Table A3.

Summary of the hypotheses testing for the supplementary study (Study 2B)

HypothesesAnalysisDependent variableF-statistics, mean differences, and coefficientsRemark
H1Main effects of DRR decisionWTP[F(1, 226) = 92.28, p < 0.001]Supported
DRR (Madoption = 4.35, SD = 1.49) vs (Mnon_adoption = 2.53, SD = 1.36)
Advocacy intentions[F(1, 226) = 111.78, p < 0.001]Supported
DRR (Madoption = 4.63, SD = 1.59) vs (Mnon_adoption = 2.46, SD = 1.50)
H2Moderation by power distance belief)WTP[F(1, 226) = 4.33, p < 0.04] 
Consumers low in PDB:(Madoption = 4.37, SD = 1.45 vs Mnon-adoption = 2.15, SD = 1.08, b = 2.21, SE = 0.27, p < 0.01) 
 Consumers high in PDB:(Madoption = 4.34, SD = 1.54 vs Mnon-adoption = 2.91, SD = 1.51, b = 1.43, SE = 0.26, p < 0.01) 
Advocacy intentions[F(1, 226) = 7.96, p < 0.001] 
Consumers low in PDB:(Madoption = 4.84, SD = 1.37 vs Mnon-adoption = 2.10, SD = 1.25, b = 2.74, SE = 0.29, p < 0.01) 
 Consumers low in PDB: (Madoption = 4.42, SD = 1.77 vs. Mnon-adoption = 2.82, SD = 1.65, b = 1.60, SE = 0.29, p < 0.01) 
 Moderated mediation 
H3Moderated mediation through perceived altruismWTP(I = −0.55, SE = 0.24, 95% CI = [−1.06, −0.11])Supported
Consumers low in PDB: (b = 2.26, CI [1.72, 2.92]).
Consumers high in PDB: (b = 1.71, CI [1.30, 2.20])
Advocacy intentions(I = −0.69, SE = 0.28, 95% CI = [−1.24, −0.15])Supported
Consumers low in PDB: (b = 2.81, CI [2.24, 3.39]).
Consumers high in PDB: (b = 2.12, CI [1.64, 2.64])

Source(s): Authors’ own work

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal