Climate Change Worry and Purchase Behavior Towards Biodegradable Plastic Bags: The New Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, climate change is causing significant threats to the survival of humanity and future generations.This study is designed to explore the purchase behavior towards biodegradable plastic bags by addressing significant advancements in the protection motivation theory (PMT): investigating the role of climate change worry (CCW) to trigger threat appraisal (TAP) or coping appraisal (CAP), the correlation between deontic justice (DJ), attitude (AT), and purchase intention (PUR), and filling cognition-behavior gap by adding green skepticism (GS).A non-probability sampling technique is employed with a data set of 1,284 Vietnamese consumers, which was analyzed using the SmartPLS program.The findings indicate that the AT mediates the correlations between CAP, TAP, DJ, and PUR.Simultaneously, green skepticism (GS) also plays as the moderator in the correlations between AT and PUR, CAP and PUR, TAP and PUR.Based on the findings, effective marketing campaign can be propose to highlight the possible dangers of environmental pollution to promote consumers' purchase behavior.Additionally, the findings also highlight the theoretical implications for future studies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".