The Impact of Green Corporate Social Responsibility and Greenwashing on Green Packaged FMCG Product Purchase Intention: The Mediating Role of Perception
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present investigation was carried out to examine the influence of green corporate social responsibility (GCSR) and greenwashing (GW) upon consumers' purchase intentions for fastmoving consumer goods (FMCG) wrapped in eco-friendly packaging within Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam.Employing quota sampling, the final data set was collected from 308 consumers who showed past, present, or prospective tendency to purchase such FMCG.The dataset experienced strict examination utilising SPSS 26 and AMOS 24.Findings revealed that GW exerts a negative effect upon green-packaged FMCG purchase intention.Furthermore, GCSR, perceived personal responsibility (PPR), environmental awareness (EA), and green packaging perception (PGP) each manifest positive impacts upon green-packaged FMCG purchase intention.The mediatory functions of PPR, EA, and PGP were likewise substantiated.Grounded in these outcomes, the study advances managerial prescriptions designed to augment consumers' propensity to acquire green-packaged FMCG, thereby facilitating enhanced competitiveness within an increasingly ecologically orientated marketplace.
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 | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".