Figure 1
The Parallel Mediation Model Hypothesised.
Table 1
Manipulation check values according to experimental conditions (Study 1).
| MANIPULATION CHECK MEASURE | EXPERIMENTAL CONDITION | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HIGH DESCRIPTIVE, HIGH INJUNCTIVEM (SD) | HIGH DESCRIPTIVE, LOW INJUNCTIVEM (SD) | LOW DESCRIPTIVE, HIGH INJUNCTIVEM (SD) | LOW DESCRIPTIVE, LOW INJUNCTIVEM (SD) | |
| Descriptive norm | 7.00 (0.33) | 6.97 (0.29) | 4.15 (0.94) | 3.49 (1.40) |
| Injunctive norm | 7.88 (0.37) | 3.86 (1.58) | 7.81 (0.79) | 4.46 (1.38) |
[i] Note. Scale coding: 1 = 1–9%, 2 = 10–19%, 3 = 20–29%, 4 = 30–39%, 5 = 40–49%, 6 = 50–59%, 7 = 60–69%, 8 = 70–79%, 9 = 80–89%, 10 = 90–99%.
Table 2
Means, standard deviation, and correlations with confidence intervals (Study 1).
| VARIABLE | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Outcome expectancy | 4.32 | 1.30 | |||
| 2. Normative influence | 4.93 | 1.20 | .281** [.15, .40] | ||
| 3. Informational influence | 5.13 | 1.05 | .283** [.15, .40] | .459** [.35, .56] | |
| 4. Intention | 5.25 | 1.27 | .380** [.26, .49] | .554** [.45, 64] | .651** [.57, .72] |
[i] Note: ** < .001.
Table 3
Component approach results (Study 1).
| VARIABLES | OUTCOME EXPECTANCY | NORMATIVE INFLUENCE | INFORMATIONAL INFLUENCE | INTENTION | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F | p | ƞ2p | F | p | ƞ2p | F | p | ƞ2p | F | p | ƞ2p | |
| Step 1 dfs (1, 210) | ||||||||||||
| Descriptive norm | 6.92 | .009 | .001 | 7.75 | .006 | .036 | 0.35 | .554 | .002 | 0.75 | .387 | .004 |
| Injunctive norm | 2.35 | .127 | .011 | 11.97 | .001 | .054 | 1.78 | .183 | .008 | 0.12 | .728 | .001 |
| Interaction | 0.20 | .657 | .001 | 4.43 | .037 | .021 | 6.77 | .010 | .031 | 4.55 | 0.34 | .021 |
| Gender | 2.14 | .145 | .010 | .001 | .975 | .000 | 0.37 | .544 | .022 | 1.18 | .278 | .006 |
| Age | 14.83 | <.001 | .066 | 5.53 | .020 | .026 | 5.19 | .024 | .024 | 1.39 | .240 | .006 |
| Step 2 dfs (1, 212) | ||||||||||||
| Outcome expectancy | 29.54 | <.001 | .122 | |||||||||
| Normative influence | 89.06 | <.001 | .296 | |||||||||
| Informational influence | 147.56 | <.001 | .410 | |||||||||
| Step 3 dfs (1, 207) | ||||||||||||
| Descriptive norm | 0.04 | .836 | .000 | |||||||||
| Injunctive norm | 4.80 | .030 | .023 | |||||||||
| Interaction | 0.09 | .764 | .000 | |||||||||
| Outcome expectancy | 10.78 | .001 | .050 | |||||||||
| Normative influence | 32.35 | <.001 | .135 | |||||||||
| Informational influence | 70.71 | <.001 | .255 | |||||||||
Figure 2
Parallel Mediation Model PROCESS Output (Study 1).
Table 4
Manipulation check values according to experimental conditions (Study 2).
| MANIPULATION CHECK MEASURE | EXPERIMENTAL CONDITION | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HIGH DESCRIPTIVE, HIGH INJUNCTIVE M (SD) | HIGH DESCRIPTIVE, LOW INJUNCTIVE M (SD) | LOW DESCRIPTIVE, HIGH INJUNCTIVE M (SD) | LOW DESCRIPTIVE, LOW INJUNCTIVE M (SD) | |
| Descriptive norm | 6.99 (0.34) | 6.96 (0.40) | 4.14 (0.69) | 3.33 (1.10) |
| Injunctive norm | 7.97 (0.22) | 3.55 (1.41) | 7.94 (0.34) | 4.29 (0.95) |
[i] Note. Scale coding: 1 = 1–9%, 2 = 10–19%, 3 = 20–29%, 4 = 30–39%, 5 = 40–49%, 6 = 50–59%, 7 = 60–69%, 8 = 70–79%, 9 = 80–89%, 10 = 90–99%.
Table 5
Means, standard deviation, and correlations with confidence intervals (Study 2).
| VARIABLE | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Outcome expectancy | 4.54 | 1.40 | |||
| 2. Normative influence | 4.80 | 1.34 | .332** [.27, .40] | ||
| 3. Informational influence | 5.23 | 1.14 | .425** [.36, .48] | .491** [.43, .54] | |
| 4. Intention | 5.25 | 1.43 | .498** [.44, .55] | .418** [.36, .48] | .649** [.61, .69] |
[i] Note. ** < .001.
Table 6
Component approach results (Study 2).
| VARIABLES | OUTCOME EXPECTANCY | NORMATIVE INFLUENCE | INFORMATIONAL INFLUENCE | INTENTION | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F | p | ƞ2p | F | p | ƞ2p | F | p | ƞ2p | F | p | ƞ2p | |
| Step 1 dfs (1, 724) | ||||||||||||
| Descriptive norm | 38.91 | <.001 | .051 | 40.70 | <.001 | .053 | 2.08 | .150 | .003 | 19.24 | <.001 | .026 |
| Injunctive norm | 23.88 | <.001 | .032 | 138.23 | <.001 | .160 | 23.30 | <.001 | .031 | 9.80 | .002 | .013 |
| Interaction | 0.15 | .694 | .000 | 1.64 | .201 | .002 | 0.03 | .866 | .000 | 2.27 | .132 | .003 |
| Gender | 14.36 | <.001 | .019 | 4.02 | .045 | .006 | 4.88 | .027 | .007 | 13.04 | <.001 | .018 |
| Age | 13.16 | <.001 | .018 | 0.00 | .971 | .000 | 0.63 | .428 | .001 | 0.23 | .632 | .000 |
| Past behaviour | 55.50 | <.001 | .071 | 28.16 | <.001 | .037 | 159.07 | <.001 | .180 | 563.85 | <.001 | .438 |
| Step 2 dfs (1, 726) | ||||||||||||
| Outcome expectancy | 169.50 | <.001 | .189 | |||||||||
| Normative influence | 119.81 | <.001 | .142 | |||||||||
| Informational influence | 283.45 | <.001 | .281 | |||||||||
| Step 3 dfs (1, 721) | ||||||||||||
| Descriptive norm | 2.86 | .091 | .004 | |||||||||
| Injunctive norm | 2.74 | .098 | .004 | |||||||||
| Interaction | 3.45 | .064 | .005 | |||||||||
| Outcome expectancy | 62.23 | <.001 | .079 | |||||||||
| Normative influence | 14.90 | <.001 | .020 | |||||||||
| Informational influence | 124.30 | <.001 | .147 | |||||||||
Figure 3
Parallel Mediation Model PROCESS Output (Study 2).