The Role Of Fomo In The Impact Of Religious Attitude And Hedonic Consumption Among Turkish Muslim Consumers

The Role Of Fomo In The Impact Of Religious Attitude And Hedonic Consumption Among Turkish Muslim Consumers | 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 Research Article The Role Of Fomo In The Impact Of Religious Attitude And Hedonic Consumption Among Turkish Muslim Consumers SERHAT ATA, ŞÜKRAN KARACA, ZÜLEYHAN BARAN This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-5980124/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This study explores the intricate dynamics between religious attitudes and hedonic consumption behaviors, with Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) as a pivotal mediator, focusing on Turkish Muslim consumers. By examining data from 562 participants across Türkiye, this research unveils how religious principles, while traditionally curbing materialism, paradoxically foster specific hedonic consumption motivations when mediated by FoMO. Utilizing advanced structural equation modeling, the findings underscore FoMO's transformative role in linking religious attitudes to adventure and gratification-based, role-based, value-based, and social-based shopping behaviors. The strongest effects are observed in socialized and adventure-oriented consumption, reflecting a tension between spiritual adherence and contemporary consumerist pressures. This study not only expands the theoretical discourse on religious consumer behavior but also offers a groundbreaking perspective on how psychological constructs like FoMO reshape traditional paradigms. These learnings offer implementable strategies for culturally sensitive marketing practices for Muslim consumers, which maintains the tension between the spirit of authenticity and contemporary consumerism. Jel Codes: M30; M31; M37 Marketing Religiosity Attitudes Consumers Fear of Missing Out Hedonic Consumption Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Introduction Most people have an aspect of religiosity or belief that stems from a desire for clarity regarding life and the nature (Pandey ve Singh, 2019). Religion influences life for believers in many ways, both personally and socially, and makes their lives meaningful (Judd, 2009 ). Religiosity manifests itself in various aspects of human life (Pandey & Singh, 2019 ). Even at the subconscious level, religion serves as a constant supply of fundamental values that influence consumer behavior and drive purchasing decisions (Minton & Kahle, 2016 ; Zainol et al., 2024 ). As a matter of course, people strive to be pleased and enjoy themselves and thus, it is natural for people to live to look for pleasure and this is based on the nature of people desiring to have fun, and it is crucial for attaining pleasures. A way of life always oriented towards pleasure, happiness, or avoidance of unpleasant emotions is known as hedonism (Prajabti et al., 2022 ). Hedonism is a view of life that assumes that individuals are happy when they achieve happiness and avoid painful emotions as much as possible. Hedonism, in the sense of people's understanding, has evolved into a purely material-oriented conception. This is what hedonism means to most people who consider that the main purpose of living in this world is simply pleasure and happiness, both physical and mental. In conclusion, hedonism is a particular way of understanding human life in the world (Fendi et al., 2019). From the Islamic point of view, hedonism clearly contradicts the guidelines of Islam, because Islam does not teach people to waste and do useless things. Living a luxurious, easy and materialistic life in Islam is condemned in the Qur'an as it results in selfishness and arrogance. Islam particularly discourages the use of luxury commodities for excess and vanity (Zainol et al., 2024 ). Quran and Prophet Muhammad repeatedly warned the rich against waste, no matter how rich they were. When he saw a Companion who used water excessively while performing ablution, the Prophet intervened by saying, "What a waste of money!" When the answer was received, "Is there wastage in wudu too?” they said, "Yes, do not waste water even when making wudu in a flowing river." Allah Almighty says in a verse O children of Adam, take your adornment [i.e., wear your clothing] at every masjid, and eat and drink, but be not excessive. Indeed, He likes not those who commit excess. (Surat al-Araf, verse 31). In this respect, Muslims are taught by Islam to approach consumption in a balanced manner (Rahmadani et al., 2024). A person's religious beliefs are negatively associated with hedonism. However, since pleasure and material satisfaction are assumed to be the main goals in life, entertainment, and luxury are the main goals of life for those who have these kind of considerations. This is attributed to the assumption that people live only once and therefore need to enjoy life as much as possible. A number of factors influence consumers' decisions to buy, such as increased status, peer opinions, brand familiarity, and hedonistic desires (Bock et al., 2014 ; Hamari, 2015 ). Muslim consumers operate within a distinct Islamic worldview that shapes their purchase decision. According to Adnan ( 2011 ), their consumption is not solely focused on immediate worldly benefits; rather, it also incorporates spiritual considerations, as consumption acts as a means to fulfill religious obligations to Allah. This perspective introduces a unique time horizon in their decision-making processes, where the implications of purchases are evaluated in both this life and the hereafter (Kahf, 2011 ). Apart from these reasons, it can sometimes occur in different situations when making a purchase decision. When the control of physical integrity is lost, pain occurs in the body, and fear occurs in case of deterioration of psychological integrity. This fear, which is expressed as Fear of Missing Out (FOMO), is defined as the behavior of unnecessarily regretting for fear of missing out on developments (Littman et al., 2024). People with FOMO symptoms feel the need to be rewarded and experience some anxiety (Turan, 2016 ). In order to eliminate this fear, they turn to consumption under the influence of hedonistic motives. FoMO, along with hedonism, leads to increased consumption of luxury goods and experiences among Muslim millennials, as they strive to stay connected with global trends and seek instant gratification. This behavior often conflicts with local religious values and traditions, creating a dilemma for young individuals trying to balance modern lifestyles with cultural and religious identities (Batubara, 2024 ) and it also indicate that the urge to engage in popular experiences or acquire trending products can result in heightened expenditure during shopping occasions, particularly among younger individuals. This inclination is further intensified by the influence of social media, where people display appealing lifestyles and products, fostering a sense of urgency and apprehension about being left out of social groups (Rahim et al., 2021 ; Özen & Hus, 2025 ). Basically, understanding how religious attitude interacts with FoMO and how this, in turn, influences hedonic consumption—specifically its aspects is critical for advancing consumer behavior theory. In this context; The primary objective of this study is to analyze the role of FoMO in mediating the relationship between religious attitudes and the sub-dimensions of hedonic consumption. Specifically, it seeks to: Examine the direct influence of religious attitude on FoMO. Investigate how FoMO affects various dimensions of hedonic consumption. Explore the mediating role of FoMO in the relationship between religious attitude and hedonic consumption. Theoretical Backgorund Theoretically, values and religiosity are explained as significantly interrelated concepts. Religion contains teachings that warn people about how they should behave by highlighting the importance and insignificance of values (Rokeach, 1969 ). Today, the transformation into a consumer society all over the world is due to factors such as the increase in the quality of life, the expansion of the market and service, and the increase in dependence on objects and substances. In addition, technological developments, constantly renewed trends in the fashion world as well as the role played by the media in the dissemination of brands are factors that facilitate all these factors (Lipovetsky, 2002). Religious values serve as the basis for market strategies since these principles are believed to have a significant impact on customer behavior (Delener, 1990 ). This is because typical consumer behavior is in a state of flux and certain characteristics can change depending on time and situation (McDaniel & Burnett, 1990 ). Therefore, determining how consumers' behavior is influenced by religious factors is critical for marketing success (Patel, 2010 ). Hedonism is commonly characterized as a condition of conduct linked to emotional elements including joy, pleasure, quick gratification, and excessive consumption (Gabriel & Lang, 1995 ). The main purpose of this behavior style stems from the individual's desire to improve other people's perception of themselves by embellishing their personal image. Therefore, these individuals are thought to have lower levels of sustainable consumption values (Empacher et al., 2002 ; Mcneill & Moore, 2015 ). In the literature, hedonistic shopping values are discussed using a variety of terminology, including pleasure, entertainment, and leisure shopping (Atulkar & Kesari, 2017 ; Vieira et al., 2018 ; Aruldoss et al., 2024 ; Nawi et al., 2024 ). Furthermore, a variety of hedonic shopping motivations have been identified, including adventure (excitement), pleasure (fulfillment), role (shopping for someone else), value (the joy of uncovering discounts and the value of the price paid), social (means of getting together), and opinion (sharing information emerging market trends) (Arnold & Reynolds, 2003 ). The most significant cultural factor that significantly affects people's attitudes, values, and beliefs in a society at both the individual and collective levels is religion (Mokhlis, 2009 ). A person's dedication to upholding religion's principles and demonstrating this dedication by their disposition and behavior is known as religiosity (Johnson et al., 2001 ). Similar to how major texts of religion highlight the value of preserving a healthy relationship with the environment, Islamic teachings also stress the need of preserving environmental balance and making a commitment to resource sustainability (Akhtar, 1996 ; Djupe & Gwiasda, 2010 ). The degree to which an individual upholds and applies religious values, beliefs, and practices in their daily life is known as religiosity, and it plays a significant role in determining the purchase intentions of Muslim consumers (Worthington et al., 2003 ; Shaharudin et al., 2010 ; Ashraf et al., 2017 ; Koç et al., 2024). Because it is linked to consumer behavior characteristics including lifestyle and buying habits, religiosity is crucial for research on consumer behavior (Davis & Jai, 2014 ). The theory of planned behavior is a major influence on people's shopping thoughts. According to the widely recognized social psychology theory of planned behavior, behavior directly precedes intention (Bagozzi et al., 1989 ). According to the theory of planned behaviour, intentions are influenced by beliefs and related attitudes, and intentions then direct actual behaviour. Three dimensions are specifically taken into consideration: attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. Eagly and Chaiken ( 1993 ) describe attitude as the psychological sensation and assessment, whether favorable or unfavorable, that arises when a person does specific actions. When consumers are making decisions, their attitude toward an action is a clear indication of their behavioral intention (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975 ). This relationship between attitude and purchase intention is positively evaluated by different products and services. Attitudes also positively affect recycling intentions (Culiberg, 2014 ). According to Ajzen (1991), subjective norms are the level of social pressure an individual experiences regarding a behavior. Consumers are under social pressure to act in particular ways in order to be accepted in the social settings they find themselves in. Examining the connection between people's behavioral intents and subjective standards reveals that behavioral intention is positively impacted by subjective norms (Taylor & Todd, 1995 ). The term "perceived behavioral control" describes how someone perceives the potential challenges they might face when engaging in a particular behavior. Individuals may not have control over certain external and unexpected circumstances, such as time, luck, money, etc. Hence, evidences advocate that people with high self-efficacy in controlling their actions are likely to be high on self motivation (Ajzen, 1991). More specifically, belief about having more resources available such as time, money, or skills increases people's perceived control and behavioral intentions (Wang, 2020 ). Empirical evidence reveals a correlation between hedonic shopping value and behavioral intention (Chang et al., 2004 ; Jones et al., 2006 ; Davis et al., 2014 ). Meanwhile, the question of how religious values can influence the global consumption patterns has also been a valuable area of study. Selectivity associated with a particular religion can be explained using the theory of planned behavior and it helps explain how certain purchasing behaviors are acquired (Ajzen & Fishbein, 2000 ). In particular, it has been argued that religious beliefs can rather influence an individual's attitude towards hedonic consumption because potential consumers with stronger FOMO tendencies, are less strict to the tenets of their faith. Because of the ethical and moral basis of the theories, religion strong believers may tend to restrain their hedonic desire more than others (Tarka & Kinney, 2024). Empirical studies reveal that hedonic shopping value is related to behavioral intention According to other studies that applied the theory of planned behavior, hedonic shopping decisions are significantly influenced by behavioral control and subjective norm (Alam & Sayuti, 2011 ). In particular, subjective norms were found to have a relatively higher influence (Lada et al. 2009 ). In these studies it is suggested that the shopping experience provides consumers with a combination of utilitarian and hedonic shopping value (Baboinet al., 1994). The effect of religious attitude on FoMO Psychological and social inclinations are significantly shaped by religious attitude, which include people's beliefs, values, and actions derived from their religional attitude (McDaniel & Burnett, 1990 ; Farrel et al., 2017). These same attitudes often advocate for appreciation, gratitude, and even spiritual happiness as a buffer against the materialistic and comparison oriented pressures that are predominant in the world today (Essoo & Dibb, 2004 ; Rakrachakarn et al., 2015 ; Istiqomah & Wahyudi, 2024 ). Another rise in the new age technology influenced phenomena is the Fear of Missing Out or “FoMO” – a psychological concept that gained popularity due to the absence of digital technology paired with the existence of social media (Przybylski et al., 2013 ; Fioravanti et al., 2021 ). FoMO, which is frequently aggravated by the use of social media, is the worry of not being part of an activity that other people are already busy with (Mediasite; Tieto innovations, 2012). This kind of link grows beside the developing of the platforms as people notice they are not in the circle. FoMO becomes widespread when people feel more and more excluded. The possibility of FoMo as a feeling deepens exclusion in people. This fear is the result of the human urge to be socially close and included, which leads to pondering of an individual’s life and decisions among the context of everything else (Knowthenature, 2014). It is related to high levels of anxiety, discontent, and obsessive behaviors such as online platform checking to an extreme degree (Beyens et al., 2016 ; Tandon et al., 2024 ). Belief principles such as self-control, awareness, and prioritizing internal rewards over external rewards seem to be the ones causing the lessening of the fear of missing out in those who are deeply religious. The relation of religion to the fear of missing out is proven by empirical investigations that usually discuss how religious activities are a counterforce to the negative consequences of FOMO. Research implies that those with a solid belief system are more likely to find happiness and moral direction, which, in turn, may help them get through their FoMO-linked anxieties (Surzkiewicz, 2022; Mirawati et al., 2024 ). Religious practices like prayer and µeditation have been found to alleviate stress and enhance µental well-being, thereby providing a clearer focus on what is deeµed essential in life. Furtherµore, religious teachings eµphasizing qana'ah (contentµent) and tawakkul (trust in Allah) can encourage adherents to prioritize spiritual fulfillµent over µaterial pursuits, thereby reducing susceptibility to FoMO (Sinan, 2024 ) and it refers that stronger social pressures and an emphasis on community participation may heighten feelings of FoMO; however, the intrinsic value attributed to familial and communal bonds can serve as a protective factor against its adverse effects (Surzkiewicz, 2022). Based on literature, we developed the following hypothesis: H1: Religious attitude have an effect on FoMO. The FoMO on adventure and gratification-based shopping Adventure is defined as intellectual stimulation that in terms of arousal, excitement, the feeling of being in another world, and entering a different sensory universe (Arnold & Reynolds, 2003 ; King and Sondhi 2018 ). It is based on arousal (Berlyne, 1969 ; McGuire 1974 ) and expression theories (Huizinga, 1970 ; Sherry, 1990 ). These extrinsic theories highlight the necessity of play for human creatures to express themselves along with getting stimulation. Adventurous-based shopping also refers to individuals who frequently seek sensory stimulation. The fact that sensory stimulation elicits a personal shopping motive (Tauber, 1972 ; Westbrook & Black, 1985 ; Babin et al., 1994 ) is a factor that can create hedonic shopping value for the adventurous aspects of shopping and a behavioral pattern suitable for individuals who enjoy exploring (Jarboe & McDaniel, 1987 ). It may be shaped by the phenomenon of FoMO, as people are motivated by the excitement of uncovering distinctive or intriguing products and there is also a positive correlation between impulsive buying behaviors and the fear of missing out (FoMO), indicating that individuals who experience high levels of FoMO may be more likely to participate in adventure shopping as a means to mitigate their anxiety about missing new trends or products (Činjarević et al., 2011; Ali et al., 2024 ). On the other hand, this can motivate people to explore and enjoy the pleasures of happy coincidence at discovering the wonderful opportunities that shopping sometimes offers. This quest for adventure was designed to satisfy the individual's hedonic requirement for stimulation, deriving a sense of achievement by discovering something hidden (Platon, 2024 ). These FoMO instances raise this adventure mindset, thereby exciting the consumer to add common impulsivity to capture what they purport to be short-lived possibilities. The dread of losing out on an exciting deal or a special product often may cause a consumer to make a spontaneous purchase (Rachman, 2024). Gratification-based shopping is defined as a method used to minimize stress, alleviate negative moods, and make oneself happy through autonomy (Vrocharidou & Efthymiou 2012 ). According to the self-determination theory, as long as an activity is autonomous, it suggests that it can offer itself as a source of inspiration to the individual to some extent (Ryan & Deci, 2017 ). This means that individuals who feel autonomous in their shopping decisions due to these impulses can reach an invigorating and satisfying feeling during shopping (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009 ). Additionally, the expectation of future enjoyment further stimulates impulsive shopping behavior (Chang et al., 2011 ). In various studies, it was revealed that both participants went shopping to reduce stress or forget their problems and people do shopping was to calm down, relax, improve negative mood or just to be happy (Arnold & Reynolds, 2003 ). Gratification-based shopping is based on stress reduction theories in human motivation. Individuals who shop in this style have stated that they are mobilized, and motivated and their tension is reduced by shopping. It is suggested that individuals shop to maintain internal balance and find a way out (McGuire, 1974 ). It has been recognized as a therapeutic activity for individuals who seek satisfaction and escape from reality and has been defined as a form of treatment for depressed individuals (Babin et al., 1994 ). The satisfying benefit of shopping is explained as the individual being in the shopping process until he/she feels good (Tauber, 1972 ). According to Lee et al. ( 2001 ), this is an accepted emotion-oriented coping strategy for handling stressful situations or solving problems. With its emphasis on indulgence and emotional benefits, gratification- baseds hopping offers a way for people to lessen the worry that comes with FoMO. Customers can counteract emotions of exclusion or deprivation by making purchases or engaging in shopping as a leisure activity, which can lead to a sense of accomplishment and enjoyment (Hodkinson, 2019 ). As it is driven by the instant pleasure obtained from acquiring products, FoMO intensifies this drive by instilling a sense of urgency; consumers may feel pressured to make swift purchases to prevent missing advantageous offers or items that guarantee immediate gratification (Good & Hyman, 2021 ; Platon, 2024 ). Based on literature, we developed the following hypothesis: H2: FoMO has an effect on adventure and gratification-based shopping. The effect of FoMO on role-based shopping Role-based shopping is an emotional state that represents the enjoyment people derive from shopping while playing various roles. It is described as the pleasure people get from purchasing for other people, how this activity affects their feelings and moods, and the emotional state that expresses the delight and excitement they experience on the inside. According to the majority of survey participants in a study, shopping for friends and family was very important to them and made them feel good. They also discussed the joy they had from doing so. Furthermore, some individuals reported feeling really happy when they found the ideal present for their loved ones (Arnold & Reynolds, 2003 ). Identification theories of human motivation (ego development in self-concepts through the attachment of fulfilling roles and the "mobilization" of role obligations) explain the role-based shopping drive (McGuire, 1974 ). This motive has a beneficial impact on people who view shopping as a social role, which is connected to the personal "role-playing" motive (Tauber, 1972 ). According to Westbrook and Black ( 1985 ), it also aligns with role assumption, which characterizes the desire to fulfill culturally prescribed responsibilities associated with buying. Various research findings indicate that some consumers perceive role-based shopping as a chore, find enjoyment in the activity, and get hedonic value in it (Babin et al. 1994 ). According to Miller ( 1998 ) and Otnes and McGrath ( 2001 ), several research have also examined how purchasing is a way for some consumers, particularly women, to communicate their love. It can be revealed that self-determination theory (SDT) states that people are dependent on the need for relatedness and competence (Khawaja et al. 2017 ; Su et al. 2019) through its psychological bases of FOMO in role shopping (Kim et al., 2020 ). The acceptance of values of those an individual feels connected with or wants to feel connected to in a belonging context (Niemiec and Ryan 2009 ). Motivated by the things they love, people can shop any time, and life is full of adventures. Research from self-determination theory shows that role-based shopping behavior can be effective in making people happy (Khawaja et al. 2017 ). Consumers are motivated to purchase as a means of expressing their social identities when they worry about losing out on social interactions or chances to connect. The drive to buy things that will improve their standing or acceptance in their social circles is heightened by this need for social feedback, especially in digital settings. Because, the pressure to buy presents or fashionable products often rises as people try to keep in touch and relevant in their social networks (Acquino & Natividade, 2024). As such, we propose the following hypothesis: H3: FoMO has an effect on role-based shopping. The effect of FoMO on value-based shopping Prior to the sixteenth century, early philosophers believed that value and price were identical, and value has been translated as price. Value is simply considered as "what I get for what I give" (Zeithaml, 1988 ). Value refers to the variables that directly result from the consumer's perception of quality, sacrifice, and attributes of a product, which bring together important details that result in product choice (Dodds et al., 1991 ). Another definition explains the value in an overview way, taking into account all relevant evaluation criteria. Here, value is "all the factors, both qualitative and quantitative, subjective and objective, that make up an entire shopping experience" (Zeithaml 1988 ). According to these definitions, value-based shopping is understood as the whole shopping experience (Babin et al., 1994 ). All of the benefits offered by consumption experiences cannot be well explained by a value-based shopping strategy that concentrates on a consumption good, its cost, or the functional utility it offers (Hirschman & Holbrook, 1982 ). Therefore, while establishing a measure of value-based shopping, factors other than functional utility should be included (Bloch et al., 1986 ). Value-based shopping refers to the optimal use of resources such as promotions, discounts, and freebies. In addition to the economic benefits of value-based shopping, the importance of increased self-esteem due to the prestige of having the privilege of enjoying them is emphasized (Trant et al. 2015 ). It is associated with the most generalized reward-oriented incentive system, which has existed universally for a long time. It's extrinsically motivating and hedonic through greater sensory involvement and perceptions of bargains for excitement (Ryan and Deci, 2017 ). Value-based shopping means shopping based on value, which involves searching for discounts and bargaining. The results of the study showed those who have this behavior, finding value hunting for deals, discounts, and low prices will have a feeling as if "winning" shopping or "conquering" a challenge (Arnold & Reynolds, 2003 ). Value-based shopping is backed by theories (McGuire ( 1974 )) that depict the individual as seeking to grow his potential of being a successful competitor, craving admiration, and, consequently, self-esteem. Hedonic benefits are gathered when deals become visible, which raises excitement and sensory involvement (Babin et al., 1994 ). Moreover, the sense of urgency around marketing campaigns and temporary discounts is increased by FoMO (Bok et al., 2025 ). Shoppers are more inclined to engage in value-based buying in order to avoid missing out on a good offer when retailers use terms like "Only today!" or "Limited stock available!" to cause FoMO (Lamba, 2021 ). The hypothesis we have formed in this direction is as follows; H4: FoMO has an effect on value-based shopping. The effect of FoMO on social-based shopping Social-based shopping is defined as an independent, selective, self-directed and organized behavioral state that involves the individual communicating (Keren et al. 2020 ). This motivation is driven by a persistent urge to be with others (Parigi et al. 2017 ). Self-determination theory emphasizes that this state is intrinsically motivated to engage in exciting, optimally challenging, self-fulfilling activities and supports development (Ryan and Deci 2001 ). According to Schuler et al. (2019), sociability is a significant stimulant that promotes and facilitates growth, partly by satisfying psychological requirements for competence, autonomy, and the process of relationships. This natural and active tendency to form and internalize social relationships is recognized as a fundamental basis for healthy development, with tendencies towards the differentiation and integration of the individual structure into a coherent, healthy sense of self (Ryan and Deci 2017 ). Social-based shopping refers to enjoying socializing and connecting with others while performing the activity. According to a study's findings, it appears naturally known that shopping is an active social activity. Several participants stated that they liked to interact with people when shopping and that it allowed them to form bonds with other consumers (Arnold & Reynolds, 2003 ). The foundation of social-based shopping is a group of commitment theories of human motivation (McGuire, 1974 ) that all center on people's adaptive, altruistic, and interpersonal need for love and approval in relationships. In the first study on the social components of shopping motivation, a "personalizing" shopper was described as one who looks for personal interactions when shopping (Stone, 1954 ). A second study identified this behavior as that of a "psycho-socializing" consumer (Moschis, 1976 ). Additionally, it indicated that consumers intend to connect with reference groups, communicate with people who share their interests, and engage in social interaction outside the house (Tauber, 1972 ). Higher levels of anxiety, discontent, and compulsive behaviors, like obsessively monitoring online platforms, are associated with the human need for belonging and social connection, which makes people think about their decisions and experiences in light of social activities taking place elsewhere (Beyens et al., 2016 ; Tandon et al., 2024 ; Groenestein, 2024). FOMO is the widespread fear that others are enjoying rewarding experiences that one is missing, and it is frequently made worse by social media platforms. As people become more conscious of the events and activities, they are not able to participate in, their sense of exclusion is increased (Alt, 2015 ; Zhang et al., 2020 ). The hypothesis we formulated in line with the above literature is as follows: H5: FoMO has an effect on social-based shopping. The mediating role of FoMO in the effect of religious attitude on hedonic consumption Hedonistic consumption associate with the usage of items by people to promote their identities to others (Whiting & Hannam, 2015 ) and is refers to self-expression (Schau et al., 2009 ). Consumers' intangible and sensory feelings are associated with hedonism (Hirschman & Holbrook, 1982 ). In the post-consumption appraisal process, hedonism plays a major role (Babin et al., 1994 ). Additionally, hedonism is favorably connected to emotions of excitement and high levels of satisfaction (Dunham et al., 2006 ). As a result, hedonism is a lifelong memory and a crucial component of experiential consumption (Mannell & Kleiber, 1997 ). Customers are influenced to make sustainable purchases by their fundamental religious convictions (Djupe & Gwiasda, 2010 ). Such a high degree of conspicuous consumption is forbidden in Islam since it is deemed extravagant (Rice, 1999 ). Hedonic consumers, however, are more inclined to consume based on symbolic values, i.e. what other people think of them due to lifestyle and social status (Mcneill & Moore, 2015 ). This suggests that higher levels of religiosity will reduce the negative impact of hedonistic shopping values on consumption (Razzac et al., 2018) but will have a mediating effect on shopping values due to the influence of FoMO (Batubara, 2024 ). Further, fear of missing out (FoMO), as a perpetual fear of missing out on something good (Casale et al., 2018 ) and wanting to remain connected to what others are experiencing, is articulated as a mood that compels individuals to engage in hedonic buying (Buglass et al., 2017 ). FoMO is a consumer behavior social phenomenon which isolates people from current experiences (Kang et al., 2019 ). FOMO is a key influencer in the consumption process as far as leading purchases are concerned (Hodkinson, 2019 ). According to Eide et al. ( 2018 ), those who experience strong FOMO symptoms are likely to remain conscious of the activities around them and try to satisfy their craving to be connected. One's need for something new may be manifested through an intense desire to be affirmed by others. Hedonic value of the brand and high loyalty to the brand as a driver for customers' interest in the brand explains FoMO (Kang et al., 2020 ). In addition, self-esteem and esteem needs are more relevant to high FooM consumers (Hodkinson, 2019 ). In the context of responding to a sense of crisis, fear of missing out (FoMO) has recently become a widely recognized phenomenon (Good & Hyman, 2020). As one of the determinants of consumer behavior, FoMo can be a personal trait, but it can also be caused by social factors such as family members, friends, or economic situation (Priantina & Sapian, 2021 ). Religious values shape individuals to avoid what religious guidance does not want (Masnono, 2005 ), while on the other hand there are different levels of FoMO as it is perceived as personal (de Run et al., 2010 ). Therefore, it is one of the relatively important influencing factors in determining consumption decisions based on FoMO (Mukhtar and Butt, 2012 ; Weaver and Agle, 2002 ). Following the above arguments, we hypothesized that: H6: FoMO has a mediating role in the effect of religious attitude on hedonic consumption. H6a: FoMO has a mediating role in the effect of religious attitude on adventure and gratification-based shopping H6b: FoMO hs a mediating role in the effect of religious attitude on role-based shopping H6c: FoMO has a mediating role in the effect of religious attitude on value-based shopping H6d: FoMO has a mediating role in the effect of religious attitude on socialized-based shopping. Research Methods Measurement The multiple-item scale utilized in this study were modified from previous research to assess the constructs. A questionnaire was designed to obtain responses from participants on a five-point Likert-type scale, ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree” (Table 1 ). It had two sections, one measuring the constructs and second measuring the demographics. There are many underlying drivers for why researchers may be willing, or even require, to adapt existing scales for their studies. For instance, researchers may shorten scales in their research to generate higher response rates and cope with respondent fatigue (Heggestad et al., 2019 ). The ''Religious attitude scale '', representing the items of religious belief and the degree of religious belief, was originally adapted from Allport & Ross (1967). Subsequent criteria were adapted from Onay (2002), Arslan (2003), Ok (2011), and Gümüş (2022), and the outline of the religious values variable, which includes items such as "My religious belief determines my approach in life.", "Although I am a religious person, I do not want the rules of religion to affect my daily work.", was drawn up and the scale consists of twenty-five items with one structure. Although it is used in the literature as a dimensional scale, this scale also can be used as a single-factor religious attitude scale. In line with our research model, general religious attitude scores were used instead of subscale scores. The hedonic consumption scale was adapted from Arnold and Reynold (2003) and Ceylan (2007) and the scale was constructed by almost preserving the original six-factor structure consisting of adventure, gratification, role, value, and social-based shopping motivations except idea-based shopping regarding exploratory qualitative and quantitative studies. Ten items from FoMO scale were adopted for this study; scale of FoMO was originated from Tomczyk and Selmanagic-Lizde ( 2018 ) and adopted from Gökler et al. ( 2016 ). The adaptation of the scale in this way preserved the validity and reliability specifications of the original scale while ensuring compliance with the targeted sample size. Sampling and Data Collection This study was conducted in 7 regions of Turkiye (Marmara, Aegean, Mediterranean, Black Sea, Eastern Anatolia, and Southeastern Anatolia). The sample of people of Islamic faith in these 7 regions provides an ideal setting to understand the consumers' situation as it encompasses the whole country. Data was collected through structured questionnaires administered to Muslim consumers and focused descriptively on regional, demographic, occupational, and educational variables (Table I). A total of 594 participants stating their religion as Islam completed the online questionnaire. With more than 80% of respondents, the data offers an accurate portrayal of how Muslim customers perceive. A pilot research study was carried out following the completion of 100 questionnaires in total. The data gathering procedure proceeded since the analysis's findings were consistent with predictions. A total of 594 individuals provided data for the study. Nevertheless, 562 valid questionnaires were included for the analysis after 32 questionnaires that provided the same response to every statement and 32 questionnaires that failed to respond to more than 10% of the survey questions were removed. Data Analysis Along with demographic statistics, second-order confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation modeling (SEM) approaches which was favored by many researchers since it can be used when the data are not normally distributed and simultaneously estimates the measurement mode and hypothesised model (Kline, 2005 ; Henseler et al., 2009 ) were included in the data analysis procedure. The required sample size for SEM is 300 and the acceptable level of communality is 0.45 (Hair et al., 2010 ). Considering all the requirements of the analysis technique, the total sample size in this study was 562 valid responses. For this, second-order CFA was conducted using SmartPLS version 4.1.0.9 to validate theoretical model and, mark a significant advancement in development with its entirely redesigned graphical user interface, faster data estimation processing speed, and new model assessment features such as a necessary condition analysis, endogeneity assessment, and a cross-validated predictive ability test (Ringle et al., 2020 ; Cheah; 2024), while other analyses were conducted by using SPSS version 23. Compared to other methods when the sample size is small, it is convergent particular in marketing studies (Henseler et al., 2014 ; Guenter et al., 2023). Results Demographic and Descriptive Results As shown in Table 1 below, participants in this study are mostly female (57.8%) and 42.2% were male (136). The participants in this study are overwhelmingly between the ages of 18 and 35 (73%). The participant’s majority have an undergraduate degree with 190 participants (33.8%). Table 1 Demographic Statistics (n:562) Characteristics n % Region 1.Black Sea 131 23.3 2.Marmara 162 28.8 3.Central Anatolia 80 14.2 4.Aegean 47 8.4 5.Mediterranean 58 10.3 6.Eastern-Southeastern Anatolia 84 14.9 Gender a. Female 325 57.8 b. Male 237 42.2 Age a. 18–25 228 40.5 b. 26–35 183 32.5 c. 36–45 87 15.4 d. 46–55 44 7.8 e. >55 20 3.5 Education a. Primary School 32 5.6 b. High School 163 29 c. Associate 97 17.2 d. Undergraduate 190 33.8 e. Postgraduate 80 14.2 Occupation a. Civil Servant 155 27.5 b. Private Employees 145 25.8 c. College Student 164 29.1 d. Housewife 65 11.5 e. Unemployed 33 5.8 f. Other 155 27.5 Considering the professional background of the participants, university students are predominant (29.1%). Furthermore, respondents living in the Marmara and Black Sea regions of Türkiye dominantly characterized the results of the survey questionnaire (62.1%). Common Method Bias Based on self-reported data collected with a single survey instrument, it was critical in our study to address and minimize the risk of Common Method Bias (CMB), which refers to variance that is attributable to the measurement method rather than the constructs measured and potentially threatens the validity of research findings (Podsakoff et al., 2003 ). We implemented several procedural solutions to reduce the likelihood of CMB during the data collection process. First, we designed the survey to ensure participants' anonymity and confidentiality, thus aiming to reduce social desirability bias and participant anxiety. We explicitly informed participants that their responses would be used for academic purposes only and would remain anonymous. Second, we aimed to encourage honest and unbiased responses by emphasizing in the survey instructions that there were no “right” or “wrong” answers. To further reduce CMB, we structured the questionnaire to reduce item ambiguity. We randomized order of question to minimize the potential influence of response patterns by designing construct-specific items to avoid overlapping. In addition, we used a mix of positive and negative statements to reduce response acceptance and potential halo effects. The structural design of the questionnaire was deliberately developed to minimize respondent fatigue and monotony, especially in questions related to critical dependent and independent variables. Our analytical approach to addressing CMB was equally robust. We performed a comprehensive multicollinearity test using SmartPLS, systematically verifying that all Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) values remained below the critical threshold of 5, confirming the absence of multicollinearity concerns (James et al.,2013). Besides procedural approaches, we used statistical techniques to detect and control for potential Common Method Variance (CMV) in the data. To assess whether a single factor explained the majority of the variance, we performed Harman's single factor test as suggested in the literature. The results showed that no single factor explained a dominant proportion of the variance, suggesting that CMV is not a major concern. We also used the marker variable technique, which involves including a theoretically uncorrelated variable in the analysis to estimate CMV. This approach confirmed that the effect of CMV on the constructs of the study was negligible. Finally, we conducted a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and a comparison of fit indices between the single-factor and multifactor models further supported the conclusion that CMV did not significantly distort the results. Measurement Model Evaluation The Measurement Model is defined by the characteristics of the constructs that are assessed to a large extend such as reliability and validity (Vinzi et al., 2010 ; Ahmad et al., 2016 ). In order to maintain validity of the measurement model, we began to process by eliminating items with factor loadings less than 0.4. Subsequently, we tested the items against Fornell and Larcker ( 1981 ) criteria after we found them to be acceptable. We checked the overlapping variables by examining the cross-loadings chart. We also reviewed the VIF values for multicollinearity and checked values of 5 and above. The variables eliminated at these stages are as follows: we eliminated ID3, ID4, ID6, MG4, MK1-7, and SD1-4 from the religious attitude scale; FoMO2, and FoMO8-10 from the FoMO scale; MDA3, ZDA2 by combining the adventure-gratification-based scale from the sub-dimensions of the hedonic consumption scale (Çopuroğlu, 2021 ); and the idea-based shopping sub-dimension completely (FDA1-3) unlike the original hedonic consumption scale (Arnold & Reynolds, 2003 ). We conducted the analyses with 2 main variables and four sub-dimensions of 1 main variable and 30 items and presented the results in Table 2 . We evaluated using both convergent validity and discriminant validity to ensure the reliability and validity of the constructs. Convergent validity was assessed through composite reliability (CR), factor loadings, and average variance extracted (AVE). The results demonstrated that all factor loadings exceeded the recommended threshold of 0.7, indicating that the individual items were strongly correlated with their respective constructs (Hair et al., 2019 ). The CR values for all constructs were above the minimum threshold of 0.7, which confirms the internal consistency of the scales (Fornell & Larcker, 1981 ). Additionally, the AVE values for each construct surpassed the recommended criterion of 0.5, indicating strong convergent validity of the measurement model (Bagozzi & Yi, 2012 ). To assess reliability, both CR and Cronbach’s Alpha (CA) values were examined. For all constructs, the CR and CA values were within the acceptable range of 0.7 to 0.95, demonstrating a high level of internal consistency without redundancy (Hair et al., 2019 ; Hair et al., 2021). Table 2 Result of Measurement Model Construsts Item λ P value α AVE CR ID1 0.769 < 0.001 ID2 0.830 < 0.001 ID5 0.670 < 0.001 ID7 0.888 < 0.001 Religious Attitude (RA) ID8 0.871 < 0.001 0.914 0.921 0.527 MG1 0.689 < 0.001 MG2 0.749 < 0.001 MG3 0.790 < 0.001 MG5 0.520 < 0.001 MG6 0.792 < 0.001 Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) FoMO1 0.558 < 0.001 FoMO3 0.522 < 0.001 FoMO4 0.510 < 0.001 0.869 0.889 0.510 FoMO5 0.862 < 0.001 FoMO6 0.915 < 0.001 FoMO7 0.796 < 0.001 Adventure and Gratification-based Shopping (AGS) MDA1 0.892 < 0.001 MDA2 0.793 < 0.001 MDA3 0.878 < 0.001 0.928 0.929 0.720 ZDA1 0.804 < 0.001 ZDA3 0.870 < 0.001 Role-based Shopping (RS) RDA1 0.837 < 0.001 RDA2 0.747 < 0.001 0.903 0.921 0.759 RDA3 0.885 < 0.001 Value-based Shopping (VS) DDA1 DDA2 DDA3 0.772 0.880 0.800 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.857 0.862 0.671 Socialized-based Shopping (SS) SDA1 0.768 < 0.001 SDA2 0.827 < 0.001 0.859 0.862 0.671 SDA3 0.860 < 0.001 CR: Composite reliability; AVE: Average Variance Extracted; α:Cronbach’s alpha; λ: Factor Loadings Discriminant validity was established using the Fornell-Larcker criterion and the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio. The square root of the AVE for each construct was greater than the correlation coefficients between constructs, satisfying the Fornell-Larcker criterion (Fornell & Larcker, 1981 ). Additionally, all HTMT values were below the recommended threshold of 0.85, confirming the distinctiveness of the constructs (Henseler et al., 2015 ). Shown in Table 3 , the square root of the AVE values on the diagonals (in bold numbers) is larger than the corresponding row and column values, confirming that the measurements are different from one another. These findings demonstrate that the measurement model possesses robust reliability and validity, providing a solid foundation for the subsequent structural model analysis. Table 3 Discriminant Validity of the Constructs Fornell-Larcker criterion Constructs Value-based Shopping Religious Attitude Fear of Missing Out Adventure and Gratification-based Shopping Role-based Shopping Socialized-based Shopping Value-based Shopping 0.819 Religious Attitude 0.606 0.726 Fear of Missing Out 0.467 0.339 0.714 Adventure and Gratification-based Shopping 0.574 0.405 0.549 0.849 Role-based Shopping 0.708 0.545 0.416 0.693 0.871 Socialized-based Shopping 0.686 0.501 0.573 0.590 0.665 0.820 HTMT Criteria Constructs Value-based Shopping Religious Attitudes Fear of Missing Out Adventure and Gratification-based Shopping Role-based Shopping Socialized-based Shopping Value-based Shopping Religious Attitude 0.611 Fear of Missing Out 0.441 0.342 Adventure and Gratification-based Shopping 0.575 0.417 0.540 Role-based Shopping 0.718 0.556 0.380 0.695 Socialized-based Shopping 0.688 0.510 0.565 0.591 0.671 Structural model assessments To evaluate the structural model, we conducted a series of analyses to ensure its reliability, validity, and explanatory power. We initially assessed multicollinearity among the first-order constructs and the second-order constructs using the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) in SmartPLS. We applied threshold of 5, as higher values indicate severe multicollinearity that could compromise the model’s accuracy (Hair et al., 2019 ). All VIF values were below this threshold, confirming the absence of multicollinearity issues. We subsequently evaluated the structural model's explanatory power and predictive relevance using the coefficient of determination (R²), predictive relevance (Q²), and effect sizes (f²). We categorized R² values, which measure the percentage of variance in the dependent variables explained by the independent variables, based on thresholds of 0.25 (weak), 0.50 (moderate), and 0.75 (substantial) (Hair et al., 2019 ). In addition, we interpreted f² values, which reflect the relative effect sizes of predictor variables, using thresholds of 0.02 (small), 0.15 (medium), and 0.35 (large) as outlined by Cohen ( 1988 ). We employed the bootstrap method with 5,000 resamples to test the significance of the hypothesized relationships in the structural model then we assessed path coefficients at significance levels of p < 0.001 and p < 0.05 (one-tailed), as directional hypotheses were proposed (Hair et al., 2019 ). Factor loadings, presented in Table 2 , consistently exceeded the threshold of 0.7, further confirming the adequacy of the measurement model (Fornell & Larcker, 1981 ). These analyses collectively demonstrate that the structural model is reliable, valid, and capable of providing meaningful insights into the relationships between the study variables. Hypothesized Relationships We evaluated the structural model to test the hypothesized relationships among the constructs. Table 4 summarizes the results, including path coefficients (Original Sample, O), sample means (M), standard deviations, t-statistics, confidence intervals (2.5% and 97.5%), and p-values. The findings demonstrate strong support for all proposed hypotheses; H1: RA→ FoMO was significant positively, with a path coefficient of 0.339 (t = 7.084, p < 0.001). The confidence intervals (CI = [0.243, 0.430]) exclude zero, confirming a robust positive religious between individuals’ religious attitude and the FoMO levels. H2: FoMO → AGS was the strongest among all hypotheses, with a path coefficient of 0.549 (t = 13.476, p < 0.001). CI ([0.470, 0.627]) validate this strong positive effect, indicating that FoMO significantly drives adventure- and gratification-based shopping behaviors. H3: FoMO→ RS was positively significant with a path coefficient of 0.416 (t = 9.873, p < 0.001). CI ([0.334, 0.499]) confirm that individuals experiencing higher levels of FoMO are more likely to engage in shopping behaviors tied to fulfilling specific roles or responsibilities. H4: FoMO → VS was significant in a positive way, with a path coefficient of 0.467 (t = 10.468, p < 0.001). CI ([0.378, 0.553]) confirm that FoMO positively influences shopping behaviors that prioritize value and practicality. Finally H5: FoMO → SS exhibited a strong positive effect with a path coefficient of 0.573 (t = 13.602, p < 0.001). CI ([0.489, 0.653]) underscore the robustness of this relationship, suggesting that individuals experiencing FoMO are highly motivated to engage in socialized-based shopping motives. Across all relationships, the t-statistics exceeded the critical thresholds for significance (t > 1.96 for p 2.58 for p < 0.01) (Hair et al., 2019 ). Additionally, the absence of zero within the 95% confidence intervals provides further evidence of the statistical significance of these relationships. Table 4 Hyphothesis Results Variables Original sample (O) Sample mean (M) Standard deviation T statistics 2.5% 97.5% P values H1: RA > FoMO 0.339 0.340 0.048 7.084 0.243 0.430 0.000 H2: FoMO > AGS 0.549 0.550 0.041 13.476 0.470 0.627 0.000 H3: FoMO-> RS 0.416 0.418 0.042 9.873 0.334 0.499 0.000 H4: FoMO > VS 0.467 0.468 0.045 10.468 0.378 0.553 0.000 H5: FoMO > SS 0.573 0.574 0.042 13,602 0.489 0.653 0.000 Mediation Analysis The mediation analysis results presented in Table 5 assess the role of Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) as a mediator between Religious Attitude (RA) and four types of hedonic shopping behaviors: Adventure and Gratification-Based Shopping (AGS), Role-Based Shopping (RS), Value-Based Shopping (VS), and Socialized-Based Shopping (SS). The analysis used bootstrapping with 5,000 resamples to assess the significance of the indirect effects, revealing that FoMO significantly mediates the relationships across all four paths. For H6a: RA → FoMO → AGS, the indirect effect was 0.186 (t = 5.635, p < 0.001), indicating that FoMO effectively mediates the impact of RA on adventure- and gratification-based shopping, with CI ([0.125, 0.255]) confirming the robustness of this mediation. Table 5 Mediation Analysis Variables Original sample (O) Sample mean (M) Standard deviation T statistics 2.5% 97.5% P values H5a: RA > FoMO > AGS 0,186 0,188 0,033 5,635 0,125 0,255 0,000 H5b: RA > FoMO > RS 0,141 0,143 0,029 4,902 0,089 0,202 0,000 H5c: RA > FoMO > VS 0,158 0,160 0,032 4,909 0,100 0,227 0,000 H5d: RA > FoMO > SS 0,194 0,196 0,035 5,549 0,129 0,266 0,000 Similarly, for H6b: RA → FoMO → RS, the indirect effect was 0.141 (t = 4.902, p < 0.001), highlighting that FoMO partially mediates the effect of RA on role-based shopping, with CI ([0.089, 0.202]) supporting the significance of this relationship. In the case of H6c: RA → FoMO → VS, the indirect effect was 0.158 (t = 4.909, p < 0.001), demonstrating that FoMO plays a critical role in mediating the relationship between RA and value-based shopping, as confirmed by the CI ([0.100, 0.227]). Finally, for H6d: RA → FoMO → SS, the indirect effect was 0.194 (t = 5.549, p < 0.001), with CI ([0.129, 0.266]) indicating that FoMO has the strongest mediation effect in explaining the link between RA and socialized-based shopping behaviors. The t-statistics for all paths were above the critical threshold for significance (t > 1.96 for p 2.58 for p < 0.01), and the confidence intervals did not contain zero, confirming the statistical significance and robustness of the mediation effects. These findings collectively underscore the crucial role of FoMO in mediating the effects of RA on all dimensions of hedonic shopping behaviors, suggesting that individuals' religious attitudes influence their shopping behaviors through the experience of FoMO. Table 6 f 2 , R 2 , and R 2 adjusted Variables f 2 Variables R 2 adjusted RA > FoMO 0.130 FoMO 0.114 FoMO > AGS 0.431 AGS 0.300 FoMO-> RS 0.209 RS 0.171 FoMO > VS 0.279 VS 0.217 FoMO > SS 0.488 SS 0.327 Variables R 2 FoMO 0.115 AGS 0.301 RS 0.173 VS 0.218 SS 0.328 We conducted the evaluation of the structural model by examining the effect sizes (f²), explained variance (R²), and adjusted explained variance (R² adjusted) for the dependent variables in the model. These indicators provide a comprehensive assessment of the model’s predictive power and the relative importance of each predictor. The f² values represent the effect size of each independent variable on the dependent variable, providing insights into the relative contribution of the predictors to the structural model (Hair et al., 2010 ). The results indicate that RA → FoMO has an f² of 0.130, signifying a small effect size Among the relationships involving FoMO, the largest effect size is observed for FoMO → SS (f² = 0.488), followed by FoMO → AGS (f² = 0.431), FoMO → VS (f² = 0.279), and FoMO → RS (f² = 0.209). These values suggest that FoMO has the strongest impact on Socialized-Based Shopping (SS) and Adventure and Gratification-Based Shopping (AGS), highlighting the role of FoMO in shaping these specific hedonic shopping behaviors. The R² values measure the proportion of variance explained by the predictor variables for each endogenous construct. The results reveal that FoMO accounts for 11.5% of the variance in its corresponding model ( R² = 0.115 ). For the shopping behavior constructs, the variance explained ranges from moderate to substantial: AGS ( R² = 0.301 ) , RS ( R² = 0.173 ) , VS ( R² = 0.218 ) , and SS (R² = 0.328 ). These findings indicate that the model demonstrates sufficient predictive power, with FoMO serving as a significant driver of variance in shopping behaviors, particularly in SS and AGS. The R² adjusted values, which account for the number of predictors in the model and provide a more conservative measure of explained variance, closely align with the R² values. The adjusted variance explained for FoMO is R² adjusted = 0.114, reflecting minimal adjustment for overfitting. For the shopping behavior constructs, the adjusted explained variances are as follows: AGS ( R² adjusted = 0.300 ) , RS ( R² adjusted = 0.171 ) , VS ( R² adjusted = 0.217), and SS ( R² adjusted = 0.327 ). The alignment between the R² and R² adjusted values indicates the robustness of the structural model and the absence of significant model overfitting (Hair et al., 2010 ). Discussion Through the Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) which is the mediator in this study tries to explore how Religious Attitude (RA) play their role in hedonic shopping motives (Adventure and Gratification-Based Shopping (AGS), Role-Based Shopping (RS), Value-Based Shopping (VS), and Socialized-Based Shopping (SS) within Islamic consumption perspectives. The results highlight FoMO as particularly essential and reveal the previously unknown psychological processes through which Islamic religion shapes purchasing behaviors. Also, the findings are that RA can predict FoMO. In addition, one's adherence to RA in an Islamic context can be viewed as a combined respect for both personal religious beliefs and social expectations like maintaining community relations and spiritual duties (Alserhan, 2010). What's more, these parts will increase their sensitivity to the absence of social and religious activities, thus leading to the increase of FoMO. This given linkage matches other studies saying that religious individuals often report to be more psychologically involved in religious customs, sharing their emotional involvement with others who are also close in Islamic culture (Hassan & Harun, 2016 ). f² value gives another reason to pay attention to RA in the context of the explanation of the micro variables of consumption given that the FoMO depends on it. Current research has also shown that the analogy of religion (FoMO) and religiosity could go even deeper. Arifin, Mismiwati, and Anwar (2024) examined the influence of religiosity on FoMO and concluded that a higher level of religiosity is related to fewer FoMO behaviors which are consequently shown by Shopee users in Palembang. In the same line, Nasution et al. ( 2023 ) also pointed out that social media dependence and FoMO have a significant impact on student behavior and thus religiosity possibly serves as a regulator of FoMO but presumes self-regulation and prioritization of needs over wants. The resulting studies offer strong evidence that religion, especially from the Islamic perspective, plays a crucial role in curtailing the potential consequences of FoMO. By developing a higher level of self-awareness and sticking to Islamic principles, religion influences people to set long-term welfare as the main concern above keeping up to date with society trends. This internalizing of conscious consumption and its connection with the Islamic core thematic notions suggests that the participation in Islamic beliefs will address the anxiety associated with FoMO and impel an individual to make purposive and morally right decisions. The research result showed that fear of missing out (FoMO) is the driving force behind hedonic consumption reasons and it is one of the main influential factors in four constructs of hedonic consumption. The strong association between FoMO and AGS in an Islamic context, while materialism is discouraged, permissible (Halal) consumption is encouraged as a means of fulfilling psychological and social needs (Wilson & Liu, 2011 ). The f² value highlights FoMO’s substantial impact on AGS, suggesting that individuals experiencing FoMO may view consumption as a way to satisfy unmet personal desires. The strongest effect was observed for FoMO on SS, with an f² value, reflecting the significance of social dimensions in Islamic consumption behaviors. Shopping often serves as a medium for strengthening social bonds, particularly during communal events such as Eid or Ramadan shopping (Touzani & Hirschman, 2008 ). The heightened influence of FoMO in this context suggests that individuals fearing exclusion may engage more actively in socially oriented consumption. The relationship between FoMO and VS reflects the role of values in shaping consumption choices, where Islamic principles such as modesty and ethical considerations guide purchasing behaviors (Bonne et al., 2007 ). The f² value indicates that FoMO moderately influences the prioritization of value-based consumption decisions. We can conclude that the relationship between FoMO and RS highlights the influence of societal expectations in Islamic cultures, where roles as caregivers or providers are often integral to individual identity (Essoo & Dibb, 2004 ). The mediation analysis reveals that FoMO fully mediates the relationship between RA and all hedonic consumption motives. RA → FoMO → SS demonstrates that RA, through its emphasis on social cohesion, influences socially motivated consumption via FoMO. Similarly, RA → FoMO → AGS reflects how FoMO transforms the psychological influence of religious values into exploratory and gratifying consumption behaviors. These findings align with prior research suggesting that religiosity, when coupled with psychological drivers, motivates individuals to engage in consumption practices that reinforce social and spiritual identity (Jafari & Süerdem, 2012 ). Although studies specifically addressing Turkish Muslim consumers are limited, existing research offers valuable insights. Dogan ( 2019 ) highlights the role of self-construal in shaping FoMO, noting that individuals with interdependent self-construals are more prone to experiencing FoMO. This heightened susceptibility fosters increased engagement in social and consumer activities aimed at securing social acceptance and maintaining connections. Complementing this, Çopuroğlu ( 2021 ) investigates the link between social media usage, FoMO, and hedonic consumption in Gaziantep, Türkiye. According to the research results, the use of social media is extremely likely to provoke the FoMO phenomenon, consequently giving way to hedonic consumption behaviors. The concerned examinations argue that it is the predominant role of cultural factors and digital platforms in consumer behavior that are the major contributors to the matter and thereby shed light on the significance of the FoMO in delineating consumption patterns among the Turkish Muslims. According to the R² values, the model's explanation power is observed through FoMO with the value of R² at 11.5%. Out of the hedonic motivations, SS, and ASC demonstrate the highest explained variance, ensuring that even in social and adventure–driven consumption FoMO is particularly relevant. These results are similar with the study emphasizing the centrality of social interactions and permissible indulgences in Islamic consumption (Razzaque & Chaudhry, 2013 ). This study extends the understanding of RA in consumer behavior by identifying FoMO as a mediating factor that bridges religious values and consumption patterns. The results suggest that while RA discourages materialism, it can indirectly encourage permissible hedonic consumption through psychological pathways like FoMO. Marketers targeting Islamic consumers should focus on strategies that emphasize exclusivity, community engagement, and value alignment to resonate with this demographic. Limitations and Recommendations This study investigates Muslim consumers in Türkiye, based on a sample of 562 participants from regions including Marmara, Black Sea, Mediterrian, Aegean, and Central, South and Southeastern Anatolia. While the findings shed light on the connections between FoMO, religious attitude, and hedonic consumption, the focus on specific regions and cultural contexts may constrain their broader applicability. To address this gap, future research could expand its scope to include comparative studies across diverse cultural and economic settings, uncovering unique patterns and variations. The research adopts a cross-sectional methodology, which captures data at a single point in time and effectively highlights the associations between key variables. Nevertheless, the present technique departs from the capability to track changes or developments over time. Examining the data from longitudinal studies would give us a moving target and a more spacious view of the dynamics of such relationships in the course of several years affecting consumer choice. Though data collection via self-reported surveys has its own logistical advantages, it might result in issues such as social desirability bias and memory recall errors. Success with these results would further require qualitative methods such as interviews or focus groups, which would give rise to the possibility of researchers gaining more detailed understanding about the ways consumers behave and what makes them motivated. In spite of the provisional study’s focus on the issues with FoMO, religious attitudes, and their relationship to hedonic consumption, the aspect that is not explained completely refers to the importance of additional factors, namely, for example, socioeconomic conditions, digital literacy, or psychological attributes. These dimensions included in studies that are to be done in the future will provide a wider context for the understanding of consumer behavior. Specifically, a non-probability purposive sampling technique allows for the realization that the process is interpreted within practical boundaries, although it may still decrease the extent of generalization. By extending the sample size and handicrafting the use of probabilistic sampling methods, one could have a material increase in the representativeness of the findings with a wider scope of applicability. Besides, the technology and social media are the main elements through which people get deeper into the FoMO disease. Furthermore, going for subgroup analyses according to demographic categories like age, gender, and income may be conducive to the development of a targeted strategy aimed at promoting sustainable and culturally sensitive consumption. Conclusion The study addresses religious attitude affecting FoMO and hedonic consumption motives. Turkish Muslim consumers such as university students, civil servants, private sector employees, etc. constituted the primary data sources and the data were analyzed by applying tests such as reliability, validity, CFA and PLS-SEM. The study is important to determine the impact of religiosity on FMO's behaviors, which can be an indicator of hedonic consumption motives such as adventure and gratification-based shopping, value-based shopping, role-based shopping and socialization-based shopping. Subsequent to the measurement model, religious attitudes were found to be important predictors for capturing FoMO affecting hedonic consumption drivers. All these drivers were found to be predominantly influenced by FoMO, while religious attitude was found to influence FoMO to a lesser extent. These scores are robust indicators for the mediating effect of FoMO in the structural model. Therefore, as the results revealed, the model used in the study was approved. Declarations Declaration of conflicts of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest in relation to the research, authorship or publication of this work. Funding No funding was received for conducting this study. Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate This study has received ethical approval from Duzce University's ethics committee. The respondents' informed permission was acquired. Consent for publication Not applicable. References Adnan, A. A. (2011). Islamic consumer behavior (ICB): its why and what. International Journal of Business and Social Science , 2 (21). https://doi.org/10.30845/ijbss Ahmad, S., Zulkurnain, N., & Khairushalimi, F. (2016). Assessing the validity and reliability of a measurement model in Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). British Journal of Mathematics & Computer Science, 15 (3), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.9734/bjmcs/2016/25183 Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2000). Attitudes and the attitude-behavior relation: Reasoned and automatic processes. European review of social psychology , 11 (1), 1-33. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779943000116 Ajzen, I., & Madden, T. J. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed behavior attitude, intentions, and perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 22, 453−474. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(86)90045-4 Akhtar, M. R. (1996). Towards an Islamic approach for environmental balance. Islamic Economic Studies , 3(2), 57–77. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3165366 Ali, A., Li, C., Hussain, A., & Bakhtawar. (2024). Hedonic shopping motivations and obsessive–compulsive buying on the Internet. Global Business Review , 25 (1), 198-215. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150920937535 Alam, S. S., & Sayuti, N. M. (2011). Applying the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) in halal food purchasing. International journal of Commerce and Management , 21 (1), 8-20. https://doi.org/10.1108/10569211111111676 Alt, D. (2015). College students' academic motivation, media engagement, and fear of missing out. Computers in Human Behavior , 49, 111-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.057 Arifin, M., Mismiwati, & Anwar, D. (2024). The Effect of FoMO (Fear of Missing Out) and Price Discount on Impulse Buying with Religiosity as a Moderating Variable in Palembang City People Who Shop at E-Commerce Shopee . Internatıonal Journal of Multidisciplinary Research And Analysis , 7 (5), 2068-2076. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmra/v7-i05-34. Arnold, M. J., & Reynolds, K. E. (2003). Hedonic shopping motivations. Journal of Retailing, 79(2), 77–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(03)00007-1 Aruldoss, A., Rana, S., Parayitam, S., & Gurumurthy, B. (2024). Demystifying hedonic shopping motivation and consumer buying behavior during the post-global pandemic: evidence from a developing country. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice , 32 (4), 486-505. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2023.2221442 Ashraf, S., Hafeez, M. H., Yaseen, A., & Naqvi, A. (2017). Do they care what they believe? Exploring the impact of religiosity on intention to purchase luxury products. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences (PJCSS) , 11 (2), 428-447. Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/188299 Atulkar, S., & Kesari, B. (2017). Satisfaction, loyalty and repatronage intentions: Role of hedonic shopping values. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services , 39 , 23-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.06.013 Aquino, S. D., & Natividade, J. C. (2024). " Just do it": Hedonic Shopping Motivations Predicting Consumer Behavior Beyond Personality. Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana , 42 (1). https://doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/apl/a.11501 Babin, B. J., Darden, W. R., & Griffin, M. (1994). Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research , 20 (4), 644-656. https://doi.org/10.1086/209376 Bäckström, K. (2011). Shopping as leisure: an exploration of manifoldness and dynamics in consumers shopping experiences. Journal of Retailing and Consumer services , 18 (3), 200-209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2010.09.009 Bagozzi, R. P., Baumgartner, J., & Yi, Y. (1989). An investigation into the role of intentions as mediators of the attitude-behavior relationship. Journal of Economic Psychology , 10, 35–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-4870(89)90056-1 Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (2012). Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural equation models. Journal of the academy of marketing science , 40 , 8-34 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0278-x Batubara, A. (2024). The Role of FoMO and Hedonism in Shaping Consumptive Behaviors and Religious Adherence Among Sibolga's Muslim Millennials. Abrahamic Religions: Jurnal Studi Agama-Agama , 4 (2), 150-159. http://dx.doi.org/10.22373/arj.v4i2.25710 Berlyne, D. (1969). Laughter, humor and play. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (291–297). MA: Addison-Wesley Beyens, I., Frison, E., & Eggermont, S. (2016). “I don’t want to miss a thing”: Adolescents’ fear of missing out and its relationship to social needs, Facebook use, and Facebook-related stress. Computers in Human Behavior , 64, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.083 Bloch, P. H., Sherrell, D. L., & Ridgway, N. M. (1986). Consumer search: An extended framework. Journal of Consumer Research , 13 (1), 119-126. https://doi.org/10.1086/209052 Bock, D. E., Eastman, J. K., & McKay, B. (2014). The impact of economic perceptions on status consumption: An exploratory study of the moderating role of education. Journal of Consumer Marketing , 31(2), 111–117. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-10-2013-0725 Bok, S., Shum, J., & Lee, M. (2025). The fear of missing out influence on excitement-seeking and the thrill of a sale. Cogent Business & Management , 12 (1), 2451125. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2025.2451125 Bonne, K., Vermeir, I., Bergeaud-Blackler, F., & Verbeke, W. (2007). Determinants of halal meat consumption in France. British Food Journal , 109(5), 367-386. https://doi.org/10.1108/0070700710746786 Buglass, S. L., Binder, J. F., Betts, L. R., & Underwood, J. D. M. (2017). Motivators of online vulnerability: The impact of social network site use and FOMO. Computers in Human Behavior , 66, 248–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.055 Casale, S., Rugai, L., & Fioravanti, G. (2018). Exploring the role of positive metacognitions in explaining the association between the fear of missing out and social media addiction. Addictive Behaviors , 85(5), 83–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.05.020 Chang, E., Burns, L. D., & Francis, S. K. (2004). Gender differences in the dimensional structure of apparel shopping satisfaction among Korean consumers: The role of hedonic shopping value. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal , 22, 185−199. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887302X0402200404 Chang, H. J., Eckman, M., & Yan, R. N. (2011). Application of the Stimulus-Organism-Response model to the retail environment: the role of hedonic motivation in impulse buying behavior. The International review of retail, distribution and consumer research , 21 (3), 233-249. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593969.2011.578798 Cheah, J. H., Magno, F., & Cassia, F. (2024). Reviewing the SmartPLS 4 software: the latest features and enhancements. Journal of Marketing Analytics , 12 , 97-107. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-023-00266-y Cinjarevic, M., Tatic, K., & Petric, S. (2011). See it, like it, buy it! Hedonic shopping motivations and impulse buying. Economic Review: Journal of Economics and Business , 9 (1), 3-15. Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/193794 Culiberg, B. (2014). Towards an understanding of consumer recycling from an ethical perspective. International Journal of Consumer Studies , 38, 90−97. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12068 Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587 Çopuroğlu, F. (2021). Tüketicilerin sosyal medya kullanımı, fomo ve hedonik tüketim arasındaki ilişki. OPUS International Journal of Society Researches , 17 (37), 4298-4326. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.845545 Davis, L., & Jai, C. (2014). Effects of religiosity on apparel shopping orientation: An exploratory study. International Journal of Business Anthropology , 5 (2), 24-36. Davis, R. A., Lang, B., & San Diego, J. (2014). How gender affects the relationship between hedonic shopping motivation and purchase intentions? Journal of Consumer Behavior , 13, 18−30. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1450 De Run, E. C., Butt, M. M., Fam, K. S., & Jong, H. Y. (2010). Attitudes towards offensive advertising: Malaysian Muslims' views. Journal of Islamic Marketing , 1 (1), 25-36. https://doi.org/10.1108/17590831011026204 Delener, N. (1990). The effects of religious factors on perceived risk in durable goods purchase decisions. Journal of Consumer Marketing , 7 (3), 27-38. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000002580 Djupe, P. A., & Gwiasda, G. W. (2010). Evangelizing the environment: Decision process effects in political persuasion. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion , 49 (1), 73-86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5906.2009.01493.x Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research , 28 (3), 307-319. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379102800305 Dogan, V. (2019). Why Do People Experience the Fear of Missing Out (FoMO)? Exposing the Link Between the Self and the FoMO Through Self-Construal. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology , 50(4), 524–538. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022119839145 Dunham, L., Freeman, R. E., & Liedtka, J. (2006). Enhancing stakeholder practice: A particularized exploration of community. Business Ethics Quarterly , 16 (1), 23-42. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq20061611 Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Eide, T. A., Aarestad, S. H., Andreassen, C. S., Bilder, R. M., & Pallesen, S. (2018). Smartphone restriction and its effect on subjective withdrawal related scores. Frontiers in Psychology , 9 , 1444. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01444 Empacher, C., Gotz, K., & Schultz, I. (2002). Target group analysis of the Institute for Social-Ecological Research. Models of Sustainable Consumption: A New Ecopolitical Sphere of Action as a Challenge to Environmental Communication. Federal Environmental Agency, Forschung, Berlin , 87-181. Essoo, N., & Dibb, S. (2004). Religious influences on shopping behavior: An exploratory study. Journal of Marketing Management , 20 (7-8), 683-712. https://doi.org/10.1362/0267257041838728 Farrell, J. E., Hook, J. N., Zhang, H., Mosher, D., Aten, J. D., Van Tongeren, D. R., & Davis, D. E. (2018). Religious attitudes and behaviors toward individuals who hold different religious beliefs and perspectives: An exploratory qualitative study. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality , 10 (1), 63. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000143 Fioravanti, G., Casale, S., Benucci, S. B., Prostamo, A., Falone, A., Ricca, V., & Rotella, F. (2021). Fear of missing out and social networking sites use and abuse: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior , 122 , 106839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106839 Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). B elief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research . MA: Addison-Wesley. Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. F. (1981), "Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error: Algebra and Statistics", Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 382-388. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800313 Gabriel, Y., & Lang, T. (1995). The unmanageable consumer: Contemporary consumption and its fragments . London, UK: SAGE. Good, M. C., & Hyman, M. R. (2021). Direct and indirect effects of fear‐of‐missing‐out appeals on purchase likelihood. Journal of Consumer Behaviour , 20 (3), 564-576. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1885 Gökler, M. E., Aydın, R., Ünal, E., & Metintaş, S. (2016). Sosyal ortamlarda gelişmeleri kaçırma korkusu ölçeğinin Türkçe sürümünün geçerlilik ve güvenilirliğinin değerlendirilmesi. Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi, 17(1), 52-59. Groenestein, E., Willemsen, L., van Koningsbruggen, G. M., Ket, H., & Kerkhof, P. (2024). The relationship between fear of missing out, digital technology use, and psychological well-being: A scoping review of conceptual and empirical issues. Plos one , 19 (10), e0308643. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0308643 Guenther, P., Guenther, M., Ringle, C. M., Zaefarian, G., & Cartwright, S. (2023). Improving PLS-SEM use for business marketing research. Industrial Marketing Management , 111 , 127-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2023.03.010 Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. & Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective, Pearson, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European business review , 31 (1), 2-24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203 Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N. P., & Ray, S. (2021). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using R: A workbook (p. 197). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7 Hamari, J. (2015). Why do people buy virtual goods? Attitude toward virtual good purchases versus game enjoyment. International Journal of Information Management , 35(2), 299–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.01.007 Fendi, H., Taufiq, M. A., & Putri, R. E. (2020). Islamic views on hedonism among students. Proceeding IAIN Batusangkar , 1 (3), 131-136. Hassan, S. H., & Harun, H. (2016). Factors influencing fashion consciousness in hijab fashion consumption among hijabistas. Journal of Islamic Marketing , 7(4), 476-494. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-10-2014-0064 Heggestad, E. D., Scheaf, D. J., Banks, G. C., Monroe Hausfeld, M., Tonidandel, S., & Williams, E. B. (2019). Scale adaptation in organizational science research: A review and best-practice recommendations. Journal of Management, 45 (6), 2596-2627. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319850280 Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. & Sinkovics, R.R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing, New Challenges to International Marketing. (Advances in International Marketing , 20 , 277-319. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014 Henseler, J., Dijkstra, T. K., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Diamantopoulos, A., Straub, D. W., & Calantone, R. J. (2014). Common beliefs and reality about partial least squares. Organizational Research Methods , 17 (2), 182-209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114526928 Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the academy of marketing science , 43 , 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8 Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of marketing , 46 (3), 92-101. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298204600314 Hodkinson, C. (2019). ‘Fear of Missing Out’(FOMO) marketing appeals: A conceptual model. Journal of Marketing Communications , 25 (1), 65-88. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2016.1234504 Huizinga, J. (1970). Homo Ludens: A study of the play element in culture . New York: Harper and Row. Istiqomah, E. F., & Wahyudi, A. (2024). The Impact of FOMO on The Hedonism Attitude of Generation Z In Islamic Consumption Behavior. Al-Amwal: Jurnal Ekonomi dan Perbankan Syari'ah , 16 (2), 178-192. https://doi.org/10.70095/alamwal.v16i2.18680 Jafari, A., & Süerdem, A. (2012). An analysis of material consumption culture in the Muslim world. Marketing Theory , 12(1), 61-79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593111424184 James, G., Witten, D., Hastie, T., and Tibshirani, R. (eds.). (2013). An introduction to statistical learning: with applications in R . New York: Springer Jarboe, Glen R., & McDaniel, Caral D. (1987). A profile of browsers in regional shopping malls. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science , 15(1), 46–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02721953 Johnson, B. R., Jang, S. J., Larson, D. B., & De Li, S. (2001). Does adolescent religious commitment matter? A reexamination of the effects of religiosity on delinquency. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency , 38 (1), 22-44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427801038001002 Jones, M. A., Reynolds, K. E., & Arnold, M. (2006). Hedonic and utilitarian shopping value: Investigating differential effects on retail outcomes. Journal of Business Research , 59, 974−981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.03.006 Judd, M. W. (2009). Religious orientation, context effects, and socially desirable responding (Master's thesis, Marietta College). http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=marietta1254943217 Kahf, M. (2011). The demand side or consumer behavior: Islamic perspective . Available at: http://monzer.kahf.com/papers/Islamic/demand_side_or_consumer_behavior.pdf Kang, I., Cui, H., & Son, J. (2019). Conformity consumption behavior and FoMO. Sustainability , 11 (17), 4734. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11174734 Kang, I., He, X., & Shin, M. M. (2020). Chinese consumers’ herd consumption behavior related to Korean luxury cosmetics: The mediating role of fear of missing out. Frontiers in psychology , 11 , 121. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00121 Keren, D., Lockyer, J., Kelly, M., Chick, N., & Ellaway, R. H. (2020). In our own time: Medical students’ informal social studying and learning. Teaching and Learning in Medicine , 32(4), 353–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2020.1733579 Khawaja, N. G., Ibrahim, O., & Schweitzer, R. D. (2017). Mental well-being of students from refugee and migrant backgrounds: The mediating role of resilience. School Mental Health , 9(3), 284–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-017-9215-6 Kim, J., Lee, Y., & Kim, M. L. (2020). Investigating ‘Fear of Missing Out’(FOMO) as an extrinsic motive affecting sport event consumer’s behavioral intention and FOMO-driven consumption’s influence on intrinsic rewards, extrinsic rewards, and consumer satisfaction. PLoS One , 15 (12), e0243744. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0243744 King, R., & Sondhi, G. (2018). International student migration: A comparison of UK and Indian students’ motivations for studying abroad. Globalisation, Societies and Education , 16(2), 176–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2017.1405244 Kline, T.J. (2005), Psychological Testing: A Practical Approach to Design and Evaluation, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. Koc, F., Ozkan, B., Komodromos, M., Halil Efendioglu, I., & Baran, T. (2024). The effects of trust and religiosity on halal products purchase intention: indirect effect of attitude. EuroMed Journal of Business , 20 (5), 141-165. https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-01-2024-0004 Lada, S., Tanakinjal, G. H., & Amin, H. (2009). Predicting intention to choose halal products using theory of reasoned action. International journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern finance and management , 2 (1), 66-76. https://doi.org/10.1108/17538390910946276 Lamba, S. (2021). FoMO: Marketing to Millennials . USA: Notion Press. Lee, E., Moschis, G. P., & Mathur, A. (2001). A study of life events and changes in patronage preferences. Journal of Business Research , 54(10), 25–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00116-8 Lipovetsky, G. (2009). O império do efêmero: a moda e seu destino nas sociedades modernas . Editora Companhia das Letras. Littman-Ovadia, H., & Russo-Netzer, P. (2024). Exploring the lived experience and coping strategies of Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) among emerging adults. Current Psychology , 43, 32665–32685. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-06793-w Mannell, R. C., & Kleiber, D. A. (1997). A social psychology of leisure . Venture Publishing Inc.. Masnono, A. (2005). Factors influencing the Muslim consumer’s level of confidence on halal logo issued by JAKIM: An empirical study. Unpublished Master’s thesis. University Saints Malaysia . Mathras, D., Cohen, A. B., Mandel, N., & Mick, D. G. (2016). The effects of religion on consumer behavior: A conceptual framework and research agenda. Journal of Consumer Psychology , 26 (2), 298-311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2015.08.001 McDaniel, S. W., & Burnett, J. J. (1990). Consumer religiosity and retail store evaluative criteria. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science , 18 , 101-112. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02726426 McGuire, W.. (1974). Psychological motives and communication Gratification. In J. F. Blumer & Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communication: Current perspectives on gratification research (106–167). Beverly Hills: Sage. McNeill, L., & Moore, R. (2015). Sustainable fashion consumption and the fast fashion conundrum: fashionable consumers and attitudes to sustainability in clothing choice. International Journal of Consumer Studies , 39 (3), 212-222. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12169 Miller, D. (1998). A theory of shopping . Cornell University Press. Minton, E.A. and Kahle, L.R. (2016), “Religion and consumer behavior”, International Handbook of Consumer Psychology, Routledge, New York, NY-EUA Mirawati, M., Suud, F. M., & Ismail, F. B. H. (2024). Revealing the Meaning of Religiosity in Overcoming FOMO in the Digital Age Among Students. In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol. 594, p. 03001). EDP Sciences. Mokhlis, S. (2009). Relevancy and measurement of religiosity in consumer behavior research. International Business Research , 2 (3), 75-84. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v2n3p75. Moschis, G. P. (1976). Shopping orientations and consumer uses of information. Journal of Retailing , 52 (2), 61. Mukhtar, A., & Butt, M. M. (2012). Intention to choose Halal products: the role of religiosity. Journal of Islamic marketing , 3 (2), 108-120. https://doi.org/10.1108/17590831211232519 Nasution, R. S., Sugianto, S., & Dharma, B. (2023). Perilaku Fear Of Missing Out (FOMO) Dalam Konsumsi Di Kalangan Mahasiswa FEBI UINSU Ditinjau Dalam Prespektif Maslahah. EKOMBIS REVIEW: Jurnal Ilmiah Ekonomi Dan Bisnis , 11(2), 1997-2006. https://doi.org/10.37676/ekombis.v11i2.6819 Nawi, N. B. C., Mamun, A. A., Hayat, N., & Yang, Q. (2024). Attitude of Fashion consumers toward the IoT: estimating consumer hedonic and utilitarian shopping motivations. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing , 15 (1), 751-763. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-023-04733-3 Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and Research in Education , 7(2), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878509104318 Otnes, C., & McGrath, M. A. (2001). Perceptions and realities of male shopping behavior. Journal of Retailing , 77 (1), 111-137. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(00)00047-6 Özen, H., & Hus, S. (2025). Digital Triggers: The Influence of Fomo and Social Media Addiction on Impulsive Buying and Regret. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5091437 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5091437 Pandey, J., & Singh, M. (2019). Positive religious coping as a mechanism for enhancing job satisfaction and reducing work-family conflict: A moderated mediation analysis. Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion , 16 (3), 314-338. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766086.2019.1596829 Parigi, P., Santana, J. J., & Cook, K. S. (2017). Online field experiments: Studying social interactions in context. Social Psychology Quarterly , 80(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272516680842 Patel, M. (2010). Influence of religion on shopping behavior of consumers-an exploratory study. National Monthly Refereed Journal of Research in Commerce and Management , 1 (5), 68-78. Platon, O. E. (2024). Understanding The Influence of Hedonic Motivation and Fear Of Missing Out (Fomo) on Online Impulse Purchase Intentions of Discounted Products. Challenges of the Knowledge Society , 684-695. https://doi.org/10.37641/riset.v6i2.2109 Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology , 88 (5), 879. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 Prajabti, A., Kien, X. H. D., & Ridho, M. R. (2022). Hedonism in the Young Generation: The Challenge of Pancasila Moral Education. Jurnal Panjar: Pengabdian Bidang Pembelajaran , 4(2). https://doi.org/10.15294/panjar.v4i2.55040 Priantina, A., & Sapian, S. M. (2021). The Impact of Covid19 to Millennials' Consumption Behavior and Halal Preference: Does Religiosity Matter?. The Journal of Muamalat and Islamic Finance Research , 125-135. https://doi.org/10.33102/jmifr.v19i2.466 Przybylski, A. K., Murayama, K., DeHaan, C. R., & Gladwell, V. (2013). Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Computers in human behavior , 29 (4), 1841-1848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.014 Rachman, A., Efawati, Y., & Anmoel, J. T. (2024). Understanding The Role Of Fomo (Fear Of Missing Out) In Impulse Purchase For Smes. Riset: Jurnal Aplikasi Ekonomi Akuntansi Dan Bisnis , 6 (2), 117-134. https://doi.org/10.37641/riset.v6i2.2109 Rahim, H., Abdul Rasool, M. S., Rusli, N. R. L., & Ani, N. (2021). The effects of social media influencer towards factors of Muslim Millennial Generation’s attitude into halal food product purchase in Malaysia. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences , 11 (8), 1609-1621. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v11-i8/10876 Rahmadani, N., & Putri, Q. A. R. (2024). Analysis of the Influence of Religiosity Values In Reducing Consumptive Behavior in Indonesian Muslim Consumers. Amwaluna: Jurnal Ekonomi dan Keuangan Syariah , 8 (2), 253-274. https://doi.org/10.29313/amwaluna.v8i2.3785 Rakrachakarn, V., Moschis, G. P., Ong, F. S., & Shannon, R. (2015). Materialism and life satisfaction: The role of religion. Journal of religion and health , 54 , 413-426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-013-9794-y Ramirez, A., Himang, C., Selerio, E., Manalastas, R., Himang, M., Giango, W., & Ocampo, L. (2020). Exploring the hedonic and eudaimonic motivations of teachers for pursuing graduate studies. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher , 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-020-00542-w Razzaq, Z., Razzaq, A., Yousaf, S., & Hong, Z. (2018). The impact of utilitarian and hedonistic shopping values on sustainable fashion consumption: The moderating role of religiosity. Global Business Review , 19 (5), 1224-1239. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150918777947 Razzaque, M. A., & Chaudhry, S. M. (2013). Religiosity and Muslim consumers’ decision-making process in a non-Muslim society. Journal of Islamic Marketing , 4(2), 198-217. https://doi.org/10.1108/17590831311329313 Rice, G. (1999). Islamic ethics and the implications for business. Journal of Business Ethics , 18(4), 345–358. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005711414306 Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Mitchell, R., & Gudergan, S. P. (2020). Partial least squares structural equation modeling in HRM research. The international journal of human resource management , 31 (12), 1617-1643. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1416655 Rokeach, M. (1969). Part I. Value systems in religion. Review of Religious Research , 11 (1), 3-23. https://doi.org/10.2307/3510550 Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology , 52(1), 141–166. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141 Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness . New York: Guilford Publications Schau, H. J., Gilly, M. C., & Wolfinbarger, M. (2009). Consumer identity renaissance: the resurgence of identity-inspired consumption in retirement. Journal of Consumer Research , 36 (2), 255-276. https://doi.org/10.1086/597162 Schüler, J., Baumann, N., Chasiotis, A., Bender, M., & Baum, I. (2019). Implicit motives and basic psychological needs. Journal of Personality , 87(1), 37–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12431 Shaharudin, M. R., Pani, J. J., Mansor, S. W., Elias, S. J., & Sadek, D. M. (2010). Purchase intention of organic food in Kedah, Malaysia; A religious overview. International Journal of Marketing Studies , 2 (1), 96. Available at: www.ccsenet.org/ijms Sherry Jr, J. F. (1990). A sociocultural analysis of a Midwestern American flea market. Journal of Consumer Research , 17 (1), 13-30. https://doi.org/10.1086/208533 Sinan, M. (2024). FOMO in the Digital Age: Islamic Insights on Mental Well-being and Spiritual Balance. Islamonweb. Available at: https://en.islamonweb.net/fomo-in-the-digital-age-islamic-insights-on-mental-well-being-and-spiritual-balance. Stone, G. P. (1954). City shoppers and urban identification: observations on the social psychology of city life. American Journal of Sociology , 60 (1), 36-45. https://doi.org/10.1086/221483 Su, T., Tian, L., & Huebner, E. S. (2021). The reciprocal relations among prosocial behavior, satisfaction of relatedness needs at school, and subjective well-being in school: A three-wave cross-lagged study among Chinese elementary school students. Current Psychology , 40 (8), 3734-3746. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00323-9 Surzykiewicz, J., Skalski, S. B., Niesiobędzka, M., & Konaszewski, K. (2022). Exploring the mediating effects of negative and positive religious coping between resilience and mental well-being. Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience , 16 , 954382. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2022.954382 Tandon, A., Laato, S., Islam, N., & Dhir, A. (2024). Social comparisons at social networking sites: how social Media-induced fear of missing out and envy drive compulsive use. Internet Research . https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-10-2022-0770 Tarka, P., & Kukar‐Kinney, M. (2024). How different religiosity facets affect materialism, hedonistic shopping values, and compulsive buying: Toward mediation‐moderation effects. Journal of Consumer Affairs , 58 (4), 1126-1160 https://doi.org/10.1111/joca.12600 Tauber, E. M. (1972). Marketing notes and communications: Why do people shop?. Journal of Marketing , 36 (4), 46-49. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224297203600409 Touzani, M., & Hirschman, E. C. (2008). Cultural syncretism and Ramadan observance: Consumer research visits Islam. Advances in Consumer Research , 35 (1), 374-380. Available at: http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/13141/volumes/v35/NA-35 Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research , 6, 144−176. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.6.2.144 Trant, E. C., Crabtree, K. E., Ciancio, D. J., Hart, L. A., Watson, T. B., & Williams, R. L. (2015). Why some HOPE scholarship recipients retain the scholarship and others lose it. Innovative Higher Education , 40(3), 201–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-014-9306-3 Tomczyk, Ł., & Selmanagic-Lizde, E. (2018). Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) among youth in Bosnia and Herzegovina—Scale and selected mechanisms. Children and Youth Services Review , 88, 541-549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.03.048 Turan, Y. (2016). Sosyal Medyanın Kimlik Gelişimindeki Rolü. 10-12 Haziran, Ordu Uluslararası Kişilik Ve Karakter İnşasında Dinin Yeri Sempozyumu. Vieira, V., Santini, F. O., & Araujo, C. F. (2018). A meta-analytic review of hedonic and utilitarian shopping values. Journal of Consumer Marketing , 35 (4), 426-437. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-08-2016-1914] Vinzi, V. E., Chin, W. W., Henseler, J., & Wang, H. (2010). Handbook of partial least squares: Concepts. Springer Science & Business Media: Methods and Applications. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32827-8 Vrocharidou, A., & Efthymiou, I. (2012). Computer mediated communication for social and academic purposes: Profiles of use and university students’ gratifications. Computers & Education , 58(1), 609–616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.09.015 Wang, Y. (2020). The Roles of Hedonic Value and Fashion Consciousness in Female Shoes Purchase Context: Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior. International Journal of Marketing Studies , 12 (2), 1-38. Available at: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:218471761 Weaver, G. R., & Agle, B. R. (2002). Religiosity and ethical behavior in organizations: A symbolic interactionist perspective. Academy of management review , 27 (1), 77-97. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2002.5922390 Westbrook, R.A., & Black, W. (1985). A motivation-based shopper typology. Journal of Retailing , 61(2), 78–103. Wilson, J. A., & Liu, J. (2011). Shaping the halal into a brand? Journal of Islamic Marketing , 2(3), 214-225. https://doi.org/10.1108/17590831011055851 Whiting, J., & Hannam, K. (2015). Creativity, self-expression and leisure. Leisure Studies , 34 (3), 372-384. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2014.923494 Worthington, E. L., Jr., Wade, N. G., Hight, T. L., Ripley, J. S., McCullough, M. E., Berry, J. W., Schmitt, M. M., Berry, J. T., Bursley, K. H., & O'Connor, L. (2003). The Religious Commitment Inventory--10: Development, refinement, and validation of a brief scale for research and counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50 (1), 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.50.1.84 Zainol, Z., Noor, N., & Tong, A. (2024). Faithful and luxurious: Mediating halal with luxury through self-congruity. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing , 15 (4), 422-439. https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2024.2346841 Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of marketing , 52 (3), 2-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298805200302 Zhang, Z., Jiménez, F. R., & Cicala, J. E. (2020). Fear of missing out scale: A self‐concept perspective. Psychology & Marketing , 37 (11), 1619-1634. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21406 Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted 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-5980124","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":412533217,"identity":"879558e6-c8c7-4064-aadd-97d957f2238c","order_by":0,"name":"SERHAT ATA","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5423-5118","institution":"DUZCE UNİVERSITY","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"SERHAT","middleName":"","lastName":"ATA","suffix":""},{"id":412533218,"identity":"d28a9466-55af-4ba8-81cd-de5e88f7ad30","order_by":1,"name":"ŞÜKRAN KARACA","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0268-1810","institution":"SİVAS CUMHURİYET UNIVERSITY","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"ŞÜKRAN","middleName":"","lastName":"KARACA","suffix":""},{"id":412533219,"identity":"39ef67a6-87ef-439f-908c-12d63e03e55c","order_by":2,"name":"ZÜLEYHAN BARAN","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4804-5622","institution":"DUZCE UNIVERSITY","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"ZÜLEYHAN","middleName":"","lastName":"BARAN","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-02-07 10:22:36","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":true,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":true,"humanSubjectConsent":true,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5980124/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5980124/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":75897942,"identity":"c4cad077-0d73-42d2-b414-0c4de96be32b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-10 10:43:28","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":15310,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eResearch model portraying the impact of variousconstructs on sub-dimensions of Hedonic Consumption\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5980124/v1/aa8b788a4b2abec2eaf786ad.png"},{"id":75900294,"identity":"4f8765f1-fca8-424d-9f21-56863df60b0f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-10 11:07:28","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":31395,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eStructural Model\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5980124/v1/3b2180381687295cb5dfb1a7.png"},{"id":75925259,"identity":"d62facb2-2ec1-4281-ba53-33f937800786","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-10 15:11:24","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":2013689,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5980124/v1/f1d86221-1682-45cd-8e16-e7ea0a4d743b.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThe Role Of Fomo In The Impact Of Religious Attitude And Hedonic Consumption Among Turkish Muslim Consumers\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eMost people have an aspect of religiosity or belief that stems from a desire for clarity regarding life and the nature (Pandey ve Singh, 2019). Religion influences life for believers in many ways, both personally and socially, and makes their lives meaningful (Judd, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR75\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). Religiosity manifests itself in various aspects of human life (Pandey \u0026amp; Singh, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR107\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Even at the subconscious level, religion serves as a constant supply of fundamental values that influence consumer behavior and drive purchasing decisions (Minton \u0026amp; Kahle, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR97\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Zainol et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR152\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs a matter of course, people strive to be pleased and enjoy themselves and thus, it is natural for people to live to look for pleasure and this is based on the nature of people desiring to have fun, and it is crucial for attaining pleasures. A way of life always oriented towards pleasure, happiness, or avoidance of unpleasant emotions is known as hedonism (Prajabti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR112\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Hedonism is a view of life that assumes that individuals are happy when they achieve happiness and avoid painful emotions as much as possible. Hedonism, in the sense of people's understanding, has evolved into a purely material-oriented conception. This is what hedonism means to most people who consider that the main purpose of living in this world is simply pleasure and happiness, both physical and mental. In conclusion, hedonism is a particular way of understanding human life in the world (Fendi et al., 2019). From the Islamic point of view, hedonism clearly contradicts the guidelines of Islam, because Islam does not teach people to waste and do useless things. Living a luxurious, easy and materialistic life in Islam is condemned in the Qur'an as it results in selfishness and arrogance. Islam particularly discourages the use of luxury commodities for excess and vanity (Zainol et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR152\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Quran and Prophet Muhammad repeatedly warned the rich against waste, no matter how rich they were. When he saw a Companion who used water excessively while performing ablution, the Prophet intervened by saying, \"What a waste of money!\" When the answer was received, \"Is there wastage in wudu too?\u0026rdquo; they said, \"Yes, do not waste water even when making wudu in a flowing river.\" Allah Almighty says in a verse O children of Adam, take your adornment [i.e., wear your clothing] at every masjid, and eat and drink, but be not excessive. Indeed, He likes not those who commit excess. (Surat al-Araf, verse 31). In this respect, Muslims are taught by Islam to approach consumption in a balanced manner (Rahmadani et al., 2024). A person's religious beliefs are negatively associated with hedonism. However, since pleasure and material satisfaction are assumed to be the main goals in life, entertainment, and luxury are the main goals of life for those who have these kind of considerations. This is attributed to the assumption that people live only once and therefore need to enjoy life as much as possible.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA number of factors influence consumers' decisions to buy, such as increased status, peer opinions, brand familiarity, and hedonistic desires (Bock et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Hamari, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Muslim consumers operate within a distinct Islamic worldview that shapes their purchase decision. According to Adnan (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e), their consumption is not solely focused on immediate worldly benefits; rather, it also incorporates spiritual considerations, as consumption acts as a means to fulfill religious obligations to Allah. This perspective introduces a unique time horizon in their decision-making processes, where the implications of purchases are evaluated in both this life and the hereafter (Kahf, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR76\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Apart from these reasons, it can sometimes occur in different situations when making a purchase decision. When the control of physical integrity is lost, pain occurs in the body, and fear occurs in case of deterioration of psychological integrity. This fear, which is expressed as Fear of Missing Out (FOMO), is defined as the behavior of unnecessarily regretting for fear of missing out on developments (Littman et al., 2024). People with FOMO symptoms feel the need to be rewarded and experience some anxiety (Turan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR142\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). In order to eliminate this fear, they turn to consumption under the influence of hedonistic motives. FoMO, along with hedonism, leads to increased consumption of luxury goods and experiences among Muslim millennials, as they strive to stay connected with global trends and seek instant gratification. This behavior often conflicts with local religious values and traditions, creating a dilemma for young individuals trying to balance modern lifestyles with cultural and religious identities (Batubara, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) and it also indicate that the urge to engage in popular experiences or acquire trending products can result in heightened expenditure during shopping occasions, particularly among younger individuals. This inclination is further intensified by the influence of social media, where people display appealing lifestyles and products, fostering a sense of urgency and apprehension about being left out of social groups (Rahim et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR116\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; \u0026Ouml;zen \u0026amp; Hus, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR106\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Basically, understanding how religious attitude interacts with FoMO and how this, in turn, influences hedonic consumption\u0026mdash;specifically its aspects is critical for advancing consumer behavior theory. In this context;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe primary objective of this study is to analyze the role of FoMO in mediating the relationship between religious attitudes and the sub-dimensions of hedonic consumption. Specifically, it seeks to:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003col\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eExamine the direct influence of religious attitude on FoMO.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eInvestigate how FoMO affects various dimensions of hedonic consumption.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eExplore the mediating role of FoMO in the relationship between religious attitude and hedonic consumption.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003c/ol\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Theoretical Backgorund","content":"\u003cp\u003eTheoretically, values and religiosity are explained as significantly interrelated concepts. Religion contains teachings that warn people about how they should behave by highlighting the importance and insignificance of values (Rokeach, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR124\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1969\u003c/span\u003e). Today, the transformation into a consumer society all over the world is due to factors such as the increase in the quality of life, the expansion of the market and service, and the increase in dependence on objects and substances. In addition, technological developments, constantly renewed trends in the fashion world as well as the role played by the media in the dissemination of brands are factors that facilitate all these factors (Lipovetsky, 2002). Religious values serve as the basis for market strategies since these principles are believed to have a significant impact on customer behavior (Delener, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e). This is because typical consumer behavior is in a state of flux and certain characteristics can change depending on time and situation (McDaniel \u0026amp; Burnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR93\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, determining how consumers' behavior is influenced by religious factors is critical for marketing success (Patel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR109\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHedonism is commonly characterized as a condition of conduct linked to emotional elements including joy, pleasure, quick gratification, and excessive consumption (Gabriel \u0026amp; Lang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe main purpose of this behavior style stems from the individual's desire to improve other people's perception of themselves by embellishing their personal image. Therefore, these individuals are thought to have lower levels of sustainable consumption values (Empacher et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e; Mcneill \u0026amp; Moore, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR95\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). In the literature, hedonistic shopping values are discussed using a variety of terminology, including pleasure, entertainment, and leisure shopping (Atulkar \u0026amp; Kesari, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Vieira et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR143\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Aruldoss et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Nawi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR103\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, a variety of hedonic shopping motivations have been identified, including adventure (excitement), pleasure (fulfillment), role (shopping for someone else), value (the joy of uncovering discounts and the value of the price paid), social (means of getting together), and opinion (sharing information emerging market trends) (Arnold \u0026amp; Reynolds, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe most significant cultural factor that significantly affects people's attitudes, values, and beliefs in a society at both the individual and collective levels is religion (Mokhlis, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR99\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). A person's dedication to upholding religion's principles and demonstrating this dedication by their disposition and behavior is known as religiosity (Johnson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e). Similar to how major texts of religion highlight the value of preserving a healthy relationship with the environment, Islamic teachings also stress the need of preserving environmental balance and making a commitment to resource sustainability (Akhtar, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1996\u003c/span\u003e; Djupe \u0026amp; Gwiasda, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). The degree to which an individual upholds and applies religious values, beliefs, and practices in their daily life is known as religiosity, and it plays a significant role in determining the purchase intentions of Muslim consumers (Worthington et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR151\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; Shaharudin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR129\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Ashraf et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Ko\u0026ccedil; et al., 2024). Because it is linked to consumer behavior characteristics including lifestyle and buying habits, religiosity is crucial for research on consumer behavior (Davis \u0026amp; Jai, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). The theory of planned behavior is a major influence on people's shopping thoughts. According to the widely recognized social psychology theory of planned behavior, behavior directly precedes intention (Bagozzi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1989\u003c/span\u003e). According to the theory of planned behaviour, intentions are influenced by beliefs and related attitudes, and intentions then direct actual behaviour. Three dimensions are specifically taken into consideration: attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. Eagly and Chaiken (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e) describe attitude as the psychological sensation and assessment, whether favorable or unfavorable, that arises when a person does specific actions. When consumers are making decisions, their attitude toward an action is a clear indication of their behavioral intention (Fishbein \u0026amp; Ajzen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1975\u003c/span\u003e). This relationship between attitude and purchase intention is positively evaluated by different products and services. Attitudes also positively affect recycling intentions (Culiberg, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). According to Ajzen (1991), subjective norms are the level of social pressure an individual experiences regarding a behavior. Consumers are under social pressure to act in particular ways in order to be accepted in the social settings they find themselves in. Examining the connection between people's behavioral intents and subjective standards reveals that behavioral intention is positively impacted by subjective norms (Taylor \u0026amp; Todd, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR139\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e). The term \"perceived behavioral control\" describes how someone perceives the potential challenges they might face when engaging in a particular behavior. Individuals may not have control over certain external and unexpected circumstances, such as time, luck, money, etc. Hence, evidences advocate that people with high self-efficacy in controlling their actions are likely to be high on self motivation (Ajzen, 1991). More specifically, belief about having more resources available such as time, money, or skills increases people's perceived control and behavioral intentions (Wang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR146\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Empirical evidence reveals a correlation between hedonic shopping value and behavioral intention (Chang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e; Jones et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Davis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Meanwhile, the question of how religious values can influence the global consumption patterns has also been a valuable area of study. Selectivity associated with a particular religion can be explained using the theory of planned behavior and it helps explain how certain purchasing behaviors are acquired (Ajzen \u0026amp; Fishbein, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e). In particular, it has been argued that religious beliefs can rather influence an individual's attitude towards hedonic consumption because potential consumers with stronger FOMO tendencies, are less strict to the tenets of their faith. Because of the ethical and moral basis of the theories, religion strong believers may tend to restrain their hedonic desire more than others (Tarka \u0026amp; Kinney, 2024). Empirical studies reveal that hedonic shopping value is related to behavioral intention According to other studies that applied the theory of planned behavior, hedonic shopping decisions are significantly influenced by behavioral control and subjective norm (Alam \u0026amp; Sayuti, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). In particular, subjective norms were found to have a relatively higher influence (Lada et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR85\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). In these studies it is suggested that the shopping experience provides consumers with a combination of utilitarian and hedonic shopping value (Baboinet al., 1994).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eThe effect of religious attitude on FoMO\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ePsychological and social inclinations are significantly shaped by religious attitude, which include people's beliefs, values, and actions derived from their religional attitude (McDaniel \u0026amp; Burnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR93\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e; Farrel et al., 2017). These same attitudes often advocate for appreciation, gratitude, and even spiritual happiness as a buffer against the materialistic and comparison oriented pressures that are predominant in the world today (Essoo \u0026amp; Dibb, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e; Rakrachakarn et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR118\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Istiqomah \u0026amp; Wahyudi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Another rise in the new age technology influenced phenomena is the Fear of Missing Out or \u0026ldquo;FoMO\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash; a psychological concept that gained popularity due to the absence of digital technology paired with the existence of social media (Przybylski et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR114\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Fioravanti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). FoMO, which is frequently aggravated by the use of social media, is the worry of not being part of an activity that other people are already busy with (Mediasite; Tieto innovations, 2012). This kind of link grows beside the developing of the platforms as people notice they are not in the circle. FoMO becomes widespread when people feel more and more excluded. The possibility of FoMo as a feeling deepens exclusion in people. This fear is the result of the human urge to be socially close and included, which leads to pondering of an individual\u0026rsquo;s life and decisions among the context of everything else (Knowthenature, 2014). It is related to high levels of anxiety, discontent, and obsessive behaviors such as online platform checking to an extreme degree (Beyens et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Tandon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR135\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBelief principles such as self-control, awareness, and prioritizing internal rewards over external rewards seem to be the ones causing the lessening of the fear of missing out in those who are deeply religious. The relation of religion to the fear of missing out is proven by empirical investigations that usually discuss how religious activities are a counterforce to the negative consequences of FOMO. Research implies that those with a solid belief system are more likely to find happiness and moral direction, which, in turn, may help them get through their FoMO-linked anxieties (Surzkiewicz, 2022; Mirawati et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR98\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Religious practices like prayer and \u0026micro;editation have been found to alleviate stress and enhance \u0026micro;ental well-being, thereby providing a clearer focus on what is dee\u0026micro;ed essential in life. Further\u0026micro;ore, religious teachings e\u0026micro;phasizing qana'ah (content\u0026micro;ent) and tawakkul (trust in Allah) can encourage adherents to prioritize spiritual fulfill\u0026micro;ent over \u0026micro;aterial pursuits, thereby reducing susceptibility to FoMO (Sinan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR131\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) and it refers that stronger social pressures and an emphasis on community participation may heighten feelings of FoMO; however, the intrinsic value attributed to familial and communal bonds can serve as a protective factor against its adverse effects (Surzkiewicz, 2022). Based on literature, we developed the following hypothesis:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH1: Religious attitude have an effect on FoMO.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eThe FoMO on adventure and gratification-based shopping\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdventure is defined as intellectual stimulation that in terms of arousal, excitement, the feeling of being in another world, and entering a different sensory universe (Arnold \u0026amp; Reynolds, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; King and Sondhi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR82\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). It is based on arousal (Berlyne, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1969\u003c/span\u003e; McGuire \u003cspan citationid=\"CR94\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1974\u003c/span\u003e) and expression theories (Huizinga, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1970\u003c/span\u003e; Sherry, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR130\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e). These extrinsic theories highlight the necessity of play for human creatures to express themselves along with getting stimulation. Adventurous-based shopping also refers to individuals who frequently seek sensory stimulation. The fact that sensory stimulation elicits a personal shopping motive (Tauber, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR137\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1972\u003c/span\u003e; Westbrook \u0026amp; Black, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR148\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1985\u003c/span\u003e; Babin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1994\u003c/span\u003e) is a factor that can create hedonic shopping value for the adventurous aspects of shopping and a behavioral pattern suitable for individuals who enjoy exploring (Jarboe \u0026amp; McDaniel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1987\u003c/span\u003e). It may be shaped by the phenomenon of FoMO, as people are motivated by the excitement of uncovering distinctive or intriguing products and there is also a positive correlation between impulsive buying behaviors and the fear of missing out (FoMO), indicating that individuals who experience high levels of FoMO may be more likely to participate in adventure shopping as a means to mitigate their anxiety about missing new trends or products (Činjarević et al., 2011; Ali et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). On the other hand, this can motivate people to explore and enjoy the pleasures of happy coincidence at discovering the wonderful opportunities that shopping sometimes offers. This quest for adventure was designed to satisfy the individual's hedonic requirement for stimulation, deriving a sense of achievement by discovering something hidden (Platon, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR110\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). These FoMO instances raise this adventure mindset, thereby exciting the consumer to add common impulsivity to capture what they purport to be short-lived possibilities. The dread of losing out on an exciting deal or a special product often may cause a consumer to make a spontaneous purchase (Rachman, 2024).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGratification-based shopping is defined as a method used to minimize stress, alleviate negative moods, and make oneself happy through autonomy (Vrocharidou \u0026amp; Efthymiou \u003cspan citationid=\"CR145\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). According to the self-determination theory, as long as an activity is autonomous, it suggests that it can offer itself as a source of inspiration to the individual to some extent (Ryan \u0026amp; Deci, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR126\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). This means that individuals who feel autonomous in their shopping decisions due to these impulses can reach an invigorating and satisfying feeling during shopping (Niemiec \u0026amp; Ryan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR104\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, the expectation of future enjoyment further stimulates impulsive shopping behavior (Chang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). In various studies, it was revealed that both participants went shopping to reduce stress or forget their problems and people do shopping was to calm down, relax, improve negative mood or just to be happy (Arnold \u0026amp; Reynolds, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). Gratification-based shopping is based on stress reduction theories in human motivation. Individuals who shop in this style have stated that they are mobilized, and motivated and their tension is reduced by shopping. It is suggested that individuals shop to maintain internal balance and find a way out (McGuire, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR94\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1974\u003c/span\u003e). It has been recognized as a therapeutic activity for individuals who seek satisfaction and escape from reality and has been defined as a form of treatment for depressed individuals (Babin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1994\u003c/span\u003e). The satisfying benefit of shopping is explained as the individual being in the shopping process until he/she feels good (Tauber, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR137\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1972\u003c/span\u003e). According to Lee et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR87\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e), this is an accepted emotion-oriented coping strategy for handling stressful situations or solving problems. With its emphasis on indulgence and emotional benefits, gratification- baseds hopping offers a way for people to lessen the worry that comes with FoMO. Customers can counteract emotions of exclusion or deprivation by making purchases or engaging in shopping as a leisure activity, which can lead to a sense of accomplishment and enjoyment (Hodkinson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). As it is driven by the instant pleasure obtained from acquiring products, FoMO intensifies this drive by instilling a sense of urgency; consumers may feel pressured to make swift purchases to prevent missing advantageous offers or items that guarantee immediate gratification (Good \u0026amp; Hyman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Platon, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR110\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBased on literature, we developed the following hypothesis:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH2: FoMO has an effect on adventure and gratification-based shopping.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eThe effect of FoMO on role-based shopping\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRole-based shopping is an emotional state that represents the enjoyment people derive from shopping while playing various roles. It is described as the pleasure people get from purchasing for other people, how this activity affects their feelings and moods, and the emotional state that expresses the delight and excitement they experience on the inside. According to the majority of survey participants in a study, shopping for friends and family was very important to them and made them feel good. They also discussed the joy they had from doing so. Furthermore, some individuals reported feeling really happy when they found the ideal present for their loved ones (Arnold \u0026amp; Reynolds, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). Identification theories of human motivation (ego development in self-concepts through the attachment of fulfilling roles and the \"mobilization\" of role obligations) explain the role-based shopping drive (McGuire, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR94\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1974\u003c/span\u003e). This motive has a beneficial impact on people who view shopping as a social role, which is connected to the personal \"role-playing\" motive (Tauber, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR137\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1972\u003c/span\u003e). According to Westbrook and Black (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR148\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1985\u003c/span\u003e), it also aligns with role assumption, which characterizes the desire to fulfill culturally prescribed responsibilities associated with buying. Various research findings indicate that some consumers perceive role-based shopping as a chore, find enjoyment in the activity, and get hedonic value in it (Babin et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1994\u003c/span\u003e). According to Miller (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR96\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e) and Otnes and McGrath (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR105\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e), several research have also examined how purchasing is a way for some consumers, particularly women, to communicate their love. It can be revealed that self-determination theory (SDT) states that people are dependent on the need for relatedness and competence (Khawaja et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR80\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Su et al. 2019) through its psychological bases of FOMO in role shopping (Kim et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR81\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). The acceptance of values of those an individual feels connected with or wants to feel connected to in a belonging context (Niemiec and Ryan \u003cspan citationid=\"CR104\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). Motivated by the things they love, people can shop any time, and life is full of adventures. Research from self-determination theory shows that role-based shopping behavior can be effective in making people happy (Khawaja et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR80\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Consumers are motivated to purchase as a means of expressing their social identities when they worry about losing out on social interactions or chances to connect. The drive to buy things that will improve their standing or acceptance in their social circles is heightened by this need for social feedback, especially in digital settings. Because, the pressure to buy presents or fashionable products often rises as people try to keep in touch and relevant in their social networks (Acquino \u0026amp; Natividade, 2024). As such, we propose the following hypothesis:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH3: FoMO has an effect on role-based shopping.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eThe effect of FoMO on value-based shopping\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to the sixteenth century, early philosophers believed that value and price were identical, and value has been translated as price. Value is simply considered as \"what I get for what I give\" (Zeithaml, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR153\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1988\u003c/span\u003e). Value refers to the variables that directly result from the consumer's perception of quality, sacrifice, and attributes of a product, which bring together important details that result in product choice (Dodds et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1991\u003c/span\u003e). Another definition explains the value in an overview way, taking into account all relevant evaluation criteria. Here, value is \"all the factors, both qualitative and quantitative, subjective and objective, that make up an entire shopping experience\" (Zeithaml \u003cspan citationid=\"CR153\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1988\u003c/span\u003e). According to these definitions, value-based shopping is understood as the whole shopping experience (Babin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1994\u003c/span\u003e). All of the benefits offered by consumption experiences cannot be well explained by a value-based shopping strategy that concentrates on a consumption good, its cost, or the functional utility it offers (Hirschman \u0026amp; Holbrook, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1982\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, while establishing a measure of value-based shopping, factors other than functional utility should be included (Bloch et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1986\u003c/span\u003e). Value-based shopping refers to the optimal use of resources such as promotions, discounts, and freebies. In addition to the economic benefits of value-based shopping, the importance of increased self-esteem due to the prestige of having the privilege of enjoying them is emphasized (Trant et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR140\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). It is associated with the most generalized reward-oriented incentive system, which has existed universally for a long time. It's extrinsically motivating and hedonic through greater sensory involvement and perceptions of bargains for excitement (Ryan and Deci, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR126\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Value-based shopping means shopping based on value, which involves searching for discounts and bargaining. The results of the study showed those who have this behavior, finding value hunting for deals, discounts, and low prices will have a feeling as if \"winning\" shopping or \"conquering\" a challenge (Arnold \u0026amp; Reynolds, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). Value-based shopping is backed by theories (McGuire (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR94\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1974\u003c/span\u003e)) that depict the individual as seeking to grow his potential of being a successful competitor, craving admiration, and, consequently, self-esteem. Hedonic benefits are gathered when deals become visible, which raises excitement and sensory involvement (Babin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1994\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, the sense of urgency around marketing campaigns and temporary discounts is increased by FoMO (Bok et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Shoppers are more inclined to engage in value-based buying in order to avoid missing out on a good offer when retailers use terms like \"Only today!\" or \"Limited stock available!\" to cause FoMO (Lamba, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). The hypothesis we have formed in this direction is as follows;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH4: FoMO has an effect on value-based shopping.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eThe effect of FoMO on social-based shopping\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSocial-based shopping is defined as an independent, selective, self-directed and organized behavioral state that involves the individual communicating (Keren et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR79\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). This motivation is driven by a persistent urge to be with others (Parigi et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR108\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Self-determination theory emphasizes that this state is intrinsically motivated to engage in exciting, optimally challenging, self-fulfilling activities and supports development (Ryan and Deci \u003cspan citationid=\"CR125\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e). According to Schuler et al. (2019), sociability is a significant stimulant that promotes and facilitates growth, partly by satisfying psychological requirements for competence, autonomy, and the process of relationships. This natural and active tendency to form and internalize social relationships is recognized as a fundamental basis for healthy development, with tendencies towards the differentiation and integration of the individual structure into a coherent, healthy sense of self (Ryan and Deci \u003cspan citationid=\"CR126\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Social-based shopping refers to enjoying socializing and connecting with others while performing the activity. According to a study's findings, it appears naturally known that shopping is an active social activity. Several participants stated that they liked to interact with people when shopping and that it allowed them to form bonds with other consumers (Arnold \u0026amp; Reynolds, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). The foundation of social-based shopping is a group of commitment theories of human motivation (McGuire, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR94\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1974\u003c/span\u003e) that all center on people's adaptive, altruistic, and interpersonal need for love and approval in relationships. In the first study on the social components of shopping motivation, a \"personalizing\" shopper was described as one who looks for personal interactions when shopping (Stone, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR132\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1954\u003c/span\u003e). A second study identified this behavior as that of a \"psycho-socializing\" consumer (Moschis, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR100\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1976\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, it indicated that consumers intend to connect with reference groups, communicate with people who share their interests, and engage in social interaction outside the house (Tauber, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR137\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1972\u003c/span\u003e). Higher levels of anxiety, discontent, and compulsive behaviors, like obsessively monitoring online platforms, are associated with the human need for belonging and social connection, which makes people think about their decisions and experiences in light of social activities taking place elsewhere (Beyens et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Tandon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR135\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Groenestein, 2024). FOMO is the widespread fear that others are enjoying rewarding experiences that one is missing, and it is frequently made worse by social media platforms. As people become more conscious of the events and activities, they are not able to participate in, their sense of exclusion is increased (Alt, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Zhang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR154\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). The hypothesis we formulated in line with the above literature is as follows:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH5: FoMO has an effect on social-based shopping.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eThe mediating role of FoMO in the effect of religious attitude on hedonic consumption\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eHedonistic consumption associate with the usage of items by people to promote their identities to others (Whiting \u0026amp; Hannam, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR150\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) and is refers to self-expression (Schau et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR127\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). Consumers' intangible and sensory feelings are associated with hedonism (Hirschman \u0026amp; Holbrook, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1982\u003c/span\u003e). In the post-consumption appraisal process, hedonism plays a major role (Babin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1994\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, hedonism is favorably connected to emotions of excitement and high levels of satisfaction (Dunham et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). As a result, hedonism is a lifelong memory and a crucial component of experiential consumption (Mannell \u0026amp; Kleiber, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR90\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e). Customers are influenced to make sustainable purchases by their fundamental religious convictions (Djupe \u0026amp; Gwiasda, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Such a high degree of conspicuous consumption is forbidden in Islam since it is deemed extravagant (Rice, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR122\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e). Hedonic consumers, however, are more inclined to consume based on symbolic values, i.e. what other people think of them due to lifestyle and social status (Mcneill \u0026amp; Moore, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR95\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). This suggests that higher levels of religiosity will reduce the negative impact of hedonistic shopping values on consumption (Razzac et al., 2018) but will have a mediating effect on shopping values due to the influence of FoMO (Batubara, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Further, fear of missing out (FoMO), as a perpetual fear of missing out on something good (Casale et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) and wanting to remain connected to what others are experiencing, is articulated as a mood that compels individuals to engage in hedonic buying (Buglass et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). FoMO is a consumer behavior social phenomenon which isolates people from current experiences (Kang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR77\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). FOMO is a key influencer in the consumption process as far as leading purchases are concerned (Hodkinson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). According to Eide et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), those who experience strong FOMO symptoms are likely to remain conscious of the activities around them and try to satisfy their craving to be connected. One's need for something new may be manifested through an intense desire to be affirmed by others. Hedonic value of the brand and high loyalty to the brand as a driver for customers' interest in the brand explains FoMO (Kang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR78\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). In addition, self-esteem and esteem needs are more relevant to high FooM consumers (Hodkinson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). In the context of responding to a sense of crisis, fear of missing out (FoMO) has recently become a widely recognized phenomenon (Good \u0026amp; Hyman, 2020). As one of the determinants of consumer behavior, FoMo can be a personal trait, but it can also be caused by social factors such as family members, friends, or economic situation (Priantina \u0026amp; Sapian, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR113\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Religious values shape individuals to avoid what religious guidance does not want (Masnono, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR91\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e), while on the other hand there are different levels of FoMO as it is perceived as personal (de Run et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, it is one of the relatively important influencing factors in determining consumption decisions based on FoMO (Mukhtar and Butt, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR101\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Weaver and Agle, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR147\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). Following the above arguments, we hypothesized that:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH6: FoMO has a mediating role in the effect of religious attitude on hedonic consumption.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eH6a: FoMO has a mediating role in the effect of religious attitude on adventure and gratification-based shopping\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eH6b: FoMO hs a mediating role in the effect of religious attitude on role-based shopping\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eH6c: FoMO has a mediating role in the effect of religious attitude on value-based shopping\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eH6d: FoMO has a mediating role in the effect of religious attitude on socialized-based shopping.\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e "},{"header":"Research Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eMeasurement\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe multiple-item scale utilized in this study were modified from previous research to assess the constructs. A questionnaire was designed to obtain responses from participants on a five-point Likert-type scale, ranging from \u0026ldquo;strongly disagree\u0026rdquo; to \u0026ldquo;strongly agree\u0026rdquo; (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). It had two sections, one measuring the constructs and second measuring the demographics. There are many underlying drivers for why researchers may be willing, or even require, to adapt existing scales for their studies. For instance, researchers may shorten scales in their research to generate higher response rates and cope with respondent fatigue (Heggestad et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). The \u003cem\u003e''Religious attitude scale\u003c/em\u003e'', representing the items of religious belief and the degree of religious belief, was originally adapted from Allport \u0026amp; Ross (1967). Subsequent criteria were adapted from Onay (2002), Arslan (2003), Ok (2011), and G\u0026uuml;m\u0026uuml;ş (2022), and the outline of the religious values variable, which includes items such as \"My religious belief determines my approach in life.\", \"Although I am a religious person, I do not want the rules of religion to affect my daily work.\", was drawn up and the scale consists of twenty-five items with one structure. Although it is used in the literature as a dimensional scale, this scale also can be used as a single-factor religious attitude scale. In line with our research model, general religious attitude scores were used instead of subscale scores. The hedonic consumption scale was adapted from Arnold and Reynold (2003) and Ceylan (2007) and the scale was constructed by almost preserving the original six-factor structure consisting of adventure, gratification, role, value, and social-based shopping motivations except idea-based shopping regarding exploratory qualitative and quantitative studies. Ten items from FoMO scale were adopted for this study; scale of FoMO was originated from Tomczyk and Selmanagic-Lizde (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR141\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) and adopted from G\u0026ouml;kler et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). The adaptation of the scale in this way preserved the validity and reliability specifications of the original scale while ensuring compliance with the targeted sample size.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSampling and Data Collection\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study was conducted in 7 regions of Turkiye (Marmara, Aegean, Mediterranean, Black Sea, Eastern Anatolia, and Southeastern Anatolia). The sample of people of Islamic faith in these 7 regions provides an ideal setting to understand the consumers' situation as it encompasses the whole country. Data was collected through structured questionnaires administered to Muslim consumers and focused descriptively on regional, demographic, occupational, and educational variables (Table I). A total of 594 participants stating their religion as Islam completed the online questionnaire. With more than 80% of respondents, the data offers an accurate portrayal of how Muslim customers perceive. A pilot research study was carried out following the completion of 100 questionnaires in total. The data gathering procedure proceeded since the analysis's findings were consistent with predictions. A total of 594 individuals provided data for the study. Nevertheless, 562 valid questionnaires were included for the analysis after 32 questionnaires that provided the same response to every statement and 32 questionnaires that failed to respond to more than 10% of the survey questions were removed.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eData Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlong with demographic statistics, second-order confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation modeling (SEM) approaches which was favored by many researchers since it can be used when the data are not normally distributed and simultaneously estimates the measurement mode and hypothesised model (Kline, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e; Henseler et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e) were included in the data analysis procedure. The required sample size for SEM is 300 and the acceptable level of communality is 0.45 (Hair et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Considering all the requirements of the analysis technique, the total sample size in this study was 562 valid responses. For this, second-order CFA was conducted using SmartPLS version 4.1.0.9 to validate theoretical model and, mark a significant advancement in development with its entirely redesigned graphical user interface, faster data estimation processing speed, and new model assessment features such as a necessary condition analysis, endogeneity assessment, and a cross-validated predictive ability test (Ringle et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR123\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Cheah; 2024), while other analyses were conducted by using SPSS version 23. Compared to other methods when the sample size is small, it is convergent particular in marketing studies (Henseler et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Guenter et al., 2023).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eDemographic and Descriptive Results\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e below, participants in this study are mostly female (57.8%) and 42.2% were male (136). The participants in this study are overwhelmingly between the ages of 18 and 35 (73%). The participant\u0026rsquo;s majority have an undergraduate degree with 190 participants (33.8%).\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\u003eDemographic Statistics (n:562)\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=\"char\" char=\".\" 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\u003eCharacteristics\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003en\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\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\u003eRegion\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 \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.Black Sea\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e131\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.Marmara\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e162\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.Central Anatolia\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e80\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.Aegean\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e47\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.Mediterranean\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.Eastern-Southeastern Anatolia\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e84\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eGender\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 \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ea. Female\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e325\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e57.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eb. Male\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e237\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e42.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eAge\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 \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ea. 18\u0026ndash;25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e228\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eb. 26\u0026ndash;35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e183\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e32.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ec. 36\u0026ndash;45\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e87\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ed. 46\u0026ndash;55\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ee. \u0026gt;55\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eEducation\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 \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ea. Primary School\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eb. High School\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e163\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ec. Associate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e97\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ed. Undergraduate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e190\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ee. Postgraduate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e80\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eOccupation\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 \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ea. Civil Servant\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e155\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eb. Private Employees\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e145\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ec. College Student\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e164\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ed. Housewife\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ee. Unemployed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ef. Other\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e155\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.5\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\u003eConsidering the professional background of the participants, university students are predominant (29.1%). Furthermore, respondents living in the Marmara and Black Sea regions of T\u0026uuml;rkiye dominantly characterized the results of the survey questionnaire (62.1%).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eCommon Method Bias\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eBased on self-reported data collected with a single survey instrument, it was critical in our study to address and minimize the risk of Common Method Bias (CMB), which refers to variance that is attributable to the measurement method rather than the constructs measured and potentially threatens the validity of research findings (Podsakoff et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR111\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). We implemented several procedural solutions to reduce the likelihood of CMB during the data collection process. First, we designed the survey to ensure participants' anonymity and confidentiality, thus aiming to reduce social desirability bias and participant anxiety. We explicitly informed participants that their responses would be used for academic purposes only and would remain anonymous. Second, we aimed to encourage honest and unbiased responses by emphasizing in the survey instructions that there were no \u0026ldquo;right\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;wrong\u0026rdquo; answers.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo further reduce CMB, we structured the questionnaire to reduce item ambiguity. We randomized order of question to minimize the potential influence of response patterns by designing construct-specific items to avoid overlapping. In addition, we used a mix of positive and negative statements to reduce response acceptance and potential halo effects. The structural design of the questionnaire was deliberately developed to minimize respondent fatigue and monotony, especially in questions related to critical dependent and independent variables. Our analytical approach to addressing CMB was equally robust. We performed a comprehensive multicollinearity test using SmartPLS, systematically verifying that all Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) values remained below the critical threshold of 5, confirming the absence of multicollinearity concerns (James et al.,2013). Besides procedural approaches, we used statistical techniques to detect and control for potential Common Method Variance (CMV) in the data. To assess whether a single factor explained the majority of the variance, we performed Harman's single factor test as suggested in the literature. The results showed that no single factor explained a dominant proportion of the variance, suggesting that CMV is not a major concern. We also used the marker variable technique, which involves including a theoretically uncorrelated variable in the analysis to estimate CMV. This approach confirmed that the effect of CMV on the constructs of the study was negligible. Finally, we conducted a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and a comparison of fit indices between the single-factor and multifactor models further supported the conclusion that CMV did not significantly distort the results.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eMeasurement Model Evaluation\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Measurement Model is defined by the characteristics of the constructs that are assessed to a large extend such as reliability and validity (Vinzi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR144\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Ahmad et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). In order to maintain validity of the measurement model, we began to process by eliminating items with factor loadings less than 0.4. Subsequently, we tested the items against Fornell and Larcker (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1981\u003c/span\u003e) criteria after we found them to be acceptable. We checked the overlapping variables by examining the cross-loadings chart. We also reviewed the VIF values for multicollinearity and checked values of 5 and above. The variables eliminated at these stages are as follows: we eliminated ID3, ID4, ID6, MG4, MK1-7, and SD1-4 from the religious attitude scale; FoMO2, and FoMO8-10 from the FoMO scale; MDA3, ZDA2 by combining the adventure-gratification-based scale from the sub-dimensions of the hedonic consumption scale (\u0026Ccedil;opuroğlu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); and the idea-based shopping sub-dimension completely (FDA1-3) unlike the original hedonic consumption scale (Arnold \u0026amp; Reynolds, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). We conducted the analyses with 2 main variables and four sub-dimensions of 1 main variable and 30 items and presented the results in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe evaluated using both convergent validity and discriminant validity to ensure the reliability and validity of the constructs. Convergent validity was assessed through composite reliability (CR), factor loadings, and average variance extracted (AVE). The results demonstrated that all factor loadings exceeded the recommended threshold of 0.7, indicating that the individual items were strongly correlated with their respective constructs (Hair et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). The CR values for all constructs were above the minimum threshold of 0.7, which confirms the internal consistency of the scales (Fornell \u0026amp; Larcker, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1981\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, the AVE values for each construct surpassed the recommended criterion of 0.5, indicating strong convergent validity of the measurement model (Bagozzi \u0026amp; Yi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). To assess reliability, both CR and Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s Alpha (CA) values were examined. For all constructs, the CR and CA values were within the acceptable range of 0.7 to 0.95, demonstrating a high level of internal consistency without redundancy (Hair et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Hair et al., 2021).\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 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResult of Measurement Model\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\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 \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConstrusts\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eItem\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eλ\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eα\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAVE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eID1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.769\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eID2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.830\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eID5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.670\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eID7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.888\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReligious Attitude (RA)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eID8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.871\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.914\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.921\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.527\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMG1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.689\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMG2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.749\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMG3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.790\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMG5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.520\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMG6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.792\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFear of Missing Out (FoMO)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFoMO1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.558\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFoMO3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.522\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFoMO4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.510\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.869\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.889\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.510\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFoMO5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.862\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFoMO6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.915\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFoMO7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.796\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdventure and\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGratification-based\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eShopping (AGS)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMDA1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.892\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMDA2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.793\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMDA3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.878\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.928\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.929\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.720\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eZDA1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.804\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eZDA3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.870\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRole-based Shopping (RS)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRDA1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.837\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRDA2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.747\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.903\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.921\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.759\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRDA3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.885\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eValue-based Shopping (VS)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDDA1\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDDA2\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDDA3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.772\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.880\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.800\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.857\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.862\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.671\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocialized-based Shopping (SS)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSDA1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.768\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSDA2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.827\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.859\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.862\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.671\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSDA3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.860\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"7\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCR: Composite reliability; AVE: Average Variance Extracted; α:Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha; λ: Factor Loadings\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\u003eDiscriminant validity was established using the Fornell-Larcker criterion and the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio. The square root of the AVE for each construct was greater than the correlation coefficients between constructs, satisfying the Fornell-Larcker criterion (Fornell \u0026amp; Larcker, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1981\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, all HTMT values were below the recommended threshold of 0.85, confirming the distinctiveness of the constructs (Henseler et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, the square root of the AVE values on the diagonals (in bold numbers) is larger than the corresponding row and column values, confirming that the measurements are different from one another. These findings demonstrate that the measurement model possesses robust reliability and validity, providing a solid foundation for the subsequent structural model analysis.\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 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDiscriminant Validity of the Constructs\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\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 \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"7\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFornell-Larcker criterion\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConstructs\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eValue-based Shopping\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReligious Attitude\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFear of Missing Out\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdventure and\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGratification-based Shopping\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRole-based Shopping\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocialized-based Shopping\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eValue-based Shopping\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.819\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eReligious Attitude\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.606\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.726\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFear of Missing Out\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.467\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.339\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.714\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eAdventure and Gratification-based Shopping\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.574\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.405\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.549\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.849\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eRole-based Shopping\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.708\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.545\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.416\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.693\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.871\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSocialized-based Shopping\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.686\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.501\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.573\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.590\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.665\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.820\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"7\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eHTMT Criteria\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eConstructs\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eValue-based Shopping\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eReligious Attitudes\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFear of Missing Out\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eAdventure and\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eGratification-based Shopping\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eRole-based Shopping\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSocialized-based Shopping\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eValue-based Shopping\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 \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eReligious Attitude\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.611\u003c/p\u003e \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 \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFear of Missing Out\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.441\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.342\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eAdventure and\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eGratification-based Shopping\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.575\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.417\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.540\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eRole-based Shopping\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.718\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.556\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.380\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.695\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSocialized-based Shopping\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.688\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.510\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.565\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.591\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.671\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStructural model assessments\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo evaluate the structural model, we conducted a series of analyses to ensure its reliability, validity, and explanatory power. We initially assessed multicollinearity among the first-order constructs and the second-order constructs using the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) in SmartPLS. We applied threshold of 5, as higher values indicate severe multicollinearity that could compromise the model\u0026rsquo;s accuracy (Hair et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). All VIF values were below this threshold, confirming the absence of multicollinearity issues. We subsequently evaluated the structural model's explanatory power and predictive relevance using the coefficient of determination (R\u0026sup2;), predictive relevance (Q\u0026sup2;), and effect sizes (f\u0026sup2;). We categorized R\u0026sup2; values, which measure the percentage of variance in the dependent variables explained by the independent variables, based on thresholds of 0.25 (weak), 0.50 (moderate), and 0.75 (substantial) (Hair et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). In addition, we interpreted f\u0026sup2; values, which reflect the relative effect sizes of predictor variables, using thresholds of 0.02 (small), 0.15 (medium), and 0.35 (large) as outlined by Cohen (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1988\u003c/span\u003e). We employed the bootstrap method with 5,000 resamples to test the significance of the hypothesized relationships in the structural model then we assessed path coefficients at significance levels of p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001 and p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05 (one-tailed), as directional hypotheses were proposed (Hair et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Factor loadings, presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, consistently exceeded the threshold of 0.7, further confirming the adequacy of the measurement model (Fornell \u0026amp; Larcker, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1981\u003c/span\u003e). These analyses collectively demonstrate that the structural model is reliable, valid, and capable of providing meaningful insights into the relationships between the study variables.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eHypothesized Relationships\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe evaluated the structural model to test the hypothesized relationships among the constructs. Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e summarizes the results, including path coefficients (Original Sample, O), sample means (M), standard deviations, t-statistics, confidence intervals (2.5% and 97.5%), and p-values. The findings demonstrate strong support for all proposed hypotheses; H1: RA\u0026rarr; FoMO was significant positively, with a path coefficient of 0.339 (t\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7.084, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). The confidence intervals (CI = [0.243, 0.430]) exclude zero, confirming a robust positive religious between individuals\u0026rsquo; religious attitude and the FoMO levels. H2: FoMO \u0026rarr; AGS was the strongest among all hypotheses, with a path coefficient of 0.549 (t\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;13.476, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). CI ([0.470, 0.627]) validate this strong positive effect, indicating that FoMO significantly drives adventure- and gratification-based shopping behaviors. H3: FoMO\u0026rarr; RS was positively significant with a path coefficient of 0.416 (t\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;9.873, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). CI ([0.334, 0.499]) confirm that individuals experiencing higher levels of FoMO are more likely to engage in shopping behaviors tied to fulfilling specific roles or responsibilities. H4: FoMO \u0026rarr; VS was significant in a positive way, with a path coefficient of 0.467 (t\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10.468, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). CI ([0.378, 0.553]) confirm that FoMO positively influences shopping behaviors that prioritize value and practicality. Finally H5: FoMO \u0026rarr; SS exhibited a strong positive effect with a path coefficient of 0.573 (t\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;13.602, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). CI ([0.489, 0.653]) underscore the robustness of this relationship, suggesting that individuals experiencing FoMO are highly motivated to engage in socialized-based shopping motives. Across all relationships, the t-statistics exceeded the critical thresholds for significance (t\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;1.96 for p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05 and t\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;2.58 for p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) (Hair et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, the absence of zero within the 95% confidence intervals provides further evidence of the statistical significance of these relationships.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHyphothesis Results\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\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 \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariables\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOriginal\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003esample (O)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSample\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003emean (M)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStandard\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003edeviation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT statistics\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.5%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e97.5%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003evalues\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\u003eH1: RA\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;FoMO\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.339\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.340\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.048\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.084\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.243\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.430\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eH2: FoMO\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;AGS\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.549\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.550\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.041\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.476\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.470\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.627\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eH3: FoMO-\u0026gt; RS\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.416\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.418\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.042\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.873\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.334\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.499\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eH4: FoMO\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;VS\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.467\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.468\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.045\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.468\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.378\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.553\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eH5: FoMO\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;SS\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.573\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.574\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.042\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13,602\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.489\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.653\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\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\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eMediation Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe mediation analysis results presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e assess the role of Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) as a mediator between Religious Attitude (RA) and four types of hedonic shopping behaviors: Adventure and Gratification-Based Shopping (AGS), Role-Based Shopping (RS), Value-Based Shopping (VS), and Socialized-Based Shopping (SS). The analysis used bootstrapping with 5,000 resamples to assess the significance of the indirect effects, revealing that FoMO significantly mediates the relationships across all four paths. For H6a: RA \u0026rarr; FoMO \u0026rarr; AGS, the indirect effect was 0.186 (t\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.635, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), indicating that FoMO effectively mediates the impact of RA on adventure- and gratification-based shopping, with CI ([0.125, 0.255]) confirming the robustness of this mediation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMediation Analysis\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\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 \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariables\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOriginal\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003esample (O)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSample\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003emean (M)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStandard\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003edeviation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT statistics\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.5%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e97.5%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003evalues\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\u003eH5a: RA\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;FoMO\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;AGS\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,186\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,188\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,033\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5,635\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,125\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,255\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eH5b: RA\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;FoMO\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;RS\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,141\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,143\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,029\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4,902\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,089\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,202\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eH5c: RA\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;FoMO\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;VS\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,158\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,160\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,032\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4,909\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,227\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eH5d: RA\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;FoMO\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;SS\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,194\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,196\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,035\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5,549\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,129\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,266\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,000\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\u003eSimilarly, for H6b: RA \u0026rarr; FoMO \u0026rarr; RS, the indirect effect was 0.141 (t\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.902, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), highlighting that FoMO partially mediates the effect of RA on role-based shopping, with CI ([0.089, 0.202]) supporting the significance of this relationship. In the case of H6c: RA \u0026rarr; FoMO \u0026rarr; VS, the indirect effect was 0.158 (t\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.909, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), demonstrating that FoMO plays a critical role in mediating the relationship between RA and value-based shopping, as confirmed by the CI ([0.100, 0.227]). Finally, for H6d: RA \u0026rarr; FoMO \u0026rarr; SS, the indirect effect was 0.194 (t\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.549, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), with CI ([0.129, 0.266]) indicating that FoMO has the strongest mediation effect in explaining the link between RA and socialized-based shopping behaviors. The t-statistics for all paths were above the critical threshold for significance (t\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;1.96 for p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05 and t\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;2.58 for p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), and the confidence intervals did not contain zero, confirming the statistical significance and robustness of the mediation effects. These findings collectively underscore the crucial role of FoMO in mediating the effects of RA on all dimensions of hedonic shopping behaviors, suggesting that individuals' religious attitudes influence their shopping behaviors through the experience of FoMO.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab6\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 6\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ef\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e, R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e, and R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e adjusted\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\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 \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariables\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ef\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariables\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eR\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e adjusted\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRA\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;FoMO\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.130\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFoMO\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.114\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFoMO\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;AGS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.431\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAGS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.300\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFoMO-\u0026gt; RS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.209\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.171\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFoMO\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;VS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.279\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.217\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFoMO\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;SS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.488\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.327\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eVariables\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eR\u003c/b\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cb\u003e2\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" morerows=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFoMO\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.115\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAGS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.301\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.173\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.218\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.328\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe conducted the evaluation of the structural model by examining the effect sizes (f\u0026sup2;), explained variance (R\u0026sup2;), and adjusted explained variance (R\u0026sup2; adjusted) for the dependent variables in the model. These indicators provide a comprehensive assessment of the model\u0026rsquo;s predictive power and the relative importance of each predictor. The f\u0026sup2; values represent the effect size of each independent variable on the dependent variable, providing insights into the relative contribution of the predictors to the structural model (Hair et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). The results indicate that RA \u0026rarr; FoMO has an f\u0026sup2; of 0.130, signifying a small effect size Among the relationships involving FoMO, the largest effect size is observed for FoMO \u0026rarr; SS (f\u0026sup2; = 0.488), followed by FoMO \u0026rarr; AGS (f\u0026sup2; = 0.431), FoMO \u0026rarr; VS (f\u0026sup2; = 0.279), and FoMO \u0026rarr; RS (f\u0026sup2; = 0.209). These values suggest that FoMO has the strongest impact on Socialized-Based Shopping (SS) and Adventure and Gratification-Based Shopping (AGS), highlighting the role of FoMO in shaping these specific hedonic shopping behaviors. The R\u0026sup2; values measure the proportion of variance explained by the predictor variables for each endogenous construct. The results reveal that FoMO accounts for 11.5% of the variance in its corresponding model \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eR\u0026sup2; = 0.115\u003cb\u003e).\u003c/b\u003e For the shopping behavior constructs, the variance explained ranges from moderate to substantial: AGS \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eR\u0026sup2; = 0.301\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e, RS \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eR\u0026sup2; = 0.173\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e, VS \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eR\u0026sup2; = 0.218\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e, and SS (R\u0026sup2; = 0.328\u003cb\u003e).\u003c/b\u003e These findings indicate that the model demonstrates sufficient predictive power, with FoMO serving as a significant driver of variance in shopping behaviors, particularly in SS and AGS. The R\u0026sup2; adjusted values, which account for the number of predictors in the model and provide a more conservative measure of explained variance, closely align with the R\u0026sup2; values. The adjusted variance explained for FoMO is R\u0026sup2; adjusted\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.114, reflecting minimal adjustment for overfitting. For the shopping behavior constructs, the adjusted explained variances are as follows: AGS \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eR\u0026sup2; adjusted\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.300\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e, RS \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eR\u0026sup2; adjusted\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.171\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e, VS \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eR\u0026sup2; adjusted\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.217), and SS \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eR\u0026sup2; adjusted\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.327\u003cb\u003e).\u003c/b\u003e The alignment between the R\u0026sup2; and R\u0026sup2; adjusted values indicates the robustness of the structural model and the absence of significant model overfitting (Hair et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThrough the Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) which is the mediator in this study tries to explore how Religious Attitude (RA) play their role in hedonic shopping motives (Adventure and Gratification-Based Shopping (AGS), Role-Based Shopping (RS), Value-Based Shopping (VS), and Socialized-Based Shopping (SS) within Islamic consumption perspectives. The results highlight FoMO as particularly essential and reveal the previously unknown psychological processes through which Islamic religion shapes purchasing behaviors. Also, the findings are that RA can predict FoMO. In addition, one's adherence to RA in an Islamic context can be viewed as a combined respect for both personal religious beliefs and social expectations like maintaining community relations and spiritual duties (Alserhan, 2010). What's more, these parts will increase their sensitivity to the absence of social and religious activities, thus leading to the increase of FoMO. This given linkage matches other studies saying that religious individuals often report to be more psychologically involved in religious customs, sharing their emotional involvement with others who are also close in Islamic culture (Hassan \u0026amp; Harun, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). f\u0026sup2; value gives another reason to pay attention to RA in the context of the explanation of the micro variables of consumption given that the FoMO depends on it. Current research has also shown that the analogy of religion (FoMO) and religiosity could go even deeper. Arifin, Mismiwati, and Anwar (2024) examined the influence of religiosity on FoMO and concluded that a higher level of religiosity is related to fewer FoMO behaviors which are consequently shown by Shopee users in Palembang. In the same line, Nasution et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR102\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) also pointed out that social media dependence and FoMO have a significant impact on student behavior and thus religiosity possibly serves as a regulator of FoMO but presumes self-regulation and prioritization of needs over wants. The resulting studies offer strong evidence that religion, especially from the Islamic perspective, plays a crucial role in curtailing the potential consequences of FoMO. By developing a higher level of self-awareness and sticking to Islamic principles, religion influences people to set long-term welfare as the main concern above keeping up to date with society trends. This internalizing of conscious consumption and its connection with the Islamic core thematic notions suggests that the participation in Islamic beliefs will address the anxiety associated with FoMO and impel an individual to make purposive and morally right decisions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe research result showed that fear of missing out (FoMO) is the driving force behind hedonic consumption reasons and it is one of the main influential factors in four constructs of hedonic consumption. The strong association between FoMO and AGS in an Islamic context, while materialism is discouraged, permissible (Halal) consumption is encouraged as a means of fulfilling psychological and social needs (Wilson \u0026amp; Liu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR149\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). The f\u0026sup2; value highlights FoMO\u0026rsquo;s substantial impact on AGS, suggesting that individuals experiencing FoMO may view consumption as a way to satisfy unmet personal desires. The strongest effect was observed for FoMO on SS, with an f\u0026sup2; value, reflecting the significance of social dimensions in Islamic consumption behaviors. Shopping often serves as a medium for strengthening social bonds, particularly during communal events such as Eid or Ramadan shopping (Touzani \u0026amp; Hirschman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR138\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). The heightened influence of FoMO in this context suggests that individuals fearing exclusion may engage more actively in socially oriented consumption. The relationship between FoMO and VS reflects the role of values in shaping consumption choices, where Islamic principles such as modesty and ethical considerations guide purchasing behaviors (Bonne et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e). The f\u0026sup2; value indicates that FoMO moderately influences the prioritization of value-based consumption decisions. We can conclude that the relationship between FoMO and RS highlights the influence of societal expectations in Islamic cultures, where roles as caregivers or providers are often integral to individual identity (Essoo \u0026amp; Dibb, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe mediation analysis reveals that FoMO fully mediates the relationship between RA and all hedonic consumption motives. RA \u0026rarr; FoMO \u0026rarr; SS demonstrates that RA, through its emphasis on social cohesion, influences socially motivated consumption via FoMO. Similarly, RA \u0026rarr; FoMO \u0026rarr; AGS reflects how FoMO transforms the psychological influence of religious values into exploratory and gratifying consumption behaviors. These findings align with prior research suggesting that religiosity, when coupled with psychological drivers, motivates individuals to engage in consumption practices that reinforce social and spiritual identity (Jafari \u0026amp; S\u0026uuml;erdem, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Although studies specifically addressing Turkish Muslim consumers are limited, existing research offers valuable insights. Dogan (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) highlights the role of self-construal in shaping FoMO, noting that individuals with interdependent self-construals are more prone to experiencing FoMO. This heightened susceptibility fosters increased engagement in social and consumer activities aimed at securing social acceptance and maintaining connections. Complementing this, \u0026Ccedil;opuroğlu (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) investigates the link between social media usage, FoMO, and hedonic consumption in Gaziantep, T\u0026uuml;rkiye. According to the research results, the use of social media is extremely likely to provoke the FoMO phenomenon, consequently giving way to hedonic consumption behaviors. The concerned examinations argue that it is the predominant role of cultural factors and digital platforms in consumer behavior that are the major contributors to the matter and thereby shed light on the significance of the FoMO in delineating consumption patterns among the Turkish Muslims. According to the R\u0026sup2; values, the model's explanation power is observed through FoMO with the value of R\u0026sup2; at 11.5%. Out of the hedonic motivations, SS, and ASC demonstrate the highest explained variance, ensuring that even in social and adventure\u0026ndash;driven consumption FoMO is particularly relevant. These results are similar with the study emphasizing the centrality of social interactions and permissible indulgences in Islamic consumption (Razzaque \u0026amp; Chaudhry, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR121\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). This study extends the understanding of RA in consumer behavior by identifying FoMO as a mediating factor that bridges religious values and consumption patterns. The results suggest that while RA discourages materialism, it can indirectly encourage permissible hedonic consumption through psychological pathways like FoMO. Marketers targeting Islamic consumers should focus on strategies that emphasize exclusivity, community engagement, and value alignment to resonate with this demographic.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec23\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eLimitations and Recommendations\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study investigates Muslim consumers in T\u0026uuml;rkiye, based on a sample of 562 participants from regions including Marmara, Black Sea, Mediterrian, Aegean, and Central, South and Southeastern Anatolia. While the findings shed light on the connections between FoMO, religious attitude, and hedonic consumption, the focus on specific regions and cultural contexts may constrain their broader applicability. To address this gap, future research could expand its scope to include comparative studies across diverse cultural and economic settings, uncovering unique patterns and variations. The research adopts a cross-sectional methodology, which captures data at a single point in time and effectively highlights the associations between key variables. Nevertheless, the present technique departs from the capability to track changes or developments over time. Examining the data from longitudinal studies would give us a moving target and a more spacious view of the dynamics of such relationships in the course of several years affecting consumer choice. Though data collection via self-reported surveys has its own logistical advantages, it might result in issues such as social desirability bias and memory recall errors. Success with these results would further require qualitative methods such as interviews or focus groups, which would give rise to the possibility of researchers gaining more detailed understanding about the ways consumers behave and what makes them motivated. In spite of the provisional study\u0026rsquo;s focus on the issues with FoMO, religious attitudes, and their relationship to hedonic consumption, the aspect that is not explained completely refers to the importance of additional factors, namely, for example, socioeconomic conditions, digital literacy, or psychological attributes. These dimensions included in studies that are to be done in the future will provide a wider context for the understanding of consumer behavior. Specifically, a non-probability purposive sampling technique allows for the realization that the process is interpreted within practical boundaries, although it may still decrease the extent of generalization. By extending the sample size and handicrafting the use of probabilistic sampling methods, one could have a material increase in the representativeness of the findings with a wider scope of applicability. Besides, the technology and social media are the main elements through which people get deeper into the FoMO disease. Furthermore, going for subgroup analyses according to demographic categories like age, gender, and income may be conducive to the development of a targeted strategy aimed at promoting sustainable and culturally sensitive consumption.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe study addresses religious attitude affecting FoMO and hedonic consumption motives. Turkish Muslim consumers such as university students, civil servants, private sector employees, etc. constituted the primary data sources and the data were analyzed by applying tests such as reliability, validity, CFA and PLS-SEM. The study is important to determine the impact of religiosity on FMO's behaviors, which can be an indicator of hedonic consumption motives such as adventure and gratification-based shopping, value-based shopping, role-based shopping and socialization-based shopping. Subsequent to the measurement model, religious attitudes were found to be important predictors for capturing FoMO affecting hedonic consumption drivers. All these drivers were found to be predominantly influenced by FoMO, while religious attitude was found to influence FoMO to a lesser extent. These scores are robust indicators for the mediating effect of FoMO in the structural model. Therefore, as the results revealed, the model used in the study was approved.\u003c/p\u003e "},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDeclaration of conflicts of interest\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no conflict of interest in relation to the research, authorship or publication of this work.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNo funding was received for conducting this study.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDeclarations Ethics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study has received ethical approval from Duzce University\u0026apos;s ethics committee. The respondents\u0026apos; informed permission was acquired.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAdnan, A. A. (2011). Islamic consumer behavior (ICB): its why and what. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Business and Social Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e(21). https://doi.org/10.30845/ijbss\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAhmad, S., Zulkurnain, N., \u0026amp; Khairushalimi, F. (2016). Assessing the validity and reliability of a measurement model in Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). \u003cem\u003eBritish Journal of Mathematics \u0026amp; Computer Science, 15\u003c/em\u003e(3), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.9734/bjmcs/2016/25183\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAjzen, I., \u0026amp; Fishbein, M. (2000). Attitudes and the attitude-behavior relation: Reasoned and automatic processes. \u003cem\u003eEuropean review of social psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1-33. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779943000116\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAjzen, I., \u0026amp; Madden, T. J. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed behavior attitude, intentions, and perceived behavioral control. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Experimental Social Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, 22, 453\u0026minus;474. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(86)90045-4\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAkhtar, M. R. (1996). Towards an Islamic approach for environmental balance. \u003cem\u003eIslamic Economic Studies\u003c/em\u003e, 3(2), 57\u0026ndash;77. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3165366\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAli, A., Li, C., Hussain, A., \u0026amp; Bakhtawar. (2024). Hedonic shopping motivations and obsessive\u0026ndash;compulsive buying on the Internet. \u003cem\u003eGlobal Business Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e(1), 198-215. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150920937535\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlam, S. S., \u0026amp; Sayuti, N. M. (2011). Applying the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) in halal food purchasing. \u003cem\u003eInternational journal of Commerce and Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e21\u003c/em\u003e(1), 8-20. https://doi.org/10.1108/10569211111111676\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlt, D. (2015). College students\u0026apos; academic motivation, media engagement, and fear of missing out. \u003cem\u003eComputers in Human Behavior\u003c/em\u003e, 49, 111-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.057\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eArifin, M., Mismiwati, \u0026amp; Anwar, D. (2024).\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cem\u003eThe Effect of FoMO (Fear of Missing Out) and Price Discount on Impulse Buying with Religiosity as a Moderating Variable in Palembang City People Who Shop at E-Commerce Shopee\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003eInternatıonal Journal of Multidisciplinary Research And Analysis\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(5), 2068-2076. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmra/v7-i05-34.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArnold, M. J., \u0026amp; Reynolds, K. E. (2003). Hedonic shopping motivations. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Retailing,\u003c/em\u003e 79(2), 77\u0026ndash;95. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(03)00007-1\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAruldoss, A., Rana, S., Parayitam, S., \u0026amp; Gurumurthy, B. (2024). Demystifying hedonic shopping motivation and consumer buying behavior during the post-global pandemic: evidence from a developing country. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Marketing Theory and Practice\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e32\u003c/em\u003e(4), 486-505. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2023.2221442\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAshraf, S., Hafeez, M. H., Yaseen, A., \u0026amp; Naqvi, A. (2017). Do they care what they believe? Exploring the impact of religiosity on intention to purchase luxury products. \u003cem\u003ePakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences (PJCSS)\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(2), 428-447. Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/188299\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAtulkar, S., \u0026amp; Kesari, B. (2017). Satisfaction, loyalty and repatronage intentions: Role of hedonic shopping values. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Retailing and Consumer Services\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e39\u003c/em\u003e, 23-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.06.013\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAquino, S. D., \u0026amp; Natividade, J. C. (2024). \u0026quot; Just do it\u0026quot;: Hedonic Shopping Motivations Predicting Consumer Behavior Beyond Personality. \u003cem\u003eAvances en Psicolog\u0026iacute;a Latinoamericana\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e42\u003c/em\u003e(1). https://doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/apl/a.11501\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBabin, B. J., Darden, W. R., \u0026amp; Griffin, M. (1994). Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Consumer Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(4), 644-656. https://doi.org/10.1086/209376\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eB\u0026auml;ckstr\u0026ouml;m, K. (2011). Shopping as leisure: an exploration of manifoldness and dynamics in consumers shopping experiences. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Retailing and Consumer services\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(3), 200-209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2010.09.009\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBagozzi, R. P., Baumgartner, J., \u0026amp; Yi, Y. (1989). An investigation into the role of intentions as mediators of the attitude-behavior relationship. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Economic Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, 10, 35\u0026ndash;62. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-4870(89)90056-1\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBagozzi, R. P., \u0026amp; Yi, Y. (2012). Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural equation models. \u003cem\u003eJournal of the academy of marketing science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e40\u003c/em\u003e, 8-34 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0278-x\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBatubara, A. (2024). The Role of FoMO and Hedonism in Shaping Consumptive Behaviors and Religious Adherence Among Sibolga\u0026apos;s Muslim Millennials. \u003cem\u003eAbrahamic Religions: Jurnal Studi Agama-Agama\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e4\u003c/em\u003e(2), 150-159. http://dx.doi.org/10.22373/arj.v4i2.25710\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBerlyne, D. (1969). Laughter, humor and play. In G. Lindzey \u0026amp; E. Aronson (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eHandbook of social psychology\u003c/em\u003e (291\u0026ndash;297). MA: Addison-Wesley\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBeyens, I., Frison, E., \u0026amp; Eggermont, S. (2016). \u0026ldquo;I don\u0026rsquo;t want to miss a thing\u0026rdquo;: Adolescents\u0026rsquo; fear of missing out and its relationship to social needs, Facebook use, and Facebook-related stress. \u003cem\u003eComputers in Human Behavior\u003c/em\u003e, 64, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.083\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBloch, P. H., Sherrell, D. L., \u0026amp; Ridgway, N. M. (1986). Consumer search: An extended framework. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Consumer Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e(1), 119-126. https://doi.org/10.1086/209052\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBock, D. E., Eastman, J. K., \u0026amp; McKay, B. (2014). The impact of economic perceptions on status consumption: An exploratory study of the moderating role of education. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Consumer Marketing\u003c/em\u003e, 31(2), 111\u0026ndash;117. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-10-2013-0725 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBok, S., Shum, J., \u0026amp; Lee, M. (2025). The fear of missing out influence on excitement-seeking and the thrill of a sale. \u003cem\u003eCogent Business \u0026amp; Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(1), 2451125. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2025.2451125\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBonne, K., Vermeir, I., Bergeaud-Blackler, F., \u0026amp; Verbeke, W. (2007). Determinants of halal meat consumption in France. \u003cem\u003eBritish Food Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 109(5), 367-386. https://doi.org/10.1108/0070700710746786\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBuglass, S. L., Binder, J. F., Betts, L. R., \u0026amp; Underwood, J. D. M. (2017). Motivators of online vulnerability: The impact of social network site use and FOMO. \u003cem\u003eComputers in Human Behavior\u003c/em\u003e, 66, 248\u0026ndash;255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.055\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCasale, S., Rugai, L., \u0026amp; Fioravanti, G. (2018). Exploring the role of positive metacognitions in explaining the association between the fear of missing out and social media addiction. \u003cem\u003eAddictive Behaviors\u003c/em\u003e, 85(5), 83\u0026ndash;87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.05.020\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChang, E., Burns, L. D., \u0026amp; Francis, S. K. (2004). Gender differences in the dimensional structure of apparel shopping satisfaction among Korean consumers: The role of hedonic shopping value. \u003cem\u003eClothing and Textiles Research Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 22, 185\u0026minus;199. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887302X0402200404\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChang, H. J., Eckman, M., \u0026amp; Yan, R. N. (2011). Application of the Stimulus-Organism-Response model to the retail environment: the role of hedonic motivation in impulse buying behavior. \u003cem\u003eThe International review of retail, distribution and consumer research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e21\u003c/em\u003e(3), 233-249. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593969.2011.578798\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCheah, J. H., Magno, F., \u0026amp; Cassia, F. (2024). Reviewing the SmartPLS 4 software: the latest features and enhancements.\u003cem\u003e Journal of Marketing Analytics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e, 97-107. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-023-00266-y\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCinjarevic, M., Tatic, K., \u0026amp; Petric, S. (2011). See it, like it, buy it! Hedonic shopping motivations and impulse buying. \u003cem\u003eEconomic Review: Journal of Economics and Business\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(1), 3-15. Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/193794\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCuliberg, B. (2014). Towards an understanding of consumer recycling from an ethical perspective. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Consumer Studies\u003c/em\u003e, 38, 90\u0026minus;97. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12068\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCohen, J. (1988). \u003cem\u003eStatistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences\u003c/em\u003e (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026Ccedil;opuroğlu, F. (2021). T\u0026uuml;keticilerin sosyal medya kullanımı, fomo ve hedonik t\u0026uuml;ketim arasındaki ilişki. \u003cem\u003eOPUS International Journal of Society Researches\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e17\u003c/em\u003e(37), 4298-4326. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.845545\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDavis, L., \u0026amp; Jai, C. (2014). Effects of religiosity on apparel shopping orientation: An exploratory study. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Business Anthropology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e(2), 24-36.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDavis, R. A., Lang, B., \u0026amp; San Diego, J. (2014). How gender affects the relationship between hedonic shopping motivation and purchase intentions? \u003cem\u003eJournal of Consumer Behavior\u003c/em\u003e, 13, 18\u0026minus;30. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1450\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDe Run, E. C., Butt, M. M., Fam, K. S., \u0026amp; Jong, H. Y. (2010). Attitudes towards offensive advertising: Malaysian Muslims\u0026apos; views. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Islamic Marketing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e(1), 25-36. https://doi.org/10.1108/17590831011026204\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDelener, N. (1990). The effects of religious factors on perceived risk in durable goods purchase decisions. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Consumer Marketing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e (3), 27-38. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000002580\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDjupe, P. A., \u0026amp; Gwiasda, G. W. (2010). Evangelizing the environment: Decision process effects in political persuasion. \u003cem\u003eJournal for the Scientific Study of Religion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e49\u003c/em\u003e(1), 73-86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5906.2009.01493.x\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., \u0026amp; Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers\u0026rsquo; product evaluations. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Marketing Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e28\u003c/em\u003e(3), 307-319. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379102800305\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDogan, V. (2019). Why Do People Experience the Fear of Missing Out (FoMO)? Exposing the Link Between the Self and the FoMO Through Self-Construal. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Cross-Cultural Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, 50(4), 524\u0026ndash;538. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022119839145\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDunham, L., Freeman, R. E., \u0026amp; Liedtka, J. (2006). Enhancing stakeholder practice: A particularized exploration of community. \u003cem\u003eBusiness Ethics Quarterly\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(1), 23-42. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq20061611\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEagly, A. H., \u0026amp; Chaiken, S. (1993). \u003cem\u003eThe psychology of attitudes.\u003c/em\u003e San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEide, T. A., Aarestad, S. H., Andreassen, C. S., Bilder, R. M., \u0026amp; Pallesen, S. (2018). Smartphone restriction and its effect on subjective withdrawal related scores. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e, 1444. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01444\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEmpacher, C., Gotz, K., \u0026amp; Schultz, I. (2002). Target group analysis of the Institute for Social-Ecological Research. \u003cem\u003eModels of Sustainable Consumption: A New Ecopolitical Sphere of Action as a Challenge to Environmental Communication. Federal Environmental Agency, Forschung, Berlin\u003c/em\u003e, 87-181.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEssoo, N., \u0026amp; Dibb, S. (2004). Religious influences on shopping behavior: An exploratory study. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Marketing Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(7-8), 683-712. https://doi.org/10.1362/0267257041838728\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFarrell, J. E., Hook, J. N., Zhang, H., Mosher, D., Aten, J. D., Van Tongeren, D. R., \u0026amp; Davis, D. E. (2018). Religious attitudes and behaviors toward individuals who hold different religious beliefs and perspectives: An exploratory qualitative study. \u003cem\u003ePsychology of Religion and Spirituality\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(1), 63. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000143\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFioravanti, G., Casale, S., Benucci, S. B., Prostamo, A., Falone, A., Ricca, V., \u0026amp; Rotella, F. (2021). Fear of missing out and social networking sites use and abuse: A meta-analysis. \u003cem\u003eComputers in Human Behavior\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e122\u003c/em\u003e, 106839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106839\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFishbein, M., \u0026amp; Ajzen, I. (1975). B\u003cem\u003eelief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research\u003c/em\u003e. MA: Addison-Wesley.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFornell, C. and Larcker, D. F. (1981), \u0026quot;Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error: Algebra and Statistics\u0026quot;, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 382-388. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800313 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGabriel, Y., \u0026amp; Lang, T. (1995). \u003cem\u003eThe unmanageable consumer: Contemporary consumption and its fragments\u003c/em\u003e. London, UK: SAGE.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGood, M. C., \u0026amp; Hyman, M. R. (2021). Direct and indirect effects of fear‐of‐missing‐out appeals on purchase likelihood. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Consumer Behaviour\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(3), 564-576. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1885\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eG\u0026ouml;kler, M. E., Aydın, R., \u0026Uuml;nal, E., \u0026amp; Metintaş, S. (2016). Sosyal ortamlarda gelişmeleri ka\u0026ccedil;ırma korkusu \u0026ouml;l\u0026ccedil;eğinin T\u0026uuml;rk\u0026ccedil;e s\u0026uuml;r\u0026uuml;m\u0026uuml;n\u0026uuml;n ge\u0026ccedil;erlilik ve g\u0026uuml;venilirliğinin değerlendirilmesi. Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi, 17(1), 52-59.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGroenestein, E., Willemsen, L., van Koningsbruggen, G. M., Ket, H., \u0026amp; Kerkhof, P. (2024). The relationship between fear of missing out, digital technology use, and psychological well-being: A scoping review of conceptual and empirical issues. \u003cem\u003ePlos one\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e19\u003c/em\u003e(10), e0308643. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0308643\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGuenther, P., Guenther, M., Ringle, C. M., Zaefarian, G., \u0026amp; Cartwright, S. (2023). Improving PLS-SEM use for business marketing research. \u003cem\u003eIndustrial Marketing Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e111\u003c/em\u003e, 127-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2023.03.010\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. \u0026amp; Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective, Pearson, Upper Saddle River, NJ.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., \u0026amp; Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. \u003cem\u003eEuropean business review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e31\u003c/em\u003e(1), 2-24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N. P., \u0026amp; Ray, S. (2021). \u003cem\u003ePartial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using R: A workbook\u003c/em\u003e (p. 197). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHamari, J. (2015). Why do people buy virtual goods? Attitude toward virtual good purchases versus game enjoyment. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Information Management\u003c/em\u003e, 35(2), 299\u0026ndash;308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.01.007 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFendi, H., Taufiq, M. A., \u0026amp; Putri, R. E. (2020). Islamic views on hedonism among students. \u003cem\u003eProceeding IAIN Batusangkar\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e(3), 131-136.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHassan, S. H., \u0026amp; Harun, H. (2016). Factors influencing fashion consciousness in hijab fashion consumption among hijabistas. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Islamic Marketing\u003c/em\u003e, 7(4), 476-494. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-10-2014-0064\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHeggestad, E. D., Scheaf, D. J., Banks, G. C., Monroe Hausfeld, M., Tonidandel, S., \u0026amp; Williams, E. B. (2019). Scale adaptation in organizational science research: A review and best-practice recommendations. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Management, 45\u003c/em\u003e(6), 2596-2627. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319850280\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHenseler, J., Ringle, C.M. \u0026amp; Sinkovics, R.R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing, \u003cem\u003eNew Challenges to International Marketing. (Advances in International Marketing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e, 277-319. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHenseler, J., Dijkstra, T. K., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Diamantopoulos, A., Straub, D. W., \u0026amp; Calantone, R. J. (2014). Common beliefs and reality about partial least squares. \u003cem\u003eOrganizational Research Methods\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e17\u003c/em\u003e(2), 182-209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114526928\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHenseler, J., Ringle, C. M., \u0026amp; Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. \u003cem\u003eJournal of the academy of marketing science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e43\u003c/em\u003e, 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHirschman, E. C., \u0026amp; Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methods and propositions. \u003cem\u003eJournal of marketing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e46\u003c/em\u003e(3), 92-101. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298204600314\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHodkinson, C. (2019). \u0026lsquo;Fear of Missing Out\u0026rsquo;(FOMO) marketing appeals: A conceptual model. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Marketing Communications\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e(1), 65-88. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2016.1234504\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHuizinga, J. (1970). \u003cem\u003eHomo Ludens: A study of the play element in culture\u003c/em\u003e. New York: Harper and Row.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIstiqomah, E. F., \u0026amp; Wahyudi, A. (2024). The Impact of FOMO on The Hedonism Attitude of Generation Z In Islamic Consumption Behavior. \u003cem\u003eAl-Amwal: Jurnal Ekonomi dan Perbankan Syari\u0026apos;ah\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(2), 178-192. https://doi.org/10.70095/alamwal.v16i2.18680\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJafari, A., \u0026amp; S\u0026uuml;erdem, A. (2012). An analysis of material consumption culture in the Muslim world. \u003cem\u003eMarketing Theory\u003c/em\u003e, 12(1), 61-79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593111424184\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJames, G., Witten, D., Hastie, T., and Tibshirani, R. (eds.). (2013). \u003cem\u003eAn introduction to statistical learning: with applications in R\u003c/em\u003e. New York: Springer\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJarboe, Glen R., \u0026amp; McDaniel, Caral D. (1987). A profile of browsers in regional shopping malls. \u003cem\u003eJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science\u003c/em\u003e, 15(1), 46\u0026ndash;53. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02721953\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJohnson, B. R., Jang, S. J., Larson, D. B., \u0026amp; De Li, S. (2001). Does adolescent religious commitment matter? A reexamination of the effects of religiosity on delinquency. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Research in Crime and Delinquency\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e38\u003c/em\u003e(1), 22-44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427801038001002\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJones, M. A., Reynolds, K. E., \u0026amp; Arnold, M. (2006). Hedonic and utilitarian shopping value: Investigating differential effects on retail outcomes. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Business Research\u003c/em\u003e, 59, 974\u0026minus;981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.03.006\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJudd, M. W. (2009). \u003cem\u003eReligious orientation, context effects, and socially desirable responding\u003c/em\u003e (Master\u0026apos;s thesis, Marietta College). http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=marietta1254943217\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKahf, M. (2011). \u003cem\u003eThe demand side or consumer behavior: Islamic perspective\u003c/em\u003e. Available at: http://monzer.kahf.com/papers/Islamic/demand_side_or_consumer_behavior.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKang, I., Cui, H., \u0026amp; Son, J. (2019). Conformity consumption behavior and FoMO. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(17), 4734. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11174734\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKang, I., He, X., \u0026amp; Shin, M. M. (2020). Chinese consumers\u0026rsquo; herd consumption behavior related to Korean luxury cosmetics: The mediating role of fear of missing out. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e, 121. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00121\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKeren, D., Lockyer, J., Kelly, M., Chick, N., \u0026amp; Ellaway, R. H. (2020). In our own time: Medical students\u0026rsquo; informal social studying and learning. \u003cem\u003eTeaching and Learning in Medicine\u003c/em\u003e, 32(4), 353\u0026ndash;361. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2020.1733579\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKhawaja, N. G., Ibrahim, O., \u0026amp; Schweitzer, R. D. (2017). Mental well-being of students from refugee and migrant backgrounds: The mediating role of resilience. \u003cem\u003eSchool Mental Health\u003c/em\u003e, 9(3), 284\u0026ndash;293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-017-9215-6\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKim, J., Lee, Y., \u0026amp; Kim, M. L. (2020). Investigating \u0026lsquo;Fear of Missing Out\u0026rsquo;(FOMO) as an extrinsic motive affecting sport event consumer\u0026rsquo;s behavioral intention and FOMO-driven consumption\u0026rsquo;s influence on intrinsic rewards, extrinsic rewards, and consumer satisfaction. \u003cem\u003ePLoS One\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(12), e0243744. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0243744\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKing, R., \u0026amp; Sondhi, G. (2018). International student migration: A comparison of UK and Indian students\u0026rsquo; motivations for studying abroad. \u003cem\u003eGlobalisation, Societies and Education\u003c/em\u003e, 16(2), 176\u0026ndash;191. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2017.1405244\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKline, T.J. (2005), Psychological Testing: A Practical Approach to Design and Evaluation, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKoc, F., Ozkan, B., Komodromos, M., Halil Efendioglu, I., \u0026amp; Baran, T. (2024). The effects of trust and religiosity on halal products purchase intention: indirect effect of attitude. \u003cem\u003eEuroMed Journal of Business\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(5), 141-165. https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-01-2024-0004\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLada, S., Tanakinjal, G. H., \u0026amp; Amin, H. (2009). Predicting intention to choose halal products using theory of reasoned action. \u003cem\u003eInternational journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern finance and management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e(1), 66-76. https://doi.org/10.1108/17538390910946276\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLamba, S. (2021). \u003cem\u003eFoMO: Marketing to Millennials\u003c/em\u003e. USA: Notion Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLee, E., Moschis, G. P., \u0026amp; Mathur, A. (2001). A study of life events and changes in patronage preferences. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Business Research\u003c/em\u003e, 54(10), 25\u0026ndash;38. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00116-8\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLipovetsky, G. (2009). \u003cem\u003eO imp\u0026eacute;rio do ef\u0026ecirc;mero: a moda e seu destino nas sociedades modernas\u003c/em\u003e. Editora Companhia das Letras.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLittman-Ovadia, H., \u0026amp; Russo-Netzer, P. (2024). Exploring the lived experience and coping strategies of Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) among emerging adults. \u003cem\u003eCurrent Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, 43, 32665\u0026ndash;32685. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-06793-w\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMannell, R. C., \u0026amp; Kleiber, D. A. (1997). \u003cem\u003eA social psychology of leisure\u003c/em\u003e. Venture Publishing Inc..\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMasnono, A. (2005). Factors influencing the Muslim consumer\u0026rsquo;s level of confidence on halal logo issued by JAKIM: An empirical study. \u003cem\u003eUnpublished Master\u0026rsquo;s thesis. University Saints Malaysia\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMathras, D., Cohen, A. B., Mandel, N., \u0026amp; Mick, D. G. (2016). The effects of religion on consumer behavior: A conceptual framework and research agenda. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Consumer Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e26\u003c/em\u003e(2), 298-311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2015.08.001\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcDaniel, S. W., \u0026amp; Burnett, J. J. (1990). Consumer religiosity and retail store evaluative criteria. \u003cem\u003eJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e, 101-112. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02726426\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcGuire, W.. (1974). Psychological motives and communication Gratification. In J. F. Blumer \u0026amp; Katz (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eThe uses of mass communication: Current perspectives on gratification research\u003c/em\u003e (106\u0026ndash;167). Beverly Hills: Sage.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcNeill, L., \u0026amp; Moore, R. (2015). Sustainable fashion consumption and the fast fashion conundrum: fashionable consumers and attitudes to sustainability in clothing choice. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Consumer Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e39\u003c/em\u003e(3), 212-222. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12169\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMiller, D. (1998). \u003cem\u003eA theory of shopping\u003c/em\u003e. Cornell University Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMinton, E.A. and Kahle, L.R. (2016), \u0026ldquo;Religion and consumer behavior\u0026rdquo;, International Handbook of Consumer Psychology, Routledge, New York, NY-EUA\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMirawati, M., Suud, F. M., \u0026amp; Ismail, F. B. H. (2024). Revealing the Meaning of Religiosity in Overcoming FOMO in the Digital Age Among Students. In \u003cem\u003eE3S Web of Conferences\u003c/em\u003e (Vol. 594, p. 03001). EDP Sciences.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMokhlis, S. (2009). Relevancy and measurement of religiosity in consumer behavior research. \u003cem\u003eInternational Business Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e(3), 75-84. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v2n3p75.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMoschis, G. P. (1976). Shopping orientations and consumer uses of information. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Retailing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e52\u003c/em\u003e(2), 61.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMukhtar, A., \u0026amp; Butt, M. M. (2012). Intention to choose Halal products: the role of religiosity. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Islamic marketing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e(2), 108-120. https://doi.org/10.1108/17590831211232519\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNasution, R. S., Sugianto, S., \u0026amp; Dharma, B. (2023). Perilaku Fear Of Missing Out (FOMO) Dalam Konsumsi Di Kalangan Mahasiswa FEBI UINSU Ditinjau Dalam Prespektif Maslahah. \u003cem\u003eEKOMBIS REVIEW: Jurnal Ilmiah Ekonomi Dan Bisnis\u003c/em\u003e, 11(2), 1997-2006. https://doi.org/10.37676/ekombis.v11i2.6819\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNawi, N. B. C., Mamun, A. A., Hayat, N., \u0026amp; Yang, Q. (2024). Attitude of Fashion consumers toward the IoT: estimating consumer hedonic and utilitarian shopping motivations. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(1), 751-763. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-023-04733-3\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNiemiec, C. P., \u0026amp; Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. \u003cem\u003eTheory and Research in Education\u003c/em\u003e, 7(2), 133\u0026ndash;144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878509104318\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOtnes, C., \u0026amp; McGrath, M. A. (2001). Perceptions and realities of male shopping behavior. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Retailing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e77\u003c/em\u003e(1), 111-137. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(00)00047-6\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026Ouml;zen, H., \u0026amp; Hus, S. (2025). Digital Triggers: The Influence of Fomo and Social Media Addiction on Impulsive Buying and Regret. \u003cem\u003eAvailable at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5091437 or \u003c/em\u003ehttp://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5091437\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePandey, J., \u0026amp; Singh, M. (2019). Positive religious coping as a mechanism for enhancing job satisfaction and reducing work-family conflict: A moderated mediation analysis. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Management, Spirituality \u0026amp; Religion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(3), 314-338. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766086.2019.1596829\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eParigi, P., Santana, J. J., \u0026amp; Cook, K. S. (2017). Online field experiments: Studying social interactions in context. \u003cem\u003eSocial Psychology Quarterly\u003c/em\u003e, 80(1), 1\u0026ndash;19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272516680842\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePatel, M. (2010). Influence of religion on shopping behavior of consumers-an exploratory study. \u003cem\u003eNational Monthly Refereed Journal of Research in Commerce and Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e(5), 68-78. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePlaton, O. E. (2024). Understanding The Influence of Hedonic Motivation and Fear Of Missing Out (Fomo) on Online Impulse Purchase Intentions of Discounted Products. \u003cem\u003eChallenges of the Knowledge Society\u003c/em\u003e, 684-695. https://doi.org/10.37641/riset.v6i2.2109\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePodsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., \u0026amp; Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. \u003cem\u003eJournal of applied psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e88\u003c/em\u003e(5), 879. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePrajabti, A., Kien, X. H. D., \u0026amp; Ridho, M. R. (2022). Hedonism in the Young Generation: The Challenge of Pancasila Moral Education. \u003cem\u003eJurnal Panjar: Pengabdian Bidang Pembelajaran\u003c/em\u003e, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.15294/panjar.v4i2.55040\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePriantina, A., \u0026amp; Sapian, S. M. (2021). The Impact of Covid19 to Millennials\u0026apos; Consumption Behavior and Halal Preference: Does Religiosity Matter?. \u003cem\u003eThe Journal of Muamalat and Islamic Finance Research\u003c/em\u003e, 125-135. https://doi.org/10.33102/jmifr.v19i2.466\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePrzybylski, A. K., Murayama, K., DeHaan, C. R., \u0026amp; Gladwell, V. (2013). Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. \u003cem\u003eComputers in human behavior\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e29\u003c/em\u003e(4), 1841-1848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.014\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRachman, A., Efawati, Y., \u0026amp; Anmoel, J. T. (2024). Understanding The Role Of Fomo (Fear Of Missing Out) In Impulse Purchase For Smes. \u003cem\u003eRiset: Jurnal Aplikasi Ekonomi Akuntansi Dan Bisnis\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(2), 117-134. https://doi.org/10.37641/riset.v6i2.2109\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRahim, H., Abdul Rasool, M. S., Rusli, N. R. L., \u0026amp; Ani, N. (2021). The effects of social media influencer towards factors of Muslim Millennial Generation\u0026rsquo;s attitude into halal food product purchase in Malaysia. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(8), 1609-1621. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v11-i8/10876\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRahmadani, N., \u0026amp; Putri, Q. A. R. (2024). Analysis of the Influence of Religiosity Values In Reducing Consumptive Behavior in Indonesian Muslim Consumers. \u003cem\u003eAmwaluna: Jurnal Ekonomi dan Keuangan Syariah\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e8\u003c/em\u003e(2), 253-274. https://doi.org/10.29313/amwaluna.v8i2.3785\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRakrachakarn, V., Moschis, G. P., Ong, F. S., \u0026amp; Shannon, R. (2015). Materialism and life satisfaction: The role of religion. \u003cem\u003eJournal of religion and health\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e54\u003c/em\u003e, 413-426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-013-9794-y\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRamirez, A., Himang, C., Selerio, E., Manalastas, R., Himang, M., Giango, W., \u0026amp; Ocampo, L. (2020). Exploring the hedonic and eudaimonic motivations of teachers for pursuing graduate studies. \u003cem\u003eThe Asia-Pacific Education Researcher\u003c/em\u003e, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-020-00542-w\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRazzaq, Z., Razzaq, A., Yousaf, S., \u0026amp; Hong, Z. (2018). The impact of utilitarian and hedonistic shopping values on sustainable fashion consumption: The moderating role of religiosity. \u003cem\u003eGlobal Business Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e19\u003c/em\u003e(5), 1224-1239. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150918777947\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRazzaque, M. A., \u0026amp; Chaudhry, S. M. (2013). Religiosity and Muslim consumers\u0026rsquo; decision-making process in a non-Muslim society. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Islamic Marketing\u003c/em\u003e, 4(2), 198-217. https://doi.org/10.1108/17590831311329313\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRice, G. (1999). Islamic ethics and the implications for business. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Business Ethics\u003c/em\u003e, 18(4), 345\u0026ndash;358. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005711414306\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRingle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Mitchell, R., \u0026amp; Gudergan, S. P. (2020). Partial least squares structural equation modeling in HRM research. \u003cem\u003eThe international journal of human resource management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e31\u003c/em\u003e(12), 1617-1643. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1416655\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRokeach, M. (1969). Part I. Value systems in religion. \u003cem\u003eReview of Religious Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(1), 3-23. https://doi.org/10.2307/3510550\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRyan, R. M., \u0026amp; Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. \u003cem\u003eAnnual Review of Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, 52(1), 141\u0026ndash;166. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRyan, R. M., \u0026amp; Deci, E. L. (2017). \u003cem\u003eSelf-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness\u003c/em\u003e. New York: Guilford Publications\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSchau, H. J., Gilly, M. C., \u0026amp; Wolfinbarger, M. (2009). Consumer identity renaissance: the resurgence of identity-inspired consumption in retirement. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Consumer Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e36\u003c/em\u003e(2), 255-276. https://doi.org/10.1086/597162\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSch\u0026uuml;ler, J., Baumann, N., Chasiotis, A., Bender, M., \u0026amp; Baum, I. (2019). Implicit motives and basic psychological needs. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Personality\u003c/em\u003e, 87(1), 37\u0026ndash;55. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12431\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShaharudin, M. R., Pani, J. J., Mansor, S. W., Elias, S. J., \u0026amp; Sadek, D. M. (2010). Purchase intention of organic food in Kedah, Malaysia; A religious overview. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Marketing Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e(1), 96. Available at: www.ccsenet.org/ijms\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSherry Jr, J. F. (1990). A sociocultural analysis of a Midwestern American flea market. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Consumer Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e17\u003c/em\u003e(1), 13-30. https://doi.org/10.1086/208533\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSinan, M. (2024). FOMO in the Digital Age: Islamic Insights on Mental Well-being and Spiritual Balance. Islamonweb. Available at: https://en.islamonweb.net/fomo-in-the-digital-age-islamic-insights-on-mental-well-being-and-spiritual-balance. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStone, G. P. (1954). City shoppers and urban identification: observations on the social psychology of city life. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Journal of Sociology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e60\u003c/em\u003e(1), 36-45. https://doi.org/10.1086/221483\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSu, T., Tian, L., \u0026amp; Huebner, E. S. (2021). The reciprocal relations among prosocial behavior, satisfaction of relatedness needs at school, and subjective well-being in school: A three-wave cross-lagged study among Chinese elementary school students. \u003cem\u003eCurrent Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e40\u003c/em\u003e(8), 3734-3746. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00323-9\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSurzykiewicz, J., Skalski, S. B., Niesiobędzka, M., \u0026amp; Konaszewski, K. (2022). Exploring the mediating effects of negative and positive religious coping between resilience and mental well-being. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e, 954382. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2022.954382\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTandon, A., Laato, S., Islam, N., \u0026amp; Dhir, A. (2024). Social comparisons at social networking sites: how social Media-induced fear of missing out and envy drive compulsive use. \u003cem\u003eInternet Research\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-10-2022-0770\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTarka, P., \u0026amp; Kukar‐Kinney, M. (2024). How different religiosity facets affect materialism, hedonistic shopping values, and compulsive buying: Toward mediation‐moderation effects. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Consumer Affairs\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e58\u003c/em\u003e(4), 1126-1160 https://doi.org/10.1111/joca.12600\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTauber, E. M. (1972). Marketing notes and communications: Why do people shop?. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Marketing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e36\u003c/em\u003e(4), 46-49. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224297203600409\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTouzani, M., \u0026amp; Hirschman, E. C. (2008). Cultural syncretism and Ramadan observance: Consumer research visits Islam. \u003cem\u003eAdvances in Consumer Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e35\u003c/em\u003e(1), 374-380. Available at: http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/13141/volumes/v35/NA-35\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTaylor, S., \u0026amp; Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. \u003cem\u003eInformation Systems Research\u003c/em\u003e, 6, 144\u0026minus;176. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.6.2.144\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTrant, E. C., Crabtree, K. E., Ciancio, D. J., Hart, L. A., Watson, T. B., \u0026amp; Williams, R. L. (2015). Why some HOPE scholarship recipients retain the scholarship and others lose it. \u003cem\u003eInnovative Higher Education\u003c/em\u003e, 40(3), 201\u0026ndash;214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-014-9306-3\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTomczyk, Ł., \u0026amp; Selmanagic-Lizde, E. (2018). Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) among youth in Bosnia and Herzegovina\u0026mdash;Scale and selected mechanisms. \u003cem\u003eChildren and Youth Services Review\u003c/em\u003e, 88, 541-549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.03.048\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTuran, Y. (2016). Sosyal Medyanın Kimlik Gelişimindeki Rol\u0026uuml;. 10-12 Haziran, Ordu Uluslararası Kişilik Ve Karakter İnşasında Dinin Yeri Sempozyumu. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVieira, V., Santini, F. O., \u0026amp; Araujo, C. F. (2018). A meta-analytic review of hedonic and utilitarian shopping values. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Consumer Marketing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e35\u003c/em\u003e(4), 426-437. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-08-2016-1914]\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVinzi, V. E., Chin, W. W., Henseler, J., \u0026amp; Wang, H. (2010). Handbook of partial least squares: Concepts. Springer Science \u0026amp; Business Media: Methods and Applications. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32827-8\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVrocharidou, A., \u0026amp; Efthymiou, I. (2012). Computer mediated communication for social and academic purposes: Profiles of use and university students\u0026rsquo; gratifications. \u003cem\u003eComputers \u0026amp; Education\u003c/em\u003e, 58(1), 609\u0026ndash;616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.09.015\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWang, Y. (2020). The Roles of Hedonic Value and Fashion Consciousness in Female Shoes Purchase Context: Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Marketing Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(2), 1-38. Available at: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:218471761\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWeaver, G. R., \u0026amp; Agle, B. R. (2002). Religiosity and ethical behavior in organizations: A symbolic interactionist perspective. \u003cem\u003eAcademy of management review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e27\u003c/em\u003e(1), 77-97. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2002.5922390\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWestbrook, R.A., \u0026amp; Black, W. (1985). A motivation-based shopper typology. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Retailing\u003c/em\u003e, 61(2), 78\u0026ndash;103.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWilson, J. A., \u0026amp; Liu, J. (2011). Shaping the halal into a brand? \u003cem\u003eJournal of Islamic Marketing\u003c/em\u003e, 2(3), 214-225. https://doi.org/10.1108/17590831011055851\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWhiting, J., \u0026amp; Hannam, K. (2015). Creativity, self-expression and leisure. \u003cem\u003eLeisure Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e34\u003c/em\u003e(3), 372-384. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2014.923494\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWorthington, E. L., Jr., Wade, N. G., Hight, T. L., Ripley, J. S., McCullough, M. E., Berry, J. W., Schmitt, M. M., Berry, J. T., Bursley, K. H., \u0026amp; O\u0026apos;Connor, L. (2003). The Religious Commitment Inventory--10: Development, refinement, and validation of a brief scale for research and counseling. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Counseling Psychology, 50\u003c/em\u003e(1), 84\u0026ndash;96. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.50.1.84\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZainol, Z., Noor, N., \u0026amp; Tong, A. (2024). Faithful and luxurious: Mediating halal with luxury through self-congruity. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Global Fashion Marketing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(4), 422-439. https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2024.2346841\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. \u003cem\u003eJournal of marketing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e52\u003c/em\u003e(3), 2-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298805200302\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang, Z., Jim\u0026eacute;nez, F. R., \u0026amp; Cicala, J. E. (2020). Fear of missing out scale: A self‐concept perspective. \u003cem\u003ePsychology \u0026amp; Marketing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e37\u003c/em\u003e(11), 1619-1634. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21406\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"Duzce University","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Religiosity, Attitudes, Consumers, Fear of Missing Out, Hedonic Consumption","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5980124/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5980124/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis study explores the intricate dynamics between religious attitudes and hedonic consumption behaviors, with Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) as a pivotal mediator, focusing on Turkish Muslim consumers. By examining data from 562 participants across Türkiye, this research unveils how religious principles, while traditionally curbing materialism, paradoxically foster specific hedonic consumption motivations when mediated by FoMO. Utilizing advanced structural equation modeling, the findings underscore FoMO's transformative role in linking religious attitudes to adventure and gratification-based, role-based, value-based, and social-based shopping behaviors. The strongest effects are observed in socialized and adventure-oriented consumption, reflecting a tension between spiritual adherence and contemporary consumerist pressures. This study not only expands the theoretical discourse on religious consumer behavior but also offers a groundbreaking perspective on how psychological constructs like FoMO reshape traditional paradigms. These learnings offer implementable strategies for culturally sensitive marketing practices for Muslim consumers, which maintains the tension between the spirit of authenticity and contemporary consumerism.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eJel Codes:\u003c/strong\u003e M30; M31; M37\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"The Role Of Fomo In The Impact Of Religious Attitude And Hedonic Consumption Among Turkish Muslim Consumers","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-02-10 10:43:23","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5980124/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"153c5993-e6fb-4ac7-83ba-28847c609608","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 10th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":44085275,"name":"Marketing"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-02-10T10:43:24+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-02-10 10:43:23","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-5980124","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-5980124","identity":"rs-5980124","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}