Figure 1
Discriminant validity_
| Hedonic benefits | Symbolic benefits | Utilitarian benefits | Cost–benefit | Purchase intention | Brand emotional attachment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hedonic benefits | 0.837 | |||||
| Symbolic benefits | 0.681 | 0.786 | ||||
| Utilitarian benefits | 0.554 | 0.609 | 0.921 | |||
| Cost–benefit | 0.515 | 0.510 | 0.486 | 0.870 | ||
| Purchase intention | 0.449 | 0.492 | 0.444 | 0.479 | 0.908 | |
| Brand emotional attachment | 0.672 | 0.731 | 0.449 | 0.516 | 0.432 | 0.842 |
Structural model results_
| Hypotheses | Statistics t | Path coefficient | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| H1: Utilitarian benefits are positively associated with brand emotional attachment | 1,389 | −0.071 | Not supported |
| H2: Symbolic benefits are positively associated with brand emotional attachment. | 8,602*** | 0.541 | Supported |
| H3: Hedonic benefits are positively associated with brand emotional attachment | 5,790*** | 0.343 | Supported |
| H4: Brand emotional attachment is positively associated with purchase intention | 3,809*** | 0.250 | Supported |
| H5: Cost–benefit has a positive moderating effect on the relationship between brand emotional attachment and purchase intention | 0.202 | −0.008 | Not Supported |
Item and scale reliabilities_
| Scale items | Factor loading | Cronbach’s alpha | Composite reliability | AVE | R 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Utilitarian benefits | 0.918 | 0.911 | 0.944 | 0.849 | — |
| 1. I have the opportunity to shop at a lower cost, opting for eco-efficient packaging | |||||
| 2. I can spend less on my purchase through a special price on eco-efficient packaging | 0.948 | ||||
| 3. I save money through exclusive discounts for products that use eco-efficient packaging | 0.898 | ||||
| Symbolic benefits | 0.742 | 0.896 | 0.918 | 0.617 | — |
| 1. Eco-efficient packaging takes better care of me | |||||
| 2. Eco-efficient packaging makes me feel better than other customers who don’t use it | 0.795 | ||||
| 3. Brands that use eco-efficient packaging treat me with more attention | 0.795 | ||||
| 4. Eco-efficient packaging makes me feel more distinct than other customers who don’t use it | 0.803 | ||||
| 5. I feel like I belong to a community of people who share the same eco-efficiency values | 0.706 | ||||
| 6. I feel closer to the brand (with these eco-efficiency values) | 0.839 | ||||
| 7. I feel like I share the same values as the brand (which uses eco-efficient packaging) | 0.812 | ||||
| Hedonic benefits | 0.841 | 0.913 | 0.933 | 0.700 | — |
| 1. Following the eco-efficient packaging trend on social media is fun | |||||
| 2. Following the eco-efficient packaging trend on social media is enjoyable | 0.881 | ||||
| 3. The content presented about eco-efficient packaging is interesting (social media) | 0.846 | ||||
| 4. I have the opportunity to stay up to date with new eco-efficient packaging | 0.839 | ||||
| 5. I discover packaging that I wouldn’t have known about otherwise | 0.864 | ||||
| 6.I can have exclusive access to receive and try new eco-efficient packaging | 0.741 | ||||
| Brand emotional attachment | 0.839 | 0.931 | 0.945 | 0.709 | 0.594 |
| 1.Brands that use eco-efficient packaging reflect who I am. | |||||
| 2. I can identify with brands that use eco-efficient packaging | 0.844 | ||||
| 3. I feel a personal connection with brands that use eco-efficient packaging | 0.843 | ||||
| 4. I use (or can use) brands that use eco-efficient packaging to communicate who I am to someone else | 0.834 | ||||
| 5. I think that brands that use eco-efficient packaging help (can help) make me the type of person I want to be | 0.849 | ||||
| 6. I see myself in brands that use eco-efficient packaging (reflecting what I consider myself to be or the way I want to be seen by others) | 0.873 | ||||
| 7. Brands that use eco-efficient packaging fit me well | 0.810 | ||||
| Purchase intention | 0.931 | 0.893 | 0.934 | 0.825 | 0.276 |
| 1. I intend to buy eco-efficient packaging | |||||
| 2. I plan to purchase eco-efficient packaging | 0.938 | ||||
| 3. I will purchase eco-efficient packaging in my next purchase | 0.855 | ||||
| Cost-benefit | 0.842 | 0.892 | 0.925 | 0.756 | — |
| 1. Eco-efficient packaging is good packaging for its price | |||||
| 2. Eco-efficient packaging has good economic value | 0.889 | ||||
| 3. Eco-efficient packaging is reasonably priced | 0.906 | ||||
| 4. Eco-efficient packaging offers a good value for money | 0.840 |