Addition-
ally, Ünal et al.58 suggest that individuals’ intentions to engage in eco-friendly actions increase when they feel a
strong sense of obligation. This argument implies that PN leads to planned, environmentally conscious behaviors.
Hwang et al.82 also revealed that moral obligation has a favorable and substantial effect on the purchase intentions
of organic, fair trade, and recycled clothing products. With growing concerns about environmental damage and
social inequality in the fashion industry, consumers’ personal values have shifted from being self-centered to
society-centered83. Joanes16 discovered a positive and substantial relationship between PN and the intention to
minimize personal clothing consumption. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H9. PN is positively linked with the intention to engage in SCI.
SN refer to shared beliefs about proper behavior within a community regarding one’s response to a situation84.
Various studies have shown that SN have a positive impact on different behavioral domains related to sustainable
behavior84. In the context of green consumerism, SN have been found to positively influence consumers’ behav-
ioral intentions to buy green goods and s ervices26. Additionally, an individual’s SN have been found to impact
their word-of-mouth purchasing intention and intention to sacrifice52. Doran and L arsen85 found that people are
more likely to engage in pro-environmental behavior when they receive messages indicating that people around
them are doing the same things. Moreover, Borusiak and Szymkowiak5 explained that individuals usually feel
pressured to engage in specific behaviors by the people around them. Observing others’ contributions to a com-
mon cause, such as environmental preservation, can enhance trust in cooperative intentions, strengthen beliefs
about achieving desired outcomes, and increase the willingness to contribute to environmental preservation.
Recently, Zahid et al.30 revealed a positive relationship between SN and SCI in the case of second-hand clothing
in China, while Zhang et al.29 found the same relationships in the case of clothing disposal behavior in China.
Yeap et al.27 found that perceived norms (external influence) have positive influence on the intention to adopt
second hand clothes in Malaysian perspectives. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H10: There is a positive relationship between SN and SCI.
Trust is a belief that has been shown to have a positive relationship with green purchasing intention, as
established by some authors86. Studies indicate that ethical cues can influence consumer opinions about low-
performing products87, and trust in ethical businesses can influence green buying intentions, while greenwashing
can damage consumer trust and reduce their green buying i ntentions88. Thus, companies that want to increase
Vol.:(0123456789)
consumers’ green buying intentions should avoid actions that create green skepticism, focus on developing strong
relationships with consumers, and build trust in green practices. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H11: There is a positive relationship between TR and SCI.
Enfeeblers of Sustainable consumption behavior (SCB)

SCB refers to actions taken by individuals or groups to reduce their negative impacts on the environment and
promote sustainable development. This involves making conscious and informed choices when purchasing goods
and services, and considering the environmental and social impacts of these c hoices89. Behavioral intention is
an important predictor of actual behavior, as people who intend to participate in green behavior are more likely
to follow these a ctions90. Gkargkavouzi et al.74 revealed that behavioral intention is a significant factor in vol-
untary actions aimed at mitigating the effects of climate change among Greek respondents. Additionally, taking
responsibility for reducing energy consumption in households has been shown to promote energy conserva-
tion behaviors in h ouseholds91. The growing need for green products and services suggests that individuals are
increasingly adopting environmentally conscious behaviors92. Therefore, we hypothesize that as PN supporting
green behavior strengthens, individuals are more likely to participate in environmentally conscious actions.
H12: SCI is significantly and positively linked with SCB.
Green trust refers to individuals’ “willingness to depend on a product or service based on the belief or expec-
tations resulting from its credibility, benevolence, and environmental performance”93. A lack of trust can create
skepticism, which may negatively affect purchase intention94. While most studies have focused on trust as an
antecedent of purchase i ntention95, only a few have considered it as a predictor of purchase behavior. Nuttavu-
thisit and Thøgersen96 found that green trust influences green consumption, and Taufique et al.97 observed that
consumers’ trust in green products leads to pro-environmental consumer behavior. Several recent studies98–100
have investigated consumer behavior towards various green products and services. Thus, the following hypoth-
esis is postulated:
H13: TR is positively linked with the SCB.
Moderation of TR
Trust, which refers to consumer beliefs and expectations regarding the reliability, capability, and goodwill of
both green products and their producers, leads to the intention to trust the companies and products i nvolved101.
Individuals pursue sustainable lifestyles not only because of their ecological awareness and comprehension, but
also the personal benefits or contentment derived from the products or services they consume101. In this study,
TR is indicated for second-hand clothes based on its credibility in meeting expectations, usability of clothes,
and hygiene issues. Many people want to wear clothes for long periods. Therefore, consumers may feel a lack
of trust in the durability of fashion products, as they have already been used for a while. According to Harris
and Hagger102, the intention to act does not necessarily mean being able to do so. Studies show that consumers’
lack of trust can be a major barrier to purchasing organic products96. According to Sultan et al.103 and Zheng
et al.104, trust plays a moderating role in addressing intention-behavior gaps. Therefore, we propose the follow-
ing hypothesis:
HM1: TR positively moderates the link between SCI and SCB.
All associations hypothesized above are presented in Fig. 1 below:
Materials and methods

Research design
The research followed a cross-sectional design in which an online survey was conducted. This approach differs
from that of a longitudinal study that collects data repeatedly within a specific timeframe. This study is quantita-
tive and utilizes a pre-existing research framework. The following sections delve more deeply into the techniques
employed in this study.
Population and sample

The target population was Chinese adults who were more than 18 years old and could participate in the survey
without their guardians’ permission. We obtained signed informed consent forms through a questionnaire.
Using the G-power 3.1 tool with 10 different predictors, a power of 0.80 and an effect size of 0.15 were utilized
to arrive at an estimate for the sample size. The minimum number of samples required to perform an analysis
with sufficient power was 118105. However, Hair et al.106 recommend that partial least squares structural equation
modelling (PLS-SEM) should use at least 200 samples. To avoid restrictions of a small sample size, this study
intended to obtain data from more than 300 Chinese adults.
Data collection procedure

Present research created an electronic questionnaire to collect empirical data by applying measurement scale
items from previous studies. In addition, this study used a back-translation technique to ensure that the survey
was accurate. First, the research questionnaires were carefully examined using English. Second, investigators
obtained help from professional experts who were used to the research and spoke both English and Chinese to
translate it into Chinese. Third, two professional translators who spoke English and Chinese blindly translated
the Chinese questionnaire back into English. Fourth, the quality of the translations was assessed by compar-
ing the two versions. In the case of dispersion, researchers and translators worked to find solutions. Finally,
the questionnaire was pretested to determine its accuracy. The issuance and completion of the questionnaires
were closely supervised to ascertain the validity and well-organized gathering of the data. Researchers sent 32
Vol:.(1234567890)
questionnaires and collected them from a pretest sample. The pre-test findings confirmed the preliminary validity
and reliability of the items used.
The survey collecting data took place in China, since the participants of the research were from different parts
of China; the empirical data was obtained using the online survey method. The human research ethics commit-
tee of Nanfang College Guangzhou approved this study (Nanfang-2023–1209). This study has been performed
in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Written informed consent for participation was obtained from
respondents who participated in the survey. Respondents were selected using convenience sampling method.
All respondents were informed that the study focused on their sustainable fashion consumption (buying, swap-
ping, or donating second hand clothes). Data was collected between 2 0th November 2022 to 2 7th January 2023,
and downloaded from the website 2 8thth January 2023. The questionnaire was circulated using social media
platforms, primarily through the WJX.cn website, and 979 valid responses were received.
Measurement instruments
The questionnaire consisted of two main sections: A and B. Section A comprised the demographic information
of respondents (eight questions), whereas all related 54 questions were incorporated in section B. The study used
pre-literature for its scale after fitting it into the context, with modification (rewording) and alternation, where
necessary. Four items of BV and AV and five items of EV were extracted from Han et al.107. Five items each for
the contracts SN, TR, and SCB were adopted from Kim et al.108, Chen93, and Attiq et al.109, respectively. The EP
construct (five items) was adapted from López-Mosquera and Sánchez110, while the five items of AC originated
from López-Mosquera and Sánchez110 and Choi et al.111. The study followed López-Mosquera and Sánchez110
and Ünal et al.58 for taking the items (5) of AR. The items (5) of PN were sourced from Choi et al.111 and Ünal
et al.58. The TR (five items) was obtained from Chen93, and the SCI constructs (five items) were extracted from5.
The questionnaire had closed-ended items that evaluated 11 constructs from previous studies using a seven-point
Likert scale ranging from 1: strongly disagree to 7: strongly agree. A complete questionnaire has been submitted
to this manuscript as supporting material—S1. Survey Instrument.
Common method bias

To determine the impact of common method bias (CMB) and propose remedies, the study questions were metic-
ulously crafted, and respondents were assured that there were no right or wrong answers, and their responses
would remain anonymous112. Harman’s single-factor test was used as a diagnostic tool to determine the influence
of common method bias. The single factor was 32.507%, which was less than the prescribed limit of 50% in Har-
man’s one-factor test. This proves that the CMB had no significant effect on this study. Moreover, an examination
of CMB involved an assessment of the full collinearity of all constructs, as recommended by Kock113. All the
study structures were regressed on the common variance and variance inflation factors (VIF) values shown in
Table 1. There was no presence of bias in the data from a single source because all VIF values were lower than 3.3.
Multivariate normality
Using appropriate data analysis techniques to check multivariate normality is crucial. This study estimated mul-
tivariate normality using an online Web Power tool114. The results of the multivariate normality test revealed that
the p values for Mardia’s multivariate skewness (z = 2209.93) and kurtosis (z = 37.85) were below 0.05, indicating
non-normality. Thus, to accommodate non-normal data, this study uses PLS-SEM. Structural equation modelling
approach provides better estimates than regression for mediation and moderation115. PLS-SEM is a satisfactory
approach for evaluating complex frameworks involving moderating relationships106. Therefore, PLS-SEM was
employed with the Smart-PLS 4.0.
Data analysis method

The analysis of this research followed two stages. First, the measurement model was quantified to determine
validity and reliability. In the later phase, structural equation modeling was used to elaborate the connection
between the predictor and latent variables, including the mediation and moderation effects. It is widely accepted
that structural equation modeling provides better estimates than regression when executing mediation and
moderation115. Therefore, this research applied structural equation modeling, specifically PLS-SEM, using Smart-
PLS 4.0, which is regarded as the best choice because of its effectiveness in evaluating complex frameworks
involving moderation e ffects106.
BV AV EV EP AC AR PN SN GR SCI SCB
VIF values 1.360 1.455 1.419 1.284 1.435 1.512 1.533 1.365 1.774 1.952 2.073
Table 1. Full collinearity test. BV biospheric values, AV altruistic values, EV egoistic values, EP new ecological
paradigm, AC awareness of consequences, AR ascription of responsibility, PN personal norms, SN social
norms, TR trust in recycling, SCI sustainable fashion consumption intention, SCB sustainable fashion
consumption behavior, VIF variance inflation factors.
Vol.:(0123456789)
Ethics approval
The human research ethics committee of Nanfang College Guangzhou approved this study (Nanfang-2022-1009).
This study has been performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.
Informed consent
Written informed consent for participation was obtained from respondents who participated in the survey.
Findings
Respondents profile
The provided demographic Table 2 presents information on the gender, age group, education level, marital sta-
tus, employment status, and clothing purchasing habits of 979 individuals. The sample was evenly divided into
male (49.7%) and female (50.3%) participants. Most participants had a bachelor’s degree or below (93.0%), with
only 11.1% having a postgraduate degree. In terms of age, the sample was evenly distributed across different age
groups, with the largest groups being those aged 26–35 years (28.1%) and 36–45 years (29.3%). Most participants
were married (61.5%) and employed full-time (41.3%), with 13.2% unemployed and 3.7% retired. Regarding
clothing purchasing habits, most participants purchased new clothes one to two times per month (34.8%), and
spent less than RMB1500 per month on clothing (39.7%).
The study’s reliability and validity were examined by assessing the internal consistency of the measurement
items as well as the composite reliability and average variance extracted (Table 3). The results indicate high levels
of internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha ranging from 0.892 to 0.933 for each variable. The composite reli-
ability values ranged from 0.896 to 0.947, indicating a high degree of construct reliability. The average variance
extracted values ranged from 0.711 to 0.788, indicating that the measures accounted for a substantial proportion
of the variance in each construct. The variance inflation factor values were all below the recommended threshold
of 2.5, indicating no multicollinearity issues. Therefore, the measures demonstrated good reliability and validity,
suggesting that the results are credible and robust.
After confirming reliability and discriminant validity, we applied both Fornell and Lacker’s criterion and Het-
erotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) ratio (Table 4; Fig. 2). The Fornell–Larcker criterion shows the correlation between
constructs and the amount of variance shared among them. Diagonal values represent the square root of the
N % N %
Gender Education
Male 487 49.7 Diploma/advanced diploma 429 43.8
Female 492 50.3 Bachelor 373 38.1
Total 979 100.0 Postgraduate degree 109 11.1
Others 68 6.9
Age group Total 979 100.0
18–25 years 190 19.4
26–35 years 275 28.1 Marital status
36–45 years 287 29.3 Single 298 30.4
46–55 years 121 12.4 Married 602 61.5
56–65 years 69 7.0 Divorced 60 6.1
Above 65 years 37 3.8 Widow 19 1.9
Total 979 100.0 Total 979 100.0
Employment status Average monthly income
Employed full time 404 41.3 Less than RMB1500 247 25.2
Employed part time 188 19.2 RMB1500–RMB3000 133 13.6
Self-employed 141 14.4 RMB3001–RMB4500 240 24.5
Student 81 8.3 RM4501–RMB6000 208 21.2
Unemployed 129 13.2 RMB6001–RMB7500 102 10.4
Retired 36 3.7 More than RMB 7500 49 5.0
Total 979 100.0 Total 979 100.0
How often do you purchase new cloths? How much do you spend on new clothing per month?
Seldom 299 30.5 Less than RMB1500 389 39.7
One to two times a month 341 34.8 RMB1500–RMB3000 117 12.0
Three to five times a month 194 19.8 RMB3001–RMB4500 205 20.9
Six to ten times a month 118 12.1 RM4501–RMB6000 150 15.3
Almost every day 27 2.8 RMB6001–RMB7500 93 9.5
Total 979 100.0 More than RMB 7500 25 2.6
Total 979 100.0
Table 2. Demographic characteristics. 1 USD = 6.35 CNY.
Vol:.(1234567890)
Composite reliability Composite reliability Average variance Variance inflation

Variables Items Mean Std. deviation Cronbach’s alpha (rho_a) (rho_c) extracted factors
BV 4 4.708 1.613 0.911 0.911 0.937 0.788 1.233
AV 4 4.637 1.599 0.892 0.896 0.925 0.755 1.231
EV 5 4.743 1.420 0.913 0.915 0.935 0.742 1.176
EP 5 4.725 1.476 0.899 0.902 0.925 0.711 1.125
AC 6 4.840 1.412 0.933 0.937 0.947 0.748 1.174
AR 5 5.034 1.369 0.905 0.908 0.929 0.725 1.185
PN 5 4.968 1.480 0.920 0.922 0.940 0.757 1.314
SN 5 4.901 1.427 0.918 0.918 0.938 0.753 1.211
TR 5 4.798 1.399 0.906 0.907 0.930 0.726 1.485
SCI 5 4.852 1.402 0.909 0.912 0.932 0.734 1.504
SCB 5 4.975 1.401 0.910 0.911 0.933 0.736 -
Table 3. Reliability and validity. BV biospheric values, AV altruistic values, EV egoistic values, EP new
ecological paradigm, AC awareness of consequences, AR ascription of responsibility, PN personal norms, SN
social norms, TR trust in recycling, SCI sustainable fashion consumption intention, SCB sustainable fashion
consumption behavior, VIF variance inflation factors.
average variance extracted (AVE) for each construct. Values above the diagonal represent the correlation between
constructs, whereas those below the diagonal represent the AVE for each construct. All diagonal values exceed
0.5, indicating acceptable convergent validity. The off-diagonal values were generally lower, suggesting good
discriminant validity. The standard value of the HTMT is less than 0.90, and values exceeding this limit indicate
low discriminant validity116. All values in the HTMT matrix are below the threshold value (i.e., 0.90) confirming a
high level of discriminant validity. However, all cross-loadings remained greater than 0.5, as shown (Appendix 1).
Overall, the analysis suggests that the measures have adequate reliability and validity for the constructs studied.
The results (as presented in Table 5; Fig. 3) reveal that BV (β = 0.193, t = 5.091, p < 0.01), AV (β = 0.163,
t = 4.378, p < 0.01) and EV (β = 0.204, t = 5.608, p < 0.01) influenced significantly on EP. The link between EP and
AC was identified as positive (β = 0.265, t = 7.998, p < 0.01), signifying the positive effect of EP on AC. Moreover,
AC had a positive significant influence on AR (β = 0.342, t = 10.591, p < 0.01). EP (β = 0.130, t = 3.712, p < 0.01),
AC (β = 0.294, t = 7.963, p < 0.01) and AR (β = 0.231, t = 6.530, p < 0.01) affected positively on PN. Additionally,
PN (β = 0.228, t = 6.645, p < 0.01), SN (β = 0.207, t = 6.170, p < 0.01) and TR (β = 0.364, t = 10.777, p < 0.01) dem-
onstrated a positive relation on SCI. SCI (β = 0.374, t = 11.140, p < 0.01) and TR (β = 0.333, t = 9.759, p < 0.01) had
significant positive effects on SCB. Similarly, the study finds a statistically insignificant moderation role of TR
(β = , t = − 0.056, t = 2.071, p < 0.05) within the connection between SCI and SCB (Fig. 4). Although the p value
(0.019) falls within the 5% level of significance, the hypothesis is rejected as it presents the opposite relationship.
Therefore, this study found that hypotheses (H1–13) were validated at the 1% level of significance, and hypothesis
(HM1) was rejected (Table 5).
Moreover, the outcome (Table 6) of the study found that BV, AV, and EV had indirect relationships with AC
and PN, and EP has the same with AR, PN, and SCI. Likewise, AC is indirectly linked with PN and SCI, while
AR is with SCI. The constructs PN, SN, and TR are indirectly related on the SCB.
Discussion
This study investigated the relationship between values, attitudes, and sustainable fashion consumption behav-
ior. It proposed 14 hypotheses based on the extended VBN theory, 13 of which were confirmed by empirical
investigation. The exogenous constructs in the model were found to have a significant impact on the endogenous
construct, with an explanatory power of 42.3% for SCB, indicating a good fit between the model and the inves-
tigation. The following discussion provides details of the relationships identified in this study.
The finding that Biospheric, Altruistic, and Egoistic values had a significant influence on the New Ecologi-
cal Paradigm (NEP) is consistent with previous research63 that highlights the importance of values in shaping
environmental attitudes and behavior (H1–3). The finding that these values significantly influence the New
Ecological Paradigm suggests that individuals who hold these values are more likely to adopt an environmentalist
perspective and engage in sustainable behaviors. The results also suggest that individuals who hold values that
prioritize the environment, personal and collective well-being, and personal growth, are more likely to adopt a
new ecological paradigm that views humans as part of the ecosystem and emphasizes the importance of protect-
ing the natural environment.
The present study revealed that the New Ecological Paradigm significantly influences individuals’ Awareness
of Consequences (H4), indicating that people who hold environmental concerns and beliefs tend to be more
aware of the environmental consequences of their actions. These findings are consistent with previous research
showing that the New Ecological Paradigm is an essential predictor of individuals’ A C50. Han et al.66 suggest that
individuals who hold a new ecological paradigm perspective are more likely to be aware of the environmental
consequences of their actions. This new ecological paradigm represents an underlying belief system that rec-
ognizes the interdependence between humans and the natural environment. Therefore, it can be assumed that
individuals with a new ecological paradigm perspective are more likely to be conscious of the consequences of
Vol.:(0123456789)
AC AR AV BV EP EV PN SCB SCI SN TR
AC1 0.867 0.314 0.318 0.222 0.258 0.294 0.379 0.322 0.390 0.226 0.357
AC2 0.880 0.353 0.337 0.278 0.255 0.355 0.389 0.407 0.421 0.281 0.387
AC3 0.861 0.258 0.324 0.236 0.206 0.282 0.353 0.322 0.403 0.220 0.342
AC4 0.863 0.268 0.322 0.236 0.215 0.258 0.350 0.319 0.399 0.203 0.327
AC5 0.863 0.302 0.308 0.220 0.235 0.283 0.348 0.347 0.403 0.239 0.334
AC6 0.854 0.264 0.331 0.228 0.197 0.273 0.280 0.328 0.358 0.223 0.338
AR1 0.245 0.825 0.330 0.292 0.217 0.332 0.301 0.410 0.371 0.281 0.331
AR2 0.284 0.864 0.315 0.288 0.243 0.361 0.305 0.394 0.364 0.271 0.346
AR3 0.322 0.868 0.357 0.314 0.263 0.342 0.341 0.417 0.360 0.267 0.347
AR4 0.311 0.859 0.311 0.299 0.222 0.354 0.305 0.408 0.406 0.270 0.372
AR5 0.289 0.840 0.321 0.297 0.248 0.335 0.314 0.408 0.383 0.232 0.351
AV1 0.368 0.361 0.872 0.337 0.288 0.319 0.319 0.367 0.409 0.263 0.366
AV2 0.329 0.369 0.855 0.351 0.245 0.254 0.306 0.387 0.379 0.286 0.383
AV3 0.290 0.313 0.882 0.311 0.264 0.270 0.265 0.360 0.366 0.222 0.308
AV4 0.307 0.290 0.867 0.321 0.247 0.265 0.257 0.342 0.358 0.250 0.337
BV1 0.230 0.301 0.338 0.884 0.291 0.297 0.284 0.355 0.333 0.270 0.332
BV2 0.241 0.322 0.350 0.891 0.293 0.282 0.278 0.346 0.320 0.218 0.289
BV3 0.264 0.314 0.353 0.891 0.277 0.296 0.288 0.345 0.323 0.237 0.306
BV4 0.241 0.306 0.306 0.886 0.276 0.269 0.267 0.361 0.333 0.228 0.315
EP1 0.271 0.230 0.289 0.262 0.856 0.301 0.267 0.327 0.311 0.254 0.303
EP2 0.222 0.246 0.279 0.297 0.844 0.270 0.219 0.334 0.311 0.205 0.324
EP3 0.180 0.222 0.225 0.259 0.842 0.274 0.222 0.314 0.271 0.213 0.281
EP4 0.216 0.279 0.213 0.266 0.839 0.255 0.228 0.305 0.309 0.230 0.294
EP5 0.222 0.210 0.258 0.267 0.837 0.240 0.213 0.294 0.289 0.207 0.252
EV1 0.282 0.386 0.275 0.273 0.273 0.864 0.291 0.362 0.331 0.252 0.322
EV2 0.284 0.378 0.302 0.303 0.274 0.868 0.330 0.399 0.406 0.286 0.347
EV3 0.312 0.333 0.243 0.243 0.293 0.883 0.287 0.339 0.355 0.249 0.341
EV4 0.299 0.350 0.312 0.303 0.282 0.858 0.294 0.357 0.378 0.302 0.333
EV5 0.280 0.295 0.247 0.268 0.246 0.832 0.280 0.326 0.310 0.232 0.326
PN1 0.351 0.338 0.274 0.268 0.240 0.291 0.885 0.427 0.398 0.277 0.393
PN2 0.355 0.353 0.295 0.298 0.273 0.321 0.879 0.456 0.406 0.334 0.407
PN3 0.371 0.283 0.278 0.282 0.235 0.271 0.868 0.435 0.397 0.281 0.377
PN4 0.371 0.340 0.327 0.268 0.228 0.327 0.863 0.439 0.440 0.314 0.410
PN5 0.323 0.284 0.260 0.249 0.211 0.283 0.856 0.388 0.370 0.261 0.383
SCB1 0.358 0.414 0.379 0.364 0.343 0.353 0.433 0.835 0.481 0.402 0.454
SCB2 0.336 0.427 0.334 0.333 0.289 0.338 0.439 0.874 0.521 0.409 0.507
SCB3 0.341 0.390 0.379 0.330 0.310 0.361 0.392 0.860 0.460 0.400 0.482
SCB4 0.343 0.414 0.358 0.345 0.347 0.370 0.425 0.875 0.541 0.413 0.471
SCB5 0.322 0.406 0.349 0.327 0.317 0.356 0.429 0.844 0.474 0.354 0.484
SCI1 0.407 0.416 0.395 0.342 0.288 0.388 0.419 0.533 0.859 0.407 0.497
SCI2 0.411 0.400 0.393 0.315 0.296 0.339 0.394 0.515 0.870 0.351 0.488
SCI3 0.390 0.371 0.360 0.320 0.332 0.367 0.405 0.501 0.861 0.356 0.456
SCI4 0.391 0.396 0.374 0.305 0.300 0.369 0.397 0.489 0.863 0.351 0.455
SCI5 0.365 0.299 0.339 0.293 0.303 0.306 0.367 0.434 0.829 0.326 0.431
SN1 0.230 0.266 0.268 0.259 0.229 0.266 0.301 0.381 0.364 0.855 0.316
SN2 0.237 0.287 0.268 0.226 0.235 0.284 0.328 0.431 0.376 0.880 0.338
SN3 0.251 0.265 0.242 0.228 0.214 0.244 0.289 0.401 0.367 0.875 0.318
SN4 0.219 0.265 0.246 0.228 0.219 0.266 0.281 0.410 0.357 0.868 0.308
SN5 0.236 0.260 0.248 0.224 0.249 0.272 0.267 0.377 0.355 0.860 0.329
TR1 0.344 0.333 0.328 0.284 0.292 0.305 0.383 0.482 0.471 0.294 0.850
TR2 0.356 0.363 0.353 0.309 0.294 0.372 0.393 0.495 0.495 0.344 0.853
TR3 0.344 0.375 0.360 0.312 0.283 0.326 0.386 0.492 0.455 0.302 0.864
TR4 0.341 0.347 0.346 0.297 0.310 0.324 0.405 0.477 0.462 0.310 0.855
TR5 0.333 0.329 0.318 0.287 0.295 0.322 0.362 0.434 0.433 0.331 0.838
AC 0.865
AR 0.342 0.851
Continued
Vol:.(1234567890)
AC AR AV BV EP EV PN SCB SCI SN TR
AV 0.374 0.384 0.869
BV 0.275 0.350 0.379 0.888
EP 0.265 0.281 0.302 0.320 0.843
EV 0.339 0.405 0.320 0.322 0.319 0.861
PN 0.408 0.369 0.331 0.314 0.273 0.344 0.870
SCB 0.396 0.479 0.419 0.396 0.374 0.414 0.494 0.858
SCI 0.459 0.442 0.436 0.369 0.354 0.414 0.464 0.579 0.857
SN 0.270 0.310 0.293 0.268 0.264 0.307 0.338 0.461 0.420 0.868
TR 0.404 0.411 0.401 0.350 0.346 0.387 0.453 0.559 0.545 0.371 0.852
Table 4. Loading, cross-loading and Fornell–Larcker criterion. The bold off-diagonal values are the square
root of AVE. BV biospheric values, GT green trust, AV altruistic values, PN personal norms, EV egoistic values,
AC awareness of consequences, EP new ecological paradigm, IGP intention towards green consumption
practices, AR ascription of responsibility, AGP adoption of green consumption practices.
Figure 2. Heterotrait–monotrait ratio (HTMT) matrix.
their actions on the environment. Consequently, they may be more motivated to engage in SCB to reduce their
environmental impact.
Furthermore, the finding that awareness of consequences had a positive and significant influence on AR (H5)
supports previous research58,69 that has suggested that individuals who are more aware of the consequences of
their actions are more likely to feel responsible for their impact on the environment. This finding aligns with
Value-Belief-Norm theory, which proposes that individuals who are aware of ecological consequences accept
responsibility for their actions. In this study, the relationship between awareness of consequences and AR may be
explained by the fact that individuals who are more aware of the consequences of their actions are more likely to
feel a sense of responsibility for their impact on the environment. This finding has implications for interventions
aimed at promoting sustainable fashion consumption, as it suggests that increasing awareness of the consequences
of unsustainable fashion practices may help individuals develop a stronger sense of responsibility for their actions,
and motivate them to engage in more sustainable fashion consumption behaviors.
Moreover, this study identified a positive and significant relationship between EP, AC, AR, and PN (H6–8),
consistent with previous studies22,63,77,78. This implies that individuals who strongly believe in the need for eco-
logical conservation and are aware of the consequences of their actions towards the environment are more likely
to develop a sense of responsibility for their actions. They are more likely to form a PN that prioritizes sustain-
able fashion consumption, which could result in behavioral changes towards more sustainable fashion choices.
Individuals who internalize sustainable values and beliefs are more likely to form PN that prioritize sustainable
fashion consumption, leading to changes in their behavior. This finding suggests that interventions aimed at
promoting sustainable fashion consumption should focus on developing PN that prioritize the environment
and sustainability.
Additionally, the results of this study suggest that PN, SN, and TR have positive effects on SCI (H9–11). This
is important because it indicates that personal influence, social influence, and TR motivate individuals to adopt
SCB. SN refers to shared beliefs and behaviors within a society or a particular group. The positive effect of social
Vol.:(0123456789)
Hypothesis Beta CI Min CI Max Std. error t value p value f2 r2 Q2 Decision

H1 BV → EP 0.193 0.131 0.254 0.038 5.091** 0.000 0.037 Accepted
H2 AV → EP 0.163 0.101 0.224 0.037 4.378** 0.000 0.026 0.176 0.123 Accepted
H3 EV → EP 0.204 0.144 0.265 0.036 5.608** 0.000 0.043 Accepted
H4 EP → AC 0.265 0.212 0.321 0.033 7.998** 0.000 0.076 0.070 0.051 Accepted
H5 AC → AR 0.342 0.290 0.396 0.032 10.591** 0.000 0.133 0.117 0.084 Accepted
H6 EP → PN 0.130 0.072 0.187 0.035 3.712** 0.000 0.020 Accepted
H7 AC → PN 0.294 0.233 0.354 0.037 7.963** 0.000 0.097 0.241 0.179 Accepted
H8 AR → PN 0.231 0.174 0.290 0.035 6.530** 0.000 0.060 Accepted
H9 PN → SCI 0.228 0.172 0.284 0.034 6.645** 0.000 0.065 Accepted
H10 SN → SCI 0.207 0.152 0.263 0.034 6.170** 0.000 0.058 0.391 0.284 Accepted
H11 TR → SCI 0.364 0.307 0.418 0.034 10.777** 0.000 0.162 Accepted
H12 SCI → SCB 0.374 0.317 0.427 0.034 11.140** 0.000 0.161 Accepted
0.423 0.308
H13 TR → SCB 0.333 0.276 0.389 0.034 9.759** 0.000 0.129 Accepted
HM1 TR*SCI → SCB − 0.056 − 0.102 − 0.012 0.027 2.071*^ 0.019 0.006 Rejected*
Table 5. Hypothesis testing. BV biospheric values, AV altruistic values, EV egoistic values, EP new ecological
paradigm, AC awareness of consequences, AR ascription of responsibility, PN personal norms, SN social
norms, GR trust in recycling, SCI sustainable fashion consumption intention, SCB sustainable fashion
consumption behavior. **Significant at 1% level of significance, &,*indicates significant at 5% level of
significance. ^The hypothesis is rejected due to its opposite result as hypothesized.
Figure 3. Measurement model.
norms on SCI implies that individuals are more likely to engage in SCB when they perceive such behaviors as
socially accepted and valued. This finding is consistent with previous research84. Yeap et al.27, Zahid et al.30,
Zhang et al.22 demonstrating the important role of SN in shaping pro-environmental behaviors. TR, on the other
hand, refers to an individual’s confidence in the effectiveness and efficiency of recycling programs. The posi-
tive effect of TR on SCI suggests that individuals who trust recycling programmes are more likely to engage in
SCB. This finding is particularly relevant81 in the context of sustainable fashion consumption, as it suggests that
individuals in TR programs may be more likely to engage in behaviors such as recycling clothes or purchasing
clothes made from recycled materials. Also, this is true for renting clothes in case of circular fashion conducted
by Shrivastava et al.117.
Vol:.(1234567890)
Figure 4. Moderation of trust in recycling.
Finally, this study found that SCI and TR were significant predictors of SCB (H12–13). This result suggests
that individuals who have a higher intention to consume sustainability and TR are more likely to engage in SCB,
such as buying, swapping, or donating second-hand clothes. The positive effect of SCI on SCB suggests that
individuals with a strong intention to engage in sustainable fashion consumption are more likely to engage in
such behaviors. This finding is consistent with previous research86 demonstrating the important role of intention
in predicting pro-environmental behaviors. However, the study found that TR did not moderate the relation-
ship between SCI and SCB, contrary to the hypothesized relationship ( HM1) and the findings of Sultan et al.103.
Implications of the study

Theoretical implications
This study makes several theoretical contributions to the field of sustainable fashion consumption. First, it identi-
fies several factors that influence sustainable fashion consumption behavior, including BV, AV, and EV, as well as
AC, AR, PN, SN, and TR. This provides a comprehensive understanding of the factors that motivate individuals
to engage in SCB, which can inform the development of interventions aimed at promoting such behaviors. Sec-
ond, it used bi-dimensional norms, such as PN and SN, in the VBN frameworks, and established that both are
predictors of SCB. Thus, this study contributes to the literature on the role of SN in promoting pro-environmental
behavior. The finding that SN has a positive effect on SCI suggests that interventions aimed at increasing SN to
support sustainable fashion consumption may be effective in promoting SCB.
Third, this study identified the importance of SCI and TR as predictors of SCB. This highlights the importance
of considering not only individuals’ values and beliefs, but also their perceptions of the effectiveness and efficiency
of recycling programs in promoting SCB. Finally, this study contributes to the literature on the intention-behavior
gap in SCB. Many respondents are highly willing to purchase, but ultimately do not purchase pro-environmental
products, which is referred to as the intention-behavior gap. Although these findings suggest that SCI and TR are
significant predictors of SCB, there is no evidence that TR is a moderator. This result will encourage academia to
conduct further research on the intention-behavior gap in SCB in another cultural context.
Practical implications
The results of this study have important practical implications for the promotion of SCB. First, the results suggest
that interventions aimed at promoting SFC should focus on fostering values that prioritize the environment,
personal and collective well-being, and personal growth. For example, campaigns highlighting the environmental
and social benefits of SFC may appeal to individuals who hold these values. Furthermore, the findings imply
that interventions aimed at promoting SFC should focus not only on increasing awareness of the consequences
of unsustainable fashion consumption but also on promoting a sense of responsibility for one’s actions. Such
interventions could include educating individuals on the environmental impact of their fashion choices and
Vol.:(0123456789)
Beta CI Min CI Max Std. error t value p value

BV → EP → AC 0.051 0.033 0.072 0.012 4.227 0.000
BV → EP → AC → AR 0.018 0.011 0.026 0.005 3.725 0.000
BV → EP → AC → AR → PN 0.004 0.002 0.006 0.001 3.186 0.001
BV → EP → AC → AR → PN → SCI 0.001 0.000 0.002 0.000 2.728 0.003
BV → EP → AC → AR → PN → SCI → SCB 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 2.520 0.006
BV → EP → AC → PN 0.015 0.009 0.022 0.004 3.737 0.000
BV → EP → AC → PN → SCI 0.003 0.002 0.006 0.001 3.069 0.001
BV → EP → AC → PN → SCI → SCB 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.000 2.844 0.002
BV → EP → PN 0.025 0.012 0.040 0.009 2.885 0.002
BV → EP → PN → SCI 0.006 0.003 0.010 0.002 2.563 0.005
BV → EP → PN → SCI → SCB 0.002 0.001 0.004 0.001 2.408 0.008
AV → EP → AC 0.043 0.025 0.065 0.012 3.564 0.000
AV → EP → AC → AR 0.015 0.008 0.023 0.005 3.200 0.001
AV → EP → AC → AR → PN 0.003 0.002 0.006 0.001 2.790 0.003
AV → EP → AC → AR → PN → SCI 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.000 2.448 0.007
AV → EP → AC → AR → PN → SCI → SCB 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 2.277 0.011
AV → EP → AC → PN 0.013 0.007 0.020 0.004 3.272 0.001
AV → EP → AC → PN → SCI 0.003 0.001 0.005 0.001 2.761 0.003
AV → EP → AC → PN → SCI → SCB 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.000 2.572 0.005
AV → EP → PN 0.021 0.010 0.034 0.008 2.770 0.003
AV → EP → PN → SCI 0.005 0.002 0.008 0.002 2.486 0.006
AV → EP → PN → SCI → SCB 0.002 0.001 0.003 0.001 2.325 0.010
EV → EP → AC 0.054 0.035 0.076 0.013 4.261 0.000
EV → EP → AC → AR 0.019 0.011 0.027 0.005 3.749 0.000
EV → EP → AC → AR → PN 0.004 0.002 0.007 0.001 3.177 0.001
EV → EP → AC → AR → PN → SCI 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.000 2.785 0.003
EV → EP → AC → AR → PN → SCI → SCB 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 2.620 0.004
EV → EP → AC → PN 0.016 0.010 0.023 0.004 3.970 0.000
EV → EP → AC → PN → SCI 0.004 0.002 0.006 0.001 3.284 0.001
EV → EP → AC → PN → SCI → SCB 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.000 3.107 0.001
EV → EP → PN 0.027 0.013 0.043 0.009 2.949 0.002
EV → EP → PN → SCI 0.006 0.003 0.010 0.002 2.647 0.004
EV → EP → PN → SCI → SCB 0.002 0.001 0.004 0.001 2.519 0.006
EP → AC → AR 0.091 0.067 0.119 0.016 5.766 0.000
EP → AC → AR → PN 0.021 0.014 0.030 0.005 4.207 0.000
EP → AC → AR → PN → SCI 0.005 0.003 0.007 0.001 3.363 0.000
EP → AC → AR → PN → SCI → SCB 0.002 0.001 0.003 0.001 3.039 0.001
EP → AC → PN 0.078 0.057 0.101 0.013 5.910 0.000
EP → AC → PN → SCI 0.018 0.011 0.026 0.004 4.091 0.000
EP → AC → PN → SCI → SCB 0.007 0.004 0.010 0.002 3.671 0.000
EP → PN → SCI 0.030 0.015 0.046 0.009 3.145 0.001
EP → PN → SCI → SCB 0.011 0.005 0.018 0.004 2.902 0.002
AC → AR → PN 0.079 0.057 0.104 0.014 5.531 0.000
AC → AR → PN → SCI 0.018 0.011 0.026 0.004 4.042 0.000
AC → AR → PN → SCI → SCB 0.007 0.004 0.010 0.002 3.559 0.000
AC → PN → SCI 0.067 0.045 0.092 0.014 4.761 0.000
AC → PN → SCI → SCB 0.025 0.016 0.036 0.006 4.181 0.000
AR → PN → SCI 0.053 0.035 0.073 0.012 4.511 0.000
AR → PN → SCI → SCB 0.020 0.012 0.029 0.005 3.938 0.000
PN → SCI → SCB 0.085 0.060 0.113 0.016 5.242 0.000
SN → SCI → SCB 0.077 0.054 0.103 0.015 5.083 0.000
TR → SCI → SCB 0.136 0.110 0.162 0.016 8.532 0.000
Table 6. Specific indirect effects. BV biospheric values, AV altruistic values, EV egoistic values, EP new
ecological paradigm, AC awareness of consequences, AR ascription of responsibility, PN personal norms, SN
social norms, GR trust in recycling, SCI sustainable fashion consumption intention, SCB sustainable fashion
consumption behavior.
Vol:.(1234567890)
encouraging them to take responsibility for their actions towards the environment to adopt a new ecological
paradigm. This can be achieved through educational campaigns and by creating a sustainable fashion culture
that highlights the importance of SCB. These interventions can be implemented through various channels, such
as social media campaigns, educational programs, and fashion industry initiatives that promote SFC.
Second, this study emphasizes the importance of creating social norms that support SFC., which can be
achieved through initiatives such as sustainable fashion events, sustainable fashion collaborations, and sustainable
fashion blogs. By creating a sustainable fashion community that promotes SCB, individuals are more likely to
adopt this behavior. Third, this study highlights the importance of increasing TR, which is a significant predictor
of SCB and has important implications for policymakers and marketers seeking to promote SFC. This can be
achieved through initiatives that increase awareness about the importance of recycling and highlight the benefits
of recycling, such as reduced waste and increased resource efficiency. Additionally, initiatives that increase access
to recycling facilities and make recycling more convenient can increase TR and promote SCB.
Finally, this study provides important insights into the intention-behavior gap in SCB. These findings suggest
that SCI and TR are significant predictors of SCB. Therefore, interventions aimed at promoting SFC should focus
on increasing individuals’ SCI and TR to close the intention-behavior gap and encourage SCB.
Conclusion
This study highlights the significant roles played by values, attitudes, and norms in shaping SCB among individu-
als. These findings suggest that individual values, including BV, AV, and EV, significantly influence EP, which
positively affects AC. This awareness leads to a greater sense of responsibility toward the environment, which, in
turn, positively influences SCB. This study also suggests that PN plays a vital role in shaping SCB, and creating
an environment where SFC is considered normal, to encourage more individuals to adopt SCB. Moreover, this
study emphasizes the importance of increasing TR to promote SCB. The findings have significant implications
for policymakers and businesses aiming to promote SFC and create a more sustainable fashion industry.
This study has limitations worth noting. Firstly, it exclusively examined individual-level factors influencing
SCB and did not consider broader societal influences like policies and regulations that might impact SCB. Future
research should explore the interplay between individual and societal factors to achieve a more comprehensive
understanding of SCB. Another limitation is the study’s neglect of other factors like price, availability, and con-
venience that can affect SCB. While values, beliefs, and norms are important predictors of behavior, practical
factors also play a role in individuals’ engagement in SFC. Subsequent research could assess the relative influ-
ence of these practical factors in addition to values, attitudes, and norms. Additionally, the study concentrated
on SCB without examining the influence of sustainable fashion production practices. Sustainable production
practices, including the use of sustainable materials, waste reduction, and fair labor practices, are crucial for
overall sustainable fashion. Future research should explore the factors affecting these production practices and
their relationship with consumption.
Furthermore, the study relied on self-reported SCB measures, potentially subject to social desirability bias,
wherein participants might have overreported SCB to appear more socially responsible. Future research could
employ objective measures, like tracking actual purchasing and disposal behaviors. The study used a cross-
sectional design, limiting its ability to establish causality between the variables studied. Future research could
utilize longitudinal or experimental designs to investigate causal relationships between variables. Finally, the
present study adopted the convenience sampling method, which might trigger common method biases, even
though precautions were taken during the study. Advanced research could consider employing other sampling
techniques, such as probability sampling, to mitigate any potential biases and ensure more accurate results.
Data availability
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Research Data, further inquiries can
be directed to the corresponding author/s.
Received: 4 June 2023; Accepted: 16 January 2024
References
1. Xu, J., Zhou, Y., Jiang, L. & Shen, L. Exploring sustainable fashion consumption behavior in the post-pandemic era: Changes in
the antecedents of second-hand clothing-sharing in China. Sustainability 14, 9566 (2022).
2. Li, X., Wang, L. & Ding, X. Textile supply chain waste management in China. J. Clean. Prod. 289, 125147 (2021).
3. China Association of Circular Economy. What to Do with the 26 Million Tons of Discarded Clothing? (2021). https://www.china
cace.org/news/view?id=7191. Accessed 1 Nov 2023.
4. WRAP. Sustainable clothing action plan 2020 commitment. WRAP (2020). https://wrap.org.uk/taking-action/textiles/initiatives/
scap-2020. Accessed 1 Nov 2023.
5. Borusiak, B., Szymkowiak, A., Horska, E., Raszka, N. & Żelichowska, E. Towards building sustain able consumption: A study
of second-hand buying intentions. Sustainability 12, 875 (2020).
6. Persson, O. & Hinton, J. B. Second-hand clothing markets and a just circular economy? Exploring the role of business forms
and profit. J. Clean. Prod. 390, 136139 (2023).
7. Xiong, J. The second-hand economy: A new change in consumption. Financ. Rev. 12, 92–93 (2021).
8. Faschan, M., Chailan, C. & Huaman-Ramirez, R. Emerging adults’ luxury fashion brand value perceptions: A cross-cultural
comparison between Germany and China. J. Glob. Fashion Mark. 11, 207–231 (2020).
9. GMA. Thriving Second-hand Market in China: Opportunities and Challenges. GMA https://m arket ingto
china.c om/c hinas-t hriv
ing-second-hand-fashion-market-opportunities-and-challenges/#:~:text=The growing second-hand clothing market in China
indicates a,environmental impact of fast fashion (2023).
10. Chen, L., Zheng, H. & Shah, V. Consuming to conserve: A multilevel investigation of sustainable consumption. Sustainability
14, 223 (2021).
Vol.:(0123456789)
11. Wang, Y. & Xiao, Z. The dual effects of consumer satisfaction on brand switching intention of sharing apparel. Sustainability 14,
4526 (2022).
12. Kim, J., Kang, S. & Lee, K. H. How social capital impacts the purchase intention of Sustainable Fashion Products. J. Bus. Res.
117, 596–603 (2020).
13. Baier, D., Rausch, T. M. & Wagner, T. F. The drivers of Sustainable Apparel and sportswear consumption: A segmented kano
perspective. Sustainability 12, 2788 (2020).
14. Su, J., Watchravesringkan, K., Zhou, J. & Gil, M. Sustainable clothing: Perspectives from US and Chinese young millennials. Int.
J. Retail Distrib. Manage. 47, 1141–1162 (2019).
15. Zhang, B., Zhang, Y. & Zhou, P. Consumer attitude towards sustainability of fast fashion products in the UK. Sustainability 13,
1646 (2021).
16. Joanes, T. Personal norms in a globalized world: Norm-activation processes and reduced clothing consumption. J. Clean. Prod.
212, 941–949 (2019).
17. Henninger, C. E., Bürklin, N. & Niinimäki, K. The clothes swapping phenomenon—when consumers become suppliers. J. Fashion
Mark. Manage. 23, 327–344 (2019).
18. Machado, M. A., Almeida, S. O., Bollick, L. C. & Bragagnolo, G. Second-hand fashion market: Consumer role in Circular
Economy. J. Fashion Mark. Manage. 23, 382–395 (2019).
19. Wai Yee, L., Hassan, S. H. & Ramayah, T. Sustainability and philanthropic awareness in clothing disposal behavior among young
Malaysian consumers. SAGE Open 6, 215824401562532 (2016).
20. Hur, E. Rebirth fashion: Secondhand clothing consumption values and perceived risks. J. Clean. Prod. 273, 122951 (2020).
21. Wang, B., Wang, X., Guo, D., Zhang, B. & Wang, Z. Analysis of factors influencing residents’ habitual energy-saving behavior
based on Nam and TPB models: Egoism or altruism?. Energy Policy 116, 68–77 (2018).
22. Zhang, L., Ruiz-Menjivar, J., Luo, B., Liang, Z. & Swisher, M. E. Predicting climate change mitigation and adaptation behaviors in
agricultural production: A comparison of the theory of planned behavior and the value-belief-norm theory. J. Environ. Psychol.
68, 101408 (2020).
23. Onel, N. & Mukherjee, A. Why do consumers recycle? A holistic perspective encompassing moral considerations, affective
responses, and self-interest motives. Psychol. Mark. 34, 956–971 (2017).
24. Wolske, K. S., Stern, P. C. & Dietz, T. Explaining interest in adopting residential solar photovoltaic systems in the United States:
Toward an integration of behavioral theories. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 25, 134–151 (2017).
25. Whitley, C. T., Takahashi, B., Zwickle, A., Besley, J. C. & Lertpratchya, A. P. Sustainability behaviors among college students: An
application of the VBN theory. Environ. Educ. Res. 24, 245–262 (2016).
26. Han, H. Travelers’ pro-environmental behavior in a green lodging context: Converging value-belief-norm theory and the theory
of planned behavior. Tourism Manage. 47, 164–177 (2015).
27. Yeap, J. A. L., Ooi, S. K., Yapp, E. H. T. & Ramesh, N. Preloved is reloved: investigating predispositions of second-hand clothing
purchase on C2C platforms. Serv. Ind. J. 20, 1–25 (2022).
28. Lang, C. & JoynerArmstrong, 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. 13, 37–47 (2018).
29. Zhang, L. et al. Consumers’ clothing disposal behaviors in Nanjing, China. J. Clean. Prod. 276, 123184 (2020).
30. Zahid, N. M., Khan, J. & Tao, M. Exploring mindful consumption, ego involvement, and social norms influencing second-hand
clothing purchase. Curr. Psychol. 42, 13960–13974 (2023).
31. Gomes, G. M., Moreira, N., Bouman, T., Ometto, A. R. & van der Werff, E. Towards circular economy for more sustainable
apparel consumption: Testing the value-belief-norm theory in Brazil and in the Netherlands. Sustainability 14, 618 (2022).
32. Wu, M., Al Mamun, A., Yang, Q. & Masud, M. M. Modeling the reuse intention and practices of secondhand clothing: Evidence
from a developing nation. Human. Soc. Sci. Commun. 10, 25 (2023).
33. Chan, L. & Bishop, B. A moral basis for recycling: Extending the theory of planned behaviour. J. Environ. Psychol. 36, 96–102
(2013).
34. Davies, I. A. & Gutsche, S. Consumer motivations for mainstream “ethical” consumption. Eur. J. Mark. 50, 1326–1347 (2016).
35. Joyner Armstrong, C. M., Connell, K. Y., Lang, C., Ruppert-Stroescu, M. & LeHew, M. L. Educating for sustainable fashion: Using
clothing acquisition abstinence to explore sustainable consumption and life beyond growth. J. Consumer Policy 39, 417–439
(2016).
36. McEachern, M. G., Middleton, D. & Cassidy, T. Encouraging sustainable behaviour change via a social practice approach: A
focus on apparel consumption practices. J. Consumer Policy 43, 397–418 (2020).
37. Han, H., Olya, H. G., Cho, S. & Kim, W. Understanding museum vacationers’ eco-friendly decision-making process: Strengthen-
ing the VBN Framework. J. Sustain. Tourism 26, 855–872 (2018).
38. Nguyen, H. V., Nguyen, C. H. & Hoang, T. T. Green consumption: Closing the intention-behavior gap. Sustain. Dev. 27, 118–129
(2019).
39. Vehmas, K., Raudaskoski, A., Heikkilä, P., Harlin, A. & Mensonen, A. Consumer attitudes and communication in circular
fashion. J. Fashion Market. Manage. Int. J. 22, 286–300 (2018).
40. Wang, B., Fu, Y. & Li, Y. Young consumers’ motivations and barriers to the purchase of second-hand clothes: An empirical study
of China. Waste Manage. 143, 157–167 (2022).
41. Hammad, H., Muster, V., El-Bassiouny, N. M. & Schaefer, M. Status and sustainability. J. Fashion Market. Manage. Int. J. 23,
537–550 (2019).
42. Kong, H. M. & Ko, E. Why do consumers choose sustainable fashion? A cross-cultural study of South Korean, Chinese, and
Japanese consumers. J. Glob. Fashion Market. 8, 220–234 (2017).
43. Pencarelli, T., Ali Taha, V., Škerháková, V., Valentiny, T. & Fedorko, R. Luxury products and sustainability issues from the per-
spective of young Italian consumers. Sustainability 12, 245 (2019).
44. Mohr, L. A., Webb, D. J. & Harris, K. E. Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? The impact of corporate
social responsibility on buying behavior. J. Consumer Affairs 35, 45–72 (2001).
45. Bianchi, C. & Gonzalez, M. Exploring sustainable fashion consumption among eco-conscious women in Chile. Int. Revof Retail
Distrib. Consumer Res. 31, 375–392 (2021).
46. Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A. & Kalof, L. A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The
case of environmentalism. Hum. Ecol. Rev. 20, 81–97 (1999).
47. Schwartz, S. H. Normative influences on altruism. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 10, 221–279 (1977).
48. Schwartz, S. H. Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values?. J. Soc. 50, 19–45 (1994).
49. Sarkis, A. M. A comparative study of theoretical behaviour change models predicting empirical evidence for residential energy
conservation behaviours. J. Clean. Prod. 141, 526–537 (2017).
50. Landon, A. C., Woosnam, K. M. & Boley, B. B. Modeling the psychological antecedents to tourists’ pro-sustainable behaviors:
An application of the value-belief-norm model. J. Sustain. Tourism 26, 957–972 (2018).
51. Karpudewan, M. The relationships between values, belief, personal norms, and climate conserving behaviors of Malaysian
primary school students. J. Clean. Prod. 237, 117748 (2019).
52. Han, H., Hwang, J., Lee, M. J. & Kim, J. Word-of-mouth, buying, and sacrifice intentions for eco-cruises: Exploring the function
of norm activation and value-attitude-behavior. Tourism Manage. 70, 430–443 (2019).
Vol:.(1234567890)
53. Han, H. Consumer behavior and environmental sustainability in tourism and hospitality: A review of theories, concepts, and
latest research. J. Sustain. Tourism 29, 1021–1042 (2021).
54. Sánchez-García, M., Zouaghi, F., Lera-López, F. & Faulin, J. An extended behavior model for explaining the willingness to pay
to reduce the air pollution in road transportation. J. Clean. Prod. 314, 128134 (2021).
55. Han, H., Hwang, J. & Lee, M. J. The value–belief–emotion–norm model: Investigating customers’ eco-friendly behavior. J. Travel
Tourism Mark. 34, 590–607 (2017).
56. Kim, M. J., Hall, C. M. & Kim, M. What is significant for engagement in cycling and walking in South Korea? Applying value-
belief-norm theory. Travel Behav. Soc. 32, 100571 (2023).
57. Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G. & Jones, R. E. New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: Measuring
endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: A revised NEP scale. J. Soc. 56, 425–442 (2000).
58. Ünal, A. B., Steg, L. & Granskaya, J. “To support or not to support, that is the question”. Testing the VBN theory in predicting
support for car use reduction policies in Russia. Transp. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. 119, 73–81 (2019).
59. Ye, Q. & Tkaczynski, A. Environmental-focused events: Saving tourism landmarks for future generations. Adv. Hosp. Leisure
20, 155–163 (2017).
60. Vuorio, A. M., Puumalainen, K. & Fellnhofer, K. Drivers of Entrepreneurial Intentions in Sustainable Entrepreneurship. Int. J.
Entrepr. Behav. Res. 24, 359–381 (2018).
61. Schultz, P. W. & Zelezny, L. C. Values and proenvironmental behavior. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 29, 540–558 (1998).
62. Kim, J. H. Determining the factors affecting the memorable nature of travel experiences. J. Travel Tourism Mark. 27, 780–796
(2010).
63. Chua, K. B., Quoquab, F., Mohammad, J. & Basiruddin, R. The mediating role of new ecological paradigm between value ori-
entations and pro-environmental personal norm in the agricultural context. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logistics 28, 25 (2016).
64. Campos-Soria, J. A., García-Pozo, A. & Marchante-Mera, A. J. Explaining tourists’ attitudes to environmental support: A mul-
tilevel approach. J. Sustain. Tourism 26, 987–1006 (2018).
65. Liobikienė, G. & Poškus, M. S. The importance of environmental knowledge for private and public sphere pro-environmental
behavior: Modifying the value-belief-norm theory. Sustainability 11, 3324 (2019).
66. Han, J., Seo, Y. & Ko, E. Staging luxury experiences for understanding sustainable fashion consumption: A balance theory
application. J. Bus. Res. 74, 162–167 (2017).
67. Ogiemwonyi, O. et al. Environmental factors affecting green purchase behaviors of the consumers: Mediating role of environ-
mental attitude. Cleaner Environ. Syst. 10, 100130 (2023).
68. Yang, Q. et al. Modelling the mass consumption potential of organic food: Evidence from an emerging economy. PLoS One 18,
14 (2023).
69. Ghazali, E. M., Nguyen, B., Mutum, D. S. & Yap, S. F. Pro-environmental behaviours and Value-Belief-Norm theory: Assessing
unobserved heterogeneity of two ethnic groups. Sustainability 11, 3237 (2019).
70. Bronfman, N., Cisternas, P., López-Vázquez, E., Maza, C. & Oyanedel, J. Understanding attitudes and pro-environmental behav-
iors in a Chilean community. Sustainability 7, 14133–14152 (2015).
71. Al Mamun, A. et al. Energy conservation behavior among the Malaysian youth: a study under the premises of value-belief-norm
model. Front. Energy Res. 10, 902619 (2022).
72. Yeboah, F. K. & Kaplowitz, M. D. Explaining energy conservation and environmental citizenship behaviors using the value-
belief-norm framework. Human Ecol. Rev. 22, 137–159 (2016).
73. Nguyen, Y. T. & Nguyen, H. V. An alternative view of the Millennial Green Product Purchase: The roles of online product review
and self-image congruence. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logistics 33, 231–249 (2020).
74. Gkargkavouzi, A., Halkos, G. & Matsiori, S. Environmental behavior in a private-sphere context: Integrating theories of planned
behavior and value-belief norm, self-identity and habit. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 148, 145–156 (2019).
75. Steg, L. & Nordlund, A. Theories to explain environmental behavior. Environ. Psychol. Introd. 20, 217–227 (2018).
76. Rezvani, Z., Jansson, J. & Bengtsson, M. Cause I’ll feel good! an investigation into the effects of anticipated emotions and personal
moral norms on consumer pro-environmental behavior. J. Promotion Manage. 23, 163–183 (2017).
77. Yang, Q., Al Mamun, A., Naznen, F., Siyu, L. & Mohamed Makhbul, Z. K. Modelling the significance of health values, beliefs,
and norms on the intention to consume and the consumption of organic foods. Heliyon 9, 25 (2023).
78. Kiatkawsin, K., Sutherland, I. & Lee, S. K. Determinants of smart tourist environmentally responsible behavior using an extended
norm-activation model. Sustainability 12, 4934 (2020).
79. Schwartz, S. H. Elicitation of moral obligation and self-sacrificing behavior: An experimental study of volunteering to be a bone
marrow donor. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 15, 283–293 (1970).
80. Int, An. Sia, S. K. & Jose, A. Attitude and subjective norm as personal moral obligation mediated predictors of intention to build
an eco-friendly house. Manage. Environ. Qual. J. 30, 678–694 (2019).
81. Han, H. Theory of green purchase behavior (TGPB): A new theory for sustainable consumption of Green Hotel and Green
Restaurant Products. Bus. Strat. Env. 29, 2815–2828 (2020).
82. Hwang, C. G., Lee, Y.-A. & Diddi, S. Generation Y’s moral obligation and purchase intentions for Organic, fair-trade, and recycled
apparel products. Int. J. Fashion Des. Technol. Educ. 8, 97–107 (2015).
83. Diddi, S., Yan, R.-N., Bloodhart, B., Bajtelsmit, V. & McShane, K. Exploring young adult consumers’ sustainable clothing con-
sumption intention-behavior gap: A behavioral reasoning theory perspective. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 18, 200–209 (2019).
84. Pristl, A., Kilian, S. & Mann, A. When does a social norm catch the worm? Disentangling social normative influences on sustain-
able consumption behaviour. J. Consum. Behav. 20, 635–654 (2020).
85. Doran, R. & Larsen, S. The relative importance of social and personal norms in explaining intentions to choose eco-friendly
travel options. Int. J. Tourism Res. 18, 159–166 (2015).
86. Amin, S. & Tarun, M. T. Effect of consumption values on customers’ green purchase intention: a mediating role of green trust.
Soc. Responsibil. J. 17, 1320–1336 (2021).
87. Bezençon, V., Girardin, F. & Lunardo, R. When does an ethical attribute matter for product evaluation? The role of warm-glow
feelings for low-rated products. Psychol. Mark. 37, 1571–1585 (2020).
88. Schmuck, D., Matthes, J. & Naderer, B. Misleading consumers with green advertising? An affect–reason–involvement account
of greenwashing effects in environmental advertising. J. Advert. 47, 127–145 (2018).
89. Ogiemwonyi, O. & Jan, M. T. The correlative influence of consumer ethical beliefs, environmental ethics, and moral obligation
on green consumption behavior. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. Adv. 19, 200171 (2023).
90. Mao, S. et al. Using characteristic energy to study rural ethnic minorities’ household energy consumption and its impact factors
in Chongqing, China. Sustainability 12, 6898 (2020).
91. Ma, X., Wang, M. & Li, C. A summary on research of Household Energy Consumption: A bibliometric analysis. Sustainability
12, 316 (2019).
92. Ramkissoon, H. Covid-19 place confinement, pro-social, pro-environmental behaviors, and residents’ wellbeing: A new con-
ceptual framework. Front. Psychol. 11, 25 (2020).
93. Chen, Y.-S. The drivers of green brand equity: Green brand image, green satisfaction, and green trust. J. Bus. Ethics 93, 307–319
(2009).
Vol.:(0123456789)
94. Lili, Z. et al. Celebrity endorsement, brand equity, and green cosmetics purchase intention among Chinese youth. Front. Psychol.
13, 860177 (2022).
95. Lii, Y. & Lee, M. The joint effects of compensation frames and price levels on service recovery of online pricing error. Manage.
Serv. Qual. Int. J. 22, 4–20 (2012).
96. Nuttavuthisit, K. & Thøgersen, J. The Importance of Consumer Trust for the emergence of a market for green products: The case
of organic food. J. Bus. Ethics 140, 323–337 (2015).
97. Taufique, K. M., Vocino, A. & Polonsky, M. J. The influence of Eco-label knowledge and trust on pro-environmental consumer
behaviour in an emerging market. J. Strateg. Mark. 25, 511–529 (2017).
98. Wang, J., Wang, S., Xue, H., Wang, Y. & Li, J. Green image and consumers’ word-of-mouth intention in the Green Hotel Industry:
The moderating effect of millennials. J. Clean. Prod. 181, 426–436 (2018).
99. Yadav, R., Balaji, M. S. & Jebarajakirthy, C. How psychological and contextual factors contribute to travelers’ propensity to choose
Green Hotels?. Int. J. Hosp. Manage. 77, 385–395 (2019).
100. Ricci, E. C., Banterle, A. & Stranieri, S. Trust to go green: An exploration of consumer intentions for eco-friendly convenience
food. Ecol. Econ. 148, 54–65 (2018).
101. Xu, A., Wei, C., Zheng, M., Sun, L. & Tang, D. Influence of perceived value on repurchase intention of green agricultural products:
From the perspective of multi-group analysis. Sustainability 14, 15451 (2022).
102. Harris, J. & Hagger, M. S. Do basic psychological needs moderate relationships within the theory of planned behavior?. J. Appl.
Biobehav. Res. 12, 43–64 (2007).
103. Sultan, P., Tarafder, T., Pearson, D. & Henryks, J. Intention-behaviour gap and perceived behavioural control-behaviour gap in
theory of planned behaviour: Moderating roles of communication, satisfaction and trust in Organic Food Consumption. Food
Qual. Prefer. 81, 103838 (2020).
104. Zheng, G.-W., Akter, N., Siddik, A. B. & Masukujjaman, M. Organic foods purchase behavior among generation Y of Bangladesh:
The moderation effect of trust and Price Consciousness. Foods 10, 2278 (2021).
105. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G. & Buchner, A. G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behav-
ioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav. Res. Methods 39, 175–191 (2007).
106. Hair, J. F. et al. An introduction to structural equation modeling. Classroom Companion Bus. 20, 1–29 (2021).
107. Han, H., Hwang, J. & Lee, M. J. The value–belief–emotion–norm model: Investigating customers’ eco-friendly behavior. J. Travel
Tourism Mark. 34, 590–607 (2016).
108. Kim, H., Kim, J., Oh, K. W. & Jung, H. J. Adoption of eco-friendly faux leather. Clothing Textiles Res. J. 34, 239–256 (2016).
109. Attiq, S. et al. Sustainability of household food waste reduction: A fresh insight on youth’s emotional and cognitive behaviors.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18, 7013 (2021).
110. López-Mosquera, N. & Sánchez, M. Theory of planned behavior and the value-belief-norm theory explaining willingness to pay
for a suburban park. J. Environ. Manage. 113, 251–262 (2012).
111. Choi, H., Jang, J. & Kandampully, J. Application of the extended VBN theory to understand consumers’ decisions about Green
Hotels. Int. J. Hosp. Manage. 51, 87–95 (2015).
112. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y. & Podsakoff, N. P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review
of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88, 879–903 (2003).
113. Kock, N. Common method bias: A full collinearity assessment method for PLS-SEM. Partial Least Squares Path Model. 20,
245–257 (2017).
114. Lin, X., Mamun, A. A., Yang, Q. & Masukujjaman, M. Examining the effect of logistics service quality on customer satisfaction
and re-use intention. PLoS One 18, e0286382 (2023).
115. Preacher, K. J. & Hayes, A. F. SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behav. Res.
Methods Instrum. Comput. 36, 717–731 (2004).
116. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M. & Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equa-
tion modeling. J. Acad. Market. Sci. 43, 115–135 (2014).
117. Shrivastava, A., Jain, G., Kamble, S. S. & Belhadi, A. Sustainability through online renting clothing: Circular fashion fueled by
instagram micro-celebrities. J. Clean. Prod. 278, 123772 (2021).
Author contributions
Conceptualization: Y.H., A.A.M., Q.Y., M.M. Formal analysis: A.A.M. Methodology: Y.H., Q.Y., M.M. Writ-
ing—original draft: Y.H., Q.Y. Writing—review and editing: A.A.M., M.M.
Funding
This study is supported via funding from Nanfang College Guangzhou (2022 School-level Research Project.
No. 2022XK06), Fund received by: Yingxiu Hong. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and
analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/
10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z.
Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to A.A.M.
Reprints and permissions information is available at www.nature.com/reprints.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.
Vol:.(1234567890)
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or
format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the
Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this
article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the
material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not
permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from
the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
© The Author(s) 2024
Vol.:(0123456789)

Predicting Sustainable Fashion Consumption Intentions and Practices

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Predicting Sustainable Fashion Consumption Intentions and Practices

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

Predicting Sustainable Fashion Consumption Intentions and Practices

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

www.nature.

OPEN Predicting sustainable fashion

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 1

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 2

Theoretical background and hypotheses development

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 3

Figure 1. Conceptual framework.

Enablers of awareness of consequences (AC)

Enablers of ascription of responsibility (AR)

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 4

Antecedents of personal norms

Enablers of sustainable fashion consumption intention

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 5

Enfeeblers of Sustainable consumption behavior (SCB)

Materials and methods

Population and sample

Data collection procedure

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 6

Common method bias

Data analysis method

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 7

Table 2. Demographic characteristics. 1 USD = 6.35 CNY.

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 8

Composite reliability Composite reliability Average variance Variance inflation

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 9

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 10

Figure 2. Heterotrait–monotrait ratio (HTMT) matrix.

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 11

Hypothesis Beta CI Min CI Max Std. error t value p value f2 r2 Q2 Decision

Figure 3. Measurement model.

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 12

Figure 4. Moderation of trust in recycling.

Implications of the study

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 13

Beta CI Min CI Max Std. error t value p value

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 14

Received: 4 June 2023; Accepted: 16 January 2024

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 15

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 16

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 17

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 18

© The Author(s) 2024

Scientific Reports | (2024) 14:1706 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52215-z 19

You might also like