Next Article in Journal
Air Pollution Prediction Based on Discrete Wavelets and Deep Learning
Previous Article in Journal
“Some Angles Are Gonna Be Weird”: Tinkering with Math and Weaving
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 9
10.3390/su15097356
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Did Anything Good Come Out of the Pandemic? COVID-19-Stress Induced Self-Regulatory Sustainable Apparel Consumption among the Millennials in the U.S.

by
Swagata Chakraborty
1,* and
Amrut Sadachar
2
1
Department of Merchandising and Digital Retailing, University of North Texas, Denton, TX 76203, USA
2
Department of Consumer and Design Sciences, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36830, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(9), 7356; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097356
Submission received: 8 February 2023 / Revised: 30 March 2023 / Accepted: 26 April 2023 / Published: 28 April 2023
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Based on the theoretical frameworks of cognitive dissonance theory, regulatory focus theory, and the compensatory consumer behavior model, we proposed and tested a conceptual model delineating the relationships between COVID-19-stress, commitment to the environment, and intentions for sustainable apparel consumption in terms of intentions for purchasing sustainable apparel and divesting apparel (e.g., handing down or donating apparel). Conducting an online survey (n = 312) with the national millennial population of the U.S., we found that COVID-19-stress positively influenced (i) commitment to the environment and (ii) purchase intentions for sustainable apparel; commitment to the environment positively influenced (iii) purchase intentions for sustainable apparel and (iv) intentions for divesting apparel. Although COVID-19-stress did not influence intentions for divesting apparel directly, commitment to the environment mediated the relationships between COVID-19-stress and both purchase intentions for sustainable apparel and intentions for divesting apparel. We suggest that COVID-19-stress triggered self-regulatory sustainable apparel consumption intentions due to a heightened commitment to the environment to protect the environment amid the pandemic. Based on the findings of our study, we recommend the sustainable apparel brands and marketers promote how sustainable apparel consumption can protect the environment to make the environment and human beings less susceptible to the future outbreaks of pandemics.

1. Introduction

With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, several researchers indicated how the consequences of the pandemic were particularly dire due to poor environmental health and how human actions were partly responsible for the negative impact on the environment [1,2]. The increasing environmental concerns and/or awareness [1,2] and intentions for sustainable consumption during the pandemic [1,2,3,4,5] testify to people’s willingness to protect the environment to lessen the brunt of the pandemic due to poor environmental health. Millennials (i.e., people born between the years 1981 to 1996) were known to have a high environmental concern, pro-environmental attitude, and favorable intentions for sustainable consumption before the pandemic [6,7,8,9,10]. When the pandemic brought unprecedented changes into people’s lives and lifestyles, were the millennials still committed to the environment and willing to engage in sustainable consumption? Several studies in the past have shown millennials’ propensity to purchase sustainable (e.g., environmentally friendly) apparel [11,12,13] and donate/hand down apparel [14,15,16,17]. However, there is limited research on whether millennials are maintaining their status quo of being environmentally conscious and whether they are still interested in engaging in sustainable apparel consumption (e.g., purchasing sustainable apparel and donating apparel) after the onset of the pandemic. In this present study, we have addressed this research gap.
Furthermore, sustainable tourism [18,19,20,21] and sustainable practices in the hospitality sector [21,22,23] have grown during the pandemic. Because these instances reflect how environmental concerns and pro-environmental attitudes are positively influencing pro-environmental consumption in the tourism and hospitality industries, it is pertinent to investigate if the heightened pro-environmental attitudes and concerns can encourage intentions for sustainable apparel consumption as well. However, despite the apparel industry being one of the biggest contributors to environmental ill-health [24], there is limited research on how the pandemic influenced intentions for sustainable apparel consumption. Our research attempts to fill this gap in the literature.
Additionally, the different negative consequences of the pandemic (e.g., increased deaths and perceived feelings of alienation) evoked COVID-19-stress (i.e., increased stress, depression, and other negative psychological and emotional responses to the pandemic) [25]. Several studies have indicated that the instances of maladaptive practices (e.g., alcohol, drugs, the internet, and gaming addictions) increased manifold amid the pandemic [26,27,28]. However, there is limited research on alternative ways of coping with COVID-19-stress which can reduce millennials’ dependence on maladaptive practices. Although a few research studies indicated how the anxiety and stress experienced during the pandemic encouraged sustainable consumption intentions (e.g., buying environmentally friendly products) [29,30,31], there is a lack of research on how COVID-19-stress can beget intentions for sustainable apparel consumption and if that could be an effective strategy for coping with COVID-19-stress among millennials. Our study opens avenues for research in this area.
Furthermore, several studies have indicated instances of wasteful consumption amid the pandemic [32,33,34,35,36], including instances of panic buying (i.e., buying products in excess due to the fear of the products becoming unavailable) [33,36,37,38]. Even millennials, who are considered to be environmentally conscious engaged in panic buying amid the pandemic, reflecting wasteful consumption [39,40]. While sustainable consumption is conceptually less wasteful in nature, increased instances of both sustainable consumption and wasteful consumption amid the pandemic seem contradictory. Although some studies suggested that the consumption of toilet paper, groceries, and food increased among millennials amid the pandemic [39], intentions for purchasing leisure items and apparel decreased during this time [39]. Therefore, it could be implied that the increase or decrease in purchase intentions amid the pandemic was largely dependent on the product category. While a decreased intention for purchasing apparel reflects intentions for engaging in less wasteful consumption, it is not clear whether the motivation for reduced apparel shopping was to protect the environment and if that could relate to a higher purchase intention for sustainable apparel and/or donated/handed down apparel. We imply that engaging in panic buying may have triggered an insecurity among millennials in terms of not being able to maintain their identity of being environmentally conscious, contributing to their COVID-19-stress and encouraging them in engaging in sustainable apparel consumption to reaffirm their commitment to the environment. We support this assumption based on the literature on the compensatory consumer behavior model [41,42,43], which posits that when individuals experience a discrepancy in their desired identity, they tend to achieve that identity by consuming products that symbolize that identity. In the context of our study, purchasing sustainable apparel or divesting apparel could symbolize environmentally friendly behavior that can help millennials maintain their commitment to the environment which may have become threatened amid the pandemic. Therefore, our research explored the underlying motivation for sustainable apparel consumption among millennials amid the pandemic. Specifically, we tested if a commitment to the environment can influence intentions for sustainable apparel consumption among this population when they are experiencing COVID-19-stress. In addition to the compensatory consumer behavior model, we have applied the self-regulatory theory [44] and cognitive dissonance theory [45] to support our assumptions in exploring the relationships between the aforementioned variables.
Specifically, the objectives of our study were to explore the influence of (i) COVID-19-stress on commitment to the environment and intentions for sustainable apparel consumption in terms of purchase intentions for sustainable apparel and intentions for divesting apparel; (ii) commitment to the environment on purchase intentions for sustainable apparel and intentions for divesting apparel; and (iii) how commitment to the environment mediates the relationship between COVID-19-stress and intentions for purchasing sustainable apparel or divesting apparel. We tested our conceptual model through structural equation modeling with the national population of millennials in the U.S. We believe that our research will give directions to the researchers and marketers exploring evolving consumer behavior amid the pandemic among the millennials of the U.S.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Theoretical Framework: Regulatory Focus Theory, Cognitive Dissonance Theory, and Compensatory Consumer Behavior Model

The regulatory focus theory posits that people have two distinct foci for self-regulation: promotion-focused and prevention-focused [44]. The promotion-focused people are driven by aspirations, growth, and developmental needs to align their actual self with their ideal self. The prevention-focused people are driven by security needs to align their actual self with their ought self to fulfill their duties and secure their future [44]. The cognitive dissonance theory [45] posits that when there is an inconsistency between what an individual wants and what the individual has, the individual experiences a psychological discomfort (i.e., dissonance). That state of discomfort will motivate the individual to reach that desired state of being and reduce the dissonance by making changes in the situation at hand [45]. Integrating the regulatory focus theory [44] and cognitive dissonance theory [45], we suggest that when promotion-focused people are not able to reach their ideal self and prevention-focused people are not able to reach their ought self, they will experience dissonance, which in turn, will motivate them to behave in ways that will reduce the dissonance. Furthermore, the compensatory consumer behavior model posits that when people have self-discrepancy in their identity (i.e., a gap between a desired identity and the actual self), they experience aversive consequences (e.g., negative affective, cognitive, and physiological responses) which drive them to reduce that discrepancy in identity and the aversive consequences through consuming certain products [41]. The coping strategy could be in terms of symbolic self-completion where they purchase/use certain products that symbolically represent their desired identity, thereby reducing the aversive consequences by eliminating or attenuating the discrepancy, reducing the importance of the discrepancy, or lowering the salience of the discrepancy [41]. In the context of this present study, we integrate the compensatory consumer behavior model [41] to support our assumptions further on how millennials may experience self-discrepancy in their commitment to the environment amid the pandemic, contributing to a higher COVID-19-stress and how that in turn motivates them in engaging in sustainable apparel consumption to reaffirm their identity of being committed to the environment.
Previously, researchers have indicated the relationship between the self-regulatory foci and sustainable consumption/sustainably oriented mindset [46,47,48]. For example, Minero et al. [48] found that prevention-focused people engage in both short- and long-term green behavior. Long-term promotion-focus increases environmental concern [46]. Drawing from the regulatory focus theory [44] and cognitive dissonance theory [45], we implied that the promotion-focused millennials will engage in sustainable consumption to reach their ideal selves who believe that engaging in pro-environmental behaviors would be idealistic to protect the environment amid the pandemic. In doing so, they can avoid the dissonance that could have been evoked due to the perceived sense of not doing enough to protect the environment and not engaging in sustainable consumption. Similarly, based on the regulatory focus theory [44] and cognitive dissonance theory [45], we implied that the prevention-focused millennials will engage in sustainable consumption to reach their ought selves who believe that it is their duty to engage in pro-environmental behaviors to protect the environment amid the pandemic. In doing so, they can avoid the dissonance that could have been evoked due to the perceived sense of failing to perform their duties to protect the environment and not engaging in sustainable consumption. In this present study, we have conceptualized cognitive dissonance as an antecedent of COVID-19-stress. COVID-19-stress is defined as the negative psychological and emotional experiences during the pandemic [25]. In our study, we suggest that people will experience COVID-19-stress when they want to stay in a healthy environment to protect themselves and their close ones from contracting COVID-19 but are unable to do so due to living in an environment of poor health. Furthermore, we suggest that the emerging instances of poor environmental health amid the pandemic will trigger a self-discrepancy in the identity of being committed to the environment among millennials, increasing COVID-19-stress, which in turn will motivate them to strengthen their commitment to the environment through sustainable apparel consumption. Therefore, we have conceptualized self-discrepancy in the identity of being committed to the environment as another antecedent of COVID-19-stress.
During the pandemic, instances of growing environmental concerns were rife [1,2,3,4,5]. A few researchers mentioned increased sustainable consumption behavior during the pandemic [3,5,49]. In the context of this present study, we suggest that the anticipated dissonance and self-discrepancy in the identity of being committed to the environment among the prevention- and promotion-focused millennials for not engaging in pro-environmental behavior can contribute to their COVID-19-stress, evoking commitment to the environment and intentions for divesting apparel and purchasing sustainable apparel to avoid chances of experiencing further dissonance/discrepancies in identity. In this present study, we have defined commitment to the environment as an individual’s connectedness with and protective instincts for nature. We defined intentions for divesting apparel as the willingness to hand down or donate apparel instead of discarding it. A purchase intention for sustainable apparel is defined as the willingness to purchase green (i.e., environmentally friendly) apparel over other available non-green apparel. We have conceptualized self-regulatory sustainable apparel consumption in terms of the intention to purchase sustainable apparel or divest apparel in the hope of avoiding negative consequences to environmental health (among the prevention-focused individuals) or to improve environmental health (among the promotion-focused individuals). In the next section, we have described how COVID-19-stress can influence commitment to the environment and intentions for divesting apparel and purchasing sustainable apparel.

2.2. COVID-19-Stress and Commitment to the Environment

Studies showed that people were particularly susceptible to the brunt of the pandemic due to poor environmental health [50,51,52,53]. For example, poor air quality was associated with lung-related problems and co-morbidities, making people more susceptible to contracting COVID-19 [26] and obtaining severe symptoms [51], including higher risks of death [50,51,52]. Therefore, poor environmental health can contribute to COVID-19-stress due to the anticipated risks of contracting the disease, suffering from dire symptoms, and/or dying. Based on the compensatory consumer behavior model [41] and cognitive dissonance theory [45], we suggest that all of these instances of poor environmental health amid the pandemic may trigger an aversive response among millennials and heighten COVID-19-stress that their contributions in protecting the environment have not been enough and that they need to be more committed to the environment to bring a positive change.
For example, anxiety due to the perceived threat to climate change and poor environmental health led to adaptive behaviors such as climate activism to reduce the carbon footprint [23,54]. The fear of COVID-19 was found to be positively correlated with low-carbon footprint behaviors [29,30,31]. Integrating this literature with the cognitive dissonance theory [45] and compensatory consumer behavior model [41], we suggest that this COVID-19-stress will motivate millennials to protect the environment in the hope of improving environmental health and becoming more immune to the health risks associated with the pandemic. Soga et al. [55] suggested that COVID-19 has altered human–nature interactions in significant ways which can have a long-term effect on human behavior to protect the environment. Based on the cognitive dissonance theory [45] and compensatory consumer behavior model [41], we suggest that having higher COVID-19-stress will increase commitment to the environment, increasing the assurance that improved environmental health will help in ending the pandemic and making humans more immune to combat the disease. Based on this discussion, we propose the following hypothesis.
Hypothesis 1 (H1).
COVID-19-stress will positively influence commitment to the environment.

2.3. COVID-19-Stress and Intentions for Sustainable Apparel Consumption

There were several instances of improved environmental conditions in terms of cleaner air and water in urban locations after the onset of the pandemic [56,57,58]. A major reason behind this was the temporary closures of businesses across the world which helped in curbing the amount of industrial waste disposals into the environment [56]. We suggest that these instances motivated people to introspect more about their consumptions and how human actions impact environmental health. Millennials, who are known for their sustainable mindsets, may have questioned their identity of being committed to the environment when they engaged in wasteful consumption amid the pandemic. Based on the compensatory consumer behavior model [41], we suggest that those wasteful consumptions amid the pandemic evoked a self-discrepancy in the identity of being committed to the environment, encouraging millennials in purchasing sustainable apparel or divesting apparel to regain their sense of commitment to the environment. We support our assumptions with the extant literature which suggests that the anticipated guilt for not consuming sustainable products begets future intentions for purchasing sustainable products [59,60,61,62,63]. Advertisements with negative appeals attract attention toward the message [64]. Fear appeal in an advertisement can positively influence purchase intentions for green products [65]. The fear of COVID-19 [23,30,66], the perceived threat of COVID-19 [67], and a perceived knowledge about the pandemic [68] lead to increased sustainable and conscious consumption intentions that lower the carbon footprint and negative impact on the environment. In the context of this present study, we suggest that the fear of COVID-19 (i.e., COVID-19-stress) can motivate people to protect the environment among the prevention-focused people to reduce potential outbreaks of future pandemics or reduce the brunt of the ongoing pandemic.
Some studies suggested that prevention-focused appeals encourage green consumption more than promotion-focused appeals [48]. Some studies have indicated that promotion-focused appeals are more effective for sustainable and reduced consumption as compared to prevention-focused appeals [69]. Zou and Chan [70] indicated both prevention-focused and promotion-focused people can engage in green behaviors with a mediating influence of ethical judgement and ethical intention. Kareklas et al. [71] suggested that both promotion- and prevention-focused environmental appeals can generate a favorable attitude toward addressing environmental concerns in different situational contexts. Taken together, we suggest that both promotion and prevention regulatory foci can encourage intentions for sustainable consumption depending upon the situational context. For example, the pandemic increased environmental awareness and sustainable consumption intentions [5,72] and decreased the frequency of purchasing apparel [49].
Drawing from the regulatory focus theory [44] and the cognitive dissonance theory [45], it could be implied that the promotion-focused millennials may have a high commitment to the environment and evoke intentions for purchasing sustainable apparel and divesting apparel to improve/recover environmental health to cope with their COVID-19-stress. On the other hand, the prevention-focused millennials may exhibit a high commitment to the environment and evoke intentions for purchasing sustainable apparel and divesting apparel due to the insecurity that if they do not do so it will negatively impact the environment, worsening the brunt of the pandemic. Therefore, the prevention-focused millennials may feel that it is their duty to be more committed to the environment and engage in sustainable apparel consumption by purchasing sustainable apparel or divesting apparel to help environmental health not become worse during the pandemic. Based on this discussion, we propose the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 2 (H2).
COVID-19-stress will positively influence purchase intentions for sustainable apparel.
Hypothesis 3 (H3).
COVID-19-stress will positively influence intentions for divesting apparel.

2.4. Commitment to the Environment as a Mediator between COVID-19-Stress and the Intentions for Sustainable Apparel Consumption

Researchers have shown that a higher concern or commitment to the environment encourages sustainable consumption, including higher intentions for purchasing sustainable apparel [62,73,74] and divesting apparel [75,76,77]. A pro-environmental attitude and environmental concern increases intentions for slowing down the pace of consumption [78]. As such, people often hand down or donate apparel and/or engage in renting apparel to minimize the dependance on virgin natural resources to make new clothing items [79]. Several studies have shown that millennials purchase sustainable apparel [11,12,13] or donate apparel [14,15,16,17] to protect the environment. However, the pandemic also induced wasteful consumption intentions in certain product categories of essential items such as food and toilet paper [32,33,34,35,36]. Millennials also engaged in panic buying to cope with the stress of not having access to these essential items amid the pandemic [39]. While there was an increase in the consumption of food and toilet paper among millennials, apparel shopping decreased during this time [39]. Based on the compensatory consumer behavior model [41], cognitive dissonance theory [45], and regulatory focus theory [44], we suggest that the wasteful consumption of these essential products contributed to COVID-19-stress by threatening millennials’ commitment to the environment. As a result, millennials curbed their apparel shopping to reaffirm their commitment to the environment. Since the consumption of sustainable apparel and donating apparel could protect the environment as well, we suggest that the commitment to the environment evoked by COVID-19-stress could encourage millennials to purchase sustainable apparel and donate apparel to compensate for their negative impact on the environment due to the overconsumption of other product categories. Additionally, drawing from the cognitive dissonance theory [45] and regulatory focus theory [44], we suggest that COVID-19-stress will positively influence commitment to the environment which in turn will positively influence intentions for purchasing sustainable apparel and divesting apparel to avoid anticipated guilt for not protecting the environment among the prevention-focused consumers and to evoke pride among the promotion-focused consumers for improving environmental health. Furthermore, because purchasing sustainable apparel and/or divesting apparel could symbolize commitment to the environment based on the compensatory consumer behavior model [41], we imply that millennials will cope with their COVID-19-stress by purchasing and/or divesting apparel to eliminate or attenuate their self-discrepancy in their identity of being committed to the environment through symbolic self-completion. Therefore, we propose the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 4 (H4).
Commitment to the environment will positively influence purchase intentions for sustainable apparel.
Hypothesis 5 (H5).
Commitment to the environment will positively influence intentions for divesting apparel.
Hypothesis 6 (H6).
Commitment to the environment will mediate the relationship between COVID-19-stress and (H6a) purchase intentions for sustainable apparel and (H6b) intentions for divesting apparel.
Based on the aforementioned hypotheses (H1–H6), we propose the following conceptual model (see Figure 1).

3. Method

An online survey designed in Qualtrics was administered on Amazon Mechanical Turk to collect the data. We used purposeful sampling to collect our data from the national population of millennials in the U.S. (born between 1981 and 1996). Researchers have employed purposeful sampling of millennials in studies related to sustainability and sustainable consumption in the U.S. [6,7,8,10,11,12,13,78,80]. Since our study addressed questions related to sustainable consumption in the U.S. as well, millennials were considered to be an appropriate sample. We used the criterion Location is U.S. in the MTurk platform to ensure recruitment from the current residents of the U.S. To ensure good quality data, we added the criterion to include only those MTurkers in the survey who had an 80% or higher HIT (i.e., Human Intelligence Task) approval rate.
Before entering the survey, the participants read and consented to the Institutional Review Board-approved information letter. After the prospective MTurkers consented to participate in the survey, screening questions (e.g., which of the following best describes your age group; which of the following best describes your current county of residence) were employed to make sure only the millennial MTurkers of the U.S. participated in the survey. All the ineligible participants were shown the message “Sorry, you do not quality to participate in this study” and taken to the termination page of the survey. Extant measurement scales were adapted to measure COVID-19-stress [25], commitment to the environment [81], purchase intentions for sustainable apparel [82], and intentions for divesting apparel [83]. These measurement scales were indicated to have the required validity and reliability in the extant literature [25,81,82,83]. All the variables were measured in 7-point Likert scales (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree). The measurement scale items were randomized to minimize potential order effects. To minimize potential non-responsiveness, we added the forced response feature (i.e., respondents cannot move to the next question before answering all the questions in the current page) to all the questions. The questions related to the dependent variables (i.e., purchase intentions for sustainable apparel and intentions for divesting apparel) were followed by the questions related to the mediator (i.e., commitment to the environment), independent variable (i.e., COVID-19-stress), and the demographic variables. At the end of the survey, the survey code was provided for the MTurkers to receive their participation compensation.
The direction for the questions related to intentions for sustainable apparel consumption was as follows: Please SELECT an appropriate box to indicate your level of agreement regarding your thoughts about buying, using, and disposing apparel. The direction for the questions related to commitment to environmental issues was as follows: Please SELECT an appropriate box to indicate your level of agreement with the following statements regarding your thoughts about environmental issues. The direction for the questions related to COVID-19-stress was as follows: Please SELECT an appropriate box to indicate your level of agreement with the following statements regarding your experience of being in the time of COVID-19 pandemic.
The sample size of 200 is considered acceptable for analyses involving structural equation modeling (SEM) [84]. Additionally, a subject to item ratio of 10:1 is deemed adequate for conducting factor analysis [85,86]. The maximum number of items in a single scale for this study was 8. Therefore, a minimum sample size of 80 was considered adequate to run the factor analysis. For SEM analysis, a minimum sample size of 150 is considered sufficient for convergence and proper solution when latent variables with 3 or more indicators per factor exist [87]. Because all the latent variables in this study consisted of more than 3 indicators per factor, the sample size of 300 was considered acceptable to compute all required analyses (i.e., factor analysis and SEM).

4. Data Analysis

4.1. Sample Profiling

A total of 416 responses were initially collected. A total of 100 responses were deleted due to straight-liner responses and respondents being younger or older than 24 and 39 years, respectively. We used attention check questions (e.g., Please click on Strongly Agree if you are reading this question) to identify straight-liner responses. Anyone not responding to the attention check question correctly were considered to have click-through responses, thus bringing errors into the data for responding to the items without properly reading them. Respondents who gave straight-liner responses but correctly responded to the attention check questions were considered to be truthfully and attentively responding to the items. We retained those responses. Therefore, the useable sample size was 312. A majority of the respondents were between 30 and 35 years (f = 132; 42.3%); male (f = 171; 54.8%); employed for wages (f = 204; 65.4%); had a 4 year college degree (f = 179; 57.4%) and an annual household income between USD 31,000 and USD 60,000 (f = 120; 38.8%); were married (f = 224; 71.8%), and Caucasian (f = 215; 68.9%) (see Table 1).

4.2. Reliability and Validity

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was performed in Mplus (version 8.6) which fitted the data well (χ2 = 433.68, df = 164, p < 0.001; χ2/df = 2.64; RMSEA = 0.07; CFI = 0.92, TLI = 0.91, SRMR = 0.06). The factor loadings for all the measurement scales were above 0.40 and ranged between 0.67 and 0.86 (see Table 2). The composite reliability (CR) and Cronbach’s alpha were greater than 0.70 for all the measurement scales and ranged between 0.74 and 0.93, indicating that the measurement scales were reliable. The average variance extracted (AVE) for the scales were above 0.50 and ranged between 0.55 and 0.61, indicating adequate convergent validity, except for intentions for divesting apparel (AVE = 0.48). However, since the CR (0.74) and Cronbach’s alpha (0.74) of intentions for divesting apparel were above 0.70, the factor loadings were greater than 0.40 (0.67 to 0.71), and the square root of the AVE was greater than the inter-construct correlations, we retained the variable for further analysis (see Table 3). The square roots of AVEs for all the other variables were higher than the inter-construct correlations, indicating that all the measurement scales had adequate discriminant validity. No items were deleted in any of the measurement scales.

4.3. Hypotheses Testing

The hypotheses were tested in Structural Equation Modelling as a comprehensive model in Mplus. The model fitted the data well (χ2 = 433.68, df = 164, p < 0.001; χ2/df = 2.64; RMSEA = 0.07; CFI = 0.92, TLI = 0.91, SRMR = 0.06). H1 (β = 0.43, p < 0.001), H2 (β = 0.37, p < 0.001), H4 (β = 0.56, p < 0.001), and H5 (β = 0.71, p < 0.001) were supported. H3 (β = −0.05, p = 0.43) was rejected. A summary of the findings of H1-H5 is given in Figure 2. H6a (β = 0.24, p < 0.001, C.I. = [0.18, 0.30]) and H6b (β = 0.30, p < 0.001, C.I. = [0.22, 0.38]) were supported. The variance explained in commitment to the environment (R2 = 18.2%, p < 0.001), purchase intentions for sustainable apparel (R2 = 63.1%, p < 0.001), and intentions for divesting apparel (R2 = 47%, p < 0.001) were significant.

5. Discussion

Several studies emphasized the importance of improving environmental health to combat the dire consequences of the global pandemic, COVID-19 [50,51,52,53]. Specifically, studies showed that the consequences of the pandemic were particularly severe due to poor environmental health [50,51,52,53]. Therefore, there was an increased environmental awareness, concern, and attitude amid the pandemic that led to an increased favorable attitude toward and intentions for sustainable consumption [5,78,88]. These instances indicated people’s willingness to engage in sustainable consumption to improve environmental health to protect themselves from the brunt of the ongoing pandemic and the future outbreaks of other pandemics. Although there is substantial research on how the pandemic increased sustainable consumption in the tourism and hospitality industries [18,19,20,21,22,23], there is a literature gap on how the pandemic influenced intentions for sustainable apparel consumption. With the textile industry being one of the major contributors to poor environmental health [24], it was important to explore how consumers were trying to improve environmental health at an individual level through sustainable apparel consumption to combat the consequences of the pandemic. In conceptualizing sustainable apparel consumption in terms of intentions for purchasing sustainable (i.e., environmentally friendly) apparel and divesting (e.g., donating) apparel, we have addressed this literature gap by exploring how a commitment to the environment evoked due to COVID-19-stress influences intentions for purchasing sustainable apparel and divesting apparel among the millennials of the U.S. We have chosen millennials as our target sample because despite this population being identified as environmentally conscious [6,7,8,10,11,12,13,78,80], there is limited research on how this population contributed to protecting the environment amid the pandemic through their apparel consumption. In the next section, we have discussed the theoretical and marketing implications of our study.

5.1. Theoretical Implications

Several studies have indicated that the fear and stress experienced during the pandemic influenced intentions for sustainable consumption [1,2,3,4,5,29,30,31]. Because millennials are widely known for their environmental concerns/awareness [6,7,8,10,11,12,13,78,80], it is particularly important to explore how they have responded to the environmental crisis amid the pandemic through their consumption habits. Studies have shown an increase in wasteful [32,33,34,35,36] and sustainable consumption [29,30,31] amid the pandemic to cope with the fear and stress experienced due to the pandemic. While wasteful and sustainable consumptions are contradictory in nature, the extant literature indicated that millennials engaged in the wasteful consumption of essential products (e.g., food; toilet paper) but refrained from apparel shopping amid the pandemic [39]. Although refraining from shopping reflects the desire to protect the environment, it is unclear if millennials showed reluctance in shopping apparel because they perceived apparel as a non-essential product category or to reinstate their commitment to the environment which may have been threatened due to the wasteful consumption of other product categories. We have addressed this literature gap by delineating how millennials are maintaining their status quo of being committed to the environment through purchasing sustainable apparel or divesting (e.g., donating) apparel when they are experiencing COVID-19-stress.
According to the regulatory focus theory, people who are promotion-focused will engage in activities that will improve future situations, and people who are prevention- focused will engage in activities that will help avoid negative consequences of their actions in the future [44]. In this present study, we proposed that promotion-focused millennials with a high commitment to the environment will engage in sustainable apparel consumption to improve environmental health so as to make the environment better equipped for combating COVID-19 or future outbreaks of pandemics, thereby coping with COVID-19-stress in the process. On the other hand, prevention-focused millennials will engage in sustainable apparel consumption to prevent further negative impacts on environmental health so as to avoid dire consequences of COVID-19 or future outbreaks of other pandemics, thereby alleviating COVID-19-stress in the process. In summary, we suggested that irrespective of whether millennials are promotion- or prevention-focused, they will engage in sustainable apparel consumption to protect the environment. We supported our assumptions from the extant literature, which states that both prevention and promotion foci can lead to intentions for sustainable consumption [70,71].
Furthermore, studies have shown that despite being highly environmentally conscious, millennials engaged in the wasteful consumption of certain essential products such as food and toilet paper amid the pandemic [39,40]. We suggested that such wasteful consumptions may have triggered an insecurity in terms of millennials’ commitment to the environment, contributing to higher COVID-19-stress. We supported these assumptions based on the cognitive dissonance theory [45] and compensatory consumer behavior model [41]. For example, the cognitive dissonance theory posits that when people want to attain a certain identity or sense of being but are unable to do so, they will experience a psychological discomfort (i.e., cognitive dissonance) that will drive them in engaging in activities that will help them in attaining those identities or sense of being and reduce the dissonance. Similarly, the compensatory consumption model [41] posits that people consume different products that symbolically represent the identity that they desire, thereby helping in reducing the insecurity in their desired identity. Therefore, purchasing sustainable apparel or divesting apparel may help millennials reaffirm their identities of being committed to the environment thereby facilitating in coping with COVID-19-stress.
Based on the regulatory focus theory [44] and cognitive dissonance theory [45], we proposed and found support for our conceptual model that COVID-19-stress positively influences commitment to the environment and purchase intentions for sustainable apparel. Additionally, the commitment to the environment mediated the relationship between COVID-19-stress and purchase intentions for sustainable apparel. Therefore, the higher the degree of COVID-19-stress, the higher would be the commitment to the environment which in turn would encourage purchase intentions for sustainable apparel. Our findings support the extant literature that COVID-19 led to an increased environmental awareness and concern along with pro-environmental consumption behaviors [1,2,3,4,5]. A few studies mentioned that the fear of COVID-19 and the anxiety experienced during COVID-19 motivated people to engage in sustainable consumption in the hope to reduce the carbon footprint [23,29,30,31,54]. Together, the findings of our study and the extant literature imply that people became more pro-environmental and engaged in sustainable consumption when they saw the immediate risk of poor environmental health on the severity of the pandemic and its dire consequences on human health. This contributes to the theory building of the cognitive dissonance theory [45] by suggesting that when people want to stay safe and healthy amid the pandemic but are unable to do so due to being susceptible to infection due to poor environmental health, they will experience dissonance that will drive them to become more committed to the environment and increase their purchase intentions for sustainable apparel in the hope of improving environmental health and becoming more immune to COVID-19.
Although we did not find support for our hypothesis that COVID-19-stress positively influences intentions for divesting apparel, we did find an indirect positive influence of COVID-19-stress on the intentions for divesting apparel via commitment to the environment. Therefore, the higher the degree of COVID-19-stress, the higher would be the commitment to the environment which in turn would encourage intentions for divesting apparel. This further corroborates the significance of the pandemic in evoking pro-environmental attitudes in the form of a heightened commitment to the environment which can encourage people in handing down or donating apparel.
In the context of millennials in particular, we expanded on the extant literature which suggested that this population showed reluctance in purchasing apparel amid the pandemic [39]. Specifically, we suggested that millennials can still show positive intentions for purchasing apparel or divesting apparel as long as their commitment to the environment is not threatened. Further research is required to explore millennials’ attitude toward purchasing other sustainable product categories and if the perceived degree of a product’s necessity moderates the relationship between their commitment to the environment and purchase intentions for those products. The extant literature indicated that anticipatory guilt for not consuming and anticipatory pride for consuming sustainable products can engender intentions for engaging in sustainable consumption [59,60,61,62,63]. Future research can explore if the anticipatory pride (or guilt) for purchasing (or not purchasing) sustainable apparel or divesting (or not divesting) apparel amid the pandemic begets intentions for engaging in sustainable apparel consumption.
In our study, we have used the regulatory focus theory [17] and cognitive dissonance theory [18] to support the rationale of our hypotheses and used the compensatory consumption model [41] in supporting our assumptions behind developing these hypotheses. However, we did not apply the theories to explain the underlying psychological mechanisms behind evoking a pro-environmental attitude or behavior due to a negative psychological state. Therefore, in the future, studies could apply the regulatory focus theory [17] to explore how the two regulator foci (i.e., prevention- and promotion-focused) may influence intentions of purchasing sustainable apparel or divesting apparel. Cognitive dissonance theory [18] could be applied further to see how the dissonance in terms of not being able to protect the environment may moderate the relationship between COVID-19-stress and intentions for sustainable apparel consumption. The compensatory consumer behavior model [41] could be applied to test how the self-discrepancy in a desired identity (e.g., environmentally conscious) can influence purchase intentions for sustainable products amid the pandemic.

5.2. Marketing Implications

Based on our findings, we recommend that marketers and apparel brands communicate how the consumption of sustainable apparel would help protect the environment and minimize the degree of the negative consequences of the pandemic due to poor environmental health. For example, the marketers can indicate the facts and figures of how consuming unsustainable apparel is polluting the environment and increasing the cases of respiratory diseases and other co-morbidities, making people susceptible to pandemic outbreaks. Marketers can also communicate how purchasing sustainable apparel or divesting apparel can have a direct impact on improving environmental health in terms of better air, water, and soil quality and how that can help in reducing the cases of respiratory problems and other diseases related to poor environmental health. Apparel brands can give score cards for each of the clothing items in terms of their impact on the environment and their estimated long-term contributions in decreasing diseases due to poor environmental health. That way, consumers can see a measurable impact of their consumption choices in the environment and their own health.
The apparel brands can also communicate how purchasing sustainable apparel or divesting apparel amid the pandemic would help millennials maintain their identity of being committed to the environment. For example, apparel brands can explore ways for the consumers to donate apparel in exchange for loyalty points for protecting the environment. Based on the cognitive dissonance theory [45] and compensatory consumer behavior model [41], we suggest that those loyalty points may serve as a symbol for consumers (e.g., millennials) in attaining/reaffirming their identities of being environmentally conscious amid the pandemic. Furthermore, the extant literature indicated that anticipatory pride could encourage intentions for sustainable consumption [59,61]. Drawing from this literature and the findings of our study, we suggest that communication on the projected environmental improvements and projected minimized risks to environmental health from purchasing sustainable apparel or divesting apparel may help millennials cope with their COVID-19-stress by evoking anticipatory pride for protecting the environment amid the pandemic.

5.3. Limitations and Future Scopes of Study

We have focused only on the millennials of the U.S. in our study. However, since millennials are usually more sustainably oriented, they may have a high commitment to the environment and favorable intentions for purchasing sustainable apparel and divesting apparel, irrespective of the pandemic. Therefore, it needs further research to explore if the pandemic has induced pro-environmental attitudes and behavioral intentions among the other generational cohorts as well. Due to COVID-19 being an infectious disease, intentions for consuming second-hand (i.e., divested) apparel may have been low due to the fear of contracting the disease. This perceived fear of contracting the disease from second-hand apparel may have confounded the relationship between intentions for divesting apparel and the other variables in the proposed model. It would be worthwhile to test our proposed conceptual model with the national population of the U.S. who are vaccinated and thus, have a lower fear of contracting the disease. Further, it would be interesting to test our conceptual model in the context of different product categories such as apparel, food, electronics, and furniture, etc.

6. Conclusions

This present study offers empirical evidence of the role of COVID-19-stress in influencing intentions for substantiable apparel consumption. Specifically, we delineate the underlying mediating role of commitment to the environment in the relationships between COVID-19-stress and intentions for sustainable apparel consumption in terms of purchase intentions for sustainable apparel and divesting apparel. Based on the findings of this study, pertinent theoretical implications are suggested in the context of the applicability of the compensatory consumer behavior model [41], regulatory focus theory [44], and cognitive dissonance theory [45] in exploring the antecedents of sustainable apparel consumption amid the pandemic. Practical recommendations are proposed for sustainable apparel brands and marketers highlighting the evolving consumption behavior among millennials of the U.S. amid the pandemic.

Author Contributions

S.C. conceptualized the study, proposed the methodology, conducted the research, analyzed the data, and wrote the manuscript. A.S. was the advisor in this research. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The Auburn University Institutional Review Board has approved this document for use from 5 March 2020—Protocol #20-126 EX 2003.

Informed Consent Statement

The participants consented to the Institutional Review Board-approved information form before participating in this study.

Data Availability Statement

As per the Institutional Review Board-approved information form, the data for this study are accessible only to the authors of this study to maintain confidentiality.

Acknowledgments

The authors express their gratitude to the reviewers of this manuscript who gave us constructive feedback on our paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Barreiro-Gen, M.; Lozano, R.; Zafar, A. Changes in sustainability priorities in organisations due to the COVID-19 outbreak: Averting environmental rebound effects on society. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Mishra, J.; Mishra, P.; Arora, N.K. Linkages between environmental issues and zoonotic diseases: With reference to COVID-19 pandemic. Environ. Sustain. 2021, 4, 455–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ali, Q.; Parveen, S.; Yaacob, H.; Zaini, Z.; Sarbini, N.A. COVID-19 and dynamics of environmental awareness, sustainable consumption and social responsibility in Malaysia. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 56199–56218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Garel, A.; Petit-Romec, A. Investor rewards to environmental responsibility: Evidence from the COVID-19 crisis. J. Corp. Financ. 2021, 68, 101948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Severo, E.A.; De Guimarães, J.C.F.; Dellarmelin, M.L. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on environmental awareness, sustainable consumption and social responsibility: Evidence from generations in Brazil and Portugal. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 286, 124947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Allen, M.W.; Spialek, M.L. Young millennials, environmental orientation, food company sustainability, and green word-of-mouth recommendations. J. Food Prod. Mark. 2018, 24, 803–829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Bonadonna, A.; Giachino, C.; Truant, E. Sustainability and mountain tourism: The millennial’s perspective. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Hwang, J.; Griffiths, M.A. Share more, drive less: Millennials value perception and behavioral intent in using collaborative consumption services. J. Consum. Mark. 2017, 34, 132–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Gazzola, P.; Colombo, G.; Pezzetti, R.; Nicolescu, L. Consumer empowerment in the digital economy: Availing sustainable purchasing decisions. Sustainability 2017, 9, 693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Muralidharan, S.; Xue, F. Personal networks as a precursor to a green future: A study of “green” consumer socialization among young millennials from India and China. Young Consum. 2016, 17, 226–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Su, J.; Watchravesringkan, K.; Zhou, J.; Gil, M. Sustainable clothing: Perspectives from US and Chinese young Millennials. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 2019, 47, 1141–1162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Fu, W.; Liang, B.C. How millennials personality traits influence their eco-fashion purchase behaviour. Athens J. Bus. Econ. 2018, 1, 1–14. [Google Scholar]
  13. Miller, N.J.; Yan, R.N.T.; Jankovska, D.; Hensely, C. Exploring US Millennial consumers’ consumption values in relation to traditional and social cause apparel product attributes and purchase intentions. J. Glob. Fash. Mark. 2017, 8, 54–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Park, S.Y.; Song, D. The “just-right feeling” and recycling behaviors: The role of regulatory focus, self-construal, and involvement. J. Nonprofit Public Sect. Mark. 2021, 33, 239–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Stanes, E.; Klocker, N.; Gibson, C. Young adult households and domestic sustainabilities. Geoforum 2015, 65, 46–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Diddi, S.; Yan, R.N.; Bloodhart, B.; Bajtelsmit, V.; McShane, K. Exploring young adult consumers’ sustainable clothing consumption intention-behavior gap: A behavioral reasoning theory perspective. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2019, 18, 200–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Wai Yee, L.; Hassan, S.H.; Ramayah, T. Sustainability and philanthropic awareness in clothing disposal behavior among young Malaysian consumers. Sage Open 2016, 6, 2158244015625327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Crossley, É. Ecological grief generates desire for environmental healing in tourism after COVID-19. Tour. Geogr. 2020, 22, 536–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Eichelberger, S.; Heigl, M.; Peters, M.; Pikkemaat, B. Exploring the role of tourists: Responsible behavior triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Vinerean, S.; Opreana, A.; Tileagă, C.; Popșa, R.E. The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on residents’ support for sustainable tourism development. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Yousaf, Z.; Radulescu, M.; Sinisi, C.I.; Serbanescu, L.; Paunescu, L.M. Harmonization of green motives and green business strategies towards sustainable development of hospitality and tourism industry: Green environmental policies. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ho, C.Y.; Tsai, B.H.; Chen, C.S.; Lu, M.T. Exploring green marketing orientations toward sustainability the hospitality industry in the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Jian, Y.; Yu, I.Y.; Yang, M.X.; Zeng, K.J. The impacts of fear and uncertainty of COVID-19 on environmental concerns, brand trust, and behavioral intentions toward green hotels. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Environmental Protection Agency. Material-Specific Data. Available online: https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/textiles-material-specific-data (accessed on 15 November 2022).
  25. Perz, C.A.; Lang, B.A.; Harrington, R. Validation of the fear of COVID-19 scale in a US college sample. Int. J. Ment. Health Addict. 2020, 20, 273–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Daglis, T. The increase in addiction during COVID-19. Encyclopedia 2021, 1, 1257–1266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Glowacki, E.M.; Wilcox, G.B.; Glowacki, J.B. Identifying# addiction concerns on twitter during the COVID-19 pandemic: A text mining analysis. Subst. Abus. 2021, 42, 39–46. [Google Scholar]
  28. Koob, G.F.; Powell, P.; White, A. Addiction as a coping response: Hyperkatifeia, deaths of despair, and COVID-19. Am. J. Psychiatry 2020, 177, 1031–1037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Liu, W.; Shao, W.; Wang, Q. Does fear of the new coronavirus lead to low-Carbon behaviors: The moderating effect of outcome framing. Risk Manag. Healthc. Policy 2021, 14, 4185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Kholaif, M.M.N.H.K.; Ming, X. COVID-19’s fear-uncertainty effect on green supply chain management and sustainability performances: The moderate effect of corporate social responsibility. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 30, 42541–42562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kholaif, M.M.N.H.K.; Xiao, M.; Tang, X. COVID-19’s fear-uncertainty effect on renewable energy supply chain management and ecological sustainability performance; the moderate effect of big-data analytics. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2022, 53, 102622. [Google Scholar]
  32. Haque, M.S.; Uddin, S.; Sayem, S.M.; Mohib, K.M. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) induced waste scenario: A short overview. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 104660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Chakraborty, S.; Sadachar, A. COVID-stress and compensatory consumption among the U.S. consumers. J. Mark. Manag. Consum. Behav. 2022, 4, 111–133. [Google Scholar]
  34. Leal Filho, W.; Voronova, V.; Kloga, M.; Paço, A.; Minhas, A.; Salvia, A.L.; Ferreira, C.D.; Sivapalan, S. COVID-19 and waste production in households: A trend analysis. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 777, 145997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Scacchi, A.; Catozzi, D.; Boietti, E.; Bert, F.; Siliquini, R. COVID-19 lockdown and self-perceived changes of food choice, waste, impulse buying and their determinants in Italy: QuarantEat, a cross-sectional study. Foods 2021, 10, 306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Brizi, A.; Biraglia, A. “Do I have enough food?” How need for cognitive closure and gender impact stockpiling and food waste during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-national study in India and the United States of America. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2021, 168, 110396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Wang, H.H.; Na, H.A.O. Panic buying? Food hoarding during the pandemic period with city lockdown. J. Integr. Agric. 2020, 19, 2916–2925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Chua, G.; Yuen, K.F.; Wang, X.; Wong, Y.D. The determinants of panic buying during COVID-19. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 3247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Putri, A.; Retsan, A.; Andika, H.; Hendriana, E. Antecedents of panic buying behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. Manag. Sci. Lett. 2021, 11, 1821–1832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Niranjini, N.; Sridevi, J. COVID-19 pushes marketers to sell differently to global millennials in emerging markets. J. Pharm. Negat. Results 2023, 13, 6993–7003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Mandel, N.; Rucker, D.D.; Levav, J.; Galinsky, A. The compensatory consumer behavior model: How self-discrepancies drive consumer behavior. J. Consum. Psychol. 2017, 27, 133–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Chakraborty, S.; Chattaraman, V. Acculturative stress and compensatory consumption through symbolic self-completion among first-generation Asian-Indian immigrants in the U.S. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2021, 46, 831–849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Wang, Q.; Lisjak, M.; Mandel, N. On the flexibility of self-repair: How holistic versus analytic thinking style impacts fluid compensatory consumption. J. Consum. Psychol. 2022, 33, 3–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Higgins, E.T. Regulatory Focus Theory; Sage Publications Ltd.: New York, NY, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  45. Festinger, L. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance; Stanford University Press: Redwood City, CA, USA, 1962; Volume 2. [Google Scholar]
  46. Bhatnagar, N.; McKay-Nesbitt, J. Pro-environment advertising messages: The role of regulatory focus. Int. J. Advert. 2016, 35, 4–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Fischer, D.; Mauer, R.; Brettel, M. Regulatory focus theory and sustainable entrepreneurship. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 2018, 24, 408–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Miniero, G.; Codini, A.; Bonera, M.; Corvi, E.; Bertoli, G. Being green: From attitude to actual consumption. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2014, 38, 521–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Esposti, P.; Mortara, A.; Roberti, G. Sharing and sustainable consumption in the era of COVID-19. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Ali, N.; Islam, F. The effects of air pollution on COVID-19 infection and mortality—A review on recent evidence. Front. Public Health 2020, 8, 580057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Brandt, E.B.; Beck, A.F.; Mersha, T.B. Air pollution, racial disparities, and COVID-19 mortality. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 2020, 146, 61–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Frontera, A.; Lorenzo, C.; Konstantinos, V.; Giovanni, L.; George, C. Severe air pollution links to higher mortality in COVID-19 patients: The “double-hit” hypothesis. J. Infect. 2020, 81, 255–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Razzaq, A.; Sharif, A.; Aziz, N.; Irfan, M.; Jermsittiparsert, K. Asymmetric link between environmental pollution and COVID-19 in the top ten affected states of US: A novel estimations from quantile-on-quantile approach. Environ. Res. 2020, 191, 110189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Taylor, S. Anxiety disorders, climate change, and the challenges ahead: Introduction to the special issue. J. Anxiety Disord. 2020, 76, 102313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Soga, M.; Evans, M.J.; Cox, D.T.; Gaston, K.J. Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on human–nature interactions: Pathways, evidence and implications. People Nat. 2021, 3, 518–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Debata, B.; Patnaik, P.; Mishra, A. COVID-19 pandemic! It’s impact on people, economy, and environment. J. Public Aff. 2020, 20, e2372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Khan, I.; Shah, D.; Shah, S. COVID-19 pandemic and its positive impacts on environment: An updated review. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2021, 18, 521–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Kotnala, G.; Mandal, T.K.; Sharma, S.K.; Kotnala, R.K. Emergence of blue sky over Delhi due to coronavirus disease (COVID-19) lockdown implications. Aerosol Sci. Eng. 2020, 4, 228–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Antonetti, P.; Maklan, S. Feelings that make a difference: How guilt and pride convince consumers of the effectiveness of sustainable consumption choices. J. Bus. Ethics 2014, 124, 117–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Antonetti, P.; Maklan, S. Exploring postconsumption guilt and pride in the context of sustainability. Psychol. Mark. 2014, 31, 717–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Onwezen, M.C.; Bartels, J.; Antonides, G. The self-regulatory function of anticipated pride and guilt in a sustainable and healthy consumption context. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 2014, 44, 53–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Cowan, K.; Kinley, T. Green spirit: Consumer empathies for green apparel. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2014, 38, 493–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Young, W.; Hwang, K.; McDonald, S.; Oates, C.J. Sustainable consumption: Green consumer behaviour when purchasing products. Sustain. Dev. 2010, 18, 20–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Gómez-Carmona, D.; Muñoz-Leiva, F.; Liébana-Cabanillas, F.; Nieto-Ruiz, A.; Martínez-Fiestas, M.; Campoy, C. The effect of consumer concern for the environment, self-regulatory focus and message framing on green advertising effectiveness: An eye tracking study. Environ. Commun. 2021, 15, 813–841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Shen, B.; Kim, Y. Green with Fear: Fear Appeals and temporal framing in eco-friendly clothing advertising. Cloth. Text. Res. J. 2022, 40, 154–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Kim, J.; Yang, K.; Min, J.; White, B. Hope, fear, and consumer behavioral change amid COVID-19: Application of protection motivation theory. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2022, 46, 558–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Kim, S.; Kim, J.; Lee, J.C.; Park, J. Threat-induced sustainability: How COVID-19 has affected sustainable behavioral intention and sustainable hotel brand choice. J. Hosp. Tour. Res. 2022, 10963480221116060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Batool, A.; Shabbir, R.; Abrar, M.; Bilal, A.R. Do fear and perceived knowledge of COVID-19 drive sustainable consumption behaviour in Muslims? The mediating role of religiosity. J. Islam. Mark. 2022; ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar]
  69. Krpan, D.; Basso, F. Keep degrowth or go rebirth? Regulatory focus theory and the support for a sustainable downscaling of production and consumption. J. Environ. Psychol. 2021, 74, 101586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Zou, L.W.; Chan, R.Y. Why and when do consumers perform green behaviors? An examination of regulatory focus and ethical ideology. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 94, 113–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Kareklas, I.; Carlson, J.R.; Muehling, D.D. The role of regulatory focus and self-view in “green” advertising message framing. J. Advert. 2012, 41, 25–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Aghaei, M.; Sahebi, A.G.; Kordheydari, R. Investigating the change in customers’ sustainable consumption behaviour after the outbreak of COVID-19. Int. J. Appl. Mark. 2021, 6, 34–49. [Google Scholar]
  73. Kumar, A.; Prakash, G.; Kumar, G. Does environmentally responsible purchase intention matter for consumers? A predictive sustainable model developed through an empirical study. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2021, 58, 102270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Lin, P.H.; Chen, W.H. Factors that influence consumers’ sustainable apparel purchase intention: The moderating effect of generational cohorts. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Brydges, T.; Henninger, C.E.; Barbu, L.; Lupu, R. Designing for longevity and neutrality: Investigating how the Swedish children’s clothing industry implements circular economy principles. Fash. Pract. 2022, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Joung, H.M.; Park-Poaps, H. Factors motivating and influencing clothing disposal behaviours. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2013, 37, 105–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Sonnenberg, N.C.; Stols, M.J.; Taljaard-Swart, H.; Marx-Pienaar, N.J.M.M. Apparel disposal in the South African emerging market context: Exploring female consumers’ motivation and intent to donate post-consumer textile waste. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2022, 182, 106311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Chakraborty, S.; Sadachar, A. Can a connection with the indigenous cultural values encourage sustainable apparel consumption? J. Fash. Mark. Manag. Int. J. 2022, 27, 80–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Park, M.; Cho, H.; Johnson, K.K.; Yurchisin, J. Use of behavioral reasoning theory to examine the role of social responsibility in attitudes toward apparel donation. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2017, 41, 333–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Chakraborty, S.; Sadachar, A. “Why should I buy sustainable apparel?” Impact of user-centric advertisement appeals on consumers’ emotional responses and sustainable apparel purchase intentions. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Davis, J.L.; Green, J.D.; Reed, A. Interdependence with the environment: Commitment, interconnectedness, and environmental behavior. J. Environ. Psychol. 2009, 29, 173–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Ghazali, E.M.; Mutum, D.S.; Ariswibowo, N. Impact of religious values and habit on an extended green purchase behaviour model. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2018, 42, 639–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Cho, E.; Gupta, S.; Kim, Y.K. Style consumption: Its drivers and role in sustainable apparel consumption. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2015, 39, 661–669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Barrett, P. Structural equation modelling: Adjudging model fit. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2007, 42, 815–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Osborne, J.W.; Costello, A.B. Sample size and subject to item ratio in principal components analysis. Pract. Assess. Res. Eval. 2004, 9, 11. [Google Scholar]
  86. Nunnally, J.C.; Bernstein, I.H. Psychometric Theory; McGraw Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1967. [Google Scholar]
  87. Anderson, J.C.; Gerbing, D.W. The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika 1984, 49, 155–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Filho, W.; Salvia, A.L.; Paço, A.; Dinis, M.A.P.; Vidal, D.G.; Da Cunha, D.A.; de Vasconcelos, C.R.; Baumgartner, R.J.; Rampasso, I.; Anholon, R.; et al. The influences of the COVID-19 pandemic on sustainable consumption: An international study. Environ. Sci. Eur. 2022, 34, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Sustainability 15 07356 g001 550
Figure 1. Conceptual model.
Figure 1. Conceptual model.
Sustainability 15 07356 g001
Sustainability 15 07356 g002 550
Figure 2. Path model with standardized coefficients. *** p < 0.001.
Figure 2. Path model with standardized coefficients. *** p < 0.001.
Sustainability 15 07356 g002
Table
Table 1. Sample Profiling.
Table 1. Sample Profiling.
MeasuresCategoriesf%
Age (in years)24–29 10634
30–35 13242.3
36–39 7423.7
GenderMale17154.8
Female14145.2
Highest level of educational qualificationSome high school 31
High school graduate, diploma, or the equivalent268.3
Technical/vocational training72.2
College degree (4 years)17957.4
Some graduate school206.4
Graduate degree (Master’s, doctorate, etc.)7724.7
Annual household income (in USD)30,000 or less4213.5
31,000 to 60,00012038.5
61,000 to 90,0009630.8
91,000 to 120,000309.6
121,000 to 150, 000165.1
151,000 or more82.6
Marital statusSingle, never married8126
Married22471.8
Divorced51.6
Other (separated; dating)20.6
Employment statusCurrently unemployed196.1
Employed for wages20465.4
Self-employed7724.7
Homemaker92.9
Student31
EthnicityAsian/Pacific Islander3310.6
Caucasian21568.9
African American309.6
Latino/Hispanic289
Mixed/Biracial31
Other31
Table
Table 2. Measurement Scale Items with their Factor Loadings from CFA and Reliabilities.
Table 2. Measurement Scale Items with their Factor Loadings from CFA and Reliabilities.
ItemsAVECFA Factor LoadingCRα
COVID-19-stress0.61 0.920.93
1. I am very afraid of coronavirus. 0.71
2. It makes me uncomfortable to think about coronavirus. 0.74
3. My hands become clammy when I think about coronavirus. 0.80
4. I am afraid of dying because of coronavirus. 0.76
5. When watching/reading news about coronavirus, I become nervous or anxious. 0.83
6. I cannot sleep because I’m worrying about getting coronavirus. 0.80
7. My heart races or palpitates when I think about getting coronavirus. 0.86
8. When hearing stories about coronavirus, I become nervous or anxious. 0.73
Commitment to the Environment0.55 0.880.88
1. I am interested in strengthening my connection to the environment in the future. 0.77
2. I feel strongly linked to the environment. 0.73
3. Feeling a connection with the environment is important to me. 0.75
4. I expect that I will always feel a strong connection with the environment. 0.71
5. I feel very attached to the natural environment. 0.75
6. I feel committed to keeping the best interests of the environment in mind. 0.74
Purchase Intentions for Sustainable Apparel0.60 0.820.81
1. Over the next month, I will consider buying green products because they are less polluting. 0.70
2. Over the next month, I will consider switching to other apparel brands for ecological reasons. 0.83
3. Over the next month, I plan to switch to sustainable apparel. 0.80
Intentions for Divesting Apparel0.48 0.740.74
1. I would consider ‘handing down’ apparel in family or among friends. 0.71
2. I would consider giving away my apparel to help others that I know. 0.71
3. I would consider reusing apparel products for other purposes to get the most out of them. 0.67
Table
Table 3. Mean, Standard Deviation, and Correlations of the Research Variables.
Table 3. Mean, Standard Deviation, and Correlations of the Research Variables.
MeasuresMSDCorrelations
1234
1. COVID-19-stress4.731.450.78
2. Commitment to the environment5.470.930.39 **0.74
3. Purchase intention for sustainable apparel5.071.180.53 **0.64 **0.77
4. Intentions for divesting apparel5.500.950.22 **0.55 **0.34 **0.69
Note. ** p < 0.01. Numbers in the diagonal represent the square roots of the AVEs of the constructs.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chakraborty, S.; Sadachar, A. Did Anything Good Come Out of the Pandemic? COVID-19-Stress Induced Self-Regulatory Sustainable Apparel Consumption among the Millennials in the U.S. Sustainability 2023, 15, 7356. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097356

AMA Style

Chakraborty S, Sadachar A. Did Anything Good Come Out of the Pandemic? COVID-19-Stress Induced Self-Regulatory Sustainable Apparel Consumption among the Millennials in the U.S. Sustainability. 2023; 15(9):7356. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097356

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chakraborty, Swagata, and Amrut Sadachar. 2023. "Did Anything Good Come Out of the Pandemic? COVID-19-Stress Induced Self-Regulatory Sustainable Apparel Consumption among the Millennials in the U.S." Sustainability 15, no. 9: 7356. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097356

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop