This study explored the generation gap in American consumers’ green perceptions and purchase intentions across four generations (Gen Z, Y, X, and Baby Boomers) from the perspectives of consumer socialization and social intelligence. Analyzing a nationally representative sample of adults in the United States (N = 19,450), the survey results revealed that the American consumer’s green norms and beliefs varied by generation. A series of multiple regression analyses showed that each generation had similar but idiosyncratic beliefs in purchasing products from green companies. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
AbramowitzS.McKuneS. L.FallahM.MongerJ.TehoungueK.OmidianP. A. (2017). The opposite of denial: social learning at the onset of the Ebola emergency in Liberia. Journal of Health Communication, 22(Suppl 1), 59-65.
AlbaJ. W.HutchinsonJ. W. (2000). Knowledge calibration: What consumers know and what they think they know. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2), 123-156.
4.
AtkinsK. G.HyunS.-Y. J. (2016). Smart shoppers’ purchasing experiences: Functions of product type, gender, and generation. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 8(2), 1.
BarnesM. L.BodinÖ.GuerreroA. M.McAllisterR. R.AlexanderS. M.RobinsG. (2017). The social structural foundations of adaptation and transformation in social–ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 22(4), 16.
7.
BassiouniD. H.HackleyC. (2014). ‘Generation Z’children’s adaptation to digital consumer culture: A critical literature review. Journal of Customer Behaviour, 13(2), 113-133.
8.
BeiL.-T.SimpsonE. M. (1995). The determinants of consumers’ purchase decisions for recycled products: An application of acquisition-transaction utility theory. In KardesF. R.SujanM. (Eds.), Advances in consumer research (Vol. 22, pp. 257-261). Association for Consumer Research.
9.
BornsteinM. H.JagerJ.PutnickD. L. (2013). Sampling in developmental science: Situations, shortcomings, solutions, and standards. Developmental Review, 33(4), 357-370.
10.
BoushD. M.FriestadM.RoseG. M. (1994). Adolescent skepticism toward TV advertising and knowledge of advertiser tactics. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 165-175.
11.
CampbellM. C. (1995). When attention-getting advertising tactics elicit consumer inferences of manipulative intent: The importance of balancing benefits and investments. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 4(3), 225-254.
12.
ChangH. S., HuhC.LeeM. J. (2016). Would an energy conservation nudge in hotels encourage hotel guests to conserve?Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 57(2), 172-183.
13.
CharterM.PolonskyM. J. (1999). Greener marketing: A global perspective on greening marketing practice (2nd ed.). Greenleaf.
14.
ChenA.LuY.WangB. (2017). Customers’ purchase decision-making process in social commerce: A social learning perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 37(6), 627-638.
15.
CheungM. F.ToW. M. (2019). An extended model of value-attitude-behavior to explain Chinese consumers’ green purchase behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 50, 145-153.
16.
ClarkW. C.MunnR. E. (1986). Sustainable development of the biosphere. Cambridge University Press.
17.
ConwayG. R. (1985). Agroecosystem analysis. Agricultural administration, 20(1), 31-55.
18.
CoughlinJ. (2018, May, 5 2018). Greener than you: Boomers, gen X & millennials score themselves on the environment. Forbes.
19.
DavisC. D.PolyakovaA.BodapatiA. V.DroletA. (2020). Are young adults more narcissistic than older adults? In The Aging Consumer: perspectives from psychology and marketing (159). Routledge.
20.
DawsonT. L. (2002). New tools, new insights: Kohlberg’s moral judgement stages revisited. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 26(2), 154-166.
21.
DesaiS. P.LeleV. (2017). Correlating internet, social networks and workplace–A case of Generation Z students. Journal of Commerce and Management Thought, 8(4), 802-815.
DiamantopoulosA.SchlegelmilchB. B.SinkovicsR. R.BohlenG. M. (2003). Can socio-demographics still play a role in profiling green consumers? A review of the evidence and an empirical investigation. Journal of Business Research, 56(6), 465-480.
24.
DiLulloC.McGeeP.KriebelR. M. (2011). Demystifying the Millennial student: A reassessment in measures of character and engagement in professional education. Anatomical Sciences Education, 4(4), 214-226.
25.
DoranR.LarsenS. (2016). The relative importance of social and personal norms in explaining intentions to choose eco‐friendly travel options. International Journal of Tourism Research, 18(2), 159-166.
26.
D’SouzaC.TaghianM.KhoslaR. (2007). Examination of environmental beliefs and its impact on the influence of price, quality and demographic characteristics with respect to green purchase intention. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 15(2), 69-78.
27.
ElliottR. (2013). The taste for green: The possibilities and dynamics of status differentiation through “green” consumption. Poetics, 41(3), 294-322.
28.
FarrowK.GrolleauG.IbanezL. (2017). Social norms and pro-environmental behavior: A review of the evidence. Ecological Economics, 140, 1-13.
29.
ForehM. R.GrierS. (2003). When is honesty the best policy? The effect of stated company intent on consumer skepticism. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 349-356.
30.
FornaraF.PattitoniP.MuraM.StrazzeraE. (2016). Predicting intention to improve household energy efficiency: The role of value-belief-norm theory, normative and informational influence, and specific attitude. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 45, 1-10.
31.
FriestadM.WrightP. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 1-31.
GoldsteinN. J.CialdiniR. B.GriskeviciusV. (2008). A room with a viewpoint: Using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 472-482.
34.
HamC. D.NelsonM. R.(2019). The reflexive persuasion game: the persuasion knowledge model (1994-2017). In RodgersS.ThorsonE. (Eds.), Advertising Theory (2nd ed., pp. 124-140). Routledge.
35.
HamC.-D.ParkJ. S.ParkS. (2017). How US Consumers respond to product placement: Cluster analysis based on cognitive and attitudinal responses to advertising in general. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 94(4), 943-971.
36.
HanW.McCabeS.WangY.ChongA. Y. L. (2018). Evaluating user-generated content in social media: An effective approach to encourage greater pro-environmental behavior in tourism?Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 26(4), 600-614.
37.
HansmannR.LaurentiR.MehdiT.BinderC. R. (2020). Determinants of pro-environmental behavior: A comparison of university students and staff from diverse faculties at a Swiss University. Journal of Cleaner Production, 268, 121864.
38.
HarlandP.StaatsH.WilkeH. A. (1999). Explaining pro-environmental intention and behavior by personal norms and the theory of planned behavior1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(12), 2505-2528.
39.
HotaM.BartschF. (2019). Consumer socialization in childhood and adolescence: Impact of psychological development and family structure. Journal of Business Research, 105, 11-20.
40.
HumeM. (2010). Compassion without action: Examining the young consumers consumption and attitude to sustainable consumption. Journal of World Business, 45(4), 385-394.
41.
HwangJ.KimW.KimJ. J. (2020). Application of the value-belief-norm model to environmentally friendly drone food delivery services. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 32(5), 1778-1794.
42.
JanssonJ.MarellA.NordlundA. (2011). Exploring consumer adoption of a high involvement eco-innovation using value-belief-norm theory. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 10(1), 51-60.
43.
JohnsonR. E.ChangC.-H. (2006). “I” is to continuance as “We” is to affective: The relevance of the self-concept for organizational commitment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(5), 549-570.
JostJ. T.KruglanskiA. W.NelsonT. O. (1998). Social metacognition: An expansionist review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(2), 137-154.
47.
KaiserF. G.HübnerG.BognerF. X. (2005). Contrasting the theory of planned behavior with the value-belief-norm model in explaining conservation behavior 1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35(10), 2150-2170.
48.
KamaruddinA. R.MokhlisS. (2003). Consumer socialization, social structural factors and decision‐making styles: A case study of adolescents in Malaysia. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 27(2), 145-156.
49.
KanchanapibulM.LackaE.WangX.ChanH. K. (2014). An empirical investigation of green purchase behaviour among the young generation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 66, 528-536.
KiatkawsinK.HanH. (2017). Young travelers’ intention to behave pro-environmentally: Merging the value-belief-norm theory and the expectancy theory. Tourism Management, 59, 76-88.
52.
KimS.LeeY-J. (2012). The complex attribution process of CSR motives. Public Relations Review, 38(1), 168-170.
53.
KimS. H.SeockY. K. (2019). The roles of values and social norm on personal norms and pro-environmentally friendly apparel product purchasing behavior: The mediating role of personal norms. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 51, 83-90.
54.
KirmaniA.CampbellM. C. (2004). Goal seeker and persuasion sentry: How consumer targets respond to interpersonal marketing persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(3), 573-582.
55.
KristensenK.GrunertS. C. (1994). The Green Consumer: Some Danish evidence. Xingxiao Pinglun, 8, 138-145.
LiW.BhuttoT. A.XuhuiW.MaitloQ.ZafarA. U.BhuttoN. A. (2020). Unlocking employees’ green creativity: The effects of green transformational leadership, green intrinsic, and extrinsic motivation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 255, 120229.
58.
LienG.HardakerJ. B.FlatenO. (2007). Risk and economic sustainability of crop farming systems. Agricultural Systems, 94(2), 541-552.
59.
LiereK. D. V.DunlapR. E. (1980). The social bases of environmental concern: A review of hypotheses, explanations and empirical evidence. Public Opinion Quarterly, 44(2), 181-197.
60.
LimD.BaekT. H.YoonS.KimY. (2020). Colour effects in green advertising. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 44(6), 552-562.
61.
LinP.-C.HuangY.-H. (2012). The influence factors on choice behavior regarding green products based on the theory of consumption values. Journal of Cleaner Production, 22(1), 11-18.
62.
López-MosqueraN.SánchezM. (2012). Theory of planned behavior and the value-belief-norm theory explaining willingness to pay for a suburban park. Journal of Environmental Management, 113, 251-262.
63.
MajhiR.(2020). Behavior and perception of younger generation towards green products. Journal of Public Affairs, e2288.
64.
MalleB. F.KnobeJ. (1997). The folk concept of intentionality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33(2), 101-121.
65.
MandeseJ. (1991). New study finds green confusion. Advertising Age, 62(45), 1-2.
66.
MansteadA. S. R. (1999, November 1). The Role of moral Norm in the attitude-behavior relation. Attitudes, behavior, and social context, Psychology Press.
67.
MarkertM. (2004). Demographics of age: Generational and cohort confusion. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 26(2), 11-25.
MetcalfeJ.ShimamuraA. P. (1994). Metacognition: Knowing about knowing. MIT Press.
70.
MilesS. (2000). Youth lifestyles in a changing world. McGraw-Hill Education.
71.
MishraA.MaheswarappaS. S.ColbyC. L. (2018). Technology readiness of teenagers: A consumer socialization perspective. Journal of Services Marketing. 32(5), 592-604.
72.
MoschisG. P.ChurchillG. A. (1978). Consumer socialization: A theoretical and empirical analysis. Journal of Marketing Research, 15(4), 599-609.
73.
NaderiI.Van SteenburgE. (2018). Me first, then the environment: Young Millennials as green consumers. Young Consumers, 19, 280-295.
ObermillerC.SpangenbergE. R. (1998). Development of a scale to measure consumer skepticism toward advertising. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7(2), 159-186.
76.
OregS.Katz-GerroT. (2006). Predicting proenvironmental behavior cross-nationally: Values, the theory of planned behavior, and value-belief-norm theory. Environment and Behavior, 38(4), 462-483.
77.
ParguelB.Benoît-MoreauF.LarceneuxF. (2011). How sustainability ratings might deter ‘Greenwashing’: A closer look at ethical corporate communication. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(1), 15.
78.
ParkJ. S.HoyM. G. (2015). Tapping into Simmons OneView: A method for deconstructing aggregate data for advertising research. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 36(2), 195-211.
79.
PereiraV. C.MacielC. (2013). The internet generation and the posthumous interaction. In MacielC.PereiraV. C. (Eds.), Digital legacy and interaction: Post-mortem issues (pp. 63-81). Springer International Publishing.
80.
PietersR. G. (1991). Changing garbage disposal patterns of consumers: Motivation, ability, and performance. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 10(2), 59-76.
81.
PoolerJ. A. (2018). Demographic targeting: The essential role of population groups in retail marketing. Routledge.
82.
PriporasC.-V.StylosN.FotiadisA. K. (2017). Generation Z consumers’ expectations of interactions in smart retailing: A future agenda. Computers in Human Behavior, 77, 374-381.
83.
ReevesT. C.OhE. (2008). Generational Differences. In Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (5, pp. 314-318). The Business Review Cambridge.
84.
RobertsJ. A. (1996). Green consumers in the 1990s: Profile and implications for advertising. Journal of Business Research, 36(3), 217-231.
SalzmannO.Ionescu-somersA.StegerU. (2005). The business case for corporate sustainability: Literature review and research options. European Management Journal, 23(1), 27-36.
87.
SchalteggerS.SynnestvedtT. (2002). The link between ‘green’ and economic success: Environmental management as the crucial trigger between environmental and economic performance. Journal of Environmental Management, 65(4), 339-346.
88.
SchwartzS. H.HowardJ. A. (1981). A normative decision-making model of altruism. Altruism and Helping Behavior, 189-211.
89.
SeemillerC.GraceM. (2016). Generation Z goes to college. John Wiley & Sons.
90.
ShethJ. N.NewmanB. I.GrossB. L. (1991). Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 159-170.
91.
SkarmeasD.LeonidouC. N. (2013). When consumers doubt, Watch out! the role of CSR skepticism. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1831-1838.
92.
StegerU. (2006). Building a business case for corporate sustainability. In SchalteggerS.WagnerM. (Eds.), Managing the business case for sustainability (pp. 412-443). Greenleaf: Aizlewood Mill.
93.
SternP. C.DietzT.AbelT.GuagnanoG. A.KalofL. (1999). A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Human Ecology Review, 6(2), 81-97.
94.
StraughanR. D.RobertsJ. A. (1999). Environmental segmentation alternatives: A look at green consumer behavior in the new millennium. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 16(6), 558-575.
95.
ThaichonP. (2017). Consumer socialization process: The role of age in children’s online shopping behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 34, 38-47.
96.
ThøgersenJ. (2002). Direct experience and the strength of the personal norm–behavior relationship. Psychology & Marketing, 19(10), 881-893.
97.
ThomasC.SharpV. (2013). Understanding the normalisation of recycling behaviour and its implications for other pro-environmental behaviours: A review of social norms and recycling. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 79, 11-20.
98.
TormalaZ. L.PettyR. E. (2004). Resistance to persuasion and attitude certainty: The moderating role of elaboration. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(11), 1446-1457.
Van RiperC. J.KyleG. T. (2014). Understanding the internal processes of behavioral engagement in a national park: A latent variable path analysis of the value-belief-norm theory. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 38, 288-297.
101.
VetlesenA. J. (1993). Perception, empathy, and judgment: An inquiry into the preconditions of moral performance. Penn State Press.
102.
Vicente-MolinaM. A.Fernández-SáinzA.Izagirre-OlaizolaJ. (2013). Environmental knowledge and other variables affecting pro-environmental behaviour: Comparison of university students from emerging and advanced countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 61, 130-138.
WagnerM.SchalteggerS. (2004). The effect of corporate environmental strategy choice and environmental performance on competitiveness and economic performance: An empirical study of EU manufacturing. European Management Journal, 22(5), 557-572.
105.
WegenerD. T.PettyR. E. (1997). The flexible correction model: The role of Naive theories of bias in bias correction. In ZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 29, pp. 141-208). Academic Press.
106.
WrightT. S. A. (2002). Definitions and frameworks for environmental sustainability in higher education. Higher Education Policy, 15(2), 105-120.
107.
XieG.CavalleroA.ChengM. (2014). Reluctant for a reason? A persuasion knowledge perspective on green advertising. In KahleL. R.Gurel-AtayE. (Eds.), Communicating sustainability for the green economy (pp. 141-157). M.E. Sharpe.
