Predictors of behavioral intention to purchase risky consumer products

2018 Summer.Includes bibliographical references.Two online surveys dealing with the purchase of potentially risky consumer products, sunscreen containing nanoparticles (n=373) and genetically modified foods (n=379), examined behavioral intention within the framework of the theory of reasoned action (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010). In addition to attitude and social norms, which are subsumed under the theory, predictors examined included cognitive and affective risk perceptions, systematic versus heuristic processing, and two personality traits: need for cognition and need for affect (specifically, the avoidance and approach sub-dimensions identified by Maio & Esses, 2001). Four hypotheses were tested and supported. High cognitive and affective risk perceptions were negatively related to attitude, adherence to social norms and purchase intent. High need for cognition was positively related to systematic processing, while negatively related to heuristic processing. High need for affect avoidance was positively related to heuristic processing, while high need for affect approach was positively related to systematic processing. Finally, higher systematic processing was positively related to both cognitive risk perception and affective risk perception, while higher heuristic processing was not. Sex, awareness, and product use were included as explanatory variables that helped explain purchase intent. Females were more likely to purchase and more aware of both products. Level of prior product perceived knowledge (measured for GM foods only) was not significantly related to purchase intent. However, its higher level was correlated to systematic processing, while its lower level was associated with heuristic processing. Separate hierarchical regressions examined the combined effects of the focal and explanatory variables on purchase intent. The final regression model in the sunscreen study explained 39.0% of the variance and suggested purchase intent was related to sex (being female), low product awareness, low cognitive risk perception, and positive attitude and conformity to social norms. The final regression model in the GM foods study, which explained 29.2% of the variance, suggested that purchase intention was best explained by the need for affect avoidance, low affective risk perceptions, positive attitude, and conformity to social norms. This study proposed a framework in which personality traits based on psychological needs (need for cognition and need for affect) led to different styles of processing. Then, two forms of risk perception (cognitive and affective) together were shown to influence purchase intention of common technologically enhanced consumer goods. The study underscored the importance of looking into both affective and cognitive risk perceptions examining purchase intention for risky products. This study also illustrated the potential practical importance of the two sub-dimensions of need for affect identified in the literature, suggesting that each can possibly influence the processing of persuasive messages and risk perceptions and ultimately consumer actions