Purchasing organic products: role of social context and consumer innovativeness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate how individual innovativeness and social factors shape consumers’ purchase decisions of organic products. Design/methodology/approach The study is based on an online survey of 988 Canadian participants. Structural equation modelling was used to test the relationships between social identity, social influence, perceived value and purchase intention within a multi-group framework to show the moderating effect of consumer innovativeness. Findings The results show that the two social dimensions – social identity and social influence – influence purchase intention and the perceived value of organic products partially mediates these relationships. Further, the personal characteristic, “consumer innovativeness”, moderates these relationships. Research limitations/implications Although the sample consists of a higher proportion of younger participants, the results are consistent with theoretical arguments and empirical evidence, which underscores the importance of generational differences in organic product purchases. Practical implications Managers need to develop a more nuanced understanding of how social influence and social identity play different roles in the purchase intentions of consumer innovators vs later adopters. This knowledge can guide practical segmentation, targeting, positioning and promotion strategies. Originality/value This study complements the individual innovativeness predispositions literature by showing that the consideration of social factors leads to a more nuanced understanding of consumers’ purchase intention than either set of factors separately. It also contributes to the literature on adoption of organic products by introducing consumer innovativeness dimension as a key factor.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".