Next Article in Journal
Antecedents of Sustainable Performance in Manufacturing Organizations: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach
Next Article in Special Issue
An Empirical Study into Consumer Acceptance of Dockless Bikes Sharing System Based on TAM
Previous Article in Journal
Applying the DRCA Risk Template on the Flood-Prone Disaster Prevention Community Due to Climate Change
Previous Article in Special Issue
Country Differences in Determinants of Behavioral Intention towards Sustainable Apparel Products
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 13
Issue 2
10.3390/su13020892
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

Impact of Susceptibility to Global Consumer Culture on Commitment and Loyalty in Botanic Cosmetic Brands

by
Jae Kwang Hwang
1,
Eun-Jung Kim
2,
Sae-Mi Lee
3 and
Yong-Ki Lee
4,*
1
F.S. Korea Industries Inc., Seoul 01062, Korea
2
College of Hotel and Tourism Management, Youngsan University, Busan 48015, Korea
3
School of Business, Busan National University, Busan 46241, Korea
4
School of Business, Sejong University, Seoul 05000, Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2021, 13(2), 892; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020892
Submission received: 12 December 2020 / Revised: 12 January 2021 / Accepted: 14 January 2021 / Published: 17 January 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Trends and Patterns in Consumer Behavior and Sustainable Consumption)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Given that the market is becoming more competitive, it is imperative to understand what influences purchasing decisions of global consumers as consumer trends change regarding botanic cosmetics for anti-aging, maintaining appearance and skin health. This study considers and examines susceptibility to global consumer culture (SGCC) (conformity to consumer trend, social prestige, and quality perception) and its effect on affective commitment, which in turn influences behavioral commitment and loyalty in the context of the botanic cosmetic industry. In addition to examining the structural relationships among the variables, we test whether purchase experience moderates the proposed relationships. The results are as follows. First, conformity to consumer trends has a significant effect on emotional commitment, but is not positively associated with behavioral commitment. Second, social prestige has no significant direct effect on either emotional or behavioral commitment. Third, quality perception has a significant impact on emotional commitment, but no positive impact on behavioral commitment. Fourth, both emotional commitment and behavioral commitment affect brand loyalty, and behavioral commitment in particular has a significant effect on brand loyalty. Finally, through the analysis of the moderating effect on the cosmetic purchasing experience, first, it was confirmed that the less purchasing experience, the stronger the effect of conformity to consumption trend (CCT) on emotional commitment and behavioral commitment.

1. Introduction

Due to global consumer culture, consumers the world over have increasingly homogeneous needs and tastes that are not based on their own unique cultures and customs [1,2]. These global consumers are a new class of consumers who show similar lifestyles, purchasing patterns and consumer preferences worldwide as the barriers to trade between countries are lifted and market openings accelerate [3]. Although there are cultural differences, they are emerging as a very important consumer class in the global market because they obtain information through online activities and overseas trips and experience homogenous consumption patterns while experiencing various cultures. Therefore, research on SGCC (susceptibility to global consumer culture) is currently underway to explain how global consumers understand and accept the symbolic meaning of global brands [4].
Given these trends, global consumer culture theory (GCCT) has become influential in international business and marketing [5]. Advocates of this theory argue that the globalization of markets has led to the existence of a global consumer culture in which many consumers share consumption values regardless of their residential countries [6]. Moreover, the global consumer class that aims to participate in the global consumer culture is increasing in each country, including Korea [7,8], and as a result, GCCT has become influential in global consumer culture. In accordance with GCCT, Zhou, Teng and Poon [4] expanded and verified a scale to measure consumers’ susceptibility to global consumer culture (SGCC) across cultures, which is composed of three dimensions: conformity to consumption trends, quality perception and social prestige.
Globalization of a company is difficult if its globalization efforts do not increase the consumer’s global brand awareness in the market [9]. In this regard, global companies must understand the impact of their marketing efforts on consumer acceptance of global products. Recent scholars have argued that global companies’ marketing efforts should be measured using the SGCC scale and analyzed for their impact on consumer and corporate performance because understanding consumers’ global consumption trends can be a source of competitive advantage, which leads to firm growth [2,4,9,10].
SGCC is defined as the consumer’s desire or tendency to purchase and use global brands [4] and is being accelerated by the development of SNS (Social Networking Service) with the recent development of the Internet, which not only affects the emotional attachment to the brands they use [11] but also affects consumers’ willingness to commit and sacrifice to the brand [12].
Commitment to a brand refers to an intentional behavior in which consumers want to have a lasting relationship with the brand in the future. Once commitment is made, a strong conviction determines a concrete attitude toward the brand, which makes it difficult to switch to a competitive brand [13,14]. Emotional commitment, which appears as a positive attitude, is generally an important factor influencing loyalty expressed through positive word of mouth and repurchase based on psychological intimacy and trust [15,16]. Behavioral engagement not only has a direct and powerful impact on loyalty but also plays a role in reinforcing brand-support behavior, such as brand advocacy and brand-supportive behavior, even if it cannot lead to buying behavior [12].
On the other hand, the consumption trend of domestic consumers is increasing the awareness of and preference for domestic cosmetics due to the influence of the Korean Wave and building product images through quality, design and story formation of domestic cosmetics companies. As the importance of eco-friendly products with low carbon emissions increases, consumer safety demand for cosmetics is also becoming more pronounced. As such, human- and environment-oriented consumption is a trend, and companies are also striving for sustainable management by putting a great deal of resources into green product production, environmental advertising and green marketing [17].
Since consumer demand for organic and natural personal care products is increasing, there is a growing interest in botanic cosmetics containing natural and botanical ingredients [18]. Botanic cosmetics are made of natural and botanical ingredients from plants (herbs, roots, flowers, fruits, leaves or seeds) [19]. Botanic cosmetics can also be referred to as green cosmetics, herbal cosmetics and organic cosmetics [20]. According to Shi [21], more than 75% of the cosmetics market is made up of natural ingredients derived from plants. Marketing trends are moving towards healthy lifestyles, and the cosmetics industry is turning to natural cosmetics suitable for healthy living [22], so much so that the global botanic cosmetics market is predicted to grow to USD 48.04 billion by 2025 [23].
Therefore, this study provides practical implications for companies to execute more efficient marketing strategies for global botanic cosmetic brands based on susceptibility to global consumer culture (SGCC), a variable that affects global cosmetics consumers’ commitment and loyalty to botanic cosmetics. The attempts of this study can identify key motivations as to why cosmetic consumers commit to the brand or the firm.
In addition, this research examines the moderating role of purchase experience and compares the differentiating effects on SGCC (conformity to consumer trend, social prestige, quality perception), commitment (emotional and behavioral) and loyalty toward botanic cosmetic brand according to the frequency of purchasing experience (see Figure 1). Consumer’s purchase experience influences the perceived value of a product differently based on differences in familiarity and previous knowledge of a product [24]. However, few studies empirically examine comparisons of SGCC, commitment or loyalty between non-purchasers and purchasers. In order to establish an effective marketing strategy, it is important to compare consumers who have purchased botanic cosmetics with those who do not to identify the various consumption values and product attitudes that may affect purchase intention or repurchase intention. Thus, it will be beneficial for marketers to identify how a consumer’s previous purchase experience influences the relationship between SGCC, commitment and loyalty.
The significance of this study is threefold. First, this study examines the link between SGCC and emotional and behavioral commitment using GCCT. Some studies have suggested that SGCC can be used for global positioning by using global consumers’ perception of global brands (e.g., Akaka and Alden [25]; Alden, Steenkamp and Batra [26]), but few studies have been conducted on the effect of SGCC on outcome variables such as commitment and loyalty. In addition, some studies (e.g., Akaka and Alden [25]) demanded the need to study whether perceptions of SGCC are perceived differently by consumers of cultures other than Western cultures. From this point of view, it is practically meaningful to study the effect of SGCC perception of foreign botanic cosmetics on commitment and loyalty in the Korean market, where the demand for botanic cosmetics is increasing. Second, this study explains the commitment–loyalty link mechanism using the behavioral commitment construct. Behavioral commitment refers to true current behavior, promises and sacrifices (Gutiérrez, Cillán and Izquierdo, 2004, p. 355) [27]. Some studies [27,28] have called for a need to investigate the effect of emotional commitment on behavioral commitment and loyalty. This research responds to these calls and tries to clarify how emotional commitment generated by the perception of SGCC continuously affects consumers’ expenditure or sacrifice and, as a result, affects loyalty. Lastly, this study concerns treatment of purchase experience as a moderator. Based on the belief adjustment model [29] and reasoned action theory [30], purchase experience explains how consumers adjust their beliefs about SGCC perception [31] and increase their familiarity with the purchasing process [32].

2. Literature Review

2.1. Susceptibility to Global Consumer Culture (SGCC)

Susceptibility to global consumer culture (SGCC) is defined as the consumer’s desire or inclination to purchase and use global brands [4]. Consumer culture theory in global markets has been referred to as GCCT, and over time, this theory has become a key theory in international business and marketing [33]. As a testament to this and following the trend, GCCT has re-defined what constitutes a global brand. Global consumer culture (GCC) [26], global consumption orientation (GCO) [2] and acculturation to the global consumer culture (AGCC) [10] have developed into global consumer culture positioning (GCCP) [34] and susceptibility to global consumer culture (SGCC) [4].
Due to the development of the Internet, global consumers can know in real time what is happening in different cultures quickly absorbing new consumer culture trends into global trends [35]. Zhou et al. [4] argued that the increase in the cultural homogeneity of consumers and growing similarity of consumer culture patterns such as consumption habits, product category and trademarks are highly related to the growth of the global market. Therefore, it can be seen that the integration of the market due to the cultural homogeneity of consumers causes a global consumer culture [36].
Meanwhile, luxury brand purchase motivation appears differently according to cultural differences [37]. For example, consumers with strong collectivist tendencies buy luxury brands to satisfy their desire to improve self-expression, while consumers with strong individualist tendencies buy luxury brands to emphasize their personality [38]. Susceptibility to global consumer culture (SGCC) is conceptualized as a set of multidimensional aspects of motivation for global consumption, collection and use of preferences, acting as an important factor affecting individual consumption behavior and psychological tendency toward global brands [4].
In a study by Keillor, D’Amico and Horton [39], susceptibility to global consumer culture (SGCC) was explained in connection with psychological constructs such as consumer ethnocentrism, national identity, social desirability and consumer influence sources, and it is measured by conceptualizing the tendency related to consumption of global consumers. According to Steenkamp, Batra, and Alden’s [40] study, SGCC originated from perceived brand globalness (PBG), which positively affects perceived quality, perceived prestige and purchase intentions of a brand. Cleveland and Laroche [10] define SGCC as a concept related to whether consumers assimilate to global consumer culture; in addition, they developed the SGCC scale to include cosmopolitanism, exposure to multinational corporate marketing, use of and exposure to English, contact with other cultures, exposure to global mass media and the dimension of admiration and openness of global consumer culture. Zhou et al. [4] developed the SGCC scale in three dimensions: conformity to consumption trend, quality perception and social prestige.
In their study, Zhou et al. [4] aim to study susceptibility to global consumer culture (SGCC) in three dimensions: conformity to consumption trends, quality perception and social prestige.

2.1.1. Conformity to Consumer Trend

In social psychology, conformity to consumption is defined as the tendency of an individual to comply with the norms within a group [41]. The conformity to consumption trend reflects the attitude of consumers following the convergence of consumption on a global level, which is a tendency to comply with the group’s norms for consumer products in the consumption situation [42,43]. In most previous studies, consumer conformity is studied in terms of norm compliance [44,45] or susceptibility to information [46], but Mangleburg, Doney and Bristol [47] studied dimensions of susceptibility to both informational and normative influence.
SGCC is formed by consumers’ attempts to follow consumption trends at a global level [48], and as a multidimensional concept of consumer desire to own a global brand, it affects consumer behavior and consumption tendencies of global brand consumers [49]. The process of formation and change of these trends is determined by the interaction of environmental factors such as society, culture, politics, and economy and personal factors such as consumer’s consciousness structure and lifestyle [50]. In addition, consumers generally perceive several countries in which global brands are sold as global consumption countries, and this susceptibility to a global brand is shaped by brand exposure through marketing promotions (packaging, advertising) and general media (sports events, word of mouth, travel) [40].
Cialdini and Goldstein [51] insisted that conformity to consumption trends is also related to consumer self-esteem and product knowledge level. Consumers tend to recognize superior products and prefer global brands because this conformity to consumer trend recognizes global brands preferred by consumers in a symbolic meaning [52]. Therefore, companies need to be able to consistently expose good global brands so that consumers can be susceptible and conform to global brands [2,26].

2.1.2. Social Prestige

Social prestige refers to consumers’ attribution of pride and social status enhanced through the ownership or consumption of global products [52]. Social prestige refers to a consumer’s subjective feelings toward the improvement of social status and self-esteem strengthened through possession or consumption of global products [52]. In general, social reputation is used interchangeably with a corporate image or corporate identity [53]. Social reputation is a strategic response that enables organizations to be distinguished, meaning practical factors such as environmental issues and product and service quality, and appears as a comprehensive image of a company [54]. Steenkamp, Batra and Alden [40] asserted that social reputation reflects the self-esteem and social status strengthened through product ownership and consumption by global companies. Companies that have successfully built their social reputation may avoid social normative procedures in times of crisis and maintain their legitimacy [55].
Social reputation is described as a brand reputation in relation to a brand, and the brand reputation represents a relatively higher status than other products or brands in product positioning related to the brand [56]. In this positioning, the overall quality, performance or specific attributes of a product are evaluated as a key criterion for brand reputation [57]. Baek, Kim and Yu [58] claimed that consumers tend to consume famous products as a way to express their social status or wealth and that the purchase of famous brands is strongly associated with the individual’s self-concept and social image.
On the other hand, brand reputation does not affect all consumers equally because consumption of famous brands can vary depending on sensitivity to others [59]. Fenigstein, Scheier and Buss [60] found that extroverted self-conscious people are more likely to purchase luxury brands by considering how they are expressed to others, while those with strong personal consciousness are less likely to purchase luxury brands because they focus more on their inner self and emotions.
Famous brands influence consumers’ purchase motivations, which can improve their social status and self-expression, and only provide intangible benefits to consumers, but they also create value for consumers through social status and outstanding consumption compared to non-famous brands [61]. Batra et al. (2000) [52] found that the reputation of global brands is established by the relative scarcity and higher prices than local brands. Wong and Zhou [62] indicated that perceived brand reputation has a greater effect on purchase intention when high social value for a product is expressed.

2.1.3. Quality Perception

Quality perception refers to a consumer’s desire to achieve a functional or physical benefit from a global brand or product [40]. Quality perception is a psychological evaluation of all product quality based on consumer perception and includes not only the quality characteristics inherent to the product but also characteristics other than quality [63]. Quality consists of objective quality, such as the attribute or function of the product itself, and subjective quality, such as the consumer’s perception of the attribute or function of the product [64]. In addition, consumer’s perception of quality is influenced by the physical attributes of the product and external attributes related to the product and external attributes related to the product [65] and depends on the consumer’s evaluation of the product function [63].
Meanwhile, consumers tend to perceive quality by price or brand name. They use price as an indicator of the quality of a product and perceive the quality of a product differently depending on the price [66]. In addition, because consumers perceive the quality level of a product in relation to the brand, they perceive quality differently by such a brand name [67]. The perception of quality of a high-satisfied brand leads to brand recognition and brand recall, increasing the likelihood of being selected in competition with other brands, as well as increasing the brand’s status, thereby increasing the brand value and corporate asset value [68,69,70]. Therefore, quality perception plays a key role in consumer consumption behavior as an important factor that positively influences brand value [71].

2.2. Emotional Commitment

Commitment is a major mediator of loyalty and is defined as the willingness to maintain the relationship with it [72,73]. Once a strong commitment is achieved, consumer attitude is determined based on conviction, and consumers show a deliberate behavior of desiring a lasting relationship in the future [13,14].
Emotional commitment is commitment due to the psychological aspect and is defined as a state of mind that wants to maintain this relationship while feeling loyalty and belonging to the other party and having fun [74,75]. In addition, emotional commitment is a positive emotional attachment to the brand that consumers feel in the relationship with the brand [11], and it is intended to keep the joy and happiness arising from emotional motives [76]. Emotional commitment is an important factor that has a great influence on trust and intimacy, as well as the willingness for positive word of mouth and the behavioral intention for loyalty [15,77].
On the other hand, calculative commitment in the relationship with consumers increases the cost of the relationship to maintain the relationship, but emotions can build a strong relationship with the consumer [78]. In addition, the customer’s emotional commitment toward the brand or company appears positively to others [79]. Harrison-Walker [79] stated that emotional commitment positively influenced oral behavior, and Johnson, Herrmann and Huber [80] suggested that emotional commitment had a greater effect on loyalty than satisfaction.

2.3. Behavioral Commitment

Emotional commitment appears to be a generally positive attitude, but behavioral commitment has a direct and powerful effect on behavioral loyalty and is an important factor in inducing brand-supportive behavior and brand advocacy even if it cannot lead to purchasing behavior [12]. Behavioral commitment is essentially defined as a strong willingness for consumers to maintain a relationship with a brand in terms of sacrifice and commitment [81,82]. Anderson and Weitz [83] argued that behavioral commitment is a willingness to maintain the relationship while achieving stability by strengthening the bond with the subject and enduring a certain degree of dedication and sacrifice.
Behavioral commitment is a willingness to maintain a transactional relationship based on profits and losses such as price benefits, profits and switching costs [84]. Behavioral commitment is composed of a dimension of commitment that accompanies behavior and is like investing in resources to maintain a relationship [85]. In addition, behavioral commitment is another form of contribution that represents relationship continuity [86,87] and a promise of trust [88], and it functions to develop closer relationships with business partners [83].

2.4. Loyalty

Brand loyalty is an important antecedent that directly affects the profitability of a company by providing a stable source of revenue to the company [89,90]. Customers’ brand loyalty plays a crucial role in enhancing the brand value of companies facing a competitive environment by forming a positive attitude toward shopping experiences and promoting repurchases [91]. In this study, we conceptualize customer loyalty as a unidimensional construct with a focus on attitudinal loyalty, asking respondents about the likelihood that they will repurchase and recommend botanic cosmetics to others [92]. Loyalty generally involves two concepts: positive word-of-mouth and repeat purchasing [92]. Repeat purchase intention is an expression of loyalty and is a concept that directly affects a company’s profits [93]. Positive word of mouth is an active and voluntary communication of customers after purchase, and because consumers perceive that they are relatively less biased than general mass media such as advertisement, it can be said that it has a greater effect on motivating consumers than general mass media [94,95,96].

2.5. Purchase Experience

As customer awareness of the dangers of synthetic cosmetics increases, customer preferences are shifting to purchasing eco-friendly cosmetics [97]. In spite of the increasing preference for botanic cosmetics, there is a dearth of studies on the purchase experience and behavior of botanic cosmetics or personal care products. Studies on cosmetic product purchase behavior by Jaini et al. [98] and Quoquab, Jaini and Mohammad [97] also investigated the factors affecting Malaysian consumers’ green purchase behavior of cosmetics based on value–belief–norm (VBN) theory. Weber and Capitant de Villebonne [99] found important factors (price, quality, opinion about product or firm, and recognition) influencing consumer choice in France and the USA. Kim and Chung [100] studied US consumers’ purchasing behavior of organic personal care products by examining the relationship between consumer attitudes toward organic personal care product purchase and consumer purchase intentions for the products based on the theory of planned behavior (TPB).
Consumers are more likely to form attitudes based on their past purchase experiences when purchasing a specific product, so the past experiences of consumers are an important variable in determining behavior [101,102]. According to Park, Rabolt and Jeon [103], purchasing frequency was found to have the most significant effect on the purchasing of foreign luxury fashion brands among demographic characteristics including conformity, age and pocket money.
Prior purchase experience influences future purchase behavior [104]. The past purchase experience through the website strongly affects the intention to make future online purchases [105]. Shim and Drake [106] showed that consumers who have purchase experience in the past are less likely to have uncertainty about their purchase. The result of the research conducted by Ling, Chai and Piew [107] showed that customers who have previous online shopping experience tend to buy online more than those who have not. According to the preceding studies, it will be meaningful to identify how a consumer’s previous purchase experience influences their commitment and loyalty towards a brand.

3. Methodology

3.1. Hypothesis

3.1.1. Relationship between Conformity to Consumer Trend, Emotional Commitment and Behavioral Commitment

Using the consumption convergence hypothesis, Dholakia and Talukdar [48] argued that the consumption behavior of consumers in emerging markets and in developed markets including the United States shows homogeneous consumption behavior patterns due to the integration of global markets in various aspects. In the same vein, Holt, Quelch and Taylor [9] argue that as the 21st century has begun, consumers have had similar values and consumption cultures as cultures between countries become global because of the paradigm shift to the information society and as communication changes with the spread of mass media and the Internet. This has led global consumers to have a global identity that uses the attributes of the global brand as the purchasing decision criterion. This conformity to global consumer trends has been accelerated by the recent development of the Internet and the development of SNS and has an influence on the emotional attachment to the brands they use [11]. This also has an impact on behavioral responses that show commitment and sacrifice to the brand [12].
From the perspective of social response theory, conformity is a behavioral response that conforms to social norms [108]. Batra et al. [52] argued that consumers who are sensitive to social norms prefer global brands whose brand origin is in advanced countries. As a result of this, for consumers with a higher perception of conformity to consumer trend, if the cosmetics they use reflect the global consumer culture, their attitudes in terms of emotions such as the pleasure and joy of using global brand cosmetics will improve. Bearden, Netemeyer and Teel [109] mentioned that cosmetic consumers would show positive commitment rather than negative commitment if global market trends meet their expectations for interpersonal relationships. Therefore, if cosmetic consumers use cosmetics that reflect global consumption trends, their emotional and behavioral commitment to cosmetics will increase.
Accordingly, in this study, the following research hypotheses were established.
Hypothesis 1 (H1).Conformity to consumer trend has a positive (+) significant effect on emotional commitment.
Hypothesis 2 (H2).Conformity to consumer trend has a positive (+) significant effect on behavioral commitment.

3.1.2. Relationship between Social Prestige, Emotional Commitment, and Behavioral Commitment

Carmeli, Gilat and Weisberg [110] posited that perceived social prestige in stakeholder research influences commitment. In a study on citizenship behavior, Carmeli [54] also stated that social prestige has a significant effect on commitment beyond basic needs such as economic prestige. Stokburger-Sauer, Ratneshwar and Sen [111] found that consumers meet the need for self-enhancement by identifying brands with social prestige in order to sustain or reinforce their own positive views. This assertion implies that consumers identify them with groups of people who use specific products or brands positioned on social prestige, and if these social motives are met, it means that they will have positive emotions for the brand or product.
Tian, Bearden and Hunter [112] pointed out that social prestige brands are perceived as unique to consumers, so consumer use of that brand becomes a driver of trying to become similar to the group that tries to use social prestige brands, and positive consumer commitment to the brand or product that expresses their social image will increase. Snyder and DeBono [113] also proved that consumers respond favorably to such brands or products if their brands or products reflect their image or social goals.
Wilcox, Kim and Sen [114] noted that consumers respond favorably to the product if they have a social-adjustive function that allows a product or brand to be recognized in a social context, or a social-expressive function that conveys their beliefs, values and attitudes to others. Therefore, in this study, it can be predicted that if botanical cosmetics reflect consumers’ personality and symbolize social self-expression, it will show favorable emotional and behavioral commitment.
Thus, in this study, the following research hypotheses were made based on the results of previous studies.
Hypothesis 3 (H3).Social prestige has a positive (+) significant effect on emotional commitment.
Hypothesis 4 (H4).Social prestige has a positive (+) significant effect on behavioral commitment.

3.1.3. Relationship between Quality Perception, Emotional Commitment and Behavioral Commitment

Akram et al. [71] illustrated that quality perception is a way for consumers to obtain functional and practical benefits through global brands or products and that consumers’ perception of quality for globalized brands affects their commitment and purchase intention. Wang et al. [115] also identified that the quality of global brands perceived by consumers affects consumers’ emotional attachment to global brands and increases purchase intention.
Dai, Haried and Salam [116] postulated in a study on service quality that consumer perception of quality had a significant effect on commitment and loyalty mediating service satisfaction. Van der Aa, Bloemer and Henseler [117] and Dean [118] also showed that service quality affects commitment in studies on customer centers. In addition, Hennig-Thurau, Langer and Hansen [119] showed that service quality is a factor that enhances emotional commitment. Comprehensively examining these studies on quality perception and commitment, it can be seen that quality perception of cosmetics directly and indirectly influences emotional commitment and behavioral commitment.
Therefore, in this study, the following research hypotheses were set up based on the results of previous studies.
Hypothesis 5 (H5).Quality perception has a positive (+) significant effect on emotional commitment.
Hypothesis 6 (H6).Quality perception has a positive (+) significant effect on behavioral commitment.

3.1.4. Relationship between Emotional Commitment, Behavioral Commitment and Loyalty

Morgan and Hunt [73] argued that commitment plays a major role in determining positive word-of-mouth and future intentions. Commitment to a specific brand acts as a central antecedent in building loyalty such as the brand’s continuous purchase intention, favorable evaluation and recommendation intention [120]. Gutierrez, Cillán and Izquierdo [27] affirmed that emotional commitment forms an emotional bond that arouses behavioral commitment such as repeated purchases and affects continuance commitment, which is the behavioral intention to continue purchasing.
Oliver [121] contended that emotional factors in consumer–brand relationships are the main factors that determine consumer behavior. Evanschitzky et al. [122] showed that emotional commitment is an essential variable in explaining behavioral loyalty and attitudinal loyalty in explaining long-term relationships with customers. Rhoades, Eisenberger and Armeli [123] also suggested that emotional commitment is an instrumental determinant influencing loyalty. In addition, Dick and Basu [124] announced that emotional commitment influences loyalty from an attitude perspective, and Davis-Sramek et al. [125] cited that emotional commitment was an antecedent of behavioral loyalty (commitment), including both behavioral and attitudinal views.
As mentioned earlier, based on studies on emotional commitment, behavioral commitment and loyalty, emotional commitment to cosmetic brands directly and indirectly affects global consumers’ behavioral commitment and loyalty, and behavioral commitment directly affects loyalty.
Therefore, the following research hypotheses were established based on the results of previous studies.
Hypothesis 7 (H7).Emotional commitment has a positive (+) significant effect on behavioral commitment.
Hypothesis 8 (H8).Emotional commitment has a positive (+) significant effect on loyalty.
Hypothesis 9 (H9).Behavioral commitment has a positive (+) significant effect on loyalty.

3.1.5. Moderating Effect of Purchasing Experience

By examining the influence of the cosmetic purchasing experience as a moderating variable, the influence of susceptibility to global consumer culture on emotional and behavioral commitment can be understood more systematically and clearly. After Asch’s [126] conformity experiment, many studies have shown that consumers are influenced by others’ choices when purchasing products and tend to agree with others’ choices [51,127]. Ratner and Kahn [128] argued that when making decisions in front of others in a personal situation, they choose to be different from others in order to show off their creativity and subjectivity. Therefore, we examine the role of cosmetic purchasing experience as a moderating variable in the relationship between the susceptibility to global consumer culture, commitment and loyalty. In general, the more purchasing experience one has, the higher their expected commitment and loyalty is. However, since this study comprehensively considers the relationship between the three sub-dimensions of susceptibility to global consumer culture and the two sub-dimensions of commitment, emotional and behavioral commitment, it is very interesting to find out what moderating role the purchasing experience will play.
Prior experience can be an important factor in predicting purchase attitudes and behavior [129]. Product knowledge is formed from past product experience, so there will be a difference between those who have product purchase experience and those who do not since they acquire a different level of product knowledge [24]. Consumers with high prior purchase experience are familiar with the product and have much more confidence in the product attributes [130,131]. However, consumers with less purchase experience do not have as much confidence as people with more previous experience have. Therefore, there will be differences between SGCC, commitment and loyalty depending on purchase experience. The hypothesis is established as follows.
Hypothesis 10 (H10).Purchasing experience moderates the relationship between susceptibility of global consumer culture, commitment and loyalty.

3.2. Measures

Susceptibility to global consumer culture (SGCC) is defined as the consumer desire or tendency to purchase and use global brands [4]. In this study, SGCC was measured in three dimensions—conformity to consumer trends, social prestige, and quality perception —based on the study of Zhou et al. [4]. First, conformity to consumer trend is defined as the intention of consumers to follow the consumption trend at the global level, and based on previous studies, it was modified to fit the situation of this study and measured in five items. Social prestige is defined as a consumer’s symbolic image of a company that successfully acquired prestige and was measured in six items. Lastly, quality perception was defined as the subjective quality of individual consumers about the attributes or functions of the product itself and was measured in five items.
Emotional commitment is defined as a psychological attachment to the brand of botanic cosmetic brands they are using [27] and was measured in three items modified to fit the context of this study based on previous studies by Gutiérrez, Cillán and Izquierdo [27]. Behavioral commitment is defined as dedication and sacrifice to the brand they are using [27] and was measured in two items modified to fit the context of this study based on preceding researches by Gutiérrez et al. [27]. Loyalty is defined as repurchase intention and word-of-mouth intention of cosmetics [132] and was measured into three items modified according to the present study situation based on previous studies of Klein, Ettenson and Morris [132]. All items were measured on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 point = strongly disagree to 7 points = strongly agree).
The structured questionnaire was initially developed in English and then translated into the Korean languages by three Korean bilingual speakers using a back-translation technique. The original and translated versions of the questionnaire were compared for consistency. The measuring items were confirmed by university researchers and cosmetic experts.

3.3. Data Collection

The data were collected from 20-year-old online research panels with experience in purchasing foreign botanic cosmetics with assistance from a leading internet research company (www.d8aspring.com) in South Korea in order to examine how SGCC influenced their decisions. According to Kim et al. (2019) [77], online surveys reduce survey costs and social desirability bias and give researchers easy access to a large sample as well. Furthermore, online surveys offer lower item non-response bias rates than paper surveys. Online surveys have been used in a variety of fields. For the development of the questionnaire questions to be used for the online survey, a translation was performed according to the following procedure. First, the researcher translated. Second, two Korean graduate students who speak English and two Korean-speaking professors from the United States conducted a second review. Third, for the final confirmation of the translation, two scholars finally reviewed the translated survey instrument.
The survey questionnaires were distributed to 490 of the research company panel members who had purchasing experience of foreign botanic cosmetics, and 380 questionnaires were returned, showing a 77.6% initial response rate. However, 15 out of 380 respondents were excluded because they do not meet the requirements of the aforementioned foreign botanic cosmetics (74.5% valid response rate). The sample size is sufficient to analyze the data because it is larger than 10 times the largest number of structural paths directed at a particular latent construct in the structural model.

4. Results

4.1. Sample Characteristics

The demographic characteristics of 365 respondents used in this study are as shown in Table 1. Among the respondents, the genders comprised 86% women and 14% men. Married individuals accounted for 62.5% of respondents, while single people accounted for 37.5%. The age groups were divided as follows: thirties (50.4%) showed the most, followed by forties (27.1%), twenties (13.4%), fifties (7.9%) and sixties or older (1.1%). In terms of education, holders of 4-year college degrees (67.4%) was the highest, followed by holders of postgraduate degrees (13.7%), holders of 2-year college degrees (13.4%) and high school graduates (5.5%). As for jobs, management/office workers (51.5%) were the most common, followed by housewives (20.8%), professional/technical workers (14.0%), sales/service workers (2.5%), college students (4.4%) and others (1.9%). Monthly household incomes were, from most frequent to least frequent, 2 to 3 million won (22.7%), 3 to 4 million won (16.7%), 4 to 5 million won (14.0%), 1 to 2 million won (8.8%), 6 to 7 million won (8.2%), 7 to 8 million won (4.7%), less than 1 million won (4.4%), more than 10 million won (3.8%), 9 to 10 million won (3.0%) and 8 to 9 million won (62.7%). In order to measure the purchasing experience, this study surveyed the number of times the respondents purchased cosmetics in the last year. Looking at the number of cosmetic purchases in one year, 4 purchases accounted for 14.5%, 5 purchases for 14.2%, followed by 6 (12.3%), 3 and 10 purchases (10.4%).
Several socio-demographic variables such as gender, age, and monthly income can be tested as moderating variables. However, in the case of the gender variable, the number of male (n = 51) respondents was too small compared to females (n = 314), so gender was excluded. We only found that age (under 40- vs. 40-year-old or older group) played a moderating role in the relationship between conformity to consumption trend and emotional commitment (p < 0.05) and could not find that monthly income played a moderating role in the constructs. The findings show that our proposed model using pool data does not have any serious problems to explain this model and to draw deep implications.

4.2. Measurement Reliability and Validity

In this study, the unidimensionality of each construct consisting of multiple items of SGCC (conformity to consumer trends, social prestige, quality perception), emotional commitment, behavioral commitment and loyalty was analyzed using SmartPLS 3.0 [133,134]. First, the reliability was confirmed using Cronbach’s α and composite reliability (CR). As shown in Table 2, Cronbach’s α for the subdimensions of SGCC, conformity to consumer trends, social reputation and quality perception were 0.897, 0.919, 0.839, and CR values were 0.924, 0.949, 0.893. Cronbach’s α for emotional and behavioral commitment was 0.827, 0.820 and the CR values were 0.920, 0.917, which exceeded the generally required standard of 0.70. Cronbach’s α for loyalty was also 0.854, and the CR value was 0.932, indicating that there was no problem in reliability.
The validity was verified by dividing into convergent validity and discriminant validity. As shown in Table 2, the factor loadings of each factor were 0.70 or more, and the AVE values were 0.50 or more, confirming the convergence validity of each construct. To check discriminant validity, there was discriminant validity among the constructs if the square root of AVE in the Fornell–Larcker criterion was greater than the correlation value. As shown in Table 3, the square root of the AVE was larger than the correlation coefficient, and the square of the correlation between the paired constructs was smaller than the AVE’ therefore, discriminant validity among the constructs was proved. In addition, as a result of examining the HTMT (heterotrait–monotrait) representing the heterotrait–monotrait ratio of the correlations, as shown in Table 4, it appears as 0.287–0.835 (p < 0.01), which had discriminant validity [135]. Meanwhile, the VIF value is 1.442–2.833, so the common method bias was not a problem.

4.3. Structural Model

In this study, SmartPLS 3.0 was used to evaluate the research model [95,134,136,137]. PLS (partial least squares) is an analysis method suitable for research to maximize explanatory power of endogenous variables, that is, to maximize variance explanatory power or to minimize structural errors. In this study, the model was evaluated in the following way. First, the explanatory power and predictive relevance were examined.
Second, the predictive relevance was determined by R2, a coefficient of determination representing the explanatory power of endogenous variables. In this study, emotional commitment was 0.392 (39.2%), behavioral commitment was 0.33 (33.3%), and loyalty was 0.390 (39.0%), higher than 0.10 (10%) as suggested by Falk and Miller [138]. Although R2 of the behavioral commitment was somewhat low, R2 of emotional commitment and loyalty was gradually becoming stronger, indicating that there is no problem with the explanatory power of endogenous variables.
Third, the construct cross-validated redundancy (Q2), which represents the redundancy of endogenous variables, was used as the predictive relevance index. If this value is greater than 0, it is judged that there is predictive relevance. Emotional commitment was 0.304, behavioral commitment was 0.369, and loyalty was 0.327, which met this criterion. The standardized root mean square residual (SRMR), indicating the intensity of model prediction of endogenous variable, was 0.056, which was less than.1 or 0.08, so the intensity of model prediction was found to be at an acceptable level.
Next, the model fit was determined by multiplying the average value of R2 and communality, and the goodness of the model analysis result was evaluated as a square root; in general, the average value of the communality was used the same as the AVE [139,140]. As a result of the analysis, GoF = 0.562(√(0.399 × 0.793) was shown, which was higher than the standard of GoF (small: 0.10, medium: 0.25, large: 0.36). Finally, the value of normed fit index (NFI) was 0.801, indicating an unacceptable level. However, using the value of NFI is not recommended because it does not penalize for model complexity and its use is rare [141].

4.4. Hypothesis Testing

The results of analyzing the structural relationships affecting susceptibility to global consumer culture (conformity to consumer trend, social prestige and quality perception), emotional commitment, behavioral commitment and loyalty are shown in Table 5.
H1 and H2 analyze the impact of conformity to consumer trend on emotional commitment and behavioral commitment. The test result shows that conformity to consumer trends is found to have a significant effect on emotional commitment (β = 0.266, t-value = 3.060, p < 0.01) and has no significant effect on behavioral commitment (β = 0.034, t-value = 0.412, p = n.s.). Thus, H1 was supported, but H2 was not.
H3 and H4 examine the effect of social prestige on emotional commitment and behavioral commitment. The finding shows that social prestige has no significant positive effect on both emotional commitment (β = 0.109, t-value = 1.4312, p = n.s.) and behavioral commitment (β = 0.048, t-value = 0.546, p = n.s.), so neither H3 nor H4 is supported.
H5 and H6 analyze the effect of quality perception on emotional commitment and behavioral commitment. Quality perception is found to have a significant influence on emotional commitment (β = 0.384, t-value = 6.455, p < 0.01) and does not have significant influence on behavioral commitment (β = 0.117, t-value = 1.777, p = n.s.). H5 is supported but H6 is not.
H7 analyzes the effect of emotional commitment on behavioral commitment, and it was found that emotional commitment has a significant effect on behavioral commitment (β = 0.474, t-value = 7.401, p < 0.01). H7 is supported.
Finally, H8 and H9 analyze the effects of emotional and behavioral commitment on loyalty. Emotional commitment ((β = 0.389, t-value = 5.858, p < 0.01) and behavioral commitment (β = 0.357, t-value = 5.952, p < 0.01) have significant effects on loyalty, so both H8 and H9 are supported.
As a result of analyzing the moderating effect by the cosmetic purchasing experience, conformity to consumer trends (β = −0.166, t-value = 2.007, p < 0.05), was demonstrated to have a moderating effect on emotional commitment. The effect of conformity to consumer trends (β = −0.219, t-value = 2.618, p < 0.01) and quality perception (β = 0.149, t-value = 2.497, p < 0.05) on behavioral commitment was statistically significant according to the number of cosmetics purchased. In the relationship between emotional commitment (β = −0.161, t-value = 2.274, p < 0.05), behavioral commitment (β = 0.094, t-value = 1.667, p < 0.10) and loyalty, the number of cosmetic purchases was found to play a moderating role.

5. Discussion

This study performed an empirical analysis of how susceptibility to the global consumer culture of consumers using global botanic cosmetic brand affects loyalty through emotional and behavioral commitment. To this end, in this study, susceptibility to global consumer culture, which is an independent variable, was measured in three dimensions: conformity to consumer culture, social prestige and quality perception. Furthermore, this research examined the moderating effect of purchasing experience in the relationship between susceptibility to global consumer culture, emotional commitment, behavioral commitment and loyalty.

5.1. Theoretical Implications

The theoretical implications based on the research results are as follows. First, this study reported the importance of SGCC, and it will enable researchers to develop more sophisticated theoretical models in the botanic cosmetic context through integrating SGCC theory [5] and the commitment-loyalty mechanism. Although SGCC is critical in positioning global brands, little research has been done on the effect of SGCC on the commitment–loyalty link. From this perspective, the current study proposed that different SGCC dimensions enable global consumers to become committed and loyal customers. Therefore, the findings show that an approach to investigating the impact of different SGCC dimensions on customers is an effective way to engage customers emotionally and behaviorally and make them loyal. Second, this study included behavioral commitment in the commitment–loyalty link and examined its effect on loyalty. Similar to other research [27,28], this study richly explains the commitment–loyalty mechanism by showing the effect of emotional commitment on behavioral commitment, which explains whether the customers’ present actual behavior, promise, and sacrifice will be short-term or continuous. The findings show that emotional and behavioral commitment are closely related and lead to loyalty. Last, unlike existing studies, this study examined the moderating role of purchasing experience using the belief adjustment model [29] and reasoned action theory [30]. This research steps forward to confirm whether the belief in SGCC can be changed for each purchase stage, and as a result, whether the result of the commitment–loyalty link is strengthened or weakened. Based on these three theories and commitment –loyalty link mechanism, the current study shows that SGCC could be a driver in building customer commitment and that customer loyalty will be maximized when global botanic cosmetic management understands the process of how SGCC dimensions affect loyalty.

5.2. Practical Implications

The results and practical implications of this research are as follows. First, the study finds that conformity to consumer trends has a significant effect on emotional commitment but is not positively associated with behavioral commitment. This result is similar to the result of a study by Alden et al. [2], wherein global consumption orientation is shown to positively affect consumer attitudes using cultural globalization theory. In other words, when consumers with a high level of conformity to consumer trends purchase botanic cosmetics, they develop emotional commitment to the brand when they experience identification of consumption trends with global consumers, such as whether the cosmetics they purchased reflect a modern lifestyle [11]. Therefore, botanic cosmetic companies need to provide a global corporate image in product advertisements, and such advertisements should allow consumers to feel that they are closer to an international lifestyle by conforming to global trends.
Second, social prestige has no significant direct effect on both emotional and behavioral commitment. These findings are similar to the findings in Amberg and Fogarassy ‘s [142] green consumer behavior study showing green that cosmetics consumers place more importance on the functional aspects of cosmetics for skin health. The reason for this result can be presumed such that cosmetics used in this study are products in which the brand is not exposed, unlike general products, and botanic cosmetic consumers value product functionality and quality more than social prestige.
Third, the result indicates that quality perception has a significant impact on affective commitment, but no positive impact on behavioral commitment. There may be various reasons why consumers prefer botanic cosmetics, but in the case of botanic cosmetics, the findings imply that the quality is stable for the purpose of anti-aging, maintaining appearance and skin health, and consumers have a psychological attachment to trusted cosmetic brands. Accordingly, botanic cosmetic companies need to conduct continuous research and development to improve the quality of cosmetics and by continuing to use marketing communication strategies emphasizing that they are the best quality and functional cosmetics of botanic cosmetics brands, consumers should be able to trust and purchase the brand [143].
Fourth, both emotional commitment and behavioral commitment affect brand loyalty, and behavioral commitment in particular has a significant effect on brand loyalty. These findings are consistent with Gutiérrez et al.’s [27] research findings that the emotional commitment of customers increases the customer’s behavioral commitment and loyalty and, as a result, increases the profitability of the company. Therefore, botanic cosmetic managers need to develop differentiated marketing strategies that not only strengthen customers’ psychological attachment but also reduce negative emotions toward the brand by raising the level of expanded SGCC that strengthens customers’ behavioral commitment and loyalty.
Finally, through the analysis of the moderating effect on the cosmetic purchasing experience, first, it was confirmed that the less purchasing experience, the stronger the effect of CCT on emotional commitment and behavioral commitment. In particular, in the case of cosmetics, since it directly touches the skin and is a product for daily use, consumers with high buying frequency feel committed to cosmetics through their own experience rather than conforming to the feelings of others and becoming a part of the group. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a marketing strategy that allows potential customers to be constantly exposed to new global consumer trends and to make them feel like they want to follow consumer trends. In addition, it is necessary to reestablish a customer experience strategy using various online and offline marketing channels that fit the consumer trend. The moderating effect of purchasing experience was also confirmed in the relationship between quality perception and behavioral commitment. The more purchasing experience, the greater the effect of quality perception on behavioral commitment. This indicates that existing customers who have a lot of purchasing experience can more accurately evaluate product quality from their experience with the product than customers who do not [130], so they have a commitment to the behavior of purchasing a product.
In the relationship between emotional commitment and loyalty, it was found that the less the purchasing experience, the stronger the influence of emotional commitment on loyalty, and the more purchasing experience, the stronger the effect of behavioral commitment on loyalty. Likewise, similar to the moderating effect of purchasing experience in the relationship between conformity to consumer trends and commitment, the more emotionally attached to cosmetics in the low-purchase group, the higher the likelihood of continuing to purchase specific brand products, and in a high-purchase group, behavioral engagement, which means spending consistently on products of the same brand, affects getting others to talk positively about and buy the product. Therefore, marketers not only provide continuous values for customer retention to loyal customers but also provide benefits for attracting new customers, thereby implementing specific goals and strategies to prevent customer defections and expand new customers. For new customers with a small number of purchases, it is necessary to ensure that the product is of great significance to the consumer and can seem the same as the product through successful brand positioning, building positive brand image so that it can lead to continuous product purchase.

5.3. Limitations and Future Research

This study empirically analyzes the causal relationship between botanic cosmetic consumers to discover how consumers’ susceptibility to global consumer culture affects their emotional commitment, behavioral commitment and loyalty to botanic cosmetic brands and provides management implications for this. Nevertheless, there are certain limitations to the study, and consequently, future studies are as follows.
First, there is the limitation of generalization of the study as it focused on online panels. Therefore, in future research, it is necessary to study not online panels, but consumers across the country and to compare and analyze the results of this study.
Second, in this study, women were surveyed far more than men. Recently, the proportion of men who invest effort in their social appearance has been increasing, so the analysis results may vary depending on the ratio of men and women. Thus, in future studies, it is recommended to check the results of the study according to the male-to-female ratio once again.
Third, this study investigated the degree of susceptibility to global consumer culture of domestic cosmetic consumers for botanic cosmetics. In future research, it is necessary to study global consumers as well as domestic cosmetic consumers as well as to compare and contrast cultural differences between countries regarding the degree of susceptibility to global consumer culture among global consumers.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.K.H., E.-J.K., S.-M.L., and Y.-K.L.; formal analysis, Y.-K.L. and E.-J.K.; methodology, J.K.H., E.-J.K., S.-M.L., and Y.-K.L.; project administration, J.K.H., Y.-K.L.; writing-original draft, J.K.H., E.-J.K., S.-M.L., and Y.-K.L.; writing—review and editing, J.K.H., E.-J.K., S.-M.L., and Y.-K.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Hernani-Merino, M.; Lazo Lazo, J.G.; Talavera Lopez, A.; Afonso Mazzon, J.; Lopez-Tafur, G. An international market segmentation model based on susceptibility to global consumer culture. Cross Cult. Strat. Manag. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Alden, D.L.; Steenkamp, J.B.E.M.; Batra, R. Consumer attitudes toward marketplace globalization: Structure, antecedents and consequences. Int. J. Res. Mark. 2006, 23, 227–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Czarnecka, B.; Schivinski, B.; Keles, S. How values of individualism and collectivism influence impulsive buying and money budgeting: The mediating role of acculturation to global consumer culture. J. Consum. Behav. 2020, 19, 505–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Zhou, L.X.; Teng, L.; Poon, P.S. Susceptibility to global consumer culture: A three-dimensional scale. Psychol. Mark. 2008, 25, 336–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Arnould, E.J.; Thompson, C.J. Consumer Culture Theory; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  6. Taylor, C.R.; Okazaki, S. Do Global Brands Use Similar Executional Styles Across Cultures? A Comparison of U.S. And Japanese Television Advertising. J. Advert. 2015, 44, 276–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Dawar, N.; Parker, P. Marketing universals: Consumers’ use of brand name, price, physical appearance, and retailer reputation as signals of product quality. J. Mark. 1994, 58, 81–95. [Google Scholar]
  8. Hassan, S.S.; Katsanis, L.P. Global Market Segmentation Strategies and Trends. In Globalization of Consumermarkets: Structures and Strategies; Kaynak, E., Hassan, S.S., Eds.; International Business Press: New York, NY, USA, 1994; pp. 47–62. [Google Scholar]
  9. Holt, D.B.; Quelch, J.A.; Taylor, E.L. How global brands compete. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2004, 82, 68–75. [Google Scholar]
  10. Cleveland, M.; Laroche, M. Acculturaton to the global consumer culture: Scale development and research paradigm. J. Bus. Res. 2007, 60, 249–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Gustafsson, A.; Johnson, M.D.; Roos, I. The effects of customer satisfaction, relationship commitment dimensions, and triggers on customer retention. J. Mark. 2005, 69, 210–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Pimentel, R.W.; Kristy, E.R. A Model for Consumer Devotion: Affective Commitment with Proactive Sustaining Behaviors. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2004, 5, 1–45. [Google Scholar]
  13. Kim, J.; Morris, J.D.; Swait, J. Antecedents of true brand loyalty. J. Advert. 2008, 37, 99–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Raju, S.; Unnava, H.R.; Montgomery, N.V. The Moderating Effect of Brand Commitment on the Evaluation of Competitive Brands. J. Advert. 2009, 38, 21–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Hennig-Thurau, T.; Gwinner, K.P.; Gremler, D.D. Understanding Relationship Marketing Outcomes: An Integration of Relational Benefits and Relationship Quality. J. Serv. Res. 2002, 4, 230–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Abhishek, D.; Lester, W.J.; Dean Charles, W.; Luciana De, A.-G. Consumer emotional brand attachment with social media brands and social media brand equity. Eur. J. Mark. 2019, 53, 1176–1204. [Google Scholar]
  17. Nyilasy, G.; Gangadharbatla, H.; Paladino, A. Perceived Greenwashing: The Interactive Effects of Green Advertising and Corporate Environmental Performance on Consumer Reactions. J. Bus. Ethics. 2014, 125, 693–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Antignac, E.; Nohynek, G.J.; Re, T.; Clouzeau, J.; Toutain, H. Safety of botanical ingredients in personal care products/cosmetics. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2011, 49, 324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. INFO, C. Botanicals. Available online: https://cosmeticsinfo.org/botanicals (accessed on 6 January 2020).
  20. Kumar, M.S.; Swarnkar, V.; Sharma, S.; Baldi, A. Herbal Cosmetics: Used for Skin and Hair. Inven. J. 2012, 2012, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  21. Shi, C.-S. Status and future trends of natural and active cosmetics. Deterg. Cosmet. 2012, 35, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  22. Gubitosa, J.; Rizzi, V.; Fini, P.; Cosma, P. Hair Care Cosmetics: From Traditional Shampoo to Solid Clay and Herbal Shampoo, A Review. Cosmetics 2019, 6, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. James, S. Natural Cosmetics Market Worth $48.04 Billion by 2025|CAGR 5.01%: Grand View Research, Inc. Available online: https://www.bloomberg.com/press-releases/2019-06-11/natural-cosmetics-market-worth-48-04-billion-by-2025-cagr-5-01-grand-view-research-inc (accessed on 7 January 2020).
  24. Yu, S.; Lee, J. The effects of consumers’ perceived values on intention to purchase upcycled products. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Akaka, M.A.; Alden, D.L. Global brand positioning and perceptions: International advertising and global consumer culture. Int. J. Advert. 2010, 29, 37–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Alden, D.L.; Steenkamp, J.B.E.M.; Batra, R. Brand positioning through advertising in Asia, North America, and Europe: The role of global consumer culture. J. Mark. 1999, 63, 75–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Gutiérrez, S.S.N.; Cillán, J.G.; Izquierdo, C.C. The consumer’s relational commitment: Main dimensions and antecedents. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2004, 11, 351–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Lee, Y.-K.; Yoo, D.-K.; Jeong, Y.-K. The Determinants of Relationship Commitment: Relational Benefits, Core Quality, and Relationship Satisfaction. Acad. CS Manag. 2008, 10, 51–69. [Google Scholar]
  29. Janson, M.; Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. Making sense of e-commerce as social action. Inf. Tech. People 2005, 18, 311–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Hernández, B.; Jiménez, J.; Martín, M.J. Customer behavior in electronic commerce: The moderating effect of e-purchasing experience. J. Bus. Res. 2010, 63, 964–971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Wu, W.; Huang, V.; Chen, X.; Davison, R.M.; Hua, Z. Social value and online social shopping intention: The moderating role of experience. Inf. Tech. People 2018, 31, 688–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Gvili, Y.; Levy, S. Consumer engagement in sharing brand-related information on social commerce: The roles of culture and experience. J. Mark. Commun. 2019, 27, 53–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Taylor, C.R. Editorial: Towards stronger theory development in international advertising research. Int. J. Advert. 2010, 29, 9–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Okazaki, S.; Mueller, B.; Taylor Charles, R. Global Consumer Culture Positioning: Testing Perceptions of Soft-Sell and Hard-Sell Advertising Appeals Between U.S. and Japanese Consumers. J. Int. Mark. 2010, 18, 20–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Quelch, J. Global brands: Taking stock. Bus. Strategy Rev. 1999, 10, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Rosenbloom, A.; Haefner, J.; Joong-won, L. Global Brands in the Context of China: Insights into Chinese Consumer Decision Making. Int. J. China Mark. 2012, 3, 20–43. [Google Scholar]
  37. Bian, Q.; Forsythe, S. Purchase intention for luxury brands: A cross cultural comparison. J. Bus. Res. 2012, 65, 1443–1451. [Google Scholar]
  38. Hofstede, G.H. Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  39. Keillor, B.D.; D’Amico, M.; Horton, V. Global consumer tendencies. Psychol. Mark. 2001, 18, 1–19. [Google Scholar]
  40. Steenkamp, J.B.E.M.; Batra, R.; Alden, D.L. How perceived brand globalness creates brand value. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2003, 34, 53–65. [Google Scholar]
  41. Burnkrant, R.E.; Cousineau, A. Informational and Normative Social Influence in Buyer Behavior. J. Cons. Res. 1975, 2, 206–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Boush, D.M. How advertising slogans can prime evaluations of brand extensions. Psychol. Mark. 1993, 10, 67–78. [Google Scholar]
  43. Lascu, D.-N.; Zinkhan, G. Consumer Conformity: Review and Applications for Marketing Theory and Practice. J. Mark. Pract. 1999, 7, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  44. Clark, R.A.; Goldsmith, R.E. Market mavens: Psychological influences. Psychol. Mark. 2005, 22, 289–312. [Google Scholar]
  45. Mandrik, C.A.; Fern, E.F.; Bao, Y.Q. Intergenerational influence: Roles of conformity to peers and communication effectiveness. Psychol. Mark. 2005, 22, 813–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Wooten, D.B.; Reed Ii, A. Informational Influence and the Ambiguity of Product Experience: Order Effects on the Weighting of Evidence. J. Consum. Psychol. 1998, 7, 79–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Mangleburg, T.F.; Doney, P.M.; Bristol, T. Shopping with friends and teens’ susceptibility to peer influence. J. Retail 2004, 80, 101–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Dholakia, U.M.; Talukdar, D. How social influence affects consumption trends in emerging markets: An empirical investigation of the consumption convergence hypothesis. Psychol. Mark. 2004, 21, 775–797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Zhou, L.X.; Hui, M.K. Symbolic value of foreign products in the People’s Republic of China. J. Int. Mark. 2003, 11, 36–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Naisbitt, J.; Aburdene, P. Megatrends 2000: Ten New Directions for the 1990’s; William Morrow and Company: New York, NY, USA, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  51. Cialdini, R.B.; Goldstein, N.J. Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2004, 55, 591–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Batra, R.; Ramaswamy, V.; Alden, D.L.; Steenkamp, J.B.E.M.; Ramachander, S. Effects of brand local and nonlocal origin on consumer attitudes in developing countries. J. Consum. Psychol. 2000, 9, 83–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Grunig, J.; Hung-Baesecke, F. The Effect of Relationships on Reputation and Reputation on Relationships, 2nd ed.; Routledge and Taylor & Francis: New York, NY, USA; London, UK, 2015; pp. 63–113. [Google Scholar]
  54. Carmeli, A. Perceived external prestige, affective commitment, and citizenship behaviors. Organ. Stud. 2005, 26, 443–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Deephouse, D.L.; Carter, S.M. An examination of differences between organizational legitimacy and organizational reputation. J. Manag. Stud. 2005, 42, 329–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Truong, Y.; McColl, R.; Kitchen, P.J. New luxury brand positioning and the emergence of masstige brands. J. Brand. Manag. 2009, 16, 375–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Dubois, B.; Czellar, S. Prestige brands or luxury brands? An exploratory inquiry on consumer perceptions. In Proceedings of the European Marketing Academy 31st Conference, Braga, Portugal, 28–31 May 2002. [Google Scholar]
  58. Baek, T.H.; Kim, J.; Yu, J.H. The Differential Roles of Brand Credibility and Brand Prestige in Consumer Brand Choice. Psychol. Mark. 2010, 27, 662–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Vigneron, F.; Lester, W.J. A Review and a Conceptual Framework of Prestige-Seeking Consumer Behavior. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 1999, 1999, 1–15. [Google Scholar]
  60. Fenigstein, A.; Scheier, M.F.; Buss, A.H. Public and Private Self-Consciousness Assessment and Theory. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 1975, 43, 522–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. O’Cass, A.; Frost, H. Status brands: Examining the effects of non-product-related brand associations on status and conspicuous consumption. J. Prod. Brand. Manag. 2002, 11, 67–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Wong, A.; Zhou, L. Consumer Motivations for Consumption of Foreign Products: An Empirical Test in the People s Republic of China. U21global Work. Pap. 2005, 4, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Saleem, S.; Rahman, S.U.; Umar, R.M. Measuring Customer Based Beverage Brand Equity: Investigating the Relationship between Perceived Quality, Brand Awareness, Brand Image, and Brand Loyalty. Int. J. Mark. Stud. 2015, 7, 66–77. [Google Scholar]
  64. Kotler, P. Reconceptualizing marketing: An interview with Philip Kotler. Eur. Manag. J. 1994, 12, 353–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Jacoby, J.; Olson, J.C.; Olson, J.C. Perceived Quality: How Consumers View Stores and Merchandise; Lexington Books: Lexington, MA, USA, 1985. [Google Scholar]
  66. Rao, A.R.; Monroe, K.B. The Moderating Effect of Prior Knowledge on Cue Utilization in Product Evaluations. J. Cons. Res. 1988, 15, 253–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Luk, S.T.K.; Yip, L.S.C. The moderator effect of monetary sales promotion on the relationship between brand trust and purchase behaviour. J. Brand. Manag. 2008, 15, 452–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Gwin Carol, F.; Gwin Carl, R. Product Attributes Model: A Tool for Evaluating Brand Positioning. J. Mark. Pract. 2003, 11, 30–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Lemon, K.N.; Rust, R.T.; Zeithaml, V.A. What Drives Customer Equity? Mark. Manag. 2001, 10, 20–25. [Google Scholar]
  70. Yoo, B.; Donthu, N.; Lee, S. An examination of selected marketing mix elements and brand equity. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2000, 28, 195–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Akram, A.; Merunka, D.; Akram, M.S. Perceived brand globalness in emerging markets and the moderating role of consumer ethnocentrism. Int. J. Emerg. Mark. 2011, 6, 291–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Fullerton, G. The service quality–loyalty relationship in retail services: Does commitment matter? J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2005, 12, 99–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Morgan, R.M.; Hunt, S.D. The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing. J. Mark. 1994, 58, 20–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Bansal, H.S.; Irving, P.G.; Taylor, S.F. A three-component model of customer commitment to service providers. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2004, 32, 234–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Lai, I.K.W. The Roles of Value, Satisfaction, and Commitment in the Effect of Service Quality on Customer Loyalty in Hong Kong–Style Tea Restaurants. Cornell Hosp. Q. 2015, 56, 118–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Gruen, T.W.; Summers, J.O.; Acito, F. Relationship marketing activities, commitment, and membership behaviors in professional associations. J. Mark. 2000, 64, 34–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Liu, S.Q.; Mattila, A.S. “I Want to Help” versus “I Am Just Mad”: How Affective Commitment Influences Customer Feedback Decisions. Cornell Hosp. Q. 2015, 56, 213–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Fournier, S. Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in consumer research. J. Cons. Res. 1998, 24, 343–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Harrison-Walker, L.J. The Measurement of Word-of-Mouth Communication and an Investigation of Service Quality and Customer Commitment As Potential Antecedents. J. Serv. Res. 2001, 4, 60–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Johnson, M.D.; Herrmann, A.; Huber, F. The evolution of loyalty intentions. J. Mark. 2006, 70, 122–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  81. Mercade-Mele, P.; Molinillo, S.; Fernandez-Morales, A.; Porcu, L. CSR Activities and Consumer Loyalty: The Effect of the Type of Publicizing Medium. J. Bus. Econ. Manag. 2018, 19, 431–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  82. Anderson, J.C.; Gerbing, D.W. Assumptions and comparative strengths of the two-step approach comment on Fornell and Yi. Sociol. Methodol. 1992, 20, 321–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Anderson, E.; Weitz, B. The Use of Pledges to Build and Sustain Commitment in Distribution Channels. J. Mark. Res. 1992, 29, 18–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Meyer, J.P.; Allen, N.J. Testing the Side-Bet Theory of Organizational Commitment Some Methodological Considerations. J. Appl. Psychol. 1984, 69, 372–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Sharma, N.; Young, L.; Wilkinson, I. The Commitment Mix: Dimensions of Commitment in International Trading Relationships in India. J. Int. Mark. 2006, 14, 64–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Gundlach, G.T.; Achrol, R.S.; Mentzer, J.T. The Structure of Commitment in Exchange. J. Mark. 1995, 59, 78–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Hallen, L.; Johanson, J.; Seyedmohamed, N. Interfirm Adaptation in Business Relationships. J. Mark. 1991, 55, 29–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Frazier, G.L.; Lassar, W.M. Determinants of distribution intensity. J. Mark. 1996, 60, 39–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Chaudhuri, A.; Holbrook, M.B. The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect to brand performance: The role of brand loyalty. J. Mark. 2001, 65, 81–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  90. Sasmita, J.; Suki, N.M. Young consumers’ insights on brand equity Effects of brand association, brand loyalty, brand awareness, and brand image. Int. J. Retail. Distrib. Manag. 2015, 43, 276–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Leckie, C.; Nyadzayo, M.W.; Johnson, L.W. Antecedents of consumer brand engagement and brand loyalty. J. Mark. Manag. 2016, 32, 558–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Park, E.; Kim, K.J.; Kwon, S.J. Corporate social responsibility as a determinant of consumer loyalty: An examination of ethical standard, satisfaction, and trust. J. Bus. Res. 2017, 76, 8–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Aurier, P.; de Lanauze, G.S. Impacts of in-store manufacturer brand expression on perceived value, relationship quality and attitudinal loyalty. Int. J. Retail. Distrib. Manag. 2011, 39, 810–835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Babin, B.J.; Laroche, M.; Lee, Y.K.; Kim, E.J.; Griffin, M. Modeling consumer satisfaction and word-of-mouth: Restaurant patronage in Korea. J. Serv. Mark. 2005, 19, 133–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Kim, E.J.; Kim, S.H.; Lee, Y.K. The effects of brand hearsay on brand trust and brand attitudes. J. Hosp. Mark. Manag. 2019, 28, 765–784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Ong, C.H.; Md Salleh, S.; Yusoff, R. Influence of brand experience and brand personality on loyalty dimensions: Evidence from successful Malaysian SME brands. Int. J. Bus. Commer. 2015, 4, 51–75. [Google Scholar]
  97. Quoquab, F.; Jaini, A.; Mohammad, J. Does It Matter Who Exhibits More Green Purchase Behavior of Cosmetic Products in Asian Culture? A Multi-Group Analysis Approach. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 5258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Jaini, A.; Quoquab, F.; Mohammad, J.; Hussin, N. Antecedents of green purchase behavior of cosmetics products. Int. J. Ethics Syst. 2019, 36, 185–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Weber, J.M.; Capitant de Villebonne, J. Differences in purchase behavior between France and the USA: The cosmetic industry. J. Fash. Mark. Manag. 2002, 6, 396–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Kim, H.Y.; Chung, J.E. Consumer purchase intention for organic personal care products. J. Consum. Mark. 2011, 28, 40–47. [Google Scholar]
  101. Bagozzi, R.P. Attitudes, Intentions, and Behavior a Test of Some Key Hypotheses. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1981, 41, 607–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Ajzen, I.; Fishbein, M. Attitudinal and Normative Variables as Predictors of Specific Behaviors. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1973, 27, 41–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Park, H.J.; Rabolt, N.J.; Jeon, K.J. Purchasing global luxury brands among young Korean consumers. J. Fash. Mark. Manag. 2008, 12, 244–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Jayawardhena, C.; Souchon, A.L.; Farrell, A.M.; Glanville, K. Outcomes of service encounter quality in a business-to-business context. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2007, 36, 575–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  105. Shim, S.; Eastlick, M.A.; Lotz, S.L.; Warrington, P. An online prepurchase intentions model. J. Retail. 2001, 77, 397–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Shim, S.; Drake, M.F. Consumer intention to utilize electronic shopping.The Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model. J. Direct Mark. 1990, 4, 22–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Ling, K.C.; Chai, L.T.; Piew, T.H. The effects of shopping orientations, online trust and prior online purchase experience toward customers’ online purchase intention. Int. Bus. Res. 2010, 3, 63–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Clark, R.A.; Zboja, J.J.; Goldsmith, R.E. Status consumption and role-relaxed consumption: A tale of two retail consumers. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2007, 14, 45–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Bearden, W.O.; Netemeyer, R.G.; Teel, J.E. Measurement of Consumer Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence. J. Cons. Res. 1989, 15, 473–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Carmeli, A.; Gilat, G.; Weisberg, J. Perceived external prestige, organizational identification and affective commitment: A stakeholder approach. Corp. Reput. Rev. 2006, 9, 92–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Stokburger-Sauer, N.; Ratneshwar, S.; Sen, S. Drivers of consumer–brand identification. Int. J. Res. Mark. 2012, 29, 406–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Tian, K.T.; Bearden, W.O.; Hunter, G.L. Consumers’ need for uniqueness: Scale development and validation. J. Cons. Res. 2001, 28, 50–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Snyder, M.; Debono, K.G. Appeals to Image and Claims About Quality Understanding the Psychology of Advertising. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1985, 49, 586–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Wilcox, K.; Kim Hyeong, M.; Sen, S. Why Do Consumers Buy Counterfeit Luxury Brands? J. Mark. Res. 2009, 46, 247–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Wang, C.L.; Chen, Z.X.; Chan, A.K.K.; Zheng, Z.C. The influence of hedonic values on consumer behaviors: An empirical investigation in china. J. Glob. Mark. 2000, 14, 169–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Dai, H.; Haried, P.; Salam, A.F. Antecedents of Online Service Quality, Commitment and Loyalty. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 2011, 52, 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  117. van der Aa, Z.; Bloemer, J.; Henseler, J. Using customer contact centres as relationship marketing instruments. Serv. Bus. 2015, 9, 185–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Dean, A.M. The impact of the customer orientation of call center employees on customers’ affective commitment and loyalty. J. Serv. Res. 2007, 10, 161–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Hennig-Thurau, T.; Langer, M.F.; Hansen, U. Modeling and Managing Student Loyalty: An Approach Based on the Concept of Relationship Quality. J. Serv. Res. 2001, 3, 331–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. McAlexander, J.H.; Schouten, J.W.; Koenig, H.F. Building brand community. J. Mark. 2002, 66, 38–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  121. Oliver, R.L. Whence Consumer Loyalty? J. Mark. 1999, 63, 33–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Evanschitzky, H.; Iyer, G.R.; Plassmann, H.; Niessing, J.; Meffert, H. The relative strength of affective commitment in securing loyalty in service relationships. J. Bus. Res. 2006, 59, 1207–1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Rhoades, L.; Eisenberger, R.; Armeli, S. Affective commitment to the organization: The contribution of perceived organizational support. J. Appl. Psychol. 2001, 86, 825–836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Dick, A.S.; Basu, K. Customer loyalty: Toward an integrated conceptual framework. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 1994, 22, 99–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Davis-Sramek, B.; Droge, C.; Mentzer, J.T.; Myers, M.B. Creating commitment and loyalty behavior among retailers: What are the roles of service quality and satisfaction? J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2009, 37, 440–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Asch, S.E. Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychol. Monogr. Gen. Appl. 1956, 70, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  127. Rose, R.L.; Bearden, W.O.; Manning, K.C. Attributions and conformity in illicit consumption: The mediating role of group attractiveness. J. Public Policy Mark. 2001, 20, 84–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Ratner, R.K.; Kahn, B.E. The impact of private versus public consumption on variety-seeking behavior. J. Cons. Res. 2002, 29, 246–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Norman, P.; Smith, L. The theory of planned behaviour and exercise: An investigation into the role of prior behaviour, behavioural intentions and attitude variability. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 1995, 25, 403–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Fazio, R.H.; Zanna, M.P. Direct experience and attitude-behavior consistency. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1981; Volume 14, pp. 161–202. [Google Scholar]
  131. Park, C.W.; Lessig, V.P. Familiarity and Its Impact on Consumer Decision Biases and Heuristics. J. Cons. Res. 1981, 8, 223–230. [Google Scholar]
  132. Klein, J.G.; Ettenson, R.; Morris, M.D. The animosity model of foreign product purchase: An empirical test in the People’s Republic of China. J. Mark. 1998, 62, 89–100. [Google Scholar]
  133. Hair, J.F.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M.; Mena, J.A. An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2012, 40, 414–433. [Google Scholar]
  134. Hair, J.F., Jr.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ringle, C.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM); Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  135. Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar]
  136. Chin, W.W. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Mod. Methods Bus. Res. 1998, 295, 295–336. [Google Scholar]
  137. CHO, B.-K.; Sung-Hoon, K.; Lee, D. Effects of Dessert Café Environmental Characteristics on Overall Quality, Brand Image and Loyalty. Korean J. Fr. Manag. 2020, 11, 43–57. [Google Scholar]
  138. Falk, R.F.; Miller, N.B. A Primer for Soft Modeling; University of Akron Press: Arkon, OH, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
  139. Tenenhaus, M.; Vinzi, V.E.; Chatelin, Y.-M.; Lauro, C. PLS path modeling. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 2005, 48, 159–205. [Google Scholar]
  140. Zolkepli, I.A.; Kamarulzaman, Y. Social media adoption: The role of media needs and innovation characteristics. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 43, 189–209. [Google Scholar]
  141. Henseler, J.; Hubona, G.; Ray, P.A. Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: Updated guidelines. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2016, 116, 2–20. [Google Scholar]
  142. Amberg, N.; Fogarassy, C. Green consumer behavior in the cosmetics market. Resources 2019, 8, 137. [Google Scholar]
  143. Čater, T.; Čater, B. Product and relationship quality influence on customer commitment and loyalty in B2B manufacturing relationships. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2010, 39, 1321–1333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 13 00892 g001 550
Figure 1. Proposed model.
Figure 1. Proposed model.
Sustainability 13 00892 g001
Table
Table 1. Demographic profiles.
Table 1. Demographic profiles.
Category n = 365 %
Gender
Male 51 14.0
Female 314 86.0
Marital status
Single 137 37.5
Married 228 62.5
Education
High school or less 20 5.5
Two-years college 49 13.4
Four-years college 246 67.4
Graduate school or more 50 13.7
Job
College student 16 4.4
Housewife 76 20.8
Salaried worker 188 51.5
Profession and technical 51 14.0
Sales/Service 9 2.5
Self-employed 18 4.9
Others 7 1.9
Age
20–29 years 49 13.4
30–39 years 184 50.4
40–49 years 99 27.1
50–59 years 29 7.9
60 and over 4 1.1
Income (million won)
Below 1 16 4.4
1–<3 115 31.5
3–<5 112 30.7
5–<7 70 19.2
7–<10 38 10.4
Over 10 14 3.8
Frequency of buying in the last year
Mean 7.56
Minimum 1
Maximum 30
Table
Table 2. Measurement model.
Table 2. Measurement model.
Constructs and Items Factor Loadings α rho-A C.R AVE
Conformity to consumer trend 0.897 0.899 0.924 0.710
1. It makes me feel good in my social group 0.795
2. It makes me have a sense of global belonging 0.867
3. It makes me have a good impression of others 0.866
4. It makes me feel closer to a contemporary lifestyle 0.842
5. It makes me feel to be part of the global trend 0.840
Social prestige 0.919 0.919 0.949 0.861
1. It signifies my trendy image -
2. It represents the latest lifestyles -
3. It symbolizes my social image 0.900
4. It is associated with the symbol of prestige 0.957
5. It tells something about one’s social status 0.926
6. It is associated with wealth -
Quality perception 0.839 0.839 0.893 0.676
1. It has a very high level of standard in safety 0.817
2. It has a very high-quality image 0.831
3. It has a very high level of reliability 0.878
4. It is associated with long-lasting quality -
5. It is associated with the latest technology 0.757
Emotional commitment 0.827 0.830 0.920 0.852
1. I feel emotionally attached to this botanical cosmetic. -
2. The use of this botanical cosmetic is of great personal significance to me. 0.917
3. I feel a strong sense of identity in this botanical cosmetic. 0.929
Behavioral commitment 0.820 0.823 0.917 0.847
1.The percentage of purchases of this botanical cosmetics among the cosmetics I purchased during the last year is high. 0.926
2. In the past year, I have spent a lot of money on purchasing this botanical cosmetic. 0.915
Loyalty 0.854 0.857 0.932 0.872
1. If I buy botanic cosmetics next time, I will buy botanic cosmetics of this brand. 0.939
2. I would encourage my friends and neighbors to buy this brand of botanic cosmetics. 0.929
3. I will speak positively to others about botanic cosmetics of this brand. -
Table
Table 3. Fornell-Larcker Criterion, Mean, and Standard Deviation (SD).
Table 3. Fornell-Larcker Criterion, Mean, and Standard Deviation (SD).
1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Conformity to consumer trend 0.842
2. Social prestige 0.759 0.928
3. Quality perception 0.557 0.452 0.822
4. Emotional commitment 0.554 0.505 0.530 0.923
5. Behavioral commitment 0.381 0.353 0.425 0.554 0.921
6. Loyalty 0.383 0.253 0.578 0.521 0.575 0.934
Mean 4.120 3.907 4.895 4.602 4.658 5.137
SD 0.966 1.171 0.778 0.999 1.078 0.953
All coefficients are significant at p < 0.01. Note: Bold numbers indicate the square root of AVE.
Table
Table 4. Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT)).
Table 4. Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT)).
1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Conformity to consumer trend
2. Social prestige 0.835
3. Quality perception 0.640 0.511
4. Emotional commitment 0.640 0.577 0.635
5. Behavioral commitment 0.441 0.407 0.510 0.672
6. Loyalty 0.437 0.287 0.683 0.621 0.684
Table
Table 5. Structural estimates (PLS).
Table 5. Structural estimates (PLS).
Paths Estimate t-Value p Results
H1 Conformity to consumption trend → Emotional commitment 0.266 *** 3.060 0.002 Supported
H2 Conformity to consumption trend → Behavioral commitment 0.034 0.412 0.680 n.s.
H3 Social prestige → Emotional commitment 0.109 1.431 0.152 n.s.
H4 Social prestige → Behavioral commitment 0.048 0.546 0.585 n.s.
H5 Quality perception → Emotional commitment 0.384 *** 6.455 0.000 Supported
H6 Quality perception → Behavioral commitment 0.117 1.777 0.076 n.s.
H7 Emotional commitment → Behavioral commitment 0.474 *** 7.401 0.000 Supported
H8 Emotional commitment → Loyalty 0.389 *** 5.858 0.000 Supported
H9 Behavioral commitment → Loyalty 0.357 *** 5.952 0.000 Supported
H10 CCT * PE →EC −0.166 ** 2.007 0.045 Supported
CCT * PE → BC −0.219 *** 2.618 0.009 Supported
SP * PE → EC 0.124 1.587 0.113 n.s.
SP * PE → BC 0.045 0.562 0.574 n.s.
QP * PE → EC −0.001 0.013 0.989 n.s.
QP * PE → BC 0.149 ** 2.497 0.013 Supported
EC * PE → BC 0.019 0.284 0.776 n.s.
EC * PE → Loyalty −0.161 ** 2.274 0.023 Supported
BC * PE → Loyalty 0.094 * 1.667 0.096 Supported
R2 Q2
Emotional commitment 0.392 0.304
Behavioral commitment 0.333 0.369
Loyalty 0.390 0.327
Note: CCT (conformity to consumption trend), SP (social prestige), QP (quality perception), EC (emotional commitment), BC (behavioral commitment), PE (purchase experience). *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.10.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Hwang, J.K.; Kim, E.-J.; Lee, S.-M.; Lee, Y.-K. Impact of Susceptibility to Global Consumer Culture on Commitment and Loyalty in Botanic Cosmetic Brands. Sustainability 2021, 13, 892. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020892

AMA Style

Hwang JK, Kim E-J, Lee S-M, Lee Y-K. Impact of Susceptibility to Global Consumer Culture on Commitment and Loyalty in Botanic Cosmetic Brands. Sustainability. 2021; 13(2):892. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020892

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hwang, Jae Kwang, Eun-Jung Kim, Sae-Mi Lee, and Yong-Ki Lee. 2021. "Impact of Susceptibility to Global Consumer Culture on Commitment and Loyalty in Botanic Cosmetic Brands" Sustainability 13, no. 2: 892. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020892

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