research paper on consumer behaviour towards

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Psychological factors and consumer behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic

Contributed equally to this work with: Adolfo Di Crosta, Irene Ceccato

Roles Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Department of Neuroscience, Imaging and Clinical Sciences, G. d’Annunzio University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy

Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology

Affiliation Department of Psychological, Health and Territorial Sciences, G. d’Annunzio University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy

Roles Investigation, Writing – review & editing

Roles Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliations Department of Neuroscience, Imaging and Clinical Sciences, G. d’Annunzio University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy, Center for Advanced Studies and Technology (CAST), G. d’Annunzio University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy

Affiliation Department of Business Studies, Grenon School of Business, Assumption University, Worcester, MA, United States of America

Roles Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing

Roles Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

Roles Conceptualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

• Adolfo Di Crosta, 
• Irene Ceccato, 
• Daniela Marchetti, 
• Pasquale La Malva, 
• Roberta Maiella, 
• Loreta Cannito, 
• Mario Cipi, 
• Nicola Mammarella, 
• Riccardo Palumbo, 

• Published: August 16, 2021
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256095
• Reader Comments

The COVID-19 pandemic is far more than a health crisis: it has unpredictably changed our whole way of life. As suggested by the analysis of economic data on sales, this dramatic scenario has also heavily impacted individuals’ spending levels. To better understand these changes, the present study focused on consumer behavior and its psychological antecedents. Previous studies found that crises differently affect people’s willingness to buy necessities products (i.e., utilitarian shopping) and non-necessities products (i.e., hedonic shopping). Therefore, in examining whether changes in spending levels were associated with changes in consumer behavior, we adopted a fine-grained approach disentangling between necessities and non-necessities. We administered an online survey to 3833 participants (age range 18–64) during the first peak period of the contagion in Italy. Consumer behavior toward necessities was predicted by anxiety and COVID-related fear, whereas consumer behavior toward non-necessities was predicted by depression. Furthermore, consumer behavior toward necessities and non-necessities was predicted by personality traits, perceived economic stability, and self-justifications for purchasing. The present study extended our understanding of consumer behavior changes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results could be helpful to develop marketing strategies that consider psychological factors to meet actual consumers’ needs and feelings.

Citation: Di Crosta A, Ceccato I, Marchetti D, La Malva P, Maiella R, Cannito L, et al. (2021) Psychological factors and consumer behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS ONE 16(8): e0256095. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256095

Editor: Marcel Pikhart, University of Hradec Kralove: Univerzita Hradec Kralove, CZECH REPUBLIC

Received: March 8, 2021; Accepted: July 31, 2021; Published: August 16, 2021

Copyright: © 2021 Di Crosta et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All data are available from the figshare database (accession number(s) DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.14865663.v2 , URL: https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/RawData_PO_sav/14865663 ).

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) refers to an infection (SARS-CoV-2) of the lower respiratory tract [ 1 , 2 ], which was first detected in Wuhan (China) in late December 2019. Since then, the number of contagions by COVID-19 has been increasing globally each day [ 3 ]. In March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the COVID-19 outbreak a global pandemic [ 4 ]. Subsequently, several national governments implemented long-term full or partial lockdown measures to reduce the spread of the virus. Although these strict measures have proven to be quite effective in containing the further spread of the virus, they have severely impacted the global economic system and caused an unprecedented shock on economies and labor markets [ 5 ]. As a matter of fact, the COVID-19 pandemic can be defined as far more than just a health crisis since it has heavily affected societies and economies. COVID-19 outbreak has unpredictably changed how we work, communicate, and shop, more than any other disruption in this decade [ 6 ]. As reflected by the analysis of economic data on sales, this dramatic situation has greatly influenced consumer attitudes and behaviors. According to a study conducted by the Nielsen Company, the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic led to a globally manifested change in spending levels related to consumer behavior [ 7 ]. Specifically, a growing tendency in the sales of necessities has been observed: consumer priorities have become centered on the most basic needs, including food, hygiene, and cleaning products. In Italy, consumer shopping preferences have changed throughout the pandemic. Initially, when Italy was the first country in Europe to experience the spreading of COVID-19 (between March and April 2020). Consumer behavior tended to compulsively focus on purchasing essential goods, especially connected with preventing the virus, such as protective devices and sanitizing gel [ 8 ]. The pandemic changed the consumption patterns, for instance reducing sales for some product categories (e.g., clothes), and improving sales for other categories (e.g., entertainment products) [ 9 ]. Also, research indicated that job insecurity and life uncertainty experienced during the pandemic negatively impacted on consumer behavior of Italian workers [ 10 ].

It comes as no surprise that in such a situation of emergency, the need for buying necessities takes precedence [ 11 ]. However, the investigation of antecedent psychological factors, including attitudes, feelings, and behaviors underlying changes in consumer behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic, have received less attention. Nevertheless, understanding the psychological factors which drive consumer behavior and products choices can represent a crucial element for two main reasons. First, such investigation can extend our understanding of the underpinnings of the changes in consumer behavior in the unprecedented context of COVID-19. Second, obtained results could be helpful in the development of new marketing strategies that consider psychological factors to meet actual consumers’ needs and feelings [ 12 ]. On the one side, companies could benefit from this knowledge to increase sales during the COVID-19 pandemic [ 13 ]. Moreover, understanding these needs and feelings could be fundamental to improve the market’s preparedness to face future pandemics and emergencies [ 14 , 15 ]. On the other hand, consumers could take advantage of this new market’s preparedness to respond to their actual needs and feelings. As a result, in case of future emergency, factors such as anxiety and a perceived shortage of essential goods could be reduced [ 16 ], whereas well-being and the positive sense of self of the consumers could be supported [ 17 ]. Furthermore, the novelty of the present study lies in two main aspects. First, based on previous studies highlighting that crises differently affect people’s willingness to buy necessities and non-necessities products [ 11 , 18 ], we adopted a fine-grained approach and disentangled between necessities and non-necessities. Second, considering the unprecedented context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we adopted an integrative approach to investigate the role of different psychological factors such as fear, anxiety, stress, depression, self-justifications, personality traits, and perceived economic stability in influencing consumer behavior. Noteworthy, all these factors have been implicated in consumer behavior in previous research, but, to our knowledge, no study has considered all of them at once. Therefore, considering both the lack of studies that have focused on these factors at once and the unique opportunity to study them in the context of such an unprecedented global pandemic, we adopted an integrative approach to get one of the first overviews of the role of the several psychological factors influencing consumer behavior.

Previous studies in consumer psychology and behavioral economics have highlighted that several psychological factors impact consumer behavior differently [ 18 – 20 ]. Consumer behavior refers to the study of individuals or groups who are in the process of searching to purchase, use, evaluate, and dispose of products and services to satisfy their needs [ 12 ]. Importantly, it also includes studying the consumer’s emotional, mental, and behavioral responses that precede or follow these processes [ 21 ]. Changes in consumer behavior can occur for different reasons, including personal, economic, psychological, contextual, and social factors. However, in dramatic contexts such as a disease outbreak or a natural disaster, some factors, more than others, have a more significant impact on consumer behavior. Indeed, situations that potentially disrupt social lives, or threaten individuals’ health, have been proven to lead to strong behavioral changes [ 22 ]. An example is panic buying, a phenomenon occurring when fear and panic influence behavior, leading people to buy more things than usual [ 23 ]. Specifically, panic buying has been defined as a herd behavior that occurs when consumers buy a considerable amount of products in anticipation of, during, or after a disaster [ 24 ]. A recent review on the psychological causes of panic buying highlighted that similar changes in consumer behavior occur when purchase decisions are impaired by negative emotions such as fear and anxiety [ 25 ]. Noteworthy, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, Lins and Aquino [ 23 ] showed that panic buying was positively correlated with impulse buying, which has been defined as a complex buying behavior in which the rapidity of the decision process precludes thoughtful and deliberate consideration of alternative information and choice [ 25 ]. The analysis of the different psychological factors involved in consumer behavior and changes in purchase decisions still represents an area that is scarcely explored. Arguably, during an uncertain threatening situation, such as a health crisis or a pandemic, the primitive part of our brain usually becomes more prominent, pushing individuals to engage in behaviors that are (perceived as) necessary for survival [ 26 – 29 ]. Importantly, these primitive instinctual behaviors can override the rational decision-making process, having an immense impact on usual consumer behavior. Therefore, the basic primitive response of humans represents the core factor responsible for changes in consumer behavior during a health crisis [ 16 ]. Specifically, fear and anxiety originated from perceived feelings of insecurity and instability, are the factors driving these behavioral changes [ 30 ]. In line with the terror management theory [ 31 ], previous studies have shown that external events, which threaten the safety of individuals, motivate compensatory response processes to alleviate fear and anxiety [ 32 , 33 ]. These response processes can prompt individuals to make purchases to gain a sense of security, comfort, and momentarily escape, which can also serve as a compensatory mechanism to alleviate stress. However, as such buying motivation represents an attempt to regulate the individuals’ negative emotions, the actual need for the purchased products is often irrelevant [ 34 ].

Pandemics and natural disasters are highly stressful situations, which can easily induce negative emotions and adverse mental health states [ 35 – 37 ] such as perceived lack of control and instability, which are core aspects of emergency situations, contribute directly to stress. In turn, research has highlighted that stress is a crucial factor in influencing consumer behavior. For example, past studies have shown that individuals may withdraw and become passive in response to stress, and this inaction response can lead to a decrease in purchasing [ 38 , 39 ]. However, some studies point out that stress can lead to an active response, increasing impulsive spending behaviors [ 40 , 41 ]. Moreover, event-induced stress can lead to depressive mood. In some cases, the depressive mood may translate into the development of dysfunctional consumer behavior, such as impulsive (the sudden desire to buy something accompanied by excessive emotional response) and/or compulsive buying (repetitive purchasing due to the impossibility to control the urge) [ 41 , 42 ]. In this context, Sneath and colleagues [ 37 ] highlighted that changes in consumer behavior often represent self-protective strategies aimed at managing depressive states and negative emotions by restoring a positive sense of self. Importantly, a recent study conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic showed that depression predicted the phenomenon of the over-purchasing, which was framed as the degree to which people had increased their purchases of some necessities goods (e.g. food, water, sanitary products, pharmacy products, etc.) because of the pandemic [ 43 ].

A recent study recommended a differentiation between necessity and non-necessity products to better understand consumer behavior in response to stressful situations [ 18 ]. According to the authors, contrasting findings on the link between stress and consumer behavior may be due to the fact that stress affects certain purchasing behaviors negatively, but others positively, depending on the type of product under investigation. On one side, it has been argued that consumers may be more willing to spend money on necessities (vs. non-necessities) by making daily survival products readily available. Accordingly, recent research documented an increase in buying necessities products (i.e., utilitarian shopping) during and after a traumatic event [ 11 ]. However, other findings showed that impulsive non-necessities purchasing (i.e., hedonic shopping) could also increase as an attempt to escape or minimize the pain for the situation. That is, non-necessities buying is used as an emotional coping strategy to manage stress and negative emotional states [ 44 ]. To reconcile these findings, Durante and Laran [ 18 ] proposed that people adopt strategic consumer behavior to restore their sense of control in stressful situations. Hence, high stress levels generally lead consumers to save money and spend strategically on products perceived as necessities. Importantly, regarding the impact of perceived stress due to the COVID-19 pandemic on consumer behavior, a recent study showed that the likelihood of purchasing quantities of food larger than usual increased with higher levels of perceived stress [ 45 ].

Another psychological factor implicated in consumer behavior that deserves special attention is self-justification strategies [ 46 ]. Self-justification refers to the cognitive reappraisal process by which people try to reduce the cognitive dissonance stemming from a contradiction between beliefs, values, and behaviors. People often try to justify their decisions to avoid the feeling of being wrong to maintain a positive sense of self [ 17 ]. In consumer behavior research, it is widely acknowledged that consumers enhance positive arguments that support their choices and downplay counterarguments that put their behavior in question [ 47 ]. Based on previous research, it is plausible that, within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, self-justifications for buying non-necessities products may also include pursuing freedom and defying boredom [ 11 , 48 ]. Further, the hedonistic attitude of “I could die tomorrow” or “You only live once” could certainly see a resurgence during the COVID-19 emergency [ 48 ], and become a crucial mechanism accounting for individual differences in consumer behavior. Based on these considerations, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, self-justifications strategies could be relevant for non-necessities, since products for fun or entertainment could be more suited to the pursuit of freedom and to defy boredom. Conversely, self-justifications strategies related to necessities could be implemented to a lesser degree, due to the very nature of the products. The unprecedented context of the pandemic could already justify the purchase of those essential goods by itself, and additional justifications may not be necessary.

Furthermore, several studies have shown that household income has a significant impact in determining people’s expenses [ 49 – 51 ]. Not surprisingly, the research highlighted a positive relationship between income and spending levels [ 52 ]. Income is defined as money received regularly from work or investments. Interestingly, a different line of research pointed out that self-perceived economic stability is a more appropriate determinant of consumer behavior than actual income [ 53 , 54 ]. Usually, people tend to report subjective feelings of income inadequacy, even when their objective financial situation might not support such attitude [ 55 ]. An interesting explanation for this bias draws on the social comparison process. Indeed, the study of Karlsson et colleagues [ 53 ] showed that, compared to families who considered themselves to have a good financial situation, households which considered themselves to be worse off economically than others reported fewer purchases of goods, perceived the impact of their latest purchase on their finance to be greater, and planned purchases more carefully. Furthermore, a recent study in the context of the COVID-19 emergency showed that people who believed to have limited financial resources were the most worried about the future [ 56 , 57 ]. Therefore, in the present study, we measured both the income and the perceived economic situation of the respondents to respectively consider the objective economic information and the subjective perception of respondents. However, considering the state of uncertainty experienced by many households during the COVID-19 pandemic [ 58 ], we changed the comparison from other families to participants’ economic situation in different time frames. We asked respondents to report perceived economic stability before, during, and after the emergency.

Finally, besides situational factors related to the specific emergency, the individuals’ personality traits are likely to have a role in determining consumer behavior as well. Past research has highlighted that the Big Five personality traits [ 59 ] can differently predict consumer behavior [ 60 ]. Specifically, conscientiousness, openness, and emotional stability (alias neuroticism) were related to compulsive buying, impulsive buying, and utilitarian shopping. Nevertheless, how different personality traits are related to consumer behavior is still an open question [ 61 ].

We conducted a nationwide survey in the Italian population to examine consumer behavior during the lockdown phase due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Since the COVID-19 emergency has emphasized the usefulness of essential goods (e.g. food, medications, etc.) compared to non-essential products (e.g. luxury items such as clothes and accessories) [ 62 ], in our study, we categorized products in necessities and non-necessities. Furthermore, changes in spending levels (necessities vs. non-necessities) were examined to confirm the effect that COVID-19 had on people’s expenses. Moreover, we tried to clarify the relationship between changes in spending levels and changes in consumer behavior. Finally, we focused on the psychological factors underlying changes in consumer behavior toward the target products. Based on the literature, we expected to find an increase in purchases with a more noticeable rise in necessity products. Specifically, we explored potential underpinnings of consumer behavior by examining mood states and affective response to the emergency, perceived economic stability, self-justification for purchasing, and personality traits. All these factors have been implicated in consumer behavior in previous research, but, to our knowledge, no study has considered all of them at once. Therefore, in this study, we adopted an integrative approach to study the contribution of different psychological factors by considering their mutual influence (see Fig 1 ). Specifically, based on the empirical findings and theoretical accounts presented above, we hypothesized that during the COVID-19 pandemic:

• Higher levels of anxiety and COVID-related fear would explain changes in consumer behavior, increasing the need for buying necessities.
• Higher levels of stress would lead consumers to save money or, in alternative, would increase the need to spend money on necessities (i.e., utilitarian shopping).
• Higher levels of depressive state would be associated with an increase in the need for buying, both necessities and non-necessities.
• Higher implementation of self-justification strategies would be associated with a higher need for buying, especially for non-necessities.
• Higher perceived economic stability would be associated with an increase in the need for both necessities and non-necessities.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256095.g001

The construct involved in the study is placed in the center of the figure. Arrows depart from these constructs to show the hypothesized relationship between the constructs and the outcomes of the present study (Necessities and Non-necessities). The symbol “±” was used to take into consideration two possible opposite directions.

Materials and methods

Data were collected through a series of questionnaires, using a web-based survey implemented on the Qualtrics software. The survey was active in the period starting from April 1st, 2020, to April 20th, 2020, during the first peak of the contagion in Italy. We used a convenience sample due to the exceptional situation of the COVID-19 pandemic and the time constraints to conduct our investigation. Therefore, participants were recruited through word-of-mouth and social media. Inclusion criteria were the age over 18 and be resident in Italy. First, socio-demographic information was collected, including gender, age, annual income, and education. Then, questions on spending levels and consumer behavior, both before the COVID-19 pandemic and during the first week of lockdown in Italy, were presented, separating necessities and non-necessities. Finally, a series of specifically created questionnaires and standardized measures were administered to investigate psychological and economic variables.

Participants

A total of 4121 participants were initially recruited. For the present study, we adopted a rigorous approach, excluding 104 participants over the age of 64, since they relied on retirement benefits and -from an economic point of view- were considered a specific population, not comparable to the rest of the sample [ 63 ]. Furthermore, we excluded 184 participants who did not report spending any money before the COVID-19 pandemic on buying necessities and/or non-necessities. Therefore, 3833 Italian participants (69.3% women, age M = 34.2, SD = 12.5) were included in this study. All participants provided their written informed consent before completing the survey. The study was conducted following the ethical standards of the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Psychology (IRBP) of the Department of Psychological, Health and Territorial Sciences at G. d’Annunzio University of Chieti-Pescara (protocol number: 20004). Participants did not receive monetary or any other forms of compensation for their participation.

Demographic variables

A demographic questionnaire was administered to collect background information. The questions considered age, gender, annual income, and education. The annual income was then categorized into five levels, based on the income brackets established by the Italian National Statistical Institute [ 64 ]. Education was categorized into five levels, from elementary to school to postgraduate degree.

Consumer behavior during COVID-19

We created this questionnaire from scratch to get a comprehensive overview of people’s economic attitudes and behaviors during the COVID-19 emergency. The idea of this new questionnaire was developed based on a series of previous studies on consumer behavior [ 43 , 65 – 67 ]. However, specific items were developed from scratch adapting them to the specific unprecedented context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, these items were created following a series of group discussions between all co-authors of the present study. To directly measure changes in consumer behavior due to the COVID-19 pandemic, participants were requested to compare their actual behavior to their normal behavior before the COVID-19 outbreak. Therefore, the initial statement in the questionnaire underlined that answers had to be given by referring to the COVID-19 emergency period compared to everyday life before the outbreak.

The factor structure and reliability were evaluated in the larger sample ( n = 4121), using principal component analysis (PCA) and Cronbach’s alpha. The results revealed a six-factor structure and satisfactory reliability values (see S1 Table for more details). Note that the PCA and reliability analyses were also conducted on the current subsample, and the pattern of results did not change.

For the present study’s aims, we focused on three scales: “Necessities”, “Non-necessities”, and “Self-justifications”. Items are shown in Table 1 . The first two scales investigated consumer behavior toward the different framed products. Specifically, items addressed the individual’s attitudes, feelings, and behaviors toward necessities and non-necessities. Thus, higher scores reflected greater value (e.g., need, utility) placed on the target products.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256095.t001

The self-justifications scale referred to consumers’ thoughts to justify their purchases, with no distinction between necessity and non-necessity products. Higher scores reflected a frequent use of self-justifications in purchasing items.

For all these scales, responses were given on a Likert scale ranging from 0 ( not at all ), to 100, ( extremely ). Total scores on each scale were obtained by averaging all items.

Change in spending levels due to COVID-19

A fourth scale, i.e. “Spending Habits,” was extracted from the questionnaire mentioned above. As we aimed at measuring changes in the spending levels due to the COVID-19 emergency, we decided to use single items instead of the total scale score (items are presented in Table 1 ). Specifically, we created three percentage scores: “Changes in General Spending”, “Changes in Necessities spending”, and “Changes in Non-necessities spending” considering the difference between the money spent during the first week of lockdown, and the money spent on average in a week before the emergency (see Table 1 notes). Scores reflect the change in the amount (in Euro) that people devolved in purchasing the target products (hypothetical range from -1999 to +1999).

Big Five Inventory 10-item (BFI-10)

Big Five Inventory 10-item (BFI-10) is a short scale designed to briefly assess the five personality traits with two items for each trait. Specifically, these traits are: Agreeableness (example item: “I see myself as someone who is generally trusting”), Conscientiousness (example item: “I see myself as someone who does a thorough job”), Emotional stability (example item: “I see myself as someone who is relaxed, handles stress well”), Extraversion (example item: “I see myself as someone who is outgoing, sociable”), and Openness (example item: “I see myself as someone who has an active imagination”) [ 68 ]. In addition, respondents are asked to indicate whether they agree or disagree with each statement on a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 ( not agree at all ) to 5 ( totally agree ). A previously validated Italian version was used in the present study [ 69 ].

Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD-7)

The GAD-7 [ 70 ] is a 7-item self-reported measure designed to screen for generalized anxiety disorder and to measure the severity of symptoms, based on the DSM-IV criteria. This measure is often used in both clinical practice and research. Specifically, respondents are asked the frequency they have experienced anxiety symptoms in the past two weeks (e.g., “Not being able to stop or control worrying”) on a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from 0 ( not at all ) to 3 ( nearly every day ). The total score ranges from 0 to 21, with higher scores indicating worse anxiety symptomatology.

Patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9)

The patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9) is a 9-item self-reported brief diagnostic measure for depression [ 71 ]. Specifically, respondents are asked of the frequency they felt bothered by several depressive symptoms during the past two weeks (e.g., “Little interest or pleasure in doing things”) on a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from 0 ( not at all ) to 3 ( nearly every day ). Total score ranges from 0 to 27, with higher scores indicating higher depressive symptoms.

Perceived Stress Scale (PSS)

The Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) is a 14-item self-report measure designed to assess the degree to which situations are appraised as stressful [ 72 ]. Each item (e.g., “In the last month, how often have you been upset because of something that happened unexpectedly?”) is rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 ( never ) to 4 ( very often ). Thus, the total score ranges from 0 to 56, with a higher score indicating a higher level of perceived stress during the COVID-19 emergency.

Fear for COVID-19

We administered the Fear for COVID-19 questionnaire to measure fear and concerning beliefs related to the COVID-19 pandemic [ 35 , 36 , 73 ]. This questionnaire was created from the assumption that, during a health crisis, the individual’s fear is determined by both the hypothesized susceptibility (i.e., probability of contracting a disease) and the expected severity of the event (i.e., perceived consequences of being infected) [ 25 ]. Therefore, the 8 items dealt with the perceived probability of being infected by COVID-19 (Belief of contagion) and the possible consequences of the contagion (Consequences of contagion). See Table 1 for the complete list of the items. Previous studies have reported the PCA and reliability of the questionnaire [ 36 ]. Responses were given on a Likert scale ranging from 0 ( not at all ), to 100, ( extremely ). A total score was obtained by averaging the items (range 0–100).

Perceived economic stability

This questionnaire was developed to assess the subjective perception of an individual’s economic situation. The PCA in the larger sample revealed a unidimensional structure (see S2 Table for more details). The scale assessed perceived economic stability in three different timepoints: before, during, and after (in terms of expectation) the COVID-19 pandemic. Responses were given on a Likert scale ranging from 0 ( not at all ), to 100, ( extremely ). The total score was calculated by averaging these three items (range 0–100).

Statistical analysis

We preliminary investigated changes in spending levels due to the COVID-19 pandemic, comparing expenses before the emergency to expenses during the COVID-19 pandemic. First, we analyzed changes in the average general spending level. Then, we performed dependent (paired) sample t -tests between “Changes in necessities spending” and “Changes in non-necessities spending” to examine differences between products framed as necessities and non-necessities.

Afterward, we checked whether changes in spending levels were associated with changes in consumer behavior by conducting Pearson’s correlation analyses, respectively between “Changes in necessities spending” and “Necessities”, and “Changes in non-necessities spending” and “Non-necessities” scores.

Finally, to investigate the psychological underpinnings of consumer behavior, we performed two hierarchical multiple regressions, respectively, with “Necessities” (Model 1) and “Non-necessities” (Model 2) as outcomes. The same predictors were entered in Model 1 and Model 2. Specifically, the order of the steps was designed to include at first the socio-demographic information as control variables. Hence, we entered the age, gender, annual income brackets, and education in the first step. In Step 2, we included the personality measures (i.e., Big-Five personality traits) since these traits are stable and are not affected by the specific situation. In Step 3, Anxiety, Depression, and Stress were entered, to analyze the impact of emotional antecedents of consumer. Further, we decided to include Fear for the COVID-19 in a separate fourth step to evaluate the effect of this specific aspect. We included perceived economic stability at Step 5 after the psychological variables. This choice allowed to analyze the impact of the perceived economic stability after controlling for the role of emotional antecedents on consumer behavior. Finally, following the same logic, we included self-justifications strategies.

Considering “Changes in General spending”, our results showed that our sample reported, on average, an increase of 60.48% in the general spending level during the first week of lockdown. Furthermore, significant differences between “Changes in Necessities spending” and “Changes in Non-necessities spending”, t (3832) = 11.99, p < .001, were detected. Indeed, the spending level for necessities products showed an increase of 90.69%, while for non-necessities products, the average increase was only 36.11%. Means and standard deviations are presented in Table 2 .

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256095.t002

The results of the correlation analyses indicated that there was a significant positive association between “Changes in necessities spending” and “Necessities”, r (3831) = .22, p < .001. Furthermore, a significant positive association was highlighted between “Changes in non-necessities spending” and “Non-necessities”, r (3831) = .23, p < .001. Therefore, people’s changes in spending levels were related to their attitudes and feelings toward specific products. This finding supported our choice to investigate the psychological underpinnings of people’s consumer behavior.

Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were performed on the two consumer behavior scores. In addition, control variables, psychological factors, and economic variables were entered as predictors as detailed above.

Regarding Model 1 (Necessities), results showed that all the steps explained a significant amount of additional variance (see Table 3 for detailed results). When personality traits were entered in the model (Step 2), only agreeableness, openness, and emotional stability negatively predicted the outcome. However, when anxiety, depression, and stress were entered in the model (Step 3), only openness remained statistically significant. The variables entered in Step 3 contributed to explaining 7% of the variance, with anxiety and stress positively predicting the outcome. Adding fear for COVID-19 in the following step increased the explained variance by 6%, reduced the impact of anxiety, and completely overrode the effect of stress, which became non-significant. In the following steps, perceived economic stability offered a small but significant contribution (1%), and Self-justifications explained even further variance (4%). Overall, in the final step, the final model explained 23% of the variance in Necessities. Inspecting coefficients, we found that, after accounting for control variables, openness ( p < .001), anxiety ( p < .001), fear for COVID-19 ( p < .001), perceived economic stability ( p < .001), and self-justifications ( p < .001) emerged as significant predictors.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256095.t003

In Model 2 (Non-necessities), results indicated that each step significantly contributed to explaining the outcome (see Table 4 ). In Step 2, personality traits explained 2% of the outcome variance, with consciousness and openness emerging as significant predictors and remaining significant until the final step. Notably, consciousness was negatively associated with non-necessities behavior, while high scores in openness were associated with higher scores on the Non-necessities scale. In Step 3, only depression was significantly and positively related to the outcome and remained so in subsequent models. Both fear for COVID-19 and perceived economic stability further significantly explained the outcome, albeit weakly (about 1% of variance each one). Higher levels of fear and perceived economic stability were associated with higher scores on the Non-necessities scale. Noteworthy, adding Self-justifications in the final step explained a substantial share of variance, equal to 12%. Specifically, higher scores on self-justifications were associated with higher scores on the Non-necessities scale. Furthermore, self-justifications also had a greater impact on non-necessities compared to those had on necessities, t (7664) = -10.60, p < .05. Total variance explained in the final step was 22%, with conscientiousness ( p < .001), openness ( p = .001), depression ( p = .002), perceived economic stability ( p = .009), and self-justifications ( p < .001) being significant predictors.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256095.t004

The present study aimed to examine changes in consumer behavior and their psychological antecedents during the lockdown period due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We were specifically interested in separating necessity and non-necessity products since previous studies suggested that such a distinction is helpful to better understand consumer behavior[ 18 , 74 ]. First, our results indicated a 61% increase in spending levels during the first week of the lockdown, compared to the average expenses before the health crisis. Furthermore, spending levels were differently increased for buying products framed as necessities (91%) and non-necessities (36%). Second, we examined consumer behavior through Necessities and Non-necessities scales, which included measures related to the psychological need of buying, the specific aspects of the purchase experience (e.g., impulsiveness, perceived utility, satisfaction), and the number of products purchased. Our results highlighted that changes in consumer behavior were positively associated with changes in spending levels during the COVID-19 emergency.

Finally, we focused on psychological factors that can explain these changes in consumer behavior. In this context, our hypothesis about the role of the identified psychological factors in predicting consumer behavior during COVID-19 was supported. Also, our findings confirmed the importance of separating necessities from non-necessities products, as we found that they had different psychological antecedents. Regarding the investigation on spending levels, our findings are in line with sales data reporting that, during the COVID-19 pandemic, consumer priorities have become more centered on necessities, including food, hygiene, and cleaning products[ 7 , 62 ]. Therefore, the present study confirmed the greater tendency to buy necessities products during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is noteworthy to mention that our sample also reported an increase in spending levels related to non-necessities products. These data can be explained by referring to previous research that considered increases in non-necessities spending levels to respond to the hedonistic pursuit of freedom, defying boredom, restoring the sense of self, and compensatory mechanism, to alleviate negative psychological states[ 16 , 32 , 34 , 37 , 44 , 75 ]. However, as highlighted in the study by Forbes and colleagues[ 76 ] these hedonic needs and compensatory mechanisms can have a different impact during or in the aftermath of a crisis. In addition, the authors highlighted that the consumption of non-necessities products increased, as a way of coping to alleviate negative psychological states, particularly in the short term after a natural disaster. According to these results, a recent study conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic suggested that some factors, such as the degree of perceived threat, may vary during the COVID-19 pandemic, thus, having a different impact on consumer behavior[ 77 ]. Therefore, future research could delve into the analysis of changes in consumer behavior over time in relation to the different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Regarding our investigation of consumer behavior’s antecedent psychological factors, we found partly different antecedents for necessities and non-necessities. Regarding demographic effects, in the present study, we found that men were more oriented in terms of needs and feelings toward non-necessities than women. A possible explanation could consider the context of the COVID-19, whereas the lockdown has imposed the closure of physical stores. In this context, it could be appropriate to refer to those studies that found several gender differences between consumer e-commerce adoption and purchase decision making. Specifically, research has shown that men and women have different psychological pre-disposition of web-based purchases, with men having more positive attitudes toward online shopping[ 78 , 79 ]. Furthermore, a study conducted during COVID-19 showed that women spent more time on necessities such as childcare and chores compared to men[ 80 ]. Regarding age differences, we found that younger people were more oriented toward non-necessities products. A study conducted in Italy during the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted that older adults showed lower negative emotions than younger adults[ 73 , 81 , 82 ]. In this view, it is possible that lower emotional antecedents, such as depressive states, lowered the need to buy non-necessities for more aged people. Another study conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic showed that older adults, aged 56 to 75, had significantly reduced the purchase of non-necessities goods compared to younger people[ 83 ]. Furthermore, considering the closure of physical stores, it is possible that younger people were more able and got used to buy a broader range of non-necessities products by e-commerce. However, it is important to note that we excluded in the present study people aged over 65. We also found a positive effect of income on necessities. A possible explanation is that people more stable from an economic point of view were more oriented to feel the need to buy products. However, surprisingly we did not find this effect for non-necessities. Finally, we found a positive effect of education on non-necessities. This data is congruent with another study conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, showing that people with higher education (e.g., bachelor’s degrees and graduate or professional degrees) tended to buy an unusual amount of goods than people with lower education[ 84 ].Furthermore, another study highlighted that during COVID-19 pandemic entertainment and outdoor expenses significantly varied across different education groups[ 85 ]. Considering the present results, further studies should better investigate the impact of socio-demographic factors on the need to purchase necessities and non-necessities during health emergency and natural disaster.

Furthermore, after accounting for control variables (gender, age, income brackets, and education), consumer behavior toward necessities was explained by personality traits (openness), negative emotions (anxiety and COVID- related fear), perception of economic stability, and self-justifications. On the other side, consumer behavior toward non-necessities was explained by conscientiousness, openness, depression, perceived economic stability, and self-justifications.

Present findings showed that negative feelings have a considerable role in predicting changes in consumer behavior related to necessities products. This result is consistent with previous literature showing that, during a health crisis, fear and anxiety are developed from perceived feelings of insecurity and instability[ 30 ]. To reduce these negative feelings, people tend to focus on aspects and behaviors that can help them regain control and certainty, such as buying[ 86 ]. Therefore, changes in consumer behavior could be explained as a remedial response to reduce fear and anxiety related to the COVID-19 emergency. According to our hypothesis, present findings indicated that fear and anxiety play an important role in predicting changes in consumer behavior related to necessities. In contrast, no significant effects were found on non-necessities. A possible explanation for this remarkable difference can be provided by research in survival psychology, which highlighted that individuals might undergo behavioral changes during events such as natural disasters or health crises, including herd behavior, panic buying, changes in purchasing habits, and decision making[ 8 , 76 ]. Following these changes, individuals can be more engaged in behaviors that are necessary for survival[ 26 , 87 ]. In this view, COVID-related fear and anxiety could lead individuals to feel the need to buy necessities products useful for daily survival.

Stress is another factor suggested to differently affect changes in consumer behavior toward necessities and non-necessities[ 18 ]. It is noticeable that consumers experiencing stressful situations may show increased spending behavior, explicitly directed toward products that the consumer perceives to be necessities and that allow for control in an otherwise uncontrollable environment[ 18 ]. Our results partly support this position, showing that stress has a specific role in predicting changes in consumer behavior related to necessities but not to non-necessities. However, the role of stress was no longer significant when fear was entered in the regression model. Noteworthy, we focused on fear for COVID-19, therefore, it is possible that in such an exceptionally unprecedented situation, fear had a prominent role compared to stress. Moreover, previous literature shows that the relationship between fear and consumer behavior increases as the type of fear measured becomes more specific[ 88 ]. In this sense, further studies could delve into the relationship between fear and stress in relation to consumer behavior.

Notably, past studies had found a relationship between depressive states and consumer behavior, suggesting that changes in consumer behavior can represent self-protective behaviors to manage negative affective states[ 37 ]. The role of depression was highlighted by our results in respect to consumer behavior only related to non-necessities. Therefore, conversely to the study conducted in the UK and Ireland during the COVID-19 pandemic by Bentall et colleagues (2021), we did not find a relationship between depression and buying necessities. It is important to note that we described non-necessities products as “products for fun or entertainment”. In our opinion, people with higher levels of depressive symptoms may feel a greater need for this kind of product. Thus, people were drawn more toward this category of purchases because it was better suited to satisfy compensatory strategies to improve their negative emotional states. However, future studies are required to investigate this possibility and deepen the relationship between depressive states and the need to buy necessities and non-necessities. Furthermore, considering that depressive mood can be related to severe dysfunctional aspects of consumer behavior, such as impulsivity and compulsivity, future clinical studies should further investigate this relationship.

Furthermore, based on the limited and contrasting literature on this topic, we considered the role of personality traits. As suggested by previous studies, conscientiousness and openness were found to be associated with consumer behavior[ 89 – 91 ]. Interestingly, we found that personality traits were more relevant in consumer behavior toward non-necessities than necessities products. Only openness had a role in (negatively) predicting consumer behavior toward necessities, whereas conscientiousness (negatively) and openness (positively) predicted consumer behavior toward non-necessities. Unexpectedly, we found that people with a high level of openness showed high scores in consumer behavior toward non-necessities but low scores in necessities products. We speculated that individuals with higher levels of openness, which are more inclined to develop interests and hobbies[ 92 ], might have experienced a higher need to purchase non-necessities products during the lockdown. On the other hand, individuals with lower scores of openness, which tend to prefer familiar routines to new experiences and have a narrower range of interests, might have been more focused on purchasing necessity products. However, further studies should investigate the different roles of openness on necessities vs non-necessities consumer behavior. Globally, we acknowledge that the specific role and directions of these different personality traits on consumer behavior toward necessities and non-necessities is still an unexplored question, fully deserving of further investigations.

Finally, in both regression models, perceived economic stability and self-justifications predicted changes in consumer behavior. It comes as no surprise that individuals who perceived themselves and their family as more economically stable were prone to spend more in both products categories, necessities and non-necessities [ 52 , 53 ]. More intriguing, we found that the self-justifications that consumers adopted to motivate their purchases were a strong predictor of consumer behavior, especially in relation to non-necessities, where it explained the largest amount of variance (12%). Therefore, our hypothesis on the greater impact of self-justifications strategies on non-necessities compared to necessities was confirmed. Non-necessities, framed as products for fun or entertainment, seem more suited to satisfy that pursuit of freedom and the need to defy boredom that people increasingly experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic[ 48 ]. Therefore, we confirmed that the hedonistic attitude is an important predictor of consumer behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. This result supported and extended previous literature showing that, during a crisis, changes in consumer behavior are related to self-justifications and rationalizations that people formulate to feel right in making their purchases, including the pursuit of freedom and the reduction of boredom[ 11 , 48 ]. Companies and markets can acknowledge this process and use it to develop new marketing strategies to meet consumers’ actual needs, feelings, and motivation to purchase during the COVID-19 emergency[ 12 ]. On the one hand, satisfying these needs could support and favor well-being and the positive sense of self, which are essentially sought by the consumer developing such self-justification strategies[ 17 ]. On the other hand, focusing on strategies that consider these psychological self-justifications could be a winning marketing strategy for increasing sales, contributing to the economic recovery after the COVID-19 outbreak[ 13 ].

The results of the present study highlighted that the COVID-19 pandemic had a considerable impact on consumer behavior. In our sample, this impact resulted in increased spending levels accompanied by an increase in the psychological need to purchase both necessities and non-necessities products. Furthermore, our findings demonstrated that several psychological factors predicted these changes in consumer behavior. Notably, consumer behavior respectively toward necessities and non-necessities differed on some psychological predictors.

Some limits of the current study need to be acknowledged. First, we studied consumer behavior from a broad perspective on a non-clinical sample, therefore we did not include dysfunctional aspects related to consumer behavior, such as impulsivity and compulsivity buying and hoarding behavior, which the emergency may elicit. Hence, in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic, it would be interesting to integrate our results with investigations of dysfunctional aspects of consumer behavior. Furthermore, since the unique opportunity to study psychological factors and consumer behavior during this unprecedented period, we adopted an integrative approach to consider the impact of several psychological factors at once, obtaining one of the first overviews of consumer behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, combining all these psychological factors could have led to an aggregation bias[ 93 ], which could have masked the specific roles of each of the individual factors influencing consumer behavior. Therefore, future studies could adopt a more fine-grained approach to disentangle the role of each factor. Another limit is that we collected data during the initial stage of the COVID-19 outbreak in Italy. Notably, we reasoned that focusing on the very first period of the lockdown would likely allow us to capture the greater shift in consumer behavior, thus offering compelling evidence on the first impact of the pandemic on consumers. Nevertheless, it is likely that consumer behavior will undergo further changes in the longer term. Hence, future studies should investigate the evolution of consumer behaviors in relation to the development of the pandemic. Indeed, it is likely that when the “sense of urgency” and the negative affective reaction to the emergency will decrease, also the need for buying and purchases preferences would change. Furthermore, since we asked participants to estimate their weekly expenditures before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is important to keep in mind that our study focused on the people’s perception of changes in expenses. We did not know how much reliable these estimations were, and it is possible that objective assessment of change in the amount of money spent before and during the pandemic diverge from subjective views. In the present study, we focused on individual internal factors that could influence consumer behavior. However, other external factors, including the lockdown restrictions as the closure of physical stores, had certainly had a further impact on consumer behavior. Notwithstanding these limitations, this study represents one of the first attempts to examine changes in consumer behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic from a behavioral economic perspective, providing a thorough analysis of the psychological factors driving changes in consumer behavior, with a direct link to previous psychological research in consumer behavior. Furthermore, our results provided new evidence on the role of psychological factors influencing necessities and non-necessities spending and extended our knowledge of the antecedents of consumer behavior changes during the unprecedented health crisis we are experiencing.

In conclusion, the present study, by shedding new light on changes in people’s behavior due to the pandemic, fits into the growing body of research which helps increase economic and psychological preparedness in the face of future health emergencies.

Supporting information

S1 table. pattern matrix of the pca for the questionnaire on consumer behavior during the covid-19 pandemic..

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256095.s001

S2 Table. PCA for the “Perceived economic stability” questionnaire.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256095.s002

• View Article
• PubMed/NCBI
• Google Scholar
• 3. John Hopkins University. Coronavirus COVID-19 Global Cases by the Center for System Science and Engineering (CSSE). In: Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center [Internet]. 2020 [cited 20 Jul 2020]. Available: https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html
• 6. Despin T. Knock-on Effects Of COVID-19 On Consumer Behavior And How Businesses Can Prepare For Them. In: Entrepreneur [Internet]. 11 May 2020 [cited 12 Jun 2020]. Available: https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/350457
• 7. Nielsen. Key Consumer Behavior Thresholds Identified as the Coronavirus Outbreak Evolves–Nielsen. 2020 [cited 20 Jul 2020]. Available: https://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/article/2020/key-consumer-behavior-thresholds-identified-as-the-coronavirus-outbreak-evolves/?utm_source=sfmc&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newswire&utm_content=3-18-2020
• 12. Rajagopal . Development of Consumer Behavior. In: Rajagopal , editor. Transgenerational Marketing: Evolution, Expansion, and Experience. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2020. pp. 163–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33926-5_6
• 13. Diebner R, Silliman E, Ungerman K, Vancauwenberghe M. Adapting customer experience in the time of coronavirus. McKinsey & Company. 2020 [cited 10 Sep 2020]. Available: available at https://www. mckinsey. com/business-func tions/marketing-and-sales/our-insights/adapting-customer-experi ence-in-the-time-of-coronavirus
• 20. Foxall G. Consumer Psychology in Behavioral Perspective. Beard Books; 2004.
• 22. Leach J. Survival psychology. New York, NY, US: New York University Press; 1994. pp. xii, 220. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230372719
• 24. Steven D, O’Brien E, Jones BD. The New Politics of Strategic Resources: Energy and Food Security Challenges in the 21st Century. Brookings Institution Press; 2014. Available: https://muse.jhu.edu/book/35813
• 26. Dodgson L. A human behavior expert explains 4 psychological reasons why people are panic buying items in bulk during the coronavirus pandemic. In: Insider [Internet]. 2020 [cited 22 Jul 2020]. Available: https://www.insider.com/why-people-are-panic-bulk-buying-during-the-coronavirus-pandemic-2020-3
• 31. Greenberg J, Solomon S, Pyszczynski T. Terror Management Theory of Self-Esteem and Cultural Worldviews: Empirical Assessments and Conceptual Refinements. In: Zanna MP, editor. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Academic Press; 1997. pp. 61–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60016-7
• 55. Streib GF, 1918-, Schneider CJ. Retirement in American society. 1971 [cited 11 Sep 2020]. Available: https://agris.fao.org/agris-search/search.do?recordID=US201300475317
• 60. Maison D. The Psychological Perspective in Financial Behaviour. In: Maison D, editor. The Psychology of Financial Consumer Behavior. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2019. pp. 1–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10570-9_1
• 64. Istat. Statistiche Istat. 2020 [cited 28 Jul 2020]. Available: http://dati.istat.it/
• 86. Wilkens J. Why we hoard: Fear at root of panic-buying, psychologists say. In: San Diego Union-Tribune [Internet]. 22 Mar 2020 [cited 3 Aug 2020]. Available: https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/health/story/2020-03-22/hoard-fear-panic-buying-psychology
• 92. McCrae RR, Costa PT. Conceptions and Correlates of Openness to Experience. In: Hogan R, Johnson J, Briggs S, editors. Handbook of Personality Psychology. San Diego: Academic Press; 1997. pp. 825–847. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012134645-4/50032-9

Advertisement

Mapping the literature trends of consumer behavior and sustainability: insights from a bibliometric analysis approach

• Published: 15 January 2024

Cite this article

• Mohammed Hael   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0967-5541 1 ,
• Saddam A. Hazaea 2 ,
• Honglie Zhang 1 &
• Hadi Mareeh 3  

400 Accesses

3 Citations

Explore all metrics

Consumer behavior and sustainability are among topics that have recently received a lot of interest among social and academic circles, as there has been a significant increase in studies that discuss these topics. So, expanding knowledge and providing a comprehensive perspective on this topic is necessary. This paper brings together 1479 articles on consumer behavior and sustainability published over 27 years (1995–July, 2023) in the Scopus database, subjected to bibliometric analysis and content analysis. The results show that the number of publications has gradually increased, and the most contributing countries are the USA, China, and Italy, which contributed about 36% of the total number of publications. The USA has gone from a publication in 1997 to 23 publications in 2023, which may increase significantly by the end of the year. The results also reveal that consumer behavior is a significant factor in promoting sustainability. We identified the evolution of the topic’s most frequently used keywords and hotspots by analyzing keywords over three periods. The study results confirm that researchers have increased their focus on consumer behavior and sustainability, especially in the third phase. The results provide valuable insights for researchers, policymakers, and practitioners interested in understanding and promoting responsible consumption and sustainable development. Overall, this study contributes to the existing literature by providing a comprehensive overview of the research landscape on consumer behavior and sustainability while outlining future research directions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Bibliometric analysis of sustainability papers: Evidence from Environment, Development and sustainability

Consumer perceptions of the social vs. environmental dimensions of sustainability.

Uncovering the sustainability reporting: bibliometric analysis and future research directions

Data availability.

The list of selected publications for the bibliometric analysis is available from the first and second authors upon request.

Abuhassna, H., Awae, F., Bayoumi, K., Alzitawi, D. U., Alsharif, A. H., & Yahaya, N. (2022). Understanding online learning readiness among university students: A bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 16 (13), 81–94. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v16i13.30605

Article   Google Scholar  

Aghimien, D. O., Aigbavboa, C. O., Oke, A. E., & Thwala, W. D. (2020). Mapping out research focus for robotics and automation research in construction-related studies: A bibliometric approach. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 18 (5), 1063–1079. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-09-2019-0237

Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitude, personality, and behavior . Chicago, IL: Dorsey Press.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50 (2), 179–211.

Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32 (4), 665–683. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00236.x

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1973). Attitudinal and normative variables as predictors of specific behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27 (1), 41–57. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034440

Alsaati, T., El-Nakla, S., & El-Nakla, D. (2020). Level of sustainability awareness among university students in the Eastern province of Saudi Arabia. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12 (8), 3159. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12083159

Alshbili, I., Elamer, A. A., & Moustafa, M. W. (2021). Social and environmental reporting, sustainable development and institutional voids: Evidence from a developing country. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 28 (2), 881–895. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2096

Amicarelli, V., & Bux, C. (2021). Food waste in Italian households during the Covid-19 pandemic: A self-reporting approach. Food Security, 13 (1), 25–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-020-01121-z

Anderson, E. L. (2003). Changing US demographics and American higher education. New Directions for Higher Education, 2003 (121), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/he.97

Antonetti, P., & Maklan, S. (2014). Feelings that make a difference: How guilt and pride convince consumers of the effectiveness of sustainable consumption choices. Journal of Business Ethics, 124 (1), 117–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1841-9

Araújo-Vila, N., Toubes, D. R., & Fraiz-Brea, J. A. (2021). Effect of COVID-19 on the economy: A bibliometric and content analysis of academic research. Annals of Library and Information Studies (ALIS), 68 (4), 389–397. https://doi.org/10.56042/alis.v68i4.52245

Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40 (4), 471–499. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466601164939

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Baas, J., Schotten, M., Plume, A., Côté, G., & Karimi, R. (2020). Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies. Quantitative Science Studies, 1 (1), 377–386. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00019

Bai, X., & Liu, Y. (2016). International collaboration patterns and effecting factors of emerging technologies. PLoS One, 11 (12), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0167772

Barone, M. J., Norman, A. T., & Miyazaki, A. D. (2007). Consumer response to retailer use of cause-related marketing: Is more fit better? Journal of Retailing, 83 (4), 437–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2007.03.006

Beck, J., & Stolterman, E. (2016). Examining practical, everyday theory use in design research. She Ji, 2 (2), 125–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2016.01.010

Bjork, S., Offer, A., & Söderberg, G. (2014). Time series citation data: The Nobel Prize in economics. Scientometrics, 98 (1), 185–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-0989-5

Bölükbaş, R., Sarıkaya, G. S., & Yazıcıoğlu, İ. (2021). Analysis of food waste and sustainability behavior in Turkish television cooking shows. International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science, 24 , 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgfs.2021.100336

Cano, J. A., & Londoño-Pineda, A. (2020). Scientific literature analysis on sustainability with the implication of open innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity . https://doi.org/10.3390/10.3390/joitmc6040162

Catlin, J. R., & Wang, Y. (2013). Recycling gone bad: When the option to recycle increases resource consumption. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23 (1), 122–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2012.04.001

Cayaban, C. J. G., Prasetyo, Y. T., Persada, S. F., Borres, R. D., Gumasing, M. J. J., & Nadlifatin, R. (2023). The influence of social media and sustainability advocacy on the purchase intention of filipino consumers in fast fashion. Sustainability, 15 (11), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15118502

Chen, C.-P., Tu, Y., & Tung, Y. A. (2020). A study of opinion leaders in green consumption in Taiwan using the theory of reasoned action (TRA). International Journal of Sustainable Economies Management, 9 (3), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijsem.2020070103

Chen, X., Gao, Z., Swisher, M., House, L., & Zhao, X. (2018). Eco-labeling in the fresh produce market: Not all environmentally friendly labels are equally valued. Ecological Economics, 154 , 201–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.07.014

Cheng, Q. L., Wang, J. J., & Yin, L. G. (2014). A research framework of green consumption behavior based on value-belief-norm theory. Advanced Materials Research, 962 , 1485–1489. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.962-965.1485

Claudy, M. C., Peterson, M., & O’Driscoll, A. (2013). Understanding the attitude-behavior gap for renewable energy systems using behavioral reasoning theory. Journal of Macromarketing, 33 (4), 273–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276146713481605

Coleman, L. J., Bahnan, N., Kelkar, M., & Curry, N. (2011). Walking the walk: How the theory of reasoned action explains adult and student intentions to go green. Journal of Applied Business Research, 27 (3), 107–116. https://doi.org/10.19030/jabr.v27i3.4217

Corrado, S., Caldeira, C., Eriksson, M., Hanssen, O. J., Hauser, H. E., van Holsteijn, F., et al. (2019). Food waste accounting methodologies: Challenges, opportunities, and further advancements. Global Food Security, 20 , 93–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2019.01.002

De Moya-Anegón, F., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Vargas-Quesada, B., Corera-Álvarez, E., Muñoz-Fernández, F. J., González-Molina, A., & Herrero-Solana, V. (2007). Coverage analysis of Scopus: A journal metric approach. Scientometrics, 73 (1), 53–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1681-4

Dinu, M., Pătărlăgeanu, S. R., Petrariu, R., Constantin, M., & Potcovaru, A. M. (2020). Empowering sustainable consumer behavior in the EU by consolidating the roles of waste recycling and energy productivity. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12 (23), 9794. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12239794

Djafri, F., Laldin, M. A., & Laallam, A. (2021). The global perspective of Islamic finance and the potential for China to tap into the Islamic finance market. Journal of Islamic Business and Management, 11 (1), 14–28. https://doi.org/10.26501/jibm/2021.1101-002

Dong, X., Liu, S., Li, H., Yang, Z., Liang, S., & Deng, N. (2020). Love of nature as a mediator between connectedness to nature and sustainable consumption behavior. Journal of Cleaner Production, 242 , 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118451

Dresner, S., Jackson, T., & Gilbert, N. (2006). History and social responses to environmental tax reform in the United Kingdom. Energy Policy, 34 (8), 930–939. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2004.08.046

Dwyer, R. J. (2009). “Keen to be green” organizations: A focused rules approach to accountability. Management Decision, 47 (7), 1200–1216. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740910978377

Eger, L., Komárková, L., Egerová, D., & Mičík, M. (2021). The effect of COVID-19 on consumer shopping behaviour: Generational cohort perspective. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 61 , 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102542

Elhoushy, S., & Lanzini, P. (2021). Factors affecting sustainable consumer behavior in the MENA region: A systematic review. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 33 (3), 256–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2020.1781735

Enserink, B., & Koppenjan, J. (2007). Public participation in China: Sustainable urbanization and governance. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 18 (4), 459–474. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777830710753848

Escursell, S., Llorach-Massana, P., & Roncero, M. B. (2021). Sustainability in e-commerce packaging: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 280 , 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124314

Fagerberg, J., Fosaas, M., & Sapprasert, K. (2012). Innovation: Exploring the knowledge base. Research Policy, 41 (7), 1132–1153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.008

Falagas, M. E., Michalopoulos, A. S., Bliziotis, I. A., & Soteriades, E. S. (2006). A bibliometric analysis by geographic area of published research in several biomedical fields, 1995–2003. CMAJ. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 175 (11), 1389–1390. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.060361

Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E. I., Malietzis, G. A., & Pappas, G. (2008). Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, web of science, and Google scholar: Strengths and weaknesses. The FASEB Journal, 22 (2), 338–342. https://doi.org/10.1096/fj.07-9492lsf

Fang, H., Fang, F., Hu, Q., & Wan, Y. (2022). Supply chain management: A review and bibliometric analysis. Processes, 10 (9), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10091681

Fernandez, F., & Baker, D. P. (2017). Science production in the United States: An unexpected synergy between mass higher education and the super research university. International Perspectives on Education and Society, 33 , 85–111. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-367920170000033006

Flanagan, A., & Priyadarshini, A. (2021). A study of consumer behaviour towards food-waste in Ireland: Attitudes, quantities and global warming potentials. Journal of Environmental Management, 284 , 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112046

Gadenne, D., Sharma, B., Kerr, D., & Smith, T. (2011). The influence of consumers’ environmental beliefs and attitudes on energy saving behaviours. Energy Policy, 39 (12), 7684–7694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.09.002

Garvey, A. M., & Bolton, L. E. (2017). Eco-product choice cuts both ways: How proenvironmental licensing versus reinforcement is contingent on environmental consciousness. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 36 (2), 284–298. https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.16.096

Gazzola, P., Grechi, D., Papagiannis, F., & Marrapodi, C. (2021). The sharing economy in a digital society: Youth consumer behavior in Italy. Kybernetes, 50 (1), 147–164. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-12-2019-0796

Gazzola, P., Pavione, E., Pezzetti, R., & Grechi, D. (2020). Trends in the fashion industry. The perception of sustainability and circular economy: A gender/generation quantitative approach. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12 (7), 2809. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072809

Glass, R. I. (2013). What the United States has to gain from global health research. JAMA, 310 (9), 903–904. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.276558

Gracia, A., & Gómez, M. I. (2020). Food sustainability and waste reduction in Spain: Consumer preferences for local, suboptimal, and/or unwashed fresh food products. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12 (10), 4148. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104148

Grunert, K. G., Hieke, S., & Wills, J. (2014). Sustainability labels on food products: Consumer motivation, understanding and use. Food Policy, 44 , 177–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2013.12.001

Guo, C., Wang, Y., Hu, Y., Wu, Y., & Lai, X. (2022). Does smart city policy improve corporate green technology innovation? Evidence from Chinese listed companies. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management . https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2022.2157708

Habib, R., White, K., Hardisty, D. J., & Zhao, J. (2021). Shifting consumer behavior to address climate change. Current Opinion in Psychology, 42 , 108–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.04.007

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., & Thiele, K. O. (2017). Mirror, mirror on the wall: A comparative evaluation of composite-based structural equation modeling methods. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45 (5), 616–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-017-0517-x

Han, H. (2020). Theory of green purchase behavior (TGPB): A new theory for sustainable consumption of green hotel and green restaurant products. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29 (6), 2815–2828. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2545

Han, H. (2021). Consumer behavior and environmental sustainability in tourism and hospitality: A review of theories, concepts, and latest research. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29 (7), 1021–1042. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2021.1903019

Hao, T., Chen, X., Li, G., & Yan, J. (2018). A bibliometric analysis of text mining in medical research. Soft Computing . https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-3511-4

Hasbullah, N. (2021). Bibliometric analysis of sustainable and green consumption research from 1974 to 2019. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12 (5), 1292–1301. https://doi.org/10.17762/turcomat.v12i5.1796

Hassan, S. U., Haddawy, P., & Zhu, J. (2014). A bibliometric study of the world’s research activity in sustainable development and its sub-areas using scientific literature. Scientometrics, 99 (2), 549–579. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1193-3

Hazaea, S. A., Al-Matari, E. M., Zedan, K., Khatib, S. F. A., Zhu, J., & Al Amosh, H. (2022a). Green purchasing: Past, present and future. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14 (9), 5008. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095008

Hazaea, S. A., Zhu, J., Khatib, S. F. A., Bazhair, A. H., & Elamer, A. A. (2022b). Sustainability assurance practices: A systematic review and future research agenda. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29 (4), 4843–4864. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17359-9

Huang, L., Yuan, H., Dong, X., Chen, Z., & Zhou, L. (2023). Social norms and socially responsible consumption behavior in the sharing economy: The mediation role of reciprocity motivation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 414 , 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137750

Islam, M. T., Huda, N., Baumber, A., Shumon, R., Zaman, A., Ali, F., et al. (2021). A global review of consumer behavior towards e-waste and implications for the circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 316 , 1–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128297

Jain, S., Khan, M. N., & Mishra, S. (2017). Understanding consumer behavior regarding luxury fashion goods in India based on the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 11 (1), 4–21. https://doi.org/10.1108/JABS-08-2015-0118

James, M. L. (2014). The benefits of sustainability and integrated reporting: An investigation of accounting majors’ perceptions. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 18 (1), 93–113.

Google Scholar  

Janssens, K., Lambrechts, W., Van Osch, A., & Semeijn, J. (2019). How consumer behavior in daily food provisioning affects food waste at household level in the Netherlands. Foods, 8 (10), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods8100428

Jin, B., & Kirsch, D. A. (2022). The search for alternatives to internal combustion: Instantiation mechanisms of institutional logics among scientists and engineers. Industry and Innovation, 29 (10), 1231–1262. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2022.2114318

Jung, H. J., Choi, Y. J., & Oh, K. W. (2020). Influencing factors of Chinese consumers’ purchase intention to sustainable apparel products: Exploring consumer “attitude–behavioral intention” gap. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12 (5), 1770. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12051770

Kanda, W., & Kivimaa, P. (2020). What opportunities could the COVID-19 outbreak offer for sustainability transitions research on electricity and mobility? Energy Research and Social Science . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101666

Kang, K., Hong, K. S., Kim, K. H., & Lee, C. (2017). Shipment consolidation policy under uncertainty of customer order for sustainable supply chain management. Sustainability (Switzerland), 9 (9), 1675. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9091675

Kaur, K., Kunasegaran, M., Singh, J., & Gnasigamoney, S. S. (2020). Impact of the first phase of movement control order during the COVID-19 pandemic in Malaysia on purchasing behavior of Malaysian consumers omni-channel view project accounting ethics and education view project. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2 (6), 131–144. https://doi.org/10.37534/bp.jhssr.2020.v2.nS.id1038.p131

Khalil, M. K., & Khalil, R. (2022). Leveraging Buyers’ Interest in ESG Investments through sustainability awareness. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14 (21), 4278. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142114278

Khan, M. S., Saengon, P., Alganad, A. M. N., Chongcharoen, D., & Farrukh, M. (2020). Consumer green behaviour: An approach towards environmental sustainability. Sustainable Development, 28 (5), 1168–1180. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2066

Khan, R., Awan, T. M., Fatima, T., & Javed, M. (2021). Driving forces of green consumption in sharing economy. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 32 (1), 41–63. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-03-2020-0052

Khatun, R., Xiang, H., Yang, Y., Wang, J., & Yildiz, G. (2021). Bibliometric analysis of research trends on the thermochemical conversion of plastics during 1990–2020. Journal of Cleaner Production, 317 , 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128373

Khoshmaram, M., Shiri, N., Shinnar, R. S., & Savari, M. (2020). Environmental support and entrepreneurial behavior among Iranian farmers: The mediating roles of social and human capital. Journal of Small Business Management, 58 (5), 1064–1088. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12501

Kiba-Janiak, M., Marcinkowski, J., Jagoda, A., & Skowrońska, A. (2021). Sustainable last mile delivery on e-commerce market in cities from the perspective of various stakeholders. Literature review. Sustainable Cities and Society, 71 (5), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.102984

Kim, H., Hur, W. M., & Yeo, J. (2015). Corporate brand trust as a mediator in the relationship between consumer perception of CSR, corporate hypocrisy, and corporate reputation. Sustainability (Switzerland), 7 (4), 3683–3694. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7043683

Kostadinova, E. (2016). Sustainable consumer behavior: Literature overview.: EBSCO Discovery Service. Economic Alternatives , 1 (2), 224–234. http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=12&sid=aa25746c-d74f-427f-9cc4-f45d3f43f224%40sessionmgr4007

Lai, X., & Zhang, F. (2022). Can ESG certification help company get out of over-indebtedness? Evidence from China. Pacific Basin Finance Journal, 76 , 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pacfin.2022.101878

Landström, H., Harirchi, G., & Åström, F. (2012). Entrepreneurship: Exploring the knowledge base. Research Policy, 41 (7), 1154–1181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.009

Leal Filho, W., Salvia, A. L., Paço, A., Dinis, M. A. P., Vidal, D. G., Da Cunha, D. A., et al. (2022). The influences of the COVID-19 pandemic on sustainable consumption: An international study. Environmental Sciences Europe, 34 (1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-022-00626-y

Liang, X., Hu, X., & Meng, H. (2020). Truly sustainability or hypocrisy: The effects of corporate sustainable orientation on consumers’ quality perception and trust based on evidence from China. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12 (7), 2735. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072735

Liao, C., Lin, H. N., & Liu, Y. P. (2010). Predicting the use of pirated software: A contingency model integrating perceived risk with the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 91 (2), 237–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0081-5

Liao, H., Tang, M., Luo, L., Li, C., Chiclana, F., & Zeng, X. J. (2018). A bibliometric analysis and visualization of medical big data research. Sustainability (Switzerland), 10 (1), 166. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10010166

Liu, H. T., & Tsaur, R. C. (2020). The theory of reasoned action applied to green smartphones: Moderating effect of government subsidies. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12 (15), 5979. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12155979

Liu, X., & Chen, H. (2020). Sharing economy: Promote its potential to sustainability by regulation. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12 (3), 919. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12030919

Liu, Y., Xi, B., & Wang, G. (2021). The impact of corporate environmental responsibility on financial performance—Based on Chinese listed companies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28 (7), 7840–7853. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11069-4

Lunde, M. B. (2018). Sustainability in marketing: A systematic review unifying 20 years of theoretical and substantive contributions (1997–2016). AMS Review, 8 (3–4), 85–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-018-0124-0

Martin, C. J., Upham, P., & Klapper, R. (2017). Democratising platform governance in the sharing economy: An analytical framework and initial empirical insights. Journal of Cleaner Production, 166 , 1395–1406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.123

Martin-Rios, C., Hofmann, A., & Mackenzie, N. (2021). Sustainability-oriented innovations in food waste management technology. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13 (1), 210. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010210

Martí-Parreño, J., Méndez-Ibáñez, E., & Alonso-Arroyo, A. (2016). The use of gamification in education: A bibliometric and text mining analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32 (6), 663–676. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12161

Matharu, M., Jain, R., & Kamboj, S. (2021). Understanding the impact of lifestyle on sustainable consumption behavior: A sharing economy perspective. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 32 (1), 20–40. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-02-2020-0036

Moser, A. K. (2015). Thinking green, buying green? Drivers of pro—Environmental purchasing behavior. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 32 (3), 167–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-10-2014-1179

Mustapha, I., Khan, N., Qureshi, M. I., Harasis, A. A., & Van, N. T. (2021). Impact of industry 4.0 on healthcare: A systematic literature review (SLR) from the last decade. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 15 (18), 116–128. https://doi.org/10.3991/IJIM.V15I18.25531

Nees, J. van E., & Ludo, W. (2023). Manual for VOSviewer version 1.6.19 . Univeristeit Leiden .

Neganova, V. P. (2021). The impact of COVID-19 on consumer habits: New aspects of research. Economics and Management, 27 (12), 943–950. https://doi.org/10.35854/1998-1627-2021-12-943-950

Newton, P., & Meyer, D. (2013). Exploring the attitudes-action gap in household resource consumption: Does “Environmental Lifestyle” segmentation align with consumer behaviour? Sustainability (Switzerland), 5 (3), 1211–1233. https://doi.org/10.3390/su5031211

Nguyen, H. V., Nguyen, C. H., & Hoang, T. T. B. (2019). Green consumption: Closing the intention-behavior gap. Sustainable Development, 27 (1), 118–129. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1875

Orazalin, N., & Mahmood, M. (2020). Determinants of GRI-based sustainability reporting: Evidence from an emerging economy. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 10 (1), 140–164. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAEE-12-2018-0137

Paul, J., Modi, A., & Patel, J. (2016). Predicting green product consumption using theory of planned behavior and reasoned action. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 29 , 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRETCONSER.2015.11.006

Peattie, K. (2010). Green consumption: Behavior and norms. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 35 , 195–228. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-032609-094328

Pechdin, W., Sarnkhaowkhom, C., Kanthanetr, S., & Willemse, M. P. (2023). Retelling social inequalities in the era of market competition: Review and discussion for sustainable welfare development. Frontiers in Sociology . https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2023.1085278

Piligrimiene, Ž, Žukauskaite, A., Korzilius, H., Banyte, J., & Dovaliene, A. (2020). Internal and external determinants of consumer engagement in sustainable consumption. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12 (4), 1349. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041349

Podsakoff, P., et al. (2008). Scholarly influence in the field of management: A bibliometric analysis of the determinants of university and author impact in the management literature in the past quarter century. Journal of Management, 34 (4), 641–720. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308319533

Prajapati, D., Agarwal, S., & Murtaza, Q. (2022). Impact of COVID-19 on sustainability enablers and evaluation of performance index. Materials Today: Proceedings, 56 , 3790–3796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.01.137

Prieto-Sandoval, V., Torres-Guevara, L. E., & García-Díaz, C. (2022). Green marketing innovation: Opportunities from an environmental education analysis in young consumers. Journal of Cleaner Production, 363 , 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132509

Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics? Journal of Documentation, 25 (4), 348–349.

Qin, B., & Song, G. (2022). Internal motivations, external contexts, and sustainable consumption behavior in China—Based on the TPB-ABC integration model. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14 (13), 7677. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14137677

Rahman, M. M. (2020). Environmental degradation: The role of electricity consumption, economic growth and globalisation. Journal of Environmental Management, 253 , 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109742

Rana, T., Steccolini, I., Bracci, E., & Mihret, D. G. (2022). Performance auditing in the public sector: A systematic literature review and future research avenues. Financial Accountability and Management . https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12312

Rejeb, A., Suhaiza, Z., Rejeb, K., Seuring, S., & Treiblmaier, H. (2022). The Internet of Things and the circular economy: A systematic literature review and research agenda. Journal of Cleaner Production . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131439

Rita, P., & Ramos, R. F. (2022). Global research trends in consumer behavior and sustainability in E-commerce: A bibliometric analysis of the knowledge structure. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14 (15), 9455. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159455

Rohm, H., Oostindjer, M., Aschemann-Witzel, J., Symmank, C., Almli, V. L., de Hooge, I. E., et al. (2017). Consumers in a sustainable food supply chain (COSUS): Understanding consumer behavior to encourage food waste reduction. Foods, 6 (12), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods6120104

Routhe, A. S., Jones, R. E., & Feldman, D. L. (2005). Using theory to understand public support for collective actions that impact the environment: Alleviating water supply problems in a nonarid biome. Social Science Quarterly . https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0038-4941.2005.00361.x

Ruangkanjanases, A., You, J. J., Chien, S. W., Ma, Y., Chen, S. C., & Chao, L. C. (2020). Elucidating the effect of antecedents on consumers’ green purchase intention: An extension of the theory of planned behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 11 (1433), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01433

Sammer, K., & Wüstenhagen, R. (2006). The influence of eco-labelling on consumer behaviour—Results of a discrete choice analysis for washing machines. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15 (3), 185–199. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.522

Schäufele, I., & Hamm, U. (2017). Consumers’ perceptions, preferences and willingness-to-pay for wine with sustainability characteristics: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.01.118

Schober, A., Kittel, C., Baumgartner, R. J., & Füllsack, M. (2018). Identifying dominant topics appearing in the journal of cleaner production. Journal of Cleaner Production, 190 , 160–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.124

Shang, J., Peloza, J., & White, K. (2012). Good and Guilt free: The role of self-accountability in influencing preferences for products with ethical attributes. Journal of Marketing, 77 (1), 1–52.

Sharma, Y. K., Mangla, S. K., Patil, P. P., & Liu, S. (2019). When challenges impede the process: For circular economy-driven sustainability practices in food supply chain. Management Decision, 57 (4), 995–1017. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-09-2018-1056

Shen, Z., Ji, W., Yu, S., Cheng, G., Yuan, Q., Han, Z., et al. (2023). Mapping the knowledge of traffic collision reconstruction: A scientometric analysis in CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and SciMAT. Science and Justice . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2022.10.005

Shevchenko, T., Saidani, M., Ranjbari, M., Kronenberg, J., Danko, Y., & Laitala, K. (2023). Consumer behavior in the circular economy: Developing a product-centric framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, 384 , 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.135568

Shvarts, J. (2019). Eco-friendly packaging materials of the future: Brands must focus on infusing new, sustainable packaging materials in order to stay relevant. Brand Packaging, 23 (3), 19.

Si, H., Shi, J. G., Tang, D., Wen, S., Miao, W., & Duan, K. (2019). Application of the theory of planned behavior in environmental science: A comprehensive bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16 (15), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16152788

Sima, V., Gheorghe, I. G., Subić, J., & Nancu, D. (2020). Influences of the industry 4.0 revolution on the human capital development and consumer behavior: A systematic review. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12 (10), 4035. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12104035

Skaf, L., Franzese, P. P., Capone, R., & Buonocore, E. (2021). Unfolding hidden environmental impacts of food waste: An assessment for fifteen countries of the world. Journal of Cleaner Production, 310 , 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127523

Soyer, M., & Dittrich, K. (2021). Sustainable consumer behavior in purchasing, using and disposing of clothes. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13 (15), 8333. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158333

Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29 (3), 309–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.004

Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56 (3), 407–424. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00175

Sun, X., Tian, Z., Wang, J., & Su, W. (2022). The impact of environmental commitment on green purchase behavior in China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19 (14), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19148644

Tao, J., Yang, F., Qiu, D., & Reniers, G. (2020). Analysis of safety leadership using a science mapping approach. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 140 , 244–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2020.04.031

Thøgersen, J. (2021). Consumer behavior and climate change: Consumers need considerable assistance. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 42 , 9–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COBEHA.2021.02.008

Tjebane, M. M., Musonda, I., & Onososen, A. (2022). Eco-innovation in the built environment: A bibliometric and systematic literature review. In Proceedings of the 4th African International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management (pp. 1–9). https://doi.org/10.46254/AF03.20220086

Tommasetti, A., Singer, P., Troisi, O., & Maione, G. (2018). Extended theory of planned behavior (ETPB): Investigating customers’ perception of restaurants’ sustainability by testing a structural equation model. Sustainability (Switzerland), 10 (7), 2580. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072580

Trudel, R. (2018). Sustainable consumer behavior. Consumer Psychology Review, 2 (1), 85–96. https://doi.org/10.1002/arcp.1045

Valaskova, K., Durana, P., & Adamko, P. (2021). Changes in consumers’ purchase patterns as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Mathematics, 9 (15), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9151788

Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2012). Adoption and impacts of interorganizational business process standards: Role of partnering synergy. Information Systems Research, 23 (4), 1131–1157. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1110.0404

Vermeir, I., & Verbeke, W. (2006). Sustainable food consumption: Exploring the consumer “attitude–behavioral intention” gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 19 (2), 169–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-005-5485-3

Vernerová, D. (2021). Impact of the pandemic COVID-19 on consumer shopping behaviour in Slovakia. In 21st International Joint Conference Central and Eastern Europe in the Changing Business Environment : Proceedings (pp. 250–262). https://doi.org/10.18267/pr.2021.krn.4816.21

Vittuari, M., Falasconi, L., Masotti, M., Piras, S., Segrè, A., & Setti, M. (2020). “Not in My Bin”: Consumer’s understanding and concern of food waste effects and mitigating factors. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12 (14), 5685. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12145685

Waluyo, & Kharisma, D. B. (2023). Circular economy and food waste problems in Indonesia: Lessons from the policies of leading Countries. Cogent Social Sciences, 9 (1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2202938

Wang, M., et al. (2010). A bibliometric analysis of the performance of water research. Scientometrics, 83 (3), 813–820. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0112-0

Wang, S., Wang, J., Li, J., & Yang, F. (2020). Do motivations contribute to local residents’ engagement in pro-environmental behaviors? Resident-destination relationship and pro-environmental climate perspective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 28 (6), 834–852. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2019.1707215

Wansink, B., Soman, D., & Herbst, K. C. (2017). Larger partitions lead to larger sales: Divided grocery carts alter purchase norms and increase sales. Journal of Business Research, 75 , 202–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.06.023

White, K., Habib, R., & Hardisty, D. J. (2019). How to SHIFT consumer behaviors to be more sustainable: A literature review and guiding framework. Journal of Marketing, 83 (3), 22–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242919825649

Wu, J., Font, X., & Liu, J. (2021). Tourists’ pro-environmental behaviors: Moral obligation or disengagement? Journal of Travel Research, 60 (4), 735–748. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287520910787

Xu, F., Huang, L., & Whitmarsh, L. (2020). Home and away: Cross-contextual consistency in tourists’ pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 28 (10), 1443–1459. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1741596

Yang, Y., Chen, G., Reniers, G., & Goerlandt, F. (2020). A bibliometric analysis of process safety research in China: Understanding safety research progress as a basis for making China’s chemical industry more sustainable. Journal of Cleaner Production, 263 , 1–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121433

Yarimoglu, E., & Gunay, T. (2020). The extended theory of planned behavior in Turkish customers’ intentions to visit green hotels. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29 (3), 1097–1108. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2419

Young, W., Hwang, K., McDonald, S., & Oates, C. J. (2010). Sustainable consumption: Green consumer behaviour when purchasing products. Sustainable Development, 18 (1), 20–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.394

Yuan, B.-Z., & Sun, J. (2020). Bibliometric analysis of research on the maize based on top papers during 2009–2019. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 14 (1), 75–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2020.1787110

YuZhijiang, V. M. (2021). The hotspots and trends of research on international the sports industry from 2010–2019: A visualization analysis based on citespace. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12 (14), 4849–4863.

Zeynalova, Z., & Namazova, N. (2022). Revealing consumer behavior toward green consumption. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14 (10), 5. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14105806

Zhao, H. H., Gao, Q., Wu, Y. P., Wang, Y., & Zhu, X. D. (2014). What affects green consumer behavior in China? A case study from Qingdao. Journal of Cleaner Production, 63 , 143–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.05.021

Zhou, C. (2019). Bibliometric study of scientific literature on Poyang Lake (pp. 25–38). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97725-6_3

Zou, H., Du, H., Wang, Y., Zhao, L., Mao, G., Zuo, J., et al. (2017). A review of the first twenty-three years of articles published in the journal of cleaner production: With a focus on trends, themes, collaboration networks, low/no-fossil carbon transformations and the future. Journal of Cleaner Production . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.157

Zou, X., Yue, W. L., & Vu, H. L. (2018). Visualization and analysis of mapping knowledge domain of road safety studies. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 118 , 131–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2018.06.010

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Business, Yunnan University of Finance and Economics, Kunming, Yunnan, China

Mohammed Hael & Honglie Zhang

School Accounting, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

Saddam A. Hazaea

Center for Economic Research, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China

Hadi Mareeh

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammed Hael .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Consent to publish, additional information, publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Hael, M., Hazaea, S.A., Zhang, H. et al. Mapping the literature trends of consumer behavior and sustainability: insights from a bibliometric analysis approach. Environ Dev Sustain (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-04382-8

Download citation

Received : 16 August 2023

Accepted : 15 December 2023

Published : 15 January 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-04382-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Consumer behaviour
• Sustainable
• Bibliometric analysis
• Content analysis
• Scopus database
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• PubMed/Medline
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Factors influencing consumer behavior toward green products: a systematic literature review.

1. Introduction

2. materials and methods, 3.1. revision of the studies, 3.2. the main factors influencing consumer behavior toward green products, 3.3. social norms and consumer behavior toward green products, 3.4. a company’s perceived image and consumer behavior toward green products, 3.5. green product characteristics and consumer behavior toward green products, 3.6. perceived risks and inconvenience of buying green products and consumer behavior toward green products, 3.7. perceived benefits of buying green and consumer behavior toward green products, 3.8. institutional trust and consumer behavior toward green products, 3.9. sociodemographic characteristics and consumer behavior toward green products, 3.10. consumer confidence and consumer behavior toward green products, 4. discussion, 5. conclusions, author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

• White, K.; Hardisty, D.; Habib, R. Harvard Business Review–The Elusive Green Consumer. 2019. Available online: https://hbr.org/2019/07/the-elusive-green-consumer (accessed on 6 October 2022).
• Darnall, N.; Ponting, C.; Vazquez-Brust, D. Whameehy Consumers Buy Green. In Green Growth: Managing the Transition to a Sustainable Economy ; Vazquez-Brust, D., Sarkis, J., Eds.; Springer Science + Business Media: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2012; pp. 287–308. [ Google Scholar ]
• The United Nations Environment Programme. Decoupling Natural Resource Use and Environmental Impacts from Economic Growth ; The United Nations Environment Programme: Nairobi, Kenya, 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
• Franchise Help. Green Industry Analysis 2020–Cost & Trends. 2021. Available online: https://www.franchisehelp.com/industry-reports/green-industry-analysis-2020-cost-trends/ (accessed on 7 October 2022).
• Chen, C.-C.; Chen, C.-W.; Tung, Y.-C. Exploring the Consumer Behavior of Intention to Purchase Green Products in Belt and Road Countries: An Empirical Analysis. Sustainability 2018 , 10 , 854. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Climate Action. WWF: Huge Rise in Demand for Sustainable Goods during Pandemic. 2021. Available online: https://www.climateaction.org/news/wwf-huge-rise-in-demand-for-sustainable-goods-during-pandemic (accessed on 3 October 2022).
• European Commission. European Commission–Environment–Facts and Figures. 2022. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/facts_and_figures_en.htm (accessed on 3 October 2022).
• Fortune Business Insights. Hardware & Software IT Services/Green Technology and Sustainability Market. 2022. Available online: https://www.fortunebusinessinsights.com/green-technology-and-sustainability-market-102221 (accessed on 3 October 2022).
• Novozymes. COVID-19 Catalyzed the Demand for Greener Products. 2022. Available online: https://biosolutions.novozymes.com/en/household-care/insights/covid-19-catalyzed-need-greener-products (accessed on 5 October 2022).
• Pagalea, A.; Uta, D.S.V. Romanian Consumer Lifestyle and Attitude towards Bio Products Purchase. Procedia–Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012 , 62 , 1308–1312. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Hartmann, P.; Apaolaza-Ibanez, V. Green value added. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2006 , 24 , 673–680. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Durif, F.; Boivin, C.; Julien, C. In search of a green product definition. Innov. Mark. 2010 , 6 , 25–33. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ritter, Á.M.; Borchardt, M.; Vaccaro, G.L.R.; Pereira, G.M.; Almeida, F. Motivations for promoting the consumption of green products in an emerging country: Exploring attitudes of Brazilian consumers. J. Clean. Prod. 2015 , 106 , 507–520. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sdrolia, E.; Zarotiadis, G. A Comprehensive review for green product term: From definition to evaluation. J. Econ. Surv. 2018 , 33 , 150–178. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Sathyapriya, P.; Sekar, P. Green product and consumer behavior: An analytical study. EPRA Int. J. Res. Dev. IJRD 2020 , 5 , 536–540. [ Google Scholar ]
• Das, P. Feedough—What Is a Green Product?—Examples, Advantages, & Challenges. 2021. Available online: https://www.feedough.com/green-product/ (accessed on 5 October 2022).
• Tezer, A.; Bodur, H.O. The Greenconsumption Effect: How Using Green Products Improves Consumption Experience. J. Consum. Res. 2019 , 47 , 25–39. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ottman, J.A.; Stafford, E.R.; Hartman, C.L. Avoiding Green Marketing Myopia: Ways to Improve Consumer Appeal for Environmentally Preferable Products. Environ. Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev. 2006 , 48 , 22–36. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• De Medeiros, J.; Ribeiro, J. Environmentally sustainable innovation: Expected attributes in the purchase. J. Clean. Prod. 2017 , 142 , 240–248. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Peattie, K.; Ratnayaka, M. Responding to the green movement. Ind. Mark. Manag. 1992 , 21 , 103–110. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bhardwaj, A.; Garg, A.; Ram, S.; Gajpal, Y.; Zheng, C. Research Trends in Green Product for Environment: A Bibliometric Perspective. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020 , 17 , 8469. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Biswas, A. A Study of Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Green Products. J. Adv. Manag. Sci. 2016 , 4 , 211–215. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Catană, Ș.-A.; Toma, S.-G.; Grădinaru, C. Circular Economy Applied to the Automotive Industry. Ovidius Univ. Ann. Econ. Sci. Ser. 2022 , XXII , 516–520. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wee, Y.S.; Quazi, H.A. Development and validation of critical factors of environmental management. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2005 , 105 , 96–114. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chaudhary, S. Indies Education–Eco-Friendly Products: Its Advantages and Disadvantages. 2020. Available online: https://indieseducation.com/eco-friendly-products-its-advantages-and-disadvantages/#Disadvantages-of-using-Eco-friendly-products (accessed on 8 October 2022).
• Lamoureux, E.-C. L’Autre Couleur. 2017. Available online: https://lautrecouleur.com/green-marketing-advantages-disadvantages/ (accessed on 8 October 2022).
• Jacobs, K.; Petersen, L.; Hörisch, J.; Battenfeld, D. Green thinking but thoughtless buying? An empirical extension of the value-attitude-behaviour hierarchy in sustainable clothing. J. Clean. Prod. 2018 , 203 , 1155–1169. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kumar, P.; Polonsky, M.J. An Analysis of the Green Consumer Domain within Sustainability Research: 1975 to 2014. Australas. Mark. J. 2017 , 25 , 85–96. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bangsa, A.B.; Schlegelmilch, B.B. Linking sustainable product attributes and consumer decision-making: Insights from a systematic review. J. Clean. Prod. 2020 , 245 , 118902. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shamdasani, P.; Chon-Lin, G.O.; Richmond, D. Exploring Green Consumers in an Oriental Culture: Role of Personal and Marketing Mix Factors. Adv. Consum. Res. 1993 , 20 , 488–493. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zinkhan, G.M.; Carlson, L. Green Advertising and the Reluctant Consumer. J. Advert. 1995 , 24 , 1–6. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, A.; Ma, E.; Qu, H.; Ryan, B. Daily green behavior as an antecedent and a moderator for visitors’ pro-environmental behaviors. J. Sustain. Tour. 2020 , 28 , 1390–1408. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zeynalova, Z.; Namazova, N. Revealing Consumer Behavior toward Green Consumption. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 5806. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Glogovețan, A.-I.; Dabija, D.-C.; Fiore, M.; Pocol, C.B. Consumer Perception and Understanding of European Union Quality Schemes: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 1667. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Campos, S.; Doxey, J.; Hammond, D. Nutrition labels on pre-packaged foods: A systematic review. Public Health Nutr. 2011 , 14 , 1496–1506. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Duong, C.D.; Doan, X.H.; Vu, D.M.; Ha, N.T.; Dam, K.V. The Role of Perceived Environmental Responsibility and Environmental Concern on Shaping Green Purchase Intention. Vision 2022 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Han, M.S.; Hampson, D.P.; Wang, Y.; Wang, H. Consumer confidence and green purchase intention: An application of the stimulus-organism-response model. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2022 , 68 , 103061. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kamalanon, P.; Chen, J.-S.; Le, T.-T. “Why Do We Buy Green Products?” An Extended Theory of the Planned Behavior Model for Green Product Purchase Behavior. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 689. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sousa, S.; Correia, E.; Viseu, C.; Larguinho, M. Analysing the Influence of Companies’ Green Communication in College Students’ Green Purchase Behaviour: An Application of the Extended Theory of Planned Behaviour Model. Adm. Sci. 2022 , 12 , 80. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tan, Z.; Sadiq, B.; Bashir, T.; Mahmood, H.; Rasool, Y. Investigating the Impact of Green Marketing Components on Purchase Intention: The Mediating Role of Brand Image and Brand Trust. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 5939. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shabnam, S.; Quaddus, M.; Roy, S.K.; Quazi, A. Consumer belief system and pro-environmental purchase intention: Does psychological distance intervene? J. Clean. Prod. 2021 , 327 , 129403. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zafar, A.U.; Shen, J.; Ashfaq, M.; Shahzad, M. Social media and sustainable purchasing attitude: Role of trust in social media and environmental effectiveness. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2021 , 63 , 102751. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dekhili, S.; Nguyen, T.-P. Green consumption in Vietnam: Effects of eco-certification, brand, and moderate incongruity of their origins on purchase intent. Rech. Appl. Mark. Engl. Ed. 2021 , 36 , 25–49. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Al-Kumaim, N.H.; Shabbir, M.S.; Alfarisi, S.; Hassan, S.H.; Alhazmi, A.K.; Hishan, S.S.; Al-Shami, S.; Gazem, N.A.; Mohammed, F.; Abu Al-Rejal, H.M. Fostering a Clean and Sustainable Environment through Green Product Purchasing Behavior: Insights from Malaysian Consumers’ Perspective. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 12585. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ansu-Mensah, P. Green product awareness effect on green purchase intentions of university students’: An emerging market’s perspective. Futur. Bus. J. 2021 , 7 , 48. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dangelico, R.M.; Nonino, F.; Pompei, A. Which are the determinants of green purchase behaviour? A study of Italian consumers. Bus. Strat. Environ. 2021 , 30 , 2600–2620. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ham, C.-D.; Chung, U.C.; Kim, W.J.; Lee, S.Y.; Oh, S.-H. Greener than Others? Exploring Generational Differences in Green Purchase Intent. Int. J. Mark. Res. 2022 , 64 , 376–396. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hameed, I.; Hyder, Z.; Imran, M.; Shafiq, K. Greenwash and green purchase behavior: An environmentally sustainable perspective. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021 , 23 , 13113–13134. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Riskos, K.; Dekoulou, P.; Mylonas, N.; Tsourvakas, G. Ecolabels and the Attitude–Behavior Relationship towards Green Product Purchase: A Multiple Mediation Model. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 6867. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sharma, A.P. Consumers’ purchase behaviour and green marketing: A synthesis, review and agenda. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2021 , 45 , 1217–1238. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wasaya, A.; Saleem, M.A.; Ahmad, J.; Nazam, M.; Khan, M.M.A.; Ishfaq, M. Impact of green trust and green perceived quality on green purchase intentions: A moderation study. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021 , 23 , 13418–13435. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Witek, L.; Kuźniar, W. Green Purchase Behavior: The Effectiveness of Sociodemographic Variables for Explaining Green Purchases in Emerging Market. Sustainability 2020 , 13 , 209. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dutta, B.; Hwang, H.-G. Consumers Purchase Intentions of Green Electric Vehicles: The Influence of Consumers Technological and Environmental Considerations. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 12025. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ahmad, W.; Zhang, Q. Green purchase intention: Effects of electronic service quality and customer green psychology. J. Clean. Prod. 2020 , 267 , 122053. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, X.; Dong, F. Why Do Consumers Make Green Purchase Decisions? Insights from a Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020 , 17 , 6607. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Chen, Y.-S.; Chang, T.-W.; Li, H.-X.; Chen, Y.-R. The Influence of Green Brand Affect on Green Purchase Intentions: The Mediation Effects of Green Brand Associations and Green Brand Attitude. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020 , 17 , 4089. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• D’Souza, C.; Taghian, M.; Hall, J.; Plant, E. Green consumption: Strategic retail considerations and consumer confidence. J. Strateg. Mark. 2020 , 1–19. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Marvi, M.H.; Minbashrazgah, M.M.; Zarei, A.; Baghini, G.S. Knowledge foundation in green purchase behaviour: Multidimensional scaling method. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2020 , 7 , 1773676. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zaremohzzabieh, Z.; Ismail, N.; Ahrari, S.; Abu Samah, A. The effects of consumer attitude on green purchase intention: A meta-analytic path analysis. J. Bus. Res. 2020 , 132 , 732–743. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Caniëls, M.C.; Lambrechts, W.; Platje, J.J.; Motylska-Kuźma, A.; Fortuński, B. Impressing my friends: The role of social value in green purchasing attitude for youthful consumers. J. Clean. Prod. 2021 , 303 , 126993. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Costa, C.S.R.; da Costa, M.F.; Maciel, R.G.; Aguiar, E.C.; Wanderley, L.O. Consumer antecedents towards green product purchase intentions. J. Clean. Prod. 2021 , 313 , 127964. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• de Groot, J.I.; Bondy, K.; Schuitema, G. Listen to others or yourself? The role of personal norms on the effectiveness of social norm interventions to change pro-environmental behavior. J. Environ. Psychol. 2021 , 78 , 101688. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, B.; Li, J.; Sun, A.; Wang, Y.; Wu, D. Residents’ Green Purchasing Intentions in a Developing-Country Context: Integrating PLS-SEM and MGA Methods. Sustainability 2019 , 12 , 30. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Cheung, M.F.; To, W. An extended model of value-attitude-behavior to explain Chinese consumers’ green purchase behavior. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2019 , 50 , 145–153. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ndofirepi, T.M.; Matema, S.C. Exploring Green Purchasing Behaviour among College Students in a Developing Economy. South. Afr. Bus. Rev. 2019 , 23 , 25. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Wang, H.; Ma, B.; Bai, R. How Does Green Product Knowledge Effectively Promote Green Purchase Intention? Sustainability 2019 , 11 , 1193. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Ghazali, E.M.; Mutum, D.S.; Ariswibowo, N. Impact of religious values and habit on an extended green purchase behaviour model. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2018 , 42 , 639–654. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ricci, E.C.; Banterle, A.; Stranieri, S. Trust to Go Green: An Exploration of Consumer Intentions for Eco-friendly Convenience Food. Ecol. Econ. 2018 , 148 , 54–65. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Ko, S.B.; Jin, B. Predictors of purchase intention toward green apparel products: A cross-cultural investigation in the USA and China. J. Fash. Mark. Manag. Int. J. 2017 , 21 , 70–87. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, H.-J. Determinants of consumers’ purchase behaviour towards green brands. Serv. Ind. J. 2017 , 37 , 896–918. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sun, H.; Teh, P.-L.; Linton, J.D. Impact of environmental knowledge and product quality on student attitude toward products with recycled/remanufactured content: Implications for environmental education and green manufacturing. Bus. Strat. Environ. 2018 , 27 , 935–945. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hansmann, R.; Laurenti, R.; Mehdi, T.; Binder, C.R. Determinants of pro-environmental behavior: A comparison of university students and staff from diverse faculties at a Swiss University. J. Clean. Prod. 2020 , 268 , 121864. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ekici, F.; Orhan, G.; Gümüş, Ö.; Bahce, A.B. A policy on the externality problem and solution suggestions in air transportation: The environment and sustainability. Energy 2022 , 258 , 124827. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rahmi, D.Y.; Rozalia, Y.; Chan, D.N.; Anira, Q.; Lita, R.P. Green Brand Image Relation Model, Green Awareness, Green Advertisement, and Ecological Knowledge as Competitive Advantage in Improving Green Purchase Intention and Green Purchase Behavior on Creative Industry Products. J. Econ. Bus. Account. Ventur. 2017 , 20 , 177–186. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mayer, D.M.; Aquino, K.; Greenbaum, R.L.; Kuenzi, M. Who Displays Ethical Leadership, and Why Does It Matter? An Examination of Antecedents and Consequences of Ethical Leadership. Acad. Manag. J. 2012 , 55 , 151–171. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Adhitiya, L.; Astuti, R.D. The Effect of Consumer Value on Attitude Toward Green Product and Green Consumer Behavior in Organic Food. IPTEK J. Proc. Ser. 2019 , 5 , 193–202. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Deselnicu, D.C.; Alexandrescu, B.A. Comparative analysis of sustainable development indicators at EU and Romanian level. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Advanced Materials and Systems: ICAMS 2020, Bucharest, Romania, 1–3 October 2020; pp. 373–378. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dimitri, C.; Dettmann, R. Organic food consumers: What do we really know about them? Br. Food J. 2012 , 114 , 1157–1183. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sidique, S.F.; Lupi, F.; Joshi, S.V. The effects of behavior and attitudes on drop-off recycling activities. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2010 , 54 , 163–170. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ou, Y.-C.; De Vries, L.; Wiesel, T.; Verhoef, P. The Role of Consumer Confidence in Creating Customer Loyalty. J. Serv. Res. 2014 , 17 , 339–354. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cialdini, R.; Reno, R.R.; Kallgren, C.A. A Focus Theory of Normative Conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1990 , 58 , 1015–1026. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Barbu, A.; Militaru, G.; Popescu, M.; Marcu, I.-C.C.; Ganciu, M. A study on factors affecting the intention to use smart meters. evidence from Romania. Int. Multidiscip. Sci. GeoConference SGEM 2021 , 21 , 11–18. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lee, K. Opportunities for green marketing: Young consumers. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2008 , 26 , 573–586. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Prayag, G.; Hosany, S.; Muskat, B.; Chiapa, G.D. Understanding the relationships between tourists’ emotional experiences, perceived overall image, satisfaction, and intention to recommend. J. Travel Res. 2017 , 56 , 41–54. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Gul, R.F.; Liu, D.; Jamil, K.; Baig, S.A.; Awan, F.H.; Liu, M. Linkages between market orientation and brand performance with positioning strategies of significant fashion apparels in Pakistan. Fash. Text. 2021 , 8 , 37. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Peter, J.P.; Ryan, M.J. An investigation of perceived risk at the brand level. J. Mark. Res. 1976 , 13 , 184–188. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Howard, J.A.; Sheth, J.N. The theory of buyer behavior. N. Y. 1969 , 63 , 145. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ellen, P.S.; Wiener, J.L.; Cobb-Walgren, C. The Role of Perceived Consumer Effectiveness in Motivating Environmentally Conscious Behaviors. J. Public Policy Mark. 1991 , 10 , 102–117. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Volland, B. The role of risk and trust attitudes in explaining residential energy demand: Evidence from the United Kingdom. Ecol. Econ. 2017 , 132 , 14–30. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Wales, C.; Harvey, M.; Warde, A. Recuperating from BSE: The shifting UK institutional basis for trust in food. Appetite 2006 , 47 , 187–195. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Tonsor, G.T.; Schroeder, T.C.; Pennings, J.M.E. Factors Impacting Food Safety Risk Perceptions. J. Agric. Econ. 2009 , 60 , 625–644. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Govindasamy, R.; Italia, J.; Adelaja, A. Predicting Willingness-to-Pay a Premium for Integrated Pest Management Produce: A Logistic Approach. Agric. Resour. Econ. Rev. 2001 , 30 , 151–159. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Grebitus, C.; Steiner, B.; Veeman, M. The roles of human values and generalized trust on stated preferences when food is labeled with environmental footprints: Insights from Germany. Food Policy 2015 , 52 , 84–91. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Pugliese, P.; Zanasi, C.; Atallah, O.; Cosimo, R. Investigating the interaction between organic and local foods in the Mediterranean: The Lebanese organic consumer’s perspective. Food Policy 2013 , 39 , 1–12. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Olbrich, R.; Jansen, H.C.; Hundt, M. Effects of pricing strategies and product quality on private label and national brand performance. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017 , 34 , 294–301. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Blankenau, J.; Snowden, M.; Langan, M. Understanding environmentalism in a red, agricultural state: The impact of political party identification and place of residence. Sociol. Spectr. 2007 , 28 , 55–80. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Berenguer, J.; Corraliza, J.A.; Martín, R. Rural-Urban Differences in Environmental Concern, Attitudes, and Actions. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 2005 , 21 , 128–138. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Barbu, A.; Catană, Ș.-A.; Deselnicu, D.C.; Cioca, L.-I.; Ioanid, A. Factors Influencing Consumer Behavior toward Green Products: A Systematic Literature Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022 , 19 , 16568. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192416568

Barbu A, Catană Ș-A, Deselnicu DC, Cioca L-I, Ioanid A. Factors Influencing Consumer Behavior toward Green Products: A Systematic Literature Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health . 2022; 19(24):16568. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192416568

Barbu, Andreea, Ștefan-Alexandru Catană, Dana Corina Deselnicu, Lucian-Ionel Cioca, and Alexandra Ioanid. 2022. "Factors Influencing Consumer Behavior toward Green Products: A Systematic Literature Review" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 24: 16568. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192416568

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Wiley - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Impact of COVID‐19 on changing consumer behaviour: Lessons from an emerging economy

Debadyuti das.

1 Faculty of Management Studies, Delhi University, Delhi India

Ashutosh Sarkar

2 Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode, Kozhikode India

Arindam Debroy

3 Symbiosis Institute of Business Management Nagpur, Nagpur Maharashtra, India

Associated Data

The authors declare that the data used in the paper is collected through a questionnaire survey and have not used any proprietary data from any source. The data collected through the primary survey may be made available on demand.

The present study investigates the impact of COVID‐19 on Consumers' changing way of life and buying behaviour based on their socio‐economic backgrounds. A questionnaire survey was carried out to understand the impact of COVID‐19 on consumers' affordability, lifestyle, and health awareness and how these effects influenced their buying behaviour. A total of 425 usable responses were analysed using the structural equation modelling considering Consumers' socio‐economic background as exogenous variables and Consumers' changing way of life and Adaptation in consumers’ buying behaviour as endogenous variables. The study reveals that COVID‐19 has affected the consumers in the unorganised sectors more than others and induced an increase in the demand for affordable substitutes for daily necessities. The demand for wellness and entertainment products is found to depend upon the occupation and family earning status of consumers which is jointly mediated by affordability and lifestyle changes. Further, the findings show that the demand for health and hygiene products depends on the current employment status and family earning status of consumers which is jointly mediated by affordability and awareness towards health and hygiene. The model developed in the present study allows the decision‐makers to identify which segments of the population with certain socio‐economic backgrounds could be targeted for wellness products and which ones could be targeted for health and hygiene products. In addition, the model provides rich insights to the managers as to what kind of product substitution would be viable in the market during the pandemic.

1. INTRODUCTION

COVID‐19 has disrupted humankind in a manner not seen in recent times, infecting 6.5 million people while leaving millions unemployed (Hensher,  2020 ). While the loss of life, occupation, and livelihood are well‐articulated impacts of COVID‐19, the loss of routine social and economic life over a prolonged period is having long‐lasting effects on people (Chriscaden,  2020 ). COVID‐19‐imposed ‘self‐isolation and social lockdown’ has increased mental stress and inflicted psychological and behavioural changes (Witteveen,  2020 ). Under constant fear of infection and restricted mobility, people are becoming more aware of health and changing their lifestyles and eating habits (Sánchez‐Sánchez et al.,  2020 ). Reported preliminary studies also suggest that the nature and extent of the impact of COVID‐19 is not similar across all citizens and depend on their condition of poverty, age, residential status, and other demographic variables (U n ited Nations, n.d.).

As a consequence of the economic, social, and psychological impact of COVID‐19, people have altered how and where they should spend their money (Rogers & Cosgrove,  2020 ). Kirk and Rifkin ( 2020 ) argued that consumers react, cope, and adapt to environmentally‐imposed constraints such as the COVID‐19 pandemic. During the pandemic, consumers have displayed a variety of unusual behaviours (Laato et al.,  2020 ; Pantano et al.,  2020 ) and forced them to spend more on essentials while cutting back discretionary spending. Consumers are also observed to have changed brands and products, substituted spends when stocked out, and become more sensitive towards health and hygiene. Market studies pertaining to the impact of COVID‐19 on consumers have also indicated increased spending on groceries, and health and hygiene products (Rogers & Cosgrove,  2020 ). The above changes have motivated researchers to explore how the consumers behaved during the pandemic and the reasons for such behaviour.

Some of the COVID‐19‐induced behaviours that were studied include consumption shifts (Kansiime et al.,  2021 ; Pakravan‐Charvadeh et al.,  2021 ), impulsive buying (Naeem,  2020 ), stockpiling, and panic buying (Billore & Anisimova,  2021 ; Keane & Neal,  2021 ; Naeem,  2020 ; Prentice et al.,  2021 ), product and brand substitution (Knowles et al.,  2020 ), and shifts in channel preferences (Mehrolia et al.,  2021 ; Pantano et al.,  2020 ). Researchers have attributed such behaviour to COVID‐19‐induced impacts on consumers' socio‐economic status, changing way of life, and influence on predisposed beliefs (Milaković, 2021 ), changes in the consumers' buying environment such as stockouts, supply and demand disruptions (Prentice et al., 2021 ), and external stimuli such as information and social media exposure. (Laato et al.,  2020 ; Naeem,  2020 ). It was also reported that a significant number of people have lost their jobs (Montenovo et al.,  2020 ) and family income dwindled as a consequence of COVID‐19 (Kansiime et al.,  2021 ). COVID‐19 has affected consumers' disposable income or affordability (Mahmud & Riley,  2021 ), lifestyle (Sánchez‐Sánchez et al.,  2020 ), and awareness (Li et al.,  2021 )—in short, their way of life—making them change their pre‐COVID spending habits. We, however, did not come across research studies that analysed the nature of changes in consumer behaviour due to changes in consumers' affordability, lifestyle changes, and awareness level. This suggests an opportunity to investigate the impact of COVID‐19 on Consumers' changing way of life and consequently on their buying behaviour based on the varying socio‐economic background of the population. Our research primarily focuses on studying consumption shifts and substitution behaviour and connects such changes to the changes in consumers' way of life. Such studies are very important for market researchers and firms in terms of segmentation of the market when a pandemic of this nature affects the entire population. Such studies would help firms in devising targeted marketing strategies during the ongoing pandemic and beyond. With this background, the present study seeks to address the following research questions:

• How has the socio‐economic background influenced Consumers' way of life including affordability, lifestyle changes, and awareness towards health and hygiene arising out of COVID‐19?
• To what extent has the Consumers' changing way of life arising out of COVID‐19 influenced Adaptation in their buying behaviour?
• How has the socio‐economic background led to the Adaptation in consumers' buying behaviour arising out of COVID‐19?

The methodology followed in this study involves investigating the influence of exogenous variables including occupation, current employment status, and family earning status on the intervening variables representing Consumers' changing way of life and finally on the dependent variables which reflect the Adaptation in consumers' buying behaviour. The study provides important insights to managers in terms of designing affordable substitute products of daily necessities for the vulnerable section of the society. In addition, it also provides insights to the policy planners in terms of developing appropriate intervention strategies for the affected consumers.

2. BACKGROUND LITERATURE

Adaptations in people's buying behaviour due to COVID‐19 are in line with the existing literature encompassing changes in consumers' needs and preferences induced by events that are environmental, social, biological, cognitive, and behavioural in nature (Mathur et al.,  2006 ). Such disruptions often force consumers to seek stability (Minton & Cabano,  2021 ) and, as a result, they display conservative and planned behaviour (Sarmento et al.,  2019 ). Such stability‐seeking behaviour induces austerity measures among consumers affected by economic recession or slowdown making consumers more price‐sensitive (Hampson & McGoldrick,  2013 ). While, in the past, pandemics such as influenza have affected economic activities significantly (Verikios et al.,  2016 ), some changes in consumers’ behaviour are not entirely due to the economic impacts. For example, during the outbreak of the Asian flu, consumers have displayed risk‐coping strategies that influenced their consumption of chicken meat (Yeung & Yee,  2012 ). Similarly, natural disasters such as Hurricane Katrina contributed to stress‐induced compulsive and impulsive buying behaviour among the affected residents of the US Gulf Coast (Sneath et al.,  2009 ). During natural disasters, consumers have been observed to have spent on luxury brands and premium categories displaying both cross‐category indulgence (Mark et al.,  2016 ) and impulsive buying behaviour (Kennett‐Hensel et al.,  2012 ).

Recently, adaptations in consumers' buying behaviour due to COVID‐19 have been studied under various themes (Kansiime et al.,  2021 ; Laato et al.,  2020 ; Pakravan‐Charvadeh et al.,  2021 ; Pantano et al.,  2020 ; Rayburn et al.,  2021 ). Gordon‐Wilson ( 2021 ) noted that external influences such as COVID‐19 affected ‘consumer's feelings for self‐control’ by changing their shopping behaviour, type of shopping and preference of store format, and consumption of unhealthy snacks and alcohol. Kim et al. ( 2021 ) highlighted the influence of protection motivation in explaining consumers' commitment to hygienic behaviour, prioritization of local restaurants, and conscious consumption. Guthrie et al. ( 2021 ) employed the react‐cope‐adapt framework to understand how consumer behaviour has evolved in terms of their usage of e‐commerce as a result of stressful events such as the COVID‐19. Eroglu et al. ( 2022 ) revealed that the crowding in retail stores significantly affects the shopping satisfaction of consumers during COVID‐19, which is mediated by customer‐employee rapport. They further argued that such relationships significantly differ based on consumers' perceptions about the appropriateness of retailer precautions, the severity of threats, and vulnerability to COVID‐19. Milaković ( 2021 ) demonstrated the moderating effect of consumer adaptability in explaining the influence of consumer vulnerability and consumer resilience on purchase satisfaction and finally on the repurchase intention of consumers. Yap et al. ( 2021 ) introduced a new dimension called technology‐mediated consumption as a coping strategy adopted by consumers in coping with pandemic‐induced stress and anxiety during the pandemic. They further discussed paradoxes explaining the nexus between the consumption of technology and consumer vulnerability. Nayal et al. ( 2021 ) identified various coping strategies for firms to take care of the employee and customer well‐being. Digitalization and innovation emerged as the two focus areas for adoption by firms for their survival post‐COVID‐19. In addition, the study further revealed that consumers have demonstrated a shift in their consumption behaviour during the present pandemic in favour of hygiene, sustainability, and local products.

The present study also deals with the shifts in consumption behaviour and product substitution behaviour among consumers that were observed during COVID‐19. However, our study is quite different from the existing studies in the sense that we attribute such shifts in consumption and product substitution behaviour to how COVID‐19 has impacted the Consumers' way of life. COVID‐19 pandemic has induced changes in consumers' demand—both in magnitude as well as in their preference (del Rio‐Chanona et al.,  2020 ). The pandemic has also resulted in increased consumption of certain products which were either consumed in lesser quantities or not consumed at all before the event (Kirk & Rifkin,  2020 ). Such effects have led to significant upward shifts in the market demand for these products. We refer to such shifts as ‘new demand’. Examples of ‘new demand’ include cleaning and personal hygiene products such as Lysol and hand sanitizers (Chaudhuri,  2020 ), health and wellness products such as vitamins, healthy foods, and other immunity boosters (Hess,  2020 ), packaged goods and beverages, household care products, fresh and organic foods, personal care products (Knowles et al.,  2020 ) and digital platforms (Debroy,  2020 ), which displayed a surge in demand during COVID‐19. Consumers have also displayed substitution behaviour during the pandemic (Knowles et al.,  2020 ) thereby changing significantly the consumption both by volume as well as product preference. Product substitution is also observed during this pandemic due to lifestyle changes while the change of preference is observed due to awareness of health. The literature on product substitution is characterized by several factors prompting substitution behaviour by consumers (Hamilton et al.,  2014 ). However, while studying new demand and product substitution behaviour under disruptive events, we observed that most of these studies are limited to the economic impacts of the events (Martin et al.,  2020 ) and hence, there is still scope for studying such behaviour considering the non‐economic impacts of the pandemic.

Disruption affects people's lives in a variety of ways derailing their normal ways of living. Earlier studies on disruptions dealt with disruption‐induced depression, lifestyle changes, changes in information, awareness, and education (Mathur et al.,  2006 ; Sneath et al.,  2009 ). During the present pandemic also, significant changes in lifestyle and health awareness (Arora & Grey,  2020 ) were observed. The fear of getting infected with COVID‐19 and the government‐imposed lockdowns have reduced mobility and physical activities (Sánchez‐Sánchez et al.,  2020 ); changed dietary and consumption behaviour (Kansiime et al.,  2021 ; Pakravan‐Charvadeh et al.,  2021 ), and sleep behaviour (Chopra et al.,  2020 ). COVID‐19 has also increased health concerns and awareness impacting consumption of health and wellness products in a significant manner (Baiano et al.,  2020 ; Hess,  2020 ). However, lifestyle changes, awareness towards health, and change in consumption behaviour arising out of COVID‐19 were not found to be uniform across people of diverse socio‐economic groups (Laato et al.,  2020 ). As COVID‐19 has affected the entire population in varying degrees based on their socio‐economic background, there exists a scope for research as to how different consumer groups have adapted their buying behaviour.

3. THEORETICAL MODEL AND DEVELOPMENT OF HYPOTHESES

In order to understand how COVID‐19 has impacted consumers’ way of life and consumer buying behaviour, we mainly draw from preliminary studies, market surveys, and published research articles on the impact of COVID‐19. This study mainly has three dimensions: (1) Consumers' socio‐economic background, (2) Consumers' changing way of life, and (3) Adaptation in consumers' buying behaviour as shown in Figure  1 , which serves as the theoretical model of the present work. Consumers' changing way of life has been captured through ‘Change in affordability’, ‘Lifestyle changes’ and ‘Awareness towards health and hygiene’ arising out of COVID‐19 while Adaptation in consumers' buying behaviour has been represented through ‘Creation of new demand for wellness and entertainment products’, ‘Creation of new demand for health and hygiene products’, ‘Substitution of daily necessities due to affordability’ and ‘Substitution of daily necessities due to awareness towards health’.

Theoretical model of the impact of COVID‐19 on consumer behaviour

3.1. Consumers' socio‐economic background and affordability

COVID‐19 has significantly influenced individual and household incomes and spending habits. However, such economic hardships varied based on their occupation, employment status, and socio‐demographic background (Witteveen,  2020 ). The adverse effects are estimated to be strongest for those occupations that are characterized by lower levels of skill, education, and income, have lesser possibilities of working remotely (Adams‐Prassl et al.,  2020 ), and require more face‐to‐face interpersonal contacts (Avdiu & Nayyar,  2020 ; Montenovo et al.,  2020 ). We have observed that some people have received lower than the regular salary in their current employment while a few others have lost their jobs during lockdowns which has adversely affected their capacity to sustain the household expenditure. Many studies have observed that family income, personal savings, and occupational status affected the ability of a household to continue their pre‐COVID spending (Kansiime et al.,  2021 ; Pakravan‐Charvadeh et al.,  2021 ; Piyapromdee & Spittal,  2020 ). In addition, the ability to support the household expenditure is found to depend upon the number of earning members, which further reflects the earning potential of a family (Addabbo,  2000 ). Hence, based on the above discussion, we postulate the following hypotheses:

Occupation significantly influences the affordability of consumers.

Current employment status significantly influences the affordability of consumers.

Family earning status significantly influences the affordability of consumers.

3.2. Consumers' socio‐economic background and lifestyle changes

COVID‐19 has brought a dramatic change in the lifestyle of people. However, the change is different for people belonging to different socio‐economic backgrounds. While occupations such as travel, restaurants, Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSME) have seen reduced business activities, there are people in other occupations, for whom work from home during the pandemic is like a much‐needed break from their monotonous schedule. Thus, the nature of occupation seems to have an impact on the work schedule and lifestyle changes of people. Many studies have noted that occupational social class and status are associated with the lifestyle of people (García‐Mayor et al.,  2021 ). Likewise, receiving a reduced salary or having lost their job during lockdown seems to have had a considerable influence on consumers' lifestyles in terms of daily routine, thought process, and social habits (Khubchandani et al.,  2020 ; PTI,  2020 ). On the other hand, the lifestyle of a family with multiple earning members may be significantly different from a family with a sole earning member (Pew Research,  2008 ). Thus, we advance the following hypotheses:

Occupation significantly influences the lifestyle changes of consumers.

Current employment status significantly influences the lifestyle changes of consumers.

Family earning status significantly influences the lifestyle changes of consumers.

3.3. Consumers' socio‐economic background and awareness towards health and hygiene

COVID‐19 has resulted in people becoming more conscious about their health and personal hygiene (Baiano et al.,  2020 ; Hess,  2020 ). Government advisories and campaigns for maintaining personal hygiene through regular hand washes and wearing masks have resulted in people becoming concerned about their hygiene like never before. However, as occupation varies with the level of education, so does the awareness towards health and hygiene (Teisl et al.,  1999 ). Similarly, awareness towards health and hygiene varies with employment status and family earning status (Prasad et al.,  2008 ). Based on this, we posit the following hypotheses:

Occupation significantly influences the awareness level of consumers towards their health and hygiene.

Current employment status significantly influences the awareness level of consumers towards their health and hygiene.

Family earning status significantly influences the awareness level of consumers towards their health and hygiene.

3.4. Affordability and consumers' buying behaviour

Due to reduced affordability, a large number of people are restricting their expenditure to mostly essentials and healthcare products while cutting down on non‐discretionary products (Martin et al.,  2020 ). This has led to a reduction in sales of many non‐essentials. The pandemic, however, has witnessed a significant rise in the demand for wellness and entertainment products delivered through digital platforms (Bakhtiani,  2021 ; Madnani et al.,  2020 ). Since such subscriptions by consumers are discretionary (Singh,  2020 ), we expect an influence of reduced affordability due to the pandemic on the creation of new demand. Equivalently, it could also be stated that a positive change in affordability would have a positive impact on the usage of such products (Bakhtiani,  2021 ; Madnani et al.,  2020 ). Earlier studies in economics and public health have noted that family income significantly influences demand for hygiene products and associated practices (Aunger et al.,  2016 ; Jacob et al.,  2014 ). In many cases, consumers with lower affordability also explored cheaper alternatives such as private labels and affordable brands (Mishra & Balsara,  2020 ). Therefore, based on the above arguments, we postulate the following hypotheses:

Creation of new demand for wellness and entertainment products is significantly associated with the change in affordability.

Creation of new demand for products relating to health and hygiene is significantly associated with the change in affordability.

The demand for affordable substitute products of daily necessities is significantly associated with the change in affordability.

3.5. Lifestyle changes and demand for wellness and entertainment products

Lifestyle changes due to COVID‐19 have made people more sensitive to fitness that caused a surge in demand for wellness products (Ojha,  2020 ). Many people are now preferring organic and herbal products and are subscribing to fitness classes and channels (Wernau & Gasparro,  2020 ). Furthermore, institutional lockdowns imposed by governments have forced people to stay at home and spend time with their families (Debroy,  2020 ). Additionally, with a regular source of entertainment such as restaurants and movie theatres remaining restricted, people have turned to online platforms for recreation. Even online yoga classes have experienced a spike in their viewership with the spread of this virus (Debroy,  2020 ). Thus, we propose the following hypothesis:

Creation of new demand for wellness and entertainment products is positively associated with Lifestyle changes.

3.6. Awareness towards health and hygiene and demand for health and hygiene products

Marketing experts have always emphasized the importance of increasing awareness among consumers to increase product demand (Baiano et al.,  2020 ; Hess,  2020 ). COVID‐19 has resulted in people becoming more conscious about their health and personal hygiene. As part of maintaining a proper and healthy lifestyle, regular hand washes and wearing masks are considered to be the defence mechanisms of protecting oneself from the virus. Common people have been spending more on buying healthcare products (Rakshit,  2020 ). Moreover, the current times have witnessed an incomparable urge in people to substitute unhealthy food items and daily necessities with healthy ones (Master,  2020 ; Renner et al.,  2020 ). Thus, the following hypotheses are advanced:

Creation of new demand for products relating to health and hygiene is positively associated with consumers' awareness towards health and hygiene.

The demand for healthy substitute products of daily necessities is positively associated with consumers' awareness towards health and hygiene.

3.7. Consumers' socio‐economic background and creation of new demand for wellness and entertainment products

During this pandemic, fitness and wellness products, and digital platforms such as Netflix have become very popular (Debroy,  2020 ). However, the nature of demand for wellness and entertainment products varied across people with different socio‐economic backgrounds. A person's occupation, employment status, and family income influence consumers' preference for wellness products (Suresh & Ravichandran,  2011 ) and also have a considerable impact on the creation of new demand for wellness and entertainment products (Madnani et al.,  2020 ). Therefore, we propose to investigate further the relationship between consumers with diverse socio‐economic backgrounds and the creation of new demand for wellness and entertainment products. Thus, we postulate the following hypotheses:

Occupation significantly influences the creation of new demand for wellness and entertainment products.

Current employment status significantly influences the creation of new demand for wellness and entertainment products.

Family earning status significantly influences the creation of new demand for wellness and entertainment products.

3.8. Consumers' socio‐economic background and creation of new demand for health and hygiene products

This pandemic has also seen an increased demand for health and hygiene products (Dsouza,  2020 ). People have been forced to spend on hand washes, sanitizers, and masks to protect against this rapidly spreading virus. As there are occupations that would put an individual and her/his family into different levels of vulnerabilities (Avdiu & Nayyar,  2020 ), we expect variations in the consumption of health and hygiene products based on their occupation (Riise et al.,  2003 ). Earlier research has established the relationship between family income and consumers' preference for healthy food (Galati et al.,  2019 ; Pakravan‐Charvadeh et al.,  2021 ). The reduced income and job losses would have a significant bearing on both mental stress as well as disposable income (Witteveen,  2020 ) which, in turn, influence the choice of consumers for health and hygiene products (Khubchandani et al.,  2020 ). Therefore, the creation of new demand for health and hygiene products seems to vary depending on the types of occupation, current employment status, and family earning status. Thus, we propose the following hypotheses:

Occupation significantly influences the creation of new demand for products relating to health and hygiene.

Current employment status significantly influences the creation of new demand for products relating to health and hygiene.

Family earning status significantly influences the creation of new demand for products relating to health and hygiene.

4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

4.1. design of survey instrument and its reliability.

The findings of Paul and Bhukya ( 2021 ) reveal that the impact of COVID‐19 on consumer behaviour is one of the important contemporary topics of research. However, we could not find any suitable questionnaire in the extant literature with specific reference to the hypothesized research model depicted in Figure  1 which could be directly utilized for data collection purposes. We came across several items in the literature for other kinds of disasters, which were found relevant for our study. In addition, we also observed through newspapers, electronic media, and social media the challenges faced by the consumers in respect of reduced salary, job losses, health issues, the surge in demand for products relating to health and hygiene, etc. arising out of COVID‐19. We took cognizance of all these aspects and framed an open‐ended questionnaire in the initial phase to develop an understanding of different types of challenges faced by the consumers and their impact on changing consumer behaviour. The open‐ended questionnaire was translated into Hindi, Malayalam, and Bengali with the help of three bilingual experts having expertise in Hindi, Malayalam, and Bengali languages respectively along with English. We administered this questionnaire to consumers with different linguistic and socio‐economic backgrounds. We identified five respondents from Government/Public Sector organisations, five from Multinational/Private sector firms, and five from MSMEs. In addition, we identified three independent businessmen and seven daily wage‐earners. All these respondents were requested to participate in the study after thoroughly explaining to them the purpose of undertaking this particular exercise. They agreed to take part in the study. However, the daily wage‐earners had to be given INR100/‐ each to motivate them to take part in the study. Amongst these respondents, some of them could understand Hindi well, some of them could understand Malayalam well while a few others could understand Bengali well. In the case of employees of Public sector and Private sector firms, the questionnaire was sent through email with the request to provide unambiguous responses within a week. In the case of the employees of MSMEs and independent businessmen, we took separate appointments through telephonic calls and requested that one of the authors would seek responses from them in person by maintaining the protocol of social distancing. One author from Delhi and another author from Kozhikode separately conducted this exercise in Delhi and Kozhikode respectively. Finally, in the case of daily wage‐earners, we directly talked to a few rickshaw‐pullers, a few street vendors, and a few masons and managed to secure their responses after incentivizing them. We asked the questions verbally to this category of respondents and they replied to the specific questions based on their experience. Thus, we had to record the conversations which were later transcribed.

Based on the responses received from the preliminary study, we summarized them under different sections and designed another open‐ended questionnaire. The purpose of designing the second‐round open‐ended questionnaire was to cross‐check the same with the experts and to ensure adequate and appropriate coverage of the items under different sections thereby taking care of the content validity of the questionnaire. For example, we identified several items reflecting the financial distress faced by the common people due to COVID‐19 and put them under ‘Affordability’. We requested the experts to exercise their judgment in terms of whether those items represent the essence of ‘Affordability’. Those experts were chosen who had considerable experience in selling essential items either through the offline or online channel. In addition, a few more experts were also selected who conducted research in consumer behaviour for a sufficient period. Accordingly, we selected experts from both academia and industry, which included one Professor of Marketing, two researchers doing research in consumer behaviour, one manager from an offline store selling essential items, and one executive from an online retailer. These experts were known to be thoroughly conversant with the impact of COVID‐19 on the consumers’ way of life and also their changing buying behaviour across consumers of varying socio‐economic backgrounds. The experts recommended the retention of most of the items and the removal of very few ones. Subsequently, we designed the close‐ended questionnaire based on the recommendation of the experts. The close‐ended questionnaire was divided into three sections. The first section contained questions relating to the socio‐demographic profile and earning status of the respondents. The second section carried questions about the factors influencing Consumers' changing way of life arising out of COVID‐19. Finally, the third section contained questions pertaining to the adaptations on consumers' buying behaviour due to COVID‐19. A five‐point Likert scale ranging from 1 = Not at all True to 5 = Absolutely True was used as a response format in the second and third sections. The questionnaire was shown to the same experts once again to elicit their opinion for evaluating its ease of understanding from the perspective of potential respondents. Based on the recommendation of experts, some questions were rephrased. This exercise helped us in ensuring the content validity of the questionnaire. Table  1 presents the first part of the questionnaire while Appendices  1 and 2 show the second and third parts of the questionnaire respectively.

Distribution of the respondents based on socio‐demographic background ( n  = 425)

Subsequently, the reliability of the questionnaire was tested by administering the survey on 30 respondents chosen carefully. Cronbach's alpha of the scale representing Consumers' changing way of life turned out to be 0.795 while the same for the scale showing Adaptation in consumers’ buying behaviour was found to be 0.895. Both the scales showed high corrected item‐to‐total correlations which indicated the presence of high internal consistency. Since the alpha value of both scales was well above the threshold level of 0.7, these scales were considered reliable (Hair et al.,  2009 ).

4.2. Target respondents and collection of data

The survey was administered amongst the respondents with diverse socio‐economic backgrounds in India. The questionnaire was circulated among people working in Government organisations, private sector organisations, MSMEs, and also among the daily wage‐earners. Given the diversity of the languages, we administered the survey in four languages including, English, Hindi, Malayalam, and Bengali. The above languages were chosen as a substantial percentage of the population of India speaks these languages. Efforts were also made to ensure that only one response is received from a single household. Because of the lockdown and the restrictions on mobility, we chose a variety of mediums to reach out to the potential respondents. We approached the potential respondents both through online and offline mode. In the case of online mode, the questionnaire was circulated on social media mainly through LinkedIn, WhatsApp, and Facebook urging people to respond to the questionnaire. These mediums were chosen for their immense popularity in India in terms of the number of users. They were further selected as the authors also have their active networks and groups in these platforms. In the case of offline mode, some respondents were sent questionnaires via email while others were administered through hard copies of the questionnaire in a language of their choice. Field‐workers were hired against remuneration who physically received the responses directly by visiting the respondents' doorsteps or by reaching out to them in public places like, malls, popular restaurants, and shops. Field‐workers were clearly instructed to explain the essence of the questionnaire to the respondents thoroughly before asking them to fill out the questionnaire. They were further advised not to fill out the questionnaire on behalf of the respondents. The questionnaire survey was administered over two months during August and September 2020. During this period, different parts of India were experiencing a variety of restrictions depending on the number and severity of COVID‐19 cases in different places. A total of 494 responses were received out of which 69 responses were found to be incomplete and incoherent. Thus, we were left with 425 usable responses for the final analysis.

4.3. Tests for potential bias in survey data

Non‐response bias was assessed by performing a t ‐test on the scores of early and late respondents based on the assumption that the opinions of late respondents are representative of the opinions of non‐respondents (Krause et al.,  2001 ). A total of 241 responses (56.7%) were received in the first month (i.e., August 2020) while 184 responses (43.3%) were received in the second month (i.e., September 2020). Respondents giving responses in the first month were considered as early respondents while those giving responses in the second month were treated as late respondents. T ‐tests were carried out between early respondents with 241 responses and late respondents with 184 responses on individual items. The results did not reveal any significant difference between the two groups for most of the items. This indicates that the data was relatively free from non‐response bias.

As this study relied on single respondents for doing the final analysis, the potential for common method bias to influence the results was also evaluated. We applied Harman's one‐factor test to evaluate common method bias separately on the scale representing Consumers’ changing way of life and the scale reflecting Adaptation in consumers’ buying behaviour . We carried out the above test separately for both the scales in IBM SPSS (version 25) by doing exploratory factor analysis without rotation. All 13 items representing Consumers’ changing way of life were allowed to be loaded into one single factor and again all 16 items reflecting Adaptation in consumers' buying behaviour were loaded into another single factor. It was found that the common factor representing Consumers' changing way of life explained only 25% of the total variance while the common factor capturing Adaptation in consumers' buying behaviour explained only 30.4% of the total variance. Since the total variance of a single factor was less than 50% in both the scales, the common method bias did not seem to be a concern for the present study (Podsakoff et al.,  2003 ).

5. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

The 425 usable responses were also checked for missing values and inconsistency. An overview of the respondents' demographic profile, descriptive statistics, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), and the validation of the conceptual model using the Structured Equation Modelling (SEM) is presented in the following sub‐sections. We utilized IBM SPSS (version 25) for finding out the descriptive statistics of manifest variables and the demographic profile of the respondents. In addition, we also employed IBM SPSS AMOS (version 24) for carrying out CFA and SEM. Regarding descriptive statistics, we determined the minimum score, maximum score, mean and standard deviation of all items of both the scales and presented the same in Appendices  1 and 2 .

5.1. Demographic profile

The socio‐economic profile of 425 respondents revealed that most of them were of working age with a sizeable number of respondents (71.53%) turning out to be male. A majority of the respondents were employed (74.83%). However, a substantial portion of respondents lost their jobs or was receiving reduced salaries after the imposition of lockdown (35.76%). In terms of educational qualification, a major portion of the respondents (69.88%) were graduates with 56% of them having earned their degree in a professional course. The family earning status of the respondents showed that 29.88% were the sole earners in their family. The details of the demographic profile are provided in Table  1 .

5.2. Confirmatory factor analysis

The questionnaire developed through several rounds of an iterative process and validated by the experts allowed us to determine the underlying constructs. We observed that Consumers' changing way of life consists of three constructs while Adaptation in consumers' buying behaviour comprises four constructs. We applied CFA to assess how well the observed variables including 13 items relating to the Consumers' changing way of life and another 16 items representing Adaptation in consumers' buying behaviour arising out of COVID‐19 reflect unobserved or latent constructs in the hypothesized structure. In the CFA model, all seven constructs were allowed to be correlated with each other forming a composite measurement scale representing the Consumers' changing way of life and Adaptation in consumers' buying behaviour due to COVID‐19. The model was assessed by utilizing the maximum likelihood (ML) method. One of the prerequisites of the ML method is the normality of the endogenous variables (Kline,  2016 ). Thus, for ascertaining whether the data of the endogenous variables follow a normal distribution or not, we computed the kurtosis value. We observed that the values of almost all variables remained within the range of −7 to +7, which assuaged the concern regarding the non‐normality of the data (Mueller & Hancock,  2019 ).

All items were evaluated based on several criteria including items standardized regression weights, squared multiple correlations, and standardized residual covariance. In addition, the theoretical importance and practical significance of every item were taken into consideration while refining the model. This resulted in the removal of five variables of the Consumers' changing way of life and another three variables of Consumers' buying behaviour from the model thereby leaving eight items of Consumers' changing way of life and another 13 items of Consumers' buying behaviour in the final measurement model. This, however, did not significantly affect the content validity of the scale. Rather the model became further parsimonious. We found that one construct namely ‘lifestyle changes’ was left with only two items. However, it did not give rise to the problem of under‐identification of the measurement model. The findings of Das ( 2018 ) and Pullman et al. ( 2009 ) revealed several constructs which contain only two items. The presence of such constructs with two items did not create the problem of under‐identification of measurement models in the above research findings. Goodness of fit (GOF) measures of the final measurement model were as follows: χ 2  = 338.939, degrees of freedom ( df ) = 162, p  = .00, χ 2 / df  = 2.092, goodness fit index (GFI) = 0.931, Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI) = 0.902, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = 0.951, Tucker‐Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.937, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) [90% CI] = 0.051 [0.043, 0.058], Standardized Root Mean Residual (SRMR) = 0.0512. For an adequate model fit, the fit indices of GFI, CFI, and TLI should be at least 0.9 while the same of RMSEA and SRMR should be less than 0.08 (Hair et al.,  2009 ). Thus, based on the fit indices, it could be inferred that the measurement model fits well with the data on all major indices. The details of the measurement results are shown in Table  2 , which includes the descriptive statistics of the constructs pertaining to the Consumers' changing way of life and Adaptation to consumers' buying behaviour . This includes the mean, standard deviation, and reliability value (Cronbach's alpha) of each construct and also the inter‐construct correlations.

Summary of the measurement results and inter‐construct correlations

The above table shows that Cronbach's alpha coefficients of six constructs out of seven have exceeded 0.7 thereby indicating sound reliability of these constructs (Hair et al.,  2009 ). Alpha coefficient of the remaining one construct reveals acceptable reliability value over 0.6 (Hair et al.,  2009 ). In addition, Table  2 also shows that almost all inter‐construct correlations are significant at 0.1% or 1% level. Only one inter‐construct correlation is significant at 10% level. These inter‐construct correlations help us in ascertaining the discriminant validity of all the constructs, which is discussed in the later part of this section.

This model was systematically evaluated for Construct Reliability (CR), convergent validity, and discriminant validity in order to validate the constructs of the Consumers' changing way of life and Adaptation to consumers' buying behaviour due to COVID‐19. In the present study, we have estimated the CR coefficient of all constructs which is shown in Table  3 . The estimate of CR lying between 0.6 to 0.7 is considered acceptable while the value above 0.7 suggests good reliability of a construct (Hair et al.,  2009 ). Thus, the six constructs may be considered to possess excellent reliability while the remaining one construct is characterized by an acceptable level of reliability.

Results of Reliability, Convergent and Discriminant validity of the consumers' changing way of life and consumers' buying behaviour

Abbreviations: AVE, average variance extracted; CR, construct reliability.

Convergent validity requires that the indicator variables of a given construct share a high proportion of variance in common. It was evaluated by following two different approaches. The first method involves the inspection of estimated factor loadings of items on the constructs in the final CFA model (Anderson & Gerbing,  1988 ). It was found that the standardized loadings of all items are greater than 0.5 and statistically significant ( p  < .001). The second method involves the assessment of convergent validity with the help of Average Variance Extracted (AVE). An AVE of 0.5 or more of a construct indicates a high level of convergent validity (Hair et al.,  2009 ). The seven constructs have AVE ranging from 0.477 to 0.648 as shown in Table  3 . Six constructs have more than the threshold level of AVE (0.5), thus indicating a high convergent validity of the above constructs. Only the lifestyle changes construct is found to have an AVE slightly below the threshold value. However, since this construct meets the criteria of convergent validity in the first method and in the second method, the value of AVE is somewhat close to the threshold value, the lifestyle changes construct may be considered to possess a reasonable level of convergent validity.

Discriminant validity is a measure of how a construct is distinct from other constructs in the same model and whether each construct is measuring different concepts (Hair et al.,  2009 ). Discriminant validity was also assessed by following two different approaches. The first method involves the investigation of the correlation between each pair of constructs in the CFA model. If the correlations between constructs are well below 0.9; then there is very little possibility that a group of items loading significantly on one construct would also load on another construct (Kline,  2016 ). The correlations between the constructs occurred within the range of −0.282 to 0.616, which were well below 0.9. This is reported in Table  2 . The second method involves the comparison of the AVE of each construct with the shared variance of each pair of constructs. If the square root of the AVE of each construct is more than the correlation of each pair of constructs, then this implies that the constructs account for a greater proportion of variance of the items that are assigned to them (Fornell & Larcker,  1981 ). Table  3 shows that the lowest value of AVE of a construct is 0.477. Its square root is 0.690, which exceeds the maximum correlation coefficient of 0.616 between a pair of constructs as reported in Table  2 . Thus, the seven construct CFA model demonstrates a satisfactory level of discriminant validity. This facilitated the SEM on the final measurement model to be carried out for investigating the relationships hypothesized in Section  3 .

5.3. Structural equation modelling

The final measurement model has been taken as the main input for developing the structural model. In the structural model, demographic variables of the respondents including occupation, current employment status, and family earning status were considered as the exogenous variables while Consumers' changing way of life and consumers’ buying behaviour arising out of COVID‐19 were treated as endogenous variables. This was investigated through SEM and the hypotheses formulated earlier were tested. The model was assessed utilizing the ML estimation method. GOF measures of the structural model were as follows: χ 2  = 887.533, df  = 324, p  = .00, χ 2 / df  = 2.739, GFI = 0.878, AGFI = 0.825, TLI = 0.840, CFI = 0.881, RMSEA [90% CI] = 0.064 [0.059, 0.069], SRMR = 0.075. The fit indices indicate that TLI and CFI are below the acceptable level of 0.9 while RMSEA and SRMR are within the acceptable range of 0.08 (Hair et al.,  2009 ). In this context, it is to be mentioned that the model complexity in terms of the number of observed variables, number of parameters estimated, etc. has a significant negative impact on GFI, AGFI, and CFI. Thus, the general rules of thumb with the cut‐off values of GFI or CFI being at least 0.9 may sometimes be misleading for complex models (Baumgartner & Homburg,  1996 ). A similar observation was also made by Srinivasan et al. ( 2002 ) in respect of model complexity. In one of the measurement models developed by them, both CFI and TLI were found below 0.9. However, since both RMSEA and SRMR remained within the acceptable range of 0.08, the model was considered reasonably fitting to the data. Based on the above argument, we can infer that the present findings indicate an acceptable level of fit to the above indices. The final structural model is shown in Figure  2 . We have shown only the significant paths in this model, which include both direct effects and total effects covering both direct and indirect effects. The interpretation of these paths has been provided in appropriate places of the following section.

Final model of the impact of COVID‐19 on consumer behaviour

6. MAJOR FINDINGS

6.1. influence of occupation, employment status and earning status on affordability.

The profile of the socio‐demographic and economic background of the respondents provided in Table  1 reveals that they differ in terms of their occupations, current employment status, and also their earning status. The respondents were categorized into five types of occupations described as Job1 through Job5. In terms of employment status, they were categorized into four types which have been shown as Emp1 through Emp4. Finally, the respondents were classified into three categories in terms of the earning potential of their family, which have been designated as Earn1 through Earn3. All these categorizations in terms of occupation, employment status, and earning status have been indicated in Table  4 . The categorical variables were transformed into binary variables individually before considering them as exogenous variables. In the structural model, Job1, Emp1, and Earn2 were considered as the reference categories for occupation, employment status, and earning status respectively following Cohen et al. ( 2003 ), as each one of them was the most dominant category in the respective socio‐economic classes and least likely to be affected compared to other categories by the pandemic. Out of 21 hypotheses formulated in Section  3 , 15 hypotheses had a direct effect while the remaining six hypotheses involved both direct and indirect (mediating) effects. Tables  4 and ​ and5 5 present the results of hypotheses that only have a direct effect, based on standardized regression weights (β), critical ratios (t‐value), and p values. Table  4 specifically describes the results of the effect of Consumers' socio‐economic background on their changing way of life. The results of Hypothesis  1a showing the relationship between occupation and affordability reveal that the affordability of people with four types of occupations (Job2 through Job5) was negatively affected due to COVID‐19 compared to the affordability of people belonging to the reference category, i.e., Job1. However, the negative effect was found to be significant only for people with occupation categories Job3 and Job5. This suggests that the lockdown affected the affordability of people in the unorganised sector more than the organised sector. The results of Hypothesis  1b explaining the relationship between current employment status and affordability indicate that there was a significant negative effect on the affordability of people of three types of employment (Emp2 through Emp4) due to COVID‐19 compared to the same belonging to the reference category, i.e., Emp1. This directly demonstrates that people having lost their job or receiving reduced salaries due to COVID‐19 were severely affected in terms of their affordability compared to the people who were receiving full salaries. Hypothesis  1c describing the relationship between family earning status and affordability shows that the affordability of people with two categories of earning status (Earn1 and Earn3) was not affected due to COVID‐19 compared to the reference category, i.e., Earn2. This further illustrates the fact that the respondents with a single earning member, multiple earning members, or non‐earning members cannot be differentiated in terms of their affordability due to COVID‐19. The significant impact of occupation with categories Job3 and Job5 on affordability and again the significant effect of employment status including categories Emp2 through Emp4 have been indicated in the final structural model (Figure  2 ).

Results of structural model for socio‐economic factors (direct effects) ( n  = 425)

Job1: Respondents who are working in government or public sector jobs; Job2: Respondents who are working in private sector jobs; Job3: Respondents who are working in MSME sectors/ Contractors/ Daily wage earners;

Job4: Respondents who own their own business or startups; Job5: Respondents with other job profiles.

Emp1: Respondents who are currently employed and getting full salary; Emp2: Respondents who are currently employed but are getting reduced salary; Emp3: Respondents who have lost their jobs during lockdown; Emp4: Respondents with other employment status;

Earn1: Respondents who are the sole earners of the family; Earn2: Respondents who are one of the earning members of the family; Earn3: Respondents who are the non‐earning members of the family.

Results of structural model of consumers' way of life (direct effects) ( n  = 425)

6.2. Influence of occupation, employment status and earning status on lifestyle changes

Following a similar approach, we investigated the influence of occupation, current employment status, and earning status on lifestyle changes of people due to COVID‐19. Hypothesis  2a showing the relationship between occupation and lifestyle changes reveals that the lifestyle changes of people with Job2 through Job5 were significantly affected in opposite direction compared to the lifestyle changes of people with reference category, i.e., Job1. This demonstrates that people other than those engaged in the Government or Public sector did not indulge themselves in lifestyle changes arising out of COVID‐19. Hypothesis  2b explaining the relationship between current employment status reveals that the lifestyle changes of people with Emp2 and Emp3 were positively affected compared to the lifestyle changes of people with reference category, i.e., Emp1. The effect was found to be significant. This signifies that the people receiving a reduced salary or having lost their jobs are becoming more concerned with doing yoga and using herbal products in their day‐to‐day life compared to the people receiving full salary. Hypothesis  2c delineating the relationship between family earning status and lifestyle changes shows that the lifestyle changes of people with Earn1 and Earn3 were not affected compared to the reference category, i.e., Earn2. This indicates that the lifestyle changes of people cannot be differentiated based on their earning status. The significant effect of occupation with categories Job2 through Job5 on lifestyle changes and further the significant effect of employment with categories Emp2 and Emp3 on lifestyle changes have been shown in Figure  2 .

6.3. Influence of occupation, employment status and earning status on awareness towards health

Hypothesis  3a describing the relationship between occupation and awareness towards health reveals that the health awareness of people with occupations Job2 through Job5 was negatively affected compared to the awareness of people with reference category, i.e., Job1. However, the effect was found significant only in the case of Job2. Hypothesis  3b showing the relationship between employment status and awareness towards health indicates that the awareness of people with categories Emp2, Emp3, and Emp4 was not affected compared to the reference category, i.e., Emp1. This implies that the awareness of people towards health cannot be distinguished based on their employment status. Finally, Hypothesis  3c outlining the relationship between earning status and awareness towards health shows that the awareness of people with Earn1 and Earn3 was not affected compared to the reference category, Earn2. This further explains that the awareness of people towards health cannot be discriminated against based on their earning status. The significant effect of occupation with category Job2 on awareness towards health is shown in Figure  2 .

6.4. Association of Affordability, Lifestyle Changes and Health Awareness with Demand for Wellness Products, Health Products, Substitution of Affordable necessities etc

Table  5 presents the results of the impact of different constructs constituting Consumers' changing way of life on the Adaptation in consumers’ buying behaviour . Hypothesis  4a reveals that the increase in demand for wellness and entertainment products was associated with a fall in affordability. However, the effect was not significant. Similarly, the increase in demand for products relating to health and hygiene was associated with a non‐significant decrease in affordability as specified in Hypothesis  4b . Hypothesis  4c shows that the fall in affordability had a significant influence on the demand for affordable substitute products of daily necessities. Hypothesis  5 shows that lifestyle changes had a significant positive influence on the demand for wellness products which explains the reported rise in demand for wellness and entertainment products during the pandemic. Further, increased awareness towards health and hygiene had a significant positive influence on the demand for products relating to health and hygiene as also on the demand for healthy substitute products of daily necessities as described in Hypotheses  6a and 6b respectively. The significant results of Hypotheses  4c , 5 , 6a , and 6b have been delineated in Figure  2 . Thus, our study validates many of the anecdotal explanations that are observed in market surveys and news reports on the effect of COVID‐19 on consumers' changing buying behaviour.

6.5. Influence of occupation on the demand for wellness products

Test results of the remaining six hypotheses involving both direct and indirect effects of socio‐economic background , Consumers’ changing way of life, and consumers' buying behaviour have been shown individually in Tables  6 , ​ ,7, 7 , ​ ,8, 8 , ​ ,9. 9 . These tables show the direct effect, indirect effect, and total effect of the relationships. We utilized the AMOS plugin developed by Gaskin and Lim ( 2018 ) for estimating the specific indirect effect in IBM SPSS AMOS (version 24). Table  6 presents the results of Hypothesis  7 explaining the influence of occupation on the demand for wellness and entertainment products. We considered Job1 as the reference category and tested the scores obtained by categories Job2 through Job5 against the reference category. The results show that the occupation with category Job3 had a significant negative influence on the creation of new demand for wellness and entertainment products compared to the reference category. The association is moderate which is mediated through two mediating constructs: (1) Change in affordability and (2) Lifestyle changes. Further, the mediation is partial. However, it was observed that the creation of new demand for wellness and entertainment products by the remaining categories of occupations including Job2, Job4, and Job5 did not significantly differ from the demand created by the reference category. We present the results of Hypothesis  7 in Table  6 for occupation with category Job3 only. We further show the results of the total significant effect of occupation with category Job3 on the demand for wellness and entertainment products in Figure  2 through a bold arrow.

Hypothesis  7 Influence of occupation on the demand for wellness products (direct, indirect and total effects) ( n  = 425)

Hypothesis  9 Influence of earning status on the demand for wellness products (direct, indirect and total effects) ( n  = 425)

Hypothesis  11 Influence of emp. Status on the creation of new demand for health products (direct, indirect and total effects) ( n  = 425)

Hypothesis  12 Influence of earning status on the creation of new demand for health products (direct, indirect and total effects) ( n  = 425)

6.6. Influence of employment status and earning status on the demand for wellness products

We investigated the results of Hypothesis  8 describing the influence of current employment status on the demand for wellness products considering Emp1 as the reference category and observed that the current employment status of people with categories Emp2 through Emp4 did not have a significant influence on the creation of new demand for wellness and entertainment products compared to the reference category. Since the results of Hypothesis  8 involving all categories of employment status were insignificant, we have not reported the results. We analysed the results of Hypothesis  9 explaining the influence of family earning status on the demand for wellness products considering Earn2 as the reference category. The results are presented in Table  7 . The results reveal that the earning status of people of category Earn1 had a significant negative influence on the creation of new demand for wellness and entertainment products compared to the reference category. The relationship is mediated by two mediating constructs: (1) Change in affordability and (2) Lifestyle changes and the mediation is full. It was further observed that the earning status of people of category Earn3 did not have any significant influence on the demand for wellness and entertainment products compared to the reference category. The significant effect of Hypothesis  9 explaining the influence of earning status with category Earn1 on the demand for wellness and entertainment products is represented in Figure  2 .

6.7. Influence of occupation, employment status and earning status on the demand for health products

We analysed the influence of occupation on the creation of new demand for health and hygiene products considering Job1 as the reference category and found that the occupation with categories Job2 through Job5 did not have a significant influence on the creation of new demand for health and hygiene products compared to the reference category. We, therefore, have not reported the results of Hypothesis  10 . We investigated the results of Hypothesis  11 delineating the influence of current employment status on the creation of new demand for health and hygiene products considering Emp1 as the reference category. The results show that the employment status of category Emp3 had a significant positive influence on the creation of new demand for health and hygiene products compared to the reference category. The association is mediated by two constructs: (1) Change in affordability and (2) Awareness towards health and hygiene and the mediation is partial. We did not observe any significant influence of employment status with categories Emp2 and Emp4 on the creation of new demand for health and hygiene products compared to the reference category. Table  8 presents the results of hypothesis Hypothesis  11 for employment status with category Emp3 only. We have further shown the total significant effect of Hypothesis  11 in respect of employment status of category Emp3 in Figure  2 . Finally, Table  9 outlines the results of Hypothesis  12 explaining the influence of earning status on the creation of new demand for health and hygiene products considering Earn2 as the reference category. The results reveal that the family earning status of category Earn3 had a significant positive influence on the creation of new demand for health and hygiene products compared to the reference category. The association is mediated by two constructs: (1) Change in affordability and (2) Awareness towards health and hygiene and the mediation is partial. The significant total effect of Hypothesis  12 in respect of earning status of category Earn3 is depicted in Figure  2 . The earning status of people of category Earn1 did not have any significant influence on the demand for health and hygiene products compared to the reference category.

7. DISCUSSION

7.1. theoretical contributions.

The main theoretical contribution of the study involves understanding the impact of the socio‐economic background of the respondents in terms of their occupation, employment status, and family earning status on Consumers’ changing way of life and subsequently on consumers’ changing buying behaviour at a granular level in the context of the pandemic. While earlier researchers had studied consumption shifts during the pandemic (Laato et al.,  2020 ; Pakravan‐Charvadeh et al.,  2021 ), we are not aware of any study that investigated the Consumers' changing way of life and their changing buying behaviour arising out of COVID‐19 based on the socio‐economic background of the consumers. Although the survey was carried out in India in the backdrop of COVID‐19 pandemic, the findings of the study could provide important insights to other emerging economies afflicted with COVID‐19. Thus, it may be considered as a significant contribution to the existing body of consumer behaviour literature.

Second , we have gone beyond panic buying and stockpiling behaviour, which are extensively covered in the earlier works (Kirk & Rifkin,  2020 ; Laato et al.,  2020 ), with an attempt to link affordability, lifestyle changes, and health awareness with consumer behaviour. The findings of the study demonstrating the impact of consumers' socio‐economic background on their affordability, lifestyle changes, and awareness towards health and finally on the adaptation in consumers' buying behaviour arising out of COVID‐19 have enabled us to develop a theoretical model which seems to be generalisable for other similar kinds of pandemics in the emerging economies. Third , the extant literature suggests that during the period of the pandemic, consumers focus mostly on essential products and exercise control on discretionary expenditure. However, the present study notes that the demand for some discretionary products (e.g., the demand for wellness and entertainment products) has shown a varying pattern depending on the occupation and earning potential of a family during the pandemic. We have further demonstrated that this change in demand for wellness products among consumers of certain socio‐economic groups is not merely due to the economic impacts but also due to the pandemic‐induced lifestyle changes. By including lifestyle changes, we have added a new dimension to the understanding of consumers’ behaviour during the pandemic and enriched similar studies by earlier researchers such as Naeem ( 2020 ) who attributed consumers’ impulsive buying to information overload. Fourth, the study reveals that the creation of new demand for health and hygiene products was found to depend upon the current employment status and family earning status of consumers which is jointly mediated by affordability and awareness towards health and hygiene. These findings enrich our understanding of consumers' behaviour in terms of their demand for wellness products as also the demand for health and hygiene products during the pandemic (Pakravan‐Charvadeh et al.,  2021 ). Finally , the study further reveals that the consumers demonstrated product substitution behaviour due to the availability of affordable substitutes of daily necessities and also due to the availability of healthy substitutes of daily necessities. Therefore, our study confirms product substitution behaviour during the pandemic as noted by Knowles et al. ( 2020 ). Thus, it may also be considered to be another unique contribution of the present study.

7.2. Managerial implications

The study reveals that the affordability of the most vulnerable section of people including daily wage earners and those working in MSMEs has been affected due to COVID‐19. The study also finds that the affordability of the people receiving a reduced salary or having lost their jobs has also been severely affected. This provides an important insight to the policy planners in terms of developing targeted intervention strategies with a view to providing economic aid to the affected people. In addition, the study provides insights to marketing managers in terms of designing and introducing affordable substitute products of daily necessities for a substantial section of the population. Thus, there lies an opportunity to penetrate the market with inexpensive substitutes in a market already occupied by established brands.

The study shows that people engaged in most of the occupations other than Government or public sector jobs are not much concerned with lifestyle changes arising out of COVID‐19. However, it shows that people receiving a reduced salary or having lost their jobs have become quite active in practicing yoga and utilizing herbal products. This possibly indicates that these consumers have become sensitive in maintaining their health due to the fear of contagion despite the challenging situation faced by them in their professional lives. On further scrutiny, we observed that the demand for wellness products by people working in the unorganised sectors is significantly lower than those working in the organised sectors. It is significantly less in a family with a sole earning member than in a family with multiple earning members. In addition, the demand for wellness products by people receiving a reduced salary or having lost their jobs does not significantly differ from people receiving full salary. Thus, the market planners need to carefully take into consideration the socio‐economic factors of the consumers including occupation, employment status, and family earning status while introducing wellness products in the market. Increased awareness towards health and hygiene motivates marketing managers to introduce innovative products relating to health and hygiene and healthy substitute products of daily necessities. To boost demand, designing appropriate awareness campaigns would be very useful. It is observed that the demand for health and hygiene products by people belonging to different occupations does not significantly differ from the people working in the government or public sector jobs. Further, the people who lost their jobs exhibited significantly more demand for health and hygiene products than those receiving full salary. In addition, the demand for such products by the non‐earning members of a family has significantly increased compared to the multiple earning members of a family. This is quite surprising. This probably indicates that even though the pandemic has negatively affected the economies across the globe, the sale of products relating to health and hygiene has significantly increased. The companies selling products relating to health and hygiene should go all out in their efforts to advertise and increase their sales during such a crisis. Finally, there is an opportunity to introduce healthy substitutes of daily necessities in a market already occupied by established brands.

Given that emerging economies such as India, where this study was carried out, have a large share of the unorganised or informal sector (Murthy,  2019 ), our findings are indicative of the nature of the economic impact that the unorganised sector has experienced during this pandemic. Post‐COVID it would be essential for firms dealing with daily necessities to expand their product assortments to include cheaper alternatives. Emerging economies are further characterized by a smaller market for health and hygiene as well as the wellness and digital entertainment market (Sood,  2020 ). The study observed that it is lifestyle and health awareness that affect the demand for wellness and entertainment products, and hygiene products respectively. Hence, firms dealing with such products in emerging markets should realise that it is important to focus on market creation through lifestyle changes and health awareness in addition to regular promotions. The study also gives enough insights into the customer segments that could be targeted for such efforts.

8. CONCLUSION

In this paper, we have carried out a questionnaire survey to understand the impact of COVID‐19 on consumers' affordability, lifestyle, and health awareness and how these effects influenced their buying behaviour. Analysis of the survey data revealed several interesting facts about the impact of COVID‐19 and how the consumers behaved. Some of the major findings of this study include: (1) COVID‐19 affected the affordability of consumers employed in the unorganised sectors more than those who were employed in the organised sector, (2) Type of occupation, current employment status, and the earning potential of a family had a varying degree of impact on lifestyle changes undergone by consumers, and (3) the health awareness was significantly higher for consumers who lost their jobs or had lower family earning status. It was observed that the demand for wellness and entertainment products was not affected much by affordability but by lifestyle changes while the demand for health and hygiene products was more influenced by consumer awareness towards health. Affordability, on the other hand, influenced the demand for affordable substitutes of daily necessities. Therefore, this study and the findings would be very useful for studying the effects of disruptive events on the nature of the shift in consumption behaviour and substitution behaviour exhibited by consumers. Further, the findings of this study would help organizations formulate appropriate strategies to cope with the shift in consumption and substitution behaviour as a result of the pandemic.

The study is not free from certain limitations. The imposition of lockdown in different parts of India at different points of time made it very difficult for us to carry out the survey. Further given the diversity and the large geographical size of India, we could not reach out to all the diverse groups, communities, and cultures. Increasing reach possibly could have generated more insights into consumer behaviour and market segmentation. Moreover, our study was limited to wellness, entertainment, and health products as also the products of daily necessities. Therefore, extending this research to include more diversity in terms of the nature of products would be useful in further refinement of marketing strategies under disruption.

The observations of Paul and Bhukya ( 2021 ) encourage us to propose extension of the present research primarily along the following directions: (1) cross‐country studies for understanding how the pandemic‐induced disruptions have affected consumer behaviour across various social groups based on culture, region, and age, (2) studies on how organizations cope with such adaptations in consumers' needs during pandemic, and (3) studies focusing on understanding how and to what extent consumers' consumption shifts influence retailers' strategies related to product selection, channel choice, promotions, and discounts. It can also be expected that the choice of the above strategies would differ based on retailers' location, the scale of operations, and the target segments. A major influence on the Consumers' changing way of life during such pandemic‐induced disruptions includes government interventions in the form of schemes, aids, and subsidies. An important extension of the present research would be to understand how such interventions were able to mitigate the adverse impacts of the pandemic on consumers' life and at the same time maintain the sustainability of business organizations.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Biographies.

Debadyuti Das is a Professor at the Faculty of Management Studies, Delhi University in the Operations Management Area. He received his Ph.D. from IIT BHU. He has a rich blend of experience in both industry and academics spanning over more than two and half decades. He has extensive experience in executive education and management development programs. His current areas of research include Sustainable Supply Chain Management, Managing Carbon Footprint in Supply Chain, Distribution Network Design in Public Health, Efficient Sourcing and Distribution of water etc.

Ashutosh Sarkar is an Associate Professor at the Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode in the Quantitative Methods & Operations Management Area. He received his Ph.D. from Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur and was a Fulbright Visiting Scholar at the Naveen Jindal School of Management, University of Texas at Dallas. Earlier, Dr. Sarkar has served as a faculty member at IIT Kharagpur and Institute of Technology‐Banaras Hindu University (now IIT BHU). He has extensive experience in executive education and training. His areas of interests include Inventory and Supply Chain Optimization, Application of Stochastic Dynamic Programming in Operations Management Problems, Purchasing and Supply Chain Risk Management.

Arindam Debroy is an Assistant Professor at the Symbiosis Institute of Business Management Nagpur in the Operations Management Area. He received his Ph.D. from Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur. He has also received the Institute Fellowship during his doctoral program at IIT Kharagpur. His areas of interests include Inventory and Logistics & Supply Chain Management, Purchase Management, and Project Management.

APPENDIX 1. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF FACTORS INFLUENCING CONSUMERS' CHANGING WAY OF LIFE

APPENDIX 2. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF ADAPTATION IN CONSUMERS' BUYING BEHAVIOUR

Das, D. , Sarkar, A. , & Debroy, A. (2022). Impact of COVID‐19 on changing consumer behaviour: Lessons from an emerging economy . International Journal of Consumer Studies , 46 , 692–715. 10.1111/ijcs.12786 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

• Adams‐Prassl, A. , Boneva, T. , Golin, M. , & Rauh, C. (2020, April 1). Inequality in the impact of the coronavirus shock: New survey evidence for the UK . Cambridge‐INET Working Paper Series. IZA Institute of Labor Economics. [ Google Scholar ]
• Addabbo, T. (2000). Poverty dynamics: Analysis of household incomes in Italy . Labour , 14 ( 1 ), 119–144. 10.1111/1467-9914.00127 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson, J. C. , & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two‐step approach . Psychological Bulletin , 103 ( 3 ), 411–423. 10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Arora, T. , & Grey, I. (2020). Health behaviour changes during COVID‐19 and the potential consequences: A mini‐review . Journal of Health Psychology , 25 ( 9 ), 1155–1163. 10.1177/1359105320937053 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aunger, R. , Greenland, K. , Ploubidis, G. , Schmidt, W. , Oxford, J. , & Curtis, V. (2016). The determinants of reported personal and household hygiene behaviour: A multi‐country study . PLoS One , 11 ( 8 ), e0159551. 10.1371/journal.pone.0159551 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Avdiu, B. , & Nayyar, G. (2020). When face‐to‐face interactions become an occupational hazard: Jobs in the time of COVID‐19 . Economics Letters , 197 , 109648. [ Google Scholar ]
• Baiano, C. , Zappullo, I. , & Conson, M. (2020). Tendency to worry and fear of mental health during Italy's COVID‐19 lockdown . International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 17 ( 16 ), 5928. 10.3390/ijerph17165928 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bakhtiani, G. (2021). How the wellness market in India is witnessing a meteoric rise . Financial Express , February 6. https://www.financialexpress.com/brandwagon/how‐the‐wellness‐market‐in‐india‐is‐witnessing‐a‐meteoric‐rise/2189156/
• Baumgartner, H. , & Homburg, C. (1996). Applications of structural equation modeling in marketing and consumer research: A review . International Journal of Research in Consumer Marketing , 13 , 139–161. 10.1016/0167-8116(95)00038-0 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Billore, S. , & Anisimova, T. (2021). Panic buying research: A systematic literature review and future research agenda . International Journal of Consumer Studies , 45 , 777–804. 10.1111/ijcs.12669 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chaudhuri, S. (2020, July 28). Lysol maker seeks to capitalize on Covid hygiene concerns in hotels, on planes . The Wall Street Journal . https://www.wsj.com/articles/lysol‐maker‐seeks‐to‐capitalize‐on‐covid‐hygiene‐concerns‐in‐hotels‐on‐planes‐11595939726
• Chopra, S. , Ranjan, P. , Singh, V. , Kumar, S. , Arora, M. , Hasan, M. S. , Kasiraj, R. , Kaur, D. , Vikram, N. K. , Malhotra, A. , Kumari, A. , Klanidhi, K. B. , & Baitha, U. (2020). Impact of COVID‐19 on lifestyle‐related behaviours—A cross‐sectional audit of responses from nine hundred and ninety‐five participants from India . Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research & Reviews , 14 ( 6 ), 2021–2030. 10.1016/j.dsx.2020.09.034 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chriscaden, K. (2020). Impact of COVID‐19 on people’s livelihoods, their health and our food system . World Health Organization , October 13. https://www.who.int/news/item/13‐10‐2020‐impact‐of‐covid‐19‐on‐people's‐livelihoods‐their‐health‐and‐our‐food‐systems
• Cohen, J. , Cohen, P. , West, S. G. , & Aiken, L. S. . (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioural sciences . Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. [ Google Scholar ]
• Das, D. (2018). Sustainable supply chain management in Indian organisations: An empirical investigation . International Journal of Production Research , 56 ( 17 ), 5776–5794. 10.1080/00207543.2017.1421326 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Debroy, L. (2020, April 3). How online exercise sessions are keeping India fit during lockdown . Outlook . https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/india‐news‐how‐online‐exercise‐sessions‐are‐keeping‐india‐fit‐during‐the‐lockdown/350026
• del Rio‐Chanona, R. M. , Mealy, P. , Pichler, A. , Lafond, F. , & Farmer, J. D. (2020). Supply and demand shocks in the COVID‐19 pandemic: An industry and occupation perspective . Oxford Review of Economic Policy , 36 ( Supplement_1 ), S94–S137. 10.1093/oxrep/graa033 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dsouza, S. (2020, March 30). Government expands lists of essential items to include hygiene products . Bloomberg . https://www.bloombergquint.com/business/government‐expands‐list‐of‐essential‐items‐to‐include‐hygiene‐products
• Eroglu, S. A. , Machleit, K. A. , & Neybert, E. G. (2022). Crowding in the time of COVID: Effects on rapport and shopping satisfaction . Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services , 64 , 102760. 10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102760 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fornell, C. , & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error . Journal of Marketing Research , 8 ( 3 ), 382–388. [ Google Scholar ]
• Galati, A. , Moavero, P. , & Crescimanno, M. (2019). Consumer awareness and acceptance of irradiated foods: The case of Italian consumers . British Food Journal , 121 ( 6 ), 1398–1412. 10.1108/BFJ-05-2018-0336 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• García‐Mayor, J. , Moreno‐Llamas, A. , & De la Cruz‐Sánchez, E. (2021). High educational attainment redresses the effect of occupational social class on health‐related lifestyle: Findings from four Spanish national health surveys . Annals of Epidemiology , 58 , 29–37. 10.1016/j.annepidem.2021.02.010 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gaskin, J. , & Lim, J. (2018). “Indirect effects”, AMOS Plugin . Gaskination's StatWiki. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gordon‐Wilson, S. (2021). Consumption practices during the COVID‐19 crisis . International Journal of Consumer Studies . 10.1111/ijcs.12701 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Guthrie, C. , Fosso‐Wamba, S. , & Arnaud, J. B. (2021). Online consumer resilience during a pandemic: An exploratory study of e‐commerce behavior before, during and after a COVID‐19 lockdown . Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services , 61 , 102570. 10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102570 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hair, J. F., Jr. , Black, W. C. , Babin, B. J. , Anderson, R. E. , & Tatham, R. L. (2009). Multivariate data analysis . Pearson Education. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hamilton, R. W. , Thompson, D. V. , Arens, Z. G. , Blanchard, S. J. , Häubl, G. , Kannan, P. K. , Khan, U. , Lehmann, D. R. , Meloy, M. G. , Roese, N. J. , & Thomas, M. (2014). Consumer substitution decisions: An integrative framework . Marketing Letters , 25 ( 3 ), 305–317. 10.1007/s11002-014-9313-2 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hampson, D. P. , & McGoldrick, P. J. (2013). A typology of adaptive shopping patterns in recession . Journal of Business Research , 66 ( 7 ), 831–838. 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.06.008 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hensher, M. (2020). Covid‐19, unemployment, and health: Time for deeper solutions? The BMJ , 371 , m3687. 10.1136/bmj.m3687 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hess, A. (2020, April 6). Our health is in danger: Wellness wants to fill the void . The New York Times . https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/06/arts/virus‐wellness‐self‐care.html
• Jacob, I. , Khanna, M. , & Yadav, N. (2014). Beyond poverty: A study of diffusion & adoption of feminine hygiene products among low income group women in Mumbai . Procedia‐Social and Behavioral Sciences , 148 , 291–298. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kansiime, M. K. , Tambo, J. A. , Mugambi, I. , Bundi, M. , Kara, A. , & Owuor, C. (2021). COVID‐19 implications on household income and food security in Kenya and Uganda: Findings from a rapid assessment . World Development , 137 , 105199. 10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105199 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Keane, M. , & Neal, T. (2021). Consumer panic in the COVID‐19 pandemic . Journal of Econometrics , 220 ( 1 ), 86–105. 10.1016/j.jeconom.2020.07.045 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kennett‐Hensel, P. A. , Sneath, J. Z. , & Lacey, R. (2012). Liminality and consumption in the aftermath of a natural disaster . Journal of Consumer Marketing , 29 ( 1 ), 52–63. 10.1108/07363761211193046 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Khubchandani, J. , Kandiah, J. , & Saiki, D. (2020). The COVID‐19 pandemic, stress, and eating practices in the United States . European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education , 10 ( 4 ), 950–956. 10.3390/ejihpe10040067 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim, J. , Yang, K. , Min, J. , & White, B. (2021). Hope, fear, and consumer behavioral change amid COVID‐19: Application of protection motivation theory . International Journal of Consumer Studies . 10.1111/ijcs.12700 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kirk, C. P. , & Rifkin, L. S. (2020). I'll trade you diamonds for toilet paper: Consumer reacting, coping and adapting behaviors in the COVID‐19 pandemic . Journal of Business Research , 117 , 124–131. 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.028 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Knowles, J. , Ettenson, R. , Lynch, P. , & Dollens, J. (2020, May 5). Growth opportunities for brands during covid‐19 opportunities . MIT Sloan Management Review . https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/growth‐opportunities‐for‐brands‐during‐the‐covid‐19‐crisis/ [ Google Scholar ]
• Krause, D. R. , Pagell, M. , & Curkovic, S. (2001). Toward a measure of competitive priorities for purchasing . Journal of Operations Management , 19 ( 4 ), 497–512. 10.1016/S0272-6963(01)00047-X [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Laato, S. , Islam, A. N. , Farooq, A. , & Dhir, A. (2020). Unusual purchasing behavior during the early stages of the COVID‐19 pandemic: The stimulus‐organism‐response approach . Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services , 57 , 102224. 10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102224 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Li, X. , Zhang, D. , Zhang, T. , Ji, Q. , & Lucey, B. (2021). Awareness, energy consumption and pro‐environmental choices of Chinese households . Journal of Cleaner Production , 279 , 123734. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123734 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Madnani, D. , Fernandes, S. , & Madnani, N. (2020). Analysing the impact of COVID‐19 on over‐the‐top media platforms in India . International Journal of Pervasive Computing and Communications , 16 ( 5 ), 457–475. 10.1108/IJPCC-07-2020-0083 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mahmud, M. , & Riley, E. (2021). Household response to an extreme shock: Evidence on the immediate impact of the Covid‐19 lockdown on economic outcomes and well‐being in rural Uganda . World Development , 140 , 105318. 10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105318 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mark, T. , Southam, C. , Bulla, J. , & Meza, S. (2016). Cross‐category indulgence: Why do some premium brands grow during recession? Journal of Brand Management , 23 ( 5 ), 114–129. 10.1057/s41262-016-0004-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Martin, A. , Markhvida, M. , Hallegatte, S. , & Walsh, B. (2020). Socio‐economic impacts of COVID‐19 on household consumption and poverty . Economics of Disasters and Climate Change , 49 ( 3 ), 453–479. 10.1007/s41885-020-00070-3 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Master, F. (2020). Asia pivots toward plants for protein as coronavirus stirs meat safety fears . Reuters , April 22. https://www.reuters.com/article/us‐health‐coronavirus‐asia‐food/asia‐pivots‐toward‐plants‐for‐protein‐as‐coronavirus‐stirs‐meat‐safety‐fears‐idUKKCN224047?edition‐redirect=uk
• Mathur, A. , Moschis, G. P. , & Lee, E. (2006). Life events and brand preference changes . Journal of Consumer Behaviour: An International Research Review , 3 ( 2 ), 129–141. 10.1002/cb.128 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mehrolia, S. , Alagarsamy, S. , & Solaikutty, V. M. (2021). Customers response to online food delivery services during COVID‐19 outbreak using binary logistic regression . International Journal of Consumer Studies , 45 ( 3 ), 396–408. 10.1111/ijcs.12630 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Milaković, I. K. (2021). Purchase experience during the COVID‐19 pandemic and social cognitive theory: The relevance of consumer vulnerability, resilience, and adaptability for purchase satisfaction and repurchase . International Journal of Consumer Studies , 45 ( 6 ), 1425–1442. 10.1111/ijcs.12672 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Minton, E. A. , & Cabano, F. G. (2021). Religiosity’s influence on stability‐seeking consumption during times of great uncertainty: The case of the coronavirus pandemic . Marketing Letters , 32 ( 2 ), 135–148. 10.1007/s11002-020-09548-2 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mishra, P. , & Balsara, F. (2020). COVID‐19 and emergence of a new consumer products landscape in India . Earnst and Young . https://assets.ey.com/content/dam/ey‐sites/ey‐com/en_in/topics/consumer‐products‐retail/2020/06/covid‐19‐and‐emergence‐of‐new‐consumer‐products‐landscape‐in‐india.pdf?download
• Montenovo, L. , Jiang, X. , Rojas, F. L. , Schmutte, I. M. , Simon, K. I. , Weinberg, B. A. , & Wing, C. (2020). Determinants of disparities in covid‐19 job losses (No. w27132), National Bureau of Economic Research. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mueller, R. O. , & Hancock, G. R. (2019). Structural equation modeling. In Hancock G. R., Stapleton L. M., & Mueller R. O. (Eds.), The reviewer’s guide to quantitative methods in social sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge. [ Google Scholar ]
• Murthy, S. R. (2019). Measuring informal economy in India: Indian experience. In Seventh IMF Statistical Forum , Washington, DC. https://www.imf.org/‐/media/Files/Conferences/2019/7th‐statistics‐forum/session‐ii‐murthy.ashx#:∼:text=In_terms_of_employment_share,indicating_the_level_of_outsourcing [ Google Scholar ]
• Naeem, M. (2020). Understanding the customer psychology of impulse buying during COVID‐19 pandemic: Implications for retailers . International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management , 49 ( 3 ), 377–393. 10.1108/IJRDM-08-2020-0317 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nayal, P. , Pandey, N. , & Paul, J. (2021). Covid‐19 pandemic and consumer‐employee‐organization wellbeing: A dynamic capability theory approach . Journal of Consumer Affairs . 10.1111/joca.12399 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ojha, A. (2020, October 17). How COVID‐19 changed fitness regime of Indians; here’s what a survey revealed . Financial Express . https://www.financialexpress.com/lifestyle/health/how‐covid‐19‐changed‐fitness‐regime‐of‐indians‐heres‐what‐a‐survey‐revealed/2107825/
• Pakravan‐Charvadeh, M. R. , Mohammadi‐Nasrabadi, F. , Gholamrezai, S. , Vatanparast, H. , Flora, C. , & Nabavi‐Pelesaraei, A. (2021). The short‐term effects of COVID‐19 outbreak on dietary diversity and food security status of Iranian households (A case study in Tehran province) . Journal of Cleaner Production , 281 , 124537. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124537 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pantano, E. , Pizzi, G. , Scarpi, D. , & Dennis, C. (2020). Competing during a pandemic? Retailers' ups and downs during the COVID‐19 outbreak . Journal of Business Research , 116 , 209–213. 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.036 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Paul, J. , & Bhukya, R. (2021). Forty‐five years of International Journal of Consumer Studies: A bibliometric review and directions for future research . International Journal of Consumer Studies , 45 ( 5 ), 937–963. 10.1111/ijcs.12727 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pew Research . (2008, October 19). Family social activities and togetherness . https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2008/10/19/family‐social‐activities‐and‐togetherness/ [ Google Scholar ]
• Piyapromdee, S. , & Spittal, P. (2020). The income and consumption effects of covid‐19 and the role of public policy . Fiscal Studies , 41 ( 4 ), 805–827. 10.1111/1475-5890.12252 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Podsakoff, P. M. , MacKenzie, S. B. , Lee, J. Y. , & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioural research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies . Journal of Applied Psychology , 88 ( 5 ), 879–903. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Prasad, A. , Strijnev, A. , & Zhang, Q. (2008). What can grocery basket data tell us about health consciousness? International Journal of Research in Marketing , 25 ( 4 ), 301–309. 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2008.05.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Prentice, C. , Nguyen, M. , Nandy, P. , Winardi, M. A. , Chen, Y. , Le Monkhouse, L. , Sergio, D. , & Stantic, B. (2021). Relevant, or irrelevant, external factors in panic buying . Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services , 61 , 102587. 10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102587 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• PTI . (2020). COVID‐19 pandemic leads to worries about job loss, anxiety on lack of social interactions: surveys . The Economic Times , September 29. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics‐and‐nation/covid‐19‐pandemic‐leads‐to‐worries‐about‐job‐loss‐anxiety‐on‐lack‐of‐social‐interactions‐surveys/articleshow/78391128.cms?from=mdr
• Pullman, M. E. , Maloni, M. J. , & Carter, C. R. (2009). Food for thought: Social versus environmental sustainability practices and performance outcomes . Journal of Supply Chain Management , 45 ( 4 ), 38–54. 10.1111/j.1745-493X.2009.03175.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rakshit, A. (2020, May 10). Covid‐19 impact: demand for personal hygiene, homecare products set to rise . Business Standard . https://www.business‐standard.com/article/current‐affairs/covid‐19‐impact‐demand‐for‐personal‐hygiene‐homecare‐products‐set‐to‐rise‐120051000431_1.html
• Rayburn, S. W. , McGeorge, A. , Anderson, S. , & Sierra, J. J. (2021). Crisis‐induced behavior: From fear and frugality to the familiar . International Journal of Consumer Studies . 10.1111/ijcs.12698 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Renner, B. , Baker, B. , Cook, J. , & Mellinger, J. (2020). The future of fresh: Patterns from the pandemic . Deloitte Insights , October 13. https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/industry/retail‐distribution/future‐of‐fresh‐food‐sales/pandemic‐consumer‐behavior‐grocery‐shopping.html
• Riise, T. , Moen, B. E. , & Nortvedt, M. W. (2003). Occupation, lifestyle factors and health‐related quality of life: The Hordaland Health Study . Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine , 45 ( 3 ), 324–332. 10.1097/01.jom.0000052965.43131.c3 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rogers, K. , & Cosgrove, A. (2020, April 16). Future consumer index: How Covid‐19 is changing consumer behaviors . Ernst & Young . https://www.ey.com/en_gl/consumer‐products‐retail/how‐covid‐19‐could‐change‐consumer‐behavior
• Sánchez‐Sánchez, E. , Ramírez‐Vargas, G. , Avellaneda‐López, Y. , Orellana‐Pecino, J. I. , García‐Marín, E. , & Díaz‐Jimenez, J. (2020). Eating habits and physical activity of the Spanish population during the COVID‐19 pandemic period . Nutrients , 12 ( 9 ), 2826. 10.3390/nu12092826 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sarmento, M. , Marques, S. , & Galan‐Ladero, M. (2019). Consumption dynamics during recession and recovery: A learning journey . Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services , 50 , 226–234. 10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.04.021 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Singh, D. (2020). How is coronavirus impacting the streaming platforms with an increasing appetite of viewers? Financial Express , April 04. https://www.financialexpress.com/brandwagon/how‐is‐coronavirus‐impacting‐the‐streaming‐platforms‐with‐an‐increasing‐appetite‐of‐viewers/1919916/
• Sneath, J. Z. , Lacey, R. , & Kennett‐Hensel, P. A. (2009). Coping with a natural disaster: Losses, emotions, and impulsive and compulsive buying . Marketing Letters , 20 ( 1 ), 45–60. 10.1007/s11002-008-9049-y [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sood, D. (2020). India has the potential to become a health and wellness hub . The Hindu Business Line , July 29. https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/india‐has‐the‐potential‐to‐become‐a‐health‐and‐wellness‐hub/article32220274.ece
• Srinivasan, R. , Lilien, G. L. , & Rangaswamy, A. (2002). Technological opportunism and radical technology adoption: An application to E‐Business . Journal of Marketing , 66 , 47–60. 10.1509/jmkg.66.3.47.18508 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Suresh, S. , Ravichandran, S. , & P, G. (2011). Understanding wellness center loyalty through lifestyle analysis . Health Marketing Quarterly , 28 ( 1 ), 16–37. 10.1080/07359683.2011.545307 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Teisl, M. F. , Levy, A. S. , & Derby, B. M. (1999). The effects of education and information source on consumer awareness of diet–disease relationships . Journal of Public Policy & Marketing , 18 ( 2 ), 197–207. 10.1177/074391569901800206 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• United Nations . (n.d.). Everyone included: Social impact of COVID‐19 . https://www.un.org/development/desa/dspd/everyone‐included‐covid‐19.html [ Google Scholar ]
• Verikios, G. , Sullivan, M. , Stojanovski, P. , Giesecke, J. , & Woo, G. (2016). Assessing regional risks from pandemic influenza: A scenario analysis . The World Economy , 39 ( 8 ), 1225–1255. 10.1111/twec.12296 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wernau, J. , & Gasparro, A. (2020, October 5), People are eating healthier and cooking more, food execs say . The Wall Street Journal . https://www.wsj.com/articles/consumers‐are‐eating‐healthier‐and‐cooking‐more‐food‐execs‐say‐11601926763
• Witteveen, D. (2020). Sociodemographic inequality in exposure to COVID‐19‐induced economic hardship in the United Kingdom . Research in Social Stratification and Mobility , 69 , 100551. 10.1016/j.rssm.2020.100551 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yap, S. F. , Xu, Y. , & Tan, L. (2021). Coping with crisis: The paradox of technology and consumer vulnerability . International Journal of Consumer Studies , 45 , 1239–1257. 10.1111/ijcs.12724 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yeung, R. , & Yee, W. M. (2012). Food safety concern: Incorporating marketing strategies into consumer risk coping framework . British Food Journal , 114 ( 1 ), 40–53. 10.1108/00070701211197356 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

• DOI: 10.55041/isjem01924
• Corpus ID: 270268360

The Impact of Social Media Influencers on Consumer Behaviour

• Suyash bansal
• Published in International Scientific… 25 May 2024
• International Scientific Journal of Engineering and Management

Related Papers

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Meet the ‘new consumer’: How shopper behaviour is changing in a post-inflation world

Lecturer in the Ted Rogers School of Retail Management, Toronto Metropolitan University

Assistant Professor, Retail Management, Toronto Metropolitan University

Disclosure statement

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Toronto Metropolitan University provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation CA.

Toronto Metropolitan University provides funding as a member of The Conversation CA-FR.

View all partners

After a long anticipated wait, the Bank of Canada has finally decided to cut interest rates by 25 basis points . The decision marks a departure from the series of interest rate hikes that were previously implemented to curb inflation .

The recent decrease appears to be signalling that inflation is finally starting to stabilize in Canada.

Over the past few years, Canadians have felt the strain of inflation . Many individuals turned to deal-chasing and savings as a way to build financial safeguards, giving rise to what we, as retail researchers, call the “new consumer.”

This “new consumer” phenomenon appears to be more than just a temporary response to economic hardships. It has since evolved into a more permanent behavioural shift, reflecting a broader transformation in consumer habits and preferences.

As inflation stabilizes and the economy adjusts to a new normal, businesses must adapt to meet the changing needs and preferences of this demographic.

Who is the ‘new consumer’?

The new consumer is marked by value consciousness , digital savviness and a preference for experiences over material goods .

Despite the recent stabilization of consumer prices , the new consumer has retained habits formed during economic uncertainty , continuously seeking deals and discounts.

According to the latest Future Consumer Index report by consulting firm Ernst & Young Global Limited, U.S. consumers are increasingly prioritizing savings over brand loyalty.

The survey revealed that nearly half of participants would download a brand’s app to access loyalty promotions or exclusive deals, while 70 per cent were inclined to join loyalty programs for free shipping benefits.

Read more: The rising cost of living is eroding brand loyalty as consumers seek more cost-effective alternatives

Additionally, 45 per cent of respondents have used discount codes or vouchers during online shopping in the past six months. This trend highlights the significant shift towards cost-conscious consumer behaviour.

Consumers are also actively using digital platforms to compare prices and read reviews , making more informed purchasing decisions than ever before. This digital savviness allows them to navigate the online marketplace efficiently, ensuring they get the best value for their money.

Physical store experience is still key

Despite the emphasis on looking for deals and reviews online, the new consumer still values in-store experiences. According to the Ernst & Young survey, 59 per cent of consumers visit stores to see, touch and try items before buying, and 57 per cent prefer in-store shopping to avoid shipping hassles.

Additionally, human interaction is increasingly important during the post-purchase journey. Fifty-six per cent of U.S. consumers consider it crucial for product returns and refunds, and 55 per cent value it for discussing product questions or concerns.

There’s also a notable shift towards experiential spending . Consumers are now more inclined to invest in travel, dining and unique activities over accumulating material possessions. This trend reflects a desire for meaningful and memorable experiences that offer greater satisfaction than physical goods.

Understanding these characteristics is essential in the new age of retailing. The new consumer’s focus on value, informed by digital tools and a shift towards experiential spending, defines their behaviour in a post-inflation world.

This evolving consumer profile presents both challenges and opportunities for brands and retailers, shaping the future of the retail landscape.

How retailers can cope

In an era where digital commerce continues to grow, physical retail stores are being forced to reinvent themselves, moving away from transaction points to vibrant hubs of brand experience. For instance, fuelled by the COVID-19 pandemic, retail e-commerce sales increased 67.9 per cent in Canada from February 2020 to July 2022.

This shift underscores the evolving role of physical stores, which are becoming places where consumers can learn, experience and play. As retailers adapt to changing consumer expectations, the notion that a store must be more than a place to transact is becoming a fundamental aspect of retail strategy.

A prime example of this trend is the Nike store in Manhattan , which epitomizes the concept of the store as a medium rather than just a marketplace. Far from the traditional retail setup, this location serves as a “playground” centred around experience.

The store includes a basketball half-court with adjustable hoops and digital screens, an enclosed soccer trial area, a treadmill facing a jumbotron for simulated outdoor runs, a customization shoes bar, touchscreens throughout and dedicated coaches to assist customers testing new sneakers.

The transformation of stores into experience-rich environments reflects a broader trend in retail where the value of a physical location is measured not just by traditional sales per square foot, but by the ability to engage consumers in a more meaningful ways. Retailers who invest in making their stores true extensions of their brand are primed to set themselves apart in an increasingly competitive marketplace.

Loyalty first

To thrive in this new retail landscape, leveraging loyalty programs is essential for retailers . These programs can help bridge the gap between digital and physical retail experiences by offering personalized rewards and exclusive deals that drive both online and in-store traffic.

Retailers should focus on creating loyalty programs that not only reward purchases but also enhance the overall customer experience.

For instance, integrating mobile apps that provide real-time notifications on deals and events, offering exclusive in-store experiences for members and using data analytics to tailor rewards to individual consumer preferences can significantly enhance engagement and retention.

In essence, the future of retail lies in these dynamic, personalized and interactive spaces where shopping is only part of the appeal.

• Interest rates
• Consumer behaviour
• Consumerism
• retail industry

Social Media Producer

Student & Academic Services Officer

Dean (Head of School), Indigenous Knowledges

Senior Research Fellow - Curtin Institute for Energy Transition (CIET)

Laboratory Head - RNA Biology

Experience Stern | Faculty & Research

The eyes have it: new ai tool can predict behavior.

Window to the soul? Maybe, but the eyes are also a flashing neon sign for a new artificial intelligence-based system that can read them to predict what you’ll do next.

A new paper entitled, “ Predicting Consumer Choice From Raw Eye-Movement Data Using the RETINA Deep Learning Architecture ,” published by Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery and co-authored by NYU Stern Professor Alexander Tuzhilin , alongside professors Michel Wedel (University of Maryland’s Robert H. Smith School of Business) and Moshe Unger (Tel Aviv University), utilized eye-tracking technology and a new deep-learning AI algorithm to predict study participants’ choices while they viewed a comparison website with rows and columns of products and their features.

The algorithm, known as RETINA (Raw Eye Tracking and Image Ncoder Architecture), could accurately and effectively zero in on the areas of interest of the website crucial for making appropriate selection choices before people had even made their decisions. With their advanced machine-learning method, the research team could use the full scope of raw data from the eye-tracking rather than the snippets current methods record. Unusually, the algorithm is able to incorporate raw eye movement data from each eye.

The RETINA algorithm could be applied in many settings by all types of companies. For example, a retailer could use it to enhance the virtual shopping experiences they are developing in the metaverse, a shared, virtual online world. Many of the VR devices people will use to explore the metaverse will have built-in eye tracking to help better render the virtual environment. With this algorithm, retailers could tailor the mix of products on display in their virtual store to what a person will likely choose, based on their initial eye movements.

RETINA has applications outside of marketing as eye tracking becomes more ubiquitous in many other fields, including medicine, psychology and psychiatry, usability and design, arts, reading, finance, accounting—anything where people are making decisions based on some kind of visual assessment.

The biggest players in tech, including Apple, Meta, and Google, have recently acquired eye-tracking companies and are considering a range of applications. With front-facing cameras, it is now possible to track people’s eye movements from a personal smartphone, tablet, computer, or a VR device.

Eye tracking will become available at a very large scale, predict the authors, who also note that privacy concerns remain top of mind: “The processing of the eye movement data typically has been very laborious. With this algorithm, we side-step a lot of that, so there may be many applications that we haven’t even thought about. The excitement of future applications, however, is tempered by questions of consent and data security when using eye-tracking data, which urgently need to be addressed.”

This article was adapted from a research summary published by Maryland Today . See the original publication here . 

Consumers care about sustainability—and back it up with their wallets

Total US consumer spending accounts for over $14 trillion annually and two-thirds of the US GDP. An important subset of this spending goes toward everyday consumer packaged goods (CPG), ranging from foods and beverages to cosmetics and cleaning products. The sheer size of the CPG sector—with millions of employees and trillions of dollars in annual sales—makes it a critical component in efforts to build a more sustainable, inclusive economy.

About the authors

This article is a collaborative effort by Sherry Frey of NielsenIQ and Jordan Bar Am , Vinit Doshi, Anandi Malik, and Steve Noble , representing views from McKinsey’s Consumer Packaged Goods Practice.

CPG companies increasingly allocate time, attention, and resources to instill environmental and social responsibility into their business practices. They are also making claims about environmental and social responsibility on their product labels. The results have been evident: walk down the aisle of any grocery or drugstore these days and you’re bound to see products labeled “environmentally sustainable,” “eco-friendly,” “fair trade,” or other designations related to aspects of environmental and social responsibility. Most important is what lies behind these product claims—the actual contribution of such business practices to achieving goals such as reducing carbon emissions across value chains, offering fair wages and working practices to employees, and supporting diversity and inclusion. But understanding how customers respond to social and environmental claims is also important and has not been clear in the past.

When consumers are asked if they care about buying environmentally and ethically sustainable products, they overwhelmingly answer yes: in a 2020 McKinsey US consumer sentiment survey , more than 60 percent of respondents said they’d pay more for a product with sustainable packaging. A recent study by NielsenIQ found that 78 percent of US consumers say that a sustainable lifestyle is important to them. Yet many CPG executives report that one challenge to their companies’ environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives is the inability to generate sufficient consumer demand for these products. There are many stories of companies launching new products incorporating ESG-related claims only to find that sales fell short of expectations.

How can both of these things be true? Do consumers really care whether products incorporate ESG-related claims? Do shoppers follow through and buy these products while standing in front of store shelves or browsing online? Do their real-life buying decisions diverge from their stated preferences? The potential costs—particularly in an inflationary context—of manufacturing and certifying products that make good on ESG-related claims are high. Accurately assessing demand for products that make these claims is vital as companies think about where to make ESG-related investments across their businesses. Companies should therefore be eager to better understand whether and how these types of claims influence consumers’ purchasing decisions. Is a shopper more likely to purchase a product if there’s an ESG-related claim printed on its package? What about multiple claims? Are some kinds of claims more resonant than others? Does a claim matter more if it’s appended to a pricier product? Is it less meaningful if it comes from a big, established brand?

Over the past several months, McKinsey and NielsenIQ undertook an extensive study seeking to answer these and other questions. We looked beyond the self-reported intentions of US consumers and examined their actual spending behavior—tracking dollars instead of sentiment. The result, for CPG companies, is a fact-based case for bringing environmentally and socially responsible products to market as part of overall ESG strategies and commitments. Creating such products turns out to be not just a moral imperative but also a solid business decision.

Products making ESG-related claims averaged 28 percent cumulative growth over the past five-year period, versus 20 percent for products that made no such claims.

To be clear, this is only a first step in understanding the complex question of how consumers value brands and products that incorporate ESG-related claims. This work has significant limitations that merit mention at the outset.

First, although this study examines how the sales growth of products that feature ESG-related claims fared relative to similar products without such claims, 1 Many factors can influence growth—including distribution, pricing, marketing, and product claims not related to ESG. This analysis was not designed to control for all variables. It did control for factors such as brand size, brand type, and price tier, as well as how long a product has been in the marketplace. it does not demonstrate a causal relationship that definitively indicates whether consumers bought these brands because of the ESG-related claims or for other reasons. For instance, the study does not control for factors such as marketing investments, distribution, and promotional activity. It primarily explores the correlation between ESG-related claims and sales performance.

Second, McKinsey and NielsenIQ did not attempt to independently assess the veracity of ESG-related claims for these products. It is of course paramount for the development of a sustainable and inclusive economy that companies back any ESG-related claims they make with genuine actions. “Greenwashing”—empty or misleading claims about the environmental or social merits of a product or service—poses reputational risks to businesses by eroding the trust of consumers. It also compromises their ability to make more environmentally and socially responsible choices, and potentially undermines the role of regulators. This research is limited to assessing how ESG-related claims correlate with purchasing behavior.

Our approach: Getting granular with ESG in store aisles

In collaboration with NielsenIQ, McKinsey analyzed five years of US sales data, from 2017 to June 2022. The data covered 600,000 individual product SKUs representing $400 billion in annual retail revenues. These products came from 44,000 brands across 32 food, beverage, personal-care, and household categories.

Six types of ESG claims

We found six types of ESG claims identified on product packages:

• animal welfare (“cage free,” “cruelty free,” “not tested on animals”)
• environmental sustainability (“compostable,” “eco-friendly”)
• organic positioning (an indication of organic certification)
• plant based (“plant based,” “vegan”)
• social responsibility (“fair wage,” “ethical”)
• sustainable packaging (“plastic free,” “biodegradable”)

NielsenIQ’s measurement capabilities enabled us to identify 93 different ESG-related claims—embodied in terms such as “cage free,” “vegan,” “eco-friendly,” and “biodegradable”—printed on those products’ packages. The claims were divided into six classifications: animal welfare, environmental sustainability, organic-farming methods, plant-based ingredients, social responsibility, and sustainable packaging (see sidebar, “Six types of ESG claims”). The research also drew on consumer insights from NielsenIQ’s household panel, which tracks the purchasing behavior of people in more than 100,000 US households.

At the most fundamental level, the analysis examined the rate of sales growth for individual products by category over the five-year period from 2017 to 2022. We compared the different growth rates for products with and without ESG-related claims, while controlling for other factors (such as brand size, price tier, and whether the product was a new or established one). The results provide insights into whether, and by how much, products with ESG-related claims outperform their peers on growth and how different types of products and claims perform relative to each other.

Not every brand that made a claim saw a positive effect on sales, and the data indicate a plethora of nuance at the product level. But this study did broadly reveal, in many categories, a clear and material link between ESG-related claims and consumer spending. The following four overarching insights are important for consumer companies and retailers that build portfolios of environmentally and socially responsible products as part of their overall ESG strategies and impact commitments.

1. Consumers are shifting their spending toward products with ESG-related claims

The first goal of the study was to determine whether, over this five-year period, products that made one or more ESG-related claims on their packaging outperformed products that made none. To compare, we looked at each product’s initial share of sales in its category and then tracked its five-year growth rate relative to that share. 2 As an example: among large brands in the frozen-dessert category, products with a “plant based” claim grew at a rate of 8.5 percent over five years, compared with 4.4 percent for comparable products without “plant based” claims, resulting in a growth differential of 4.1 percent. We learned that consumers are indeed backing their stated ESG preferences with their purchasing behavior.

This study did broadly reveal, in many categories, a clear and material link between ESG-related claims and consumer spending.

Over the past five years, products making ESG-related claims accounted for 56 percent of all growth—about 18 percent more than would have been expected given their standing at the beginning of the five-year period: products making these claims averaged 28 percent cumulative growth over the five-year period, versus 20 percent for products that made no such claims. As for the CAGR, products with ESG-related claims boasted a 1.7 percentage-point advantage—a significant amount in the context of a mature and modestly growing industry—over products without them (Exhibit 1). Products making ESG-related claims therefore now account for nearly half of all retail sales in the categories examined.

Growth was not uniform across categories (Exhibit 2). For instance, products making ESG-related claims generated outsize growth in 11 out of 15 food categories and in three out of four personal-care categories—but only two out of nine beverage categories. Shopping data alone can’t explain the reasons for such variances. In the children’s formula and nutritional-beverage category, for example, it’s possible that buying decisions reflect advice from doctors and that consumers probably won’t let ESG-related claims outweigh clinical recommendations.

The overall trend, however, was clear: in two-thirds of categories, products that made ESG-related claims grew faster than those that didn’t. Evidence from NielsenIQ’s household panel showed that some demographic groups—such as higher-income households, urban and suburban residents, and households with children—were more likely to buy products that made one or more ESG-related claims. Still, the research shows that a wide range of consumers across incomes, life stages, ages, races, and geographies are buying products bearing ESG-related labels—with an average of plus or minus 15 percent deviation across demographic groups for environmentally and socially conscious buyers compared with the total population. This suggests that the appeal of environmentally and socially responsible products isn’t limited to niche audiences and is making genuine headway with broad swaths of America.

2. Brands of different sizes making ESG-related claims achieved differentiated growth

Large and small brands alike saw growth in products making ESG-related claims. In 59 percent of all categories studied, the smallest brands that made such claims achieved disproportionate growth. But in 50 percent of categories, so did the largest brands that made these claims (Exhibit 3). Some examples of category variance: in sports drinks and hair care, smaller brands grew more quickly, while in fruit juice and sweet snacks, the larger brands did. (The data can’t explain the underperformance of medium-size brands, but it’s possible that they lack the marketing and distribution scale of large brands and the aura of credibility that may benefit smaller brands.)

What about newer versus established products ? Newer ones making claims outperformed their newer, nonclaiming counterparts in only 32 percent of categories. 3 We defined established products as those that recorded sales in the first year (July 2017 to June 2018) of our study data. We defined newer products as those that recorded no sales in the first year of our study data. For the purposes of this study, newer products included, for example, new sub-brands, new product lines from existing brands, and new flavors and pack sizes from existing brands. In 68 percent of categories, established products making ESG-related claims outperformed established products without them. Again, the data don’t explain these discrepancies. One hypothesis is that shoppers may expect newer products to make ESG-friendly claims but are pleasantly surprised when older products make them. (Notably, established products that made ESG-related claims also tended to experience slower sales declines than established products that didn’t.)

Similar performance rates were seen across all price tiers for products that made ESG-related claims. Success in the less-expensive price tiers might, in part, reflect the high prevalence of private-label products making such claims. In 88 percent of categories, private-label products that made them seized more than their expected share of growth.

This finding suggests that consumers choosing private-label brands may not merely be searching for the cheapest items available—they might also be eager to support affordable ESG-related products. During an inflationary moment, when affordability is probably becoming more important to consumers, CPG manufacturers and retailers might consider interpreting these data as incentives to offer their value-seeking shoppers more ESG-friendly choices at these lower price points.

3. No one ESG-related product claim outperformed all others—but less-common claims tended to be associated with larger effects

Consumers don’t seem to consistently reward any specific claims across all categories: we found no evidence that a particular claim was consistently associated with outsize growth. However, we did find that less-common claims were associated with higher growth than more prevalent claims. This might show that claims can be a means of differentiation, especially if they also have a disproportionate impact on a company’s ESG goals and impact commitments.

Products that made the least prevalent claims (such as “vegan” or “carbon zero”) grew 8.5 percent more than peers that didn’t make them. Products making medium-prevalence claims (such as “sustainable packaging” or “plant-based”) had a 4.7 percent growth differential over their peers. The most prevalent claims (such as “environmentally sustainable”) corresponded with the smallest growth differential. Yet even products making these widespread claims still enjoyed roughly 2 percent higher growth than products that didn’t make them, suggesting that commonplace claims can be differentiating.

An analysis of NielsenIQ’s household panel data also reveals a positive association between the depth of a brand’s ESG-related claims and the loyalty it engenders from consumers (Exhibit 4).

Brands that garner more than half of their sales from products making ESG-related claims enjoy 32 to 34 percent repeat rates (meaning that buyers purchase products from the brand three or more times annually). By contrast, brands that receive less than 50 percent of their sales from products that make ESG-related claims achieve repeat rates of under 30 percent. This difference does not prove that consumers reward brands because of ESG-related claims, but it does suggest that a deeper engagement with ESG-related issues across a brand’s portfolio might enhance consumer loyalty toward the brand as a whole.

4. Combining claims may convey more authenticity

This study also analyzed the effects on growth when a product package displayed multiple types of ESG-related claims. On average, products with multiple claims across our six ESG classification themes grew more quickly than other products: in nearly 80 percent of the categories, the data showed a positive correlation between the growth rate and the number of distinct types of ESG-related claims a product made. Products making multiple types of claims grew about twice as fast as products that made only one (Exhibit 5).

We are not suggesting that companies can simply print more claims and certifications on their products and expect to be rewarded. These claims must of course be backed by genuine actions that have a meaningful ESG impact , and companies should heed the serious warning about greenwashing we presented in our introduction. Nonetheless, this finding does suggest that consumers may be more likely to perceive that a multiplicity of claims (rather than only one) made by a product correlates with authentic ESG-related behavior on the part of the brand. It also indicates that brands might be wise to reflect on their commitment to ESG practices and to ensure that they are thinking holistically across the interconnected social and environmental factors that underpin their products.

What does this mean for consumer companies and retailers?

Over the past century, global consumer consumption has been a central driver of economic prosperity and growth. This success, however, also comes with social and planetary impacts that result from producing, transporting, and discarding these consumer products. It should thus carry a moral imperative, for consumers and companies alike, to understand and address these impacts to society and the planet as part of buying decisions and ESG-related actions. Product label claims—if they represent true and meaningful environmental and social action—can be an important part of fulfilling this moral imperative.

For companies at the forefront of manufacturing and selling consumer packaged goods, there is no one formula for investing in environmentally and socially responsible product features and claims. Opportunities exist on multiple fronts. It’s important for consumer companies and retailers, first, to prioritize and invest in ESG-related actions that deliver the greatest advancement of their overall ESG commitments and , second, to inform customers of those actions, including information conveyed through product label claims. Our research points to a few insights that companies might consider as they attempt to advance their ESG commitments while also trying to achieve differentiated growth.

• Ensure that ESG product claims support an overall ESG strategy with a meaningful environmental and social impact across the portfolio. This study shows that ESG-related growth can be possible across a broad range of brands—large or small, national or private label, in price tiers both high and low. Companies should define the actions, throughout the enterprise, that have the greatest ESG impact and then publicize those actions, where appropriate, with claims across their product portfolios. Rather than making a single large bet in a particular product or category, companies will probably have a greater ESG impact and a better chance of achieving outsize growth if they incorporate high-impact ESG-related benefits across multiple categories and products.
• Develop a product design process that embraces ESG-related claims alongside cost engineering. Investments in product design aim to achieve a growth upside but must also—especially during an inflationary period—consider its cost. To ensure that investments in ESG-related claims have the greatest possible impact, companies can consider building strong product design capabilities that take a holistic look across costs, quality, and ESG-related impact. Using a disciplined design-for-sustainability  approach, product designers can maximize the visibility, efficacy, and cost-efficiency of ESG-related product features that will resonate with consumers. Meanwhile, ingredients, materials, and processes that don’t contribute to this goal should be eliminated.
• Invest in ESG through both existing brands and innovative new products. A healthy portfolio generally has a balanced mix of new and established products. ESG-related claims can play an important role in both. This study suggests that a flagship, established product fighting for share in a highly competitive environment could potentially create an edge by offering relevant and differentiating ESG-related claims. Given the outsize role of new products in boosting category growth, it’s critical to ensure that environmentally and socially responsible products account for a significant share of a company’s innovation pipeline—both to meet customer demand for such products and to ensure that they help advance the company’s overall ESG strategy.
• Understand the ESG-related dynamics specific to each category and brand. Categories differ in significant ways, so it is critically important to study category-specific patterns to learn what has worked best in which contexts. Understanding which high-impact ESG claims are associated with consistently better performance in a given category can help companies focus on the claims that matter most to consumers in those categories. Companies can also benefit from being thoughtful about how specific ESG-related claims might align with the core positioning of each brand or differentiate it from those of competitors.
• Embrace the holistic, interconnected nature of ESG by creating products addressing multiple concerns. This study shows that consumers seemingly don’t respond to specific ESG-related claims consistently across all categories. But they do tend to reward products that make multiple ESG-related claims, which may do more to help a product achieve a company’s overall ESG goals while also conveying greater authenticity and commitment to consumers. The incremental growth potential from introducing a second or third ESG-related benefit for a product may be equal to the growth impact of introducing the first one. To achieve stronger growth while delivering enhanced ESG-related benefits, companies could find it helpful to consider undertaking a category- and brand-specific assessment to determine whether and how to implement multifaceted claims.

Companies will probably have a greater ESG impact and a better chance of achieving outsize growth if they incorporate high-impact ESG-related claims across multiple categories and products.

This study does not answer all questions about the impact of investments by consumer companies in environmentally and socially responsible products. It does not assess the veracity of ESG-related claims, the relative environmental or social benefits of different claims, or the incremental cost of producing products that authentically deliver on those claims. It does, however, provide an important fact base revealing consumers’ spending habits with regard to these products, and this may help companies accelerate their ESG journeys. There is strong evidence that consumers’ expressed sentiments about ESG-related product claims translate, on average, into actual spending behavior. And this suggests that companies don’t need to choose between ESG and growth. They can achieve both simultaneously by employing a thoughtful, fact-based, consumer-centric ESG strategy. The overarching result might be not just healthier financial performance but also a healthier planet.

Jordan Bar Am is a partner in McKinsey’s New Jersey office,  Vinit Doshi is a senior expert in the Stamford office,  Anandi Malik is a consultant in the New York office, and Steve Noble is a senior partner in the Minneapolis office. Sherry Frey is vice president of total wellness at NielsenIQ.

The authors wish to thank Oskar Bracho, Nina Engels, Gurvinder Kaur, Akshay Khurana, and Caroline Ling for their contributions to this article. They also thank NielsenIQ for its contributions to the collaborative research conducted for this study.

This report draws on joint research carried out between McKinsey & Company and NielsenIQ. The work reflects the views of the authors and has not been influenced by any business, government, or other institution.

This article was edited by Seth Stevenson, a senior editor in the New York office.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

Rise of the inclusive, sustainable consumers

How US consumer behavior is changing: Insights for CPG companies

Product sustainability: Back to the drawing board

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, tackling digital payment frauds: a study of consumer preparedness in india.

Journal of Financial Crime

ISSN : 1359-0790

Article publication date: 18 June 2024

This paper aims to present a study to measure “Consumer Preparedness” (CP) towards digital payment frauds by considering factors such as awareness regarding fraud risk (“Awareness”), implementation of measures (“Protection”) and actions to be taken in case of fraud (“Responsiveness”).

Design/methodology/approach

This study reviews existing literature to understand various typologies of digital payment fraud. The data of 372 consumers was collected using a structured questionnaire. The data was analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Chi-square. CP score was calculated based on awareness score, protection score and responsiveness score.

The study shows that the score for the level of awareness was low, for the level of protection was moderate and for the level of responsiveness was high, leading to an overall moderate level of preparedness. Further, a moderate association was observed between demographic factors and the level of preparedness.

Practical implications

The authors recommend proactive and reactive measures for Central Banks regarding central fraud registry and intelligence exchange, consumer fraud vulnerability assessment model and mandating fraud risk management controls. Further, financial institutions are recommended to permit payment from registered devices only, implement strong customer authentication (including biometric authentication) and conduct periodic awareness sessions.

Originality/value

The existing body of knowledge does not have a model or scoring mechanism to assess the preparedness of consumers to tackle digital payment fraud. The research paper adds a classification of fraud typologies and an exploratory approach to measure the CP score.

• Financial crimes
• Digital payment frauds
• Fraud risk management
• Consumer preparedness
• Payment security
• Fraud awareness

Lonkar, A. , Dharmadhikari, S. , Dharurkar, N. , Patil, K. and Phadke, R.A. (2024), "Tackling digital payment frauds: a study of consumer preparedness in India", Journal of Financial Crime , Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-01-2024-0029

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2024, Emerald Publishing Limited

Related articles

We’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here