Clear your plate! the impact of cultural values and social influences on intention to reduce food waste among Malaysian consumers

Figures & data

Table 1. Assessment results of measurement model.

Construct/Associated Items	Loading	Cronbach’s α	rho_A	CR	AVE
Religiosity (RE)		0.934	0.947	0.959	0.757
RE1	0.861
RE2	0.829
RE3	0.895
RE4	0.938
RE5	0.679
RE6	0.920
RE7	0.882
RE8	0.923
RE9	0.897
RE10	0.847
Materialism (MA)		0.830	0.873	0.884	0.657
MA1	0.831
MA2	0.883
MA3	0.777
MA4	0.744
Personal Norm (PN)		0.876	0.893	0.915	0.729
PN1	0.901
PN2	0.894
PN3	0.807
PN4	0.810
Subjective Norm (SN)		0.890	0.895	0.924	0.754
SN1	0.796
SN2	0.884
SN3	0.919
SN4	0.870
Information Publicity		0.806	0.817	0.884	0.717
IP1	0.875
IP2	0.854
IP3	0.810
Intention to Reduce Food Waste (IN)		0.703	0.727	0.820	0.538
IN1	0.530
IN2	0.781
IN3	0.791
IN4	0.797

Note. CR: Composite Reliability; AVE: Average Variance Explained.

Table 2. Discriminant validity.

	IN	IP	MA	PN	RE
IP	0.498
MA	0.122	0.107
PN	0.543	0.430	0.116
RE	0.312	0.198	0.151	0.273
SN	0.284	0.420	0.198	0.356	0.315

Note. Discriminant validity established at HTMT_0.90.

Table 3. Variance Inflation Factor.

	IN	PN
IP	1.287	1.172
MA	1.054	1.049
PN	1.268
RE	1.141	1.111
SN	1.286	1.254

Table 4. Results summary of hypothesis testing.

Hypothesis	Relationship	Path Coefficient	T Value	P Value	Effect Size	LL	UL	Decision
H1	PN -> IN	0.300	5.696	0.000	0.096	0.209	0.383	Supported
H2	RE -> PN	0.154	2.963	0.002	0.027	0.066	0.236	Supported
H3	RE -> IN	0.136	2.601	0.005	0.022	0.047	0.219	Supported
H5	MA -> PN	0.063	1.067	0.143	0.005	−0.076	0.136	Rejected
H6	MA -> IN	0.038	0.366	0.357	0.002	−0.193	0.170	Rejected
H8	SN -> PN	0.157	2.677	0.004	0.025	0.061	0.253	Supported
H9	SN -> IN	−0.001	0.012	0.495	0.000	−0.093	0.088	Rejected
H11	IP -> PN	0.301	4.657	0.000	0.098	0.189	0.399	Supported
H12	IP -> IN	0.244	4.411	0.000	0.063	0.152	0.336	Supported

Note. LL (lower limit) and UL (upper limit) at 95 percent confidence intervals.

Table 5. Results summary of mediation testing.

Hypothesis	Relationship	Path Coefficient	T Value	p-Value	LL	UL	Decision
H4	RE -> PN -> IN	0.046	2.342	0.010	0.018	0.080	Supported
H7	MA -> PN -> IN	0.019	1.015	0.155	−0.023	0.043	Rejected
H10	SN -> PN -> IN	0.047	2.538	0.006	0.020	0.081	Supported
H13	IP -> PN -> IN	0.090	3.319	0.000	0.050	0.137	Supported

Note: LL (lower limit) and UL (upper limit) at 95 percent confidence intervals.

Figure 1. The conceptual framework of the research.

Figure 2. Measurement model assessment. Note: RE: religiosity; MA: materialism; SN: subjective norm; IP: information publicity; PN: personal norm; IN: intention to reduce food waste.