DOI: 10.1002/mar.

21140

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Application of GREEN scale to understanding US consumer

response to green marketing communications
Ainsworth A. Bailey1 Aditya S. Mishra2 Mojisola F. Tiamiyu3
1 Department of Marketing and International Business, College of Business and Innovation, University of Toledo, Toledo, Ohio

2 Indian Institute of Management Ranchi, Ranchi, India

3 Department of Psychology, College of Arts and Letters, University of Toledo, Toledo, Ohio

Correspondence
Ainsworth A. Bailey, Department of Marketing Abstract
and International Business, College of Business This paper reports on three studies that were done as part of an application of the GREEN scale
and Innovation, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH
(Haws, Winterich, & Naylor, 2014) to understanding US consumer response to green marketing
43606.
Email: ainsworth.bailey@utoledo.edu communications. The GREEN scale was developed originally to measure consumers’ tendency to
Ainsworth Anthony Bailey is an Associate express their environmental concern through their consumption behaviors, that is, their green
Professor in the Department of Marketing and consumption values. In the current paper, three studies explored the impact of US consumers’
International Business, College of Business and GREEN consumption values on their response to brands’ green public relations and green adver-
Innovation, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH,
USA; Aditya S. Mishra is an Assistant Professor
tising. The results show that, in addition to helping to explain green consumption behaviors,
in the Marketing Area of Indian Institute of Man- GREEN can also help to explain consumer response to brands’ marketing communications efforts.
agement Ranchi, Ranchi, India; and Mojisola F. Limitations are pointed out and future research directions are proposed.
Tiamiyu is an Associate Professor in the Depart-
ment of Psychology, College of Arts and Letters,
KEYWORDS
University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
environment, GREEN, green advertising, green consumption values

Recently, there has been renewed interest in the issue of green con- Also among the academic work that has appeared recently is work
sumption, both in the business world and in the academic world. For on scale development to assess different aspects of green behavior.
example, a recent study among consumers around the globe found that One recent scale has been the GREEN scale (Haws, Winterich, & Nay-
more and more consumers have become interested in letting their con- lor, 2014). This scale was developed by Haws et al. (2014) to assess
sumption behaviors speak for their concern about the environment consumers’ green consumption values, which they defined as “the ten-
(WARC, 2015). There has also been a flurry of academic research, as dency to explore the value of environmental protection through one's
academicians seek answers to a number of issues related to green mar- purchases and consumption behaviors” (p. 337). Haws et al. (2014)
keting, green advertising, and consumer green behavior. For example, carried out various studies to confirm the scale's internal consistency,
researchers have explored the impact of different kinds of appeals in dimensionality, test-retest reliability, and predictive validity. This scale
green advertising and cues such as eco-seals (Atkinson & Rosenthal, and its validation assessment are described later.
2014; Hartmann & Apaolaza-Ibáñez, 2012; Matthes, Wonneberger, & The current paper seeks to extend the work on the GREEN scale
Schmuck, 2014; Whitson, Ozkaya, & Roxas, 2014; Yang, Lu, Zhu, & Su, by exploring its performance in marketing communications contexts
2015); the cultural contexts in which green consumption takes place in the United States. In essence, the research reported here seeks to
(Abeliotis, Koniari, & Sardianou, 2010; Mostafa, 2007; Nittala, 2014); assess whether the GREEN scale can also be used to determine con-
the link between green consumption behavior and personality vari- sumer response to different green marketing communications activi-
ables (Lu, Chang, & Chang, 2015); shopping behaviors and green con- ties undertaken by brands, including advertising and public relations
sumers (Atkinson, 2013; Fuentes, 2014); antecedents of green con- activities. To this end, this paper reports on three studies that were
sumption behaviors (Pagiaslis & Krontalis, 2014); the gap between done as part of the application of this construct to understanding
green attitudes and green consumption behaviors (Davari & Strutton, consumer response to green marketing communications. The studies
2014; Miniero, Codini, Bonera, Corvi, & Bertoli, 2014); and efforts to were conducted among consumers in the United States and focused
classify green consumers (Verain et al., 2012). Table 1 contains sum- on advertising and PR contexts, given the interest in determining if
mary information on some of the recent studies in this stream of GREEN can distinguish between consumers in their response to green
research. communications.

Psychol Mark. 2018;1–13. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/mar 

c 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 1
2 BAILEY ET AL .

TA B L E 1 Recent research on green marketing/advertising

Author/s (Year) Focus of research Major findings

Bailey et al. (2016) Green advertising and consumer response to it Development and validation of a 9-item receptivity to
green advertising (REGRAD) scale that distinguishes
between “high green receptives” and “low green
receptives”
Bickart and Ruth (2012) Impact of environmental concern and brand familiarity Consumers with high environmental concern perceive
on consumer response to use of eco-seals. eco-seals differently, depending on brand familiarity,
eco-seal source, and ad appeal.
Brough, Wilkie, Jingjing, Gender stereotyping and green orientation An investigation of whether gender has an impact on green
Isaac, and Gal (2016) orientation, with the researchers arguing that green
behavior is associated with femininity
Chan Su-Wa (2014) Investigation of hotel customers’ perceptions of hotels’ Studied identified five factors related to hotels’ green
green marketing strategies. marketing efforts (green partnership; development of
green products and services; genuine Green products
and services; higher price for green products and
services; and credibility of green promotion; results
showed significant differences in hotel customers’
ratings of the importance of the identified factors based
on demographic variables
Chang, Zhang, and Xie Examines moderating role of temporal distance in Congruence between loss frame and low level construal
(2015) effects of message frames (gains or losses) on and the match between gain frame and high level
consumers’ attitudes and purchase intentions construal generates more positive outcomes in attitudes
toward advertised brand in context of green and purchase intention; salience of the congruency
advertising effect is a function of the level of consumer
environmental concern
Davari and Strutton Evaluation the influence of managed green marketing Results reveal seven different green marketing
(2014) mix elements on the dimensions of consumer-based implications related either to the strategic management
brand equity in a green marketing context, as well as of green products, promotions, channels, or messages
evaluation of moderating role of consumers’
environmental concerns and their consideration of
the future consequences of current behaviors
Fernando, Suganthi, and Using online media in agenda setting for consumer Two significant themes emerge in the various stakeholder
Sivakumaran (2014) concerns on “greenwashed” environmental claims discussions on green washing: marketing communication
credibility and impact on natural environment; results
also indicate a bidirectional agenda-setting relationship
between consumers and other stakeholders from the
same country.
Finisterra do Paço and Factors affecting skepticism toward green advertising Environmental concern impacts skepticism toward green
Reis (2012) claims in marketing communications, with more
environmentally consumers being more skeptical toward
green claims on packages or in ads; no gender effects on
this skepticism.
Green and Peloza (2014) Impact of advertising appeal type on environmentally When consumers experience heightened public
friendly consumption accountability, other-benefit appeals are more
persuasive; self-benefit appeals work better in private
settings.
Grimmer and Woolley Influence of type of green marketing communications No main effects of type of advertisement on purchase
(2014) on consumers’ purchase intentions and the intention; however, participants’ level of environmental
moderating role of environmental involvement on affect moderated the effect of the advertisements on
these effects measured across cognitive, affective, purchase intention.
and behavioral attitude components.
Hartmann, Apaolaza, and Analysis of the effectiveness of the use of nature Nature advertising imagery positively affects attitudes
Eisend (2016) imagery in nongreen advertising toward and brand, with these effects moderated by
consumers’ green traits.
Haws, Winterich, & Green consumption values and responses to Development and validation of a six-item GREEN scale,
Walker. (2014) environmentally friendly products which assesses consumers’ green consumption values;
GREEN scale predicts consumer preference for
environmentally friendly products
Khare, Mukerjee, and Examination of the influence of collective self-esteem, Normative values, social influence, and group esteem
Goyal (2013) normative and informational values, and social affect consumers’ green purchase behavior
influence on the green purchase behavior of Indian
consumers
Kong and Zhang (2014) Exploration of when green advertising works Green appeals work more effectively for more-harmful
products, but type of appeal (green vs. nongreen) does
not matter for less harmful products. The impact of
green appeal and product type on ad persuasiveness is
mediated by cognitive responses.
(Continues)
BAILEY ET AL . 3

TA B L E 1 (Continued)

Author/s (Year) Focus of research Major findings

Matthes and Relationship between green consumerism and Negative relationship between green consumerism and
Wonneberger (2014). skepticism toward advertising green advertising skepticism; green consumers saw
more informational utility in green ads than did
nongreen consumers did
Olsen et al. (2014) The impact of green new products on consumers’ Green new product introductions favorably impact brand
attitudes toward brands attitude; and the number of green messages, product
type, and source credibility all affect influence the
degree to which green new product introductions
change brand attitude.
Papadas, Avlonitis, and Green marketing orientation Development and testing of a scale to measure green
Carrigan (2017) marketing orientation, which comprises strategic green
marketing orientation, tactical green marketing
orientation, and internal green marketing orientation.
Park and Lee (2014) Segmentation of the US market into clusters of Study found four clusters of consumers in the United
consumers based on their beliefs and motives States with a unique set of beliefs and motives regarding
regarding proenvironmental consumer behavior consumer environmentalism; the clusters have distinct
demographic and media usage profiles; and responses to
industry's initiatives to protect the environment vary
across the clusters
Reich and Soule (2016) Exploration of demarketing in advertising appeals In the case of product advertising, consumers exhibit more
versus traditional green appeals favorable responses to traditional green ads than
demarketing ads; however, this pattern is reversed in the
case of institutional advertising.
Richey Jr. et al. (2014) Addresses the question of firms’ development of green Findings suggest that the commitment of proper resources
products; explores the effects of green marketing on is critical to the success of any green initiative; results
firm performance: financial performance, market also suggest that being the first firm in an industry to
performance, and service quality; investigates initiate a green program provides few tangible benefits;
impact of resource commitment in decision even firms with an environmental focus need consistent
support from upper management to realize superior
performance
Segev et al. (2016) Investigation of the changes in green advertising using Majority of environmental claims in ads seen as acceptable,
content analysis as advertisers sought to address concern for the
environment and demand for green products.
Tucker, Rifon, Lee, and Impact of individual characteristics on response to Consumers with positive attitudes toward environmental
Reece (2012) green advertising protection respond favorably to both strong and weak
green product claims with a cause-related marketing
strategy to advertise a “green” product.
Xue (2015) Effects of message framing (positive vs. negative) and Negative frames and collectivistic appeal generated more
appeal types (individualistic vs. collectivistic) in favorable advertising and brand attitude and a higher
green advertising on Chinese consumers’ attitudes level of green trust and purchase intention; collectivistic
and intentions appeals did not interact with message frames but in case
of individualistic appeals, negative frames led to more
favorable responses than positive frames.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. First, there is a dis- scale's internal consistency, dimensionality, test-retest reliability, and
cussion of prior validation of the GREEN scale. The scale's validation predictive validity. They also assessed whether green consumption val-
focused primarily on its application to consumer purchase behaviors. ues would predict consumers’ evaluations of the nonenvironmental
This is followed by a description of the studies that were conducted attributes of an environmentally friendly product and preference for
to assess the application of the GREEN scale in marketing communica- the product; and they tested the consistency of green consumption val-
tions contexts and their related results. A discussion of the implications ues with the effects of other consumer values such as social approval
of the studies’ results precedes a concluding discussion of the limita- or acceptance on the attribute evaluations and preference for a prod-
tions and future research avenues. uct that reflects green consumption values. The process resulted in a
one-factor six-item scale that predicts consumers’ green consumption
behavior.
1 GREEN CONSUMPTION AND THE GREEN
SCALE
1.2 GREEN reliability and validity assessment
1.1 GREEN scale and its previous validation
Haws et al. (2014) developed the parsimonious one-factor six-item
The GREEN scale was developed by Haws et al. (2014) to assess con- scale from an initial pool of 58 items, following a series of exploratory
sumers’ green consumption values. Among the studies that they con- and confirmatory factor analyses conducted initially on data collected
ducted in the scale development process were studies to confirm the from both a student sample and a nonstudent sample. The first study
4 BAILEY ET AL .

reported the GREEN scale as highly reliable, with a Cronbach alpha of Fernandes, and Hong (2016) revisited work on green advertising that
0.89. Average variance extracted (AVE) was 0.61, and construct reli- was conducted in the early 1990s by Carlson, Grove, and Kangun
ability was 0.90. In the case of the adult sample, Cronbach alpha was (1993). Segev et al. (2016) conducted a content analysis of 433 unique
0.95; AVE was 0.74; and construct reliability of 0.85. In both cases, the green ads published in magazines in 2009 and 2010. Most of the green
one-factor structure model fit the data well. Haws et al. (2014) also ads in their study were classified as acceptable. Segev et al. (2016)
assessed the test-retest reliability of the GREEN scale, using a student argued that these results implied that there was a trend toward more
sample, with the measures, which were taken two weeks apart, demon- trustworthy and reliable green advertising. These results from Segev
strating strong reliability over time (r = 0.82, P < 0.001). The scale et al. (2016), combined with those from Matthes and Wonneberger
developers also established the discriminant validity of the scale by (2014), support increased focus on green marketing communica-
using confirmatory factor analysis and comparison of squared correla- tions. This focus can benefit from an understanding of the extent to
tions with AVEs to show that GREEN differed from socially responsible which consumers could be targeted with green integrated marketing
consumption behavior (SRCB), as well as previous environmental vari- communications efforts based on their GREEN consumption values.
ables such as Socially Responsible Purchase and Disposal (SRPD); Eco- A more important reason for the assessment lies in an interest in the
logically Conscious Consumer Behavior (ECCB); and connectedness to ability to be able to generalize about consumer behavior based on the
nature scale (CNS). performance of the scale in distinguishing between green consumers
Further, Haws et al. (2014) examined the nomological validity by and nongreen consumers in different cultural contexts. The ability of
performing correlations between the GREEN scale and other related the scale to distinguish between green consumers and nongreen con-
variables. These variables included SRCB, frugality, consumer spending sumers in their responses to different forms of marketing communica-
self-control, consumers’ price consciousness, consumers’ value con- tions, despite the cultural milieu in which they exist, adds to the scale's
sciousness, product retention tendency, creative reuse, multiple use, usefulness. It is possible that the scale could perform differently in pre-
and voluntary simplicity. They argued that these variables reflected dicting consumer response to green marketing communications as a
conservation tendencies related to consumers’ personal financial and result of underlying cultural factors. This kind of assessment of a scale's
physical resources. The results demonstrated the expected relation- performance in different cultural contexts is a longstanding feature
ships, as all were found to correlate significantly with the GREEN scale. of consumer research (Griffin, Babin, & Christensen, 2004; Leo et al.,
The researchers also found a strong correlation between the GREEN 2005; Ruvio & Shoham 2016).
scale and consumers’ self-reported environmentally friendly consump-
tion behaviors. They found in one study that the GREEN scale signif-
icantly correlated relative preference for an equally priced environ- 2 METHODOLOGY
mentally friendly (EF) versus a traditional product (r = 0.43, P < 0.05),
willingness to pay for such a product (r = 0.18, P < 0.05), and like- This section features a description of three studies that were
lihood of buying such a product (r = 0.36, P < 0.05). Results from conducted in the application of the GREEN scale in marketing commu-
another study in the validation process revealed that stronger green nications contexts. The aim of the studies was to determine whether
consumption values increased evaluations of nonenvironmental prod- there was a relationship between GREEN consumption values, as mea-
uct attributes and consumers’ preference for an EF product, compared sured by the GREEN scale, and US consumer attitudes and intentions
to lower green consumption values. in response to green marketing communications. In Study 1, the focus
was on consumer response in a public relations context, while in Study
2, which used a student sample, the focus was on consumer response
1.3 Justification for application of GREEN scale in in an advertising context. Study 3 built on Study 2 by investigating the
marketing communications response of a nonstudent sample to green marketing communications,
In the development of the scale, Haws et al. (2014) focused on the in an effort to aid the generalizability of the results found in Study 2.
investigation of consumer response in terms of their green purchase Each study description is followed by a presentation of the results of
behaviors as an outcome variable. However, given the nature of the data analyses related to it.
the scale's focus on green consumption behavior, it is also possible
that it can predict consumer response to various green marketing 2.1 Study 1: GREEN values and public relations
communications initiatives. The application of the GREEN scale in
marketing communications contexts can prove useful, in light of recent 2.1.1 Participants and questionnaire
research that indicates a decline in consumer skepticism toward green Study 1, which focused on the application of the GREEN scale in a pub-
advertising and more acceptance of green advertising. For example, lic relations context, was conducted among 152 students enrolled in
Matthes and Wonneberger (2014) found, based on work carried business courses at a Midwest US university; they took part in the
out among consumers in the United States and Europe, that “green study in exchange for extra course credit. The majority of the partic-
advertisements are generally perceived positively by the green public” ipants were female (53%) and in the age range 18–24 years (92%).
(p. 126). Matthes and Wonneberger (2014), therefore, supported Most of the participants were Caucasian Americans (78%). Despite the
the use of green ads to target green consumers, “as long as they are status of the participants as “students” and the fact that a majority
detailed, specific, unambiguous, and of course truthful” (p. 126). Segev, fell into the 18–24 years age range, this audience is reflective of the
BAILEY ET AL . 5

millennial generation in the United States (America's youth born TA B L E 2 Factor loadings for GREEN scale items and initial CFA
between 1982 and 2000), the generation that has become the sin- results for Studies 1–3

gle largest in the United States (U.S. Census Bureau, 2015). In addi- Scale information Study 1 Study 2 Study 3
tion, Smith and Brewer (2012) confirmed that millennials are paying Factor loadings for scale items
more attention to environmental issues and factoring these into their GREEN1a 0.81 0.75 0.80
product choices. GREEN2 0.85 0.76 0.87
The questionnaire contained the items for the GREEN scale, a proxy
GREEN3 0.79 0.81 0.88
measure of ECCB, a 4-item environmental concern scale, and the Bai-
GREEN4 0.78 0.83 0.81
ley, Mishra, and Tiamiyu (2016) REGRAD scale. The REGRAD scale
GREEN5 0.88 0.84 0.82
was developed by Bailey et al. (2016), to measure the extent to which
GREEN6 0.86 0.73 0.67
consumers pay attention to, and are favorably disposed or responsive
Scale and model
to, advertising that uses green messages in the marketing of products
statistics
or a company itself. Given the natures of the REGRAD and GREEN
Average variance 0.68 0.62 0.66
scales, there should be a high degree of correlation in the scores on extracted (AVE)
these scales. The questionnaire also included an extract from a press Composite reliability (CR) 0.97 0.96 0.96
release, ostensibly put out by a consumer packaged goods (CPG) com- Coefficient alpha 0.93 0.91 0.93
pany to announce the launch of its new multibrand initiative that was
Comparative fit index 0.99 0.99 0.98
intended to highlight the green credentials of its products. A copy of (CFI)
this abridged press release, which is based on an actual press release Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI) 0.98 0.98 0.96
by a US CPG company, is in Appendix 1. Data on participants’ demo- Standardized root mean 0.02 0.02 0.02
graphics (age, gender, and racial background) were also collected and square residual (SRMR)
are reported above. Root mean square error 0.08 0.08 0.11
of approximation
(RMSEA)
2.1.2 Dependent measures
𝜒2 (df) 15.2 15.8 20.2
The trustworthiness of the CPG company that put out the press (8) (7) (7)
release was measured using a 5-item scale previously used to measure a
For item descriptions see Appendix 1.
celebrity endorser credibility (Ohanian, 1990). The items, which were
measured on 7-point Likert scales were: Untrustworthy/Trustworthy; reliability of the GREEN scale. Table 2 contains information on the fac-
Undependable/Dependable; Dishonest/Honest; Unreliable/Reliable; tor loadings for the items in the GREEN scale, as well as initial CFA
and Insincere/Sincere. results.
Cronbach's alpha for the scale was 0.93. Attitude toward the com-
pany was measured on 4-item 7-point Likert scales that asked partici-
2.2.1 Convergent validity
pants to rate their attitude toward the company that put out the press
As a further test of the validity of the GREEN scale, summated scores
release; anchors were: Unpleasant/Pleasant; Negative/Positive; Unfa-
on this scale were correlated with summated scores on the REGRAD
vorable/Favorable; and Bad/Good. These items represent standard
scale; the proxy ECCB scale; and a single item measure of environ-
attitude measures that have been used in extant consumer and adver-
mental concern. Information on these scales is contained in Appendix
tising research (see, e.g. Lafferty, Goldsmith, & Newell, 2002; Yi, 1990).
1. Coefficient alpha for the REGRAD scale was 0.95 and that for the
Cronbach's alpha for the company attitude scale was 0.94. The sup-
ECCB scale was 0.88. The GREEN scale correlated significantly with
port intentions for the company measure consisted of 3-item 7-point
these scales: REGRAD: r = 0.66, P = 0.000; and proxy ECCB: r = 0.77,
Likert scales that asked participants about the likelihood that they
P = 0.000. GREEN was also highly correlated with a single item,
would support the company that put out the press release (Cronbach's
7-point global measure of environmental concern (“I am very con-
alpha = 0.95); anchors were: Impossible/Possible; Very Unlikely/Very
cerned about the environment”): r = 0.65, P = 0.000. These rela-
Likely; Improbable/Probable (Lafferty et al., 2002; Yi, 1990).
tionships show that the scale has convergent validity as it is posi-
tively and significantly related to constructs that also focus on con-
2.2 Results sumers’ response to environmental issues or consumers’ environmen-

The coefficient alpha for the 6-item GREEN scale was .93. A follow- tally friendly behavior.

up assessment of dimensionality using Confirmatory Factor Analysis

(CFA) was done. The model fit was good, as evidenced by: Compar- 2.2.2 Discriminant validity
ative fit index (CFI) = 0.99; Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) = 0.98; Stan- The discriminant validity of constructs can be established using the
dardized root mean square residual (SRMR) = 0.02; and Root mean AVE method (Fornell & Larcker 1981). This method contends that
square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.08; 𝜒 2 (8) = 15.2, P = 0.06 the discriminant validity of constructs is established if the AVE of
(Hu & Bentler, 1999). Average variance extracted (AVE) was 0.68 and construct A and the AVE of construct B are both greater than the
composite reliability was 0.97. These results further underscore the squared correlation of A and B. Voorhees, Brady, Calantone, and
6 BAILEY ET AL .

TA B L E 3 Correlation matrix based on data from Study 1 with AVEs effects of the introduction of green products on consumers’ brand
on the diagonal attitudes. They found that green product introduction had the capacity
1 2 3 4 5 6 to influence brand attitudes, and the number of green messages, the
1. GREEN 0.68 product type, and their source credibility influence the extent to
2. REGRAD 0.66 0.63 which green new products change brand attitude. Matthes and Won-

3. ECCB 0.77 0.68 0.53

neberger (2014) also found that green consumers were not skeptical
of green advertising; in fact, they found that green consumers saw
4. Trust 0.35 0.35 0.41 0.73
more informational utility in green ads than did nongreen consumers.
5. Attitude 0.40 0.39 0.48 0.62 0.78
Drawing on the above referenced work, the nomological frame-
6. Intention 0.57 0.46 0.62 0.60 0.64 0.87
work in Figure 1 predicts a number of direct and indirect relationships
Model statistics: CFI = 0.93, TLI = 0.92, RMSEA = 0.07, SRMR = 0.06, 𝜒2 based on consumers’ green consumption values. In particular, in the
(469) = 840.9, P < 0.001.
case of consumer exposure to green marketing communications, con-
sumer green consumption values (GREEN) will directly impact trust
in the information source, as well as attitude toward the marketing
communication (in the case of Study 1 this is public relations with an
environmental focus). Trustworthiness and attitude in turn will impact
company support intentions, as well as play a role in the indirect
relationship between green consumption values and green company
support intentions. Specifically, the following expectations should hold.

F I G U R E 1 Nomological framework of GREEN consumption values

H1: Green consumption values (GREEN) will have a direct and positive
tested in Study 1 impact on perceived trustworthiness of green marketing communi-
cation source (company).
Ramirez (2016) assessed the results sections of 621 survey-based H2: GREEN will have a direct and positive impact on attitude toward
marketing articles published between 1996 and 2012 and concluded the brand engaged in green marketing communication (green brand).
from their study that this method should be a mandated method for H3: Perceived trustworthiness of a green communication source will
assessing discriminant validity in marketing studies. As can be seen have a direct and positive impact on attitude toward the green brand.
from the data provided in Table 3, the conditions for discriminant H4: Perceived trustworthiness of the green communication source will
validity were satisfied based on this criterion, as all the possible pairs have a direct and positive impact on green brand support intentions.
of correlations satisfy the condition for discriminant validity of the H5: Attitude toward the green brand will have a direct and positive
constructs. This includes the discriminant validity of the GREEN scale. impact on green brand support intentions.
H6: GREEN will have an indirect effect on green brand support inten-
2.2.3 GREEN and consumer response to PR tions through its impact on trustworthiness of green communication
source (company).
The ability of GREEN to aid the understanding of consumer response to
H7: GREEN will have an indirect effect on green brand support inten-
marketing communications, specifically public relations, was assessed
tions through its impact on attitude toward the green brand.
by testing the framework depicted in Figure 1. This conceptual model
H8: GREEN will have an indirect effect on attitude toward the green
is similar to other models that have been proposed to assess links
brand through its impact on trustworthiness of green communication
between consumer environmental concern or green behavior and
source.
other outcome variables. For example, Chan (2001) developed and
H9: Trustworthiness of green communication source will have an indi-
tested a model of green behavior among Chinese consumers, in which
rect effect on green brand support intentions through its impact on
he proposed that man-nature orientation had a direct impact on atti-
attitude toward the green brand.
tudes toward green purchases, which in turn impacted green purchase
intentions and ultimately green purchase behavior. These hypothe- Model statistics for the path analyses (Table 4) indicate that the
sized relationships were supported. Bickart and Ruth (2012) found model fit the data well: CFI = 0.96; TLI = 0.95; RMSEA = 0.08;
that the use of eco-seals by brands in their marketing communica- SRMR = 0.07; 𝜒 2 (128) = 243.3, P < 0.000 (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Results
tions had an impact on ad attitudes and brand attitudes, as well as pur- of the test of the hypotheses are presented in Table 4. All the hypothe-
chase intentions. Brand and ad attitudes also mediated the relation- sized paths were significant.
ship between the use of eco-seals and purchase intentions. Further,
these effects were moderated by the level of consumer environmental
2.3 Study 2: GREEN values and advertising
concern.
Hartmann and Apaolaza-Ibáñez (2012) found that in the case of Whereas Study 1 focused on the application of GREEN in a public rela-
increasing consumer demand for green energy, environmental concern tions context, Study 2 focused on the application of the GREEN scale
impacted consumers’ brand attitudes and purchase intentions. Olsen, in an advertising context. Consequently, a primary change from Study
Slotegraaf, and Chandukala (2014) carried out an assessment of the 1 was the use of a fictional ad as a stimulus, in an effort to assess
BAILEY ET AL . 7

TA B L E 4 Results of tests of nomological framework for each study the conceptual model in Figure 2; Study 1 contained a fictional press
release as a stimulus. Study 2 used an advertising stimulus in order to
Study 1 (PR) Study 2 (Ad) Study 3 (Ad)
Std. coeff. Std. coeff. Std. coeff. be able to assess whether green consumption values influence con-
Hypothesized paths (t-value) (t-value) (t-value)
sumer response to different forms of marketing communications. If
H1: GREEN → Trust 0.42a 0.19b 0.30a this is the case, then this would enhance the usefulness of the scale as a
(5.80) (2.54) (3.96) tool for segmenting and targeting consumers based on green consump-
H2: GREEN → Attitude 0.20b -0.01 ns 0.24a tion values. In addition, in Study 2, ad message attitude replaced green
(2.80) (0.01) (3.39) brand attitude in the nomological framework.
H3: Trust → Attitude 0.61a 0.56a 0.52a
(9.98) (10.42) (8.62)
2.3.1 Participants and questionnaire
H4: Trust → Intentions 0.26b 0.70a 0.63a
Study 2 was conducted among 210 students enrolled in business
(2.99) (13.69) (12.38)
courses at a Midwest US university; they took part in the study in
H5: Attitude → 0.57a 0.14c 0.31a
exchange for extra course credit. In contrast to Study 1, where the
Intentions
majority of participants were female, the majority of the participants
(7.03) (2.33) (5.40)
in Study 2 were male (55%). Most were in the age range 18–24
H6: GREEN → Trust → 0.11b 0.13b 0.19a
Intentions years (93%) and Caucasian Americans (74%). The questionnaire con-
tained the items for the GREEN scale and the REGRAD scale (Bailey
(2.60) (2.48) (3.76)
et al., 2016). A fictional ad, purportedly created by a CPG company to
H7: GREEN → Atti- 0.12b 0.00 ns 0.07b
tude → Intentions encourage consumers to go green by recycling, was used as a stimulus
(2.51) (0.01) (2.79) in this study. A copy of this ad is in Appendix 1. The order of presen-

H8: GREEN → Trust → 0.26a 0.10c 0.16a tation of information in Study 2 was different from the order in Study
Attitude 1, in that the participants first saw the ad and responded to measures
(5.01) (2.44) (3.65) of attitudes and intentions related to the ad. In addition, participants
H9: Trust → Atti- 0.35a 0.08c 0.16a responded to a question regarding the believability of the ad (“Rate
tude → Intentions the believability of the ad using the 7-point scale where 1 = “Highly
(5.75) (2.31) (4.73) unbelievable” and 7 = “Highly believable”). They then completed the
PR, Press release used as stimulus; Ad, Ad used as stimulus. second part of the questionnaire that contained the GREEN scale, the
a = P < 0.001; b = P < 0.01; c = P < 0.05. REGRAD scale, and demographic questions.
Model statistics of tests of nomological framework for each study
Study 1 (PR): CFI = 0.96; TLI = 0.95; RMSEA = 0.08; SRMR = 0.07; 𝜒 2
(129) = 243.3; P < 0.001
2.3.2 Dependent measures
Study 2 (Ad): CFI = 0.97; TLI = 0.97; RMSEA = 0.06; SRMR = 0.05; 𝜒 2
(126) = 219.9; P < 0.001 In the case of the ad stimulus, the following dependent measures
Study 3 (Ad): CFI = 0.96; TLI = 0.95; RMSEA = 0.09; SRMR = 0.04; 𝜒 2 were assessed: believability of the ad; the level of trustworthiness of
(124) = 273.2; P < 0.001
the company in the ad; attitude toward the message being promoted
by the company in the ad; and likelihood of supporting the company
in the ad. Following exposure to the ad, participants were asked to

FIGURE 2 Nomological framework of GREEN consumption values tested in Studies 2 and 3

8 BAILEY ET AL .

rate the believability of the ad using a 7-point Likert scale where tions of trustworthiness of the green ad information had a signifi-
1 = “Highly unbelievable” and 7 = “Highly believable.” Mean score on cant impact on green advertising message attitude (H3) and green
this ad believability measure was 4.17; and an independent t-test that brand support intentions (H4); and green advertising message attitude
assessed differences in responses between low GREEN consumers significantly influenced green brand support intentions (H5). Green
and high GREEN consumers revealed that there were no differences consumption values indirectly impacted both attitude(H8) and inten-
in ratings of ad believability (t = 0.48, df = 208, ns; Mean low GREEN tion (H6) through its impact on perceptions of trustworthiness of
consumers = 4.12; Mean high GREEN consumers = 4.21). In the case the green ad information source; while perceptions of trustworthi-
of trustworthiness, the level of trustworthiness was measured using ness of the green ad information indirectly impacted green brand sup-
the same 5-item scale previously used to measure celebrity endorser port intentions through its impact on green advertising message atti-
credibility (Ohanian, 1990) and used in Study 1 reported above. Coeffi- tude (H9). Overall, Study 2 provided support for the application of the
cient alpha for the trustworthiness of the company in the ad scale was GREEN scale to understanding consumer response to advertising, with
0.94. Attitude toward the message was measured on the same 4-item the results upholding the conceptual framework depicted in Figure 2
7-point Likert scale that was used in Study 1 to measure company in which GREEN was a predictor variable. However, this study was
attitude; anchors were: Unpleasant/Pleasant; Negative/Positive; conducted with a student sample.
Unfavorable/Favorable; Bad/Good. Coefficient alpha was 0.94. The
likelihood of supporting the company in the ad was measured using a 2.5 Study 3: GREEN values and advertising
3-item 7-point Likert scale. Anchors were: Impossible/Possible; Very (Nonstudent sample)
Unlikely/Very Likely; and Improbable/Probable. Cronbach alpha for
Study 3 was conducted with a nonstudent sample, primarily to enhance
the scale was 0.94.
external validity of the findings using a student sample. The aim
was to apply GREEN to understanding consumer response to green
2.4 Results advertising.

The coefficient alpha for the 6-item GREEN scale was 0.91. A follow-
2.5.1 Participants and questionnaire
up assessment of dimensionality using CFA was done. The model fit
Study 3 was conducted using students enrolled in business courses
was good: CFI = 0.99; TLI = 0.98; SRMR = 0.021; and RMSEA = 0.077;
in a Midwestern USA college to recruit nonstudent participants for
𝜒 2 (7) = 15.77, P = 0.0273 (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Average variance
the study. This method of data collection has a history in consumer
extracted (AVE) was 0.62 and composite reliability was 0.96.
research. The students were provided with the link to the survey on
Survey Monkey and asked to recruit nonstudent respondents to take
2.4.1 Convergent validity
part (Babin, Hardesty, & Suter, 2003; Park, Shin, & Ju, 2015; West-
Scores on the GREEN scale were correlated with scores on the john, Singh, & Magnusson, 2012). The sample included 51% female
REGRAD scale. Coefficient alpha for the REGRAD scale was 0.88. The (49% male). The majority of the participants were in the age ranges
GREEN scale correlated significantly with the REGRAD scale: r = 0.48, 45–54 years (43%) and 25–34 years (22%). They were mainly Cau-
P = 0.000. This relationship again indicates that the scale has conver- casian (79%), with African-Americans/Blacks (9%) and Asian/Asian
gent validity as it is positively and significantly related to a construct Americans (6%) being among the other racial subcultures.
that focus on consumers’ response to environmental messages. In par-
The Study 3 questionnaire contained the same information
ticular, it correlates highly with a measure of consumers’ receptivity to
as that in the Study 2 questionnaire, with the fictional ad pur-
green messages.
portedly from the packaged good company being the focal
stimulus. The order of presentation of information was also
2.4.2 GREEN and consumer response to advertising the same as in Study 2. Consumers saw the ad (Appendix
The ability of GREEN to aid in understanding consumer response to 1), responded to a single-item question regarding the likeli-
marketing communications, specifically advertising, was assessed by hood that this ad would be put out by a company such as this,
testing the nomological framework depicted in Figure 2. Model statis- and then responded to measures of ad attitude, message atti-
tics for the path analyses for the ad stimulus indicate that the model fit tude, trustworthiness of the company, and support intentions
the data well: CFI = 0.97; TLI = 0.97; RMSEA = 0.06; SRMR = 0.05; for the company in the ad. The second part of the question-
𝜒 2 (126) = 219.9, P = 0.000 (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Results of the naire contained the items for the GREEN scale, the REGRAD
hypotheses testing are presented in Table 4. Of note is that two of scale, and a short-form ECCB scale; and the final section of
the nine hypothesized relationships were not supported. In the case of the questionnaire contained demographic questions.
the advertising stimulus, there was no significant link between green
consumption values and green advertising message attitude (H2); and 2.5.2 Dependent measures
green consumption values did not have an indirect effect on brand The same measures used to assess the dependent variables in Study
support intentions through its effects on green advertising message 2 were used in Study 3; the dependent variables were the level of
attitude (H7). However, GREEN had a significant impact on percep- trustworthiness of the company in the ad; attitude toward the message
tions of trustworthiness of the green ad information (H1); percep- being promoted by the company in the ad; and likelihood of supporting
BAILEY ET AL . 9

the company in the ad. Participants also rated likelihood of a company

such as the one in the ad putting out the ad; this was on a single item 7-
point Likert scale (1 = “Highly unlikely”/7 = “Highly likely”). Mean score
on this ad likelihood measure was 4.12; and an independent t-test that
assessed differences in responses between low GREEN consumers
and high GREEN consumers revealed that there were no differences in
ratings of ad likelihood (t = –1.21, df = 159, ns, Mean low GREEN con-
sumers = 3.96; Mean high GREEN consumers = 4.26). Coefficient alpha
for the trustworthiness of the company in the ad scale was 0.97; coef-
ficient alpha for the attitude toward the message scale was 0.97; and
Cronbach alpha for the company support intentions scale was 0.97.

2.6 Results
The coefficient alpha for the 6-item GREEN scale was 0.93. A follow-
up assessment of dimensionality using CFA was done. The model fit
was good: CFI = 0.98; TLI = 0.96; SRMR = 0.02; and RMSEA = 0.11; 𝜒 2
(7) = 20.23, P = 0.005 (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Average variance extracted
(AVE) was 0.66 and composite reliability was 0.96.

2.6.1 Convergent validity

As was the case in Study 2, in Study 3, scores on the GREEN scale were
correlated with scores on the REGRAD scale, the short-form ECCB
scale (see Study 1), and a single item 7-point global measure of environ-
mental concern (“I am very concerned about the environment”). Coef-
F I G U R E 3 a) Mediation of GREEN-ad message attitude by
ficient alpha for the REGRAD scale was 0.91, and that for the ECCB
perceived trustworthiness
scale was 0.92. The GREEN scale correlated significantly with both the b) Mediation of perceived trustworthiness-green brand support
REGRAD and the ECCB scales: r = 0.80, P = 0.000 (REGRAD); r = 0.81, intentions by green ad message attitude
P = 0.000 (ECCB). GREEN was also highly correlated with the sin-
gle item, 7-point global measure of environmental concern: r = 0.67,
motivated an investigation of the possible mediating roles of: green
P = 0.000. In this study with the nonstudent sample, these relationships
trust in the GREEN-green brand support intentions relationship (H6);
reinforce that the scale has convergent validity as it relates positively
green ad message attitude in the GREEN-green brand support inten-
and significantly to constructs that focus on consumers’ response to
tions relationship (H7); green trust in the GREEN-green ad message
environmental messages or on environmental behavior.
attitude relationship (H8); and ad message attitude in the green trust-
green brand support intentions relationship (H9). Figure 3a and b,
2.6.2 GREEN and response to advertising which represent a dissecting of Figure 2, presents the proposed medi-
As was the case in Study 2, the ability of GREEN to aid understand- ational paths for H8 and H9. The mediational paths were tested using
ing of consumer response to green advertising was assessed by testing SPSS v 23 and Hayes's (2013) Process macro Model 4, with 95% bias-
conceptual model depicted in Figure 2. Model statistics for the path corrected bootstrap CIs and a 5,000 bootstrap resample. Results of
analyses for the ad stimulus indicate that the model fit the data well: the investigation were as follows: H6: SE = 0.04; LLCI: 0.0357, ULCI:
CFI = 0.96; TLI = 0.95; RMSEA = 0.04; SRMR = 0.09; 𝜒 2 (124) = 273.23, 0.1843); H7: SE = 0.03; LLCI: 0.0795, ULCI: 0.2153); H8: SE = 0.04;
P = 0.000 (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Results of the hypotheses testing are in LLCI: 0.0319, ULCI: 0.1899); and H9: SE = 0.04; LLCI: 0.0732, ULCI:
Table 4. The results show support for all the hypothesized paths in the 0.2299). In all cases, the 95% CI did not contain zero, indicating the
model in Figure 2. GREEN significantly influences perceived trustwor- existence of mediation.
thiness of a brand involved in green advertising (H1) as well as attitude
toward the green message used by the brand (H2). In turn, perceived
trustworthiness of the green brand impacts attitude toward the green 3 GENERAL DISCUSSION
message (H3) as well intentions to support the green brand (H4); and
consistent with extant literature, attitude toward the green message This paper reports on three studies that were conducted as part of an
significantly influences intentions to support the green brand (H5). application of the GREEN consumption values construct (Haws et al.,
Hypotheses H6 through H9 proposed certain indirect effects, and 2014) to understanding US consumers’ response to green marketing
the results indicated that there was support for all these hypothesized communications. The GREEN scale had been developed to measure
relationships. This support for the proposed indirect links in H6–H9 consumers’ tendency to express their environmental concern through
10 BAILEY ET AL .

their consumption behaviors. In particular, the studies reported in this communications. These include education level, income level, and
paper used public relations (Study 1) and advertising (Studies 2 and 3) race.
stimuli to determine whether consumers’ attitudes and intentions in The studies reported here extended the use of the GREEN con-
relation to marketing communications were impacted by their green sumption values construct into the domains of advertising and publi-
consumption values. These studies were against the background of cation relations. This was in an effort to assess whether there are links
recent research that counters previous views on green marketing. In between green consumption values and consumer response to brands’
particular, the argument was made that results from the work of Segev advertising and other marketing communications initiatives; most of
et al. (2016), combined with those from Matthes and Wonneberger the prior research in this domain has focused on green advertising. The
(2014), lend support for increased focus on green marketing commu- results from the studies indicate that GREEN consumers respond in
nications. Given a reduction in skepticism toward green advertising, favorable ways to different forms of green marketing communications.
and given that more green ads are perceived as acceptable, brand Therefore, it would be advantageous to brands to develop and imple-
managers, and marketing communications managers can benefit from ment green integrated communications strategies, rather than just a
an understanding of the extent to which US consumers could be tar- green advertising strategy. Such an idea has been proposed before
geted with green integrated marketing communications efforts based (Carlson, Grove, Laczniak, & Kangun, 1996), but it does not seem to be
on their GREEN consumption values. guiding current practice.
While the GREEN scale development and initial validation pro-
cessed may have been in the context of consumer choice of products
based on their green consumption values, the overall results from the
4 LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
three studies reported in this paper provide support for the validity
DIRECTIONS
and usefulness of the GREEN scale in marketing communications con-
texts. The results show that it has convergent validity based on its
As with any research, this research has certain limitations. For exam-
correspondence with the consumer receptivity to green advertising
ple, Study 1 used a student sample in investigating consumer response
(REGRAD) scale, which assesses consumers’ responsiveness to adver-
to green marketing communications, in particular public relations with
tising that uses green messages in the marketing of products or a com-
an environmental focus. Further studies regarding consumer response
pany (Bailey et al., 2016). The results also provide evidence that, among
to this kind of initiative should be conducted among nonstudent sam-
US consumers, there are positive links between GREEN and consumer
ples in order to enhance the generalizability of the results. There was
attitudes and intentions. In addition, green consumption values influ-
no exploration of the extent to which the GREEN construct could
ence consumer perceptions of the trustworthiness of a green brand. An
be applied in understanding consumer response to different types of
important note is that the studies do not tell us what individual differ-
green advertising appeals, or other types of green public relations or
ence factors might operate as antecedents to green consumption val-
green marketing activities. Prior research on green advertising has
ues. The studies also do not tell us about outcome variables other than
investigated consumer response to different kinds of green appeals
attitudes and intentions; so additional research could seek to identify
(Matthes et al., 2014; Reich & Soule 2016; Yang et al., 2015), and the
some of the factors that contribute to the development of green con-
results have shown that consumers do respond differently to different
sumption values, as well as additional links among green consumption
types of green appeals. Future research could use experimental studies
values, exposure to green marketing communications, and consumer
to determine whether green consumption values influence consumer
green behaviors.
response to different kinds of green advertising appeals and green
Though not explicitly tested in these studies, results from the two
marketing activities.
advertising stimuli-based studies suggest that consumer age may have
The models in the studies also did not have behavioral outcome as a
an impact on the manner in which green consumption values work
dependent variable, so there was no investigation of actual green con-
to impact consumers’ attitudes and intentions when consumers are
sumption behavior based on consumer exposure to green marketing
exposed to green marketing communications. For example, in the case
communications activities. For example, there was no investigation of
of Study 3, which featured an older audience, all the hypothesized
whether there is a link among GREEN consumption values, green brand
links in the nomological model were supported. This was, however, not
trust, and behavioral response to green ad messages such as actual
the case in Study 2, with a younger audience, as GREEN consumption
green product purchases. Future research should explore this issue,
values did not directly influence attitudes toward GREEN advertising.
using data other than consumer self-reports and cross-sectional data.
In addition, attitude toward green advertising did not mediate the
relationship between GREEN consumption values and intentions
to support a brand that uses green advertising. These differences
in findings regarding the impact of GREEN consumption values on
REFERENCES
consumer attitudes, based on consumer age, suggest that there are
Abeliotis, K., Koniari, C., & Sardianou, E. (2010). The profile of the green con-
possibly different routes to influence of GREEN consumption values.
sumer in Greece. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 34, 153–160.
In addition, within the US population, there are other demographic
Atkinson, L. (2013). Smart shoppers? Using QR codes and ‘green’ smart-
variables other than age that may explain how green consumption phone apps to mobilize sustainable consumption in the retail environ-
values impact consumers when they are exposed to green marketing ment. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 37, 387–393.
BAILEY ET AL . 11

Atkinson, L., & Rosenthal, S. (2014). Signaling the green sell: The influence Hartmann, P., Apaolaza, V., & Eisend, M. (2016). Nature imagery in non-
of eco-label source, argument specificity, and product involvement on green advertising: The effects of emotion, autobiographical memory,
consumer trust. Journal of Advertising, 43, 33–45. and consumer's green traits. Journal of Advertising, 45(4), 427–440.
Babin, B. J., Hardesty, D. M., & Suter, T. A. (2003). Color and shopping Haws, K. L., Winterich, K. P., & Naylor, R. W. (2014). Seeing the world through
intentions: The intervening effect of price fairness and perceived affect. GREEN-tinted glasses: Green consumption values and responses to
Journal of Business Research, 56(7)541–551. environmentally friendly products. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24,
Bailey, A. A., Mishra, A., & Tiamiyu, M. F. (2016). Green advertising receptiv- 336–354.
ity: An initial scale development process. Journal of Marketing Communi- Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional pro-
cations, 22(3), 327–345. cess analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: The Guilford
Bickart, B. A., & Ruth, J. A. (2012). Green eco-seals and advertising persua- Press.
sion. Journal of Advertising, 41, 51–67. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance
Brough, A. R., Wilkie, J. B., Jingjing, M., Isaac, M. S., & Gal, D. (2016). Is structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struc-
eco-friendly unmanly? The green-feminine stereotype and its effect tural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.
on sustainable consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(4), Khare, A., Mukerjee, S., & Goyal, T. (2013). Social influence and green mar-
567–582. keting: An exploratory study on Indian consumers. Journal of Customer
Carlson, L., Grove, S. J., & Kangun, N. (1993). A content analysis of environ- Behavior, 12, 361–381.
mental advertising claims: A matrix method approach. Journal of Adver- Kong, Y., & Zhang, L. (2014). When does green advertising work? The mod-
tising, 22, 27–39. erating role of product type. Journal of Marketing Communications, 20,
Carlson, L., Grove, S. J., Laczniak, R. N., & Kangun, N. (1996). Does 197–213.
environmental advertising reflect integrated marketing communica- Lafferty, B. A., Goldsmith, R. E., & Newell, S. J. (2002). The dual credibility
tions? An empirical investigation. Journal of Business Research, 37, model: The influence of corporate and endorser credibility on attitudes
225–232. and purchase intentions. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 10,
Chan, Ricky Y. K. (2001). Determinants of Chinese consumers’ green pur- 1–12.
chase behavior. Psychology and Marketing, 18, 389–413. Leo, Y. M. S., Tse, A. B., Yau, O. M., Chow, R. M., Lee, J. Y., &
Chan, S.-W. (2014). Green marketing: Hotel customers’ perspective. Journal Lau, L. Y. (2005). Relationship marketing orientation: Scale develop-
of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 31, 915–936. ment and cross-cultural validation. Journal of Business Research, 58(2),
185–194.
Chang, H., Zhang, L., & Xie, G.-X. (2015). Message framing in green advertis-
ing: The effect of construal level and consumer environmental concern. Lu, L.-C., Chang, H.-H., & Chang, A. (2015). Consumer personality and green
International Journal of Advertising, 34, 158–176. buying intention: The mediate role of consumer ethical beliefs. Journal
of Business Ethics, 127, 205–219.
Davari, A., & Strutton, D. (2014). Marketing mix strategies for closing the
gap between green consumers’ pro-environmental beliefs and behav- Matthes, J., & Wonneberger, A. (2014). The skeptical green consumer revis-
iors. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 22, 563–586. ited: Testing the relationship between green consumerism and skepti-
cism toward advertising. Journal of Advertising, 43, 115–127.
Fernando, A. G., Suganthi, L., & Sivakumaran, B. (2014). If you blog, will
they follow? Using online media to set the agenda for consumer con- Matthes, J., Wonneberger, A., & Schmuck, D. (2014). Consumers’ green
cerns on “greenwashed” environmental claims. Journal of Advertising, 43, involvement and the persuasive effects of emotional versus functional
167–180. ads. Journal of Business Research, 67, 1885–1893.

Finisterra do Paço, A. M., & Reis, R. (2012). Factors affecting skepticism Miniero, G., Codini, A., Bonera, M., Corvi, E., & Bertoli, G. (2014). Being
toward green advertising. Journal of Advertising, 41, 147–155. green: From attitude to actual consumption. International Journal of Con-
sumer Studies, 38, 521–528.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models
with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Market- Mostafa, M. M. (2007). A hierarchical analysis of the green consciousness of
ing Research, 8, 39–50. the Egyptian consumer. Psychology and Marketing, 24, 445–473.

Fuentes, C. (2014). Managing green complexities: Consumers’ strategies Neff, J. (2012). As more marketers go green, fewer consumers willing to pay
and techniques for greener shopping. International Journal of Consumer for it. Retrieved October 30, 2015, from Retrieved from https://adage.
Studies, 38, 485–492. com/article/news/marketers-green-fewer-consumers-pay/237377/

Green, T., & Peloza, J. (2014). Finding the right shade of green: The effect of Nittala, R. (2014). Green consumer behavior of the educated segment in
advertising appeal type on environmentally friendly consumption. Jour- India. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 26, 138–152.
nal of Advertising, 43, 128–141. Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure
Griffin, M., Babin, B. J., & Christensen, F. (2004). A cross-cultural investiga- celebrity endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attrac-
tion of the materialism construct: Assessing the Richins and Dawson's tiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19, 39–52.
materialism scale in Denmark, France and Russia. Journal of Business Olsen, M. C., Slotegraaf, R. J., & Chandukala, S. R. (2014). Green claims
Research, 57(8), 893–900. and message frames: How green new products change brand attitude.
Grimmer, M., & Woolley, M. (2014). Green marketing messages and con- Journal of Marketing, 78, 119–137.
sumers’ purchase intentions: Promoting personal versus environmental Pagiaslis, A., & Krontalis, A. K. (2014). Green consumption behavior
benefits. Journal of Marketing Communications, 20, 231–250. antecedents: Environmental concern, knowledge, and beliefs. Psychol-
Hartmann, P., & Apaolaza-Ibáñez, V. (2012). Consumer attitude and ogy and Marketing, 31, 335–348.
purchase intention toward green energy brands: The roles of Papadas, K., Avlonitis, G. J., & Carrigan, M. (2017). Green marketing orien-
psychological benefits and environmental concern. Journal of Busi- tation: Conceptualization, scale development and validation. Journal of
ness Research, 65, 1254–1263. Business Research, 80, 236–246.
12 BAILEY ET AL .

Park, J. S., & Lee, J. (2014). Segmenting green consumers in the United
States: Implications for green marketing. Journal of Promotion Manage- How to cite this article: Bailey AA Mishra AS Tiamiyu MF.
ment, 20, 571–589.
Application of GREEN scale to understanding US consumer
Park, M.-S., Shin, J.-K., & Ju, Y. (2015). A taxonomy of social networking site response to green marketing communications. Psychol Mark.
users: Social surveillance and self-surveillance perspective. Psychology
2018;1–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21140
and Marketing, 32(6), 601–610.
Reich, B. J., & Soule, C. A. (2016). Green demarketing in advertise-
ments: Comparing “buy green” and “buy less” appeals in product
and institutional advertising contexts. Journal of Advertising, 45(4),
441–458. APPENDIX 1: MAIN SCALES USED IN THE STUDIES
Richey, Jr., R. G., Musgrove, C. F., Gillison, S. T., & Gabler, C. B. (2014). The
effects of environmental focus and program timing on green marketing
performance and the moderating role of resource commitment. Indus- APPENDIX: GREEN scale (Haws et al., 2014)
trial Marketing Management, 43(7), 1246–1257. GREEN 1 (It is important to me that the products I use do not harm
Roberts, J. A. (1995). Profiling levels of socially responsible consumer the environment.)
behavior: A cluster analytic approach and its implications for marketing. GREEN 2 (I consider the potential environmental impact of my
Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 3, 97–117.
actions when making many of my decisions.)
Roberts, J. A. (1996). Green consumers in the 1990s: Profile and implica-
GREEN 3 (My purchase habits are affected by my concern for our
tions for advertising. Journal of Business Research, 36, 217–231.
environment.)
Ruvio, A. A., & Shoham, A. (2016). Consumer arrogance: Scale development
GREEN 4 (I am concerned about wasting the resources of our
and validation. Journal of Business Research, 69(10), 3989–3997.
planet.
Segev, S., Fernandes, J., & Hong, C. (2016). Is your product really green?
A content analysis to reassess green advertising. Journal of Advertising, GREEN 5 (I would describe myself as environmentally responsible.)
45(1), 85–93. GREEN 6 (I am willing to be inconvenienced in order to take actions
Smith, K. T., & Brower, T. R. (2012). Longitudinal study of green marketing that are more environmentally friendly.)
strategies that influence millennials. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 20,
535–551.
APPENDIX: REGRAD Scale (Bailey et al., 2016)
Tucker, E. M., Rifon, N. J., Lee, E. M., & Reece, B. B. (2012). Consumer recep-
tivity to green ads: A test of green claim types and the role of individual I tend to pay attention to advertising messages that talk about the
consumer characteristics for green ad response. Journal of Advertising, environment.
41, 9–23.
I tend to pay attention to green advertising messages.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2015). Millennials outnumber baby boomers and The use of green messages in ads affects my attitude toward the ads.
are far more diverse, Census Bureau Reports. Retrieved October 18,
I respond favorably to brands that use green messages in their
2015, from Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-
releases/2015/cb15-113.html advertising.

Verain, M. C. D., Bartels, J., Dagevos, H., Sijtsema, S. J., Onwezen, M. C., & I am the kind of consumer who responds favorably when brands use
Antonides, G. (2012). Segments of sustainable food consumers: A liter- green messages in their ads.
ature review. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 36, 123–132. I think that green advertising is valuable.
Voorhees, C. M., Brady, M. K., Calantone, R., & Ramirez, E. (2016). Discrim- Green advertising is a necessary form of advertising.
inant validity testing in marketing: An analysis, causes for concern, and I am the kind of consumer who is willing to purchase products mar-
proposed remedies. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(1),
keted as being green.
119–134.
I support brands that support the environment.
WARC (2015). Consumers expect greenness from brands. Retrieved Octo-
ber 30, 2015, from Retrieved from https://www.warc.com/LatestNews/ Short-form proxy ECCB scale (proxy based on work of Bailey et al.,
News/Consumers_expect_greenness_from_brands_.news?ID=34637 2016; Roberts, 1995, 1996)
Westjohn, S. A., Singh, N., & Magnusson, P. (2012). Responsiveness to global I buy environmentally friendly products whenever possible.
and local consumer culture positioning: A personality and collective I use products made from recycled materials whenever possible.
identity perspective. Journal of International Marketing, 20(1), 58–73. I reduce household waste, whenever possible.
Whitson, D., Erkan, O. H., & Roxas, J. (2014). Changes in consumer seg- I recycle household waste, whenever possible.
ments and preferences to green labelling. International Journal of Con-
I would be willing to reduce my consumption to help protect the
sumer Studies, 38, 458–466.
environment.
Xue, F. (2015). Message framing and collectivistic appeal in green
I am the kind of concerned consumer who recycles.
advertising—A study of Chinese consumers. Journal of International Con-
sumer Marketing, 27, 152–166. Article used in Study 1*
Yang, D., Lu, Y., Zhu, W., & Su, C. (2015). Going green: How different adver-
tising appeals impact green consumption behavior. Journal of Business “Packaging Good Company R Us, a major marketer of
Research, 68, 2663–2675.
consumer packaged goods, has launched a new ‘multi-
Yi, Y. (1990). Cognitive and affective priming effects of the context for print brand initiative’ that intends to demonstrate the ‘green’
advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 19, 40–48.
credentials of its products. The company plans to spend
BAILEY ET AL . 13

more of its marketing budget on making and promot- Copy of Ad used in Study 2 and Study 3
ing ‘sustainable innovation products’, and said last year it
would run its first ‘green’ marketing campaign in the US
in 2013. It has now announced that the Green Friendly
scheme will feature three of its major brands, and aims
to educate shoppers on how to ‘save water, waste and
energy at home.’

“‘With Green Friendly, we're trying to educate main-

stream consumers on how to conserve natural resources
in their homes,’ said one of the company's spokesper-
sons. ‘These consumers want to purchase the brands
they already know, and they understand how using these
products can help them lower their impact on the envi-
ronment.’”

*Participants were told that the name of the company was changed
to protect its identity.