Search results

Amidst escalating sustainability challenges, product and brand managers face a pressing need to foster responsible consumption and marketing strategies. Guided by the theory of planned behavior, this paper aims to explore consumers’ motivation to purchase second-hand clothing, a type of product that contributes to Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 12 on Responsible Consumption and Production by democratizing the brand, extending the life-cycle of the product, promoting a circular economy, while reducing economic costs for consumers and environmental costs for companies.

A two-stage study was conducted: 20 consumers were initially interviewed to identify the salient beliefs about second-hand clothing, and following that, a survey was conducted with 449 consumers to statistically analyze consumers’ motivation to purchase second-hand clothing. The data were analyzed using partial least squares-structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) and necessary condition analysis (NCA).

From a “should-have” perspective (PLS-SEM), the study reveals that behavioral beliefs, injunctive normative beliefs, descriptive normative beliefs and control beliefs positively shape attitudes, injunctive norms, descriptive norms and perceived behavioral control toward second-hand clothing, whereas attitudes, injunctive norms, moral norms and perceived behavioral control positively influence consumers’ purchases of second-hand clothing. From a “must-have” perspective (NCA), the study shows that behavioral beliefs, injunctive normative beliefs and descriptive normative beliefs are necessary conditions to positively shape attitudes, injunctive norms and descriptive norms toward second-hand clothing, whereas attitudes, injunctive norms and perceived behavioral control are necessary conditions to stimulate second-hand clothing purchases.

The study offers a deep dive into consumers’ motivation to purchase second-hand clothing using a multimethod approach that enables not only the elicitation of salient beliefs (through interviews) but also the empirical examination of these beliefs alongside varying subjective norms in motivating consumers to purchase second-hand clothing (via survey). Given that beliefs are deeply rooted, the rigorous unfolding and validation of consumers’ beliefs about second-hand clothing, including the “should-haves” versus the “must-haves,” provide finer-grained insights that product and brand managers can strategically use to encourage consumers to purchase second-hand clothing.

This paper engages multidisciplinary perspectives on truth, authority, expertise and belief to unpack and better understand the underlying epistemology and implications of the ACRL Frame “authority is constructed and contextual.”

Following an overview of the issues confronting us in a “post-truth world,” the paper reviews critiques of the ACRL Frame “authority is constructed and contextual” and examines the related concepts of truth, authority, expertise and belief from multidisciplinary perspectives.

While the Frame acknowledges the limitations and biases of current scholarly publishing and implicitly supports social justice, it runs the danger of promoting relativism and is ambiguous regarding the relationships between expertise and authority. The critical concepts of truth and belief are conspicuously absent. Engaging a critical discussion and understanding of these concepts is a valuable contribution to information literacy.

This paper offers an important and accessible analysis of the frame “authority is constructed and contextual” and its underlying concepts. It moves beyond the library literature to include multidisciplinary perspectives and will require the engagement of the wider library community to promote discussion of the underlying epistemology and links between the construction of authority and truth, expertise and belief. In particular, the discussion of the construction of belief and the difference between judgments of fact and judgments of value offers important additions to the library literature.

Little is known about how religious-related beliefs (i.e. karmic beliefs and beliefs in a just world) might affect consumers to engage in more environmentally friendly behavior. Drawing on the justice motive theory, this study aims to explore the individual, complementary, congruent and incongruent impacts of karmic beliefs and belief in a just world on consumers’ proenvironmental consumption.

A sample of 736 consumers was recruited by means of a mall-intercept survey in the most populus cities in Vietnam. An advanced technique – polynomial regression with response surface analysis – was used to test the hypothesized model, whereas the PROCESS macro approach was used to estimate indirect effects.

The findings indicate that while karmic beliefs do not directly affect proenvironmental consumption, they can inspire environmentally friendly behaviors through belief in a just world. High levels of both beliefs enhance proenvironmental consumption, but imbalanced levels erode such behaviors. Importantly, the findings revealed gender differences concerning the role of religious beliefs in influencing proenvironmental consumption among male and female consumers.

The findings of this study offered several theoretical and managerial implications for proenvironmental consumption.

The research provides new insights into how religious beliefs (karmic beliefs and belief in a just world) affect, interact, balance and imbalance with each other to trigger proenvironmental consumption. The research also contributes to the sustainable consumption literature by indicating the mediation roles of belief in a just world and proenvironmental consumption intention in the relationship between beliefs in karma and actual proenvironmental consumption behavior, as well as offering empirical evidence about the gender differences regarding these relationships.

Food choice is influenced by a range of factors, including sensory attributes and beliefs about the nutritional value of the foods. It is difficult to determine the relative importance of beliefs about nutritional and sensory attributes to foods. It is necessary to examine these within an overall framework. The attitudes model developed by Fishbein and Ajzen is presented as a framework within which such comparisons can be made. It has been shown to be useful in a variety of studies of food choice. The relative importance of different types of beliefs can be assessed within this approach by examining the relationship between individual beliefs (or groups of beliefs) and either attitude or behaviour. In a number of studies sensory attributes have been found to be more important for table salt use, snack food consumption and consumption of foods contributing highly to fat in the diet. In the case of low‐fat milk consumption, however, nutritional beliefs were found to be more important than beliefs about the sensory attributes of the milks or their suitability for different uses.

Epistemological beliefs are fundamental assumptions about the nature of knowledge and learning. Research in university contexts has shown that they affect the ways and results of student learning. This article transfers the concept of epistemological beliefs on workplace learning. The basic assumption is that employees' epistemological beliefs affect whether they perceive their workplace as learning environments. A study was conducted in which the interrelation of employees' epistemological beliefs with their appraisal of the workplace as supportive for learning was investigated. Additionally, the role of professional hierarchical levels concerning work‐related epistemological beliefs was analyzed. No significant interrelation between epistemological beliefs and workplace appraisal was found. Groups from different professional hierarchical levels did not differ in their workplace appraisal. Consequences about future research about the role of epistemological for workplace learning are discussed.

The purpose of this paper is to look at the relation between beliefs and action in common sense judgment. The basic aim of the paper is to define and present a rational model of commonsense choice for the individual based on situation, belief, and personal resources. Second, the paper hypothesizes skills needed to make “good” commonsense choices.

This paper is a speculative essay. It draws from psychology, economics and game theory as a basis for its findings.

A schema useful for the modeling of commonsense judgment is developed. Factors that are the basis for belief formation or belief changes are analyzed within the context of the schema. Skills needed for good judgment are proposed.

The model lays a basis for conceptual and empirical study on judgments made by individuals as defined by their situation, beliefs, and resources.

The model has promise for analyzing individual and group decisions in a variety of social and organizational settings.

This paper posits a construct of common sense useful as an operant in modeling and explaining individual judgments.

Leaders have long understood the importance a belief system has on the productivity of their team. The authors explain how can such an intangible motivational force be addressed and how leaders have the capability to influence a firm's success by inspiring positive beliefs.

Belief management involves recognizing those beliefs that both hinder and promote the advancement of a leader's vision. This includes the leader's beliefs as well as those of the team.

To begin managing beliefs, executives should take three initial steps: identify core belief, ask others what they believe, brand your beliefs.

Dr Gregory Berns, a psychiatrist and neuroscientist at Emory University in Atlanta mapped the neurological effects of a belief exercise on his test subjects. Through the use of magnetic resonance imaging, Berns could see specific changes in cellular activity.

There's new evidence that a leader's beliefs are the foundations for each team's aspirations.

Leaders must not only tell people what they believe but let them know why they believe. If managed correctly, these beneficial beliefs will spread throughout a company to all its stakeholders.

Face-to-face meetings between auditors and clients are becoming increasingly more difficult and expensive to arrange, due in large part to the ceaseless expansion of commerce across the globe. Relying on electronic communication media such as e-mail messaging or video-conferencing for auditor–client inquiry purposes is one way to enhance the timeliness of such communications; however, questions arise with respect to potentially biasing influences of certain technical aspects of electronic media on auditors’ judgment and decision-making processes. Drawing on information processing theories, the current study posits that media and message attributes can interact, thereby differentially affecting auditors’ belief revisions – holding information content constant. The media attributes examined in the current study are cue multiplicity (i.e., the range of central and peripheral cues a medium is capable of transmitting) and message reprocessability (i.e., the extent of archival and retrieval features a medium is capable of handling); and the message attribute studied is evidence strength (e.g., the credibility of client-provided evidence). Research findings from a laboratory experiment with 189 graduate accounting students indicate the following: (1) when client-provided evidence is strong, neither message reprocessability nor cue multiplicity significantly affect the auditors’ belief revisions; (2) when evidence is weak and reprocessability is present, higher cue multiplicity leads to significantly greater belief revision in favor of the client; (3) when evidence is weak and reprocessability is absent, lower cue multiplicity results in significantly greater belief revision in favor of the client. Study results suggest theoretical and practical implications for globally distributed auditor–client communications.

We study how giving depends on income and luck, and how culture and information about the determinants of others’ income affect this relationship. Our data come from an experiment conducted in two countries, the USA and Spain – each of which have different beliefs about how income inequality arises. We find that when individuals are informed about the determinants of income, there are no cross-cultural differences in giving. When uninformed, however, Americans give less than the Spanish. This difference persists even after controlling for beliefs, personal characteristics, and values.

This study evaluates cross-national differences in public beliefs about the causes of health and the role of these beliefs in shaping attitudes regarding health policy.

The study uses data from the 2011 International Social Survey Program, which includes questions on health and health care, asked in 29 countries. Respondents were asked about four specific causes of poor health (i.e., genes, behavior, the environment, and poverty). Respondents were also asked about their attitudes regarding three aspects of health policy: their support for government-provided care, the perceived fairness of income disparities in medical treatment, and their support for providing health care to noncitizens.

The study has three findings. First, the study reveals the global reach of a multicausal view. The four beliefs about the causes of poor health are positively correlated in all countries. However, there is considerable cross-national variation in the average support for specific causes. Although in some countries proximate causes, such as genes, are endorsed more frequently than distal causes, such as poverty, this is by no means a uniform pattern. Support for genetic causes is high, but genetic reductionism is rare. Second, the study reveals that health beliefs are fundamentally political beliefs. The single most important determinant of beliefs about the causes of health is the country in which the respondent resides, exceeding in influence religion, education, and even personal experiences with health and health care. Third, the study reveals that the political connotations of health beliefs vary between countries, especially beliefs regarding genes. In general, those who endorse behavioral arguments favor less government involvement in health care and are more accepting of income disparities in the quality of care. Those who endorse the environment and poverty, meanwhile, tend to support a stronger role of government. Yet, the magnitude of these associations varies and, in the case of genetic arguments, even the direction of the association varies. Genetic arguments are frequently associated with support for a stronger role of government, but genetic arguments also are occasionally associated with support for the exclusion of noncitizens from the health care system.

International survey research is valuable for exploring the scope of patterns revealed in a limited set of countries, but it is difficult to pinpoint the source of cross-national differences.

The study demonstrates the importance of national context in shaping health beliefs, as well as the role of beliefs regarding the causes of health in setting the stage for public receptivity to government-provided care. The study also illustrates the value of thinking about beliefs about genes as reflecting larger projects of biocitizenship, at least in some countries.