##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Submitted
May 5, 2019
Published
Jun 30, 2019
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 785 Download : 1207

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Abstract

Konsumsi produk ramah lingkungan kini menjadi gaya hidup yang popular yang mulai diikuti oleh pemuda. Beberapa penelitian membuktikan bahwa perilaku konsumsi produk ramah lingkungan lebih didorong oleh motivasi sosial dan emosional daripada motivasi fungsional. Keterlibatan pemuda dalam kegiatan dan organisasi ramah lingkungan mendorong dia untuk melakukan kegiatan yang ramah lingkungan dalam kehidupan sehari-harinya. Penelitian ini melaporan hasil studi minat beli terhadap produk ramah lingkungan kepada 124 mahasiswa di tiga Perguruan Tinggi Negeri di Surakarta. Tiga variabel yang akan diuji adalah, keikutsertaaan mahasiswa dalam organisasi ramah lingkungan, consumer guilt jika tidak melakukan kegiatan ramah lingkungan, dan minat beli terhadap produk ramah lingkungan. Hasil path analysis dan effect size measure untuk menguji mediasi menunjukkan bahwa, consumer guilt mampu menjadi mediator dari hubungan keikutsertaan mahasiswa dalam organisasi ramah lingkungan dengan minat beli mahasiswa terhadap produk ramah lingkungan.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

References

  1. Alisjahbana, A. S., Yusuf, A. A., Anna, Z., Hadisoemarto, P. F., Kadarisman, A., Maulana, N., … Megananda. (2017). Menyongsong SDGs. Kesiapan Daerah-daerah di Indonesia. Bandung: UNPAD Press.
  2. Awuni, J. A., & Du, J. (2016). Sustainable Consumption in Chinese Cities: Green Purchasing Intentions of Young Adults Based on the Theory of Consumption Values. Sustainable Development, 24(2), 124–135. http://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1613
  3. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.
  4. Baumeister, R. F., Still, A. M., & Heatherton, T. F. (1995). Personal Narratives About Guilt: Role in Action Control and Interpersonal Relationships. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 77(1992), 173–198.
  5. Bissing-Olson, M. J., Fielding, K. S., & Iyer, A. (2016). Experiences of pride, not guilt, predict pro- environmental behavior when pro-environmental descriptive norms are more positive. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 45, 145–153. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.01.001
  6. Burnett, M. S., & Lunsford, D. a. (1994). Conceptualizing Guilt in the Consumer Decision-making Process. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 11(3), 33–43. http://doi.org/10.1108/07363769410065454
  7. Fairchild, A. J., MacKinnon, D. P., Taborga, M. P., & Taylor, A. B. (2009). R2 effect-size measures for mediation analysis. Behavior Research Methods, 41(2), 486–498. http://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.2.486
  8. Heus, P. De. (2012). R squared effect-size measures and overlap between direct and indirect effect in mediation analysis. Behavior Research, 44, 213–221. http://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0141-5
  9. Lee, H. J., & Park, S. (2013). Environmental orientation in going green : A qualitative approach to consumer psychology and sociocultural factors of green consumption. Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science, 23(3), 245–262. http://doi.org/10.1080/21639159.2013.788366
  10. MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis. New York: Taylor & Francis.
  11. Nair, S. R., & Little, V. J. (2017). Context , Culture and Green Consumption : A New Framework. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 28(3), 169–184. http://doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2016.1165025
  12. Nittala, R. (2014). Green Consumer Behavior of the Educated Segment in India. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 26(2), 138–152. http://doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2014.878205
  13. Peattie, K. (2010). Green Consumption: Behavior and Norms. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 35, 195–228. http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-032609-094328
  14. Schmitt, M. T., Mackay, C. M. L., Droogendyk, L. M., & Payne, D. (2019). What predicts environmental activism ? The roles of identification with nature and politicized environmental identity. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 61(November 2018), 20–29. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2018.11.003
  15. Seyfang, G. (2011). The New Economic of Sustainable Consumption: Seeds of Change. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
  16. Southerton, D., Warde, A., & Hand, M. (2004). The limited autonomy of the consumer implications for sustainable consumption. In D. Southerton, H. Chappells, & B. Van Vliet (Eds.), Sustainable Consumption. The implications of changing infrastructure of provision (pp. 32–64). Massachusetts: Edward Elgar.
  17. Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424.
  18. Stern, P. C. (2008). Environmentally significant behaviour in the home. In A. Lewis (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Psychology and Ecoomic Behaviour (pp. 363–382). Cambridge.
  19. Streiner, D. L. (2005). Finding Our Way: An Introduction to Path Analysis. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 50(2), 115–122.
  20. Werts, C. E., & Linn, R. (1969). The Path Analysis of Categorical Data. Research Bulletin, (July).
  21. White, H. (1980). A heteroskedasticity-consitent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Economoetrica, 48(4), 817–838.
  22. Yadav, R., & Pathak, G. S. (2017). Determinants of Consumers’ Green Purchase Behavior in a Developing Nation: Applying and Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior. Ecological Economics, 134, 114–122. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.12.019