Green Consumption

Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461
Against the Green: A Multi-method Examination of the Barriers to

Green Consumption
Mark R. Gleim a, , Jeffery S. Smith b,1 , Demetra Andrews b,2 , J. Joseph Cronin Jr. b,3
a
The University of Toledo, College of Business and Innovation, Department of Marketing and International Business, Stranahan Hall 4039, Mail Stop #109,
Toledo, OH 43606-3390, United States
b The Florida State University, The College of Business, Department of Marketing, Rovetta Business Annex Room 307,
P.O. Box 3061110, Tallahassee, FL 32306-1110, United States
Abstract
Knowledge regarding the barriers to green consumption is of increasing importance as retail organizations place greater emphasis on the
environment in evaluating performance in adherence with the triple-bottom line approach. The objective of this research is to investigate individual
barriers that affect consumers evaluations of the green products found in retail outlets. The research presented utilizes a critical incident qualitative
study and two quantitative studies to examine the factors associated with non-green purchase behaviors. In addition, findings from an experiment
suggest that altering the number and form of informational product cues may overcome purchase barriers. These factors are discussed, as are the
implications of the research for stakeholders of retail organizations.
Published by Elsevier Inc on behalf of New York University.
Keywords: Retailing; Retail strategy; Green; Sustainability; Social dilemma; Segmentation analysis
As consumers become aware of issues related to the fragile

state of the environment, they place greater importance on environmentally friendly purchases. Polls suggest that as many as
83 percent of individuals are concerned about the environment
(Nielson 2011). However, in spite of consumers expressed concern for the environment, and the growing prevalence of green
products on retail shelves, consumers are not purchasing green
goods and services with the regularity expected. In fact, environmentally sustainable products represent only a small fraction of
global demand. Specifically, estimates report the market share
for green products to be less than four percent worldwide (UNEP
20054 ). Further, sales of green products appear to be trending
downward. Clorox Green Works sales have fallen 40 percent
Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 419 530 2119; fax: +1 419 530 7744.
E-mail addresses: mark.gleim@utoledo.edu (M.R. Gleim),
jssmith@cob.fsu.edu (J.S. Smith), dandrews2@fsu.edu (D. Andrews),
jcronin@cob.fsu.edu (J.J. Cronin Jr.).
1 Tel.: +1 850 644 0166; fax: +1 850 644 4098.
2 Tel.: +1 850 644 7878; fax: +1 850 644 4098.
3 Tel.: +1 850 644 7858; fax: +1 850 644 4098.
4 UNEP includes fair trade food, organic food, hybrid and advanced diesel
vehicles, green electricity, socially responsible investments, and green household
goods (e.g., recycled paper, phosphate free detergent) when examining green
product demand.
over the past two years, while Natures Source has seen a 50
percent decrease in sales (Clifford and Martin 2011).
Given the lack of consumer acceptance of green products, it
is likely that many barriers to green consumption exist. Knowledge regarding these barriers is of increasing importance to
retail organizations as directors and other stakeholders place
greater emphasis on the environment in evaluating performance
in adherence with the triple-bottom line approach (i.e., people,
planet, and profits). Nevertheless, substantial resources are spent
by both retailers and their suppliers to develop and sell green5
products. For example, Wal-Mart spends $500 million annually
on the development and implementation of green technologies
(Fetterman 2006). In addition, one of Wal-Marts stated goals is
To sell products that sustain people and the environment. Further, GE is reportedly investing $10 billion into its green product
retail line, Ecomagination, over the next five years (For 2011).
General Motors is estimated to be spending upwards of $2.5 billion a year on research and development for alternative energy
vehicles (Pope 2010). However, despite tremendous financial
expenditures by firms, the vast majority of consumers do not buy
5 The terms green, environmentally friendly and environmental sustainability

are used interchangeably throughout this paper.
0022-4359/$ see front matter. Published by Elsevier Inc on behalf of New York University.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2012.10.001
M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461
green products. The huge investments made by firms, in spite of

the lackluster consumption of green goods and services, justifies the need for greater knowledge as to how consumers decide
whether to purchase such products. This research attempts to
better understand why consumers choose to make non-green
purchasing decisions with the objective of enabling retailers to
better understand how to overcome the factors that limit the
successful implementation of green strategies.Building on the
definition of a socially conscious consumer (Webster 1975), a
green consumer is defined as one that takes into account his
or her impact on the physical environment when making product purchases. A green consumer purchases environmentally
friendly products to minimize the potentially negative environmental impact of purchases. Therefore, non-green consumers are
described as individuals that make purchases not in the best interest of the physical environment when environmentally friendly
alternatives are available. Further, a green product is one that is
produced with concern for the physical environment: air, water,
and land (Shrum, McCarty, and Lowrey 1995). This definition
incorporates all facets of green as a marketing strategy, not just
a select set of sub-components (e.g., recycling, organic purchasing, and energy consumption) and is therefore appropriate for
delineating the scope of green for the present research. While
it is currently unclear as to why the vast majority of retail consumers continue to choose products not in the best interest of
the environment, the existence of such consumers represents a
tremendous opportunity, and challenge, for both producers of
green products and the retailers adding such goods and services
to their product lines.
Given the relative lack of success accompanying environmentally sustainable retail strategies, the practical and theoretical
implications of understanding why the vast majority of consumers continue to make non-green purchasing decisions are
tremendous. Although initial research examining the behaviors of environmentally friendly consumers exists (e.g., Webster
1975; Roberts 1996), no study investigates the barriers that
ultimately impede green consumption. Consequently, recent
research suggests the importance, and need to better understand
the impact, of socially responsible actions in consumers purchasing decisions (e.g., Cronin et al. 2010; Ganesan et al. 2009). In
addition, Grewal and Levy (2007) note the important research
opportunities evident within pricing and promotion research, as
well as consumer behavior, and the present research addresses
those areas within a green context. Specifically, the objective of
this research is to better understand the motivations, or barriers, leading to non-green consumption with the goal of helping
producers and retailers utilize more effective green marketing
strategies.
To accomplish the objectives of the research, a qualitative
study is first conducted to identify specific barriers to the adoption of green products. A quantitative study is then reported
that identifies unique consumer segments based on the inhibiting factors leading to various levels of green consumption.
To provide further insights, a second quantitative study is conducted to validate the results from the two initial studies. An
experiment is also conducted to examine the impact of various knowledge-promoting cues and formats on future intentions
45
relative to green products. In addition, the limitations of the

research are identified, as well as future research opportunities.
Background
Rather than examining potential impediments to the successful enactment of green marketing or retail strategies, the
literature focuses on identifying why consumers purchase environmentally friendly products. Specifically, the effects of culture
(Anderson and Cunningham 1972; Webster 1975), personality
(Kinnear, Taylor, and Ahmed 1974), and socio-demographic
characteristics (Diamantopoulos et al. 2003; Ngobo 2010;
Shrum, McCarty, and Lowrey 1995) on consumers attitudes
and behaviors relative to sustainable goods and services are
among the most frequently considered drivers of green consumption. Unfortunately, the focus on the relatively small portion of
the market that purchases green goods and services does little
to assist retailers in indentifying how to successfully identify
and enact environmentally sustainable strategies. The lack of
knowledge relative to why an overwhelming majority of consumers proclaim to be pro-environmental, yet do not purchase
green products, represents a substantial knowledge gap in the
literature.
Unfortunately, research has yet to address why retail
organizations are unable to successfully enact large-scale
sustainability-directed marketing strategies (c.f. Menon and
Menon 1997). However, research suggests that there is a sustainability liability that may deter consumers from purchasing
sustainable products in certain categories (Luchs et al. 2010).
Specifically, research suggests that sustainable products are
often viewed negatively based on the strength attributes
expected by consumers (i.e., attributes that provide consumers
benefits such as power and durability) (Luchs et al. 2010).
The positive gains that accrue for firms offering environmentally friendly products are noted (e.g., Lash and Wellington
2007) and make the lack of focus on identifying how retail
organizations can successfully enact green marketing strategies
more disconcerting. Specifically, firms having a green orientation achieve greater financial gains and market share (Menguc
and Ozanne 2005), greater levels of employee commitment
(Maignan and Ferrell 2001), and increased firm performance
(Pujari, Wright, and Peattie 2003). Research also suggests that
socially responsible actions lead to increased customer satisfaction (Luo and Bhattacharya 2006) and reduce undesirable
firm-idiosyncratic risk, which can lead to greater firm valuations
(Luo and Bhattacharya 2009). While the benefits to producers and retailers implementing a green orientation are noted,
organizations currently reach only a small fraction of potential
consumers.
Thus, the benefits accruing to green organizations are from a
small number of consumers. This leaves a tremendous opportunity for green retailers that are able to capture larger segments of
consumers. Even though retailers are finding profits in serving
the relatively small number of consumers currently purchasing
green products, anecdotal evidence suggests that retailers such
as Wal-Mart are not satisfied with treating green consumption
as a market niche. An examination of the actions of Wal-Mart
46
suggest that this retailer, a leader in enacting green product and

marketing strategies, is pursuing a triple-bottom line approach
throughout the organization in designing and implementing market strategies (Humes 2011). As a market leader, this retailers
efforts are likely to be emulated within the retail sector. In the
next section, theory is integrated with previous research to illustrate how social, personal, and economic influences impact the
consumption habits of non-green consumers.
Conceptual framework
Well-grounded theoretical explanations as to why consumers
do, or do not, engage in environmentally sustainable behaviors
or purchase green products are rare. Building on research that
examines the impact of social and personal norms on altruistic behaviors (Schwartz 1977), Osterhus (1997) suggests that
normative and economic influences, combined with trust and
credibility, influence pro-social, or green, behaviors. Similarly,
social dilemma theory provides additional insight into the motivations that define consumer actions. As members of a group
(i.e., consumers) face conflict in maximizing personal interests
while supporting the actions of a group (i.e., society), they experience a social dilemma (Dawes 1980; Hardin 1968). Since green
products often involve greater costs (e.g., higher prices, information search, or performance risk), the purchase of such items
creates a social dilemma for consumers. Thus, an understanding
of social influences on the purchase of green goods and services
is also an important consideration.
It is clear that many things influence consumers decisionmaking, but perhaps the strongest influences are the economic
costs associated with green consumption (Lynn and Oldenquist
1986; Osterhus 1997). The economic influences that affect
consumers include more than just price. The time and effort
needed to evaluate and search for products are part of the cost
of consumption. In order for consumers to embrace desirable
behaviors, the perceived ratio of benefits to costs (i.e., value)
assigned green goods and services must be greater than that of
alternatives (Geller 1992). Thus, theory suggests that if consumers feel that green products are priced too high, or are not
as readily available, green consumption is impeded. As green
products are shown to be considerably more expensive than traditional products (Kavilanz 2008), it is likely that price deters
many non-green consumers.
Further, consumers are generally reluctant to conduct extensive information search and elaborate cognitive processing
(Petty and Caccioppo 1986). For example, many consumers see
higher prices associated with energy star rated appliances, but
do not consider future cost savings. Thus, consumers opt for
alternatives requiring a lower initial financial outlay not realizing another option is cheaper in the long run while also being
beneficial for the environment. Moreover, consumers loyal to a
traditional (i.e., non-green) product may not be willing to incur
the cognitive costs of searching out, and evaluating the information needed to assess, an alternative to a currently used product.
Research further suggests that consumers do not want to be seen
as a sucker (Komorita and Parks 1994), which may be the
case if a green product fails to meet their standards. The time
and effort needed to seek and evaluate green substitutes, as well

as the financial and cognitive risks associated with green product failures, likely further hinders environmentally sustainable
consumption.
Past research also suggests that consumer decision-making
is largely influenced by the attitudes of friends, family, and
other groups deemed important to a consumer (Childers and Rao
1992). For example, if a hotel guest believes that his/her peers
are not acting in a socially responsible (i.e., green) manner, then
she/he is likely to mimic the beliefs and behaviors of the group
(e.g., request laundered towels regularly) (Goldstein, Cialdini,
and Griskevicius 2008). If an individual associates with people not concerned with the environment, his/her consumption is
likely to be non-green. Thus, a consumer that believes his/her
peers are making non-green purchasing decisions has very little
incentive to pay a higher price for, or seek out, green products.
The social norms that influence consumers also lead to
more specific personal norms (Schwartz 1977). While social
norms may be characterized as the prevailing social sentiment
toward an issue, personal norms are more individual, or what a
consumer feels she/he should do in a specific consumption situation (Osterhus 1997). As such, consumer decision making is
informed by personal norms that are in large part generated from
the social norm of groups to which a consumer values membership. Thus, individual consumers are likely to act in a manner
that is consistent with beliefs expressed by such groups (Miniard
and Cohen 1983; Osterhus 1997). Unfortunately, given that the
vast majority of U.S. consumers do not purchase green products
in spite of voiced support for environmentally friendly products
and causes, it seems likely that consumers personal norms are
conflicted due to exposure to friends, family, or peers whose
intentions and behaviors relative to green products are likely to
be weak or negative.
In addition, social dilemma theory suggests that perceived
efficacy, or the extant to which one believes that she/he can make
a difference toward achieving a goal (i.e., positively impacting
the planet), impacts cooperation, or green behaviors (van Lange
et al. 1992). It is likely that many consumers feel as though they
do not individually make a difference in achieving goals related
to green consumption. That is, a consumer might feel that the single purchase of a product, or the purchases of any one individual,
does not make a difference on the environment. An individuals
specific belief that s/he makes a difference or impact on the
environment by purchasing environmentally friendly products
is known as perceived consumer effectiveness (PCE) (Kinnear,
Taylor, and Ahmed 1974; Webster 1975). Research suggests that
PCE is an important predictor of green consumption (Roberts
1996). Consumers that believe they make a difference (i.e., high
PCE) are more likely to purchase green products (Balderjahn
1988; Roberts 1996).
Finally, as consumers are increasingly inundated with promotional messages that stress the environmental benefits of
products of all types, they are often left wondering what to
believe. When evaluating an environmentally friendly product,
the trust attributed to the organization offering that good or
service is posited to have a direct impact on consumers perceptions of the product (Berger and Kanetkar 1995). As consumers
trust in an organization increases, the likelihood of purchasing a green product from that firm increases. The actions of an
organization that produces a green product, and the retailer that
makes the product available to consumers, must be consistent
with the product offered (Wagner, Lutz, and Weitz 2009). That
is, a retailer or other firm that engages in actions considered
by consumers to be less than green is likely to have difficulty
in marketing green products whether or not such actions are
directly related to the product. Greenwashing is commonly
used to describe the actions of a firm that claims to be environmentally friendly, but acts in a manner that is perceived to
be harmful to the environment (Kangun, Carlson, and Grove
1991). If consumers believe a firm is misleading consumers
about environmental efforts, or greenwashing, the negative
repercussions can be severe. In order to further explore the concepts discussed, a qualitative study is first conducted to identify
specific barriers to the adoption of green products.
Methodology
Study 1
Sample and data collection. Given the pressing need to better understand the issues hindering green consumption, the first
study utilized a critical incident (CIT) survey (e.g., Bitner,
Booms, and Tetrault 1990) that included both qualitative and
quantitative sections. The survey asked participants to recall a
recent opportunity to purchase a green product (subjects were
given a definition of green prior to starting) and explain why they
did not purchase a green product. Specifically, participants were
asked to recall a recent shopping experience where they were
considering the purchase of a traditional product or an alternative green product and explain why he or she did not purchase
the specific product (i.e., green or non-green product depending
on the purchase). Also, if the participants felt as though they
did not have an opportunity to purchase a green product, they
were asked to explain why that was the case. The goal of the
CIT survey was to better understand the barriers that consumers
face. The data collection resulted in a sample of 330 unique
consumers (see Table 1 for demographics).
Results
The 330 qualitative responses provided valuable insights as to
the reasons non-green purchasing decisions were made. The vast
majority of respondents held very simplistic attitudes toward
green products. They were often unaware of green products
either through their own ignorance of the topic, or due to poor
placement within a store. Further, many of the respondents commonly associated cleaning products as the only green product
they may consider purchasing. Two doctoral students acting
as independent coders categorized the responses. In numerous
instances, more than one reason was provided as to why the
green product was not purchased. Individuals reporting more
than one reason were classified into multiple categories yielding
411 responses. Discrepancies in coding were discussed between
the coders and if a resolution was not reached, the response was
47
Table 1
Participant demographics.
Demographics
Age range
1835
3654
55+
Mean age
Sex
Male
Female
Ethnicity
African American
Asian
Caucasian
Hispanic
Native American
Other
Education
High School Diploma
Some College
Bachelors Degree
Masters Degree
Terminal Degree
Income
<$25,000
$25,00150,000
$50,001100,000
$100,001150,000
>$150,000
No reply
Study 1
Study 2
Study 2 post hoc
53.2%
36.3%
10.5%
35.7
50.8%
37.5%
11.7%
34.8
51.3%
30.0%
18.7%
37.0
47.4%
52.6%
46.1%
53.9%
42.6%
53.4%
5.1%
3.5%
80.0%
6.5%
.5%
4.1%
5.2%
3.6%
79.1%
7.0%
.6%
4.2%
4.7%
3.9%
71.3%
16.3%
1.5%
2.3%
7.2%
42.9%
35.5%
11.8%
2.3%
6.7%
44.1%
36.2%
10.7%
1.8%
8.5%
46.4%
35.6%
8.5%
1.0%
20.7%
10.7%
22.4%
17.3%
10.3%
18.4%
22.1%
9.9%
23.4%
16.8%
10.0%
17.7%
26.4%
17.1%
20.2%
5.4%
17.1%
14.0%
counted against the reliability assessment (Kassarjian 1977).

Inter-coder reliability was nearly 95 percent. The classification of responses resulted in eight main green barrier categories.
The eight main categories were price, quality, expertise, trust,
availability, apathy, brand loyalty, and a miscellaneous category.
Within the eight main categories, nine subcategories were identified that resulted from the refinement of the main categories.
Representative quotes from participants, as well as the full list
of categories, subcategories, and frequencies, are identified in
Table 2.
The results of the qualitative study revealed that consumers
face numerous barriers when contemplating the purchase of
green products. In particular, the perceived high price of green
products was the barrier noted most frequently (42.09%). Perceptions of poor product quality were another important obstacle
noted by participants (14.11%). The subcategories of quality
indicate that many of the respondents experienced poor product quality with a previous purchase and thus were reluctant
to purchase green again. Others were not sure of the quality of
green products and therefore unwilling to risk purchasing a product of unknown quality. A lack of expertise among participants
was the next most frequent response category as 10.71 percent
noted a general ignorance of the subject. Trust was another barrier frequently identified (10.46%). In particular, respondents
were skeptical of firm motivations for going green and of the
environmental benefit of green products.
Green product availability, or rather the lack thereof, was
identified as a barrier by 9.98 percent of the respondents.
48
Table 2
Qualitative responses by non-green consumers.
Category
% of Respondents
Qualitative comments
Price
42.09
I buy green products when they are similar in price, within a 20% range or so, of regular products. However,
when the cost is significantly higher than regular products, I tend to buy the regular product.
Price is the biggest factor when choosing a product and green products are usually more expensive.
Although green products are good for the environment, they are somewhat expensive for the average income.
Quality
Poor experience
14.11
10.22
Unsure of quality
3.89
Expertise
10.71
Trust
Trust org greenness
10.46
5.60
Trust product greenness
Availability
Inconvenient
Lack of availability
4.87
9.98
5.11
4.87
Apathy
5.60
Brand loyalty
3.16
Miscellaneous
Belief in climate change
3.89
1.46
Product recognition
1.46
Lack of options
0.97
Sometimes I do not buy green products because they seem inferior to the comparable non-green products.
For example, green paper towels are not as absorbent as non-green paper towels. Green laundry detergent
sometimes does not have the same pleasant fragrance.
The green products that I have purchased do not have the same quality as their counterparts.
I dont know how well they work. Especially the cleaning products.
I know the brands I buy work, Im habitual and do not want to waste money on a product I am not sure will
work or not
I would probably buy more green products is I understood more about them. It is really just a matter of
education about green products. I did watch HGTVs Green House Giveaway and thought it very interesting.
Its an issue that rarely crosses my mind. While I disagree with nuclear dumping, Im not educated enough
on the other effects of hazards to the environment. I only have a high level view of this issue.
I just dont have a good knowledge of green products.
I would not purchase green products because the majority of companies just slap a label on so they can
charge more to the customer without really making a difference in the environment. This green revolution is
just marketing by corporate America.
Hard to tell whats truthful and whats marketing. Feel most companies exploit going green doing the
bare minimum in order to charge outlandish prices.
I feel like green products are kind of like a bandwagon that every company is trying to jump on.
I am not interested in changing my habits based on the fact that most green products dont even offset their
own production impact. So . . . what is the point?
I am not sure if green products really help anything.
The benefits of green products cannot be physically seen.
Too much of a hassle!
I would not buy green products because it is less convenient to find suitable replacements for other non-green
products.
There is only one store where I live that sells truly green products and it is not always convenient to get to.
Green products are not readily available at all the common stores I shop at.
Not readily available, visible, or both in the grocery store.
Sometimes I honestly do not know where they can be found/sold.
I dont care about the environment.
It hasnt really crossed my mind to buy green products.
Im too lazy!
I have habitual buying patterns and green products have only recently been introduced into the consumer
market.
Because, I have formed a habit of things that I buy all the time, and Id rather not put in the time and money,
and somewhat cost difference for green products.
Brand loyalty to existing products.
I evaluate based on payback period and also Im dubious about the climate change bandwagon. I have spent
some time studying climate change and Im not persuaded.
Disbelief in the dire needs of our planet. Global warming is impossible to prove.
Not in plain sight. . .I tend to not see them as much. So maybe put them not in their own section but next to
things that are more regularly bought, with a sign saying go green next to them.
Dont easily recognize that product is green and dont take time to look.
Not many options to choose from. For example, if you want a window cleaner thats green you usually
only have one option.
Specifically, of those that noted a lack of availability, nearly

half indicated that green products could not be purchased
conveniently, while the other half found that green products
were not readily available to purchase. Apathy surrounding
the environment and green products was also evident among
respondents (5.6%). Loyalty toward existing non-green products was a barrier acknowledged by 3.16 percent of respondents.
In addition, a miscellaneous category contains consumers that

did not purchase green products for reasons such as they did
not believe in climate change (1.46%), did not recognize green
products (1.46%), or perceived there to be a shortage of green
product options (0.97%).
As evidenced by the frequencies presented for each category,
price appears to have the greatest adverse effect on green
consumption. However, it is also important to note that nearly

half of the respondents noting price as the main barrier leading
to the non-green purchase also mentioned another reason when
discussing motivations for non-green consumption. Given the
overt nature of the initial study it is not surprising that price
dominated the other categories when the participants were asked
to use memory recall. Thus, in an effort to better understand
the differences between green and non-green consumers, and
to specifically examine the barriers to green consumption, a
more covert quantitative study is conducted with a new group
of participants and a number of quantitative scales are used to
identify the barriers to green consumption.
Study 2
Measurement. The measures used in the research were based
on established scales (see Section A) and modified to fit the
research context as necessary. The independent variables of
interest (i.e., the variables on which green and non-green
purchasing behaviors were expected to differ) were selected
to assess the theoretical framework. The survey instrument
included measures for the following constructs: (1) social norms
(Spangenberg et al. 2003), (2) willingness to comply with social
norms (Fishbein and Ajzen 1975), (3) personal norms (Osterhus
1997), (4) perceived consumer effectiveness (Webster 1975), (5)
price sensitivity (Lichtenstein, Bloch, and Black 1988), (6) value
(Dodds, Monroe, and Grewal 1991), (7) quality (Dodds et al.
1991), (8) expertise (Sharma and Patterson 2000), (9) awareness (Seiders et al. 2007), (10) availability (Yoo, Donthu, and
Lee 2000), (11) inertia (Anderson and Srinivasan 2003), (12)
advertising trust (Soh, Reid, and King 2009), (13) organizational trust (Morgan and Hunt 1994), (14) satisfaction (Oliver
and Swan 1989), and (15) purchase intentions (Mano and Oliver
1993). All of the scales that were originally created in a green
context were left unaltered. The scales that were not created in
a green context were modified for the current research.
Sample and data collection. The data for empirical assessment were collected using a standard survey administration
technique (Dillman 1978) incorporating practices noted as beneficial in increasing the effective response rate. First, potential
respondents were identified from a stratified random sample generated from a panel of general consumers maintained within the
United States. In all, 1,900 potential survey participants were
delivered an electronic link via email and 638 were returned
(33.6 percent response rate). To ensure the independence of the
observations, the survey was designed to allow for only one
attempt to be completed per internet protocol (IP) address. Further, once data collection was complete, twenty percent of the
participants were contacted to verify their independent participation in the study.
Preliminary data analysis for the quantitative study resulted
in a reduced sample. In total, 57 questionnaires were from the
study. Questionnaires were eliminated due to questions left blank
(n = 13) or for failing to properly answer a quality check question (n = 44). Specifically, in an effort to control for acquiescence
bias (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, and Podsakoff 2003), participants were given the following statement, Please do not provide
49
an answer for this statement. This procedure resulted in a final,

usable sample of 581, which equates to an effective response rate
of 30.6 percent (see Table 1 for sample demographics). In addition, the survey questions for each construct were randomized
for each respondent to eliminate order effects.
A test for non-response bias was conducted in accordance
with standard practices (Armstrong and Overton 1977) with no
differences observed between early and late responders.
Measurement model analysis. The psychometric properties of
the items were evaluated through a comprehensive confirmatory
factor analysis (CFA). All items were simultaneously tested in
one model and were restricted to load on their assigned factors.
The results of the confirmatory factor analysis are identified in
Table 3. Due to the sensitivity of chi-square to sample size, the
model fit was evaluated using the root mean square error of
approximation (RMSEA), the comparative fit index (CFI), and
the TuckerLewis index (TLI). These fit indices were identified
based on their relative stability and insensitivity to sample size
(Hu and Bentler 1999; Gerbing and Anderson 1992).
The measurement model fit the data well (2 = 3,899,
df = 1,490, RMSEA = .05, CFI = .93, TLI = .92). Reliability was
measured via the composite reliability (Fornell and Larcker
1981) with results indicating that the constructs were reliable
as each exceeded the recommended rule of thumb of 0.70
(Nunnally 1978). All scales were reliable with construct reliability estimates ranging from .83 to .98. Convergent validity
was evaluated through an examination of the average variances
extracted (see Table 3). All of the average variances extracted
were greater than .50, indicating convergent validity (Fornell
and Larcker 1981). Discriminant validity was tested in accordance with Fornell and Larckers (1981) criteria, whereby the
average variance extracted for the construct was compared with
the shared variance between the construct and other variables
in the model. The results indicate discriminant validity for all
but two of the squared correlations, as evidenced by the average variance extracted by each of the scales being greater than
the shared variance between the constructs. Since the squared
correlations for personal norms and PCE were unable to pass
the more stringent test, they were tested using a series of chisquare difference tests developed by Jreskog (1971). Given
that the two scales were conceptually related, it was not surprising that the squared correlation was high. Thus, an alternative
test for discriminant validity was necessary. The correlation
between each pair of constructs was sequentially constrained
to unity and then released. A constrained pair-wise comparison resulted in a significantly higher 2 for the constrained
model compared to the unconstrained models. Discriminant
validity was demonstrated as the change in 2 = 97.0, even after
adjusting for the family wise error rate (Anderson and Gerbing
1988).
Given the positive results relative to the reliability and validity of the items identified in the CFA, a cluster analysis was
conducted per (Punj and Stewart 1983). As this research is
exploratory in nature, with the goal of understanding the barriers
consumers face, a cluster analysis was deemed the appropriate
method of analysis (e.g., Arnold and Reynolds 2003; Reynolds
and Beatty 1999).
50
Table 3
Measurement model results.
Construct
CR
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
(14)
(15)
(1) SNorm
(2) ComplySN
(3) PNorm
(4) PCE
(5) PriceSens.
(6) Value
(7) Quality
(8) Expertise
(9) Awareness
(10) Availability
(11) Inertia
(12) AdTrust
(13) OrgTrust
(14) Satisfaction
(15) PI
.89
.90
.83
.84
.87
.93
.95
.92
.91
.91
.90
.97
.86
.91
.98
.66
.24
.22
.23
.09
.16
.14
.09
.22
.18
.24
.22
.18
.23
.31
.06
.74
.33
.26
.02
.29
.17
.02
.07
.09
.25
.47
.40
.33
.35
.05
.11
.61
.81
.34
.57
.51
.37
.36
.42
.65
.36
.27
.65
.68
.05
.07
.66
.63
.37
.56
.50
.28
.32
.41
.66
.34
.20
.63
.65
.01
.00
.11
.14
.68
.42
.26
.31
.22
.23
.36
.03
.06
.29
.41
.02
.08
.33
.31
.18
.69
.63
.33
.34
.42
.65
.39
.29
.64
.57
.02
.03
.26
.25
.07
.40
.82
.35
.35
.37
.50
.36
.25
.65
.46
.01
.00
.14
.08
.10
.11
.12
.75
.45
.45
.45
.09
.06
.41
.39
.05
.00
.13
.10
.05
.12
.12
.21
.71
.70
.44
.25
.18
.40
.37
.03
.00
.18
.16
.05
.18
.14
.20
.48
.66
.63
.23
.19
.38
.40
.06
.06
.42
.44
.13
.43
.25
.20
.19
.40
.76
.34
.26
.62
.63
.05
.22
.13
.12
.00
.15
.13
.01
.06
.05
.11
.86
.61
.44
.36
.03
.16
.07
.04
.00
.09
.06
.00
.03
.04
.07
.37
.67
.33
.26
.05
.11
.42
.40
.08
.41
.43
.17
.16
.14
.39
.19
.11
.72
.76
.10
.12
.46
.42
.17
.32
.21
.15
.14
.16
.40
.13
.07
.58
.94
Note: 2 = 3899, df = 1490, RMSEA = .05, CFI = .93, TLI = .92 correlations are shown below the diagonal; shared variances are depicted above the diagonal; the
AVE is depicted in boldface on the diagonal.
Results. A two-step cluster analysis procedure was conducted

in order to categorize sample respondents based on responses to
the clustering variables (Punj and Stewart 1983). Consumers
were assigned a label based on levels of satisfaction and purchase intentions. However, they were segmented on the complete
set of independent variables. The initial step in the clustering procedure was to analyze the data (581 observations) via
a hierarchical cluster analysis using multiple clustering algorithms (e.g., Wards method, centroid) to effectively determine
the number of clusters. An examination of relevant statistics
(e.g., R-square, agglomeration coefficients) and the dendrogram were utilized to determine the number of clusters (Sharma
1996). The second step utilized a non-hierarchical technique
(i.e., k-means) using the initial seed points generated from the
initial step to create an improved solution (Punj and Stewart
1983).
Respondents were clustered based on the independent variables identified in the conceptual framework and labeled
according to the varying levels of satisfaction and purchase
intentions exhibited toward green products. The analysis identified a four-cluster solution via Wards method as the most
interpretable in terms of practical relevance. The four groups
were labeled based on the spectrum of the color wheel. Those
high in satisfaction and purchase intentions toward green products were assigned a color closer to green, while those lower
were assigned a color closer to red. The four clusters were
labeled Red, Orange, Yellow, and Green. In addition, follow-up analyses (e.g., MANOVA and chi-square tests)
were conducted to assess differences between the clusters. The
Tukey pairwise comparisons indicated significant differences
in centroid means across all of the independent variables, as
suggested by the differences between clusters as identified in
Table 4.
The differences between clusters on the outcome measures of satisfaction and purchase intentions are identified in
Table 5. Demographic information for each cluster is found in
Table 6.
Cluster 1, labeled as Red, is comprised of 74 individuals

(12.7 percent of the sample) that are the least satisfied with green
products and exhibit the lowest purchase intentions toward green
goods and services. This segment is significantly lower than all
of the other segments on variables identified as potential drivers
of green consumption (i.e., personal norms, PCE, value, quality,
advertising trust, organizational trust, and willingness to comply
with social norms). Further, this segment is more price sensitive
and feels that purchasing green products is more of a hassle
than the other segments. Generally, this segment lacks expertise
regarding green products, does not feel that green products are a
good value or of high quality, lacks trust in green companies, and
tends to believe that they alone cannot make a positive impact
on the planet through green consumption.
Cluster 2, labeled as Orange, is comprised of 185 individuals (31.8 percent of the sample) that have the second lowest
levels of satisfaction with and purchase intentions toward green
products. Segment members tend to score significantly higher
than cluster 1 (Reds) on most variables, but less than clusters 3
(Yellows) and 4 (Greens). The segment is higher on personal
norms, PCE, value, quality, advertising trust, organizational
trust, and willingness to comply with social norms than the first
segment (Reds). Generally, this segment is similar to the first
segment (Red) as such consumers tend to be low on expertise
regarding green products, do not feel that green products are a
good value or of high quality, lack trust in green companies, and
tend to believe that they alone cannot make a positive impact on
the planet through green consumption.
Cluster 3, labeled as Yellow, is comprised of 199 individuals (34.3 percent of the sample) that have the second highest
level of satisfaction with and purchase intentions toward green
products. Segment members are higher on personal norms, PCE,
value, quality, awareness, availability, and expertise than the
first two segments (Reds and Oranges). Individuals in the segment also score higher on advertising trust, organizational trust,
and willingness to comply with social norms than cluster 1
(Reds). Generally, this segment is unique from the previous two
51
Table 4
Consumer characteristics by cluster.
Clustering
Variable
Soc. Norm
Cluster mean
Rank
Comply w/SN
Cluster mean
Rank
Pers. Norm
Cluster mean
Rank
PCE
Cluster mean
Rank
Price sens.a
Cluster mean
Rank
Value
Cluster mean
Rank
Quality
Cluster mean
Rank
Expertise
Cluster mean
Rank
Awareness
Cluster mean
Rank
Availability
Cluster mean
Rank
Inertiaa
Cluster mean
Rank
Ad trust
Cluster mean
Rank
Org trust
Cluster mean
Rank
Red
(n = 74)
Cluster 1
Orange
(n = 185)
Cluster 2
Yellow
(n = 199)
Cluster 3
Green
(n = 123)
Cluster 4
4.51
1
(3,4)
4.72
1
(4)
4.91
1
(1,4)
2.29
9
(2,3,4)
4.01
4
(1)
4.21
7
(1)
2.91
6
(2,3,4)
3.83
6
(1,3,4)
4.76
3
(1,2,4)
3.05
5
(2,3,4)
4.01
4
(1,3,4)
4.91
1
1.82
12
(2,3,4)
2.28
12
(1,3,4)
1.76
13
(2,3,4)
2.69
11
2.50
8
(2,3,4)
3.05
8
5.40
2
F = value
(p = probability)
(1,2,3)
17.7
(p < .0001)
(1)
56.7
(p < .0001)
5.38
3
(1,2,3)
177.9
(p < .0001)
(1,2,4)
5.46
1
(1,2,3)
196.6
(p < .0001)
2.82
12
(1,2,4)
3.50
13
(1,2,3)
38.3
(p < .0001)
(1,3,4)
3.29
11
(1,2,4)
4.32
10
(1,2,3)
176.8
(p < .0001)
(1,3,4)
3.71
10
(1,2,4)
4.82
8
(1,2,3)
144.7
(p < .0001)
4.19
11
1.89
11
(3,4)
1.62
13
(3,4)
2.36
13
(1,2,4)
3.78
12
(1,2,3)
94.4
(p < .0001)
3.54
2
(3,4)
3.42
7
(3,4)
4.53
5
(1,2,4)
5.19
5
(1,2,3)
96.5
(p < .0001)
2.91
6
(3,4)
2.98
9
(3,4)
3.99
9
(1,2,4)
4.84
7
(1,2,3)
116.4
(p < .0001)
(1,3,4)
4.08
8
(1,2,4)
5.04
6
(1,2,3)
254.5
(p < .0001)
2.05
10
(2,3,4)
2.96
10
3.31
4
(2,3,4)
4.57
2
(1,4)
4.68
4
(1,4)
5.26
4
(1,2,3)
74.2
(p < .0001)
3.36
3
(2,3,4)
4.09
3
(1,4)
4.24
6
(1,4)
4.73
9
(1,2,3)
34.1
(p < .0001)
Note: The numbers in parentheses show the group number(s) from which this group was significantly different at the .05 level of significance based on the Tukey
pairwise comparison tests. The rank indicates the rank order of the variable within the cluster group. All scales were assessed on a 1 (= strongly disagree) to 7 (=
strongly agree) scale.
a Reverse coding to make all scales the same direction.
Table 5
Outcome measure results by cluster.
Outcome
Measure
Satisfaction
Cluster mean
Purchase Int.
Cluster mean
Red
(n = 74)
Cluster 1
2.77
2.34
Orange
(n = 185)
Cluster 2
(2,3,4)
(2,3,4)
3.48
3.36
Yellow
(n = 199)
Cluster 3
(1,3,4)
(1,3,4)
4.30
4.57
Green
(n = 123)
Cluster 4
(1,2,4)
(1,2,4)
5.17
5.39
F = value
(p = probability)
(1,2,3)
(1,2,3)
236.35 (p < .0001)

272.92 (p < .0001)
Note: The numbers in parentheses show the group number(s) from which this group was significantly different at the .05 level of significance based on the Tukey
pairwise comparison tests. The rank indicates the rank order of the variable within the cluster group. All scales were assessed on a 1 (= strongly disagree) to 7 (=
strongly agree) scale.
52
Table 6
Demographic information by cluster.
Demographics
Mean age
Sex
Male
Female
Ethnicity
African American
Asian
Caucasian
Hispanic
Native American
Other
Education
High School Diploma
Some College
Bachelors Degree
Masters Degree
Terminal Degree
Incomea
<$25,000
$25,00135,000
$35,00150,000
$50,00180,000
$80,001100,000
$100,001150,000
>$150,000
No reply
Red
Orange
Yellow
Green
33.69
33.87
37.84
40.92
64.8
35.2
50.3
49.7
40.4
59.6
36.6
63.4
4.2
2.8
74.6
15.5
0
2.8
M = 2.56
8.5
36.6
45.1
9.9
0
M = 3.69
26.8
4.2
4.2
9.9
7.0
14.1
11.3
22.5
7.4
3.7
78.8
6.3
0
3.7
M = 2.45
10.1
46.0
32.8
10.6
.5
M = 3.66
25.9
3.7
5.3
17.5
5.8
12.7
10.6
18.5
5.6
2.5
80.8
6.1
1.0
4.0
M = 2.65
3.5
47.0
33.8
12.1
3.5
M = 4.33
13.1
6.1
4.0
13.6
15.7
18.2
10.1
19.2
2.4
0.8
80.5
9.8
0
6.5
M = 2.6
8.9
39.8
36.6
11.4
3.3
M = 4.31
12.2
4.1
10.6
15.4
9.8
19.5
10.6
17.9
M = mean.
a Those that preferred not to answer were removed from mean calculations.
non-green segments as these consumers tend to be knowledgeable regarding green products, feel that green products are a
good value and high quality, are more trusting in green companies, and tend to believe that they can have a positive impact on
the planet through their consumption.
Lastly, cluster 4, labeled as Green, is comprised of 123
individuals (21.2 percent of the sample) that score the highest
on satisfaction with and purchase intentions toward green products. This segment is higher on personal norms, PCE, value,
quality, awareness, availability, expertise, advertising trust, organizational trust, and social norms than all of the other clusters.
Generally, this segment of consumers is unique from the other
segments as such individuals tend to be more knowledgeable
regarding green products, feel that green products are a good
value and of high quality, trust green companies, and tend to
believe that they can have a positive impact on the planet through
green consumption.
Fig. 1 illustrates the reverse scored mean values for each of
the independent variables for each segment. The variables on the
X-axis, from left to right, indicate the greatest potential barriers
faced in purchasing green products. From Fig. 1, it is evident
that the lack of expertise regarding green products appears to
be a significant barrier. The low expertise scores for all of the
segments is an indication of the lack of expertise felt by consumers relative to green products. In addition, the higher prices
associated with green products appears to a substantial barrier
to adoption. The high levels of price sensitivity, coupled with
the perceived high prices of green products, is likely leading

many consumers to continue purchasing traditional products.
In an effort to reconcile the barriers noted by participants from
the initial two studies, a post hoc analysis is conducted. Again,
an overt study is conducted whereby a different sample from
the previous studies is asked to rank each of the barriers with
the goal of better understanding consumer perceptions of each
barrier versus the others.
Study 2 Post hoc analysis
In order to further explore the barriers to green consumption,
a follow-up analysis was conducted with the goal of assessing
the validity of the results obtained in the previous studies. To
accomplish this task, a questionnaire was designed with the
goal of forcing respondents to rank each of the thirteen barriers.
This method was chosen to gain a more complete understanding of the overt decisions individuals make when considering
the purchase of green products. An online survey was administered to a new group of participants yielding 230 usable
responses. The demographics of the respondents are identified in
Table 1.
The data were analyzed for significant group differences
using select non-parametric tests. These tests were chosen since
forced-rank data are non-normal in nature. Initially, the data
were inspected by the mean rank across the entire data set (see
Table 7) to determine the barriers all individuals recognize. The
results provide validation of the outcome in study two as price
sensitivity and expertise are identified as the main constraints
to purchasing green products. Next, the data were split into
two groups (green and non-green) based on a split along the
purchase intentions variable. The groups were then compared
using the KruskalWallis (KW) analysis of variance test. The
results of this test (see Table 7) indicated that there were significant differences between the groups across multiple variables.
Interestingly, the relative ranks (i.e., the mean ranks within each
group) remained relatively constant. The results confirmed that
price and expertise were the two main barriers.
A final set of tests was conducted to further validate the results
in study two. In this case, the data were split into three groups
(green, yellow/orange,6 and red) along the purchase intentions
variable. Comparisons were made via the KW test to indicate
where significant differences existed. Since the KW test indicates only the presence of group differences, not what groups
differ significantly, the Dunns comparison test was utilized to
determine what groups differed. The results (see Table 7) suggested that price and expertise were still significant barriers,
but viewed differently based on customer orientation. Given
the noted barrier that expertise appears to be both overtly and
covertly, and the important role it likely has in forming and/or
eliminating other hurdles, the following study seeks to examine
this key barrier.
6 The data were only divided into three groups as opposed to the four from
Study 2 because there was no clear division between what could be seen as the
yellow and orange groups.
53
Fig. 1. Greatest barriers to green consumption (from left to right).
Study 3
The results of studies one and two provide valuable insights
into the barriers consumers perceive regarding the purchase of
green products. While the high price of green products is identified as a major barrier to purchase, it is not likely to be easily
changed by retailers. In an effort to evaluate the efficacy of tactics
related to a non-price variable in increasing consumer willingness to purchase green products, an experimental consideration
of expertise is undertaken. Each of the prior studies suggests
that consumers lacking expertise are less willing to purchase
green products. Thus, marketing strategies that increase consumers perceptions of their own expertise regarding a green
product should produce a corresponding increase in willingness
to purchase that product. Thus, the objective of study three is to
evaluate this proposition.
Theory and hypotheses. In study two, consumers lack of

expertise with respect to green products was based, in part, on
their perceptions that they lacked knowledge of, and experience
with, those products. External informational cues can exert significant influence on information processing and lead to changes
in consumer beliefs about products (Olson 1978). As objective
knowledge of product attributes and features increases so do consumers perceptions of their knowledge (Park, Mothersbaugh,
and Feick 1994). Objective knowledge refers to information that
is actually stored in memory, while a consumers perception of
what one knows reflects his/her subjective knowledge (Brucks
1985; Carlson et al. 2009). This suggests that presentation of
informational cues about a green product increase a consumers
perception of what one knows about that product. This tactic
is expected to break down the barrier to purchase posed by a
perceived lack of expertise. To this end, study three examines
Table 7
Post hoc test results.
Barrier dimension
Price
Expertise
Availability
Awareness
Personal Norms
Inertia
Value
PCE
Social Norm Compliance
Advertising Trust
Quality
Company Trust
Social Norms
Total
Two group split sample
Three group split sample
Sample
Green
Non-green
Green
Rank
Rank
Rank
Rank
3.7
4.0
4.5
5.4
5.9
6.0
6.0
7.7
8.0
8.0
8.2
8.2
8.4
3.7
3.6
3.9
4.7
6.8
6.3
5.9
7.7
8.9
7.9
8.2
7.7
8.7
3.7
4.3
5.0
5.9
5.2
5.7
6.0
7.7
7.4
8.1
8.2
8.6
8.2
4.3
3.1
3.6
4.7
7.5
6.9
6.1
8.1
7.4
8.2
7.8
7.3
9.1
Difference
(2)
(2,3)
(3)
(2,3)
(2,3)
(2)
(3)
Yellow/orange
Red
Rank
Rank
3.5
4.1
4.5
5.4
5.9
5.9
5.9
7.7
8.4
7.9
8.2
8.1
8.3
Difference
(1)
(1)
(1,3)
(1)
(1,3)
(3)
4.1
4.1
5.3
5.9
4.1
5.1
6.3
7.7
6.4
8.4
8.5
9.6
8.6
Difference
(1)
(1)
(1,2)
(1)
(2)
(1,2)
Notes: All ranks are reported as mean values; Numbers in bold indicate significant group differences as the p = .05 level; Numbers in parentheses indicate group
differences at the p = .05 significance level.
54
the effectiveness of different forms and quantities of marketing

information in increasing consumer perceptions of their expertise and purchase intentions related to a green product.
Information form. Numerical vs. verbal information cues
offer different advantages to decision-makers. For example,
compared to equivalent numerical information (e.g., 32 mpg),
verbal information (e.g., high mileage) is argued to be more
abstract, but is imbued with greater inherent meaning (Stone
and Schkade 1991; Viswanathan and Childers 1996). In contrast, numerical information is perceived to be more concrete
than equivalent verbal information (Jiang and Punj 2010;
Viswanathan and Childers 1996). The higher degree of concreteness of numerical information reflects its clear and specific
relation to a particular product attribute (MacKenzie 1986;
Viswanathan and Childers 1996), and the ease with which it can
be employed for direct comparisons among choice alternatives
(Huber 1980). Information that is more concrete attracts more
attention than information that is more abstract, which opens
the possibility for more concrete information to exert greater
influence on consumer behavior (MacKenzie 1986).
Previous research suggests that the form of information used
to describe product attributes exerts a material influence on
information processing and memory (Viswanathan and Childers
1996). Numerical information is processed more quickly than
equivalent verbal information and is associated with more accurate recall (Viswanathan and Childers 1996). However, an
important boundary condition on the advantage of numerical
information is also observed. Namely, the differences in information processing and recall manifest only when the form of
information used to describe product attributes (i.e., numerical
vs. verbal) are alternated, both within a single choice alternative
and across choice alternatives. For example, when numerical
information cues are used to describe two attributes of product
A (e.g., warranty length and number of functions) and equivalent verbal information cues are used to describe two additional
attributes (e.g., battery life and display width), the advantages
associated with numerical information are observed. When all
of the product attributes are presented using a single information form (i.e., all numerical or all verbal information cues are
employed), the advantages attributed to numerical information,
are attenuated and both forms of information are equated in
terms of information processing times and information recall.
Drawing on the findings reported by Viswanathan and
Childers (1996), the present study focuses on conditions in
which product attribute information is presented in a uniform
format (i.e., all numerical vs. all verbal). That is, in order to investigate how differences in the form of information (as opposed to
differences in the combination of information forms) affect purchase intentions for a green product all information is presented
in the same format. The finding that display of information in
a uniform format (i.e., all numerical or all verbal) eliminates
differences in information processing and memory suggests
the possibility that no difference are observed in subsequent
processes that rely on the information, such as judgments of
intentions to purchase. However, because verbal information
is imbued with greater inherent meaning than numerical information (Viswanathan and Childers 1996), verbal information
is expected to be more advantageous for evaluation tasks in

which the consumer must determine which action he/she will
take (Huber 1980). This leads to the following hypothesis.
H1. Verbal information leads to higher purchase intentions
than equivalent numerical information.
Information quantity. Previous research also suggests that
the quantity of information presented in a choice task significantly influences decision making effectiveness (Keller and
Staelin 1987). Presentation of too many cues causes a consumer
to become overwhelmed, resulting in decreased confidence and
decision quality. Because numerical information is imbued with
less inherent meaning than equivalent verbal information, more
effort is required to use numerical information for judgment and
choice tasks (Viswanathan and Childers 1996). This is because
numerical information must be transformed during information
processing in order to generate meaning that is required for
evaluation or decision-making. When a small number of informational cues are presented, the extra effort required to derive
meaning from numerical information may be inconsequential
and exert no discernible effect on the decision task. However,
as the number of informational cues increases, it is anticipated
that information presented in numerical form is disadvantaged
relative to the verbal information form. This theorizing proposes
a boundary condition on the relationship proposed in H1.
H2. At higher (vs. lower) numbers of information cues, the
positive influence of verbal information on purchase intentions
is more evident than that of numerical information.
Information detail. All information is not uniformly
compelling. Previous research suggests that the quality of
information presented in a choice task significantly influences decision making effectiveness (Keller and Staelin 1987).
Detailed information provides more evidence or explanation of
a product attribute. According to MacKenzie (1986), the level
of detail contained in information is positively related to its concreteness and vividness, two factors that influence the amount
of attention consumers pay to product attributes and the likelihood that information about those attributes influences consumer
judgment. Thus, the following hypothesis is generated:
H3. Presentation of more detailed information about attributes
of a green product increases purchase intentions for that product.
Pretest. A pretest was conducted to develop numerical and
verbal descriptions for attributes of the environmentally friendly
Seventh Generation brand shower cleaner that were subjectively
equivalent in meaning. Since the objective was to determine
whether differences in information form yielded systematic differences in consumers perceived expertise, we first determined
the numerical equivalents of simple (i.e., brief) descriptive
verbal terms to be employed in the experiment. Forty-six participants viewed descriptive terms in an online study and used
a slider to indicate the numeric percentage that most-closely
corresponded with the term. The slider was scaled from 0 to
100. The displayed terms were, completely, mostly, one-third,
free, and no. Sample sentences that were similar to those planned
for the experimental study were displayed to put the term into

Table 8
Experimental pretest results.
Word
Mode
Mean
Completely
Mostly
One-third
Free
No
100%
80%
33%
0
0
97.94
79.79
35.55
28.36
12.57
context. For example, the sentence for the term free was It
is free of dirt. The task of the participant was to indicate the
percentage (i.e., 0100%) that best matched the meaning of the
word free. Based on the results shown in Table 8 below, modes
were employed as the numerical equivalents of the simple verbal
information employed in the experimental study.
To compare the informativeness and level of detail perceived
in different forms of information, participants also rated three
forms of attribute-level information that were intended for use in
the experiment. The three forms represented the numerical form
(e.g., 100% non-toxic), the simple verbal equivalent (e.g.,
Completely non-toxic), and a detailed verbal form that conveyed greater detail than the other two forms. The detailed verbal
form provided more information than the simple verbal form
in that it contained explanatory content that more thoroughly
defined the product attribute, its benefit, or both to the consumer
or the environment (e.g., Does not contain any toxic or poisonous materials). Due to its greater specificity, the detailed
verbal information condition should be more concrete or detailed
than the other two forms of information (MacKenzie 1986). The
verbal (vs. the numerical) information form was employed to
convey greater detail in the information due to the facility of
this information form to accommodate expanded descriptions.
The detailed verbal information condition differed from the simple verbal information condition in terms of the explanations of
attributes.
Seven-point Likert-type scales were employed that were
anchored by Contains very little information and Contains
a lot of information to indicate perceived informativeness.
To measure perception of detail, the anchors were Not at all
detailed and Extremely detailed. A series of paired-sample
t-tests revealed that, generally, simple verbal equivalents of
numerical information were perceived to be less informative,
and to provide less detail, than the other two forms of information. As anticipated, detailed verbal equivalents were perceived
to be more informative, and to provide more detail, than numerical information. Thus, the order of informativeness, from least to
most, was: simple verbal equivalents, numeric information, and
detailed verbal equivalents. The differences were statistically
significant.
Experimental design and procedures. The experimental study
employed a 2 (information quantity: 3 vs. 6 information
cues) 3 (information form: numerical vs. simple verbal vs.
detailed verbal) design. Differences in information quantity were
operationalized as the presentation of three or six information
cues about product attributes. Prior research has utilized different methods to manipulate information quantity including
55
changes in the number of attributes (Keller and Staelin 1987),

alternatives (Huber 1980), and arguments (Petty and Cacioppo
1984) presented. The numerical and simple verbal information
conditions were equivalent in meaning (as per the results of
the Pretest), which facilitates comparisons of the influence of
different forms of information. The detailed verbal information
condition presents enhanced explanations of the attribute information. A control condition was also employed in which no
attribute information was provided. This resulted in a 7-cell,
between subjects design. The study was administered online
using a new set of 201 respondents. The mean age of respondents
was 33.9, with the overall demographic profile being comparable
to those of the previous studies.
Upon signing into the study, participants were randomly
assigned to one of the seven conditions. In all conditions, a
color image of the 32 oz. bottle of Seventh Generation shower
cleaner was displayed. A cleaning product was selected as the
focus of the experiment since consumers related to it easily, as
the participants in study one frequently noted cleaning products
as potential green items they might purchase. The instructions
were displayed to all participants, followed by the stimuli, by
condition. Samples of the stimuli can be found in Section B.
The measures used in the research were the same as those used
in study two, but were modified as necessary to fit the research
context (i.e., specific to the Seventh Generation shower cleaning
product). The survey instrument included measures for the following constructs. Perceived expertise served as a check of the
manipulations of information quantity and form. The dependent variables were purchase intentions and willingness-to-pay
for the focal product. Covariate measures of prior awareness,
perceived quality, and perceived value of the focal product
were collected. Finally, a measure of price sensitivity was collected. The Cronbach alphas ranged from .87 to .93. Analysis
of the intercorrelations revealed that the highest association
was between perceived expertise and prior awareness (r2 = .60,
p < .01). This was consistent with literature asserting a positive relationship between prior knowledge and what consumers
perceive they knew (Park et al. 1994). The next highest correlation occurred between perceived quality and perceived value
(r2 = .49, p < .01). Thus, no concerns were indicated.
Results and discussion
Expertise. An analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was conducted in which information form and information quantity were
predictor variables and price sensitivity and prior awareness of
Seventh Generation were continuous covariates (unless otherwise noted). A basic premise of this study was that provision
of product information helped to overcome consumers perceptions that they lacked expertise regarding a green product, a
factor that dampens their intention to purchase the product. The
manipulation check on perceived expertise revealed a significant main effect of information quantity on perceived expertise
(F(1, 193) = 3.88, p < .05, 2 = .020) such that presentation of
six cues generated higher perceived expertise (M = 2.52) than
did three cues (M = 2.21), or the control condition (picture only)
(M = 1.93). The effect of information form (i.e., numerical vs.
56
verbal) on perceived expertise approached, but did not achieve

significance (p < .07). Although somewhat counterintuitive, this
finding was congruent with theory asserting that attribute information that is presented in a uniform format (i.e., all numerical or
all verbal) exerts equivalent influence on information processing
(Viswanathan and Childers 1996).
The main effect of information quantity on perceived
expertise was qualified by a significant information quantity by information form interaction (F(2, 193) = 4.36, p < .05,
2 = .043). Follow-up analysis of the influence of information
form by condition of information quantity revealed a significant
effect of information form when six information cues were displayed (F(2, 82) = 4.05, p < .05, 2 = .090) but not when three
cues were displayed (F(2, 81) = .943, p < .39). When six cues
were displayed, the consumers perceptions of his/her expertise
regarding Seventh Generation shower cleaner was higher for
detailed verbal information (M = 3.01) than for simple verbal
information (M = 2.35) or for numerical information (M = 2.26).
Again, in line with the relationship predicted by prior research,
the difference between numerical information and equivalent
verbal information was not significant. This suggests that the
manipulation worked as intended.7 In summary, individuals who
viewed detailed verbal information reported higher perceptions
of expertise than did people who received information in either
the simple verbal, or the numerical formats. Additionally, this
effect was more likely to manifest when larger quantities of
information were provided.
Purchase intentions. The primary objective of this study
was to investigate the efficacy of different forms and quantities of information (non-price factors) in increasing intentions
to purchase a green product. This objective was based on the
premise that factors that increase perceived expertise regarding
a green product should, correspondingly, increase willingness
to purchase the product. An ANCOVA revealed a significant main effect of information form on purchase intentions
(F(1, 193) = 4.71, p < .01, 2 = .047). Consistent with H1, simple verbal information generated higher purchase intentions
(M = 4.22) than equivalent numerical information (M = 3.55,
p < .01). Detailed verbal information also generated significantly
higher purchase intentions (M = 4.26) than numerical information (p < .01), but not simple verbal information. Purchase
intentions observed in the conditions of manipulated information were not found to be significantly different from that in the
control condition (M = 3.94).
The main effect of information form was qualified by a
significant information form by information quantity interaction (F(2, 193) = 4.03, p < .05, 2 = .040). Follow-up analysis
revealed a significant effect of information form when six cues
were displayed (F(2, 82) = 9.02, p < .01, 2 = .180). When three
cues were displayed, no significant differences were observed.
7 Further evidence of the effectiveness of the manipulation was observed in
that perceived knowledge (measured as, I have a great deal of knowledge about
green products.) was higher in all six conditions of manipulated information
than in the control condition in which no attribute information was provided. This
suggests that the provision of information increased perceptions of knowledge
as compared to having no additional information.
Fig. 2. Seventh generation shower cleaner purchase intentions.
Such equivalence of effects was in line with the findings of

(Viswanathan and Childers 1996) wherein presentation of information in a uniform format led to equivalent influences on
information processing and recall.
In contrast, when six cues were displayed, simple verbal
information (M = 4.24) generated significantly higher purchase
intentions than equivalent numerical information (M = 3.33,
p < .01), thus providing support for H2 (see Fig. 2). This finding
suggested that increasing the number of information cues presented overcame the equivalency effect observed when lower
quantities of information were provided.8 It also demonstrated
that verbal information offered a significant advantage over its
numerical equivalent with regards to increasing purchase intentions of a green product. This advantage manifested despite
perceptions that the simple verbal statements and their numerical counterparts were equated in terms of informativeness and
level of detail (per the Pretest results), elements related to the
concreteness of information. Presentation of detailed verbal
information (M = 4.64, p < .01) also led to significantly higher
purchase intentions than did numerical information. Thus, both
detailed and simple verbal information yielded higher purchase
intentions than did numerical information. In contrast with H3,
the enhanced explanations contained in the detailed verbal information cues did not generate higher purchase intentions than the
simple verbal information cues. No other differences achieved
significance.
These findings provided evidence of the positive influence
of verbal information (as opposed to numerical information) on
purchase intentions for a green product. This effect was more
likely to occur when a larger number of informational cues were
provided. Indeed, presentation of a larger number of informational cues (i.e., six) in numeric format appeared to dampen
purchase intentions, rather than yield the desired enhancement
effect. Notably, when three information cues were presented,
purchase intentions were the same as in the control condition
in which only the image of the bottle was displayed, suggesting
that a larger quantity of information was necessary to increase
purchase intentions for a green product.
8 Viswanathan and Childers (1996) displayed four information cues, which is

similar to the three information cue condition in the present research.
Willingness-to-pay. The influence on willingness-to-pay

(WTP) was also evaluated as it provided additional insight into
the effectiveness of different forms and quantities of information to bring about desired consumer responses. The analysis
revealed a significant main effect of information form on WTP
for the green product (F(1, 193) = 3.09, p < .05, 2 = .031) such
that detailed verbal information generated a significantly higher
acceptable price (M = $5.32) than did numerical information
(M = $4.23, p < .05). No other differences were significant. This
suggested that providing more detailed information about a
green product, by way of enhanced attribute explanations,
increased the amount of money a consumer would pay for
the product, reducing another barrier to purchase reported by
respondents in studies one and two.
Perceptions of quality and value. A MANCOVA was conducted to examine the influence of the predictor variables
on perceptions of value and quality for the shower cleaner.
The analysis revealed a significant main effect of information
form on beliefs about product quality (F(2, 193) = 6.73, p < .01,
2 = .065) and on beliefs about product value (F(2, 193) = 4.63,
p < .05, 2 = .046). The interaction effect was not significant for
quality beliefs (F(2, 193) = 1.34, p < .26) or for value beliefs
(F(2, 193) = .729, p < .48). Detailed verbal information generated significantly higher quality beliefs (M = 4.45) than did
numerical information (M = 3.85, p < .01), simple verbal information (M = 4.04, p < .05), or no information (control) (M = 3.98,
p < .05). Detailed verbal information also generated significantly
higher value beliefs (M = 4.30) than did numerical information (M = 3.50, p < .01), and no information (control) (M = 3.29,
p < .01), but not simple verbal information (M = 3.89, p < .12).
In other words, providing more detailed attribute information
improved consumers beliefs about the quality of the green product and, generally, the monetary value of the product. These
findings suggested a pathway for changing consumers beliefs
about green products through a process of education.
The findings from study three revealed a distinct advantage
of verbal information over numerical information in positively
influencing purchase intentions, willingness-to-pay, perceived
value, and perceived quality of a green product. Further, this
effect appeared to be more likely to manifest when a greater
quantity of information cues were provided. While little evidence emerged indicating that increasing the details presented
via verbal information (via enhanced explanations and content)
offered an advantage over a more brief and simple verbal equivalent, detailed verbal information appeared to offer a substantial
advantage over the other two forms of information in changing
consumer beliefs about the value and quality of green products.
Discussion of results
As non-green purchase behaviors continue to dominate the
retail landscape, it is imperative that firms understand the motivations that drive non-green consumption in order to build sales
and satisfy triple-bottom line objectives. While every retailer
may not seek to maximize the sales potential of green products for a purely environmental motive, the loss of revenue
from such high mark-up items gathering dust on store shelves
57
is enough to inspire most any retailer. However, as green product sales have taken a sharp decline in recent years, the lack of
turnover and wasted space is likely infuriating many retailers
(Clifford and Martin 2011). Nevertheless, as noted previously,
research that suggests retailers with a green orientation achieve
greater financial gains and market share (Menguc and Ozanne
2005), as well as increased customer satisfaction (Luo and
Bhattacharya 2006), provides substantial incentives to stock
green products. Thus, to neglect green products and marketing
strategies seems a misinformed, if not misguided, reaction for
retailers.
The goal of this research was to examine the underlying factors that impede green consumption. To achieve this goal, a series
of studies were undertaken that utilized a variety of research
methodologies (i.e., qualitative interviews, questionnaires, and
an experiment). The results of these studies provided a set of
interesting implications for retail managers as well as academicians working in the area of green marketing. For example, the
qualitative interviews offered an analysis of the overt factors
that customers readily see as being barriers to purchasing green
goods. In this case, it can be seen that consumers openly stated
that price was the key inhibitor (see Table 2) with all other factors
being significantly less detrimental. This finding was supported
in the post hoc analysis of study two (see Table 7) where individuals were asked to freely rank (i.e., overtly assess barriers) the
reasons why they did not purchase green products. The results
presented herein run counter to the conclusions of recent studies
that suggested that price was not an issue for green consumers
(e.g., Hopkins 2009; Tanner and Kast 2003).
The results from study two (and the associated post hoc
analysis) offer additional insights into the barriers of green consumption that are key components in unlocking the potential to
getting customers to actually purchase green products. Namely,
it is found that expertise plays a significant role in green purchasing decisions. Since the second study utilizes a clustering
technique, we view the expertise variable as the main covert
factor that impedes the procurement of green products. As presented (see Table 4 and Fig. 1), expertise is a significant barrier
regardless of a consumers innate personal orientation. The main
reason expertise is a linchpin in deterring the purchase of green
products is that it potentially affects all the other components.
For example, if expertise is increased, an individual understands
the impact of a single purchase (increase PCE), comprehends
why prices are higher, recognizes where green products are sold,
and what makes them environmentally friendly. It is from this
logic that an experiment is undertaken (study three) to provide
an initial investigation on the effect of expertise.
Study three was conducted with the goal of increasing consumer perceptions of expertise regarding green products via
different combinations of the number, and form, of informational
cues regarding green products. Findings from the experiment
suggest that altering the number and form of informational cues
that educate consumers about green products overcome purchase
barriers. Specifically, the results suggest that detailed verbal
cues, as opposed to numeric cues, as well as a greater number
of cues, have a greater positive impact on purchase intentions.
Thus, the results suggest that the slight amount of information
58
presented on green product packaging may not have a positive

impact on consumers, as detailed verbal cues are preferred.
Overall, the results reported herein provide unique insights
for retailers. The responses gathered from the qualitative study,
and post hoc study two, provide a glimpse into the beliefs of
consumers when asked to overtly think about the barriers surrounding green consumption, while the cluster analysis (study
two) uncovers the covert barriers. Combined, the results of the
three studies suggest that price is a significant barrier, but that
expertise also appears to be a significant impediment to the
consumption of green products.
Managerial implications
The research presented identifies numerous barriers with
actionable implications for retailers seeking to gain a greater
share of the green market. While addressing the issue of price is
something that is difficult for many retailers due to constraints
set forth by suppliers, it is nevertheless important that green
products are perceived as a good value. Essentially, this suggests that retailers must strive to achieve price competitiveness
when offering green options to consumers. Inherently, this suggests that private label or store brands are an important strategic
option in controlling product costs. It also seems implicit that
large retailers that possess the power to influence downstream
suppliers have an advantage in pursuing green strategies insofar as they have a greater ability to impact prices and product
costs. Such reasoning explains the success of retailers such as
Wal-Mart in offering green products, as it is well recognized to
have a greater influence on the cost and pricing of green products
(Humes 2011).
In contrast, information-based strategies that impact consumer expertise are available to retailers, small and large. The
first step in creating expertise is stimulating an awareness of
green products. Retailers that seek to increase sales of green
products need to make a concerted effort to promote green products. Rather than merely putting green products on the shelves,
the results presented suggest that retailers must provide detailed
verbal informational messages that communicate attribute-level
information regarding green products. Currently consumers are
only able to see the green product and any information contained
on the packaging. Presenting additional information in a verbal
form is likely to elevate purchase intentions. For example, a consumer shopping in Wal-Mart sees Clorox Green Works cleaners
on the shelf with packaging that contains no detailed information
about the product, only that it is natural. Rather than merely
providing a simple vague term, retailers need to present more
detailed verbal information regarding why or how the product
is truly natural or green to help entice consumers.
Moreover, it appears green product promotion needs to be
educational. Consumers not only need to be told about green
products and the relevant benefits, but also what makes the product environmentally friendly. Retail consumers lack confidence
in their ability to evaluate and select green products. Rather than
merely advertising the availability of green products, retailers
need to educate consumers as to the benefits of green products, and build trust with customers to offset the lack of trust
consumers appear to have in firms producing and selling green

products. Employees are a primary source of information for
consumers and retailers need to ensure that these individuals
know the benefits of green products, and that they are motivated to communicate that information to customers. Strategies
encouraging employees, and green customers, to engage in frequent positive word of mouth are likely to be very beneficial.
Retailers also need to recognize that the promotion of green
products depends on trust, and that their image as a trusted supplier is likely to generate greater interest in green products.
To the extent that green educational efforts are successful in
building trust, a potential benefit accruing to a retailer is greater
power within the supply chain. In essence, retailers can use their
proximity to consumers, and the trust built with customers, to
overcome important barriers to green consumption and enhance
their power within supply chains. At a minimum, such power
can be used to control costs (i.e., prices). Retailers that promote
green products, but dont explain how products are green, or
how they benefit the environment, or behave in a green fashion
themselves, are likely looked upon with skepticism. Retailers
that position themselves favorably in earning the trust of consumers are likely to be able to persuade consumers of the benefits
of green products more effectively.
Discounted samples or trial promotional offers designed to
enhance consumers perceptions of their expertise relative to
green products are examples of educational communication
strategies likely to be beneficial. In-store product demonstrations serve a similar purpose. Retailers attempting to increase the
sale of green products should promote green products through
prominent displays (e.g., end caps, in-aisle displays). Firms that
market themselves as being environmentally friendly should
assign prime shelf space and displays to green products to
increase awareness. A related tactic is increasing the diversity of
green options as several respondents note the lack of selection,
or variation, as a barrier to the purchase of green products.
Further, perceptions of product quality are another barrier
identified. Given the high prices of green products, many consumers attribute higher expectations to these goods and services.
Green products must meet these expectations. Retailers need to
be critical in their evaluations of green products and not assign
precious shelf space to products that are inferior to conventional
alternatives. Consumers that are exposed to a green product, and
find it to be low quality, are likely to be difficult to recapture.
In addition, green should not be the sole product characteristic
utilized by retailers to promote a product. Rather green should
be a complementary attribute of the product. While many consumers prefer to purchase green products, they do not make the
purchase unless the green option is comparable to alternatives.
Price competitiveness, or well-documented benefits, is likely
to be a critical product characteristic in satisfying the elevated
quality expectations that accompany the higher price of green
products.
Further, the demographics (Table 6) of non-green consumption present an opportunity for retailers with the ability to cater to
younger consumers. In particular, as young men are not drawn
to green products, green marketing campaigns are needed to
stimulate interest and knowledge. Retailers can partner with
manufacturers that offer environmentally friendly products in

categories such as electronics or sporting goods where young
men likely have greater expertise regarding the product category.
In addition, the results suggest that minorities tend to be less
green. Given the growth of minorities, this group also represents
a substantial green opportunity for retailers. Manufacturers
and retailers can advertise in various languages, especially Spanish, and utilize spokespersons with whom minority consumers
strongly identify. Messages that resonate with unique consumer
groups help retailers capture a larger share of the green market.
The purchasing power of untapped minority markets represents
a tremendous opportunity for managers and retailers seeking to
improve their triple-bottom line performance.
While the barriers leading to non-green consumption are
noted, personal norms and PCE appear to be factors that lead to
the adoption of green products. Personal norms are enhanced
by an awareness of the situation (e.g., environmental degradation) and attributions of personal responsibility (Schwartz
1977). Consumers need to be made aware of the personal impact
they have on the environment when purchasing green products.
Aggregated statistics do little to inform consumers as to the
difference each can make. Drawing attention to, and showing
how, individual green consumption makes a difference is a likely
means of helping to stimulate green consumption.
Therefore, retailers are well advised to enact strategies such as
the Brita water filtration promotion that details the contribution
individual consumers can make in solving environmental problems. Rather than noting the benefits if everyone participates,
Brita promotes the point that each purchase saves 300 plastic bottles from potentially going into landfills (Brita.com/US),
thus making each person accountable. Conversely, Seventh Generation uses aggregated statistics noting the impact if every
household in the U.S. took action. The aggregated statistics utilized by Seventh Generation likely make it easy for consumers
to bypass the significance of the product, as they are not able to
comprehend the impact that they alone are able to make.
Limitations and future research
No study is without limitations. The data (i.e., independent
and dependent variables) for the studies are gathered from single
sources. As self-report surveys are utilized, one cannot guarantee the true green behaviors of the respondents. The sensitive
nature of the topic also suggests the possibility that respondents
might enhance their reporting of actual greenness. If possible,
future research may find it beneficial to monitor actual consumption behaviors in order to glean the most accurate indication of
green behaviors. As the studies presented focus on the barriers to
green consumption, the samples utilized are likely appropriate
as several checks are utilized. To check for the potential effect
of common method variance (CMV) in study two, we utilized a
marker variable analysis (Lindell and Whitney 2001) where the
correlations are examined once the effects of the single method
are removed. Additionally, a sensitivity analysis is conducted
whereby the 95% and 99% confidence intervals are examined for
any changes in significance. Results of this analysis indicate that
the common method does not impact the results in a significant
59
manner. In addition, while clustering allows the identification of

unique segments of consumers, different techniques might yield
varying results. Other algorithms (e.g., single-link, completelink, and centroid) were considered, but the method reported is
the most robust and provides the most practical relevance.
The present research is intended to provide a foundation to
launch additional research relative to non-green consumers. As
the overwhelming majority of products currently purchased are
non-green, examining the drivers of such decision-making is
highly relevant. The recommendations presented above provide
a framework for future studies to attempt to empirically verify
and assess the barriers retailers face when pursuing the sale of
green products. Future research addressing issues such as green
price sensitivity and the role of personal norms on the diffusion of green products is needed. From a theoretical viewpoint,
this research is the first to utilize pro-social consumer influence
and social dilemma theory with the goal of better understanding
the barriers to green consumption. Future research that considers variables such as price sensitivity and normative influences
within a social dilemma theory framework has the potential
to expand the theoretical boundaries of the current research.
Future research that employs other theoretical models also may
be valuable in explaining non-green consumer behavior.
An additional research need is the identification of other
mechanisms by which retailers can overcome barriers to green
consumption. The results of the experiment suggest that increasing expertise likely leads to greater green purchase intentions.
However, what type of information is needed to increase PCE or
personal norms so as to increase green consumption? What types
of messages are non-green consumers most likely to believe and
what is the most credible source for these messages? Is there a
price whereby green products become too expensive? If so, is
it different for all consumers, or it is relatively uniform? How
organizational and advertising trust can be enhanced so as to
benefit green retailers is another question that is a clear research
need.
This research is the first step of hopefully many to come
as research continues to consider how marketers can increase
consumers adoption of green products, not only for the sake
of retailers, but also for the sake of the environment. There is
much left to be discussed and evaluated relative to green products
and strategies to maximize the triple-bottom line performance
demanded today of retailers worldwide.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the support of the University of
Kentuckys Von Allmen Center for Green Marketing and the
Institute for Energy Systems, Economics and Sustainability
(IESES) at The Florida State University.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data associated with this article can be
found, in the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jretai.2012.10.001.
60
References
Anderson, James C. and David W. Gerbing (1988), Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach,
Psychological Bulletin, 103 (3), 41123.
Anderson, Rolph E. and Srinivasan S. Srini (2003), E-Satisfaction and ELoyalty: A Contingency Framework, Psychology & Marketing, 20 (2),
12338.
Anderson, Thomas W. and Cunningham H. William (1972), The Socially Conscious Consumer, Journal of Marketing, 36 (July), 2331.
Armstrong, Scott J. and Terry S. Overton (1977), Estimating Nonresponse Bias
in Mail Surveys, Journal of Marketing Research, 14 (3), 396402.
Arnold, Mark J. and Kristy E. Reynolds (2003), Hedonic Shopping Motivations, Journal of Retailing, 79, 7795.
Balderjahn, Ingo (1988), Personality variables and environmental attitudes as
predictors of ecologically responsible consumption patterns, Journal of
Business Research, 17 (1), 516.
Berger, Ida.E. and Vinay Kanetkar (1995), Increasing Environmental Sensitivity via Workplace Experiences, Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 14
(Fall), 20515.
Bitner, Mary Jo, Bernard H. Booms and Mary S. Tetreault (1990), The Service
Encounter: Diagnosing Favorable and Unfavorable Incidents, Journal of
Marketing, 54 (1), 7184.
Brucks, Merrie (1985), The Effects of Product Class Knowledge on Information
Search Behavior, Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (1), 116.
Carlson, Jay P., Leslie H. Vincent, David M. Hardesty and William O. Bearden
(2009), Objective and Subjective Knowledge Relationships: A Quantitative
Analysis of Consumer Research Findings, Journal of Consumer Research,
35 (5), 86476.
Childers, Terry L. and Akshay R. Rao (1992), The Influence of Familial and
Peer-Based Reference Groups on Consumer Decisions, Journal of Consumer Research, 19 (September), 198211.
Clifford, Stephanie and Andrew Martin (2011), As Consumers Cut Spending,
Green Products Lose Allure, Retrieved from: www.nytimes.com
Cronin, Joseph J. Jr., Jeffery S. Smith, Mark R. Gleim, Edward Ramirez and
Jennifer D. Martinez (2010), Green Marketing Strategies: An Examination
of Stakeholders and the Opportunities They Present, Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science, 39, 15874.
Dawes, Robyn M. (1980), Social Dilemmas, Annual Review of Psychology,
31, 198211.
Diamantopoulos, Adamantios, Bodo B. Schlegelmilch, Rudolf R. Sinkovics
and Greg M. Bohlen (2003), Can Socio-demographics Still Play a Role
in Profiling Green Consumers? A Review of the Evidence and an Empirical
Investigation, Journal of Business Research, 56, 46580.
Dillman, Don A. (1978), Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method,
New York: Wiley & Sons.
Dodds, William B., Kent B. Monroe and Dhruv Grewal (1991), Effects of Price,
Brand, and Store Information on Buyers Product Evaluations, Journal of
Marketing Research, 28 (3), 30719.
Fetterman, Mindy (2006), Wal-Mart grows green strategies, Retrieved from:
www.usatoday.com
Fishbein, Martin and Icek Ajzen (1975), Belief, Attitude Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research, MA: Addison-Wesley
Reading.
For its green dreams for trains, planes, and automobiles (2011), Retrieved from:
www.fastcompany.com
Fornell, Claes and David F. Larker (1981), Evaluating Structural Equation
Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error, Journal of
Marketing Research, 18, 3950.
Ganesan, Shankar, Morris George, Sandy Jap, Robert W. Palmatier and Barton Weitz (2009), Supply Chain Management and Retailer Performance:
Emerging Trends Issues, and Implications for Research and Practice, Journal of Retailing, 85 (1), 8494.
Geller, Scott E. (1992), It Takes More than Information to Save Energy,
American Psychologist, 47 (6), 8145.
Gerbing, David A. and James C. Anderson (1992), Monte Carlo Evaluations
of Goodness of Fit Indices for Structural Equation Models, Sociological
Methods and Research, 21 (2), 13260.
Goldstein, Noah J., Robert B. Cialdini and Vladas Griskevicius (2008),

A Room with a Viewpoint: Using Social Norms to Motivate Environmental Conservation in Hotels, Journal of Consumer Research, 35,
47282.
Grewal, Dhruv and Michael Levy (2007), Retailing Research: Past Present and
Future, Journal of Retailing, 83 (4), 44764.
Hardin, Garrett (1968), The Tragedy of the Commons, Science, 162
(December), 12438.
Hopkins, Michael S. (2009), What the Green Consumer Wants, MIT Sloan
Management Review, 50 (4), 879.
Hu, Li-tze and Peter M. Bentler (1999), Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria Versus New Alternatives,
Structural Equation Modeling, 6 (1), 155.
Huber, Oswald (1980), The Influence of Some Task Variables on Cognitive
Operations in an Information-Processing Decision Model, Acta Psychologica, 45, 18796.
Humes, Edward (2011), Force of Nature, New York, NY: Harper-Collins Publishers.
Jiang, Ying and Girish N. Punj (2010), The Effects of Attribute Concreteness
and Prominence on Selective Processing, Choice, and Search Experience,
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38, 47189.
Jreskog, K.G. (1971), Statistical Analysis of Sets of Congeneric Tests, Psychometrika, 36 (2), 10933.
Kangun, Norman, Les Carlson and Stephen J. Grove (1991), Environmental
Advertising Claims: A Preliminary Investigation, Journal of Public Policy
& Marketing, 10 (2), 4758.
Kassarjian, Harold H. (1977), Content Analysis in Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research, 4 (June), 818.
Kavilanz, Parija B. (2008), The high price of going organic. Retrieved from:
http://money.cnn.com
Keller, Kevin Lane and Richard Staelin (1987), Effects of Quality and Quantity
of Information on Decision Effectiveness, Journal of Consumer Research,
14 (September), 20013.
Kinnear, Thomas C., James R. Taylor and Sadrudin A. Ahmed (1974), Ecologically Concerned Consumers: Who Are They, Journal of Marketing, 38
(April), 204.
Komorita, Samuel S. and Craig D. Parks (1994), Social Dilemmas, Dubuque,
IA: Brown & Benchmark.
Lash, Jonathan and Fred Wellington (2007), Competitive Advantage on a
Warming Planet, Harvard Business Review, (March), 95102.
Lichtenstein, Donald R., Peter H. Bloch and William C. Black (1988), Correlates of Price Acceptability, Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (2),
24352.
Lindell, Michael K. and David J. Whitney (2001), Accounting for Common
Method Variance in Cross-Sectional Research Designs, Journal of Applied
Psychology, 86 (1), 11421.
Luchs, Michael G., Rebecca W. Naylor, Julie R. Irwin and Rajagopal Raghunathan (2010), The Sustainability Liability: Potential Negative Effects
of Ethicality on Product Preference, Journal of Marketing, 74 (5),
1831.
Luo, Xueming and C.B. Bhattacharya (2006), Corporate Social Responsibility, Customer Satisfaction and Market Value, Journal of Marketing, 70
(October), 118.
and
(2009), The Debate over
Doing Good: Corporate Social Performance, Strategic Marketing Levers,
and Firm-Idiosyncratic Risk, Journal of Marketing, 73 (November),
198213.
Lynn, Michael and Andrew Oldenquist (1986), Egotistic and Non Egotistic
Motives in Social Dilemmas, American Psychologist, 41 (May), 52934.
MacKenzie, Scott B. (1986), The Role of Attention in Mediating the Effect of
Advertising on Attribute Importance, Journal of Consumer Research, 13
(September), 17495.
Maignan, Isabelle and O.C. Ferrell (2001), Antecedents and Benefits of Corporate Citizenship: An Investigation of French Businesses, Journal of Business
Research, 51, 3751.
Mano, Haim and Richard L. Oliver (1993), Assessing the Dimensionality and
Structure of Consumption Experience: Evaluation Feeling, and Satisfaction,
Journal of Consumer Research, 20 (December), 45166.

Menguc, Bulent and Lucie K. Ozanne (2005), Challenges of the Green
Imperative: A Natural Resource-based Approach to the Environmental
Orientation-business Performance Relationship, Journal of Business
Research, 58, 4308.
Menon, Ajay and Anil Menon (1997), Enviropreneurial Marketing Strategy:
The Emergence of Corporate Environmentalism as Market Strategy, Journal of Marketing, 61 (Jan), 5167.
Miniard, Paul W. and CohenF Joel B. (1983), Modeling Personal and Normative
Influences on Behavior, Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (September),
16980.
Morgan, Robert M. and Shelby D. Hunt (1994), The Commitment-Trust Theory
of Relationship Marketing, Journal of Marketing, 58 (3), 2038.
Nielson Wire (2011), The Green Gap Between Environmental Concerns and
the Cash Register, Retrieved from: http://www.nielsen.com/
Ngobo, Paul V. (2010), What Drives Household Choice of Organic Products in
Grocery Stores?, Journal of Retailing, 87 (1), 90100.
Nunnally, Jum C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, 2nd ed. New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill.
Oliver, Richard L. and John E. Swan (1989), Consumer Perceptions of Interpersonal Equity and Satisfaction in Transactions: A Field Study Approach,
Journal of Marketing, 53 (April), 2135.
Olson, Jerry (1978), Inferential Belief Formation in the Cue Utilization Process,
Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research pp. 706713
Osterhus Thomas, L. (1997), Pro-Social Consumer Influence Strategies: When
and How Do They Work, Journal of Marketing, 61 (October), 1629.
Park, Whan C., David L. Mothersbaugh and Lawrence Feick (1994), Consumer
Knowledge Assessment, Journal of Consumer Research, 21 (1), 7182.
Petty, Richard E. and John T. Cacioppo (1984), The Effects of Involvement
on Responses to Argument Quantity and Quality: Central and Peripheral
Routes to Persuasion, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46 (1),
6981.
Petty, Richard E. and John T. Cacioppo (1986), The Elaboration Likelihood
Model of Persuasion, in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,
Berkowitz L. ed. New York: Academic Press, 123205.
Podsakoff, Philip M., Scott B. MacKenzie, Jeong-Yeon Lee and Nathan P. Podsakoff (2003), Common Method Bias in Behavioral Research: A Critical
Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies, Journal of Applied
Psychology, 88 (5), 879903.
Pope, Byron (2010), Automotive R&D Spending Down Last Year, Study
Shows, Retrieved from: http://www.wardsauto.com/
Pujari, Devashish, Gillian Wright and Ken Peattie (2003), Green and Competitive: Influences on Environmental New Product Development Performance,
Journal of Business Research, 56, 65771.
Punj, Girish and David W. Stewart (1983), Cluster Analysis in Marketing
Research: Review and Suggestions for Application, Journal of Marketing
Research, 20 (May), 13448.
Reynolds, Kristy E. and Sharon E. Beatty (1999), A Relationship Customer
Typology, Journal of Retailing, 75 (4), 50923.
61
Roberts James, A. (1996), Green Consumers in the 1990: Profile and Implications for Advertising, Journal of Business Research, 36, 21731.
Schwartz, Shalom H. (1977), Normative Influences on Altruism, In Advances
in Experimental Social Psychology, 10, Berkowitz l. ed. New York: Academic Press, 22179.
Seiders, Kathleen, Glenn B. Voss, Andrea L. Godfrey and Dhruv Grewal (2007),
SERVCON: Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Service
Convenience Scale, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35,
14456.
Sharma, Neeru and Paul G. Patterson (2000), Switching Costs, Alternative
Attractiveness and Experience as Moderators of Relationship Commitment
in Professional, Consumer Services, International Journal of Service Industry Management, 11 (5), 47090.
Sharma, Subhash (1996), Applied Multivariate Techniques, New York: John
Wiley & Sons.
Shrum, L.J., John A. McCarty and Tina M. Lowrey (1995), Buyer Characteristics of the Green Consumer and their Implications for Advertising Strategy,
Journal of Advertising, 14 (2), 7182.
Soh, Hyeonjin, Leonard N. Reid and Karen W. King (2009), Measuring Trust
in Advertising, Journal of Advertising, 38 (2), 83103.
Spangenberg, Eric R., David E. Sprott, Bianca Grohmann and Ronn J. Smith
(2003), Mass-communicated Prediction Requests: Practical Application
and a Cognitive Dissonance Explanation for Self-Prophecy, Journal of
Marketing, 67 (July), 4762.
Stone, Dan N. and David A. Schkade (1991), Numeric and Linguistic Information Representation in Multiattribute Choice, Organizational Behavior
& Human Decision Processes, 49, 4259.
Tanner, Carmen and Sybille W. Kast (2003), Promoting Sustainable Consumption: Determinants of Green Purchases by Swiss Consumers, Psychology
& Marketing, 20 (10), 883902.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (2005), Talk the Walk:
Advancing Sustainable Lifestyles through Marketing and Communications,
UN Global Compact and Utopies.
van Lange, P.A.M., W.B.G. Liebrand, D.M. Messick and H.A.M. Wilke (1992).
Social Dilemmas: The State of the Art, in A Social Psychological Approach
to Social Dilemmas.
Viswanathan, Madhubalan and Terry L. Childers (1996), Processing of Numerical and Verbal Product Information, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 5
(4), 35985.
Wagner, Tillmann, Richard J. Lutz and Barton A. Weitz (2009), Corporate
Hypocrisy: Overcoming the Threat of Inconsistent Corporate Social Responsibility Perceptions, Journal of Marketing, 73 (November), 7791.
Webster Frederick, E. (1975), Determining the Characteristics of the
Socially Conscious Consumer, Journal of Consumer Research, 2 (Dec),
18896.
Yoo, Boonghee, Naveen Donthu and Sungho Lee (2000), An Examination
of Selected Marketing Mix Elements and Brand Equity, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 28, 195211.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Green Consumption

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Green Consumption

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

Against the Green: A Multi-method Examination of the Barriers to

As consumers become aware of issues related to the fragile

5 The terms green, environmentally friendly and environmental sustainability

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

green products. The huge investments made by firms, in spite of

relative to green products. In addition, the limitations of the

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

suggest that this retailer, a leader in enacting green product and

and effort needed to seek and evaluate green substitutes, as well

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

Study 2 post hoc

counted against the reliability assessment (Kassarjian 1977).

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

Trust product greenness

Specifically, of those that noted a lack of availability, nearly

In addition, a miscellaneous category contains consumers that

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

consumption. However, it is also important to note that nearly

an answer for this statement. This procedure resulted in a final,

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

Results. A two-step cluster analysis procedure was conducted

Cluster 1, labeled as Red, is comprised of 74 individuals

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

236.35 (p < .0001)

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

the perceived high prices of green products, is likely leading

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

Fig. 1. Greatest barriers to green consumption (from left to right).

Theory and hypotheses. In study two, consumers lack of

Two group split sample

Three group split sample

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

the effectiveness of different forms and quantities of marketing

is expected to be more advantageous for evaluation tasks in

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

changes in the number of attributes (Keller and Staelin 1987),

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

verbal) on perceived expertise approached, but did not achieve

Fig. 2. Seventh generation shower cleaner purchase intentions.

Such equivalence of effects was in line with the findings of

8 Viswanathan and Childers (1996) displayed four information cues, which is

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

Willingness-to-pay. The influence on willingness-to-pay

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

presented on green product packaging may not have a positive

consumers appear to have in firms producing and selling green

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

manufacturers that offer environmentally friendly products in

manner. In addition, while clustering allows the identification of

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

Goldstein, Noah J., Robert B. Cialdini and Vladas Griskevicius (2008),

M.R. Gleim et al. / Journal of Retailing 89 (1, 2013) 4461

You might also like