Advertisement

Applying the Extended Theory of Planned Behavior to Predict Collaborative Consumption Intentions

  • Arto Lindblom
  • Taru Lindblom
Chapter
Part of the Translational Systems Sciences book series (TSS, volume 11)

Abstract

In this study we test and validate the theory of planned behavior (TPB) to predict consumers’ collaborative consumption intentions. In addition, we extend the TPB by studying consumers’ price consciousness as a potential determinant of collaborative consumption intentions. The empirical data is based on the survey study that was conducted in Finland in 2015. Our main findings are as follows: first, our study indicates that consumers’ attitudes toward collaborative consumption are positively related to their intentions to participate in collaborative consumption. Second, our study reveals that subjective norm is positively related to consumers’ collaborative consumption intentions. Our results also demonstrate that if consumers have the abilities to engage in collaborative consumption, it enhances their intention to participate in such behavior. As a final contribution, our study indicates that price consciousness acts as determinant for taking part in collaborative consumption. Overall, our results are consistent with the TPB. Based on our study, it can be argued that TPB is a useful theoretical framework to investigate the motivations among consumers to engage in collaborative consumption.

Keywords

Sharing economy Collaborative consumption Theory of planned behavior 

References

  1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ajzen, I. (2005). Attitudes, personality, and behavior (2nd ed.). Berkshire: Open University Press and McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  3. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  4. Akbar, P., Mai, R., & Hoffmann, S. (2016). When do materialistic consumers join commercial sharing systems. Journal of Business Research, 69(10), 4215–4224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Armitage, C., & Conner, M. (2001). Social cognitive determinants of blood donation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 1431–1457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bardhi, F., & Eckhardt, G. (2012). Access-based consumption: The case of car sharing. Journal of Consumer Research, 39, 881–898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Belk, R. (2007). Why not share rather than own? Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 611, 126–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Belk, R. (2014). You are what you can access: Sharing and collaborative consumption online. Journal of Business Research, 67, 1595–1600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Botsman, R. (2013, November 21). The sharing economy lacks a shared definition. Co.Exist. http://www.fastcoexist.com/3022028/the-sharing-economy-lacks-a-shareddefinition#4
  10. Botsman, R., & Rogers, R. (2010). What's mine is yours—The rise of collaborative consumption. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  11. Dutta, K., & Singh, S. (2014). Applying the theory of planned behavior to understand Indian housewives’ purchase behavior towards healthy food brands. Journal of Brand Management, 11, 7–28.Google Scholar
  12. Eddosary, M., Yong, J., Sagas, M., & Hee, Y. (2015). Consumers’ intention to attend soccer events: Application and extension of the theory of planned behavior. Psychological Reports, 117, 89–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ferdous, A. (2010). Applying the theory of planned behavior to explain marketing managers’ perspectives on sustainable marketing. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 22, 313–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  15. Hamari, J., Mimmi Sjöklint, M., & Ukkonen, A. (2016). The sharing economy: Why people participate in collaborative consumption. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67, 2047–2059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hansen, T. (2008). Consumer values, the theory of planned behaviour and online grocery shopping. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 32, 128–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hassan, L., Shiu, E., & Parry, S. (2016). Addressing the cross-country applicability of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB): A structured review of multi-country TPB studies. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 15, 72–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hrubes, D., & Ajzen, I. (2001). Predicting hunting intentions and behavior: An application of the theory of planned behavior. Leisure Sciences, 23, 165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kopalle, P., & Lindsey-Mullikin, J. (2003). The impact of external reference price on consumer price expectations. Journal of Retailing, 79, 225–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kukar-Kinney, M., Ridgway, N., & Monroe, K. (2012). The role of price in the behavior and purchase decisions of compulsive buyers. Journal of Retailing, 88, 63–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lee, R., Murphy, J., & Swilley, E. (2009). The moderating influence of hedonic consumption in an extended theory of planned behavior. Service Industries Journal, 29, 539–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lichtenstein, D., Bloch, P., & Black, W. (1988). Correlates of price acceptability. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 243–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lichtenstein, D., Bloch, P., Black, W., Ridgway, N., & Netermeyer, R. (1993). Price perceptions and consumer shopping behavior: A field study. Journal of Marketing Research, 30, 234–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lindblom, A., & Lindblom, T. (2017). De-ownership orientation and collaborative consumption during turbulent economic times. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 41, 431–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Marta, E., Manzi, C., Pozzi, M., & Vignoles, V. (2014). Identity and the theory of planned behavior: Predicting maintenance of volunteering after three years. Journal of Social Psychology, 154, 198–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Matzler, K., Veider, V., & Kathan, W. (2015). Adapting to the sharing economy. MIT Sloan Management Review, 56, 71–77.Google Scholar
  27. McArthur, E. (2015). Many-to-many exchange without money: Why people share their resources. Consumption, Markets & Culture, 18, 239–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Moeller, S., & Wittkowski, K. (2010). The burdens of ownership: Reasons for preferring renting. Managing Service Quality, 20, 176–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Möhlmann, M. (2015). Collaborative consumption: Determinants of satisfaction and the likelihood of using a sharing economy option again. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 14, 193–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Netemeyer, R., & Bearden, W. (1992). A comparative analysis of two models of behavioral intention. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 20, 49–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Owyang, J., Samuel, A., & Grenville, A. (2014). Sharing is the new buying. Available online: www.web-strategist.com. Accessed 03 Dec 2014.
  32. Paul, j., Modi, A., & Patel, J. (2016). Predicting green product consumption using theory of planned behavior and reasoned action. Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services, 29, 123–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Philip, H., Ozanne, L., & Ballantine, P. (2015). Examining temporary disposition and acquisition in peer-to-peer renting. Journal of Marketing Management, 31, 1310–1332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Stanislawski, S., Yasushi, S., & Shuji, O. (2013). Green consumption and the theory of planned behavior in the context of post-megaquake behaviors in Japan. Advances in Consumer Research, 41, 321–325.Google Scholar
  35. Van Alstyne, M., Parker, G., & Choudary, S. (2016). Pipelines, platforms, and the new rules of strategy. Harvard Business Review, 94(4), 54.Google Scholar
  36. Watkins, R., Denegri-Knott, J., & Molesworth, M. (2016). The relationship between ownership and possession: Observations from the context of digital virtual goods. Journal of Marketing Management, 32, 44–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yunhi, K., & Heesup, H. (2010). Intention to pay conventional-hotel prices at a green hotel—A modification of the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18, 997–1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MarketingAalto University School of BusinessHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Faculty of Social Sciences, SociologyUniversity of TampereTampereFinland

Personalised recommendations