A Multi-Behaviour Longitudinal Study for Predicting Sustainable Clothing Purchasing: The Moderating Effect of Pro-Environmental Identity

A Multi-Behaviour Longitudinal Study for Predicting Sustainable Clothing Purchasing: The Moderating Effect of Pro-Environmental Identity | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article A Multi-Behaviour Longitudinal Study for Predicting Sustainable Clothing Purchasing: The Moderating Effect of Pro-Environmental Identity Valentina Carfora, Giulia Buscicchio, Patrizia Catellani This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3901271/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 14 Oct, 2024 Read the published version in Scientific Reports → Version 1 posted 12 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Previous research investigated the impact of psychosocial predictors (e.g. attitude, social and moral norm, perceived behavioural control, intention) on sustainable clothing purchasing behaviour. To date, no studies considered whether pro-environmental self-identity moderates the effects of these predictors on behaviour. In this study, we adopted an intrapersonal approach to examine the effects of pro-environmental self-identity on different behaviours and a longitudinal design to assess the moderating role of pro-environmental self-identity in predicting intentions and behaviours, controlling for past behaviour. 250 participants completed a first questionnaire designed to measure the Theory of Planned Behaviour constructs related to three different sustainable clothing purchase behaviours. One month later, the participants completed a second questionnaire in which they assessed their self-assessment of these behaviours. The results showed that for all behaviours, affective attitude influenced behaviour positively, while cognitive attitude had a negative influence. The influence of previous behaviours increased with a decrease in pro-environmental self-identity. Biological sciences/Psychology/Human behaviour Biological sciences/Psychology Earth and environmental sciences/Environmental social sciences sustainable clothing eco-friendly clothing second-hand clothing high-quality clothing pro-environmental self-identity Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 1. Introduction In recent decades, the fashion industry has experienced unprecedented growth in production and consumption, leading to significant environmental consequences 1 The relentless pursuit of fast fashion has resulted in mountains of discarded clothing, excessive resource depletion, and exploitation of labour 2 . As the adverse impacts of this industry become more apparent, it is crucial to shift towards a more responsible approach to fashion. A viable solution can be the adoption of at least three behaviours related to sustainable clothing purchasing (from now on, Sustainable Clothing Purchasing - SCP), namely eco-friendly, second-hand, and high-quality clothing purchasing. First, eco-friendly fashion encompasses a range of practices, including eco-friendly materials and transparent supply chains 3 . By supporting brands that prioritise environmental protection, consumers can contribute to the preservation of ecosystems and reduce toxic chemical usage. Second, by extending the lifespan of garments through second-hand markets, thrift stores, and clothing swaps, we can significantly reduce the demand for new production, thereby conserving precious resources and curbing carbon emissions associated with manufacturing processes 4 . Third, advocating for the purchase of clothing characterized by high-quality materials and longevity not only reduces the need for frequent replacements but also encourages a shift away from fast fashion. 5 In summary, transitioning to a fashion industry that promotes SCP adoption is crucial for achieving a more sustainable future. Numerous studies have thus far examined the psychosocial factors that determine consumers' intentions to engage in one of the behaviours described above and their actual adoption 6–9 . However, to the best of our knowledge, no study has investigated what common psychosocial factors may underlie these diverse behaviours. This paper will delve deeper into these psychosocial factors using a multi-behaviour test of theoretical models explaining consumers’ intentions and behaviours, all based on an extension of the Theory of Planned Behaviour model 10 . A deeper understanding of the common psychosocial factors driving various SCP is essential for facilitating the much-needed transformation towards a more environmentally responsible and socially conscious fashion industry. Ultimately, identifying these factors can enable policymakers to create more targeted and comprehensive initiatives, ranging from educational campaigns to incentives for sustainable clothing choices. 2. Literature Review 2.1 Applying the Theory of Planned Behaviour to Understanding Intentions and Behaviours Related to Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) is a widely used model in the study of consumers’ clothing purchasing behaviour 10 . An underlying assumption of the TPB is that behavioural intention is the key determinant of the consumers’ behaviour. Behavioural intention reflects an individual’s motivation to perform a particular behaviour based on his/her efforts and planning. In the TPB, behavioural intention is a function of three independent determinants: attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioural control. Attitude, which refers to a favourable or unfavourable evaluation of the behaviour 10 , conceptually includes cognitive (i.e. the extent to which the behaviour is perceived as beneficial) and affective (i.e. the extent to which the behaviour is perceived as pleasant) components 11 . So far, several scholars showed a relevant relationship between a positive attitude towards environmental protection or sustainable clothing and the SCP 7,9,12 . Consumers who have a more positive attitude towards sustainable clothing are more likely to engage in environmentally responsible clothing-purchasing behaviours. The majority of prior studies examined only the cognitive component of consumers' attitude, without considering the affective counterpart. Meanwhile, several researchers showed that assessing affective components increases the capability of the TPB model to explain consumers’ behaviours related to both health and environmental protection 13–15 . Furthermore, affective attitude excels in predicting consumers’ behaviours for at least four reasons 16 . First, frequent behaviours are often influenced by automatic and emotional factors, which affective attitude better capture. Second, habits play a substantial role in such behaviours, and affective attitude considers this aspect more effectively. Third, affective attitude, rooted in direct experience, tend to be better predictors of behaviour than cognitive attitude based on knowledge. Fourth, affective attitude aligns more with intrinsic motivations, which are driven by the pleasure of the behaviour itself. In this study, we aimed to gain a more nuanced understanding of how cognitive and affective attitude may impact the consumers’ intentions and behaviours related to the SCP. Subjective social norm refers to the subjective perception that an important person or group of people will approve and support a particular behaviour 9 . Subjective norm can be further differentiated into descriptive and injunctive norms. Injunctive norm refers to what most people approve of, and descriptive norm indicates what people commonly do 17 . In this study, the injunctive norm defines the perceived approval and disapproval of sustainable clothing purchasing, while the descriptive norm reflects the perceptions of others' purchasing of sustainable clothing. So far, most studies on sustainable clothing purchase have only considered the role of injunctive norm 12,18 . Regarding the few studies that considered both injunctive and descriptive norm, some showed that both types of norms were strong predictors of purchasing intention1 19–20 , while others found that only injunctive norm 18 or descriptive norm predicted purchasing intention 6,21 . Some scholars analysed the direct impact of social norm on actual pro-environmental behaviour 22 . For instance, in the case of studies on the SCP, some scholars found that social injunctive norm was statistically significantly associated with pro-environment apparel purchasing behaviour 23 . To develop a comprehensive understanding of the effect of these normative variables, in this study we aimed to investigate their role in shaping intentions and behaviours towards the SCP. Perceived behavioural control is the extent to which an individual perceives a behaviour as easy or difficult to perform, considering the individual’s resources (i.e., abilities, skills, and knowledge) and situational variables (i.e., obstacles and opportunities). It is another relevant factor in predicting both intentions and behaviours related to specific SCP. Overall, prior TPB studies showed that consumers with a high level of perceived behavioural control intend to purchase both eco-friendly clothing 11 and second-hand clothing 24–25 . However, a few TPB studies investigating the more general intention to purchase sustainable clothing found no effect on perceived behavioural control 6,9 . In our multi-behaviour model, we included perceived behavioural control as a predictor of both intention and behaviour. 2.2 Considering the Role of Moral Norm in Determining Intentions and Behaviours Related to Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours One of the main critiques of the TPB has been to overlook people’s moral drives 26–27 . Moral norm is related to the people’s consideration of the moral rightness of a behaviour 28 . Unlike social norm, which describes behavioural standards for what is typical or normal 17 , moral norm contains a sense of obligation to conform to moral behaviour. In the case of people’s pro-environmental behaviour, moral norm refers to their awareness that environmental protection is dependent on their actions, so they feel responsible for both the action and its consequences 29 . Given its importance in determining sustainable behaviours, several studies have supported its inclusion in the TPB model to increase the explained variance of intention 30–32 . This evidence has been also confirmed in the case of the purchase of eco-friendly clothing 12 and not purchasing counterfeit luxury fashion products 33 . Notably, some scholars showed that moral norm was the greater predictor of female consumers’ intention to purchase sustainable clothing 6 . As for social norm, beyond the TPB studies, other scholars evaluated and demonstrated that moral norm had also a direct impact on SCBP 23 . Therefore, in the present study, we recognized the importance of incorporating moral norm into our multi-behaviour model aimed at explaining consumers’ intentions and behaviours related to the SCP. 2.3 Including Past Behaviours as Predictor of Intentions and Behaviours Related to Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours Research applying the TPB model has also identified the importance of past behaviour, that is, the number of times in the past a particular behaviour has been performed to explain sustainable intentions and behaviours 34 . In the context of pro-environmental behaviours, some scholars emphasized the fact that consumers’ past behaviours could be positively influential 6,35 and confirmed the predictiveness of this variable on sustainable clothing purchases. However, individuals may employ past positive behaviours as moral credentials to offset subsequent negative actions, a phenomenon known as self-licensing 36 . Examples include increased household energy consumption following a perceived conservation success 37 , reduced recycling after learning about one's above-average sustainable grocery shopping 38 , and decreased likelihood of engaging in pro-environmental actions after signing a pro-environmental petition online 39 . To clarify the role of past behaviour in predicting diverse SCP behaviours, in the present study we included it as an additional predictor of our TPB model. 2.4 Analysing the Predictive Role of Pro-Environmental Self-Identity Past research on sustainable behaviours has widely investigated the role of people’s pro-environmental self-identity, that is the extent to which one sees oneself as a type of person who cares and acts in an environmentally friendly manner 40 . In the literature, pro-environmental self-identity is conceived and measured in different ways, some based on theories of the self-concept and interpersonal relationships, others grounded in theories of identity (for details 41 ). In the present research, pro-environmental self-identity was conceptualized by referring to the extent to which a person perceives environmental behaviours as an important part of who s/he is 40 . Studies within environmental psychology revealed that individuals' sense of identity can predict intentions and actions regarding pro-environmental behaviours 41–43 . In the case of the SCP, only three studies have considered the influence of sustainability self-identity on intention and behaviours. A qualitative study found that pro-environmental self-identity plays a role in influencing the purchase of second-hand products (including second-hand clothing 44 ). A quantitative study found that environmental identity was the strongest predictor in performing fashion-related pro-environmental behaviours 45 . However, another study found no significant differences between high and low degrees of pro-environmental self-identity in terms of production or garment reuse methods, except in taking part in the design process and short-term use of garments 46 . In this study, we further examined the role of assessed pro-environmental self-identity, assessing its impact on intentions and behaviours related to the SCP. Although pro-environmental self-identity might moderate any of the relationships between TPB predictors and intention or behaviour, previous studies have explored how self-identity interacts with only two variables, that is, descriptive norm and past behaviour. The interaction between pro-environmental identity and descriptive norm is an area of growing interest within the field of environmental psychology. According to the theory of normative social behaviour, the influence of descriptive norm on behaviour can be moderated by the alignment of an individual's self-identity with the enactment of a specific behaviour 47–51 . This is particularly relevant in the context of pro-environmental behaviours. For instance, a study revealed that individuals who strongly identified themselves as recyclers, or whose self-identity was closely aligned with recycling behaviour, were more likely to be influenced by descriptive norm in their behavioural intentions 52 . In addition, according to the identity activation theory 53 , we can consider that individuals tend to align sustainable behaviours based on the perceived congruence with their self-identity and perceived descriptive norm 52–54 . Pro-environmental self-identity and descriptive norm can be combined in four different ways. First, when both pro-environmental self-identity and perceived descriptive norm are high, people enact highly sustainable behaviours because they are consistent with others’ behaviours and are aligned with their identification. Second, when both pro-environmental self-identity and perceived descriptive norm are low, individuals are expected to report significantly low sustainable behaviours 55 . Third, when pro-environmental self-identity is low, but perceived descriptive norm is high, less salient environmental identity may become overcompensated by more salient social pressure. In this case, not acting in line with the others' behaviours is likely to produce an intra-personal conflict because behaving consistently with the norm facilitates meeting interpersonal goals 56–57 . Fourth, when pro-environmental identity is high, but the perceived descriptive norm is low, people may be driven more by environmental identity than by group identity 55 . As to the link with past behaviour, identity theory 58 suggests that the repetition of a given behaviour leads to perceiving that behaviour as an important part of one’s self-concept. Therefore, one may expect a positive interaction between self-identity and past behaviour in predicting intentions and behaviour. So far, however, the evidence in this regard is mixed. Some studies found a positive interaction between pro-environmental self-identity and past behaviour 59 , that is, the more people had a strong pro-environmental self-identity and the more they acted sustainably in the past, the more they were willing to do the same. Instead, other studies found a negative interaction, that is, self-identity influenced intentions at low, rather than high, levels of past behaviour 60–61 . This result was interpreted by referring to the fact that self-identity plays a more important role when behaviour is not habitual or routinized 62 . This can be also explained by referring to the self-completion theory 63 . As long as a person is committed to a self-defining or identity goal, a tension remains that motivates them to keep working towards the accomplishment of this goal. In other words, if an aspect of one's self-identity is perceived as incomplete, one will want to take action to remedy the situation. Once the fulfilment of an identity-defining goal is achieved, a sense of self-completeness emerges, which leads to effort reduction 37,64–65 . However, no studies have reported tests of the interaction between self-identity and past behaviour on intentions and behaviours related to the SCP. In the present research, we explored all possible interactions between pro-environmental self-identity and TPB variables (plus moral norm and past behaviour) in predicting either intentions or behaviour. However, given that previous research had mainly focused on the interactions between self-identity, past behaviour and descriptive norm, we formulated specific hypotheses only on these interactions. 3. The Present Study The present study aimed at extending previous research in three distinct ways. First, while existing research highlights the power of the TPB components in predicting diverse sustainable clothing purchasing behaviours (e.g., the choice of eco-friendly or second-hand clothing), our study aims at predicting several sustainable behaviours at the same time. While some intervention programs target a selected single sustainable clothing purchasing, interventions addressing multiple behaviours might be more cost-effective and efficient. To serve this purpose, examining the key predictors of multiple sustainable clothing purchasing behaviours simultaneously is advisable. In the current study, we employed a multilevel approach in which a comprehensive design and analytic framework were used to account for variance in intentions and behaviours across three SCP. Second, compared to previous studies, the present study added some psychosocial factors to better explain intentions and behaviours related to the SCP. As discussed above, although prior studies proposed diverse extended TPB models to predict diverse intentions towards SCP and actual behaviours 10,24,25 , so far, very few studies distinguished between affective and cognitive attitude, or between injunctive and descriptive norm. Third, very few studies have considered the predictive role of pro-environmental self-identity and, so far, no studies verified its moderation effect on the relationships between predictors and intention/behaviour related to the SCP. To extend the current literature as aforementioned, the first aim of the current study was to explore the influence of TPB and additional variables on intentions and behaviours related to the SCP. Based on previous literature 6,7,9,12,25,26 , we expected that: Consumers’ cognitive attitude (H1a), affective attitude (H2a), injunctive norm (H3a), descriptive norm (H4a), as well as perceived behavioural control (H5a), moral norm (H6a), past SCP behaviours (H7a) and pro-environmental self-identity (H8a) significantly predict intentions towards SCP . Consumers’ cognitive attitude (H1b), affective attitude (H2b), injunctive norm (H3b), descriptive norm (H4b), perceived behavioural control (H5b), moral norm (H6b), past SCP behaviours (H7b) and pro-environmental self-identity (H8b) significantly predict SCP behaviours . The second aim of our study was to evaluate the moderating role of pro-environmental self-identity. Regarding the interaction with descriptive norm 48,52,56 , we expected that: Among consumers with higher levels of pro-environmental self-identity, the stronger descriptive norm is associated with higher intentions towards SCP (H9a) and more frequent SCP behaviours (H9b). Conversely, among consumers with lower levels of pro-environmental self-identity, the weaker descriptive norm is associated with lower intentions (H9c) and less frequent current SCP behaviours (H9d). Regarding the interaction between pro-environmental self-identity and past behaviour, prior studies found mixed results. Some studies found a positive interaction between pro-environmental self-identity and past behaviour 59 . Others found that self-identity influenced intentions at low, rather than high, levels of past behaviour 60,61 . Given the absence of prior research on the moderating influence of pro-environmental self-identity and other TPB variables, we addressed this gap by formulating the following RQs. To what extent does pro-environmental self-identity interact with consumers' affective attitude (RQ1a), cognitive attitude (RQ2a), injunctive norm (RQ3a), perceived behavioural control (RQ4a) and moral norm (RQ5a) in influencing intentions toward SCP ? To what extent does pro-environmental self-identity interact with consumers' affective attitude (RQ1b), cognitive attitude (RQ2b), injunctive norm (RQ3b), perceived behavioural control (RQ4b) and moral norm (RQ5b) in influencing SCP behaviour ? 4. Methods 4.1 Participants and Procedure Following the Declaration of Helsinki, the present study was conducted after obtaining ethical approval from the Ethical Committee for Research in Psychology (CERP) of the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Milan. In November 2022, about 400 participants were invited to participate in this study thanks to master’s degree students attending the course in Social Psychology of Eating. Neither recruiting students nor participants received any compensation. Inclusion criteria required buying at least 10 clothing items per year for oneself. At Time 1 (T1), 280 participants completed the first questionnaire. After one month, i.e., at Time 2 (T2), they were invited to complete a second brief questionnaire. The analysis was carried out only on participants who had completed both questionnaires (N = 250). The final sample was characterized by a higher number of females ( n = 172) compared to males ( n = 78), with one participant not disclosing their gender. The age of the participants ranged from 18 to 64 years, with a mean age of 29.99 ( SD = 12.93). The sample exhibited a medium to high level of education, with most participants holding a high school diploma (29%), a bachelor’s degree (24%), or attending university without obtaining a degree (27%). Additionally, 14% of participants held a master’s degree, while 2% had a lower secondary school diploma, and 2% preferred not to disclose their educational background. In terms of marital status, most respondents reported cohabiting (61%), followed by those who were separated or divorced (21%), married (9%), widowed (1%), single (0.4%), and a small portion who chose not to disclose their marital status (7%). 4.2 Measures At T1, participants gave their informed consent to participate in the study and completed a questionnaire measuring the TPB constructs (attitude, social norm, perceived behavioural control, and intention) plus additional variables (past behaviour and pro-environmental self-identity), for each of three clothing purchasing behaviours: eco-friendly clothing purchasing (i.e. purchasing clothing made from eco-friendly and sustainable materials, fabrics, or textures, with a focus on reducing environmental impact), second-hand clothing purchasing (i.e. acquiring clothing items that were previously owned, often as a sustainable and cost-effective alternative to new purchases) and high-quality clothing purchasing (i.e. buying clothing items known for their superior quality, durability, and craftsmanship). At T2, we measured consumers’ current SCP. All the measurement items used in this study, along with reliability measures, are reported in Table 1 . Table 1 Items and Reliability Measures. Scale Cronbach's Alpha McDonald's Omega Intention I intend to purchase eco-friendly clothing I intend to purchase high-quality clothing I intend to purchase second-hand clothing Cognitive Attitude 0.68 0.79 Making sustainable/second-hand/high-quality purchasing choices to protect the environment is… …foolish-wise …useless-useful Affective Attitude 0.68 0.79 Making eco-friendly/second-hand/high-quality purchasing choices to protect the environment is… …unsatisfactory-satisfactory …unpleasant-pleasant Injunctive Norm Most of the people I know (family, friends)... ... think that I should buy eco-friendly clothing to protect the environment ... would approve if I bought second-hand clothing ... would like me to purchase high-quality apparel Descriptive Norm Most of the people I know (family, friends)... … buy eco-friendly clothing ... buy high-quality clothing ... buy second-hand clothing Perceived Behavioural Control 0.68 0.79 When buying eco-friendly/second-hand/high-quality clothing, how much do feel to control the following obstacles Outdated appearance High price Habitual aspects Moral Norm Buying eco-friendly clothing means acting in line with my principles Buying second-hand clothing is consistent with my values Buying high-quality clothing items is the right thing to do Pro-Environmental Self-Identity 0.89 0.92 I think of myself as someone who is concerned about pro-environmental issues, such as… … excessive use of the planet's natural resources (air, water, soil...) for food production … pollution of natural resources in clothing production … excessive clothing consumption … use of non-recyclable materials for clothing production … excessive use of synthetic materials for fabrics … greenhouse gas emissions from clothing production and transportation Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behavior Indicate how many eco-friendly clothing (e.g., dresses, t-shirt, pants, etc.) you have purchased in the last month Indicate how many second-hand clothing (e.g., dresses, t-shirts, pants, etc.) you have purchased in the last month Indicate how many high-quality clothing (e.g., dresses, t-shirt, pants, etc.) you have purchased in the last month Intention towards SCP was measured by using one item. Participants were asked to rate their intention to choose eco-friendly clothing, second-hand clothing, and high-quality clothing over the next month on a scale ranging from 'strongly disagree' ( 1 ) to 'strongly agree' ( 7 ). These items were adapted from 6 . Higher values reflected stronger intentions to engage in the behaviour. Cognitive and Affective Attitude towards sustainable clothing purchasing behaviours were assessed as the mean of two items respectively. Participants were asked to rate their cognitive and affective attitude towards eco-friendly clothing, second-hand clothing, and high-quality clothing items on a scale ranging from 'strongly disagree' ( 1 ) to 'strongly agree' ( 7 ). These items were adapted from 67 . Higher mean values reflected a more positive attitude. Injunctive and Descriptive Norm were measured using one item per purchasing behaviour on a scale ranging from 'strongly disagree' ( 1 ) to 'strongly agree' ( 7 ). These items were adapted from 6 . Higher values reflected stronger norm. Perceived Behavioural Control towards SCP was calculated as the mean of three items per clothing purchasing behaviour, using a scale from ‘not at all’ ( 1 ) to ‘a lot’ ( 7 ). These items were adapted from 6 . Higher values reflected stronger obstacles to overcome. Moral Norm were measured using one item per SCP, using a scale ranging from 'strongly disagree' ( 1 ) to 'strongly agree' ( 7 ). These items were adapted from 68 . Higher values reflected stronger personal norm. Pro-Environmental Self-Identity was measured as the mean of 6 items rated on a scale ranging from 'strongly disagree' ( 1 ) to 'strongly agree' ( 7 ). These items were adapted from 69 . Higher mean values reflected a stronger pro-environmental identity. Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours were assessed inviting participants to specify the quantity of eco-friendly, second-hand, and high-quality clothing purchased in the last month. For each behaviour, missing values were replaced with 0, and the total number of items reported by participants was then summed. In the present study, SCP at T1 was defined as past SCP behaviour and SCP at T2 as current SCP behaviour . 4.3 Analyses The data were analysed with R version 4.3.0. We performed initial analyses that included the calculation of means, standard deviations and intercorrelations (Table 2). We then considered the simultaneous influence of predictors at different levels through multilevel modelling: three SCP variables (i.e. eco-friendly, used and quality clothing) (level-1) and SCP within individuals on the outcome variable (level-2). This approach avoids the methodological problems associated with traditional techniques 70 . In particular, multilevel modelling with random effects enables the treatment of the problem of dependence on observations, the estimation of a correct standard error and thus a more appropriate significance test 71–72 . The advantages of multilevel modelling analyses have been convincingly demonstrated in previous TPB studies 73–74 . In the area of pro-environmental behaviours, some scholars showed that accounting for multiple pro-environmental behaviours using within-subject analyses across multiple behaviours and a longitudinal design was effective in predicting pro-environmental intentions and behaviours and tested the moderating effect of pro-environmental self-identity 59 . Table 2 Descriptive Statistics and Correlations Means, Standard deviations, and Correlations with Confidence Intervals Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1. Intention 4.33 1.74 2. Affective Attitude 5.04 1.77 0.01 3. Cognitive Attitude 5.61 1.71 .15** .63** 4. Injunctive Norm 4.3 1.57 .32** .02* 0.03 5. Descriptive Norm 3.87 1.61 .44** -0.08 0.01 .50** 6. Perceived Behavioural Control 3.25 0.91 -.14** -0.08 -0.04 -.12* -.10** 7. Moral Norm 4.67 1.55 .65** .12* .23** .34** .31** -0.14 8. Past Sustainable Clothing Behaviours 2.55 0.56 -.13* .15** 0.02 0.04 -0.02 0.04 -0.05 10. Current Sustainable Clothing Behaviours 2.83 0.68 -0.11 0.09 -0.04 0.02 0.01 0.02 -0.08 .37** 9. Pro-Environmental Self-Identity 2.98 1.05 .21** .15** .15** .16** 0.07 0.05 .27* 0.11 .06 Note. M and SD are used to represent mean and standard deviation, respectively. Within person variables ( N observations = 750); Between person variables ( N participants = 250); For within person variables by between person variables we repeat the between variables for each behaviour (r is based on 3 X N); t1 = time 1, t2 = time 2. * p < .05. ** p < .01. To run our multi-behaviour model, we employed hierarchical linear models implemented with the lme4 and lmerTest packages 75 . To decipher significant interaction terms, we decomposed them to obtain simple slopes using an effect package 76 . Plots were generated using several packages, including ggeffects , jtools and forcats 77–79 . Model comparisons were performed using the ANOVA function. For our analyses, we utilized 250 observations, corresponding to 750 within-person behaviours related to the purchasing of eco-friendly, second-hand, or high-quality clothing. Each multilevel model accounted for two levels. At Level 1, representing within-person factors, we included cognitive and affective attitudes, injunctive and descriptive norms, perceived behavioural control, moral norm, and past behaviour. At Level 2, representing between-person factors, we included pro-environmental self-identity. Level 1 predictors were centred around the group mean, while Level 2 variables were centred around the grand mean 59 . To assess the models implemented in our study, we employed a full unconditioned model for comparison, utilizing a chi-square statistic 80 . Subsequently, we used the deviance value as the foundation for evaluating model fit. A substantial reduction in deviance (-2LL) indicates a significant enhancement in model fit, while a minor reduction suggests insignificant improvement 80 . 5. Results 5.1 Explaining Intentions towards Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Table 3 shows the results of the predictors influencing intentions towards SCP. To test the main effects, intentions were first regressed on the Level 1 variables (Model 1a) and then on both the Level 1 and Level 2 variables (Model 1b). Model 1a ( χ² = 2342.7, df = 249, p < .001) significantly reduced the deviance statistic compared to the intercept-only model ( Δχ² ( 8 ) = 638.42, p < .001). At this stage, moral norm proved to be the strongest and most positive predictor of consumers’ purchase intentions, followed by injunctive and descriptive norm. Neither cognitive or affective attitude nor perceived behavioural control or previous SCP behaviours were found to be significant predictors of consumers’ purchase intentions. Table 3 Multilevel Analysis of Predictors of Intentions towards Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours. Predictors B SE t-ratio p-value Model 1 a Intercept β 00 1.01 0.48 4.96 0.09 Affective Attitude β 10 -0.01 0.03 -0.21 0.83 Cognitive Attitude β 20 0.01 0.04 0.08 0.94 Injunctive Norm β 30 0.11 0.04 3.19 0.003 Descriptive Norm β 40 0.15 0.03 4.60 < 0.001 Perceived Behavioural Control β 50 -0.08 0.08 -1.69 0.12 Moral Norm β 60 0.55 0.03 17.63 < 0.001 Past Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours β 70 -0.13 0.08 -1.69 0.09 Model 1 b Intercept β 00 1.12 0.48 2.31 0.07 Affective Attitude β 10 -0.01 0.03 -0.24 0.81 Cognitive Attitude β 20 0.01 0.03 0.14 0.89 Injunctive Norm β 30 0.10 0.03 2.80 0.005 Descriptive Norm β 40 0.17 0.03 5.17 < 0.001 Perceived Behavioural Control β 50 -0.08 0.05 -1.76 0.08 Moral Norms β 60 0.52 0.03 16.42 < 0.001 Past Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours β 70 -0.16 0.08 -1.99 0.04 Pro-Environmental Self-Identity β 01 0.26 0.27 0.95 0.34 Cross-level Interactions with Sustainable Self-Identity in Model 1 b Affective Attitude β 11 -0.11 0.03 -3.49 < 0.001 Cognitive Attitude β 21 0.10 0.04 1.95 0.002 Injunctive Norm β 31 -0.02 0.04 -0.48 0.63 Descriptive Norm β 41 0.10 0.03 2.80 0.005 Perceived Behavioural Control β 51 0.13 0.03 3.68 < 0.001 Moral Norms β 61 -0.07 0.05 -1.50 0.13 Past Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviour β 71 0.12 0.03 3.56 < 0.001 Note. B = unstandardized coefficient; SE = standard error The addition of the Level 2 variable pro-environmental self-identity (Model 1b) and its interaction with the variables of Model 1a further reduced the deviance statistic (Δχ² ( 8 ) = 35.34, p < .001). Similar to Model 1a, consumers’ injunctive (H3a), descriptive (H4a), and moral (H6a) norm remained the strongest and most positive predictors of their purchase intentions. In addition, consumers’ past SCP behaviour (H7a) was a significant and negative predictor of their intentions. Consumers’ cognitive (H1a) and affective (H2a) attitude, perceived behavioural control (H5a), and pro-environmental self-identity (H8a) were not significant predictors of purchase intentions. The introduction of pro-environmental self-identity (Model 1b) and its interaction with the existing variables significantly reduced the variance statistic, indicating an improved model fit. In particular, consumers' moral, injunctive, and descriptive norm retained their strong positive influence on purchase intentions. In addition, the importance of consumers' past SCP behaviour shifted to a negative predictor, while cognitive and affective attitude and perceived behavioural control remained non-significant predictors of purchase intentions. The decomposition of the interaction terms revealed nuanced patterns. The influence of descriptive norm on intentions weakened the higher the level of pro-environmental self-identity was, with the strongest influence at the lowest level of pro-environmental self-identity (M − 1SD; B = 0.27, p < 0.001) (H9c) compared to the highest level (M + 1SD; B = 0.07, p < 0.001) (H9a) (see Fig. 1 ). The results confirmed our hypotheses. In particular, high descriptive norm showed a positive relationship with intention when pro-environmental self-identity reached its peak. This positive effect became even more pronounced when pro-environmental self-identity was at its lowest. In such cases, the low descriptive norm was associated with lower intention for SCP. The effect of consumers’ affective attitudes on their purchase intentions increased when their pro-environmental self-identity decreased. Affective attitude had a positive effect on intentions when pro-environmental self-identity was at its lowest (M − 1SD; B = 0.11, p < 0.001) and a negative effect when pro-environmental self-identity was at its highest (M + 1SD; B = -0.12, p < 0.001) (RQ1a) (see Fig. 2 ). When pro-environmental self-identity was lowest, consumers’ cognitive attitude had a negative effect on intentions (M − 1SD; B = -0.10, p < 0.001), whereas when consumers’ cognitive attitude was highest, they had a positive effect on intentions (M + 1SD; B = 0.11, p < 0.001) (RQ2a) (see Fig. 3 ). These results emphasised that an increased affective attitude led individuals to make more purchases. However, when we introduced the moderating effect of pro-environmental self-identity, the trend changed, and individuals tended to make fewer purchases. Conversely, the moderating effect of pro-environmental self-identity was reversed for cognitive attitude, which relates more to how useful behaviour is (rather than how pleasurable). When identity was low, the cognitive attitude per se led to a lower purchase intention. However, when identity was high, people intended to buy more sustainable clothing. The effect of perceived behavioural control on purchase intentions was only significant and negative at the highest levels of pro-environmental self-identity (M + 1SD; B = -0.16, p < 0.001), but not at the lowest levels (M − 1SD; B = -0.01, p = 0.82) (RQ4a; see Fig. 4 ). We found no significant effects for injunctive (RQ3a) and moral norm (RQ5a). It appears that individuals who have a strong pro-environmental self-identity have a lower sense of control over their behaviour, leading to an increased purchase intention. Conversely, perceived behavioural control showed no discernible effect when self-identity was weak. Importantly, injunctive and moral norm had no effect on shaping intentions in this particular context. Finally, prior SCP behaviours had a significant negative effect on intentions only at the lowest level of pro-environmental self-identity (M − 1SD; B = − 0.26, p = 0.04) (H9c), whereas they had no significant effect at the highest level of pro-environmental self-identity (M + 1SD; B = -0.05, p = 0.62) (R6a) (see Fig. 5 ). Individuals with a weak pro-environmental self-identity showed a pattern in which a lower level of sustainable clothing practices corresponded with lower future purchase intentions. Interestingly, a stronger identity had no effect on the relationship between intention and past behaviour. 5.2 Explaining Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours Table 4 shows the results of the predictors influencing participants’ current SCP behaviour. To examine the primary effects, the current SCP behaviours were first regressed on the Level 1 variables (Model 2a) and then on the Level 1 and 2 variables, including their interaction (Model 2b). Model 2a (χ2 = 1317.6, df = 249, p < .001) significantly reduced the deviance statistic compared to the intercept-only model (Δχ2 ( 9 ) = 116.32, p < .001). In this model, we found three predictors to be statistically significant. Both cognitive (H1b) and affective (H2b) attitude had a modest influence on current SCP behaviour, with the former having a positive and the latter a negative influence. In addition, past SCP behaviour proved to be the strongest predictor of current SCP behaviour (H7b), which was in line with our expectations. Model 2b, which included interaction terms between the variables from Model 2a and the sustainable intentions variable at level 2, further reduced the deviance statistic (Δχ2 ( 11 ) = 23.65, p < .001). Table 4 Multilevel Analysis of Predictors of Current Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours Including Cross-Level Analyses Predictors B SE t-ratio p-value Model 2 a Intercept β 00 2.21 0.17 1.29 0.20 Intention β 10 -0.01 0.02 -0.61 0.54 Affective Attitude β 20 0.04 0.07 2.57 0.01 Cognitive Attitude β 30 -0.04 0.07 -2.23 0.02 Injunctive Norm β 40 0.01 0.04 0.83 0.41 Descriptive Norm β 50 0.02 0.07 1.25 0.21 Perceived Behavioural Control β 60 0.01 0.07 1.02 0.98 Moral Norms β 70 -0.03 0.07 -1.24 0.21 Past Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours β 80 0.34 0.07 8.31 < 0.001 Model 2 b Intercept β 00 0.20 0.18 1.12 0.26 Intention β 10 -0.01 0.02 -0.57 0.57 Affective Attitude β 20 0.04 0.02 2.58 0.01 Cognitive Attitude β 30 -0.03 0.02 -1.88 0.06 Injunctive Norm β 40 0.01 0.02 0.87 0.38 Descriptive Norm β 50 0.02 0.02 1.27 0.21 Obstacles β 60 0.01 0.03 0.21 0.83 Moral Norms β 70 -0.03 0.02 -1.43 0.15 Past Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours β 80 0.35 0.04 8.37 < 0.001 Pro-Environmental Self-Identity β 01 0.08 0.16 0.51 0.61 Cross-level Interactions with Pro-Environmental Self-Identity in Model 2 b Intention β 11 -0.02 0.02 -1.41 0.16 Affective Attitude β 21 -0.02 0.02 -1.25 0.21 Cognitive Attitude β 31 0.02 0.02 0.94 0.35 Injunctive Norm β 41 0.01 0.02 0.78 0.43 Descriptive Norm β 51 -0.01 0.02 -0.35 0.72 Perceived Behavioural Control β 61 0.01 0.03 0.08 0.93 Moral Norms β 71 0.01 0.02 0.67 0.50 Past Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours β 81 -0.17 0.04 -3.83 < 0.001 The main effects in Model 2b confirmed the results from Model 2a, all other predictors, including pro-environmental self-identity were found to be non-significant (H3b, H4bm H5b, H6b, H8b). Furthermore, Model 2a revealed an additional significant interaction term between pro-environmental identity and previous SCP behaviours. Figure 6 illustrates the decomposition of this interaction term. The effect of previous SCP behaviours on current SCP behaviours is more pronounced at lower levels of pro-environmental self-identity (M − 1SD; B = 0.52, p < 0.001) (H9c) and decreases when pro-environmental self-identity reaches a higher level (M + 1SD; B = 0.17, p < 0.001) (RQ6b). No other significant interaction effects were found that did not confirm other hypotheses and research questions (H9d, RQ1b, RQ2b, RQ3b, RQ4b, RQ5b). The patterns observed for current behaviour differed from those found for intention and included variations in both main and interaction effects. While intention was influenced by normative predictors, current behaviour was primarily influenced by affective attitude. Furthermore, while in the case of intention, pro-environmental self-identity interacted significantly with several other variables, in the case of current behaviour only the interaction with past behaviour was found to be significant. 6. Discussion The present study aimed to test the plausibility of a multi-behaviour model to explain consumers’ intentions and purchases of sustainable clothing (i.e., eco-friendly, second-hand, and high-quality clothing). To this end, we combined TPB variables (i.e., cognitive and affective attitude, descriptive and injunctive norm, perceived behavioural control) with moral norm, past behaviours and pro-environmental identity. 6.1 Explaining Intentions to Purchase Sustainable Clothing Our results suggest that normative components had the greatest weight in predicting consumers’ purchase intentions, with moral norm emerging as the most important predictor. This is in line with previous research 81 , which emphasises the importance of moral norm in consumers' clothing decisions. In line with previous TPB studies, moral norm was identified as the most important predictor of Italian female consumers' intention to purchase sustainable clothing 6 and as a significant factor in predicting Malaysians' intention to purchase second-hand clothing 20 . Overall, our findings support existing research highlighting the crucial role of ethical considerations in promoting sustainable consumption, which is also emphasised by studies such as Ajzen 10 and Stern 29 . Descriptive and injunctive norm showed relevant positive effects on intentions. This emphasises the influence of social factors on consumers' clothing choices, although the reliability of these norm in predicting intentions has produced mixed results in previous studies. For example, research on second-hand clothing purchasing habits found that both descriptive and injunctive norm were low but still significant predictors 20 . In contrast, other studies showed mixed effects, with descriptive norm influencing purchase intentions, particularly in the context of fair trade and organic cotton clothing 21 . Meanwhile, injunctive norm had a significant effect only on purchase intentions in the fair-trade clothing category 21 . Our study helps to clarify this landscape and suggests that while there may be differences in the influence of social norm based on the specific sustainability attribute of the product, overall it supports the idea that social norm play a crucial role in determining purchase intentions. One plausible reason for the observed effect of social norm could be the assumption that they exert a stronger influence on behaviours that are easily observed by others 82 . This aspect of visibility is particularly crucial in the area of fashion and clothing, where personal style and clothing choices are often flaunted in a social setting. In our current study, neither affective and cognitive attitude nor perceived behavioural control proved to be significant predictors of consumer intentions. This finding is in contrast to most TPB studies in the field of SCP behaviour, such as the studies by Kumar et al. 12 and Han and Stoel 21 . However, it finds some resonance with previous research indicating weak or no associations between attitude, perceived behavioural control and intentions about reducing clothing consumption and purchasing sustainable clothing 6,81 . From this perspective, our multiple behaviours study highlights a notable shift away from individual-centred influences and places social norm — both perceived and internalised (moral) — at the forefront of shaping purchase intentions when integrating different SCP behaviours into a single multiple behaviours model. These findings challenge the conventional focus on individual beliefs and perceptions of control in the discourse on sustainable consumption. We also found that previous SCP was a significant negative predictor of consumer intentions. The tendency of people who have bought sustainable fashion in the past to express a desire to buy less in the future can be interpreted from different angles. One plausible explanation is that their lower propensity to buy results from dissatisfaction with previous purchases of sustainable fashion, which could lead them to reconsider and limit their future choices to avoid repeating similar experiences. Another perspective could be rooted in self-licencing, which occurs when individuals use past virtuous behaviour to justify or allow subsequent negligent or less virtuous actions 83 . Examining the interaction effects between pro-environmental self-identity and other predictors revealed different patterns that provide additional insights into the role of individual factors that do not directly predict intentions. In particular, individuals with a weak pro-environmental self-identity expressed a higher intention to buy sustainable clothing when they had a high affective attitude and a low cognitive attitude. Conversely, individuals with a strong pro-ecological self-identity were more likely to have the intention to buy sustainable clothing if they had a low affective attitude and a high cognitive attitude. One possible explanation for the above findings is that individuals with a strong pro-environmental identity are more likely to rely on rational and cognitive processes rather than emotional responses when making sustainable choices. If this is the case, they may prioritise the long-term environmental impact or practical aspects of sustainable clothing, leading to a less direct translation of positive affective evaluations into a stronger inclination towards SCP. This is consistent with value-belief norm theory 29 , which posits that individuals with a well-established pro-environmental value system are more likely to incorporate cognitive considerations into their decision-making processes. In this context, a positive cognitive attitude can serve as a reinforcing mechanism that aligns with existing values and contributes to a stronger intention to purchase sustainable clothing. In addition, high purchase intention for sustainable items was observed when individuals with low pro-environmental self-identity had high descriptive norm. Similarly, the influence of descriptive norm decreased with increasing eco-friendly self-identity. In addition, the intention to purchase sustainable clothing was lower when perceived behavioural control was low and pro-environmental self-identity increased. The observed reduced influence of descriptive norm on the intentions of individuals with a high pro-environmental self-identity leads to an intriguing paradox. Contrary to conventional expectations that a stronger commitment to the environment would increase the influence of social norm, the results suggest a lower response to descriptive norm in shaping intentions to SCP in this particular subgroup. From a theoretical perspective, we propose to interpret this phenomenon in terms of a sort of saturation of normative influence. Individuals with a strong pro-environmental self-concept may have already internalised pro-environmental norm to such an extent that external descriptive norm have less influence. In other words, their deep-rooted commitment to environmental values might make them less dependent on external social cues. In addition, participants with low perceived behavioural control but a strong pro-environmental identity showed a greater intention to buy sustainable clothing. The observed significant and negative effect of perceived behavioural control on purchase intentions exclusively among individuals with a high pro-environmental self-identity introduces a thought-provoking nuance. Individuals with a strong pro-environmental self-identity could derive their motivation from their internalised environmental values, making the influence of perceived control less significant. In this scenario, their intentions towards SCP may be less dependent on a sense of control and more on a commitment to act in line with their environmental identity. Furthermore, individuals with a low eco-friendly self-identity but frequent SCP intentions in the past indicated a lower intention to purchase sustainable clothing than individuals with a high SCP intention in the past. Even in this case, the self-licencing effect could lead to a decrease in motivation to purchase additional sustainable clothing 83 . Since they have already shown environmentally friendly behaviour in the past and have not recognised themselves as environmentally friendly consumers, the sense of obligation or motivation to continue making environmentally friendly choices could decrease. 6.2 Explanation of current purchasing behaviour for sustainable clothing In terms of current SCP behaviour, both affective and cognitive attitude played a small role, albeit with different effects. Affective attitude positively influenced behaviour, suggesting that consumers who associated positive emotional reactions with purchasing sustainable clothing were more likely to behave consistently and pursue their environmental goals. Conversely, cognitive attitude showed a negative effect, suggesting that people who linked positive rational evaluations to their future purchase intentions tended to reduce their purchasing behaviour. This suggests that emotional reactions may have a greater influence on long-term sustainable consumption behaviour than rational evaluations. Those who attach positive emotions to their sustainable purchases are more likely to maintain their behaviour over a longer period. In contrast, those who rely on rational considerations are more likely to curtail their future purchases, indicating a possible divergence in the factors that influence sustainable consumption behaviour over time. In contrast to what was observed in the consumer intentions explanation (i.e. the tendency for individuals who have previously purchased sustainable clothing to express a desire to purchase less in the future), previous frequent SCP behaviour emerges as the strongest predictor of current frequent SCP behaviour, indicating the lasting impact of individuals' previous sustainable choices on their current actions. This is consistent with the expectation that past behaviours are a robust predictor of current sustainable consumption patterns. However, when identification with the environment is low, the influence of past SCP behaviours increases, suggesting that individuals with lower identification with the environment increasingly rely on past actions to shape their current sustainable consumption behaviour. This suggests that the influence of previous SCP behaviours is more pronounced when self-identification with the environment is low. In this context, the habitual nature of previous behaviours could serve as a default or automatic guide. The discrepancy between the factors that explain intention and those that influence behaviour highlights a significant difference in the factors motivating these two stages of the decision-making process and supports the observation that intention does not predict subsequent SCP behaviour. In fact, our studies found that an individual's self-perception as a green consumer and their previous SCP behaviour play a more important role in shaping their current behaviour than their initially expressed intentions. In light of these findings, the process of transition from intention to behaviour related to SCP appears to be more complicated than assumed. While consumers’ prior intentions are not important, the influence of identity and prior behaviour cannot be overlooked. This finding is supported by many studies that challenge the conventional linear model of the intention-behaviour relationship 84 and highlight the need for a more nuanced understanding of the factors that contribute to SCP decisions. 6.3 Limitations and Future Directions While the results of our study are interesting and novel, it is important to recognise certain limitations. Firstly, the sample comprised only Italians, limiting the generalisability of our findings to the wider apparel market. Furthermore, given the mixed results of previous research on the influence of cultural values on sustainability 6 , it is imperative to investigate whether cultural values exert different influences on the purchase of sustainable clothing in different cultural and local contexts. Therefore, it is crucial to assess to what extent the results of this Italian study differ from those in other countries. Secondly, the self-reporting of all recorded responses represents a potential source of error, particularly in the measurement of past and current behaviour. There is a possibility of social desirability bias, i.e. participants may have over-reported socially desirable responses, which could affect the accuracy of our results. Third, researchers might consider examining whether other variables that are under-researched in the field of SCP could be included in the proposed integrated model. For example, future studies could investigate whether additional psychosocial factors play an important role in explaining intentions and behaviours related to the purchase of sustainable clothing (e.g., concern for social sustainability 85 ). Furthermore, it would be valuable for future research to control for the moderating role of other values that may influence the decision to purchase sustainable clothing. 6.4 Theoretical and Practical Implications Our findings have several practical implications for marketing, policy and non-governmental measures aimed at promoting the purchase of sustainable clothing. First, given the positive influence of affective attitude on SCP behaviour, marketing could focus on building emotional connections with consumers. Strategies that evoke positive emotions related to environmental goals could contribute to long-term engagement and consistent sustainable consumption behaviour. Secondly, the significant influence of previous sustainable clothing behaviour on current actions highlights the importance of recognising and building on people's previous choices. Practitioners should use the positive experiences consumers have had with sustainable fashion in the past to encourage ongoing and consistent behaviour. However, the finding that the impact of past behaviours diminishes as environmental friendliness increases suggests the need for tailored strategies. Practitioners could consider individual differences in self-identity when developing interventions, recognising that individuals with higher environmental identities rely less on past behaviours in their current decisions. Third, the observed discrepancy between the drivers of consumers’ intentions and their behaviour challenges the traditional linear model. Practitioners should seek to rethink the traditional emphasis on intention as the sole predictor of behaviour and consider the nuanced interplay of self-identity and past behaviour. This would require a shift in strategies to gain a more holistic understanding of the factors that influence sustainable consumption decisions. Future efforts should also examine this model of multiple behaviours in different cultural contexts to explore the impact of cultural values on sustainable clothing choices. Adapting strategies to specific cultural values can increase the effectiveness of global initiatives and contribute to more targeted and culturally sensitive approaches to promoting sustainable behaviours. 7. Conclusion In summary, our study aimed to test the plausibility of a multi-behavioural model to understand consumers' intentions and purchasing behaviour about sustainable clothing. We incorporated TPB variables, moral norm, past behaviours and pro-environmental identity into our model and examined the role they play in shaping intentions and current behaviours related to a range of sustainable purchase behaviours (i.e., eco-friendly, second-hand and quality clothing). Overall, this study challenges the conventional emphasis on individual beliefs (i.e., attitude and perceived behavioural control) in the discourse on sustainable consumption and highlights the notable influence of norm, both social and internalised (moral). Furthermore, the present study showed that individuals with a weak pro-environmental self-identity were more influenced by a strong affective attitude, low cognitive attitude and less frequent past SCP in the case of intention, but more frequent past SCP in the case of current behaviour. Conversely, individuals with a strong pro-environmental self-identity showed a lower influence of descriptive norm with increasing identity strength and a lower intention to purchase sustainable clothing when perceived behavioural control was low. In understanding current SCP behaviour, affective attitude had a positive effect on behaviour, while cognitive attitude showed a negative influence. Past SCP behaviours were found to be a strong predictor, underlining the lasting influence of individuals' historical sustainable choices on their current actions. However, the influence of past behaviours increases with a decrease in pro-environmental self-confidence. The observed discrepancy between the factors explaining intention and the factors influencing behaviour highlights the complexity of the decision-making process related to SCP. Contrary to conventional expectations, our study suggests that consumers' prior intentions do not significantly predict subsequent SCP behaviour. Instead, self-identity and past behaviours play a more important role in shaping current behaviour. In practical terms, our findings suggest that marketing efforts should emphasise building emotional connections, leveraging positive past experiences, and acknowledging the nuanced interplay of self-identity and past behaviours. Policymakers and industry stakeholders should consider these findings to develop tailored strategies to promote sustainable apparel choices, taking into account the evolving dynamics between intentions and behaviours in the complex landscape of sustainable consumption. Declarations Author Contribution V.C. and P.C. designed the study and managed data collectionV.C. and P.C. wrote the main manuscript textG.B. analyzed data, reported findings and prepared figures References Shahid, S., Islam, J.U., Farooqi, R. & Thomas, G. (2023). Affordable luxury consumption: An emerging market's perspective. Int. J. Emerg. Mark. 18 (2), 316–336. Abbate, S., Centobelli, P., & Cerchione, R. (2023). The digital and sustainable transition of the agri-food sector. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 187. Chen, Y. (2023). How blockchain adoption affects supply chain sustainability in the fashion industry: A systematic review and case studies. Int. Trans. Oper. Res., 1–28. Srivastava, A., Mallela, K. M., Deorkar, N., & Brophy, G. (2021). Manufacturing challenges and rational formulation development for AAV viral vectors. J. Pharm. Sci. 110(7), 2609–2624. Islam, M.M., Perry, P. & Gill, S. (2021). Mapping environmentally sustainable practices in textiles, apparel and fashion industries: A systematic literature review. J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 25, 331–353. Carfora, V., Cavallo, C., Catellani, P., Del Giudice, T., & Cicia, G. (2021). Why do consumers intend to purchase natural food? Integrating theory of planned behavior, value-belief-norm theory, and trust. Nutrients 13(6), 1904. Lira, J. S. D., & Costa, M. F. D. (2022). Theory of planned behavior, ethics and intention of conscious consumption in Slow Fashion Consumption. J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 26(5), 905–925. Rizkalla, N., Lestari, E. D., Arinto, B., Purnamaningsih, P., & Sulistyarini, N. (2022). Uncovering the determinants of environmentally-friendly apparel purchase intention in Indonesia: Incorporating environmental concern and knowledge into the theory of planned behavior. Econ. Manag. Sustain. 7(1), 43–58. Saricam, C., & Okur, N. (2019). Analysing the consumer behavior regarding sustainable fashion using theory of planned behavior. In Consumer Behaviour and Sustainable Fashion Consumption . Springer, Singapore. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50(2), 179–211. Lawton, R., Conner, M., & McEachan, R. (2009). Desire or reason: predicting health behaviors from affective and cognitive attitudes. Health Psychol. 28(1), 56. Kumar, N., Garg, P., & Singh, S. (2022). Pro-environmental purchase intention towards eco-friendly apparel: Augmenting the theory of planned behavior with perceived consumer effectiveness and environmental concern. J. Glob. Fashion Mark. 13(2), 134–150. Conner, M. (2018). Affective attitudes, anticipated affect and health behaviors . In Affective determinants of health-related behavior . Oxford University Press. Conner, M. & Norman, P. (2022). Predicting long-term healthy eating behaviour: understanding the role of cognitive and affective attitude s . Psychol. & Health 36:10, 1165–1181. Zahid, H., Ali, S., Danish, M., & Sulaiman, M. A. B. A. (2022). Factors Affecting Consumers Intentions to Purchase Dairy Products in Pakistan: A Cognitive Affective-Attitude Approach. J. Int. Food Agribus. Mark.,1–26. Conner, M., van Harreveld, F., & Norman, P. (2022). Attitude stability as a moderator of the relationships between cognitive and affective attitudes and behaviour. Br. J. Soc. Psychol., 61:1, 121–142. Goldstein, N. J., & Cialdini, R. B. (2011). Using social norms as a lever of social influence . In The science of social influence . Psychology Press. Maloney, J., Lee, M. Y., Jackson, V., & Miller-Spillman, K. A. (2014). Consumer willingness to purchase organic products: Application of the theory of planned behavior. J. Glob. Fashion Mark. 5(4), 308–321. Dewanto, K. N., & Belgiawan, P. F. (2020). The influence of social norms and attitude in sustainable fashion product purchase behaviou r . Am. Int. J. Bus. Manag 3, 64–75. Koay, K. Y., Cheah, C. W., & Lom, H. S. (2022). An integrated model of consumers' intention to buy second-hand clothing. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 50(11), 1358–1377. Han, Tae-Im & Stoel, Leslie (2016). The effect of social norms and product knowledge on purchase of organic cotton and fair-trade apparel. J. Glob. Fashion Mark. 7(2), 89–102. Farrow, K., Grolleau, G., & Ibanez, L. (2017). Social norms and pro-environmental behavior: A review of the evidence. Ecol. Econ. 140, 1–13. Kim, S. H., & Seock, Y. K. (2019). The roles of values and social norm on personal norms and pro-environmentally friendly apparel product purchasing behavior: The mediating role of personal norms. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 51, 83–90. Borusiak, B., Szymkowiak, A., Horska, E., Raszka, N., & Żelichowska, E. (2020). Towards building sustainable consumption: A study of second-hand buying intentions. Sustainability 12(3), 875. Rodrigues, M., Proença, J. F., & Macedo, R. (2023). Determinants of the purchase of secondhand products: an approach by the theory of planned behaviour. Sustainability 15(14), 10912. Armitage, C.J. & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the Theory of Planned Behaviour: A meta-analytic review. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 40, 471–499. Manstead, A.S.R. (2000). The role of moral norm in the attitude–behavior relation. In Attitudes, Behavior, and Social Context . Psychology Press. Rezvani, Z., Jansson, J., & Bengtsson, M. (2017). Cause I’ll Feel Good! An Investigation into the Effects of Anticipated Emotions and Personal Moral Norms on Consumer Pro-Environmental Behavior. J. Promot. Manag. 23, 163–183. Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L. (1999). A Value-Belief-Norm Theory of Support for Social Movements: The Case of Environmentalism. Human Ecology Review 6(2), 81–97. Canova, L., Bobbio, A., & Manganelli, A. M. (2023). Sustainable purchase intentions: The role of moral norm and social dominance orientation in the theory of planned behavior applied to the case of fair trade products. Sustain. Dev. 31(2), 1069–1083. Carfora, V., Cavallo, C., Caso, D., Del Giudice, T., De Devitiis, B., Viscecchia,R., … Cicia, G. (2019). Explaining consumer purchase behavior for organic milk: Including trust and green self-identity within the theory of planned behavior. Food Qual. Prefer. 76, 1–9. Carfora, V., Conner, M., Caso, D., Catellani, P. (2020). Rational and moral motives to reduce red and processed meat consumption. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 50, 744–755. Jang, J. I., & Choo, H. J. (2015). Consumption of Counterfeit Luxury Fashion Products Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior. J. Korean Soc. Cloth. Text. 28(2), 79–94. Yuriev, A., Dahmen, M., Paillé, P., Boiral, O., & Guillaumie, L. (2020). Pro-environmental behaviors through the lens of the theory of planned behavior: A scoping review. Resour Conserv Recycl 155, 104660. Stolz, K. (2022). Why do (n’t) we buy second-hand luxury products?. Sustainability 14(14), 8656. Effron, D. A. (2016). 3 Beyond “being good frees us to be bad”. In Cheating, Corruption, and Concealment: The Roots of Dishonesty , 33. Schultz, W. P., Khazian, A. M., & Zaleski, A. C. (2008). Using normative social influence to promote conservation among hotel guests. Soc. Influ 3(1), 4–23. Longoni, C., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Oettingen, G. (2014). A green paradox: Validating green choices has ironic effects on behavior, cognition, and perception. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 50, 158–165. Bratanova, B., Vauclair, C. M., Kervyn, N., Schumann, S., Wood, R., & Klein, O. (2015). Savouring morality. Moral satisfaction renders food of ethical origin subjectively tastier. Appetite 91, 137–149. Stets, J. E., & Biga, C. F. (2003). Bringing identity theory into environmental sociology. Sociol Theory 21(4), 398–423. Balundė, A., Jovarauskaitė, L., & Poškus, M. S. (2019). Exploring the relationship between connectedness with nature, environmental identity, and environmental self-identity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. SAGE Open 9(2). Catellani, P., Carfora, V. (2023). Norms, Identities, and Values. In: The Social Psychology of Eating . Springer, Cham. Udall, A. M., De Groot, J. I., De Jong, S. B., & Shankar, A. (2021). How I see me—A meta-analysis investigating the association between identities and pro-environmental behaviour. Front. Psychol 12, 582421. Arman, S.M. & Mark-Herbert, C. (2022). Ethical Pro-Environmental Self-Identity Practice: The Case of Second-Hand Products. Sustainability 14, 2154. Bloch, S. (2023). Green Tinted Glasses: Fashion Consumption Practices as Pro-Environmental Behaviors . UVM Honors College Senior Theses. 531. Palomo-Lovinski, N., & Hahn, K. (2020). American Consumer Perceptions of Sustainable Fashion, Fast Fashion, and Mass Fashion Practices. International Journal of Social Sustainability in Economic, Social & Cultural Context 16(1). Lapinski, M. K., & Rimal, R. N. (2005). An explication of social norms. Commun Theory 15(2), 127–147. Rimal, R. N. (2008). Modeling the relationship between descriptive norms and behaviors: A test and extension of the theory of normative social behavior (TNSB). Health Commun. 23(2), 103–116. Rimal, R. N., & Real, K. (2003). Understanding the influence of perceived norms on behaviors. Commun Theory 13(2), 184–203. Rimal, R. N., & Real, K. (2005). How behaviors are influenced by perceived norms: A test of the theory of normative social behavior. Commun. Res. 32(3), 389–414. Lapinski, M. K., Rimal, R. N., DeVries, R., & Lee, E. L. (2007). The role of group orientation and descriptive norms on water conservation attitudes and behaviors. Health Commun. 22(2), 133–142. Oyserman, D. (2009). Identity-based motivation and consumer behavior. J. Consum. Psychol. 19(3), 276–279. Terry, D. J., & Hogg, M. A. (1996). Group norms and the attitude-behavior relationship: A role for group identification. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 22(8), 776–793. Masson, T., & Fritsche, I. (2014). Adherence to climate change-related ingroup norms: Do dimensions of group identification matter?. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 44(5), 455–465. Tarabashkina, O. (2022). Promoting sustainable consumption: the role of social norms, ingroup framing and identification (Doctoral dissertation). Smith, J. R., & Louis, W. R. (2009). Group norms and the attitude-behavior relationship: A role for group identification. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 35(4), 433–446. Mackie, D. M., Devos, T., & Smith, E. R. (2000). Intergroup emotions: Explaining offensive action tendencies in an intergroup context. J Pers Soc Psychol, 79(4), 602–616. Stryker, S. (1987). Identity theory: Developments and extensions. In K. Yardley & T. Honess (Eds.), Self and identity: Psychosocial Perspectives (pp. 89–103). Carfora, V., Cavallo, C., Caso, D., Del Giudice, T., De Devitiis, B., Viscecchia,R., … Cicia, G. (2019). Explaining consumer purchase behavior for organic milk: Including trust and green self-identity within the theory of planned behavior. Food Qual. Prefer . 76, 1–9. Fekadu, Z., & Kraft, P. (2001). Self-identity and the theory of planned behavior: A useful addition or an unhelpful artifice?. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 31(7), 1393–1410. Smith, J. R., Terry, D. J., Manstead, A. S., Louis, W. R., Kotterman, D., & Wolfs, J. (2007). Interaction effects in the theory of planned behavior: The interplay of self-identity and past behavior. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 37(11), 2726–2750. Verplanken, B., & Orbell, S. (2003). Reflections on past behavior: A self-report index of habit strength. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol., 33(6), 1313–1330. Gollwitzer, P. M., Wicklund, R. A., & Hilton, J. L. (1982). Admission of failure and symbolic self-completion: Extending Lewinian theory. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 43(2), 358–371. Gollwitzer, P. M., Sheeran, P., Michalski, V., & Seifert, A. E. (2009). When intentions go public: Does social reality widen the intention-behavior gap?. Psychol. Sci., 20(5), 612–618. Lalot, F., Quiamzade, A., Falomir-Pichastor, J. M., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2019). When does self-identity predict intention to act green? A self-completion account relying on past behaviour and majority-minority support for pro-environmental values. J. Environ. Psychol. 61, 79–92. Fekadu, Z., & Kraft, P. (2001). Self-identity and the theory of planned behavior: A useful addition or an unhelpful artifice?. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 31(7), 1393–1410. Honkanen, P., & Young, J. A. (2015). Cross-cultural differences in the perceived personal relevance of recycling. Environ Behav 47(3), 322–345. Van der Werff, E., & Steg, L. (2009). One model to predict them all: Predicting energy behaviours with the norm activation model. Energy Res. Soc. Sci.1, 85–94. Chen, M. F. (2020). The impacts of perceived moral obligation and sustainability self-identity on sustainability development: A theory of planned behavior purchase intention model of sustainability‐labeled coffee and the moderating effect of climate change skepticism. Bus. Strat. Env. 29(6), 2404–2417. Conner, M., Lawton, R., & McEachan, R. (2016). Basis of intentions as a moderator of the intention–health behavior relationship. Health Psychol. 35(3), 219–227. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (Vol. 1). Sage. Vanlaar, W. (2005). Multilevel modeling in traffic safety research: two empirical examples illustrating the consequences of ignoring hierarchies. Traffic Inj. Prev. 6(4), 311–316. Shukri, M., Jones, F., & Conner, M. (2022). Theory of planned behaviour, psychological stressors and intention to avoid violating traffic rules: A Multi-Level modelling analysis. Accid Anal Prev 169, 106624. Schuez, B., Brick, C., Wilding, S., & Conner, M. (2020). Socioeconomic Status Moderates the Effects of Health Cognitions on Health Behaviors within Participants: Two Multibehaviour Studies. Ann. Behav. Med. 54, Pages 36–48. Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models. J. Stat. Softw. 82(13), 1–26. Fox, J. and S. Weisberg (2018). An R Companion to Applied Regression , Third Edition. Sage Publications. Lüdecke, D. (2018). ggeffects: Tidy data frames of marginal effects from regression models . J. Open Source Softw. 3(26), 772 Long, J. A. (2022). jtools: Analysis and Presentation of Social Scientific Data . Version 2.2.0. Software per computer. Disponibile online all'indirizzo: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/jtools . Wickham, H. (2023). forcats: Tools for Working with Categorical Variables (Factors) (Version 1.0.0). Garson, G.D. (2013). Introductory guide to HLM with HLM 7 software . In Hierarchical linear modeling: Guide and applications , pp. 55–96. Joanes, T. (2019). Personal norms in a globalized world: Norm-activation processes and reduced clothing consumption . J. Clean. Prod. 212, 941–949. Vesely, S., & Klöckner, C. A. (2018). Global social norms and environmental behavior. Environment and Behavior, 50(3), 247–272. Adıgüzel, F., Linkowski, C., Olson, E. (2020). Do Sustainability Labels Make Us More Negligent? Rebound and Moral Licensing Effects in the Clothing Industry. In: Muthu, S., Gardetti, M. (eds) Sustainability in the Textile and Apparel Industries. Sustainable Textiles: Production, Processing, Manufacturing & Chemistry . Springer, Cham. Carrington, M. J., Neville, B. A., & Whitwell, G. J. (2010). Why ethical consumers don’t walk their talk: Towards a framework for understanding the gap between the ethical purchase intentions and actual buying behaviour of ethically minded consumers . J. Bus. Ethics 97, 139–158. Carfora, V., & Catellani, P. (2023). Psychosocial drivers influencing local food purchasing: beyond availability, the importance of trust in farmers. Front. Nutr. 10, 1204732. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 14 Oct, 2024 Read the published version in Scientific Reports → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 29 May, 2024 Reviews received at journal 28 May, 2024 Reviews received at journal 23 May, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 17 May, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 16 May, 2024 Reviews received at journal 25 Mar, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 18 Mar, 2024 Reviewers invited by journal 15 Feb, 2024 Editor assigned by journal 15 Feb, 2024 Editor invited by journal 08 Feb, 2024 Submission checks completed at journal 08 Feb, 2024 First submitted to journal 26 Jan, 2024 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-3901271","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":271807627,"identity":"c199c2c9-6829-4a8d-83bb-ac2d27f86a81","order_by":0,"name":"Valentina Carfora","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Università degli Studi Internazionali di Roma","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Valentina","middleName":"","lastName":"Carfora","suffix":""},{"id":271807628,"identity":"e4ac04c2-fce7-424b-a471-850e1f821e48","order_by":1,"name":"Giulia Buscicchio","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Giulia","middleName":"","lastName":"Buscicchio","suffix":""},{"id":271807629,"identity":"c6b3ebf0-c6bd-41b8-8c87-ddffff7894f1","order_by":2,"name":"Patrizia Catellani","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Catholic University of the Sacred Heart","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Patrizia","middleName":"","lastName":"Catellani","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-01-26 23:14:06","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3901271/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3901271/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-74234-6","type":"published","date":"2024-10-14T15:57:58+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":50928270,"identity":"8deca78e-c537-46f2-8dec-53a20b40ace7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-09 17:18:49","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":18828,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSimple Slopes for Descriptive Norm on Intention by Pro-Environmental Self-Identity\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3901271/v1/7f46f95cd99184ad0b208d3f.png"},{"id":50928271,"identity":"a3a31f5c-a9ec-4a1e-86bc-5891b3be3407","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-09 17:18:49","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":18271,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSimple Slopes for Affective Attitude on Intention by Pro-Environmental Self-Identity\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3901271/v1/33c5b743e7ff5d21723d6f6e.png"},{"id":50928272,"identity":"d91e19a1-a8b4-4b5d-a508-7037ea72cff0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-09 17:18:49","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":24469,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSimple Slopes for Cognitive Attitude on Intention by Pro-Environmental Self-Identity\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3901271/v1/cf0bff67f1e33ff864717cf7.png"},{"id":50928275,"identity":"87c51bdc-3930-4cd3-a8d4-f940ec1fec1c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-09 17:18:50","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":33459,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSimple Slopes for Perceived Behavioural Control on Intention by Pro-Environmental Self-Identity\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3901271/v1/5af6a1dc6941a002ae613d76.png"},{"id":50928274,"identity":"e6cc2dd6-d100-4803-8840-93306edad930","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-09 17:18:50","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":29854,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSimple Slopes for Past Sustainable Clothing Purchasing on Intention by Pro-Environmental Self-Identity\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3901271/v1/158029ec23fdad2d0f6f28bf.png"},{"id":50928273,"identity":"58b5712a-0d12-474d-ac72-21a43e8eaa7a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-09 17:18:50","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":44867,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSimple Slopes for Past Sustainable Clothing Purchasing on Current Sustainable Clothing Purchasing by Pro-Environmental Self-Identity\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3901271/v1/336d946a33dc7b946ed191f8.png"},{"id":67149089,"identity":"547f3851-8111-40e7-9148-f748147be905","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-10-21 16:11:48","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1278954,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3901271/v1/dbf26bc4-126c-4ad5-8f87-a536167a43e4.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"A Multi-Behaviour Longitudinal Study for Predicting Sustainable Clothing Purchasing: The Moderating Effect of Pro-Environmental Identity","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn recent decades, the fashion industry has experienced unprecedented growth in production and consumption, leading to significant environmental consequences\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e The relentless pursuit of fast fashion has resulted in mountains of discarded clothing, excessive resource depletion, and exploitation of labour\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e. As the adverse impacts of this industry become more apparent, it is crucial to shift towards a more responsible approach to fashion. A viable solution can be the adoption of at least three behaviours related to sustainable clothing purchasing (from now on, Sustainable Clothing Purchasing - SCP), namely eco-friendly, second-hand, and high-quality clothing purchasing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst, eco-friendly fashion encompasses a range of practices, including eco-friendly materials and transparent supply chains\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e. By supporting brands that prioritise environmental protection, consumers can contribute to the preservation of ecosystems and reduce toxic chemical usage. Second, by extending the lifespan of garments through second-hand markets, thrift stores, and clothing swaps, we can significantly reduce the demand for new production, thereby conserving precious resources and curbing carbon emissions associated with manufacturing processes\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e. Third, advocating for the purchase of clothing characterized by high-quality materials and longevity not only reduces the need for frequent replacements but also encourages a shift away from fast fashion.\u003csup\u003e5\u003c/sup\u003e In summary, transitioning to a fashion industry that promotes SCP adoption is crucial for achieving a more sustainable future.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNumerous studies have thus far examined the psychosocial factors that determine consumers' intentions to engage in one of the behaviours described above and their actual adoption\u003csup\u003e6\u0026ndash;9\u003c/sup\u003e. However, to the best of our knowledge, no study has investigated what common psychosocial factors may underlie these diverse behaviours. This paper will delve deeper into these psychosocial factors using a multi-behaviour test of theoretical models explaining consumers\u0026rsquo; intentions and behaviours, all based on an extension of the Theory of Planned Behaviour model\u003csup\u003e10\u003c/sup\u003e. A deeper understanding of the common psychosocial factors driving various SCP is essential for facilitating the much-needed transformation towards a more environmentally responsible and socially conscious fashion industry. Ultimately, identifying these factors can enable policymakers to create more targeted and comprehensive initiatives, ranging from educational campaigns to incentives for sustainable clothing choices.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Literature Review","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003e2.1 Applying the Theory of Planned Behaviour to Understanding Intentions and Behaviours Related to Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) is a widely used model in the study of consumers\u0026rsquo; clothing purchasing behaviour\u003csup\u003e10\u003c/sup\u003e. An underlying assumption of the TPB is that behavioural intention is the key determinant of the consumers\u0026rsquo; behaviour. Behavioural intention reflects an individual\u0026rsquo;s motivation to perform a particular behaviour based on his/her efforts and planning. In the TPB, behavioural intention is a function of three independent determinants: attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioural control.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAttitude, which refers to a favourable or unfavourable evaluation of the behaviour\u003csup\u003e10\u003c/sup\u003e, conceptually includes cognitive (i.e. the extent to which the behaviour is perceived as beneficial) and affective (i.e. the extent to which the behaviour is perceived as pleasant) components\u003csup\u003e11\u003c/sup\u003e. So far, several scholars showed a relevant relationship between a positive attitude towards environmental protection or sustainable clothing and the SCP\u003csup\u003e7,9,12\u003c/sup\u003e. Consumers who have a more positive attitude towards sustainable clothing are more likely to engage in environmentally responsible clothing-purchasing behaviours.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe majority of prior studies examined only the cognitive component of consumers' attitude, without considering the affective counterpart. Meanwhile, several researchers showed that assessing affective components increases the capability of the TPB model to explain consumers\u0026rsquo; behaviours related to both health and environmental protection\u003csup\u003e13\u0026ndash;15\u003c/sup\u003e. Furthermore, affective attitude excels in predicting consumers\u0026rsquo; behaviours for at least four reasons\u003csup\u003e16\u003c/sup\u003e. First, frequent behaviours are often influenced by automatic and emotional factors, which affective attitude better capture. Second, habits play a substantial role in such behaviours, and affective attitude considers this aspect more effectively. Third, affective attitude, rooted in direct experience, tend to be better predictors of behaviour than cognitive attitude based on knowledge. Fourth, affective attitude aligns more with intrinsic motivations, which are driven by the pleasure of the behaviour itself. In this study, we aimed to gain a more nuanced understanding of how cognitive and affective attitude may impact the consumers\u0026rsquo; intentions and behaviours related to the SCP.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSubjective social norm refers to the subjective perception that an important person or group of people will approve and support a particular behaviour\u003csup\u003e9\u003c/sup\u003e. Subjective norm can be further differentiated into descriptive and injunctive norms. Injunctive norm refers to what most people approve of, and descriptive norm indicates what people commonly do\u003csup\u003e17\u003c/sup\u003e. In this study, the injunctive norm defines the perceived approval and disapproval of sustainable clothing purchasing, while the descriptive norm reflects the perceptions of others' purchasing of sustainable clothing. So far, most studies on sustainable clothing purchase have only considered the role of injunctive norm\u003csup\u003e12,18\u003c/sup\u003e. Regarding the few studies that considered both injunctive and descriptive norm, some showed that both types of norms were strong predictors of purchasing intention1\u003csup\u003e19\u0026ndash;20\u003c/sup\u003e, while others found that only injunctive norm\u003csup\u003e18\u003c/sup\u003e or descriptive norm predicted purchasing intention\u003csup\u003e6,21\u003c/sup\u003e. Some scholars analysed the direct impact of social norm on actual pro-environmental behaviour\u003csup\u003e22\u003c/sup\u003e. For instance, in the case of studies on the SCP, some scholars found that social injunctive norm was statistically significantly associated with pro-environment apparel purchasing behaviour\u003csup\u003e23\u003c/sup\u003e. To develop a comprehensive understanding of the effect of these normative variables, in this study we aimed to investigate their role in shaping intentions and behaviours towards the SCP.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived behavioural control is the extent to which an individual perceives a behaviour as easy or difficult to perform, considering the individual\u0026rsquo;s resources (i.e., abilities, skills, and knowledge) and situational variables (i.e., obstacles and opportunities). It is another relevant factor in predicting both intentions and behaviours related to specific SCP. Overall, prior TPB studies showed that consumers with a high level of perceived behavioural control intend to purchase both eco-friendly clothing\u003csup\u003e11\u003c/sup\u003e and second-hand clothing\u003csup\u003e24\u0026ndash;25\u003c/sup\u003e. However, a few TPB studies investigating the more general intention to purchase sustainable clothing found no effect on perceived behavioural control\u003csup\u003e6,9\u003c/sup\u003e. In our multi-behaviour model, we included perceived behavioural control as a predictor of both intention and behaviour.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003e2.2 Considering the Role of Moral Norm in Determining Intentions and Behaviours Related to Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne of the main critiques of the TPB has been to overlook people\u0026rsquo;s moral drives\u003csup\u003e26\u0026ndash;27\u003c/sup\u003e. Moral norm is related to the people\u0026rsquo;s consideration of the moral rightness of a behaviour\u003csup\u003e28\u003c/sup\u003e. Unlike social norm, which describes behavioural standards for what is typical or normal\u003csup\u003e17\u003c/sup\u003e, moral norm contains a sense of obligation to conform to moral behaviour. In the case of people\u0026rsquo;s pro-environmental behaviour, moral norm refers to their awareness that environmental protection is dependent on their actions, so they feel responsible for both the action and its consequences\u003csup\u003e29\u003c/sup\u003e. Given its importance in determining sustainable behaviours, several studies have supported its inclusion in the TPB model to increase the explained variance of intention\u003csup\u003e30\u0026ndash;32\u003c/sup\u003e. This evidence has been also confirmed in the case of the purchase of eco-friendly clothing\u003csup\u003e12\u003c/sup\u003e and not purchasing counterfeit luxury fashion products\u003csup\u003e33\u003c/sup\u003e. Notably, some scholars showed that moral norm was the greater predictor of female consumers\u0026rsquo; intention to purchase sustainable clothing\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e. As for social norm, beyond the TPB studies, other scholars evaluated and demonstrated that moral norm had also a direct impact on SCBP\u003csup\u003e23\u003c/sup\u003e. Therefore, in the present study, we recognized the importance of incorporating moral norm into our multi-behaviour model aimed at explaining consumers\u0026rsquo; intentions and behaviours related to the SCP.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3 Including Past Behaviours as Predictor of Intentions and Behaviours Related to Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearch applying the TPB model has also identified the importance of past behaviour, that is, the number of times in the past a particular behaviour has been performed to explain sustainable intentions and behaviours\u003csup\u003e34\u003c/sup\u003e. In the context of pro-environmental behaviours, some scholars emphasized the fact that consumers\u0026rsquo; past behaviours could be positively influential\u003csup\u003e6,35\u003c/sup\u003e and confirmed the predictiveness of this variable on sustainable clothing purchases. However, individuals may employ past positive behaviours as moral credentials to offset subsequent negative actions, a phenomenon known as self-licensing\u003csup\u003e36\u003c/sup\u003e. Examples include increased household energy consumption following a perceived conservation success\u003csup\u003e37\u003c/sup\u003e, reduced recycling after learning about one's above-average sustainable grocery shopping\u003csup\u003e38\u003c/sup\u003e, and decreased likelihood of engaging in pro-environmental actions after signing a pro-environmental petition online\u003csup\u003e39\u003c/sup\u003e. To clarify the role of past behaviour in predicting diverse SCP behaviours, in the present study we included it as an additional predictor of our TPB model.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4 Analysing the Predictive Role of Pro-Environmental Self-Identity\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ePast research on sustainable behaviours has widely investigated the role of people\u0026rsquo;s pro-environmental self-identity, that is the extent to which one sees oneself as a type of person who cares and acts in an environmentally friendly manner\u003csup\u003e40\u003c/sup\u003e. In the literature, pro-environmental self-identity is conceived and measured in different ways, some based on theories of the self-concept and interpersonal relationships, others grounded in theories of identity (for details\u003csup\u003e41\u003c/sup\u003e). In the present research, pro-environmental self-identity was conceptualized by referring to the extent to which a person perceives environmental behaviours as an important part of who s/he is\u003csup\u003e40\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudies within environmental psychology revealed that individuals' sense of identity can predict intentions and actions regarding pro-environmental behaviours\u003csup\u003e41\u0026ndash;43\u003c/sup\u003e. In the case of the SCP, only three studies have considered the influence of sustainability self-identity on intention and behaviours. A qualitative study found that pro-environmental self-identity plays a role in influencing the purchase of second-hand products (including second-hand clothing\u003csup\u003e44\u003c/sup\u003e). A quantitative study found that environmental identity was the strongest predictor in performing fashion-related pro-environmental behaviours\u003csup\u003e45\u003c/sup\u003e. However, another study found no significant differences between high and low degrees of pro-environmental self-identity in terms of production or garment reuse methods, except in taking part in the design process and short-term use of garments\u003csup\u003e46\u003c/sup\u003e. In this study, we further examined the role of assessed pro-environmental self-identity, assessing its impact on intentions and behaviours related to the SCP.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlthough pro-environmental self-identity might moderate any of the relationships between TPB predictors and intention or behaviour, previous studies have explored how self-identity interacts with only two variables, that is, descriptive norm and past behaviour.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe interaction between pro-environmental identity and descriptive norm is an area of growing interest within the field of environmental psychology. According to the theory of normative social behaviour, the influence of descriptive norm on behaviour can be moderated by the alignment of an individual's self-identity with the enactment of a specific behaviour\u003csup\u003e47\u0026ndash;51\u003c/sup\u003e. This is particularly relevant in the context of pro-environmental behaviours. For instance, a study revealed that individuals who strongly identified themselves as recyclers, or whose self-identity was closely aligned with recycling behaviour, were more likely to be influenced by descriptive norm in their behavioural intentions\u003csup\u003e52\u003c/sup\u003e. In addition, according to the identity activation theory\u003csup\u003e53\u003c/sup\u003e, we can consider that individuals tend to align sustainable behaviours based on the perceived congruence with their self-identity and perceived descriptive norm\u003csup\u003e52\u0026ndash;54\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePro-environmental self-identity and descriptive norm can be combined in four different ways. First, when both pro-environmental self-identity and perceived descriptive norm are high, people enact highly sustainable behaviours because they are consistent with others\u0026rsquo; behaviours and are aligned with their identification. Second, when both pro-environmental self-identity and perceived descriptive norm are low, individuals are expected to report significantly low sustainable behaviours\u003csup\u003e55\u003c/sup\u003e. Third, when pro-environmental self-identity is low, but perceived descriptive norm is high, less salient environmental identity may become overcompensated by more salient social pressure. In this case, not acting in line with the others' behaviours is likely to produce an intra-personal conflict because behaving consistently with the norm facilitates meeting interpersonal goals\u003csup\u003e56\u0026ndash;57\u003c/sup\u003e. Fourth, when pro-environmental identity is high, but the perceived descriptive norm is low, people may be driven more by environmental identity than by group identity\u003csup\u003e55\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs to the link with past behaviour, identity theory\u003csup\u003e58\u003c/sup\u003e suggests that the repetition of a given behaviour leads to perceiving that behaviour as an important part of one\u0026rsquo;s self-concept. Therefore, one may expect a positive interaction between self-identity and past behaviour in predicting intentions and behaviour. So far, however, the evidence in this regard is mixed.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSome studies found a positive interaction between pro-environmental self-identity and past behaviour\u003csup\u003e59\u003c/sup\u003e, that is, the more people had a strong pro-environmental self-identity and the more they acted sustainably in the past, the more they were willing to do the same. Instead, other studies found a negative interaction, that is, self-identity influenced intentions at low, rather than high, levels of past behaviour\u003csup\u003e60\u0026ndash;61\u003c/sup\u003e. This result was interpreted by referring to the fact that self-identity plays a more important role when behaviour is not habitual or routinized\u003csup\u003e62\u003c/sup\u003e. This can be also explained by referring to the self-completion theory\u003csup\u003e63\u003c/sup\u003e. As long as a person is committed to a self-defining or identity goal, a tension remains that motivates them to keep working towards the accomplishment of this goal. In other words, if an aspect of one's self-identity is perceived as incomplete, one will want to take action to remedy the situation. Once the fulfilment of an identity-defining goal is achieved, a sense of self-completeness emerges, which leads to effort reduction\u003csup\u003e37,64\u0026ndash;65\u003c/sup\u003e. However, no studies have reported tests of the interaction between self-identity and past behaviour on intentions and behaviours related to the SCP.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the present research, we explored all possible interactions between pro-environmental self-identity and TPB variables (plus moral norm and past behaviour) in predicting either intentions or behaviour. However, given that previous research had mainly focused on the interactions between self-identity, past behaviour and descriptive norm, we formulated specific hypotheses only on these interactions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. The Present Study","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe present study aimed at extending previous research in three distinct ways.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst, while existing research highlights the power of the TPB components in predicting diverse sustainable clothing purchasing behaviours (e.g., the choice of eco-friendly or second-hand clothing), our study aims at predicting several sustainable behaviours at the same time. While some intervention programs target a selected single sustainable clothing purchasing, interventions addressing multiple behaviours might be more cost-effective and efficient. To serve this purpose, examining the key predictors of multiple sustainable clothing purchasing behaviours simultaneously is advisable. In the current study, we employed a multilevel approach in which a comprehensive design and analytic framework were used to account for variance in intentions and behaviours across three SCP.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecond, compared to previous studies, the present study added some psychosocial factors to better explain intentions and behaviours related to the SCP. As discussed above, although prior studies proposed diverse extended TPB models to predict diverse intentions towards SCP and actual behaviours\u003csup\u003e10,24,25\u003c/sup\u003e, so far, very few studies distinguished between affective and cognitive attitude, or between injunctive and descriptive norm.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThird, very few studies have considered the predictive role of pro-environmental self-identity and, so far, no studies verified its moderation effect on the relationships between predictors and intention/behaviour related to the SCP.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo extend the current literature as aforementioned, the first aim of the current study was to explore the influence of TPB and additional variables on intentions and behaviours related to the SCP. Based on previous literature\u003csup\u003e6,7,9,12,25,26\u003c/sup\u003e, we expected that:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsumers\u0026rsquo; cognitive attitude (H1a), affective attitude (H2a), injunctive norm (H3a), descriptive norm (H4a), as well as perceived behavioural control (H5a), moral norm (H6a), past SCP behaviours (H7a) and pro-environmental self-identity (H8a) significantly predict \u003cem\u003eintentions towards SCP\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsumers\u0026rsquo; cognitive attitude (H1b), affective attitude (H2b), injunctive norm (H3b), descriptive norm (H4b), perceived behavioural control (H5b), moral norm (H6b), past SCP behaviours (H7b) and pro-environmental self-identity (H8b) significantly predict \u003cem\u003eSCP behaviours\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe second aim of our study was to evaluate the moderating role of pro-environmental self-identity. Regarding the interaction with descriptive norm\u003csup\u003e48,52,56\u003c/sup\u003e, we expected that:\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAmong consumers with \u003cem\u003ehigher levels\u003c/em\u003e of pro-environmental self-identity, the stronger descriptive norm is associated with higher intentions towards SCP (H9a) and more frequent SCP behaviours (H9b).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eConversely, among consumers with \u003cem\u003elower levels\u003c/em\u003e of pro-environmental self-identity, the weaker descriptive norm is associated with lower intentions (H9c) and less frequent current SCP behaviours (H9d).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding the interaction between pro-environmental self-identity and past behaviour, prior studies found mixed results. Some studies found a positive interaction between pro-environmental self-identity and past behaviour\u003csup\u003e59\u003c/sup\u003e. Others found that self-identity influenced intentions at low, rather than high, levels of past behaviour\u003csup\u003e60,61\u003c/sup\u003e. Given the absence of prior research on the moderating influence of pro-environmental self-identity and other TPB variables, we addressed this gap by formulating the following RQs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo what extent does pro-environmental self-identity interact with consumers' affective attitude (RQ1a), cognitive attitude (RQ2a), injunctive norm (RQ3a), perceived behavioural control (RQ4a) and moral norm (RQ5a) in influencing \u003cem\u003eintentions toward SCP\u003c/em\u003e?\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo what extent does pro-environmental self-identity interact with consumers' affective attitude (RQ1b), cognitive attitude (RQ2b), injunctive norm (RQ3b), perceived behavioural control (RQ4b) and moral norm (RQ5b) in influencing \u003cem\u003eSCP behaviour\u003c/em\u003e?\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"4. Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1 Participants and Procedure\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e Following the Declaration of Helsinki, the present study was conducted after obtaining ethical approval from the Ethical Committee for Research in Psychology (CERP) of the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Milan. In November 2022, about 400 participants were invited to participate in this study thanks to master\u0026rsquo;s degree students attending the course in Social Psychology of Eating. Neither recruiting students nor participants received any compensation. Inclusion criteria required buying at least 10 clothing items per year for oneself. At Time 1 (T1), 280 participants completed the first questionnaire. After one month, i.e., at Time 2 (T2), they were invited to complete a second brief questionnaire. The analysis was carried out only on participants who had completed both questionnaires (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;250).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe final sample was characterized by a higher number of females (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;172) compared to males (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;78), with one participant not disclosing their gender. The age of the participants ranged from 18 to 64 years, with a mean age of 29.99 (\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;12.93). The sample exhibited a medium to high level of education, with most participants holding a high school diploma (29%), a bachelor\u0026rsquo;s degree (24%), or attending university without obtaining a degree (27%). Additionally, 14% of participants held a master\u0026rsquo;s degree, while 2% had a lower secondary school diploma, and 2% preferred not to disclose their educational background. In terms of marital status, most respondents reported cohabiting (61%), followed by those who were separated or divorced (21%), married (9%), widowed (1%), single (0.4%), and a small portion who chose not to disclose their marital status (7%).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.2 Measures\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAt T1, participants gave their informed consent to participate in the study and completed a questionnaire measuring the TPB constructs (attitude, social norm, perceived behavioural control, and intention) plus additional variables (past behaviour and pro-environmental self-identity), for each of three clothing purchasing behaviours: eco-friendly clothing purchasing (i.e. purchasing clothing made from eco-friendly and sustainable materials, fabrics, or textures, with a focus on reducing environmental impact), second-hand clothing purchasing (i.e. acquiring clothing items that were previously owned, often as a sustainable and cost-effective alternative to new purchases) and high-quality clothing purchasing (i.e. buying clothing items known for their superior quality, durability, and craftsmanship). At T2, we measured consumers\u0026rsquo; current SCP. All the measurement items used in this study, along with reliability measures, are reported in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eItems and Reliability Measures.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eScale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCronbach's\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlpha\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMcDonald's Omega\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIntention\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI intend to purchase eco-friendly clothing\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eI intend to purchase high-quality clothing\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eI intend to purchase second-hand clothing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCognitive Attitude\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.79\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMaking sustainable/second-hand/high-quality purchasing choices to protect the environment is\u0026hellip;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026hellip;foolish-wise\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026hellip;useless-useful\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAffective Attitude\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.79\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMaking eco-friendly/second-hand/high-quality purchasing choices to protect the environment is\u0026hellip;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026hellip;unsatisfactory-satisfactory\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026hellip;unpleasant-pleasant\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eInjunctive Norm\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMost of the people I know (family, friends)...\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e... think that I should buy eco-friendly clothing to protect the environment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e... would approve if I bought second-hand clothing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e... would like me to purchase high-quality apparel\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDescriptive Norm\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMost of the people I know (family, friends)...\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026hellip; buy eco-friendly clothing\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e... buy high-quality clothing\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e... buy second-hand clothing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePerceived Behavioural Control\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.79\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhen buying eco-friendly/second-hand/high-quality clothing, how much do feel to control the following obstacles\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOutdated appearance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh price\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHabitual aspects\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMoral Norm\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBuying eco-friendly clothing means acting in line with my principles\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBuying second-hand clothing is consistent with my values\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBuying high-quality clothing items is the right thing to do\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePro-Environmental Self-Identity\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.89\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.92\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI think of myself as someone who is concerned about pro-environmental issues, such as\u0026hellip;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026hellip; excessive use of the planet's natural resources (air, water, soil...) for food production\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026hellip; pollution of natural resources in clothing production\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026hellip; excessive clothing consumption\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026hellip; use of non-recyclable materials for clothing production\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026hellip; excessive use of synthetic materials for fabrics\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026hellip; greenhouse gas emissions from clothing production and transportation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSustainable Clothing Purchasing Behavior\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndicate how many eco-friendly clothing (e.g., dresses, t-shirt, pants, etc.) you have purchased in the last month\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndicate how many second-hand clothing (e.g., dresses, t-shirts, pants, etc.) you have purchased in the last month\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndicate how many high-quality clothing (e.g., dresses, t-shirt, pants, etc.) you have purchased in the last month\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eIntention\u003c/em\u003e towards SCP was measured by using one item. Participants were asked to rate their intention to choose eco-friendly clothing, second-hand clothing, and high-quality clothing over the next month on a scale ranging from 'strongly disagree' (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) to 'strongly agree' (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). These items were adapted from\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e. Higher values reflected stronger intentions to engage in the behaviour.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eCognitive and Affective Attitude\u003c/em\u003e towards sustainable clothing purchasing behaviours were assessed as the mean of two items respectively. Participants were asked to rate their cognitive and affective attitude towards eco-friendly clothing, second-hand clothing, and high-quality clothing items on a scale ranging from 'strongly disagree' (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) to 'strongly agree' (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). These items were adapted from\u003csup\u003e67\u003c/sup\u003e. Higher mean values reflected a more positive attitude.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eInjunctive and Descriptive Norm\u003c/em\u003e were measured using one item per purchasing behaviour on a scale ranging from 'strongly disagree' (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) to 'strongly agree' (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). These items were adapted from\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e. Higher values reflected stronger norm.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003ePerceived Behavioural Control\u003c/em\u003e towards SCP was calculated as the mean of three items per clothing purchasing behaviour, using a scale from \u0026lsquo;not at all\u0026rsquo; (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) to \u0026lsquo;a lot\u0026rsquo; (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). These items were adapted from\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e. Higher values reflected stronger obstacles to overcome.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eMoral Norm\u003c/em\u003e were measured using one item per SCP, using a scale ranging from 'strongly disagree' (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) to 'strongly agree' (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). These items were adapted from\u003csup\u003e68\u003c/sup\u003e. Higher values reflected stronger personal norm.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003ePro-Environmental Self-Identity\u003c/em\u003e was measured as the mean of 6 items rated on a scale ranging from 'strongly disagree' (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) to 'strongly agree' (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). These items were adapted from\u003csup\u003e69\u003c/sup\u003e. Higher mean values reflected a stronger pro-environmental identity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eSustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours\u003c/em\u003e were assessed inviting participants to specify the quantity of eco-friendly, second-hand, and high-quality clothing purchased in the last month. For each behaviour, missing values were replaced with 0, and the total number of items reported by participants was then summed. In the present study, SCP at T1 was defined as \u003cem\u003epast SCP behaviour\u003c/em\u003e and SCP at T2 as \u003cem\u003ecurrent SCP behaviour\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.3 Analyses\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe data were analysed with R version 4.3.0. We performed initial analyses that included the calculation of means, standard deviations and intercorrelations (Table\u0026nbsp;2). We then considered the simultaneous influence of predictors at different levels through multilevel modelling: three SCP variables (i.e. eco-friendly, used and quality clothing) (level-1) and SCP within individuals on the outcome variable (level-2). This approach avoids the methodological problems associated with traditional techniques\u003csup\u003e70\u003c/sup\u003e. In particular, multilevel modelling with random effects enables the treatment of the problem of dependence on observations, the estimation of a correct standard error and thus a more appropriate significance test\u003csup\u003e71\u0026ndash;72\u003c/sup\u003e. The advantages of multilevel modelling analyses have been convincingly demonstrated in previous TPB studies\u003csup\u003e73\u0026ndash;74\u003c/sup\u003e. In the area of pro-environmental behaviours, some scholars showed that accounting for multiple pro-environmental behaviours using within-subject analyses across multiple behaviours and a longitudinal design was effective in predicting pro-environmental intentions and behaviours and tested the moderating effect of pro-environmental self-identity\u003csup\u003e59\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDescriptive Statistics and Correlations\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMeans, Standard deviations, and Correlations with Confidence Intervals\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"939\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"25.026624068157613%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"25.026624068157613%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1. Intention\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.33\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.74\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"25.026624068157613%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2. Affective Attitude\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.77\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"25.026624068157613%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3. Cognitive Attitude\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.71\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.15**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.63**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"25.026624068157613%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4. Injunctive Norm\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.32**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.02*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"25.026624068157613%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5. Descriptive Norm\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.87\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.44**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.50**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"25.026624068157613%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6. Perceived Behavioural Control\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.91\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.14**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.12*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.10**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"25.026624068157613%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7. Moral Norm\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.67\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.65**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.12*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.23**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.34**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.31**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"25.026624068157613%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8. Past Sustainable Clothing Behaviours\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.56\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.13*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.15**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"25.026624068157613%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10. Current Sustainable Clothing Behaviours\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.83\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.37**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\" valign=\"bottom\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"25.026624068157613%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9. Pro-Environmental Self-Identity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.98\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.21**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.15**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.15**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.16**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.27*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"6.815761448349308%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.06\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e are used to represent mean and standard deviation, respectively. Within person variables (\u003cem\u003eN\u003csub\u003eobservations\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = 750); Between person variables (\u003cem\u003eN\u003csub\u003eparticipants\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = 250); For within person variables by between person variables we repeat the between variables for each behaviour (r is based on 3 X N); t1 = time 1, t2 = time 2. \u0026nbsp;* \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .05. ** \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo run our multi-behaviour model, we employed hierarchical linear models implemented with the \u003cem\u003elme4\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003elmerTest\u003c/em\u003e packages\u003csup\u003e75\u003c/sup\u003e. To decipher significant interaction terms, we decomposed them to obtain simple slopes using an \u003cem\u003eeffect\u003c/em\u003e package\u003csup\u003e76\u003c/sup\u003e. Plots were generated using several packages, including \u003cem\u003eggeffects\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003ejtools\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eforcats\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e77\u0026ndash;79\u003c/sup\u003e. Model comparisons were performed using the ANOVA function. For our analyses, we utilized 250 observations, corresponding to 750 within-person behaviours related to the purchasing of eco-friendly, second-hand, or high-quality clothing. Each multilevel model accounted for two levels. At Level 1, representing within-person factors, we included cognitive and affective attitudes, injunctive and descriptive norms, perceived behavioural control, moral norm, and past behaviour. At Level 2, representing between-person factors, we included pro-environmental self-identity. Level 1 predictors were centred around the group mean, while Level 2 variables were centred around the grand mean\u003csup\u003e59\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo assess the models implemented in our study, we employed a full unconditioned model for comparison, utilizing a chi-square statistic\u003csup\u003e80\u003c/sup\u003e. Subsequently, we used the deviance value as the foundation for evaluating model fit. A substantial reduction in deviance (-2LL) indicates a significant enhancement in model fit, while a minor reduction suggests insignificant improvement\u003csup\u003e80\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5. Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.1 Explaining Intentions towards Sustainable Clothing Purchasing\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e shows the results of the predictors influencing intentions towards SCP. To test the main effects, intentions were first regressed on the Level 1 variables (Model 1a) and then on both the Level 1 and Level 2 variables (Model 1b). Model 1a (\u003cem\u003eχ\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e = 2342.7, \u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;249, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001) significantly reduced the deviance statistic compared to the intercept-only model (\u003cem\u003eΔχ\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;638.42, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001). At this stage, moral norm proved to be the strongest and most positive predictor of consumers\u0026rsquo; purchase intentions, followed by injunctive and descriptive norm. Neither cognitive or affective attitude nor perceived behavioural control or previous SCP behaviours were found to be significant predictors of consumers\u0026rsquo; purchase intentions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMultilevel Analysis of Predictors of Intentions towards Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePredictors\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003et-ratio\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep-value\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModel 1 a\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntercept \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e00\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.96\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.09\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAffective Attitude \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.83\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCognitive Attitude \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.94\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInjunctive Norm \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescriptive Norm \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e40\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived Behavioural Control \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e50\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoral Norm \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e60\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.55\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17.63\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePast Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e70\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.09\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"5\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModel 1 b\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntercept \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e00\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAffective Attitude \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.81\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCognitive Attitude \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.89\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInjunctive Norm \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.80\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.005\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescriptive Norm \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e40\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived Behavioural Control \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e50\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.76\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoral Norms \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e60\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.42\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePast Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e70\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.99\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePro-Environmental Self-Identity\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003eβ\u003c/b\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cb\u003e01\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.95\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"5\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCross-level Interactions with Sustainable Self-Identity in Model 1 b\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAffective Attitude \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-3.49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCognitive Attitude \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e21\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.95\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInjunctive Norm \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e31\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.63\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescriptive Norm \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e41\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.80\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.005\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived Behavioural Control \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e51\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoral Norms \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e61\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePast Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviour \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e71\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.56\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e B\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;unstandardized coefficient; SE\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;standard error\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe addition of the Level 2 variable pro-environmental self-identity (Model 1b) and its interaction with the variables of Model 1a further reduced the deviance statistic (Δχ\u0026sup2; (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;35.34, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001). Similar to Model 1a, consumers\u0026rsquo; injunctive (H3a), descriptive (H4a), and moral (H6a) norm remained the strongest and most positive predictors of their purchase intentions. In addition, consumers\u0026rsquo; past SCP behaviour (H7a) was a significant and negative predictor of their intentions. Consumers\u0026rsquo; cognitive (H1a) and affective (H2a) attitude, perceived behavioural control (H5a), and pro-environmental self-identity (H8a) were not significant predictors of purchase intentions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe introduction of pro-environmental self-identity (Model 1b) and its interaction with the existing variables significantly reduced the variance statistic, indicating an improved model fit. In particular, consumers' moral, injunctive, and descriptive norm retained their strong positive influence on purchase intentions. In addition, the importance of consumers' past SCP behaviour shifted to a negative predictor, while cognitive and affective attitude and perceived behavioural control remained non-significant predictors of purchase intentions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe decomposition of the interaction terms revealed nuanced patterns. The influence of descriptive norm on intentions weakened the higher the level of pro-environmental self-identity was, with the strongest influence at the lowest level of pro-environmental self-identity (M \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1SD; B\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.27, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) (H9c) compared to the highest level (M\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;1SD; B\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.07, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) (H9a) (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). The results confirmed our hypotheses. In particular, high descriptive norm showed a positive relationship with intention when pro-environmental self-identity reached its peak. This positive effect became even more pronounced when pro-environmental self-identity was at its lowest. In such cases, the low descriptive norm was associated with lower intention for SCP.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe effect of consumers\u0026rsquo; affective attitudes on their purchase intentions increased when their pro-environmental self-identity decreased. Affective attitude had a positive effect on intentions when pro-environmental self-identity was at its lowest (M \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1SD; B\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.11, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) and a negative effect when pro-environmental self-identity was at its highest (M\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;1SD; B = -0.12, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) (RQ1a) (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhen pro-environmental self-identity was lowest, consumers\u0026rsquo; cognitive attitude had a negative effect on intentions (M \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1SD; B = -0.10, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), whereas when consumers\u0026rsquo; cognitive attitude was highest, they had a positive effect on intentions (M\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;1SD; B\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.11, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) (RQ2a) (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese results emphasised that an increased affective attitude led individuals to make more purchases. However, when we introduced the moderating effect of pro-environmental self-identity, the trend changed, and individuals tended to make fewer purchases. Conversely, the moderating effect of pro-environmental self-identity was reversed for cognitive attitude, which relates more to how useful behaviour is (rather than how pleasurable). When identity was low, the cognitive attitude per se led to a lower purchase intention. However, when identity was high, people intended to buy more sustainable clothing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe effect of perceived behavioural control on purchase intentions was only significant and negative at the highest levels of pro-environmental self-identity (M\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;1SD; B = -0.16, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), but not at the lowest levels (M \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1SD; B = -0.01, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.82) (RQ4a; see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). We found no significant effects for injunctive (RQ3a) and moral norm (RQ5a). It appears that individuals who have a strong pro-environmental self-identity have a lower sense of control over their behaviour, leading to an increased purchase intention. Conversely, perceived behavioural control showed no discernible effect when self-identity was weak. Importantly, injunctive and moral norm had no effect on shaping intentions in this particular context.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, prior SCP behaviours had a significant negative effect on intentions only at the lowest level of pro-environmental self-identity (M \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1SD; B\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.26, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.04) (H9c), whereas they had no significant effect at the highest level of pro-environmental self-identity (M\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;1SD; B = -0.05, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.62) (R6a) (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). Individuals with a weak pro-environmental self-identity showed a pattern in which a lower level of sustainable clothing practices corresponded with lower future purchase intentions. Interestingly, a stronger identity had no effect on the relationship between intention and past behaviour.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.2 Explaining Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e shows the results of the predictors influencing participants\u0026rsquo; current SCP behaviour. To examine the primary effects, the current SCP behaviours were first regressed on the Level 1 variables (Model 2a) and then on the Level 1 and 2 variables, including their interaction (Model 2b). Model 2a (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1317.6, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;249, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001) significantly reduced the deviance statistic compared to the intercept-only model (Δχ2 (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;116.32, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001). In this model, we found three predictors to be statistically significant. Both cognitive (H1b) and affective (H2b) attitude had a modest influence on current SCP behaviour, with the former having a positive and the latter a negative influence. In addition, past SCP behaviour proved to be the strongest predictor of current SCP behaviour (H7b), which was in line with our expectations. Model 2b, which included interaction terms between the variables from Model 2a and the sustainable intentions variable at level 2, further reduced the deviance statistic (Δχ2 (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;23.65, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMultilevel Analysis of Predictors of Current Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours Including Cross-Level Analyses\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePredictors\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003et-ratio\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep-value\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModel 2 a\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntercept \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e00\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntention \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAffective Attitude \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCognitive Attitude \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-2.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInjunctive Norm \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e40\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.83\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.41\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescriptive Norm \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e50\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived Behavioural Control \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e60\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.98\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoral Norms \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e70\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePast Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e80\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"5\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModel 2 b\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntercept \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e00\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntention \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAffective Attitude \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCognitive Attitude \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.88\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInjunctive Norm \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e40\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.87\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.38\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescriptive Norm \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e50\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eObstacles \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e60\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.83\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoral Norms \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e70\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePast Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e80\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePro-Environmental Self-Identity\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003eβ\u003c/b\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cb\u003e01\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.51\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"5\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCross-level Interactions with Pro-Environmental Self-Identity in Model 2 b\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntention \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.41\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAffective Attitude \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e21\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCognitive Attitude \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e31\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.94\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInjunctive Norm \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e41\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.78\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescriptive Norm \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e51\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived Behavioural Control \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e61\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.93\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoral Norms \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e71\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePast Sustainable Clothing Purchasing Behaviours \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e81\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-3.83\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe main effects in Model 2b confirmed the results from Model 2a, all other predictors, including pro-environmental self-identity were found to be non-significant (H3b, H4bm H5b, H6b, H8b). Furthermore, Model 2a revealed an additional significant interaction term between pro-environmental identity and previous SCP behaviours. Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e illustrates the decomposition of this interaction term. The effect of previous SCP behaviours on current SCP behaviours is more pronounced at lower levels of pro-environmental self-identity (M \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1SD; B\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.52, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) (H9c) and decreases when pro-environmental self-identity reaches a higher level (M\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;1SD; B\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.17, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) (RQ6b). No other significant interaction effects were found that did not confirm other hypotheses and research questions (H9d, RQ1b, RQ2b, RQ3b, RQ4b, RQ5b).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe patterns observed for current behaviour differed from those found for intention and included variations in both main and interaction effects. While intention was influenced by normative predictors, current behaviour was primarily influenced by affective attitude. Furthermore, while in the case of intention, pro-environmental self-identity interacted significantly with several other variables, in the case of current behaviour only the interaction with past behaviour was found to be significant.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"6. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe present study aimed to test the plausibility of a multi-behaviour model to explain consumers\u0026rsquo; intentions and purchases of sustainable clothing (i.e., eco-friendly, second-hand, and high-quality clothing). To this end, we combined TPB variables (i.e., cognitive and affective attitude, descriptive and injunctive norm, perceived behavioural control) with moral norm, past behaviours and pro-environmental identity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e6.1 Explaining Intentions to Purchase Sustainable Clothing\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur results suggest that normative components had the greatest weight in predicting consumers\u0026rsquo; purchase intentions, with moral norm emerging as the most important predictor. This is in line with previous research\u003csup\u003e81\u003c/sup\u003e, which emphasises the importance of moral norm in consumers' clothing decisions. In line with previous TPB studies, moral norm was identified as the most important predictor of Italian female consumers' intention to purchase sustainable clothing\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e and as a significant factor in predicting Malaysians' intention to purchase second-hand clothing\u003csup\u003e20\u003c/sup\u003e. Overall, our findings support existing research highlighting the crucial role of ethical considerations in promoting sustainable consumption, which is also emphasised by studies such as Ajzen\u003csup\u003e10\u003c/sup\u003e and Stern\u003csup\u003e29\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescriptive and injunctive norm showed relevant positive effects on intentions. This emphasises the influence of social factors on consumers' clothing choices, although the reliability of these norm in predicting intentions has produced mixed results in previous studies. For example, research on second-hand clothing purchasing habits found that both descriptive and injunctive norm were low but still significant predictors\u003csup\u003e20\u003c/sup\u003e. In contrast, other studies showed mixed effects, with descriptive norm influencing purchase intentions, particularly in the context of fair trade and organic cotton clothing\u003csup\u003e21\u003c/sup\u003e. Meanwhile, injunctive norm had a significant effect only on purchase intentions in the fair-trade clothing category\u003csup\u003e21\u003c/sup\u003e. Our study helps to clarify this landscape and suggests that while there may be differences in the influence of social norm based on the specific sustainability attribute of the product, overall it supports the idea that social norm play a crucial role in determining purchase intentions. One plausible reason for the observed effect of social norm could be the assumption that they exert a stronger influence on behaviours that are easily observed by others\u003csup\u003e82\u003c/sup\u003e. This aspect of visibility is particularly crucial in the area of fashion and clothing, where personal style and clothing choices are often flaunted in a social setting.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn our current study, neither affective and cognitive attitude nor perceived behavioural control proved to be significant predictors of consumer intentions. This finding is in contrast to most TPB studies in the field of SCP behaviour, such as the studies by Kumar et al.\u003csup\u003e12\u003c/sup\u003e and Han and Stoel\u003csup\u003e21\u003c/sup\u003e. However, it finds some resonance with previous research indicating weak or no associations between attitude, perceived behavioural control and intentions about reducing clothing consumption and purchasing sustainable clothing\u003csup\u003e6,81\u003c/sup\u003e. From this perspective, our multiple behaviours study highlights a notable shift away from individual-centred influences and places social norm \u0026mdash; both perceived and internalised (moral) \u0026mdash; at the forefront of shaping purchase intentions when integrating different SCP behaviours into a single multiple behaviours model. These findings challenge the conventional focus on individual beliefs and perceptions of control in the discourse on sustainable consumption.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe also found that previous SCP was a significant negative predictor of consumer intentions. The tendency of people who have bought sustainable fashion in the past to express a desire to buy less in the future can be interpreted from different angles. One plausible explanation is that their lower propensity to buy results from dissatisfaction with previous purchases of sustainable fashion, which could lead them to reconsider and limit their future choices to avoid repeating similar experiences. Another perspective could be rooted in self-licencing, which occurs when individuals use past virtuous behaviour to justify or allow subsequent negligent or less virtuous actions\u003csup\u003e83\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eExamining the interaction effects between pro-environmental self-identity and other predictors revealed different patterns that provide additional insights into the role of individual factors that do not directly predict intentions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn particular, individuals with a weak pro-environmental self-identity expressed a higher intention to buy sustainable clothing when they had a high affective attitude and a low cognitive attitude. Conversely, individuals with a strong pro-ecological self-identity were more likely to have the intention to buy sustainable clothing if they had a low affective attitude and a high cognitive attitude. One possible explanation for the above findings is that individuals with a strong pro-environmental identity are more likely to rely on rational and cognitive processes rather than emotional responses when making sustainable choices. If this is the case, they may prioritise the long-term environmental impact or practical aspects of sustainable clothing, leading to a less direct translation of positive affective evaluations into a stronger inclination towards SCP. This is consistent with value-belief norm theory\u003csup\u003e29\u003c/sup\u003e, which posits that individuals with a well-established pro-environmental value system are more likely to incorporate cognitive considerations into their decision-making processes. In this context, a positive cognitive attitude can serve as a reinforcing mechanism that aligns with existing values and contributes to a stronger intention to purchase sustainable clothing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition, high purchase intention for sustainable items was observed when individuals with low pro-environmental self-identity had high descriptive norm. Similarly, the influence of descriptive norm decreased with increasing eco-friendly self-identity. In addition, the intention to purchase sustainable clothing was lower when perceived behavioural control was low and pro-environmental self-identity increased.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe observed reduced influence of descriptive norm on the intentions of individuals with a high pro-environmental self-identity leads to an intriguing paradox. Contrary to conventional expectations that a stronger commitment to the environment would increase the influence of social norm, the results suggest a lower response to descriptive norm in shaping intentions to SCP in this particular subgroup. From a theoretical perspective, we propose to interpret this phenomenon in terms of a sort of saturation of normative influence. Individuals with a strong pro-environmental self-concept may have already internalised pro-environmental norm to such an extent that external descriptive norm have less influence. In other words, their deep-rooted commitment to environmental values might make them less dependent on external social cues.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition, participants with low perceived behavioural control but a strong pro-environmental identity showed a greater intention to buy sustainable clothing. The observed significant and negative effect of perceived behavioural control on purchase intentions exclusively among individuals with a high pro-environmental self-identity introduces a thought-provoking nuance. Individuals with a strong pro-environmental self-identity could derive their motivation from their internalised environmental values, making the influence of perceived control less significant. In this scenario, their intentions towards SCP may be less dependent on a sense of control and more on a commitment to act in line with their environmental identity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, individuals with a low eco-friendly self-identity but frequent SCP intentions in the past indicated a lower intention to purchase sustainable clothing than individuals with a high SCP intention in the past. Even in this case, the self-licencing effect could lead to a decrease in motivation to purchase additional sustainable clothing\u003csup\u003e83\u003c/sup\u003e. Since they have already shown environmentally friendly behaviour in the past and have not recognised themselves as environmentally friendly consumers, the sense of obligation or motivation to continue making environmentally friendly choices could decrease.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e6.2 Explanation of current purchasing behaviour for sustainable clothing\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn terms of current SCP behaviour, both affective and cognitive attitude played a small role, albeit with different effects. Affective attitude positively influenced behaviour, suggesting that consumers who associated positive emotional reactions with purchasing sustainable clothing were more likely to behave consistently and pursue their environmental goals. Conversely, cognitive attitude showed a negative effect, suggesting that people who linked positive rational evaluations to their future purchase intentions tended to reduce their purchasing behaviour. This suggests that emotional reactions may have a greater influence on long-term sustainable consumption behaviour than rational evaluations. Those who attach positive emotions to their sustainable purchases are more likely to maintain their behaviour over a longer period. In contrast, those who rely on rational considerations are more likely to curtail their future purchases, indicating a possible divergence in the factors that influence sustainable consumption behaviour over time.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn contrast to what was observed in the consumer intentions explanation (i.e. the tendency for individuals who have previously purchased sustainable clothing to express a desire to purchase less in the future), previous frequent SCP behaviour emerges as the strongest predictor of current frequent SCP behaviour, indicating the lasting impact of individuals' previous sustainable choices on their current actions. This is consistent with the expectation that past behaviours are a robust predictor of current sustainable consumption patterns. However, when identification with the environment is low, the influence of past SCP behaviours increases, suggesting that individuals with lower identification with the environment increasingly rely on past actions to shape their current sustainable consumption behaviour. This suggests that the influence of previous SCP behaviours is more pronounced when self-identification with the environment is low. In this context, the habitual nature of previous behaviours could serve as a default or automatic guide.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe discrepancy between the factors that explain intention and those that influence behaviour highlights a significant difference in the factors motivating these two stages of the decision-making process and supports the observation that intention does not predict subsequent SCP behaviour. In fact, our studies found that an individual's self-perception as a green consumer and their previous SCP behaviour play a more important role in shaping their current behaviour than their initially expressed intentions. In light of these findings, the process of transition from intention to behaviour related to SCP appears to be more complicated than assumed. While consumers\u0026rsquo; prior intentions are not important, the influence of identity and prior behaviour cannot be overlooked. This finding is supported by many studies that challenge the conventional linear model of the intention-behaviour relationship\u003csup\u003e84\u003c/sup\u003e and highlight the need for a more nuanced understanding of the factors that contribute to SCP decisions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e6.3 Limitations and Future Directions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile the results of our study are interesting and novel, it is important to recognise certain limitations. Firstly, the sample comprised only Italians, limiting the generalisability of our findings to the wider apparel market. Furthermore, given the mixed results of previous research on the influence of cultural values on sustainability\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e, it is imperative to investigate whether cultural values exert different influences on the purchase of sustainable clothing in different cultural and local contexts. Therefore, it is crucial to assess to what extent the results of this Italian study differ from those in other countries. Secondly, the self-reporting of all recorded responses represents a potential source of error, particularly in the measurement of past and current behaviour. There is a possibility of social desirability bias, i.e. participants may have over-reported socially desirable responses, which could affect the accuracy of our results. Third, researchers might consider examining whether other variables that are under-researched in the field of SCP could be included in the proposed integrated model. For example, future studies could investigate whether additional psychosocial factors play an important role in explaining intentions and behaviours related to the purchase of sustainable clothing (e.g., concern for social sustainability\u003csup\u003e85\u003c/sup\u003e). Furthermore, it would be valuable for future research to control for the moderating role of other values that may influence the decision to purchase sustainable clothing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e6.4 Theoretical and Practical Implications\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur findings have several practical implications for marketing, policy and non-governmental measures aimed at promoting the purchase of sustainable clothing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst, given the positive influence of affective attitude on SCP behaviour, marketing could focus on building emotional connections with consumers. Strategies that evoke positive emotions related to environmental goals could contribute to long-term engagement and consistent sustainable consumption behaviour. Secondly, the significant influence of previous sustainable clothing behaviour on current actions highlights the importance of recognising and building on people's previous choices. Practitioners should use the positive experiences consumers have had with sustainable fashion in the past to encourage ongoing and consistent behaviour. However, the finding that the impact of past behaviours diminishes as environmental friendliness increases suggests the need for tailored strategies. Practitioners could consider individual differences in self-identity when developing interventions, recognising that individuals with higher environmental identities rely less on past behaviours in their current decisions. Third, the observed discrepancy between the drivers of consumers\u0026rsquo; intentions and their behaviour challenges the traditional linear model. Practitioners should seek to rethink the traditional emphasis on intention as the sole predictor of behaviour and consider the nuanced interplay of self-identity and past behaviour. This would require a shift in strategies to gain a more holistic understanding of the factors that influence sustainable consumption decisions. Future efforts should also examine this model of multiple behaviours in different cultural contexts to explore the impact of cultural values on sustainable clothing choices. Adapting strategies to specific cultural values can increase the effectiveness of global initiatives and contribute to more targeted and culturally sensitive approaches to promoting sustainable behaviours.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"7. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn summary, our study aimed to test the plausibility of a multi-behavioural model to understand consumers' intentions and purchasing behaviour about sustainable clothing. We incorporated TPB variables, moral norm, past behaviours and pro-environmental identity into our model and examined the role they play in shaping intentions and current behaviours related to a range of sustainable purchase behaviours (i.e., eco-friendly, second-hand and quality clothing).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall, this study challenges the conventional emphasis on individual beliefs (i.e., attitude and perceived behavioural control) in the discourse on sustainable consumption and highlights the notable influence of norm, both social and internalised (moral). Furthermore, the present study showed that individuals with a weak pro-environmental self-identity were more influenced by a strong affective attitude, low cognitive attitude and less frequent past SCP in the case of intention, but more frequent past SCP in the case of current behaviour. Conversely, individuals with a strong pro-environmental self-identity showed a lower influence of descriptive norm with increasing identity strength and a lower intention to purchase sustainable clothing when perceived behavioural control was low. In understanding current SCP behaviour, affective attitude had a positive effect on behaviour, while cognitive attitude showed a negative influence. Past SCP behaviours were found to be a strong predictor, underlining the lasting influence of individuals' historical sustainable choices on their current actions. However, the influence of past behaviours increases with a decrease in pro-environmental self-confidence. The observed discrepancy between the factors explaining intention and the factors influencing behaviour highlights the complexity of the decision-making process related to SCP. Contrary to conventional expectations, our study suggests that consumers' prior intentions do not significantly predict subsequent SCP behaviour. Instead, self-identity and past behaviours play a more important role in shaping current behaviour.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn practical terms, our findings suggest that marketing efforts should emphasise building emotional connections, leveraging positive past experiences, and acknowledging the nuanced interplay of self-identity and past behaviours. Policymakers and industry stakeholders should consider these findings to develop tailored strategies to promote sustainable apparel choices, taking into account the evolving dynamics between intentions and behaviours in the complex landscape of sustainable consumption.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eV.C. and P.C. designed the study and managed data collectionV.C. and P.C. wrote the main manuscript textG.B. analyzed data, reported findings and prepared figures\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShahid, S., Islam, J.U., Farooqi, R. \u0026amp; Thomas, G. (2023). Affordable luxury consumption: An emerging market's perspective. Int. J. Emerg. Mark. 18 (2), 316\u0026ndash;336.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbbate, S., Centobelli, P., \u0026amp; Cerchione, R. (2023). The digital and sustainable transition of the agri-food sector. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 187.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen, Y. (2023). How blockchain adoption affects supply chain sustainability in the fashion industry: A systematic review and case studies. Int. Trans. Oper. Res., 1\u0026ndash;28.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSrivastava, A., Mallela, K. M., Deorkar, N., \u0026amp; Brophy, G. (2021). Manufacturing challenges and rational formulation development for AAV viral vectors. J. Pharm. Sci. 110(7), 2609\u0026ndash;2624.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIslam, M.M., Perry, P. \u0026amp; Gill, S. (2021). Mapping environmentally sustainable practices in textiles, apparel and fashion industries: A systematic literature review. J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 25, 331\u0026ndash;353.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarfora, V., Cavallo, C., Catellani, P., Del Giudice, T., \u0026amp; Cicia, G. (2021). Why do consumers intend to purchase natural food? Integrating theory of planned behavior, value-belief-norm theory, and trust. \u003cem\u003eNutrients\u003c/em\u003e 13(6), 1904.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLira, J. S. D., \u0026amp; Costa, M. F. D. (2022). Theory of planned behavior, ethics and intention of conscious consumption in Slow Fashion Consumption. J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 26(5), 905\u0026ndash;925.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRizkalla, N., Lestari, E. D., Arinto, B., Purnamaningsih, P., \u0026amp; Sulistyarini, N. (2022). Uncovering the determinants of environmentally-friendly apparel purchase intention in Indonesia: Incorporating environmental concern and knowledge into the theory of planned behavior. Econ. Manag. Sustain. 7(1), 43\u0026ndash;58.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSaricam, C., \u0026amp; Okur, N. (2019). Analysing the consumer behavior regarding sustainable fashion using theory of planned behavior. In \u003cem\u003eConsumer Behaviour and Sustainable Fashion Consumption\u003c/em\u003e. Springer, Singapore.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAjzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50(2), 179\u0026ndash;211.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLawton, R., Conner, M., \u0026amp; McEachan, R. (2009). Desire or reason: predicting health behaviors from affective and cognitive attitudes. Health Psychol. 28(1), 56.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKumar, N., Garg, P., \u0026amp; Singh, S. (2022). Pro-environmental purchase intention towards eco-friendly apparel: Augmenting the theory of planned behavior with perceived consumer effectiveness and environmental concern. J. Glob. Fashion Mark. 13(2), 134\u0026ndash;150.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eConner, M. (2018). \u003cem\u003eAffective attitudes, anticipated affect and health behaviors\u003c/em\u003e. In \u003cem\u003eAffective determinants of health-related behavior\u003c/em\u003e. Oxford University Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eConner, M. \u0026amp; Norman, P. (2022). Predicting long-term healthy eating behaviour: understanding the role of cognitive and affective attitude\u003cem\u003es\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cem\u003ePsychol. \u0026amp; Health\u003c/em\u003e 36:10, 1165\u0026ndash;1181.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZahid, H., Ali, S., Danish, M., \u0026amp; Sulaiman, M. A. B. A. (2022). Factors Affecting Consumers Intentions to Purchase Dairy Products in Pakistan: A Cognitive Affective-Attitude Approach. J. Int. Food Agribus. Mark.,1\u0026ndash;26.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eConner, M., van Harreveld, F., \u0026amp; Norman, P. (2022). Attitude stability as a moderator of the relationships between cognitive and affective attitudes and behaviour. Br. J. Soc. Psychol., 61:1, 121\u0026ndash;142.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGoldstein, N. J., \u0026amp; Cialdini, R. B. (2011). \u003cem\u003eUsing social norms as a lever of social influence\u003c/em\u003e. In \u003cem\u003eThe science of social influence\u003c/em\u003e. Psychology Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMaloney, J., Lee, M. Y., Jackson, V., \u0026amp; Miller-Spillman, K. A. (2014). Consumer willingness to purchase organic products: Application of the theory of planned behavior. J. Glob. Fashion Mark. 5(4), 308\u0026ndash;321.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDewanto, K. N., \u0026amp; Belgiawan, P. F. (2020). The influence of social norms and attitude in sustainable fashion product purchase behaviou\u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e. Am. Int. J. Bus. Manag 3, 64\u0026ndash;75.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKoay, K. Y., Cheah, C. W., \u0026amp; Lom, H. S. (2022). An integrated model of consumers' intention to buy second-hand clothing. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 50(11), 1358\u0026ndash;1377.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHan, Tae-Im \u0026amp; Stoel, Leslie (2016). The effect of social norms and product knowledge on purchase of organic cotton and fair-trade apparel. J. Glob. Fashion Mark. 7(2), 89\u0026ndash;102.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFarrow, K., Grolleau, G., \u0026amp; Ibanez, L. (2017). Social norms and pro-environmental behavior: A review of the evidence. Ecol. Econ. 140, 1\u0026ndash;13.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKim, S. H., \u0026amp; Seock, Y. K. (2019). The roles of values and social norm on personal norms and pro-environmentally friendly apparel product purchasing behavior: The mediating role of personal norms. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 51, 83\u0026ndash;90.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBorusiak, B., Szymkowiak, A., Horska, E., Raszka, N., \u0026amp; Żelichowska, E. (2020). Towards building sustainable consumption: A study of second-hand buying intentions. Sustainability 12(3), 875.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRodrigues, M., Proen\u0026ccedil;a, J. F., \u0026amp; Macedo, R. (2023). Determinants of the purchase of secondhand products: an approach by the theory of planned behaviour. Sustainability 15(14), 10912.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eArmitage, C.J. \u0026amp; Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the Theory of Planned Behaviour: A meta-analytic review. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 40, 471\u0026ndash;499.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eManstead, A.S.R. (2000). The role of moral norm in the attitude\u0026ndash;behavior relation. In \u003cem\u003eAttitudes, Behavior, and Social Context\u003c/em\u003e. Psychology Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRezvani, Z., Jansson, J., \u0026amp; Bengtsson, M. (2017). Cause I\u0026rsquo;ll Feel Good! An Investigation into the Effects of Anticipated Emotions and Personal Moral Norms on Consumer Pro-Environmental Behavior. J. Promot. Manag. 23, 163\u0026ndash;183.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A., \u0026amp; Kalof, L. (1999). A Value-Belief-Norm Theory of Support for Social Movements: The Case of Environmentalism. Human Ecology Review 6(2), 81\u0026ndash;97.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCanova, L., Bobbio, A., \u0026amp; Manganelli, A. M. (2023). Sustainable purchase intentions: The role of moral norm and social dominance orientation in the theory of planned behavior applied to the case of fair trade products. Sustain. Dev. 31(2), 1069\u0026ndash;1083.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarfora, V., Cavallo, C., Caso, D., Del Giudice, T., De Devitiis, B., Viscecchia,R., \u0026hellip; Cicia, G. (2019). Explaining consumer purchase behavior for organic milk: Including trust and green self-identity within the theory of planned behavior. \u003cem\u003eFood Qual. Prefer.\u003c/em\u003e 76, 1\u0026ndash;9.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarfora, V., Conner, M., Caso, D., Catellani, P. (2020). Rational and moral motives to reduce red and processed meat consumption. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 50, 744\u0026ndash;755.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJang, J. I., \u0026amp; Choo, H. J. (2015). Consumption of Counterfeit Luxury Fashion Products Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior. J. Korean Soc. Cloth. Text. 28(2), 79\u0026ndash;94.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYuriev, A., Dahmen, M., Paill\u0026eacute;, P., Boiral, O., \u0026amp; Guillaumie, L. (2020). Pro-environmental behaviors through the lens of the theory of planned behavior: A scoping review. Resour Conserv Recycl 155, 104660.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStolz, K. (2022). Why do (n\u0026rsquo;t) we buy second-hand luxury products?. Sustainability 14(14), 8656.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEffron, D. A. (2016). 3 Beyond \u0026ldquo;being good frees us to be bad\u0026rdquo;. In \u003cem\u003eCheating, Corruption, and Concealment: The Roots of Dishonesty\u003c/em\u003e, 33.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchultz, W. P., Khazian, A. M., \u0026amp; Zaleski, A. C. (2008). Using normative social influence to promote conservation among hotel guests. Soc. Influ 3(1), 4\u0026ndash;23.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLongoni, C., Gollwitzer, P. M., \u0026amp; Oettingen, G. (2014). A green paradox: Validating green choices has ironic effects on behavior, cognition, and perception. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 50, 158\u0026ndash;165.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBratanova, B., Vauclair, C. M., Kervyn, N., Schumann, S., Wood, R., \u0026amp; Klein, O. (2015). Savouring morality. Moral satisfaction renders food of ethical origin subjectively tastier. Appetite 91, 137\u0026ndash;149.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStets, J. E., \u0026amp; Biga, C. F. (2003). Bringing identity theory into environmental sociology. Sociol Theory 21(4), 398\u0026ndash;423.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBalundė, A., Jovarauskaitė, L., \u0026amp; Poškus, M. S. (2019). Exploring the relationship between connectedness with nature, environmental identity, and environmental self-identity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. SAGE Open 9(2).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCatellani, P., Carfora, V. (2023). Norms, Identities, and Values. In: \u003cem\u003eThe Social Psychology of Eating\u003c/em\u003e. Springer, Cham.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUdall, A. M., De Groot, J. I., De Jong, S. B., \u0026amp; Shankar, A. (2021). How I see me\u0026mdash;A meta-analysis investigating the association between identities and pro-environmental behaviour. Front. Psychol 12, 582421.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eArman, S.M. \u0026amp; Mark-Herbert, C. (2022). Ethical Pro-Environmental Self-Identity Practice: The Case of Second-Hand Products. Sustainability 14, 2154.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBloch, S. (2023). \u003cem\u003eGreen Tinted Glasses: Fashion Consumption Practices as Pro-Environmental Behaviors\u003c/em\u003e. UVM Honors College Senior Theses. 531.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePalomo-Lovinski, N., \u0026amp; Hahn, K. (2020). American Consumer Perceptions of Sustainable Fashion, Fast Fashion, and Mass Fashion Practices. International Journal of Social Sustainability in Economic, Social \u0026amp; Cultural Context 16(1).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLapinski, M. K., \u0026amp; Rimal, R. N. (2005). An explication of social norms. Commun Theory 15(2), 127\u0026ndash;147.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRimal, R. N. (2008). Modeling the relationship between descriptive norms and behaviors: A test and extension of the theory of normative social behavior (TNSB). Health Commun. 23(2), 103\u0026ndash;116.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRimal, R. N., \u0026amp; Real, K. (2003). Understanding the influence of perceived norms on behaviors. Commun Theory 13(2), 184\u0026ndash;203.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRimal, R. N., \u0026amp; Real, K. (2005). How behaviors are influenced by perceived norms: A test of the theory of normative social behavior. Commun. Res. 32(3), 389\u0026ndash;414.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLapinski, M. K., Rimal, R. N., DeVries, R., \u0026amp; Lee, E. L. (2007). The role of group orientation and descriptive norms on water conservation attitudes and behaviors. Health Commun. 22(2), 133\u0026ndash;142.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOyserman, D. (2009). Identity-based motivation and consumer behavior. J. Consum. Psychol. 19(3), 276\u0026ndash;279.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTerry, D. J., \u0026amp; Hogg, M. A. (1996). Group norms and the attitude-behavior relationship: A role for group identification. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 22(8), 776\u0026ndash;793.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMasson, T., \u0026amp; Fritsche, I. (2014). Adherence to climate change-related ingroup norms: Do dimensions of group identification matter?. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 44(5), 455\u0026ndash;465.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTarabashkina, O. (2022). Promoting sustainable consumption: the role of social norms, ingroup framing and identification (Doctoral dissertation).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSmith, J. R., \u0026amp; Louis, W. R. (2009). Group norms and the attitude-behavior relationship: A role for group identification. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 35(4), 433\u0026ndash;446.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMackie, D. M., Devos, T., \u0026amp; Smith, E. R. (2000). Intergroup emotions: Explaining offensive action tendencies in an intergroup context. J Pers Soc Psychol, 79(4), 602\u0026ndash;616.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStryker, S. (1987). Identity theory: Developments and extensions. In K. Yardley \u0026amp; T. Honess (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eSelf and identity: Psychosocial Perspectives\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 89\u0026ndash;103).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarfora, V., Cavallo, C., Caso, D., Del Giudice, T., De Devitiis, B., Viscecchia,R., \u0026hellip; Cicia, G. (2019). Explaining consumer purchase behavior for organic milk: Including trust and green self-identity within the theory of planned behavior. \u003cem\u003eFood Qual. Prefer\u003c/em\u003e. 76, 1\u0026ndash;9.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFekadu, Z., \u0026amp; Kraft, P. (2001). Self-identity and the theory of planned behavior: A useful addition or an unhelpful artifice?. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 31(7), 1393\u0026ndash;1410.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSmith, J. R., Terry, D. J., Manstead, A. S., Louis, W. R., Kotterman, D., \u0026amp; Wolfs, J. (2007). Interaction effects in the theory of planned behavior: The interplay of self-identity and past behavior. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 37(11), 2726\u0026ndash;2750.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVerplanken, B., \u0026amp; Orbell, S. (2003). Reflections on past behavior: A self-report index of habit strength. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol., 33(6), 1313\u0026ndash;1330.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGollwitzer, P. M., Wicklund, R. A., \u0026amp; Hilton, J. L. (1982). Admission of failure and symbolic self-completion: Extending Lewinian theory. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 43(2), 358\u0026ndash;371.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGollwitzer, P. M., Sheeran, P., Michalski, V., \u0026amp; Seifert, A. E. (2009). When intentions go public: Does social reality widen the intention-behavior gap?. Psychol. Sci., 20(5), 612\u0026ndash;618.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLalot, F., Quiamzade, A., Falomir-Pichastor, J. M., \u0026amp; Gollwitzer, P. M. (2019). When does self-identity predict intention to act green? A self-completion account relying on past behaviour and majority-minority support for pro-environmental values. J. Environ. Psychol. 61, 79\u0026ndash;92.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFekadu, Z., \u0026amp; Kraft, P. (2001). Self-identity and the theory of planned behavior: A useful addition or an unhelpful artifice?. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 31(7), 1393\u0026ndash;1410.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHonkanen, P., \u0026amp; Young, J. A. (2015). Cross-cultural differences in the perceived personal relevance of recycling. Environ Behav 47(3), 322\u0026ndash;345.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVan der Werff, E., \u0026amp; Steg, L. (2009). One model to predict them all: Predicting energy behaviours with the norm activation model. Energy Res. Soc. Sci.1, 85\u0026ndash;94.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen, M. F. (2020). The impacts of perceived moral obligation and sustainability self-identity on sustainability development: A theory of planned behavior purchase intention model of sustainability‐labeled coffee and the moderating effect of climate change skepticism. Bus. Strat. Env. 29(6), 2404\u0026ndash;2417.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eConner, M., Lawton, R., \u0026amp; McEachan, R. (2016). Basis of intentions as a moderator of the intention\u0026ndash;health behavior relationship. Health Psychol. 35(3), 219\u0026ndash;227.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRaudenbush, S. W., \u0026amp; Bryk, A. S. (2002). \u003cem\u003eHierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods\u003c/em\u003e (Vol. 1). Sage.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVanlaar, W. (2005). Multilevel modeling in traffic safety research: two empirical examples illustrating the consequences of ignoring hierarchies. Traffic Inj. Prev. 6(4), 311\u0026ndash;316.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShukri, M., Jones, F., \u0026amp; Conner, M. (2022). Theory of planned behaviour, psychological stressors and intention to avoid violating traffic rules: A Multi-Level modelling analysis. Accid Anal Prev 169, 106624.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchuez, B., Brick, C., Wilding, S., \u0026amp; Conner, M. (2020). Socioeconomic Status Moderates the Effects of Health Cognitions on Health Behaviors within Participants: Two Multibehaviour Studies. Ann. Behav. Med. 54, Pages 36\u0026ndash;48.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., \u0026amp; Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models. J. Stat. Softw. 82(13), 1\u0026ndash;26.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFox, J. and S. Weisberg (2018). \u003cem\u003eAn R Companion to Applied Regression\u003c/em\u003e, Third Edition. Sage Publications.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eL\u0026uuml;decke, D. (2018). \u003cem\u003eggeffects: Tidy data frames of marginal effects from regression models\u003c/em\u003e. J. Open Source Softw. 3(26), 772\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLong, J. A. (2022). \u003cem\u003ejtools: Analysis and Presentation of Social Scientific Data\u003c/em\u003e. Version 2.2.0. Software per computer. Disponibile online all'indirizzo: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/jtools\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/jtools\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWickham, H. (2023). \u003cem\u003eforcats: Tools for Working with Categorical Variables (Factors)\u003c/em\u003e (Version 1.0.0).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGarson, G.D. (2013). \u003cem\u003eIntroductory guide to HLM with HLM 7 software\u003c/em\u003e. In \u003cem\u003eHierarchical linear modeling: Guide and applications\u003c/em\u003e, pp. 55\u0026ndash;96.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJoanes, T. (2019). \u003cem\u003ePersonal norms in a globalized world: Norm-activation processes and reduced clothing consumption\u003c/em\u003e. J. Clean. Prod. 212, 941\u0026ndash;949.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVesely, S., \u0026amp; Kl\u0026ouml;ckner, C. A. (2018). Global social norms and environmental behavior. Environment and Behavior, 50(3), 247\u0026ndash;272.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAdıg\u0026uuml;zel, F., Linkowski, C., Olson, E. (2020). Do Sustainability Labels Make Us More Negligent? Rebound and Moral Licensing Effects in the Clothing Industry. In: Muthu, S., Gardetti, M. (eds) \u003cem\u003eSustainability in the Textile and Apparel Industries. Sustainable Textiles: Production, Processing, Manufacturing \u0026amp; Chemistry\u003c/em\u003e. Springer, Cham.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarrington, M. J., Neville, B. A., \u0026amp; Whitwell, G. J. (2010). \u003cem\u003eWhy ethical consumers don\u0026rsquo;t walk their talk: Towards a framework for understanding the gap between the ethical purchase intentions and actual buying behaviour of ethically minded consumers\u003c/em\u003e. J. Bus. Ethics 97, 139\u0026ndash;158.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarfora, V., \u0026amp; Catellani, P. (2023). Psychosocial drivers influencing local food purchasing: beyond availability, the importance of trust in farmers. Front. Nutr. 10, 1204732.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"scientific-reports","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"scirep","sideBox":"Learn more about [Scientific Reports](http://www.nature.com/srep/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Scientific Reports","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Scientific Reports","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"sustainable clothing, eco-friendly clothing, second-hand clothing, high-quality clothing, pro-environmental self-identity","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3901271/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3901271/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003ePrevious research investigated the impact of psychosocial predictors (e.g. attitude, social and moral norm, perceived behavioural control, intention) on sustainable clothing purchasing behaviour. To date, no studies considered whether pro-environmental self-identity moderates the effects of these predictors on behaviour. In this study, we adopted an intrapersonal approach to examine the effects of pro-environmental self-identity on different behaviours and a longitudinal design to assess the moderating role of pro-environmental self-identity in predicting intentions and behaviours, controlling for past behaviour. 250 participants completed a first questionnaire designed to measure the Theory of Planned Behaviour constructs related to three different sustainable clothing purchase behaviours. One month later, the participants completed a second questionnaire in which they assessed their self-assessment of these behaviours. The results showed that for all behaviours, affective attitude influenced behaviour positively, while cognitive attitude had a negative influence. The influence of previous behaviours increased with a decrease in pro-environmental self-identity.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"A Multi-Behaviour Longitudinal Study for Predicting Sustainable Clothing Purchasing: The Moderating Effect of Pro-Environmental Identity","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-02-09 17:18:44","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3901271/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2024-05-29T15:41:00+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-05-28T13:54:05+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-05-23T17:00:58+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"16015116186314281599561770581374084725","date":"2024-05-17T09:03:39+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"131184369218584329467651321036257182202","date":"2024-05-16T15:12:09+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-03-25T19:29:07+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"f98e831f-d5e1-4a39-bd47-e10ad6c3ba54","date":"2024-03-18T10:53:05+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2024-02-15T09:38:08+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2024-02-15T09:22:11+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2024-02-08T05:58:22+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2024-02-08T05:56:54+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Scientific Reports","date":"2024-01-26T23:02:54+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"scientific-reports","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"scirep","sideBox":"Learn more about [Scientific Reports](http://www.nature.com/srep/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Scientific Reports","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Scientific Reports","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"a1b700c4-cb0d-45cb-9406-2596fa878971","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 9th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[{"id":28661311,"name":"Biological sciences/Psychology/Human behaviour"},{"id":28661312,"name":"Biological sciences/Psychology"},{"id":28661313,"name":"Earth and environmental sciences/Environmental social sciences"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-10-21T16:04:26+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-3901271","link":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-74234-6","journal":{"identity":"scientific-reports","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Scientific Reports"},"publishedOn":"2024-10-14 15:57:58","publishedOnDateReadable":"October 14th, 2024"},"versionCreatedAt":"2024-02-09 17:18:44","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1038/s41598-024-74234-6","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-74234-6","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-3901271","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-3901271","identity":"rs-3901271","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}