Running head: THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
A Thesis
Presented to the Faculty
Of ISM University of Management and Economics
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Master of International Marketing and Management
By
Neringa Lukošiūtė
May 2020
2 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Abstract
The aim of this study is to find the effect sustainability cues in fashion advertising has on consumers trust and willingness to buy. Literature review disclosed the growing consumers’ concerns regarding environmental issues and their willingness to adopt sustainable behavior.
The importance of advertising and sustainability cues on consumers’ behavior, their trust and willingness to buy sustainable products was analyzed. It was stressed that sustainability cues in advertising has negative effect on consumers trust due to fast fashion companies’ greenwashing activities. The differences between consumers attitude towards slow and fast fashion brands advertising were observed. The higher acceptance of sustainability cues in slow fashion advertising was revealed in accordance to its sustainable nature. After analyzing scientific literature, quantitative research analysis – online experiment was conducted. Online survey was carried out among 400 experiment participants. The participants were randomly assigned to different (manipulative) conditions. Basic cotton T–shirt advertisement were created reflecting different type of fashion brands, with sustainability and without sustainability cues. Results showed that sustainability cues has effect on consumers trust and willingness to buy. Differences between this effect depending on participants’ gender were observed.
Keywords: Sustainability cues, Advertising, Consumer trust, Fast fashion, Slow fashion,
Willingness to Buy
3 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
List of Tables
Table 1. Descriptive results (respondents gender)
Table 2. Descriptive results (respondents age)
Table 3. Descriptive results (respondents education level)
Table 4. Results of reliability test
Table 5. Tests of Between–Subjects Effects, Manipulation Check on Long Term oriented
Table 6. Tests of Between–Subjects Effects, Trustworthiness
Table 7. The Overview of the Hypotheses
4 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
List of Figures
Figure 1. Analytical Research Model. Composed by the author.
Figure 2. Interaction Effect Graph. Composed by the author.
Figure 3. Manipulation Check
Figure 4. Interaction Effect Graph. Interaction effect between Trustworthiness, Sustainability cues and Type of Fashion
Figure 5. Interaction Effect Graph. Interaction between Brand Trust, Sustainability cues and
Gender
5 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Table of Contents
Abstract ...... 2 List of Tables ...... 3 List of Figures ...... 4 Introduction ...... 7 Background of the Research ...... 7 Research Problem ...... 8 Research goal and objectives ...... 10 Research Relevance...... 11 Theoretical Relevance ...... 11 Managerial Relevance...... 11 Research Design ...... 12 Thesis Layout ...... 12 Summary ...... 12 Literature review ...... 14 Introduction ...... 14 Definition of sustainable consumption ...... 14 Communicating sustainability ...... 19 Sustainability cues...... 19 Sustainability marketing...... 20 Fast fashion ...... 24 Slow fashion ...... 27 Brand trust ...... 32 Willingness to Buy ...... 36 Willingness to Buy Fast Fashion...... 37 Willingness to Buy Slow Fashion...... 39 Summary ...... 40 Research Methodology ...... 41 Introduction ...... 41 Theoretical Framework ...... 41 6 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Research design ...... 42 Sampling Design...... 46 Setting and Participants...... 48 Instrumentation and Scales...... 49 Internal and external validity...... 49 Data Analysis ...... 50 Manipulation check & Demographics ...... 50 Conditional process analysis ...... 51 Cronbach alpha test ...... 52 Empirical Research Results ...... 52 Introduction ...... 52 Descriptive statistics ...... 53 Data preparation for analysis ...... 55 Reliability analysis of scales ...... 55 Correlation analysis ...... 55 Manipulation check ...... 56 Testing the Hypotheses ...... 59 Univariate Analysis of Variance...... 59 Conditional process analysis ...... 61 Discussion and Conclusions ...... 66 Introduction ...... 66 Synthesis of Literature and Empirical Research Findings ...... 66 Theoretical Implications ...... 67 Managerial Implications ...... 68 Research Limitations ...... 69 Future Research ...... 70 Conclusions ...... 70 References ...... 72 Appendices ...... 86
7 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Introduction
Background of the Research
Every year European Commission launches the European Social Innovation competition to discuss global issues like climate change, urbanization and sustainable prosperity. The 2020 competition is called 'Reimagine Fashion: Changing behaviors for sustainable fashion', environmental and social issues related to fashion business is raised and global society is encouraged to get involved in the search for solutions (European Commission,
2020). The European Commission has introduced a number of actions targeted at textiles, footwear and retail, as part of its attempts to turn Europe's economy into a more sustainable one (European Commission, 2020). But why fashion is on the top of political agenda? It is estimated that regular EU citizen buys on average more than 12kg of clothing every year.
According to European Commission: “Clothing accounts for between 2 % and 10 % of the environmental impact of EU consumption” (2020). It is indicated that environmental issues
(e.g. resource reduction) and ethical concerns (e.g. over–consumption, unfair trade, and exploitation of child labor) are increasing due to fast fashion industry practices (Kim & Oh,
2020). The ways fashion is produced, bought, used and recycled need to change and it has to start from the change in consumer’s behavior. Hence, new approaches to promote sustainable behavior are being searched (Kenis & Mathijs, 2012). Following that, sustainable consumption was set into the spotlight of research and policy–making (Fischer, Stanszus, Geiger, Grossman,
& Schrader, 2017). Sustainability is destined to dominate twenty–first century commerce
(Ottman, Stafford, & Hartman, 2006) and consumers are seen as key stakeholders in development and implementation of business strategies and marketing decisions aimed at enhancing sustainable development (Leonidou et al., 2013). As consumers are becoming more 8 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
aware and concerned about the environmental issues in the fashion industry they are starting to demand for sustainable fashion (Hiller Connell, 2011). Therefore, fashion brands are making efforts to sustainability (Kim & Oh, 2020) and these efforts are being communicated to society using various sustainability cues.
Research Problem
Previous research predominantly focused on sustainability cues and their effect on consumer’s behavior from the perspective of food consumption, focusing on eco labels impact on consumers‘ awareness and green product buying behavior (Fifita, Seo, Ko, Conroy, &
Hong, 2019; Grunert, Hieke, & Wills, 2014; Hameed & Waris, 2018; Onel et al., 2018; Rees,
Tremma, & Manning, 2019; Spendrup, Hunter, & Isgren, 2016). Following food consumption, scholars investigated how concepts of sustainability is transferred from food to fashion (Ritch,
2015), and attention was drawn on the eco labels in fashion industry as well (Henninger, 2015).
Other research on the sustainability cues includes examination of aspects influencing consumers’ willingness to adopt sustainable behaviors (Jung & Jin, 2016a; Shaw, Deirdre,
Hogg, Wilson, Shiu, & Hassan, 2006), effect sustainability cues has on fashion consumers brand relationship, trust and loyalty (Park, Hyejune & Kim, 2016) attributes creating perceived value and willingness to buy sustainable fashion (Jung & Jin, 2016b; McNeill & Snowdon,
2019; Song & Kim, 2018) and consumers’ associations effecting sustainable fashion brand image (Kim & Oh, 2020). Finally, comparison of different type of fashion (fast and slow) consumers were made (Park, Hyejune & Kim, 2016; Watson & Yan, 2013). Sustainability research has found that consumers prefer sustainability cues when purchasing in order to simplify decision making process (Matthes & Wonneberger, 2014), reduce uncertainty 9 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
recognizing sustainable product and identifying product environmental effect (Atkinson &
Rosenthal, 2014; Hanss & Böhm, 2012; Thøgersen, Haugaard, & Olesen, 2010). However, another stream of research shows that consumers are becoming increasingly skeptical when it comes to advertising (Baum, 2012; Schmuck, Matthes, & Naderer, 2018). This skepticism arises due to greenwashing practices, when environmental claims are used for products that are not environmentally friendly (i.e. plastic bottles, cars and fast fashion) (Majláth, 2017; Segev,
2016). Many green advertisements are lacking transparency on real environmental attributes of the advertised products (Baum, 2012). How to reconcile these mixed findings? This research argues that important and previously unresearched aspects in acceptance of sustainability cues in advertising is fit between fashion brand type and sustainability cues. None of previous research has analyzed how type of fashion (fast vs slow) affects consumers behavior related to sustainability cues. Because fast fashion is frequently associated with various ethical and environmental issues such as unfair and child labor, high levels of waste (Dickson, 2001;
Fletcher, 2010), this would induce incongruence with existing schemas and in turn would lead to reduction of trust. In contrast, slow fashion is closely linked with idea of sustainability
(Brewer, 2019; Fletcher, 2010; Song & Kim, 2018; Štefko & Steffek, 2018) and is about finding a balance between fashion and economics on one side and social and environmental wealth on the other side (Fletcher, 2010; Jones, Clarke-Hill, Comfort, & Hillier, 2008).
Therefore, if sustainability cues are added to slow fashion brand advertising this should increase consumers trust. Elaborating on sustainability cues in fashion advertising the study aims to investigate emerging consumer‘s emotions and behaviors responding to a fast vs slow fashion advertising with sustainability cues in it. The current research seeks to fill the gap and 10 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
increase our understanding by analyzing how sustainability cues affect trust and purchase intention in slow vs fast fashion advertising. This research will address this gap.
Research goal and objectives
The main objective of this paper is to analyze how sustainability cues in advertising of fast vs slow fashion products influences consumers trust and willingness to buy. In attempt to reach the objective of the thesis, following goals are drawn:
• To analyze the academic literature on the main concepts, antecedents and outcomes used in this research: sustainability cues in advertising, fast and slow fashion, consumers trust and willingness to buy;
• To analyze the relationship between sustainability cues in advertising, consumers trust, fast and slow fashion brands and the consumers buying behavior;
• To develop the conceptual model and methodology for researching the relationships between sustainability cues in advertising of fast vs slow fashion brands, consumers‘ trust and willingness to buy;
• To perform the data collection and analyze the data;
• To compare the obtained research results to other researches in the field;
• To provide research conclusions, managerial implications, limitations and suggestions for the future research.
11 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Research Relevance
Theoretical Relevance. Academic literature investigating sustainability cues in fashion advertising is still under–developed. Previous research analyzed different types of sustainability approaches (i.e., proactive and reactive, meaning that slow fashion is proactive and fast fashion is reactive) and its influence to consumers’ brand loyalty (Park, Hyejune &
Kim, 2016). Moreover, there is a lack of deeper understanding how type of fashion (fast vs slow) affects consumers behavior related to sustainability cues. Sustainability cues impact varies in different fashion type advertising and what effect it has on consumers’ trust and willingness to buy advertised fashion product. Current study complements previous research of Park and Kim (2016) by drawing attention to the consumers trust, and analyses how sustainability cues effect consumer’s trust and willingness to buy, then sustainability cues are added to the advertising of fashion with different sustainability approaches. This study contributes to the literature on brand trust and sustainable fashion consumption.
Managerial Relevance. Due to the growing concerns from the global society and tightening regulations, companies will inevitably have to incorporate sustainability goals into their business model and strategy. A major challenge for marketers is to discover how to facilitate the consumers ‘choice process considering new variety of sustainable products. The usage of sustainability cues in advertising is one of the solutions, hence this research intends to reveal explicit strategies and tactics for the successful sustainability cues incorporation into different fashion brands advertising to maintain, retrieve or gain consumers trust. Current study will assist in the implementation of more sophisticated and targeted advertising campaigns contributing to the reducing consumer’s skepticism and increasing brand trust. It will support 12 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
more effective consumer’s decision-making process (Matthes & Wonneberger, 2014) and involvement in sustainable behavior.
Research Design
In order to answer the main research question, how does the sustainability cues in fast vs slow fashion advertising effect consumers’ trust and willingness to buy, a quantitative research design is selected. Experimental design will be used to understand under which condition consumers’ trust towards the fashion brands increases and under which – decreases, and what influences it has to consumers’ willingness to buy. For the data collection, method online survey is selected and distribution via social media is planned. Correlations, analysis of variance and conditional process analysis method is chosen for the data analysis.
Thesis Layout
Following the introduction part, Literature Review chapter will present a critical analysis of scientific articles regarding the most dominant theories and topics relevant to sustainability cues in order to rationalize the research problem. Continuing, thesis part of
Research Methodology delivers detailed description and justification of research design and research analysis. Subsequently, in the Research Methodology chapter quantitative research results are reported. Finally, in Discussion and Conclusions the literature review and empirical research findings are synthesized and discussed. Moreover, theoretical and managerial implications is disclosed.
Summary
This chapter has introduced the research topic about the impact of sustainability cues in fast vs slow fashion advertising on consumers trust and willingness to buy. Despite the 13 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
growing interest in sustainability cues usage in advertising, scientific literature is lacking research papers on sustainability cues in fashion advertising. Thus, the aim of this research is to fill this gap and to investigate, compare and contrast the effect of sustainability cues between fast and slow fashion advertising and what influence it has to consumers trust and willingness to buy. As a result, the difference in trust on sustainability cues between fast and slow fashion advertising is investigated. Thus, the outcomes of current research will be applicable both theoretically and practically. In order to reach current study goal, quantitative research is conducted. Primary data collected using online survey. Adaptive Choice–Based Conjoint
Analysis method is applied for quantitative data analysis. Subsequently, literature review regarding to sustainability cues and its application in fashion advertising is reviewed. 14 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Literature review
Introduction
This research aims to investigate, compare and contrast the sustainability cues between fast and slow fashion advertising and what influence it has to consumers trust and willingness to buy fashion products (basic cotton T–shirt in particular). This chapter is going to describe sustainability cues, their usage in fashion advertising and its impact on consumers trust and willingness to buy. Current literature indicates that sustainability cues is not a new concept in marketing but it is little explored regarding different fashion brand advertising. However, several studies prove the influence of sustainability cues on consumers’ behavior, as well as the relevance of this topic. Moreover, considering the growing concerns on the environmental issues especially caused by fast fashion industry, and at the same time emerging new sustainable initiatives it is worthwhile to make a comprehensive literature review of sustainability cues in fast and slow fashion advertising impact on consumers trust and buying behavior.
Literature review begins with the description of sustainability, sustainability cues, sustainability marketing and their effect on consumer behavior. Afterwards, present chapter provides a description and comparison of different types of fashion brands (fast and slow fashion in particular). Furthermore, consumer trust also mentioning greenwashing phenomena and willingness to buy different type of fashion are presented.
Definition of sustainable consumption
There has been a lot of attention to the idea of sustainable consumption. It is said that sustainability is destined to dominate twenty–first century commerce (Ottman et al., 2006) and 15 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
consumers are seen as key stakeholders in development and implementation of business strategies and marketing decisions aimed at enhancing sustainable development (Leonidou et al., 2013). Unsustainable tendencies and stages of contemporary consumption are being recognized by international organizations (e.g. Organization for Economic Co–operation and
Development, United Nations, Commission for Sustainable Development) and scientific research programs in various countries (e.g. in the United States, Norway, and the Netherlands)
(Lim, 2017). The UN World Commission on Environment and Development (UNWCED,
1987) defines sustainability as a concept, which acknowledges limitations of the planets resources and environmental deterioration and inequality influenced by industrialization and rapid population growth. According to Elkington’s (1997) triple bottom line approach (as cited by Balderjahn et al., 2013), sustainability includes three dimensions that focus on following areas: planet (environment), people (society) and profit (economic). Hanss and Böhm (2012) research expands Elkington’s approach and distinguishes sustainability info five dimensions:
1. an environmental dimension; 2. a social dimension; 3. an economic dimension; 4. a temporal dimension; and 5. a developmental dimension – development is required to move towards sustainability.
Based on United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development and developmental policies confirmed in the 2005 UN World Summit, elimination of the gap between industrialized and developing countries and economic viability are the key challenges to face in order to achieve a proper level of environmental protection (United Nations, 2005).
Global trend and need for sustainability encouraged researchers of various fields to look into consumers and their buying behaviors (Balderjahn et al., 2013; Dhandra, 2019; Dong et al.,
2020; Ericson, Kjønstad, & Barstad, 2014; Grunert et al., 2014; Jung & Jin, 2016a; Leonidou 16 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
et al., 2013; Minton, Elizabeth A., Spielmann, Kahle, & Kim, 2018; Rezvani, Jansson, &
Bengtsson, 2018; Shaw, D. et al., 2006; Stern, 2000; Thøgersen et al., 2010; Yang, Lu, Zhu, &
Su, 2015). Unsustainable buying behavior as Dhandra(2019) in her research describes it – resource–intensive lifestyle, that is perceived as the central source of environmental downturn.
In order to change current situation the transformation of before mentioned behaviors toward more sustainable consumption patterns is necessary (Dhandra, 2019). Sustainable consumption is defined as: “the consumption that simultaneously optimizes the environmental, social, and economic consequences of acquisition, use and disposition in order to meet the needs of both current and future generations” (Luchs et al., 2011 as cited in Phipps et al., 2013, p. 1227).
The rapidly growing world population in combination with materialistic lifestyle increases the global demand for goods and services resulting to indefinite hyper – consumption
(Dhandra, 2019). Many scholars believe that successful implementation of sustainable consumption programs is dependent on consumers engagement and shift in consumers behavior towards a more sustainable lifestyle that would lead to increased demand for sustainable products and reduction of irresponsible consumption (Ericson et al., 2014; Fischer et al., 2017; Hill & Lee, 2012; Stern, 2000)
Previous research aiming to understand responsible consumption behavior showed differences between individual consumers and their understanding level of consumption, it‘s impact on environment and willingness to purchase environmentally friendly products (Haws,
Winterich, & Naylor, 2014; Leonidou et al., 2013). It is important that consumers understand negative consequences at every step of consumption process when considering all three pillars of sustainability (social, economic and environmental) (Onel et al., 2018). 17 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Heightened attention from the governing institutions and consumers towards sustainability, green and circular economy prompt businesses to launch innovative tools, which increase sustainability (Lewandowska, Witczak, & Kurczewski, 2017). Wide range of businesses tries to adopt environmentally sustainable practices by introducing new brands and products (Haws et al., 2014). According to D. Hanss and G. Böhm (2012) sustainable products are goods that are in line with the principles of sustainable consumption: reduction of ecological and social problems associated with production and consumption at the same time remaining economically viable. The main principle of green or sustainable products is to make consumers aware of current environmental concerns (Rees et al., 2019; Wei, Ang, &
Jancenelle, 2018) and consequently shift their behaviors to be more sustainable. Before expecting consumers to shift towards sustainable lifestyle, it is necessary for companies’ managers and marketers to create encouraging view of sustainable consumption (Minton,
Elizabeth A. et al., 2018). Aiming to implement a large scale, long–term behavioral changes, which would lead to the reconsideration of negative consumption impact, environmental values, have to be developed through education (Dobson, 2007; Jung & Jin, 2016a). Dobson
(2007) claims that behavior change led by environmental citizenship concerns has greater likelihood to last than behavior led by financial motivations.
Motivation and factors affecting sustainable consumption behavior have already been explored by academics in environmental protection, public policy, psychology, management and marketing (Balderjahn et al., 2013; Grunert et al., 2014; Leonidou et al., 2013; Lim, 2017;
Minton, Elizabeth A. et al., 2018; Onel et al., 2018; Phipps et al., 2013; Rezvani et al., 2018;
Shaw, D. et al., 2006; Stern, 2000). Personal moral norms can effect and strengthen the positive 18 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
emotions, leading to the direct influence on the intentions to adopt sustainable products
(Rezvani et al., 2018).
A new trend called LOHAS (meaning – Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability) was introduced due to the increasing number of consumers who are concerned of social and environmental issues related to the food they eat and clothes they wear, as a result these consumers prefer environmentally friendly locally–made products (Park, Hyun Hee, 2015)
Every decision made to buy or not certain products or services contributes to a more or less sustainable consumption patterns since every purchase has its impact on ethical, resource, waste, and community aspects (Moisander, 2007). Consumer buying behavior are generally affected by sustainability concerns and the product bought (Balderjahn et al., 2013). Consumers who decided to pursue a sustainable lifestyle face a much more challenges in their decision- making. Contradictory decisions, ethical reasons are one of the factors that make sustainable consumption so motivationally and practically complex (Moisander, 2007).
In addition, purchasing intention can be transformed into green purchasing behavior when there is a believed by consumers that their efforts to consume green products will bring positive effect (Dodds, 1991). Consumers' environmental concerns, values and interests play a key role in their decision to purchase a green product (Wheeler, 2013). Due to increased awareness in environmental topics, consumers are more intended to purchase green products
(Strizhakova et. al, 2013, P. Hartmann, 2012). Conscious consumers take into account the social, environmental, and ethical concerns and translate them into accountability expressed through their buying decisions. Thus, aware of the harmful consumption influence to the world, they embraces and practices responsible consumption (Lim, 2017). 19 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Communicating sustainability
Sustainability cues. Various scientific works on the recognition of sustainability cues can be found in the marketing literature. Different researchers suggest that consumers look for sustainability cues such as product labeling, post–consumption options (e.g. recycling) and whether the company has environmentally positive image (Grimmer & Woolley, 2014).
Previous researchers largely focused on the effect sustainability cues has on consumer’s attitudes and behavior from the perspective of food consumption. In wast majority of papers the focus was drawn on consumers‘ awareness of eco labels impact and green product buying behavior(Fifita et al., 2019; Grunert et al., 2014; Hameed & Waris, 2018; Onel et al., 2018;
Rees et al., 2019; Spendrup et al., 2016; Vermeir & Verbeke, 2006). Subsequent to food consumption, academics examined how concepts of sustainability is transferred from food to fashion (Ritch, 2015), and they have focused on the eco labels in fashion industry as well
(Henninger, 2015). Other research on the sustainability cues in fashion includes examination of aspects influencing consumers’ willingness to adopt sustainable behaviors (Jung & Jin,
2016a; Shaw, Deirdre et al., 2006), effect sustainability cues has on fashion consumers brand relationship, trust and loyalty (Park, Hyejune & Kim, 2016) attributes creating perceived value and willingness to buy sustainable fashion (Jung & Jin, 2016b; McNeill & Snowdon, 2019;
Song & Kim, 2018), consumers’ associations effecting sustainable fashion brand image (Kim
& Oh, 2020). Finally, comparison of different type of fashion (fast and slow) consumers were made (Watson & Yan, 2013).
20 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Previous studies had shown low consumers awareness of sustainability cues (Soon &
Wallace, 2018). Contrarily the latest research of Rees (2019) shows a great level of consumers’ recognition of the sustainability cues. A further analysis on the causes effecting consumer’s perception of sustainability have been made. McCarthy (2017) states that consumers’ awareness is affected by their lack of knowledge. Rees (2019) supports McCarthy (2017) by adding that consumers’ perception of sustainability cues could be effected by the over–all informational context and also expands on demographic factors influence to consumers attitudinal and behavioral reaction to sustainability cues (Rees et al., 2019). Eco–literacy is another important explanatory variable of pro–environmental behaviors (Amyx et al., 1994 as cited in Wei et al., 2018). It is being conceptualized in either objective or subjective understanding about the environment and is related to consumer seeking, searching and using information during the decision–making process (Wei et al., 2018). Eco–literacy is referred to consumer’s skill to recognize or explain ecologically associated symbols, theories and behaviors (Cheah & Phau, 2011).
Sustainability cues in this paper follow a loose definition and includes cues such as environmental and ethical labels, sustainability related keywords, organizational schemes, institutional and legal arrangements, graphical elements, as well as symbols and logos
(Henninger, 2015; Niinimäki, 2006)
A key role in raising public awareness about sustainability topics and strengthening socially responsible brand images influencing consumers’ choices of sustainable products is played by sustainability advertising (Yang et al., 2015)
Sustainability marketing. Sustainability marketing, sometimes also referred by similar terms such as green marketing, ethical marketing, environmental marketing, and eco–friendly 21 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
marketing can be explained as the operation of marketing processes seeking to motivate and maintain pro–environmental consumer behaviors and attitudes (Jain & Kaur, 2004). Earlier literature on sustainability marketing has focused on the overall relationship of marketing and sustainability (Jones et al., 2008; Kemper & Ballantine, 2019). The authors note that often marketing as it is nowadays, contradicts the concept of sustainability (Jones et al., 2008) – the whole idea of marketing is to promote consumption and contrary sustainability seeks to reduce unnecessary consumption. Hameed (2018) depicted sustainability marketing as an effort to build and maintain viable relationship between nature, society and consumers. Sustainability marketing fulfills green consumers need for accessible information. By providing key information on products attributes sustainability marketing enables consumers to perform better buying decisions (Matthes & Wonneberger, 2014).
Sustainability advertising is a part of sustainability marketing and is defined as any advertising that meets one or more of the further mentioned principles: “(1) explicitly or implicitly addresses the relationship between a product/service and the biophysical environment, (2) promotes a green lifestyle with or without highlighting a product/service, and
(3) presents a corporate image of environmental responsibility” (Banerjee et al. 1995 cited by
Segev et al. 2016). The importance of developing the precise composition of messaging was stressed in causing positive evaluations by consumers on sustainable products and brands
(Sheehan & Atkinson, 2012).
Sustainability advertising effect on consumers’ behaviors have been analyzed in several researches in marketing field (Hameed & Waris, 2018; Han, J., Seo, & Ko, 2017; Minton,
Elizabeth, Lee, Orth, Kim, & Kahle, 2012). Finding shows evident correlation between sustainability advertising, positive consumer perception and willingness to buy sustainable 22 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
products (Chekima, Syed Khalid Wafa, Syed Azizi Wafa, Igau, Chekima, & Sondoh, 2016;
Yang Chang Yi, 2017).
Consumer acknowledged with latest sustainability issues and trends on the top of political agenda in local and international spheres (Vermeir & Verbeke, 2006) are changing their negative consumption behavior (Matthes & Wonneberger, 2014; Vermeir & Verbeke, 2006).
As a result, sustainability conscious (in other articles referred as ethical or green) consumers express their environmental concerns as one of the main reasons for employing a sustainable and eco–friendly behavior towards nature (Matthes & Wonneberger, 2014) for example buying ecologically packaged goods, recycling, and engaging with environmental groups (Ellen et al.,
1991; Schwepker and Cornwell, 1991 as cited by Wei et al., 2018).
For the regulated market–sectors, such as food sector, sustainability is considered as a competitive advantage, and it has been claimed that consumers’ are shaping sustainable market preferences (Zabkar & Hosta, 2013). Consumers are increasingly faced with choices between
“green” products and their more traditional counterparts, as more businesses are trying to take advantage of the green trend (Haws et al., 2014). They produce products whose composition and/or packaging are positioned as environmentally friendly and are continuously searching for new ways to differentiate their products (Gahlot Sarkar, Sarkar, & Yadav, 2019; Haws et al., 2014; Lewandowska et al., 2017; Segev, 2016).
Research shows that for consumers’ willing to purchase sustainable product verification process of green attributes is complicated. To verify green companies’ claims, judge potential product effect on environment, consumers have to use sustainability cues such as eco–labels
(Atkinson & Rosenthal, 2014; Thøgersen et al., 2010). Different public and private initiatives within the last three decades, initiated the communication of sustainability–related information 23 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
about food to consumers, introducing labels and logos in–store and on–product (Grunert et al.,
2014). Among the most popular are the Fair Trade logo, the Rainforest Alliance logo, various carbon index schemes and animal welfare–related logos (Grunert et al., 2014). Steenis et al.
(2017) notes that graphical packaging cues (e.g. manufacturers’ eco–seals) strongly affects customer perception of sustainability. Ruth and Strizhakova (2011) stresses that these cues improves consumers’ attitudes toward the brand and increase purchase intention, but only when their environmental concerns are high (Han, N. R., Baek, Yoon, & Kim, 2019).
However, the number of labels and logos might often be confusing rather than helpful
(Hanss & Böhm, 2012). To indicate how sustainable products are consumers uses their acquaintance with the labels as a cue. Consumers face difficulty when they are not familiar with some labels and their meaning of indicating sustainable products (Hanss 2012 p. 686). In the Eurobarometer (2013) research „the Attitudes of Europeans Towards Building The Single
Market For Green Products study“majority of respondents asked “Where would you like to find environmental information about a product?” stated that the information found on the product itself (e.g. the product label) is most important, after that comes information on the store shelf, and finally – information of the product in TV, radio and press advertising
(Eurobarometer 2013).
Consumers’ awareness is increased by sustainability labeling that created conditions for consumers to inspect visual cues associated with environmental, social and ethical issues or features of product such as country of origin, production process or source (Grunert et al.,
2014). Hameed & Waris (2018) study results shows that consumer eco–behavior and environmental orientation is significantly impacted by eco–labels. 24 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Fast fashion
Today’s global fashion business is increasingly driven by ‘fast fashion’ – trendy, cheap apparel that changed traditional fashion calendar (i.e. spring/summer and fall/winter) (Aakko
Maarit, 2017; Joy, Sherry, Venkatesh, Wang, & Chan, 2012). Since the early 2000s fast fashion term were widely used in the media, following that attention from academia started to grow
(Aakko Maarit, 2017; Bhardwaj & Fairhurst, 2010). “Fast fashion” is a model of the clothing supply chain that is designed for quick reaction to the changes of the latest fashion trends and renewal of clothing sold in stores (Byun and Sternquist, 2011; Moore and Fernie, 2004).
According to AAkko (2016): Nowadays fashionable look and clothing is available to everyone in the West and it is constantly promoted by an extensive marketing. In this way, fashionable look became everyone’s commodity – it became democratized. Despite in a sense beneficial aspects fast fashion industry is known for causing damage for global environment and society, it caused great level of environmental alarms due to production, maintenance, and disposal
(Fletcher, 2010; Onel et al., 2018).
As many consumers desire to catch fashion trends quickly at affordable prices, they prefer to consume fast fashion brands. When a trend becomes outdated, fast fashion consumers tend to throw away and swap their clothing with new fashionable items (Bhardwaj & Fairhurst,
2010; Jung & Jin, 2016a). The purchase of new clothes are encouraged by the intended obsolescence, regarding the limited life of trend, function or quality of material made
(Chapman 2014). The “perceived obsolescence” – the need to replace current product or piece of clothing with a new, fashionable one, even if the existing piece functions similarly well is creatively promoted by advertising. It assimilates consumption with feelings of self–worth, freedom, adventure, and success (Dauvergne, 2010). Hence, fast fashion facilitates 25 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
consumerism, encourages impulsive consumption leading to the major turnover of clothing, which in sequence generates negative impact on the environment (Fletcher, 2010; Niinimäki,
2006). Significant levels of environmental pollution is generated through all fashion production stages, from fiber growth and manufacturing (production of enormous quantities of raw materials are leaving a major carbon footprint), dyeing and printing (the discharge of dyes and toxic chemicals) and transportation. (Brewer, 2019; Hiller Connell, 2011; Kim & Oh, 2020;
Thomas, 2019) Furthermore, ethical issues (e.g. over–consumption, unfair trade, and exploitation of child labor) are increasing due to fast fashion (Kim & Oh, 2020). Many consumers have low levels of knowledge concerning impact fast fashion has on the environmental through apparel production and selling (Hill & Lee, 2015). Environmental impact of overall EU clothing consumption makes up from 2% to 10% (European Commission,
2020). More than 2 billion tons of fashion are disposed by consumers worldwide (Thomas,
2019), discarded, more than half of the clothes are not recycled but end up in mixed household waste and are sent to incinerators or landfill (Remy, Speelman, & Swartz, 2020). Recent years several major fashion companies such as Burberry was accused of disposing of significant amounts of new merchandise (House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee, 2019), which raised serious concerns about the ethical, social and environmental implications of such activities (Brewer, 2019).
Speed is fundamental for the fast fashion system and is considered as main competitive advantage by the fast fashion companies. Although efficiency and speed associated with large scale production are not necessarily causing environmental and ethical problems, rapid production pressure, often combined with reduction of manufacturing costs, increases the risk of ignoring environmentally and ethically correct practices (Barnes & Lea-Greenwood, 2006; 26 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Turker & Altuntas, 2014). Fast fashion industry is linked with various ethical issues due to the outsourcing production from the countries where unfair labor practice, which include unsafe working environment, child labor, extensive working hours, low wages, health risk, as well as psychological and physical abuse (Dickson et al. 2009; Fletcher 2010; Aakkon 2016) are common. Moreover, fast fashion fundamentally contradicts with the goals and values of sustainability. Quick changes, intended obsolescence, high disposal levels at the core of the fast fashion philosophy is opposite to sustainability. The main challenge for sustainability in fashion industry is to achieve system–level and long–term change (Fletcher 2009; Brewer
2019)
Consumers are becoming more conscious of before–mentioned issues in the fashion industry and starts to demand for more sustainable fashion. Consequently, fast fashion brands are aiming for sustainability (Kim and Oh, 2020). Increasing number of fashion companies are incorporating social responsibility and sustainability into their agendas, reporting about their ethical and ecological commitments. In consequence, new terms such as ‘sustainable fashion’ or ‘slow fashion’ are used to address these movements. The use of these terms is useful in order to signal sustainable practices behind the product; however, it is difficult to classify fashion brands under these labels, as there is no standard for identifying them exactly (Aakkon, 2016).
Even the fast fashion giants such as H&M are making efforts towards more sustainable practices – in global fashion industry, it is the second largest operator of certified organic cotton
(Textile Exchange, 2014). In addition, they presented a garment–recycling scheme in aiming to cut down the volume of textile waste that ends up in landfill and shares all the related information in the sustainability report on their website under the topic of sustainability. 27 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
It was found that there are main difference between fast and sustainable fashion brands approach to sustainability – while sustainable fashion brands are proactive in taking a sustainability leadership, fast fashion brands is reactive (Park, Hyejune & Kim, 2016). Despite that, fast fashion brands as former mentioned H&M are creating a sustainable brand image.
Kim and Oh (2020) analyzed consumers’ associations with fast fashion brand’s sustainable fashion initiatives (i.e. H&M Concious) and indicated that key words such as „recycling“ and
„eco–friendly“ has a strong association with researched fast fashion brands (Kim & Oh, 2020).
Slow fashion
Slow fashion is closely interconnected with idea of sustainability (So Young Song and
Kim 2018; Fletcher 2010; Brewer 2019). Slow fashion is based on an aim to find the right balance between fashion on one side and economic, social and ecological systems on the other.
(Clark 2008; Fletcher 2010). Other definitions of slow fashion: “environmental, ecological, green, sustainable, ethical, recycled, organic, and inclusive (universal) fashion and fashion design”( Thomas, S. 2015 as cited by Stefko, 2018). Jung and Jin (2016) in their research remarks that majority of existing articles focuses on business part of slow fashion as an overview to this new type of clothing industry (Calrk, 2008, Fletcher, 2010; Pookulangara and
Shephard, 2013; Watson and Yan, 2013;). Unlike, the majority of the authors mentioned Fisher et al. (2008) took a holistic approach to comprehend the best ways to inspire consumers to implement fashion sustainability within their everyday life and behaviors (as cited by Ritch,
2015). Also more recent work of scholars examines the phenomenon of slow fashion: from the perspective of consumption comparing to the organic food (Ritch, 2015; Fifita et. al 2019); taking into the consideration legal aspects and impact on environmental and social 28 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
sustainability (Brewer, 2019); from the marketing perspective (Jung and Jin, 2016; Grappi et al. 2017) its impact on environment and consumers behavior; finds the correlation with other type of fashion (Aakkon, 2016); looks at the present issues and future perspectives (Stefko
2018)
Slow fashion derives from slow culture, which is described as “a process whereby everyday life… is approached with care and attention…an attempt to live in the present in a meaningful, sustainable, thoughtful and pleasurable way” (Parkins & Craig 2006, p. 9). Kate
Fletcher (2007) was one of the founders of slow fashion inspired by the movement of “slow food”, which stresses the importance of responsibility in food production and consumption.
The Slow Food movement started as an alternative to fast food in the 1980s (Parkins & Craig
2006). The Slow Food Manifesto declares: “In the name of productivity, the ‘fast life’ has changed our lifestyle and now threatens our environment and our land (and city) scapes.”(As cited in Aakko, 2016, p.41). Food industry is a good example how sustainability idea can be successfully initiated into business model by highlighting the impact that consumer actions and decisions have on society (Centre for Sustainable Fashion, 2009). In this way, consumer awareness was raised and various food consumption related issues and ideas came to surface, such as: food-miles, chemical applications free food production and negotiations between food producers and multi–national organizations. (Ritch, 2015, p.1162). Local, old–fashioned and traditional cuisines are used to foster taste, quality, and rich variety of food (Parkins & Craig
2006). In a similar philosophical manner, slow fashion favors small–scale and local production, which support dispersed economies (Clark, 2008). Mass manufacturing is substituted by small–scale production and traditional craft techniques; quantity is replaced by emphasizing quality (Parkins & Craig 2006; Clark 2008; Fletcher 2010; Aakkon, 2016; Fletcher & Grose 29 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
2012). Slow fashion specifies in apparel products that are made in accordance with environmentally, socially, and ethically responsible practices, with the aim to provide basic designs from more durable materials that last longer (Watson & Yan, 2013).
The slow fashion provides an alternative paradigm to the fast fashion model; slow fashion changes the power relations between suppliers, producers and consumers focusing rather on creating stronger relationships and mutual trust that are only possible in smaller scales. As a result, sustainability and corporate responsibility increases (Fletcher & Grose
2012; Brewer 2019). Slow fashion idea draws attention to durability, local clothing production driven by sustainably sourced fair–trade fabrics and traditional artisanship (Fletcher 2010;
Brewer 2019). This often leads to a high quality product which in turn associates eco–fashion with luxury brands (Han, Seo, & Ko, 2017), Fifita et. al (2019) in their article show that it is long–term wellbeing, expression of sustainability values and signaling social status are some of the common attributes that both organic and luxury fashion entails that leads to them to being intertwined. Slow fashion not only puts its emphasis on premium quality and development of education about clothing, slow fashion attempts to promote a lesser use of chemicals and consequently its proliferation (Stefko, 2018) Once the item is manufactured, slow fashion is aware of how slowly and thoroughly it is consumed (Jung, S.J., Jin, B., 2016).
This is an essential part of sustainability idea because even the most sustainable production can easily undermine sustainability if the item is used and in this case clothes are worn only a few times before being discarded (LeBlanc, 2012).
There are five sub–dimensions of slow fashion defined by Jung and Jin (2014) through
Churchill‘s (1979) scale development paradigm. The scale’s idea was to to measure consumers 30 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
‘orientations, which were revealed to explain the slow fashion concept, include Equity,
Authenticity, Functionality, Localism and Exclusivity.
The understanding of environmental impact of throwaway clothing culture increases gradually both in customers and retailers. As a result, there is an increasing demand to minimize this with research suggesting that once unsustainable practices by companies comes to light, it has a significant impact on customer behavior and decisions (Grappi, Romani, & Bagozzi,
2013). The garments industry holds in itself a huge potential for an impact on sustainability movement that is caused by the size of the industry its effect on environment due to production, transportation, and selling (Hiller Connell, 2011). Finally, clothing and other apparel products might be used as a measure of expression for individual to show and communicate their ideas of sustainability and environmental (Hill & Lee, 2012)
Multiple studies examined differences between Fast versus Slow Fashion consumers.
Definition provided by Watson and Yan (2013) describes slow fashion consumers as consumers who „choose to purchase high quality, versatile clothing that allows them build a wardrobe based on the concept of clothing created out of care and consideration“ (Watson and
Yan, 2013, p. 155 as cited by Jung and Jin, 2016). The empirical evidence shows that slow fashion consumers carefully rethink their choices before making purchase decision (Woods,
2009), are usually well–educated women who support good things such as “local economy, fair trade and good labor prices” (Leslie et al, 2014, p. 233 as cited by Stefko, 2018). On the contrary, fast fashion consumer makes quick purchase decisions, buys several pieces of clothing for similar amount of money a slow fashion consumer would spent for a single item
(Jung, S.J., Jin, B., 2016) 31 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Researchers claims that the fashion industry is “in the midst of dynamic changes”. In the near future, the focus will be mainly drawn on the best sustainable slow fashion practices
(Stefko, 2018; Jung, S.J., Jin, B., 2016; Aakko, 2016). The global economy will be impacted by these changes. Aiming to achieve sustainability in fashion industry, slow fashion will inevitably perform as finest alternative to fast fashion. Hence, retailers and producers “need to educate the consumer about the processes used in the creation of their apparel” (Pookulangara and Shephard, 2013, p. 200, 202–203 as cited in Stefko, 2018, p. 8). Companies are going to compete in the ways of motivating the change in consumption patterns, striving to replace quantity with quality, and offering clothing made of organic and recycled materials (Jung, S.J.,
Jin, B., 2016).
Nonetheless, consumer interest in sustainable fashion has not necessarily resulted in changes in consumer behavior. For example, Sudbury and Böltner (2011) claim that consumers might sometimes base their decision on lower price rather than higher standard of sustainability even if they are more conscious of ethical fashion. On the other hand, Stefko (2018) argues the previous claim and instead argues that transparency is a key element in fashion industry nowadays and price is becoming less important. The empirical evidence that he got in his research prove that slow fashion consumers focus on lesser quantity and higher quality.
Consumers who base their choices in fashion on ethical reasons demand purchase options manufactured in "sweat–free" production. In such cases, consumers are willing to pay more
(Holt, 2009, Gam, 2009, Pookulangara 2011 et al, as cited by Stefko, 2018, p.5).
32 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Brand trust
Research of trust in marketing literature is usually made in terms of trust in the seller and in terms of trust in the organization (Morgan and hunt, 1994 as cited in Jarvenpaa et al.
2000). Brand trust is a consumer's intention to “rely on the ability of the brand to perform its stated function” (Chaudhuri and Holbrook, 2001). Brand trust is associated with consumers’ confident belief in a brand’s credibility and reliability (Delgado–Ballester, 2004, Napoli et al.,
2014). Brand reliability is related to the anticipation or undertaken performance of a brand – consumer will trust the brand if it fulfills consumers expectations by performing as promised
(Kim, Shin, Koo, Napoli et al., 2014). Consumers believe that a trustworthy brand would find solutions for an unexpected problem (Park Kim, 2016). Compared to other brands, a trustworthy brand enables consumers to believe that its activities are led by appreciation for the product, customers and society (Delgado–Ballester, 2004). Brand that are honestly involved in consumers welfare are trusted more than ones that are suspected of hiding unfair manipulative intentions (Doney and Cannon, 1997 as cited in Par and Kim, 2016, p. 116).
Brand is evaluated by consumers on both its tangible and intangible features and performance
(Holt, 2002). Chaudhuri and Holbrook (2001) emphasizes that consumers' beliefs about reliability, safety and honesty are essential aspects of trust in the brand evaluation (As cited in
Park and Kim, 2016, p. 115). Consumers’ expectations evoked by brands’ marketing activities and products advertised contributes to development of brand trust (Ashley & Leonard, 2009).
It was found in research that consumers purchase intention, brand attitude and brand trust is positively influenced by consumer perception of fashion companies’ business transparency (Kang and Hustvedt 2014, Bhaduri and Ha–Brookshire 2011 as cited in Park an
Kim, 2016). Wherefore brand trust effects consumer behavior (Schurr and J.L. Ozanne, 2000) 33 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Fashion brands in customers eyes as well as their attitude and behaviors’ are often positively influenced by brand's sustainability ideas.(Park and Kim, 2016). As a result, fashion brands or products (e.g., organic cotton, cotton grown using sustainable farming practices) are viewed favorably by those consumers who give significance to environmental sustainability (Norum and Ha–Brookshire 2011; Hustvedt and Dickson 1996). Considering these findings, researchers say that firm's brand image is not only improved by implementing sustainability into business strategy but it also works positively in elevating product credibility level
(Molthan–Hill 2014; Schmitt and Renken 2012). It was showed that consumer trust of Fair
Trade products translates into brand loyalty and a willingness to pay a premium price (Castaldo,
2009).
Sustainable fashion brands are considered to be more trusted. Vermeir & Verbeke 2006 research results indicate that moving to sustainable products can be caused by an increase of control, traceability and safety. Consumers’ brand trust is based on the drivers of brand behavior (Doney and Cannon, 1997) Sustainable businesses base their operating model by proactive approach and take it to triple bottom line (i.e., considering social, environmental and financial aspects equally) This integrity of sustainability effort may endow sustainable fashion brands with such characteristics as reliability, honesty and safety. According to Sung and Kins
(2010) study, brands characterized as sincere and honest personality traits are more strongly associated with brand trust.
As mentioned in previous part fast fashion business model receives criticism due to its impact on the ecological environment and global society. Even though several fast fashion brands made attempt to communicate their sustainability initiatives, their approaches to sustainability was reactive, mostly concentrating on ethical solutions and only addressing the 34 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
consumers segment who are environmentally conscious, whereas maintaining their current business model (Parker and Dickson, 2009). It is assumed that growing ethical consumerism raised the idea that fast fashion lacks reliability and consistency in its sustainability practices, which cause low level of trust from consumers (Park, Kim, 2015) What is more, nowadays brands very often use exaggeration, try to trick their customers (Holt, 2002). In turn, as stated in numerous publications, this cause lack of consumer trust in companies' environmental communication and sustainability advertising (e.g., OECD, 2011; Ottman 2011; Chen & Chang
2013; Lemke & Luzio 2014). It has been noticed by some of the authors that businesses try to win back the consumers' trust by highlighting the transparency and honesty in their communication. (Vermeir & Verbeke 2006). In order to meet criteria of sustainable consumption, green products now introduce features differentiating them from conventional products, such as differenced labeling, and/or environmental certification which affirm the attribute of being environmentally friendly. Many environmental claims pointing to green attributes are ambiguous and deceptive. (Sigal Segev, Juliana Fernandes & Cheng Hong, 2016)
In this context, some of the products that appear to have sustainable product characteristics might not actually have them. Such products are said to have “environmental makeup” or be described as “greenwashing” product (Sergio Braga Junior et al. 2018) It was noticed in research that the sustainability cues such as Fairtrade Foundation mark widely used on food products are not common and trusted considering fashion and clothing where child labor and worker‘s rights were pertinent issues (Klein, 2001).
Greenwashing, also referred as eco–bleaching, whitewash, eco–washing, green washing, green makeup or green image washing (Bragna et al. 2018) phenomena based on the 35 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
company’s intention to mislead customers and partners in order to show up themselves or their own products more environmental–friendly than they really are in an attempt to gain market share. (Delmas and Burbano, 2011; Parguel et al. 2011; Melinda Majláth, 2017). Greenwashing has an effect on „green“ product legitimation, it is associated with green consumer confusion and green perceived risk which negatively affects consumers trust (Sigal Segev, Juliana
Fernandes & Cheng Hong, 2016). Distrust in marketing message and threat of deception or
"greenwashing" in customers' minds cause a much less likely chance for them to buy the product or assume a positive and favorable attitude towards it. (Thøgersen 2002). This consumer’s attitude is called „green skepticism“ – consumers doubt in product's claim to be green (Leonidou & Skarmeas, 2017. Some of the key aspects identified by authors that create a sense of trust include reliability, dependability, meeting of consumers' expectations, trustworthiness and possibility for product to safeguard environment (Chen & Chang, 2013).
Customers are usually influenced and make their decisions based by advertising. However, once sense of greenwashing occurs it significantly undermines consumer confidence and trust in that advertising (Hamann and Kapelus 2004). Consumer skepticism towards green brand is often triggered by greenwashing, which looks suspicious to them. As a result, they start to feel disapprove about brands conduct and their advertisements (Nyilasy et al., 2013). Lee, Bhatt, and Suri (2018) argued that it is possible to support consumers' decision-making in a positive way by assisting them to differentiate between green attributes and greenwashed products.
According to them, it requires companies to promote green products by including all green attributes. It is well proven that eco–conscious consumer is mindful about trust of a specific brand, which shows that green trust has a significant level of influence on consumer coconscious behavior (Hameed 2018). 36 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Though research suggests that greenwashing practices have largely declined since the end of the 1990s (Segev, Fernandes, and Hong 2016), greenwashing remains prevalent in advertising (Baum 2012). In addition, new movements such as „Fashion revolution“aims to bring transparency into fashion industry. By using slogan “who made my clothes” the attention is drawn to social and environmental issues that have been caused by fast fashion industry.
Willingness to Buy
Consider customers’ intention to buy a product or a service might as a willingness to buy (Yeh, 2011). Before purchasing, the item consumers usually search for a more information about it. This search is based on their previous experience and alternative choices and if the product reaches an expected level, they purchase it (Lin, 2007). This buying intention might be used to indicate and explain certain consumer purchasing behavior (Wang, 2012). In addition,
Hill and Lee (2012) studied the sustainable brand expansion of fast fashion retailers. The results showed that the consumers’ perceptions of the fit, both between brand and cause of sustainability (brand–cause fit) and between brand and extension line (brand–extension fit), increases the positive evaluation of the extension.
Motivation and factors affecting sustainable consumption behavior have already been explored by academics in environmental protection, public policy, psychology, management and marketing (Phipps et al 2012; Shaw et al. 2006, Lim 2017; Balderjahn, 2018, Grunert et al. 2013, Zeinab 2018, Stern 2000, Minton et al. 2018, Leonidou et al. 2013, Onel et al. 2018).
Personal moral norms can effect and strengthen the positive emotions, leading to the direct influence on the intentions to adopt sustainable products (Rezvani et al., 2018). 37 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Individuals who are willing to pursue greener consumption have to overcome excess of various eco–labels (Pedersen and Neergaard, 2006; Hjalmarson et al., 2010), be aware of possibility of greenwashing (Peattie and Crane, 2005), and be up to date on various environmental issues as well as to cope with uncertainty that often is a consequence of decision to green their consumption (Halkier, 1999; Connolly and Prothero, 2008).
Willingness to Buy Fast Fashion. Overall, the findings show that knowledge level and affect toward the brand and the cause will each have an impact on the perception of the extension. In general, consumers who tend to shop frequently with a fast–fashion retailer are likely to be more willing to accept newly introduced products by that company (Choi et al., 2010).
Specifically, it has been noticed by this study that frequent customers might also be more willing to buy a new sustainable product introduced by this retailer. According to this study, fit in such a relationship is essential.
When consumers have established knowledge and affect toward the brand or the cause, they have higher perceptions of the respective fit type, leading to more positive evaluations of the extension product.
When considering the functional brand attributes, fit, style, color and fabrication are commonly used as evaluative criteria in apparel purchasing decisions (Forney et al., 2005). In other words, consumers are likely to utilize these features in examining the extension as an apparel product. Existing knowledge of these features, as well as of the brand image of the fast–fashion retailer, would influence consumers’ perceptions of the extension product’s fit with products of the existing brand. High social consciousness of Generation Y might open opportunities to gain a larger share of market for those companies, which have to offer more 38 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
sustainable options. (Jayson, 2006; Nayyar, 2001; Williams and Page, 2011). For this reason, identification of the factors that make an impact on consumers’ evaluations of sustainable product merits research. Specifically, fast–fashion retailers have a chance to target Generation
Y consumers by offering sustainable options. Although this process has already started and some Fast fashion companies have created a few sustainability driven product lines designed specifically for this, this can go even further and these companies might gradually transform to even more sustainability oriented in order to both read and encourage consumer demand for sustainable apparel products. The style of sustainable garments sold by fast–fashion retailers have also to be considered as they need to look appealing to the fast–fashion consumer who are mostly young, trendy and fashion–forward (Morgan and Birtwistle, 2009). Since fast– fashion, retailers have experience in targeting this group and they know their purchasing habits, in the end it might be very helpful in assuring that required level of trend is achieved in production of sustainable garments as well.
What is more, previously mentioned research have also argued that likelihood to buy eco–friendly products increase due to environmental and social benefits that leads to willingness to pay more for sustainable products. Higher environmental concerns in individual usually lead to that person being more interested in green products and brands as well as assumption that this kind of brands are excellent in their quality (Hartmann, 2012). Higher brand awareness increase chance of its name being recalled as the first option in purchase searches process. This provides a significant advantage over other competitors since this brand is evaluated first before consumer moves to the other option. This is because brand awareness is generally suggested to make an impact on perceived quality (McDonal, 2003). The study of 39 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
B. Ranjbarian (2012) confirmed that perceived quality makes a positive impact on consumers’ purchase intention. In general, a tendency for the consumers to purchase their favorable and familiar brand has been noticed (Chi et al, 2009) Strong brand image increase likelihood of consumer buying the products.
Willingness to Buy Slow Fashion.Consumers‘tendency to exhibit socially responsible consumption and environmental consumerism was found in early 1990s (e.g., Dickson and
Littrell 1996; Kim and Damhorst 1998 as cited in Park and Kim, 2016). More recent research shows that more than 68% of Generation Z (i.e., ages 18–24) are exhibiting sustainable consumption behavior. Hence, marketers are targeting this segment with sustainable advertising practice (Han, 2017)
Furthermore, in fashion research, a few studies indicate that customers’ environmental attitudes have an impact on their intention to purchase green fashion products (Han, N. R. et al., 2019; Hustvedt & Dickson, 2009). Hence, green fashion marketing efforts will foster a positive brand image and increase purchase intentions from existing or potential customers who care about environmental issues (Yang, 2017).
Different scholars (Han, 2017; Grimmer, 2014) analyzed how different message appeals effect consumer’s behavior of environmental persuasion. . For example, participants with a high level of environmental affect showed greater purchase intention when a pure environmental appeal was highlighted; whereas those with a low level of environmental affect showed greater purchase, intention when a personal appeal was highlighted (Grimmer &
Woolley, 2014). 40 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
The research of Griskevicius et al.(2010) on consumer motives to purchase green, sustainable products results revealed that status motives plays a central role in the purchase process choosing between environmentally friendly and luxury, non–green products, even though they are equally priced (Griskevicius, Tybur, & Van den Bergh, 2010).
While fashion consumers profess concerns about sustainability issues, the extant literature demonstrates a gap between such concerns and actual consumption decisions and behaviors. This phenomenon can be explained with the observation made by McNeill &
Snowdon (2019) indicating that customers desire for fashion, they are more likely to compromise on the environmental and social concerns than on the quality of the product. It was found that due to the certain decision–making process, that is self–developed, consumers’ resist making sustainable decisions and the future of environment is compromised by established consumption patterns (Polonsky, 2011, as cited in Hameed & Waris, 2018).
Therefore, Park and Kim (2016) complements before mentioned the research by adding that in order to successfully communicate fashion brand sustainability claims to consumers, the right product attributes should be emphasized (e.g. right styles, fits, materials, and durability).
Summary The literature review aim was to analyze previous scientific researches on sustainability ques in advertising, fast and slow fashion, consumers trust, the buying behavior choosing between fast and slow fashion clothing.
41 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Research Methodology
Introduction
After the review of literature, this part of master thesis describes the methodological approach of the study. Following chapter presents theoretical framework of the study, discusses the research design that is appropriate for current research and provides reasoning for making that choice. Afterwards, Research Questions, Conceptual model and Hypothesis are presented.
Moreover, after the explanation of the research method chosen for current study, sampling techniques, the way of collecting and analyzing the data and is enclosed.
Theoretical Framework
Based on the literature review the theoretical framework are going to be constructed.
This will be achieved by finding relations and creating missing links in connections among the key concepts (dependent and independent variables). In this case, the impact of sustainability ques in fast vs slow fashion advertising on consumers trust and willingness to buy will be observed.
This study builds up on the Park and Kim (2016) research, which suggests that there are different effect of sustainability, cues between fast and sustainable fashion on consumers’ perceptions. It is stated “consumers’ perceptions of brand sustainability may be more strongly linked to their positive brand relationships for sustainable fashion brands than for fast fashion brands.” (Park and Kim, 2016) Researchers notes that the fast fashion brands approach to sustainability is profoundly different from sustainable fashion brands. Fast fashion brands are 42 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
reactive in taking sustainable actions whereas sustainable fashion is proactive and holds a sustainability leadership in the whole fashion business (Park and Kim, 2016). Furthermore fast fashion brand’s claim of being socially responsible may not be as effective as a sustainable fashion brand’s claim, as consumers’ perception of the brand’s social sustainability does not lead to positive brand outcomes.
Park and Kim broadly analyzed effect of existing fashion brands sustainability initiatives and incorporated TBL on consumers’ evaluation on different fashion brands. Current study seeks to extend Park and Kim (2016) finding focusing on the sustainability cues in advertising effect on consumers trust and willingness to buy. Following that the main research question – what effect sustainability cues has on consumers’ trust and willingness to buy when choosing between fast and slow fashion brands will be answered.
Research design
Survey design main aim is to explain as much variances as possible. In current research,
I seek to find cause–effect relationship, explain process and boundary conditions, to observe how manipulated causal variable effects the outcome. According to Aronson (2018), the only way to determine causality is to use experimental research design. Experimental design is preferred in most social psychological research because it allows causal inferences (Aronson,
2018). Using experimental design causal relationships between variables are being identified and influence of the treatment on the outcome determined (Aronson, Wilson, Akert, &
Sommers, 2018; Creswell & Creswell, 2009; Leavy, 2017). Before mentioned influence is measured by giving a particular treatment to experimental group and retaining it from control groups and then defining how both groups succeeded on an outcome (Creswell. 2009). In 43 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
experiment, participants are randomly assigned to different (manipulative) conditions. Chances are equal for every participant to be assigned in either of conditions. This method allows eliminating possible effects of extraneous variables. The only difference between the groups of participants is in conditions they are exposed – the independent variable (IV) that has been manipulated. Because IV is manipulated, DV depends on IV.
This paper uses experimental design method to gauge the behavior (trust and willingness to buy) evoked by sustainability cues in slow vs fast fashion advertising. To establish actual effect of sustainability cues, an online experiment was conducted. Online experiment is appropriate when general psychological principles, processes; cause–effect relationships are being studied.
In order to make the research visual, the analytical model is developed (Figure 1), where dependent variable is willingness to buy, independent variables are the sustainability cues, mediator is trust, and moderator is fast vs slow fashion. Model is representing the research problem structure and illustrating the potential logical connection of sustainability cues in advertising effect on consumer trust of fast and slow fashion and in consequence – willingness to buy. Sustainability cues in advertising increases consumers trust and willingness to buy. In addition, this effect is present when moderated by slow fashion and fast fashion brand.
44 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Fast/slow fashion Trust
Sustainability WTB
message
Figure 1. Analytical Research Model. Composed by the author.
Model description. Model is representing the research problem structure and illustrating the potential logical connection of sustainability cues in advertising (IV) effect on fast and slow fashion brand (Mo) trust (Me) and in consequence – willingness to buy (DV).
Sustainability message (i. e. sustainability cues in advertising) increases consumers trust and willingness to buy. And this effect is present when moderated by type of fashion brand.
List of variables:
Dependent variable – purchase intention;
Independent variable – Sustainability message;
Moderator – Slow and fast fashion;
Mediator – Trust 45 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
This research addresses six hypotheses (H) as followed:
H1 Fashion brand advertising with sustainability cue will lead to greater willingness to buy than advertising without sustainability cue,
H2 Fashion brand advertising with sustainability cue will lead to greater brand trust compared to advertising without sustainability cue,
H3 Trust will positively predict consumers’ willingness to buy,
H4 Trust will mediate the relationship between sustainability cues and willingness to buy such that sustainability cues will increase trust and in turn, trust will increase willingness to buy,
H5 Trust will mediate the relationship between sustainability cues and willingness to buy such that sustainability cues will increase trust and in turn, trust will increase willingness to buy
The mediating effects of trust will be moderated by fashion type such that for slow fashion sustainability cues will increase trust and willingness to buy, whereas for fast fashion sustainability cues would decrease trust and willingness to buy.
H6 Fashion brand advertising with sustainability cue will lead to greater trust compared to fashion brand advertising without sustainability cue. And this affect will be moderated by types of fashion brands such that for slow fashion brand advertising with sustainability cues will lead to greater trust, but for fast fashion brand, advertising with sustainability cue will lead to distrust compared to advertising without sustainability cue.
46 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
TRUST
– control
– with sustainability cues
fast slow
Figure 2. Interaction Effect Graph. Composed by the author.
Sampling Design.
Sampling design consists of the target population, the sample size, sampling frame, sampling technique and the method sample process will be performed. Current study examines consumers who purchases clothing (both fast and slow fashion), in this case, target population is people from Lithuania, having purchase power, age range between 18–65.
For the selection process for participant
Since this study consists of quantitative online questionnaire, rather than pure experimental design, to count the volume of respondents needed to collect data, the sample size formula were used. 47 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Where:
N – sample size z² – confidence level according to the standard normal distribution. (for a level of confidence of 95%, z = 1.96)
P – standard of deviation. p = 0.5
E – margin of error (confidence interval). 5 percent.
N = (Z–score)² * StdDev*(1–StdDev) / (margin of error)²
N = (1.96)2x0.5(1–0.5))/(0.05)2= 384.16
In order to collect all the necessary data online experiment were conducted using
Qualtrics software and an URL link to the survey was generated for distributing online survey among the target population. To reach desired response rate the survey was distributed among online experiment participants using social networks. To reach diverse respondents the survey was distributed among online experiment participants using social networks. In general, the survey was shared with colleagues in Microsoft Teams, Facebook groups, promoted with paid posts, LinkedIn, and shared through influencer in Instagram with more than 10k followers with characteristics corresponding with the target population. Survey length approximately 15–
20min.
48 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Setting and Participants. In order to test these hypotheses online experiment – 2x2 factorial design with four different conditions was conducted. This type of research design enables to test causal link between variables and helps to find cause–effect relationship. A generic fashion brand product that could be chosen as a sustainable alternative, common to both men and women were used to present sustainability cues in advertising effect on consumers trust and willingness to buy. In order to find the cause effect, four different type of advertisement scenarios with description of the same fictitious brand product (T–shirts), with four conditions.
Conditions were randomly assigned to participants during the online experiment.
Fictitious brand was used, as real brands would cause a lot of noise (confounding) to the manipulation due to familiarity with the brand, previous experience, current brand image etc.
With the purpose to assure the quality of descriptions, the research uses sustainability cues (keywords) as used in descriptions written on existing fast and slow fashion brands advertising material, such as H&M, Another Unicorn and other. The next section describes each of the conditions in more detail.
Each of the four scenarios begins with the same description of the T–shirt, and follows by exposition of keywords describing different fashion types, and same sustainability cues. The description, which was used for all four samples, was formulated as following: velve T–shirts – with a round neckline and short sleeves, a comfortable loose fit. Comes in four different colors.
Description of slow fashion T–shirts: always stylish. Always-fashionable design. Today, tomorrow, next year – feel good every day. Buy what stays fashionable year after year! 49 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Description of fast fashion T–shirts: Most stylish today. Most fashionable design of 2020
Spring. Today white, tomorrow black, next day pink – feel good every day. Buy what is ultra- fashionable today!
Sustainability cues used in the research: for sustainable future, made from 100% ecological, certificated cotton, used less water and energy, ethical production
After reading the description inserted by the images of T–shirts, the participants were asked to fill in the experimental scenario to adjust for other factors that influences the consumers trust and willingness to buy.
Instrumentation and Scales. Green scales (Haws et al., 2014) are used to check how trait measure of green orientation affect hypothesizes effect consumers’ analyzing messages in fast vs slow fashion advertising. These were 7–item, 7–point Likert type questions. Felt environmentalism measurement involved the following statement–questions:
Brand trust was measured using a four–item, five–point scale (e.g. “this brand is reliable”) (Arjun Chaudhuri & Morris B. Holbrook, 2001). The brand trust measures were adapted from a source of Chaudhuri and Holbrook 2001.
Internal and external validity. The two types of validity of experiments are internal and external. Internal validity the degree to which the results are attributable to the independent variable and not some other rival explanation. External validity the extent to which the results of a study can be generalized. Achieving both is often quite difficult in social science research experiments. Consumer’s behaviors were assessed using both open ended and close–ended questions. The possible weakness of chosen research design is the difficulty to prepare a scenario reflecting all necessary features for brand trust (e.g. familiarity with the brand) to the 50 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
experiment participates to be able to answer honestly about their attitudes toward the brand. In addition, the stress caused by COVID–19 pandemic and quarantine (started in March 16th) were measured and taken into account.
Data Analysis
Responses collected were checked on incomplete answers and repetitive IP addresses.
Verified data will be analyzed using statistical software – SPSS. Descriptive statistics would be used to describe and summarize data (Babbie, 2013). Primary analysis, data exploration by means of statistical and visualization techniques (visualize some characteristics and properties of the data) will be made by conducting ANOVA. Data exploration is needed in order to bring important aspects find interesting relationships, properties and focus for further analysis. Main analysis will be made using Haye’s (2018) PROCESS.
Manipulation check & Demographics
To prove that manipulations is working (if the manipulation of an IV was successful and has an effect on a theoretically relevant causal variable) manipulations checks were added to the experimental scenario. Scale with six questions were created and participants were asked to evaluate before seen T–shirts, choose if the T–shirt were fast fashion, slow fashion, sustainable, trendy.
In last part of questioner questions were added asking the respondent to indicate his/her gender, level of education. For apparel consumption behaviors, the average number of clothing items and money spent for clothing purchases in a month were asked to be indicated. In addition, the percentage of clothing and money spent on fast fashion purchases out of the total 51 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
amount of apparel purchased was asked. To help a participants’ understanding, a short explanation about fast fashion was provided (Fletcher, 2010). When the experimental scenario questioner designing was finished, a pretesting, pilot questioner was conducted among 10 respondents in order to get feedback. Consequently, some survey visual style and text corrections were made.
Conditional process analysis
Moderation analysis will be used to find causally links between X and Y, the “how” question which is related to the underlying psychological, cognitive, or biological processes
(Hayes, 2013)
To find out under what circumstances, or for which types of people, does X has an effect on Y, to check the boundary conditions of the causal association (Hayes, 2013) – mediation analysis will be applied.
This study design has potential limitations – relatively small population of participants, primarily female individuals in the group of participants as sustainability is considered to be unmanly (Brough, 2016), limited literature on sustainability cues in advertising on different type of fashion.
Hayes’ (2018) PROCESS macro (Model3) will be used to develop and examine a three– way interaction model (Hayes & Matthes, 2009). Moderated models of regression analyses were used to explain when IV and DV are related, to test the hypothesis that the relationship between sustainability cues and WTB and sustainability cues and trust occurs primarily under certain conditions. Moderation of two factors and including gender as second moderator, to analyze how effect changes in different groups. 52 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Cronbach alpha test
By conducting the analysis, the extent to which the items from applied scales are consistent with each other, and are working in the same direction is determined. Scale is considered reliable and consistent, then the score of Cronbach’s Alfa is more than 0.6.
Pearson’s correlation analysis was used to examine the relationships between variables. Data is considered independent when there is no correlation between variables. Correlation coefficient (r) ranges from –1.0 to +1.0, if r is close to 0, it means there is no relationship between the variables.
To test research hypotheses a process analysis and analysis of variance was applied. The following paragraphs will describe the results that were found applying the regression analysis to find relationship between sustainability cues in fast vs slow fashion advertising on consumers trust and WTB.
Empirical Research Results
Introduction
This chapter introduces the research results starting from the descriptive analysis, discussing the characteristics of the experiment participants, continuing with the interpretation of results and examination of hypotheses. The primary analysis was made by conducting one– way ANOVA used for 2x2 experimental design. Data characteristics and properties were explored and visualized in order to bring important aspects and focus for further analysis.
Relationships and properties found were further analyzed using Hayes (2018) PROCESS model 4, model 1 and model 3. 53 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
The collection of data took one week, from April 2nd until April 9th, 2020. In order to ensure one response per person, the online questionnaire had a limitation of one response per IP address. The data was processed through SPSS.
Descriptive statistics
In total 810 responses were collected. After processing and cleaning the data, 410 replies were found to be incomplete and excluded from the results. Thus, there are 400 responses included in the final analysis. The participants of experiment profile is presented in tables below.
Gender
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid Female 316 79,0 79,0 79,0
Male 84 21,0 21,0 100,0
Total 400 100,0 100,0
Table 1. Descriptive results (respondents gender)
54 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Age groups
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid under 25 86 21,5 21,5 21,5
26–35 218 54,5 54,5 76,0
36–45 67 16,8 16,8 92,8
46–55 16 4,0 4,0 96,8
56+ 13 3,3 3,3 100,0
Total 400 100,0 100,0
Table 2. Descriptive results (respondents age)
Education level
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid primary 10 2,5 2,5 2,5
secondary 50 12,5 12,5 15,0
higher 333 83,3 83,3 98,3
other 7 1,8 1,8 100,0
Total 400 100,0 100,0
Table 3. Descriptive results (respondents education level)
Out of 400 experiment participants, 79% were female and remaining 21 % – were male.
Most of participants are with higher education that is 83% of total participants. In terms of age, 55 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
the largest group of respondents are between 26–35 years old (54.5%). Most of the respondents have high-income level (from 871eur to 1300 eur for one person per household, after taxes).
Data preparation for analysis
Before performing data analysis, first reversed items in the scales were reversed. After that reliability analysis of scales were conducted using Cronbach's alpha tool. Third, factor analysis was run. In the next step, means of scales were computed. Furthermore, dummy variables were created (IVs, for experimental design conditions). Finally, correlations table computed with means and standard deviations (SD).
Reliability analysis of scales
Using Cronbach’s Alfa test the internal consistency and reliability of applied scales were check and scores calculated. The results of reliability test are provided in Table (4).
Cronbach’s alpha was calculated for the affect and behavior scales, resulting in scores of 0.78 and 0.68, respectively.
Correlation analysis
Correlation analysis showed that data collected from different experiment participants is independent, meaning that the behavior of one participant was not influenced by the behavior of another participant.
56 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6
1 Experimental ,4950 ,50060 1 – ,031 ,019 ,025 –
condition(Sustainability ,035 ,015
cues/Control)
2 Type of fashion (Slow ,4975 ,50062 –,035 1 ,079 ,100 ,131 ,150
vs Fast)
3 Willingness to buy 3,4719 1,76111 ,031 ,079 1 ,878 ,603 ,620
(WTB)
4 Purchase intention 3,7100 1,57441 ,019 ,100 ,878 1 ,571 ,579
5 Trustworthiness 3,8500 1,45095 ,025 ,131 ,603 ,571 1 ,860
6 Brand trust 3,7738 1,54802 –,015 ,150 ,620 ,579 ,860 1
Table 4. Results of reliability test
In order to see if sustainability cues and types of fashion exposures were designed with proper validity analysis was run on all manipulation check scale variables. The purpose of the check was to see whether there is a significant difference in how respondents evaluated the advertised
T–shirts on manipulation check scale.
Manipulation check
Using one–way ANOVA (Univariate Analysis of Variance) the manipulation check on scenarios’ slow, fast and sustainable indications was done. The statistically significant difference in respondent’s evaluation was shown. Significant difference among fast and slow variables (F(25)=9,370, p = 0.002) and between sustainability and control conditions (F(12)=
9,370, p = 0.030) was found. 57 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
The outcomes of ANOVA test in the table below specified that the experiment participants who were exposed to a slow fashion brand T–shirts (experiment participant received T–shirt advertising with slow fashion description) evaluated T–shirts as long term oriented and slow fashion.
Tests of Between–Subjects Effects
Dependent Variable: Check_LT
Type III Sum
Source of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Corrected Model 36,730a 3 12,243 4,572 ,004
Intercept 9658,964 1 9658,964 3607,151 ,000
SlowFast 25,089 1 25,089 9,370 ,002
ContrSust 12,635 1 12,635 4,718 ,030
SlowFast * ,152 1 ,152 ,057 ,812
ContrSust
Error 1060,380 396 2,678
Total 10760,000 400
Corrected Total 1097,110 399
Table 5. Tests of Between–Subjects Effects, Manipulation Check on Long Term oriented 58 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
It can be seen from the graph below, that if experiment participant were exposed to the fast fashion T–shirt advertising with control condition, T–shirts were evaluated less long term oriented, than if participant were exposed to the slow fashion T–shirt advertising with control condition. And when participants were exposed to T–shirt advertising with sustainability cues in it, in both, slow and fast fashion conditions T–shirt were evaluated as long term oriented.
Figure 3. Manipulation Check
59 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Testing the Hypotheses
Univariate Analysis of Variance
Using one–way ANOVA (Univariate Analysis of Variance) moderation analysis prepared data was observed. Even though the interaction effect appeared to be visible in the output graph considering a sustainability cues in advertising in fast vs slow fashion on consumers trust, it was not significant, there are non–significant interaction between groups
(F(.831), p=.362). However, result shown statistically significant slow/fast fashion effect on consumers trust (F(7,136), p=0.008). Sustainable/control factor appeared to be marginally significant on consumers trust (F(.357), p=.550).
Using simple effect test it was observed that when sustainability cues is applied in advertising there are a significant difference among fast and slow fashion types (F(6.35), p=,012).
If experiment participant were exposed to advertising with fast fashion T–shirt, with sustainability cues in it, trustworthiness decreased, and if slow fashion T–shirt advertising had sustainability cues in it, trustworthiness increased.
60 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Tests of Between–Subjects Effects
Dependent Variable: TRUSTWRT
Type III Sum
Source of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Corrected Model 16,974a 3 5,658 2,722 ,044
Intercept 5932,305 1 5932,305 2854,336 ,000
SlowFast 14,831 1 14,831 7,136 ,008
ContrSust ,742 1 ,742 ,357 ,550
SlowFast * 1,728 1 1,728 ,831 ,362
ContrSust
Error 823,026 396 2,078
Total 6769,000 400
Corrected Total 840,000 399
Table 6. Tests of Between–Subjects Effects, Trustworthiness
61 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Figure 4. Interaction Effect Graph. Interaction effect between Trustworthiness, Sustainability cues and Type of Fashion
Conditional process analysis
Using Hayes’ (2018) PROCESS macro (Model 4) mediation analysis was made to asses if effect of sustainability cues in advertising on willingness to buy is mediated by consumers trust. It was observed that using sustainability cues in advertising do not lead to greater consumers trust (B=.072, SE=.14, t(1, 398)=.495, p=.620). However, consumers trust, predicts willingness to buy advertised products (B=.73, SE=.04, t(2, 397)=15.06, p=.00). This analysis presented that there is no indirect effect, the impact of sustainability cues on willingness to buy is not mediated my consumers trust. Furthermore, when controlling for the mediating effect, the direct effect of use of sustainability cues in advertising on willingness to buy was non– significant (B=.058, SE=.14, t(2, 397)=.495, p=.680). 62 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Using Hayes’ (2018) PROCESS macro (Model 1) a regression analysis was performed on willingness to buy with the sustainability cues in advertising (dummy coded, the control condition without sustainability cues being the reference category) and type of fashion as predictors (mean centered). No statistically significant main effect of presence of sustainability cues in advertising (compared to control) was observed (B=.34, SE=.35, t(3,396)=.983, p=.326).
Also same Hayes’ (2018) PROCESS macro (Model 1) regression analysis were made on Brand
Trust with the sustainability cues in advertising (dummy coded, the control condition without sustainability cues being the reference category) and type of fashion as predictors (mean centered). Results did not showed statistical significance: (B=.11, SE=.30, t(3, 396)=.336, p=.714).
Model 1 showed that when experiment participants are exposed to fast fashion advertising, trustworthiness and willingness to buy decreases, but this has no relationship with sustainability cues. In this case the H5 stating that “Fashion brand advertising with sustainability cues will lead to greater WTB, such that fashion brand advertising with sustainability cue will increase trust and trust will increase WTB” is rejected.
Using Hayes’ (2018) PROCESS macro (Model 3) it was observed that using sustainability cues in advertising do not lead to greater brand trust (B=.936, SE=.66, t(7,
392)=1.39, p=.162). Although, brand trust is influenced by type of fashion advertised (B=1.65,
SE=.65, t(7, 392)=2.56, p=.012). 63 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Continuing, the extent to which slow and fast fashion moderates the relationship between sustainability cues and brand trust was tested. The interaction between sustainability cues in advertising and type of fashion showed marginal significance (B=.099, SE=.96, t(7, 392)=–
1.93, p=.053). Analysis presented that there is no significant interaction between sustainability cues, consumers gender and brand trust (B=–.84, SE=.52, t(7, 392)=–1.62, p=.104). Interaction between types of fashion and consumers’ gender appeared to be statistically significant (B=–
1.00, SE=.503, t(7,392)=2.11, p=0.475). Furthermore, analysis revealed a significant three– way interaction among sustainability cues, types of fashion and consumers gender (B=1.60,
SE=.7590, t(7,392)=2.11, p=.035). Test of conditional interaction showed that before mentioned interaction is significant for men (B=1.34, F=3.96, p=.0472).
As can be seen in the graph (Figure 5) if fast fashion advertising has sustainability cues in it – trust decreases, and opposite effect is noticed for slow fashion sustainability cues – trust increases. And this effect is significant for men only. This finding partially confirms the last hypothesis (H6) – Fashion brand advertising with sustainability cues leads to greater trust compared to fashion brand advertising without sustainability cues. And this affect is moderated by types of fashion brands such that for slow fashion brand advertising with sustainability cues leads to greater trust, but for fast fashion brand advertising with sustainability cues leads to distrust compared to advertising without sustainability cues.
64 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Figure 5. Interaction Effect Graph. Interaction between Brand Trust, Sustainability cues, and
Gender 65 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
A Summary of Hypotheses
Table below (Table7) provides an overview of the hypotheses that were tested.
Hypothesis Outcome
H1 Fashion brand advertising with sustainability cue will lead to greater Rejected
WTB than advertising without sustainability cue,
H2 Fashion brand advertising with sustainability cue will lead to greater Supported brand trust compared to advertising without sustainability cue,
H3 Trust will positively predict consumers WTB Supported
H4 Trust will mediate the relationship between sustainability cues and Partially willingness to buy such that sustainability cues will increase trust and in supported turn trust will increase willingness to buy,
H5 The mediating effects of trust will be moderated by fashion type such Partially that for slow fashion sustainability cues will increase trust and Supported willingness to buy, whereas for fast fashion sustainability cues would decrease trust and willingness to buy.
H6 Fashion brand advertising with sustainability cue will lead to greater Partially trust compared to fashion brand advertising without sustainability cue. Supported
And this affect will be moderated by types of fashion brands such that for slow fashion brand advertising with sustainability cues will lead to greater trust, but for fast fashion brand advertising with sustainability cue will lead to distrust compared to advertising without sustainability cue.
Table 7. The Overview of the Hypotheses 66 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Discussion and Conclusions
Introduction
This part of paper discusses and interprets the main empirical research findings in light of previous research studies. Based of research the research finding, theoretical and managerial implications are provided. Potential research limitations are revealed as well as recommendations for future research are presented. Finally, this part of paper concludes with the the main points of the research.
Synthesis of Literature and Empirical Research Findings
Effect of sustainability cues in advertising on consumers’ behavior was observed in the literature. Furthermore, set of them were empirically tested in the study applying it to different type of fashion (fast vs slow) advertising. Studies in fashion research literature present that customers’ environmental concerns have an impact on their willingness to buy sustainable fashion products (Gam, 2011, Husvedt et al,, 2009, Yoo, Dvita, Kim,2013). However, present study contributes to the finding, which exposes that even though fashion consumers claim to have concerns about sustainability issues, it does not always have expected effect on actual consumer decisions and consumption behaviors (Han et al, 2016). Sustainability cues in fashion advertising does not show expected overall effect on consumers trust and therefore willingness to buy.
In terms of trust, the findings of previous research states that consumers favorable attitudes toward environmentally sustainable fashion brands or products with sustainability cues (e.g., organic cotton, sustainable farming practices) are evoked by advertising (Ashley & 67 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
leonard, 2009) and positively affect consumers’ brand trust and increase their willingness to buy (Kang and Hustvedt 2014, Bhaduri and Ha–Brookshire 2011, Norum and Ha–Brookshire
2011; Hustvedt and Dickson 1996). These findings coincide with current research predicted results that sustainability cues in fashion advertising leads to greater brand trust than advertising without sustainability cues.
Theoretical Implications
This study contributes to the research of sustainability marketing, brand trust and expands the knowledge of sustainability cues by investigating them in fast and slow fashion advertising. Empirical research results supports previous study by Park and Kim (2016).
Current finding develops the knowledge on trust, showing that it is moderated by the fashion type (or as stated in Park and Kim research – sustainability approach, there proactive approach is taken by slow fashion, and reactive – by fast fashion) . Moreover, present study highlights the influence of sustainability cues to consumers’ brand trust and willingness to buy taking into account the type of fashion advertised. Hence current research adds to the Park and Kim(2016) findings proving that sustainability cues in slow (sustainable) fashion brand advertising has a positive effect on consumers perception (in a result – higher brand trust) comparing to the sustainability cues in fast fashion brands advertising (in a result – lower brand trust). This result can be interpreted such that although it was suggested that greenwashing practices have largely declined since the end of the 1990s (Segev, 2016), today’s sustainability advertising with companies environmental claims are lacking consumer trust (Chen & Chang, 2013; Ottman et al., 2006) as greenwashing remains frequently used in advertising (Baum, 2012). And when fast fashion seeks to communicate their new sustainable initiative it is assessed against the 68 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
former and still continuing harmful practices (Dickson, 2001). Hence, fast fashion lacks reliability and consistency in its sustainability practices, which cause low level of trust to their sustainability advertising from consumers (Dickson, 2001; Park, Hyejune & Kim, 2016).
Finally, this work findings revealed the positive effect of sustainability cues on brand trust and willingness to buy, and interestingly this effect emerged to be significant for male but not female participants in the research. Existing gender-gap in sustainable behavior were analyzed in previous research (Brough, 2016) and looked into the reasoning why man are less likely to embrace sustainable behavior. The profile of slow fashion consumer there defined as well–educated women supporting worthy things such as “local economy, fair trade and good labor prices” (Leslie et al, 2014, p. 233 as cited by Stefko, 2018) (Štefko & Steffek, 2018)
Current study finding disagrees with established view of sustainable behaviors’ to be unmanly
(Brough, 2016) and supplements previous study that showed men tendency to prefer a narrow assortment of high quality products that last longer (Bakewell et al., 2006 as cited in Sung and
Woo, 2019, p. 120), which coincide with the concept of slow fashion (Sung & Woo, 2019)
Managerial Implications
The research provides several practical suggestions for the fashion industry companies willing to successfully communicate their sustainability related initiatives. Current research demonstrates that different sustainability cues can be used in fashion advertising in order to increase consumers trust. It reveals that sustainability cues has different impact on consumers’ trust depending what type of fashion is advertised. And that consumers are willing to trust slow fashion sustainability claims more than fast fashion. Moreover, for fast fashion companies it is 69 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
important to coordinate communication and actions made in order to gain consumers trust and avoid greenwashing and consumers’ skepticism. What is important to note that despite of the increasing consumers’ environmental concerns when making purchasing decision these concerns can be compromised but product quality is not. Meaning that companies should meet consumers’ expectations due to product primary functions and then communicate its sustainable aspects. Finally, companies considering their target audience could pay more attention to Y and Z generation and consider new products introduction to the market, which would be oriented to male audience.
Research Limitations
As many research, the current study has some limitations, some of which can serve as possible areas for further studies. First limitation is due to the survey design. Though ACBC survey tends to be more engaging and convenient for the respondents than non–adaptive conjoint surveys, it still took more than 20 minutes to fill on average. Due to the complexity of the survey which required high attention and efforts there are potential risk that due to the length some respondents started to answers not paying a lot of attention. Moreover, questions about brand trust could seem confusing as advertised T–shirt brand were made up and experiment participant did not had previous knowledge of the brand. Final limitation is a sample size, that is relatively small – 400 respondents, from which only 21% is male. Even though this sample size is enough for testing, bigger sample can provide more statistically significant data especially comparing effect on both genders. To sum up, due to mentioned limitations, the survey results should be considered with caution.
70 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Future Research
The before–mentioned limitations lead to the suggestions for the future research. First suggestion is to test bigger sample in different countries as sustainable fashion brands are only emerging in Lithuanian market. Findings from neighbor markets or developed Western
European countries may bring additional insights based on cultural and managerial differences.
Moreover, it would add more accuracy if future research may focus on a both genders separately. Such investigations might explain the difference in reliance on sustainability cues between male and female audience. Future research could also add additional moderator as
Life History strategy, assuming that different life experiences could affect consumer’s sustainability oriented buying behaviors’. Finally, another research design such as in–depth interviews in qualitative research could be considered on the same topic, it may uncover some other reasoning why sustainability cues do not have expected effect on consumer behavior.
Conclusions
1. In order to achieve the goal of the study, the revision of existing scientific literature was
made. Sustainability cues in advertising, slow and fast fashion, as well as consumers’
trust and willingness to buy were defined and conceptualized. According to the
literature sustainability cues in advertising has direct effect on consumer behavior and
attitudes towards the brand. And that effect varies depending on the type of fashion
brand.
2. Based on theoretical considerations, an analytical research model was developed where
the impact of sustainability cues on consumers trust and willingness to buy was
compared among fast and slow fashion advertising. 71 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
3. Empirical research results indicated that consumers trust towards the fashion brand
increases if sustainability cues are present in slow fashion advertising and vice versa,
consumer trust toward the fashion brand decreases in sustainability cues are present in
fast fashion advertising.
4. The results of current research increases the knowledge of the communication of
sustainability cues in the fashion advertising, which is still poorly researched.
Furthermore, identification of the sustainability cues diverse effect on consumers were
discussed providing recommendations for future research.
72 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
References
Aakko Maarit. (2017). Fashion in between: Artisanal design and production of fashion.
Köln: Aalto University. Retrieved from http://bvbr.bib-
bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=
028437320&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&servi
ce_type=MEDIA
Arjun Chaudhuri, & Morris B. Holbrook. (2001). The chain of effects from brand trust and
brand affect to brand performance: The role of brand loyalty. Journal of Marketing,
65(2), 81-93. doi:10.1509/jmkg.65.2.81.18255
Atkinson, L., & Rosenthal, S. (2014). Signaling the green sell: The influence of eco-label
source, argument specificity, and product involvement on consumer trust. Journal of
Advertising, 43(1), 33-45. doi:10.1080/00913367.2013.834803
Balderjahn, I., Buerke, A., Kirchgeorg, M., Peyer, M., Seegebarth, B., & Wiedmann, K.
(2013). Consciousness for sustainable consumption: Scale development and new insights
in the economic dimension of consumers’ sustainability. AMS Review, 3(4), 181-192.
doi:10.1007/s13162-013-0057-6
Barnes, L., & Lea-Greenwood, G. (2006). Fast fashioning the supply chain: Shaping the
research agenda. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International
Journal, 10(3), 259-271. doi:10.1108/13612020610679259 73 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Baum, L. M. (2012). It's not easy being green ... Or is it? A content analysis of environmental
claims in magazine advertisements from the united states and united kingdom.
Environmental Communication, 6(4), 423-440. doi:10.1080/17524032.2012.724022
Bhardwaj, V., & Fairhurst, A. (2010). Fast fashion: Response to changes in the fashion
industry. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research,
20(1), 165-173. doi:10.1080/09593960903498300
Brewer, M. K. (2019). Slow fashion in a fast fashion world: Promoting sustainability and
responsibility. Laws, 8(4), 24. doi:10.3390/laws8040024
Brough, A. R. (2016). Is eco-friendly unmanly? Journal of Consumer Research, 43(4), 567-
582. Retrieved from http://www.econis.eu/PPNSET?PPN=1000650405
Cheah, I., & Phau, I. (2011). Attitudes towards environmentally friendly products. Marketing
Intelligence & Planning, 29(5), 452-472. doi:10.1108/02634501111153674
Chekima, B., Syed Khalid Wafa, Syed Azizi Wafa, Igau, O. A., Chekima, S., & Sondoh, S.
L. (2016). Examining green consumerism motivational drivers: Does premium price and
demographics matter to green purchasing? Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 3436-
3450. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.102
Chen, Y., & Chang, C. (2013). Greenwash and green trust. Journal of Business Ethics,
114(3), 489-500. Retrieved from http://www.econis.eu/PPNSET?PPN=756353505
Dhandra, T. K. (2019). Achieving triple dividend through mindfulness: More sustainable
consumption, less unsustainable consumption and more life satisfaction. Ecological 74 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Economics, 161(C), 83-90. Retrieved from
https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v161y2019icp83-90.html
Dickson, M. A. (2001). Utility of no sweat labels for apparel consumers: Profiling label users
and predicting their purchases. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1), 96-119.
doi:10.1111/j.1745-6606.2001.tb00104.x
Dobson, A. (2007). Environmental citizenship: Towards sustainable development.
Sustainable Development, 15(5), 276-285. doi:10.1002/sd.344
Dong, X., Liu, S., Li, H., Yang, Z., Liang, S., & Deng, N. (2020). Love of nature as a
mediator between connectedness to nature and sustainable consumption behavior.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 242, 118451. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118451
Ericson, T., Kjønstad, B. G., & Barstad, A. (2014). Mindfulness and sustainability.
Ecological Economics, 104, 73-79. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.04.007
European Commission. (2020). Launch of the 2020 european social innovation competition,
'reimagine fashion: Changing behaviours for sustainable fashion'. Retrieved from
https://ec.europa.eu/growth/content/launch-2020-european-social-innovation-
competition-reimagine-fashion-changing-behaviours_en
Fifita, '. M. E., Seo, Y., Ko, E., Conroy, D., & Hong, D. (2019). Fashioning organics:
Wellbeing, sustainability, and status consumption practices. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01482963 75 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Fischer, D., Stanszus, L., Geiger, S., Grossman, P., & Schrader, U. (2017). Mindfulness and
sustainable consumption: A systematic literature review of research approaches and
findings. Journal of Cleaner Production, 162, 544-558.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.007
Fletcher, K. (2010). Slow fashion: An invitation for systems change. Fashion Practice, 2(2),
259-265. doi:10.2752/175693810X12774625387594
Gahlot Sarkar, J., Sarkar, A., & Yadav, R. (2019). Brand it green: Young consumers’ brand
attitudes and purchase intentions toward green brand advertising appeals. Young
Consumers, 20(3), 190-207. doi:10.1108/YC-08-2018-0840
Grappi, S., Romani, S., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2013). Consumer response to corporate
irresponsible behavior: Moral emotions and virtues. Journal of Business Research,
66(10), 1814-1821. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.02.002
Grimmer, M., & Woolley, M. (2014). Green marketing messages and consumers' purchase
intentions: Promoting personal versus environmental benefits. Journal of Marketing
Communications, 20(4), 231-250. doi:10.1080/13527266.2012.684065
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., & Van den Bergh, B. (2010). Going green to be seen. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(3), 392-404. doi:10.1037/a0017346
Grunert, K. G., Hieke, S., & Wills, J. (2014). Sustainability labels on food products:
Consumer motivation, understanding and use. Food Policy, 44, 177-189.
doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2013.12.001 76 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Hameed, I., & Waris, I. (2018). Eco labels and eco conscious consumer behavior: The
mediating effect of green trust and environmental concern. Journal of Management
Sciences, 5(2), 86-105. doi:10.20547/jms.2014.1805205
Han, J., Seo, Y., & Ko, E. (2017). Staging luxury experiences for understanding sustainable
fashion consumption: A balance theory application. Journal of Business Research, 74,
162-167. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.10.029
Han, N. R., Baek, T. H., Yoon, S., & Kim, Y. (2019). Is that coffee mug smiling at me? how
anthropomorphism impacts the effectiveness of desirability vs. feasibility appeals in
sustainability advertising. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 51, 352-361.
doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.06.020
Hanss, D., & Böhm, G. (2012). Sustainability seen from the perspective of consumers.
International Journal of Consumer Studies, 36(6), 678-687. doi:10.1111/j.1470-
6431.2011.01045.x
Haws, K. L., Winterich, K. P., & Naylor, R. W. (2014). Seeing the world through GREEN-
tinted glasses: Green consumption values and responses to environmentally friendly
products. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24(3), 336-354.
doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2013.11.002
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process
analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY, US: Guilford Press. 77 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Henninger, C. (2015). Traceability the new eco-label in the slow-fashion industry?—
Consumer perceptions and micro-organisations responses. Sustainability, 7(5), 6011-
6032. doi:10.3390/su7056011
Hill, J., & Lee, H. (2012). Young generation Y consumers' perceptions of sustainability in the
apparel industry. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International
Journal, 16(4), 477-491. doi:10.1108/13612021211265863
Hill, J., & Lee, H. (2015). Sustainable brand extensions of fast fashion retailers. Journal of
Fashion Marketing and Management, 19(2), 205-222. doi:10.1108/JFMM-09-2012-0056
Hiller Connell, K. Y. (2011). Exploring consumers' perceptions of eco-conscious apparel
acquisition behaviors. Social Responsibility Journal, 7(1), 61-73.
doi:10.1108/17471111111114549
House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee. (2019). Environmental audit
committee: House of commons debates. Retrieved from
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2019-01-31c.984.0
Hustvedt, G., & Dickson, M. A. (2009). Consumer likelihood of purchasing organic cotton
apparel. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal,
13(1), 49-65. doi:10.1108/13612020910939879
Jain, S. K., & Kaur, G. (2004). Green marketing: An attitudinal and behavioural analysis of
indian consumers. Global Business Review, 5(2), 187-205.
doi:10.1177/097215090400500203 78 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Jones, P., Clarke-Hill, C., Comfort, D., & Hillier, D. (2008). Marketing and sustainability.
Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 26(2), 123-130. doi:10.1108/02634500810860584
Joy, A., Sherry, J. F., Venkatesh, A., Wang, J., & Chan, R. (2012). Fast fashion,
sustainability, and the ethical appeal of luxury brands. Fashion Theory, 16(3), 273-295.
doi:10.2752/175174112X13340749707123
Jung, S., & Jin, B. (2016a). From quantity to quality: Understanding slow fashion consumers
for sustainability and consumer education. International Journal of Consumer Studies,
40(4), 410-421. doi:10.1111/ijcs.12276
Jung, S., & Jin, B. (2016b). Sustainable development of slow fashion businesses: Customer
value approach. Sustainability, 8(6), 540. doi:10.3390/su8060540
Kemper, J. A., & Ballantine, P. W. (2019). What do we mean by sustainability marketing?
Journal of Marketing Management, 35(3-4), 277-309.
doi:10.1080/0267257X.2019.1573845
Kenis, A., & Mathijs, E. (2012). Beyond individual behaviour change: The role of power,
knowledge and strategy in tackling climate change. Environmental Education Research,
18(1), 45-65. doi:10.1080/13504622.2011.576315
Kim, Y., & Oh, K. W. (2020). Which consumer associations can build a sustainable fashion
brand image? evidence from fast fashion brands. Sustainability, 12(5), 1703.
doi:10.3390/su12051703 79 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Leonidou, C., Leonidou, C., Katsikeas, C., Katsikeas, C., Morgan, N., & Morgan, N. (2013).
“Greening” the marketing mix: Do firms do it and does it pay off? Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 41(2), 151-170. doi:10.1007/s11747-012-0317-2
Lewandowska, A., Witczak, J., & Kurczewski, P. (2017). Green marketing today – a mix of
trust, consumer participation and life cycle thinking. Management, 21(2), 28-48.
doi:10.1515/manment-2017-0003
Lim, W. M. (2017). Inside the sustainable consumption theoretical toolbox: Critical concepts
for sustainability, consumption, and marketing. Journal of Business Research, 78, 69-80.
doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.05.001
Majláth, M. (2017). The effect of greenwashing information on ad evaluation. European
Journal of Sustainable Development, 6(3) doi:10.14207/ejsd.2017.v6n3p92
Matthes, J., & Wonneberger, A. (2014). The skeptical green consumer revisited: Testing the
relationship between green consumerism and skepticism toward advertising. Journal of
Advertising, 43(2), 115-127. doi:10.1080/00913367.2013.834804
McCarthy, B., & Liu, H. B. (2017). Food waste and the ‘green’ consumer. Australasian
Marketing Journal (AMJ), 25(2), 126-132. doi:10.1016/j.ausmj.2017.04.007
McNeill, L. S., & Snowdon, J. (2019). Slow fashion – balancing the conscious retail model
within the fashion marketplace. Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), 27(4), 215-223.
doi:10.1016/j.ausmj.2019.07.005 80 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Minton, E. A., Spielmann, N., Kahle, L. R., & Kim, C. (2018). The subjective norms of
sustainable consumption: A cross-cultural exploration. Journal of Business Research, 82,
400-408. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.12.031
Minton, E., Lee, C., Orth, U., Kim, C., & Kahle, L. (2012). Sustainable marketing and social
media. Journal of Advertising, 41(4), 69-84. doi:10.1080/00913367.2012.10672458
Moisander, J. (2007). Motivational complexity of green consumerism. International Journal
of Consumer Studies, 31(4), 404-409. doi:10.1111/j.1470-6431.2007.00586.x
Niinimäki, K. (2006). Ecodesign and textiles. Research Journal of Textile and Apparel,
10(3), 67-75. doi:10.1108/RJTA-10-03-2006-B009
Onel, N., Mukherjee, A., Kreidler, N. B., Díaz, E. M., Furchheim, P., Gupta, S., . . . Wang, Q.
(2018). Tell me your story and I will tell you who you are: Persona perspective in
sustainable consumption. Psychology & Marketing, 35(10), 752-765.
doi:10.1002/mar.21132
Ottman, J. A., Stafford, E. R., & Hartman, C. L. (2006). Avoiding green marketing myopia:
Ways to improve consumer appeal for environmentally preferable products.
Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 48(5), 22-36.
doi:10.3200/ENVT.48.5.22-36
Park, H., & Kim, Y. (2016). An empirical test of the triple bottom line of customer-centric
sustainability: The case of fast fashion. Fashion and Textiles, 3(1), 1-18.
doi:10.1186/s40691-016-0077-6 81 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Park, H. H. (2015). The influence of LOHAS consumption tendency and perceived consumer
effectiveness on trust and purchase intention regarding upcycling fashion goods.
International Journal of Human Ecology, 16(1), 37-47. doi:10.6115/ijhe.2015.16.1.37
Phipps, M., Ozanne, L. K., Luchs, M. G., Subrahmanyan, S., Kapitan, S., Catlin, J. R., . . .
Weaver, T. (2013). Understanding the inherent complexity of sustainable consumption:
A social cognitive framework. Journal of Business Research, 66(8), 1227-1234.
doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.08.016
Rees, W., Tremma, O., & Manning, L. (2019). Sustainability cues on packaging: The
influence of recognition on purchasing behavior. Journal of Cleaner Production, 235,
841-853. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.217
Remy, N., Speelman, E. & Swartz, S. (2020). Style that’s sustainable: A new fast-fashion
formula | McKinsey. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-
functions/sustainability/our-insights/style-thats-sustainable-a-new-fast-fashion-formula
Rezvani, Z., Jansson, J., & Bengtsson, M. (2018). Consumer motivations for sustainable
consumption: The interaction of gain, normative and hedonic motivations on electric
vehicle adoption. Business Strategy and the Environment, 27(8), 1272-1283.
doi:10.1002/bse.2074
Ritch, E. L. (2015). Consumers interpreting sustainability: Moving beyond food to fashion.
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 43(12), 1162-1181.
doi:10.1108/IJRDM-04-2014-0042 82 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Schmuck, D., Matthes, J., & Naderer, B. (2018). Misleading consumers with green
advertising? an Affect–Reason–Involvement account of greenwashing effects in
environmental advertising. Journal of Advertising, 47(2), 127-145.
doi:10.1080/00913367.2018.1452652
Segev, S. (2016). Is your product really green? Journal of Advertising, 45(1), 85-93.
Retrieved from http://www.econis.eu/PPNSET?PPN=857327151
Shaw, D., Bekin, C., Shiu, E., Hassan, L., Hogg, G., & Wilson, E. (2006). An examination of
the volitional stages in consumer decisions to avoid sweatshop clothing 35th European
Marketing Academy Conference (EMAC). Retrieved from
https://www.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=od______900::1b53f86f081adf9
5772b80b1779861b9
Shaw, D., Hogg, G., Wilson, E., Shiu, E., & Hassan, L. (2006). Fashion victim: The impact
of fair trade concerns on clothing choice. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 14(4), 427-
440. doi:10.1080/09652540600956426
Sheehan, K., & Atkinson, L. (2012). Special issue on green advertising. Journal of
Advertising, 41(4), 5-7. doi:10.1080/00913367.2012.10672453
Song, S. Y., & Kim, Y. (2018). A human-centered approach to green apparel advertising:
Decision tree predictive modeling of consumer choice. Sustainability, 10(10), 3688.
doi:10.3390/su10103688 83 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Soon, J. M., & Wallace, C. A. (2018). A greater share of the stomach? Nutrition & Food
Science, 48(2), 318-332. doi:10.1108/NFS-06-2017-0122
Spendrup, S., Hunter, E., & Isgren, E. (2016). Exploring the relationship between nature
sounds, connectedness to nature, mood and willingness to buy sustainable food: A retail
field experiment. Appetite, 100, 133-141. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2016.02.007
Steenis, N. D., Herpen, E. v., Lans, Ivo A. van der, Ligthart, T. N., & Trijp, Hans C. M. van.
(2017). Consumer response to packaging design : The role of packaging materials and
graphics in sustainability perceptions and product evaluations. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 162, 286-298. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.036
Štefko, R., & Steffek, V. (2018). Key issues in slow fashion: Current challenges and future
perspectives. Sustainability, 10(7), 2270. doi:10.3390/su10072270
Stern, P. C. (2000). New environmental theories: Toward a coherent theory of
environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407-424.
doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00175
Strizhakova, Y., Coulter, R. A., & Price, L. L. (2011). Branding in a global marketplace: The
mediating effects of quality and self-identity brand signals. International Journal of
Research in Marketing, 28(4), 342-351. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2011.05.007
Sung, J., & Woo, H. (2019). Investigating male consumers’ lifestyle of health and
sustainability (LOHAS) and perception toward slow fashion. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, 49, 120-128. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.03.018 84 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Textile Exchange. (2014). Textile exchange. Retrieved from https://textileexchange.org/
Thøgersen, J., Haugaard, P., & Olesen, A. (2010). Consumer responses to ecolabels.
European Journal of Marketing, 44(11/12), 1787-1810.
doi:10.1108/03090561011079882
Thomas, D. (2019). Fashionopolis : The price of fast fashion - and the future of clothes.
London: Apollo Library.
Turker, D., & Altuntas, C. (2014). Sustainable supply chain management in the fast fashion
industry: An analysis of corporate reports. European Management Journal, 32(5), 837-
849. doi:10.1016/j.emj.2014.02.001
United Nations. (2005). World summit outcome. ().
Vermeir, I., & Verbeke, W. (2006). Sustainable food consumption: Exploring the consumer
“Attitude – behavioral intention” gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics,
19(2), 169-194. doi:10.1007/s10806-005-5485-3
Watson, M. Z., & Yan, R. (2013). An exploratory study of the decision processes of fast
versus slow fashion consumers. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 17(2),
141-159. Retrieved from http://www.econis.eu/PPNSET?PPN=755886739
Wei, S., Ang, T., & Jancenelle, V. E. (2018). Willingness to pay more for green products:
The interplay of consumer characteristics and customer participation. Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, 45, 230-238. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.08.015 85 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Yang Chang Yi. (2017). Consumer behavior towards green products. Journal of Economics,
Business and Management, 5(4), 160-167.
Yang, D., Lu, Y., Zhu, W., & Su, C. (2015). Going green: How different advertising appeals
impact green consumption behavior. Journal of Business Research, 68(12), 2663-2675.
doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.04.004
Zabkar, V., & Hosta, M. (2013). Willingness to act and environmentally conscious consumer
behaviour: Can prosocial status perceptions help overcome the gap? International
Journal of Consumer Studies, 37(3), 257-264. doi:10.1111/j.1470-6431.2012.01134.x
86 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Appendices
Sustainability cues in fast vs slow fashion advertising and consumers‘ trust scenario for prolific online study, March 2020
INTRO
Sveiki,
Esu Neringa Lukošiūtė, ISM Vadybos ir ekonomikos universiteto Tarptautinės rinkodaros ir vadybos programos magistrantė.
Šiuo metu rašau baigiamąjį magistro darbą. Tam, kad galėčiau tinkamai atlikti tyrimą ir pagrįsti jo rezultatus, būsiu labai dėkinga, jei skirsite 15-20 minučių ir užpildysite šį klausimyną.
Apklausa yra anoniminė, o jos metu surinkti duomenys bus naudojami tik edukaciniais, t.y. tyrimo rezultatų gavimo ir pagrindimo, tikslais. Jūsų duomenys yra apsaugoti remiantis Lietuvos Respublikos Asmens duomenų apsaugos įstatymu bei Europos Sąjungos Bendruoju duomenų apsaugos reglamentu (BDAR). Jūsų IP adresas bus žinomas tik tyrimą atliekančiam studentui, jo darbo vadovui ir šiems Universiteto atstovams: studijų programos direktoriui, kvalifikacinės gynimo komisijos nariams ir etikos komisijos nariams.
Jei kiltų bet kokių klausimų, susijusių su duomenų apsauga prieš arba po dalyvavimo tyrime, susisiekite su manimi adresu [email protected], arba bendruoju Universiteto duomenų apsaugos el. paštu [email protected].
Dėkoju už jūsų laiką!
Aš perskaičiau aukščiau pateiktą informaciją ir duodu sutikimą rinkti mano asmeninius duomenis aukščiau nurodytais tikslais. 87 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
MAIN PART
Ši apklausa susideda iš kelių dalių. Pirmojoje dalyje sieksiu sužinoti jūsų požiūrį į prekes.
Netrukus jums bus pristatyti marškinėliai. Prašau atidžiai perskaityti informaciją apie juos.
Condition 1. Slow fashion with sustainability cues in advertising
Condition 2. fast fashion with sustainability cues in advertising
88 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Condition 3.Slow fashion without sustainability cues in advertising (control) 89 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Condition 4.Fast fashion without sustainability cues in advertising (control)
90 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Open ended. Boosting the manipulation. Dabar įvertinkite šiuos marškinėlius. Ką jūs apie juos manote? Prašau apibūdinti savo jausmus ir mintis 4–6 sakiniais. Prašau, pateikite kuo išsamesnį atsakymą. ______
Intention to purchase (Putrevu & Lord, 1994) Please evaluate each statement below about “Velve” T-shirts. Evaluate by using 7-point scale where 1 means „totally disagree“ and 7 means „totally agree“ Prašau įvertinkite teiginius apie “Velve” marškinėlius nuo 1 iki 7, kai 1 reiškia „visiškai nesutinku“, o 7 reiškia – „visiškai sutinku“ 91 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
1. It is very likely that I will buy this T-shirt (Labai tikėtina, kad aš nusipirksiu “Velve” marškinėlius) 2. I will purchase this T-shirt the next time I need such a product (Aš nusipirksiu “Velve” marškinėlius, kai man reikės tokio tipo marškinėlių) 3. I will definitely purchase this T-shirt (Aš tikrai nusipirksiu “Velve” marškinėlius)
Willingness to Buy Indicators Dodds, et al.
1. The likelihood of purchasing Velve T-shirts is: (very high to very low) Tikimybė, kad aš nusipirksiu “velve” marškinėlius yra (labai maža – labai didelė) 2. If I were going to buy T-shirts, I would consider buying “velve” T-shirts (strongly agree to strongly disagree) Jei man reikėtų pirkti marškinėlius, aš pagalvočiau apie “Velve” marškinėlius (visiškai nesutinku – pilnai sutinku) 4. The probability that I would consider buying the product is: (very high to very low) Tikimybė, kad aš svarstysiu įsigyti “Velve” marškinėlius yra (labai maža – labai didelė) 5.My willingness to buy the product is: (very high to very low) Aš noriu įsigyti „Velve“ marškinėlius (Labai nenoriu – labai noriu)
Trustworthiness (Tülin Erdem, Joffre Swait, & [Dawn Iacobucci and David Glen Mick served as editors and Joel Huber served as associate editor for this article.], 2004) This brand delivers what it promises “Šis prekės ženklas išpildo savo pažadus” This brand’s product claims are believable “Šio prekės ženklo teiginiais galima pasitikėti” This brand has a name you can trust “Šiuo prekės ženklu galima pasitikėti” This brand doesn’t pretend to be something it isn’t “Šis prekės ženklas neapsimetinėja tuo kas nėra”
Brand trust (Arjun Chaudhuri & Morris B. Holbrook, 2001) Brand trust was measured as a four-item index based on seven-point ratings of agreement (1 = very strongly disagree, 7 = very strongly agree) with the following four statements:
"I trust this brand," “Aš pasitikiu šiuo prekės ženklu“ "I rely on this brand," “Aš pasikliauju šiuo prekės ženklu” "This is an honest brand," “Šis prekės ženklas yra sąžiningas” "This brand is safe." “Šis prekės ženklas yra saugus”
Desirability (Frazier, Gelman, Wilson, & Hood, 2009) Worth What do you think this T-shirt is worth? (Estimated in euros) Kaip manote, kiek šie marškinėliai verti? (Sumą pateikite eurais) Keep 92 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Is this T-shirt worth keeping or would you throw it out? Ar šiuos marškinėlius verta pasilikti ar juos išmestumėte? (1=“definitely throw out” to 7=“definitely keep”) 1=“tikrai išmesčiau“, 7= “tikrai pasilikčiau“ Own How much do you like to own this T-shirt? Nuo 1 iki 7 įvertinkite kaip labai norėtumėte turėti šiuos marškinėlius? (1=“not at all” to 7=”very much”) 1 =“visai nenorėčiau“, 7= “labai norėčiau“
Touch How much would you want to touch this T-shirt? (1=“not at all” to 7=“very much”) Nuo 1 iki 7 įvertinkite kaip labai norėtumėte paliesti šiuos marškinėlius? (1 =“visai nenorėčiau“, 7= “labai norėčiau“)
Liking (based on Frazier, Gelman, Wilson, Hood, 2009) How much you like this T-shirt? (1=“not at all” to 7=”very much”) Kiek labai jums patinka šie marškinėliai? (1=“visai nepatinka” to 7=”labai patinka”) How attractive do you find this T-shirt? (1=“not at all” to 7=”very much”) Kiek Jums norėtųsi turėti šiuos marškinėlius? How appealing do you find this T-shirt? (1=“not at all” to 7=”very much”) Kiek patrauklūs jums atrodo šie marškinėliai?
Dabar užduosime kelis klausimus apie tvarumą (angl. sustainable). “tvarus” - darantis mažai žalos aplinkai arba jos išvis nedarantis, todėl gali tęstis ilgą laiką. Cambridge dictionary)
Felt environmentalism (Kamleitner, Thürridl, & Martin, 2019) – to rule out
How sustainable would you feel with this product? 1 = not at all, 7 =very Kiek tvarus jūs jaustumėtės su šiais marškinėliais? How environmentally friendly would you feel with this product? 1 = not at all, 7 =very Kiek aplinkai draugiškas jūs jaustumėtės su šiais marškinėliais? How environmentally conscious would you feel with this product? 1 = not at all, 7 =very Kiek ekologiškai sąmoningas jaustumėtės su šiais marškinėliais? If you were to buy this T-shirt, to what extent would you do so with an eye toward sustainability? 1 = not at all, 7 =very Jei jūs pirktumėte šiuos marškinėlius, kiek tai darytumėte atsižvelgdamas į tvarumą?
Would you consider this T-shirt to be “green” 1 = not at all, 7 =very Ar jūs manote, kad šie marškinėliai yra “tvarūs”?
Would you consider this T-shirt to be good for the planet? 1 = not at all, 7 =very Ar jūs manote, kad šie marškinėliai yra saugūs mūsų planetai?
If you were to buy this this T-shirt, to what extent would you feel more or less environmentally oriented 93 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
(-3 much less environmentally oriented….. 0 = neither more or less environmentally oriented….+3 = much more environmentally oriented)
Jeigu jūs planuotumėte įsigyti šiuos marškinėlius, ar jūs jaustumėtės labiau ar mažiau besirūpinantys aplinka?
Manipulation check Please evaluate these statements. Use the 7 point scale where 1 means „definitely disagree“, 7 means „definitely agree”. Prašau įvertinkite šiuos teiginius, kai vienas reiškia „visiškai nesutinku“, o 7 „pilnai sutinku“
Velve marškinėliai yra…
Tvarūs Draugiški aplinkai Orientuoti į ilgalaikiškumą Orientuoti į šio sezono naujoves Greitosios mados prekės ženklas Lėtosios mados prekės ženklas
[Paaiškinimas: greita mada (eng. Fast fashion) – madingi, masinės gamybės būtų pagaminti, pigūs drabužiai pakeitę tradicinį mados kalendorių Lėta mada (eng. Slow fashion) – tvari mada, gaminama atsižvelgiant į aplinkosaugą ir sumažintą vartojimą skatina vietinę gamybą ir tradicinius amatų metodus; Vietoj kiekybės pabrėžia kokybę]
GREEN scale (Haws, Winterich, & Naylor, 2014) 1 It is important to me that the products I use do not harm the environment. Man svarbu, kad rūbai, kuriuos aš perku neturėtų neigiamo poveikio aplinkai 2 I consider the potential environmental impact of my actions when making many of my decisions. Prieš priimdamas daugumą savo sprendimų aš įvertinu galimą mano veiksmų poveikį aplinkai 3 My purchase habits are affected by my concern for our environment. Mano apsipirkimo įpročius veikia mano noras gyventi tausojant gamtą. 4 I am concerned about wasting the resources of our planet. Aš esu susirūpinęs dėl netvaraus planetos resursų eikvojimo. 5 I was born on February 30th [attention check] Aš gimiau Vasario 30 dieną 6 I would describe myself as environmentally responsible. Aš galėčiau apibūdinti save kaip žmogų, kuriam rūpi aplinkosauga 94 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
7 I am willing to be inconvenienced in order to take actions that are more environmentally friendly. Aš esu linkęs susitaikyti su nepatogumais siekiant imtis veiksmų, kurie yra labiau draugiški aplinkai.
ADDITIONAL
Life history strategy (childhood unpredictability). Griskevicius (2017, unpublished) Please evaluate these statements. Use the 9-point scale where 1 means „definitely disagree“, 9 means „definitely agree”. When I was growing up. . . 1. My family life was generally inconsistent and unpredictable from day to day. Mano šeimos gyvenimas paprastai būdavo nenuoseklus ir nenuspėjamas kiekvieną dieną. 2. My family life was generally consistent and predictable each day.* Mano šeimos gyvenimas paprastai būdavo nuoseklus ir nuspėjamas kiekvieną dieną. 3. My parent(s) frequently had arguments or fights with each other or other people in my house. Mano tėvai namuose dažnai pykdavosi tarpuasavyje ar su kitais asmenimis. 4. My parents had a difficult or unstable relationship. Mano tėvai turėjo sudėtingus ir nestabilius santykius. 5. People often moved in and out of my house on a pretty random basis. Žmonės su kuriais gyvenau namuose dažnai keisdavosi 6. Alcohol and/or drugs never caused problems in my house. * Alkoholis ir/ar narkotikai niekada nesukeldavo problemų mano namuose. 7. When I woke up, I often didn’t know what could happen in my house that day. Kai aš ryte atsikeldavau, aš nežinodavau kas gali nutikti namuose tą dieną. 8. My family environment was often tense and ‘on edge’. Mano šeimos santykiai dažnai būdavo įtempti. 9. Things were often chaotic in my house. Mano namuose dažnai būdavo sąmyšis. 10. I had a hard time knowing what my parent(s) or other people in my house were going to say or do from day-to-day. Aš dažnai blogai jausdavausi dėl to, kad nežinojau ką mano tėvai ar kiti žmonės mūsų namuose planuoja daryti ar sakyti.
Perceived childhood SES and current SES (Griskevicius et al., 2011). Please indicate the extent of agreement with following statements, where 1 means „totally disagree“ and 9 means „totally agree“. 1. My family usually had enough money for things when I was growing up Man augant mano šeima paprastai turėdavo pakankamai pinigų 2. I grew up in a relatively wealthy neighborhood Aš užaugau pakankamai sveikoje kaimynystėje 3. I felt relatively wealthy compared to the other kids in my school 95 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Aš jaučiausi sąlyginai pasiturintis lyginant su kitais vaikais mano mokykloje. 4. I have enough money to buy things I want Aš turiu pakankamai pinigų nusipirkti tai, ko noriu. 5. I don’t need to worry too much about paying my bills Man netenka nerimauti dėl sąskaitų apmokėjimo. 6. I don’t think I’ll have to worry about money too much in the future Aš nemanau, kad ateityje man reikės neriamuti dėl pajamų.
The Mini-K Short Form (Figueredo et al. 2006) Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with the following statements. Use the scale below and write your answers in the spaces provided. For any item that does not apply to you, please enter “0”. 3 – strongly disagree, 2 – somewhat disagree, 1 – slightly disagree, 0 – Don’t know/ not applicable, 1 – slightly agree, 2 – somewhat agree, 3 – strongly agree. 1. I can often tell how things will turn out. Aš dažnai nujaučiu kaip susiklostys įvykiai 2. I try to understand how I got into a situation to figure out how to handle it. Siekdamas rasti sprendimą susidariusiai sitaucijai aš bandau suprasti kaip aš joje atsiradau 3. I often find the bright side to a bad situation. Aš dažnai įžvelgiu teigiamus dalykus blogose situacijose. 4. I don’t give up until I solve my problems. Aš nepasiduodu kol neišsprendžiu savo problemų. 5. I often make plans in advance. Aš dažnai planuoju į priekį. 6. I avoid taking risks. Aš stengiuosi išvengti pavojų. 7. While growing up, I had a close and warm relationship with my biological mother. Augdamas aš turėjau artimus ir šiltus santykius su savo biologine motina. 8. While growing up, I had a close and warm relationship with my biological father. Augdamas aš turėjau artimus ir šiltus santykius su savo biologiniu tėvu. 9. I have a close and warm relationship with my own children. Aš turiu artimus ir šiltus santykius su savo vaikais. 10. I have a close and warm romantic relationship with my sexual partner. Aš turiu artimus ir šiltus romantinius saktykius su savo partneriu. 11. I would rather have one than several sexual relationships at a time. Aš rinkčiausi turėti vieną vietoj kelių partnerių vienu metu. 12. I have to be closely attached to someone before I am comfortable having sex with them. Man svarbus stiprus emocinis ryšys prieš turint lytinius santykius. 13. I am often in social contact with my blood relatives. Aš dažnai bendrauju su savo giminėmis. 14. I often get emotional support and practical help from my blood relatives. Aš dažnai gaunu emocinį palaikymą ir pagalbą iš giminaičių. 15. I often give emotional support and practical help to my blood relatives. Aš dažnai palaikau emociškai ir padedu savo giminaičiams. 16. I am often in social contact with my friends. 96 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Aš dažnai bendrauju su savo draugais. I have spent my last vacation on Bonferroni island [attention check] Aš praleidau paskutines atostogas Bonferroni saloje 17. I often get emotional support and practical help from my friends. Aš dažnai gaunu emocinį palaikymą ir pagalbą iš savo draugų 18. I often give emotional support and practical help to my friends. Aš dažnai palaikau emociškai ir padedu savo draugams. 19. I am closely connected to and involved in my community. Aš esu įsitraukusi ir turiu artimą ryšį su savo bendruomene. 20. I am closely connected to and involved in my religion. Aš esu praktikuojantis vieną iš religijų.
Q10. Pažymėkite, kiek kartų pirkote šiose parduotuvėse per pastaruosius vienerius metus. MULTI AND RANDOMIZE
1 Zara 17 Tommy Hilfiger 2 Asos 18 Apranga 3 H&M 19 Locals 4 Lindex 20 Massimo Dutti 5 Reformation 21 Bershka 6 Primark 22 Unlabel 7 COS 23 Utenos trikotažas 8 Urban outfitter 24 Agnė Gilytė 9 Urban yoga stories 25 Another unicorn 10 Patagonia 26 Coocoomoss 11 Topshop 27 OVO things 12 S. Oliver 28 Butiq.lt 13 The Knotty Ones 29 ABOUT 14 City men&woman 30 Everlane 15 TOMS 31 Nei vienoje iš nurodytų EXCLUSIVE 16 Reserved 32 Nepirkau drabužių per paskutinius metus
Intention to purchase sustainable clothing (Putrevu & Lord, 1994) Please evaluate each statement below by using 7-point scale where 1 means „totally disagree“ and 7 means „totally agree“ Prašau įvertinkite kiekvieną teiginį nuo 1 iki 7, kai 1 reiškia „visiškai nesutinku“ ir 7 reiškia – „visiškai sutinku“
It is very likely that I will buy this sustainable clothes 97 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Labai tikėtina, kad aš pirksiu tvarios mados prekės ženklo drabužius
I will purchase sustainable clothes the next time I need such a product Aš pirksiu tvaraus prekės ženklo drabužius, kai man reikės naujo drabužio
I will definitely purchase sustainable clothes Aš tikrai pirksiu tvarios mados prekės ženklo drabužius
Using the scale provided, please indicate how much each of the following statements reflects how you typically are, where 1 means “not at all like me” and 5 – “very much like me” Self-control (Tangney, Baumeister, Boone, 2004) I am good at resisting temptation 1 2 3 4 5 Aš lengvai atsispiriu pagundoms. I have a hard time breaking bad habits. (R) 1 2 3 4 5 Man sunku atsikratyti blogų įpročių. I am lazy. (R) 1 2 3 4 5 Aš esu tingus. I say inappropriate things. (R) 1 2 3 4 5 Dažnai pasakau netinkamus dalykus I do certain things that are bad for me, if they are fun. (R) 1 2 3 4 5 Aš darau dalykus, kurie yra smagūs, net jei ir žinau, kad jei man kenkia. I refuse things that are bad for me 1 2 3 4 5 Aš atsisakau dalykų, kurie man kenkia. I wish I had more self-discipline. (R) 1 2 3 4 5 Aš norėčiau tūrėti griežtesnę discipliną. People would say that I have iron self- discipline. 1 2 3 4 5 Jei paklaustumėte, aplinkiniai sakytų, kad aš turiu griežtą discipliną. Pleasure and fun sometimes keep me from getting work done. (R) 1 2 3 4 5 Kartais malonumai ir linksmybės man trukdo atlikti darbus. I have trouble concentrating. (R) 1 2 3 4 5 Man sunku susikaupti I am able to work effectively toward long-term goals. 1 2 3 4 5 Aš galiu sėkmingai dirbti siekiant ilgalaikio tikslo. Sometimes I can’t stop myself from doing something, even if I know it is wrong. 1 2 3 4 5 (R) Kartais aš elgiuosi netinkamai ir tai žinau, tačiau vis tiek negaliu saves sulaikyti. I often act without thinking through all the alternatives. (R) 1 2 3 4 5 Aš dažnai priimu sprendimus neapgalvodamas kitų alternatyvų.
98 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
The questions in this scale ask you about your feelings and thoughts during the last month. In each case, you will be asked to indicate by circling how often you felt or thought a certain way. 0 = Never 1 = Almost Never 2 = Sometimes 3 = Fairly Often 4 = Very Often Perceived stress (Cohen et al., 1988) In the last month, how often have you felt that you were unable to 0 1 2 3 4 control the important things in your life?
Per paskutinį mėnesį, kaip dažnai jautėtė, kad negalite kontroliuoti svarbių įvykių savo gyvenime? In the last month, how often have you felt confident about your ability 0 1 2 3 4 to handle your personal problems?
Per praėjusį mėnesį, kaip dažnai jautėtės užtikrinti savo jėgomis įveikti asmeninius sunkumus? In the last month, how often have you felt that things were going your 0 1 2 3 4 way?
Per praėjusį mėnesį, kaip dažnai jautėte, kad viskas vyksta taip kaip jūs planavote? In the last month, how often have you felt difficulties were piling up 0 1 2 3 4 so high that you could not overcome them?
Per praėjusį mėnesį kiek dažnai jūs jautėte, kad jūsų sunkumai yra nepakeliami?
DEMOGRAPHICS
Have you taken this survey seriously and answered conscientiously? Ar jūs rimtai vertinote šią apklausą ir atvirai atsakinėjote į klausimus? Yes/no
What is the aim of this study? (if you have no ideas leave it empty) Kaip manote, koks šio tyrimo tikslas? (Jei neturite minčių, palikite laukelį tuščią) […]
Jūs save apbūdintumėte kaip žmogų perkantį greitosios mados prekės ženklų drabužius ar lėtosios mados?
Lėtosios 99 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
Greitosios Nežinau
How many items on average do you buy per 6 month? Kiek paprastai drabužių įsigyjate per pusę metų?
What percentage of all clothes was fast fashion? Kiek procentų jūsų įsigytų drabužių sudarė greitosios mados prekės ženklų drabužiai?
How much money on average do you spend on new clothes per month? Kiek vidutiniškai per mėnesį išleidžiate pinigų naujiems drabužiams?
1. < €10-€50 2. €51-€100 3. €101-€150 4. €151-€200 5. €201-€250 6. €251-€300 7. €301-€350 8. €351-€400 9. €401-€500 10. €501-€600 11. €601-€700 12. €701-€800 13. €801-€900 14. €901-€1000 15. €1000-€1100 16. €1100-€1200 17. €1200-€1300 18. €1300-€1400 19. €1400-€1500 20. >€1500
What percentage of all money spent, were spent on fast fashion? Kurią dalį išleistų pinigų sudaro išlaidos greitos mados prekėms? Įvardinkite procentai(%)
Jūsų lytis: Please indicate your gender: Male / Vyras Female / Moteris
Please indicate your age: Jūsų amžius 100 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
____
Please indicate your average disposable income per household (after taxes): Vidutinės namų ūkio pajamos vienam šeimos nariui per mėnesį (po mokesčių) iki 580 eur 581-870 eur 871-1300 eur 1300-2000 eur 2001 ir daugiau Atsisakau nurodyti
Please indicate your nationality: Jūsų tautybė: ______
Please indicate your level of education Jūsų išsilavinimo lygis Pradinis išsilavinimas Pagrindinis išsilavinimas Vidurinis išsilavinimas Aukštesnysis Aukštasis neuniversitetinis Aukštasis universitetinis Kita
Please indicate your marital status: Jūsų šeiminiai santykiai:
Vienišas/vieniša Vedęs/ištekėjusi ar gyvenu su partneriu (-e) Vedęs/ištekėjusi, turiu vaikų Našlys/našlė Kita Atsisakau nurodyti
What is your height (cm)?______Koks jūsų ūgis?(cm)
What is your weight? (kg )? ______Koks jūsų svoris? (kg)
Kaip stipriai šiuo metu jaučiate nerimą dėl koronaviruso pandemijos? Kai 1-visai nejaučiu, o 7-labai jaučiu
101 THE IMPACT OF SUSTAINABILITY CUES IN SLOW VS FAST FASHION
ADVERTISING ON CONSUMER’S TRUST AND PURCHASE INTENTION
THANKING AND DEBRIEFING
Dėkoju, kad skyrėte laiko ir dalyvavote tyrime. Jo tikslas išsiaiškinti kaip vartotojai vertina greitos ir lėtos mados prekes, kai jų reklamose yra tvarumo žinutės. Magistro darbo tema: “Sustainability ques in fast vs slow fashion advertising effect on consumers trust and willingness to buy”. Ši informacija nebuvo pateikta pradžioje, kad dalyviai neturėtų išankstinio nusistatymo. Jei norėtumėte sužinoti tyrimo rezultatus susisiekite su manimi el. paštu: [email protected]
Jei norite laimėti vieną iš trijų Wolt dovanų kuponų, į laukelį įrašykite savo el. pašto adresą. Laimėtojai bus atrinkti burtų keliu ir paskelbti balandžio viduryje.