In the past decade, serious global environmental issues such as climate change, global warming, depletion of natural resources, and air pollution have made customers more aware of their purchasing decisions and their impact on the environment. As environmental problems intensify, it is necessary to alter consumption patterns, lifestyles, and the ways products and services are extracted, distributed, and consumed. Consequently, understanding green purchasing behavior has become increasingly crucial. Numerous studies in recent decades have examined the environmentally friendly behavior of consumers in response to escalating environmental hazards.

Pro-environmental products – also known as environmentally friendly, green or sustainable products – are designed to minimize environmental impacts throughout their entire life-cycle by conserving resources, using renewable energy sources, reducing or eliminating packaging, and minimizing toxicity (Ritter et al. 2015; Durif, Boivin & Julien, 2017). These products benefit both society and the environment, being made from materials that are recyclable, biodegradable or easily reusable (Chen & Chai, 2010).

Green purchasing behavior involves buying pro-environmental products and reducing the purchasing and use of products that harm the environment (Seema et al., 2023; Mohammad et al., 2020; Jaiswal & Kant, 2018). Green consumption is a social phenomenon whereby consumers consider the impact of the products they purchase on present and future generations (Paul et al., 2016; Carman & Cheng, 2016; Mostafa, 2006; Yang et al, 2015). Pro-ecological behavior includes not only consumer practices and motivation to adopt a more sustainable lifestyle, such as separating waste and recycling, conserving resources like water or energy, and changing travel habits (switching from cars to walking or cycling), but can also include specific purchasing decisions, such as buying sustainable products (e.g. local food, organic food, ecological cleaning products, ecological cosmetics, or electric vehicles). Nowadays an increasing number of consumers are interested in pro-environmental products that pose fewer threats to the environment throughout their life-cycle, from production, to use and disposal (Lee & Haley, 2022).

Researchers have focused on a wide range of environmentally friendly products, including food products (Li et al., 2020; Woo & Kim, 2019, De Toni et al., 2018), skin care products (Chin et al., 2018; Hsu et al., 2017), apparel products (Saepudin et al., 2023; Moon & Lee, 2018; Jim Gam, 2011; Lee, 2011), and green electronic appliances (Zhang et al., 2022; Mansoor, Awan & Paracha, 2021).

The main objective of this article is to explore Poles’ attitudes towards pro-environmental behaviors, specifically focusing on environmental concern (EC), promoting pro-environmental behavior (PPB), the belief that Poland should move away from coal (MAFC), and willingness to pay (WTP). Thereby it seeks to advance our knowledge regarding the pro-environmental behavior of Polish consumers.

2. Liturature review

Various contexts of green purchasing behavior have for years been the subject of research around the world. It is extremely important to understand when, how, and why people consume and conserve resources, advocate for environmental causes, and engage in various pro-ecological behaviors. These behaviors have been studied in terms of a variety of factors that influence consumers’ green purchasing decisions. The existing literature has identified a number of individual and social-level variables that affect consumers’ pro-environmental behaviors. However, it remains remarkably difficult to predict responsible consumer behavior, due to the supporting and hindering factors that give rise to individual dilemmas (Dursun et al., 2016). A growing number of researchers agree that there is a clear inconsistency between consumers’ attitudes and their actual sustainable consumption practices; this is known as the attitude–behavior gap (Quoquab et al., 2019; Sudbury-Riley & Kohlbacher, 2016; Carrington et al., 2010; Eckhardt, Belk and Devinney, 2010). The need for additional research to understand pro-environmental behaviors is often discussed.

Environmentally friendly purchasing behavior is a complex and multifaceted issue, influenced by many factors (Sheng et al., 2019). Among the most important factors shaping pro-environmental consumer behavior, researchers have distinguished the following: pro-environmental awareness (Wang, 2013; Liu et al., 2017; Eze, 2020), environmental knowledge (Vasiljevic-Shikaleska et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2014; Mei et al., 2016), environmental concern (Polonsky, 2014; Suki & Suki, 2015), green purchase intention (Polonsky, 2014; Mei et al., 2012; Ramayah et al., 2010), consumer values (Laroche et al., 2001), and consumer attitude (Paul et al., 2016).

Ecological awareness and knowledge in this area have a major impact on pro-ecological behavior. When consumers have a deeper understanding of the environment and pollution problems, they are more likely to adopt environmentally friendly green consumption. Research has demonstrated that consumers who have extensive knowledge of green consumption are more likely to adopt pro-environmental consumption behaviors (Liobikien et al., 2016). In addition, many studies have shown that consumers’ sense of responsibility for the environment has a significant positive influence on their willingness to buy pro-environmental products (Sheng et al., 2019). Environmental responsibility is a sense of commitment that individuals have when they are willing to make efforts to solve ecological and environmental problems, both at the individual and national levels.

Another factor that affects the degree of environmental concern is consumers’ country of origin. Empirically, consumers from developed countries have been shown to be more concerned about the environment than those from developing countries. Nevertheless, further research is needed to understand the particular environmental purchasing behaviors of consumers in each country and how they differ from their counterparts around the world in terms of environmental concerns, beliefs, and attitudes (Singh & Gupta, 2013). This entails a need to conduct research in individual countries, as consumer behavior may vary significantly.

3. Hypothesis Development

The scope of our study includes examining the impact of four contextual variables: environmental concern (EC), promoting pro-environmental behavior (PPB), willingness to pay (WTP), and the belief that Poland should move away from coal (MAFC). In addition, the paper explores the interrelationships between these factors of pro-environmental behavior. We aim to verify not only whether people are concerned about environmental changes, but whether they are also active advocates for changes in consumer behavior and whether they are willing to bear the costs of transformation (regarding products and energy). Specifically, we want to determine if passive concern translates into an intention for action and readiness to make financial sacrifices.

Willingness to pay (WTP)

In this paper, willingness to pay (WTP) is understood as a readiness to share in the costs of transitioning from conventional or less sustainable practices to more environmentally friendly alternatives. The acceptance of environmentally friendly products is strongly influenced by price (Laroche et al., 2001). Consumers who feel an ethical responsibility toward society and the environment demonstrate this through their consumption behavior (Lee et al., 2015). Customers with a strong environmental consciousness and a desire to minimize their impact on the environment are more likely to invest in pro-environmental products, even if it comes at a higher cost.

Consumers who prioritize environmental sustainability are willing to pay more for their beliefs. Environmentally conscious consumers focus on long-term environmental benefits. They are willing to make an upfront investment for a more sustainable future. Findings from Arpad’s (2018) study indicate that in five countries analyzed, a majority of citizens would prefer to increase funding for environmental protection even if doing so requires higher taxes.

Environmental concern (EC)

Environmental concern refers to a consumer’s overall attitude towards protecting the environment (De Canio, 2023). This variable is considered the most important predictor of pro-environmental behavior because it can influence consumers to minimize the impact of human actions on the environment (Newton et al., 2015). The level of environmental concern can range from recycling to green purchasing (Mohammad, 2020). Previous studies have confirmed the positive relationship between environmental concern and pro-environmental consumer behavior (Scott & Vigar-Ellis, 2014), demonstrating that environmental concerns do significantly impact green purchase intentions (Yadav et al., 2022; De Canio et al., 2021; Akehurst et al., 2012; Hartmann & Apaolaza-Ibáñez, 2012). Customers with a higher level of environmental concern try to protect the environment by purchasing green products. Geng et. al.’s (2023) study found environmental awareness (concern) to be a significant predictor of willingness to pay a premium for living a green lifestyle (e.g., paying more for green products). Li et. al. (2016), in turn, also confirmed that the more people are concerned about the negative impact of climate change, the more they are willing to pay more for energy-efficient and environmentally friendly products. Kim and Kim (2023) showed that environmentalism has a positive effect on willingness to pay for sanctioning instruments (e.g., imposing a carbon tax in response to climate change, increasing electricity rates). Dienes (2015) reported that people with higher climate concerns are more likely to pay for mitigating the effects of climate change. Irfan et al.’s (2020) study, on the other hand, found that environmental concern did not have a significant effect on WTP for renewable energy, whereas Liobikienė and Dagiliūtė (2021) reported that environmental concern negatively, albeit insignificantly, influenced the willingness to pay more for green energy. Lin and Syrgabayeva (2016) found that environmental concern has a positive and significant impact on attitudes toward renewable energy.

Based on this review of past research, we formulated the following hypotheses for the present study:
Hypothesis 1 (H1). Polish consumers’ environmental concern (EC) positively influences promoting pro-environmental behavior (PPB).
Hypothesis 2 (H2). Polish consumers’ environmental concern (EC) positively influences the belief that Poland should move away from coal (MAFC).
Hypothesis 3 (H3). Polish consumers’ environmental concern (EC) positively influences willingness to pay (WTP).

Promoting pro-environmental behavior (PPB)

Individual consumers are encouraged to be more environmentally friendly not only by many initiatives, but also by friends or family members. Environmentally conscious individuals inspire others to act in accordance with shared values. Some environmentally concerned consumers actively advocate for environmental causes and engage in activism to raise awareness and promote change.

Socially engaged people tend to be more consistent in their pro-environmental behavior. A stronger sense of connection with others motivates people to strive to fulfil their social roles and to participate in actions that promote environmentally friendly purchasing behavior. Vanegas-Rico et al. (2022) argued that in social dilemma situations, the expectation by significant others for cooperation enhances an individual’s chances to act pro-environmentally. Expectations regarding the environmental behavior of others have a positive effect on one’s own pro-environmental behavior. Carrico (2021) observed that the norm of buying green products by peers and colleagues encourages individuals to purchase these environmentally friendly products themselves.

Based on this background, we formulated the following hypotheses for the present study:

Hypothesis 4 (H4). Promoting pro-environmental behavior (PPB) by Polish consumers positively influences their belief that Poland should move away from coal (MAFC).

Hypothesis 5 (H5). Promoting pro-environmental behavior (PPB) by Polish consumers positively influences their willingness to pay (WTP).

The belief that Poland should move away from coal (MAFC)

Poland was the world’s ninth-largest producer of coal in 2022 (GlobalData, 2022). Compared to other EU countries, Poland has much larger reserves of hard coal and lignite, which are extensively harnessed for electricity generation. Poland’s renewable energy capacity is increasing, but the country’s electricity and heat generation is still dominated by coal and is the largest contributor to emissions. National energy consumption generates a significant proportion of global carbon emissions and damages the quality of the environment (Vivian et al., 2011). The introduction of pro-environmental solutions in the energy sector is associated with convergence costs, which in turn may result in incurring higher taxes and/or energy prices.

Based on previous research, we aimed to test whether positive attitudes toward greener energy solutions translates into a willingness to bear such additional costs. Lin and Qiao (2023) found that more than 80% of Chinese households are willing to pay extra for green electricity. Wang et. al. (2022) reported that the ecological environmental cognition significantly influenced rural residents’ willingness to spend (WTS) on Biomass Briquette Fuel (BBF) to replace coal. Lin and Syrgabayeva (2016) showed that attitudes toward renewable energy have a positive and significant impact on willingness to spend more for renewable energy. Hojnik (et. al., 2021) also found that acceptance of green energy has a significant positive impact on WTP for green energy.

Based on these findings, we posited the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 6 (H6). The belief that Poland should move away from coal (MAFC) positively influences willingness to pay (WTP).

The following conceptual research model is proposed (Figure 1):

4. Research findings

The data for this study was collected through an online research panel (Nationwide Research Panel Ariadna) in April 2023. The online survey included a total of 554 Polish respondents; all interviews were complete (with no missing data). A non-random sampling method was used; the sample structure matched the demographics of adult Poles in terms of gender, age, education level, and place of residence. The dataset was created with SPSS, version 28 (IBM). A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed and a structural equation model (SEM) was developed using IBM SPSS AMOS Graphics, version 25. A multi-item measurement scale was developed to measure the attitudes of Poles regarding environmental concern (EC) (adopted from Polonsky et al., 2014), promoting pro-environmental behavior (PPB), the belief that Poland should move away from coal (MAFC) and willingness to pay (WTP) (based on Laroche et. al., 2001). Each factor was measured by three items using a five-point Likert scale (from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). Since ordinal variables were used in the measurement process, before conducting further analyses, it was assumed that there were equal distances between the categories on the measurement scale. The selection of the research sample was carried out by the quota method (selection criteria: sex, age and place of residence). The structure of the research sample is presented in Table 1.

5. Results

Measurement Model

Table 2 shows the results of the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), including factor loadings and descriptive statistics. One of the four sets of variables was found to be characterized by a high average – environmental concern (EC) (meanEC = 3.92). The remaining sets of variables were considered by the respondents as less important – the belief that Poland should move away from coal (MAFC) (meanMAFC = 3.26), promoting pro-environmental behavior (PPB) (meanPPB = 3.17) and, as the least important, willingness to pay (WTP) (meanWTP = 2.84).

A structural equation model was used to test hypothetical relationships between observable and/or latent variables in experimental and non-experimental research (Konarski, 2009, p. 15). The structural equation model consists of two parts – the structural and the measurement parts. The structural part of the model describes the theoretical cause-and-effect or correlation between the studied phenomena, while the measurement part defines the variables which are not directly measurable (therefore they are represented in the constructed model by unobservable/latent variables). This means that before starting the estimation of the structural equation model, its measurement part should be determined and verified. One of the methods of verifying the measurement model is confirmatory factor analysis (Bedyńska, Książek, 2012, pp. 219–223). The reliability of measurement instrument was tested using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), where the results showed acceptable model fit indices.

The overall measurement model and reliability and validity of the constructs were evaluated with a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).

In the process of evaluating the measurement model, both discriminant and convergent validity were verified. Discriminant validity measures the extent to which the factors intended to measure a specific construct are actually unrelated (Wang & Wang, 2012). For this, Fornell and Larcker’s (1981) approach was used, which states that the average variance extracted (AVE) for each research construct should be higher than the square of the correlation between that construct and other constructs (Ode & Ayavoo, 2020). The diagonal elements in Table 4 (shown in bold with asterisks) are the squares of multiple correlations between the research variables. The AVE values ranged from 0.69 to 0.91, while the diagonal values ranged from 0.83 to 0.89, indicating that all constructs have the appropriate discriminant validity. Table 4 shows that the measurement model has a satisfactory discriminant validity.

Convergent validity, in turn, measures the degree to which the factors measuring single constructs are consistent with each other. Convergent validity was assessed using composite reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE) – the minimum values adopted in the analysis were such that AVE should be greater than 0.5 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981), factor loadings should be greater than 0.6 and CR should be greater than 0.6 (Hair et al., 2009; Ahmed et al., 2020; Popa & Dabija, 2019; Szczepańska-Woszczyna, 2021). On the basis of the obtained results, all three minimum values were reached, which suggests that the reliability and validity of the model and the constructs used are acceptable.

Structural Model

Based on the literature review, the results of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and the adopted research hypotheses, a research model was developed and is graphically illustrated in Figure 3.

The fit indices indicate that the structural equation model is appropriate for verifying the research hypotheses.

Testing Hypothesis

The hypothesis test results are shown in Table 5 below. The results indicate that promoting pro-environmental behavior (PPB) was influenced by environmental concern (EC) (ꞵ = 0.575, p < 0.001). We found that the belief that Poland should move away from coal (MAFC) was influenced by environmental concern (EC) (ꞵ = 0.525, p < 0.001) and promoting pro-environmental behavior (PPB) (ꞵ = 0.140, p ≤ 0.005). Furthermore willingness to pay (WTP) was influenced by promoting pro-environmental behavior (PPB) (ꞵ = 0.541, p < 0.001) and the belief that Poland should move away from coal (MAFC) (ꞵ = 0.279, p < 0.001). The results obtained confirm the validity of hypotheses H1, H2, H4, H5 and H6, whereas hypothesis H3, which posited that environmental concern (EC) affects willingness to pay (WTP), was not supported.

6.Discussion

The results of our study indicate that while environmental concern (EC) positively influences promoting pro-environmental behavior (PPB) and the belief that Poland should move away from coal (MAFC), it does not significantly influence willingness to share in the costs of conversion. Therefore, a certain dissonance was observed between concern for the environment and the willingness to make financial commitments to improve it, which may result from the rising costs of living in Poland, including energy costs. Our findings suggest that EC influencers PPB. Taking on the role of an opinion leader and making efforts to ensure that people around oneself are also more pro-ecological, in turn, influences both attitudes towards changing energy sources to more environmentally friendly ones and the willingness to bear the associated costs. We found that the belief that Poland should move away from coal (MAFC) positively influences willingness to pay (WTP), indicating that opinions on the need to change to more pro-ecological ones are backed by declarations about the willingness to pay for them. Our research shows that environmental concern alone is not enough for some Poles to be willing to spend additional money on (more expensive) pro-ecological products or support changing the energy mix to a more ecological one. The lack of a significant impact of CE on WTP shows that further research in this area is needed, as in the literature this relationship remains ambiguous. Perhaps it depends on the level of development and wealth of the citizens of a given country, hence comparative studies in other countries would be advisable. Our study partially fills this research gap on the influence of EC on WTP among Polish consumers.

Limitations and future research directions

The study has several limitations. Due to the sample size and the selected method of sampling, the results cannot be treated as representative for the general population of Polish consumers. Our research focused on four factors – environmental concern (EC), promoting pro-environmental behavior (PPB), the belief that Poland should move away from coal (MAFC), and willingness to pay (WTP) – so future research could widen the spectrum of factors in future research. While our results are relevant to Polish consumers, cultural differences may result in varying attitudes toward environmentally friendly behavior in other countries. Conducting transnational research in this area would be valuable.

References

Ahmed, R. R., Romeika, G., Kauliene, R., Streimikis, J., & Dapkus , R. (2020). ES-QUAL model and customer satisfaction in online banking: evidence from multivariate analysis techniques. Oeconomia Copernicana, 11(1), 59–93. https://doi.org/10.24136/oc.2020.003

Akehurst, G., Afonso, C., & Martins Gonçalves, H. (2012). Re-examining green purchase behaviour and the green consumer profile: New evidences. Management Decision, 50(5), 972–988. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741211227726

Anderson, E. W. (1996). Customer satisfaction and price tolerance. Marketing Letters, 7, 265–274.

Arpad, T. (2018). Willing to pay to save the planet? Evaluating support for increased spending on sustainable development and environmentally friendly policies in five countries. PLoS ONE, 13(11), e0207862. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0207862

Bedyńska, S. & Książek, M. (2012). Statystyczny drogowskaz 3. Praktyczny przewodnik wykorzystania modeli regresji oraz równań strukturalnych. Szkoła Wyższa Psychologii Społecznej: Warsaw, POL, pp. 219–223, ISBN 9788363354053

Carrington, M., Neville, B., & Whitwell, G. (2010). Why ethical consumers don’t walk their talk: Towards a framework for understanding the gap between the ethical purchase intentions and actual buying behaviour of ethical minded consumers. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0501-6

Carman, K. M. L., & Cheng, E. W. L. (2016). Green purchase behavior of undergraduate students in Hong Kong. The Social Science Journal, 53(1), 67–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2015.11.003

Carrico, A. R. (2021). Climate change, behavior, and the possibility of spillover effects: Recent advances and future directions. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 42, 76–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.03.025

Chen, T. B., & Chai, L. T. (2010). Attitude towards the environment and green products: Consumers’ perspective. Management Science and Engineering, 4(2), 27–39. https://doi.org/10.3968/j.mse.1913035×20100402.002

Chin, J., Jiang, B., Mufidah, I., Persada, S., & Noer, B. (2018). The investigation of consumers’ behavior intention in using green skincare products: A pro-environmental behavior model approach. Sustainability, 10(11), 3922. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10113922

De Canio, F. (2023). Consumer willingness to pay more for pro-environmental packages: The moderating role of familiarity. Journal of Environmental Management, 339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117828

De Toni, D., Eberle, L., Larentis, F., & Milan, G. S. (2018). Antecedents of perceived value and repurchase intention of organic food. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 24, 456–475. https://doi.org/10.1080/10454446.2017.1314231

Dienes, C. (2015). Actions and intentions to pay for climate change mitigation: Environmental concern and the role of economic factors. Ecological Economics, 109, 122–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.11.012

Durif, F., Boivin, C., & Julien, C. (2017). In search of a green product definition. Innovative Marketing, 6(1), 25–33.

Dursun, I., Kabadayi, E. T., Koksal, C. G., & Tuger, A. T. (2016). Pro-environmental consumption: Is it really all about the environment? Journal of Management Marketing and Logistics, 3(2), 114–134. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia. 2016219940

Eckhardt, G. M., Belk, R., & Devinney, T. M. (2010). Why don’t consumers consume ethically? Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 9(6), 426–436. https://doi.org/10.1002/ cb.332

Eze, E. (2020). Sociographic analysis of climate change awareness and proenvironmental behaviour of secondary school teachers and students in Nsukka local government area of Enugu State, Nigeria. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 29, 89–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10382046.2019.1657683

Fornell, C. & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18/3, pp. 382–388.

Geng, J., Yang, N., Zhang, W., & Yang, L. (2023). Public willingness to pay for green lifestyle in China: A contingent valuation method based on integrated model. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20, 2185. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20032185

GlobalData. (2022). Poland power market size and trends by installed capacity, generation, transmission, distribution, and technology, regulations, key players and forecast, 2022–2035.

Hair, J.F. Jr., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. & Anderson, R.E. (2009). Multivariate Data Analysis, 7-th ed.; Pearson International Edition, Upper Saddle River: New Jersey, USA, pp. 627–686, ISBN 9780138132637

Hartmann, P., & Apaolaza-Ibañez, V. (2012). Consumer attitude and purchase intention toward green energy brands: The roles of psychological benefits and environmental concern. Journal of Business Research, 65, 1254–1263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.11.001

Hojnik, J., Ruzzier, M., Fabri, S., & Klopčič, A. L. (2021). What you give is what you get: Willingness to pay for green energy. Renewable Energy, 174, 733–746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.04.037

Hsu, C.-L., Chang, C.-Y., & Yansritakul, C. (2017). Exploring purchase intention of green skincare products using the theory of planned behavior: Testing the moderating effects of country of origin and price sensitivity. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 34, 145–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser. 2016.10.006

Irfan, M., Zhao, Z. Y., Li, H., et al. (2020). The influence of consumers’ intention factors on willingness to pay for renewable energy: A structural equation modeling approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 21747–21761. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08592-9

Jaiswal, D., & Kant, R. (2018). Green purchasing behaviour: A conceptual framework and empirical investigation of Indian consumers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 41, 60–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.11.008

Jin Gam, H. (2011). Are fashion-conscious consumers more likely to adopt eco-friendly clothing? Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 15(2), 178–193. https://doi.org/10.1108/13612021111132627

Kim, S., & Kim, S. (2023). Willingness to pay for what? Testing the impact of four factors on willingness to pay for facilitating and sanctioning energy policy instruments. Energy Reports, 10, 285–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2023. 06.021

Konarski, R. (2009). Modele równań strukturalnych. Teoria i praktyka. Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN p. 15, ISBN 9788301160944.

Laroche, M., Bergeron, J., & Barbaro-Forleo, G. (2001). Targeting consumers who are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(6), 503–520. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006155

Lee, K. H., Bonn, M. A., & Cho, M. (2015). Consumer motives for purchasing organic coffee. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 27, 1157–1180. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-02-2014-0060

Lee, J., & Haley, E. (2022). Green consumer segmentation: Consumer motivations for purchasing pro-environmental products. International Journal of Advertising, 41(8), 1477–1501. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2022.2038431

Lee, S. (2011). Consumers’ value, environmental consciousness, and willingness to pay more toward green-apparel products. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 2(3), 161–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2011.10593094

Li, L., Long, X., & Laubayeva, A. et al. (2020). Behavioral intention of environmentally friendly agricultural food: The role of policy, perceived value, subjective norm. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 18949–18961. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08261-x

Li, Y., Mu, X., Schiller, A., & Zheng, B. (2016). Willingness to pay for climate change mitigation: Evidence from China. The Energy Journal, 37(1_suppl), 179–194. https://doi.org/10.5547/01956574.37.SI1.yli

Lin, B., & Qiao, Q. (2023). Exploring the participation willingness and potential carbon emission reduction of Chinese residential green electricity market. Energy Policy, 174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113452

Lin, C. Y., & Syrgabayeva, D. (2016). Mechanism of environmental concern on intention to pay more for renewable energy: Application to a developing country. Asia Pacific Management Review, 21(3), 125–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.apmrv.2016.01.001

Liobikienë, G., & Dagiliûtë, R. (2021). Do positive aspects of renewable energy contribute to the willingness to pay more for green energy? Energy, 231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.120817

Liobikienë, G., Mandravickaitë, J., & Bernatonienë, J. (2016). Theory of planned behavior approach to understand the green purchasing behavior in the EU: A cross-cultural study. Ecological Economics, 125, 38–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.ecolecon.2016.02.008

Liu, W., Wang, X., & Chen, Z. (2017). The consistency of rural residents’ ecological consumption awareness and behavior based on the investigation of eco-civilization demonstration areas in Jiangxi Province. Issues in Agricultural Economy, 38, 37–49. https://doi.org/10.13246/j.cnki.iae.2017.09.006

Mansoor, M., Awan, T. M., & Paracha, O. S. (2021). Predicting pro-environmental behaviors of green electronic appliances’ users. International Journal of Business and Economic Affairs, 6(4), 175–186. https://doi.org/10.24088/IJBEA-2021-64002

Mei, N. S., Wai, C. W., & Ahamad, R. (2016). Environmental awareness and behaviour index for Malaysia. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 222, 668–675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.223

Mohammad, H. M., Morteza, M. M., Azim, Z., & Golnar, S. B. (2020). Knowledge foundation in green purchase behaviour: Multidimensional scaling method. Cogent Business & Management, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020. 1773676

Monroe, K. B. (1973). Buyers’ subjective perceptions of price. Journal of Marketing Research, 10, 70–80.

Moon, H., & Lee, H.-H. (2018). Environmentally friendly apparel products: The effects of value perceptions. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 46(8), 1373–1384. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.6392

Mostafa, M. M. (2006). Antecedents of Egyptian consumers’ green purchase intentions: A hierarchical multivariate regression model. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 19(2), 97–126. https://doi.org/10.1300/J046v19n02_06

Newton, J. D., Tsarenko, Y., Ferraro, C., & Sands, S. (2015). Environmental concern and environmental purchase intentions: The mediating role of learning strategy. Journal of Business Research, 68, 1974–1981. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jbusres.2015.01.007

Ode, E. & Ayavoo, R. (2020). The mediating role of knowledge application in the relationship between knowledge management practices and firm innovation. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 5, pp. 209–217

Paul, J., Modi, A., & Patel, J. (2016). Predicting green product consumption using theory of planned behavior and reasoned action. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 29, 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2015.11.006

Polonsky, M. J., Vocino, A., Grimmer, M., & Miles, M. P. (2014). Temporal and environmental orientation and PECB. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 38, 612–619. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12131

Popa, I.D. & Dabija, D.C. (2019). Developing the Romanian Organic Market: A Producer’s Perspective. Sustainability, 11, 467.

Quoquab, F., Mohammad, J., & Sukari, N. N. (2019). A multiple-item scale for measuring “sustainable consumption behaviour” construct: Development and psychometric evaluation. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 31(4), 791–816. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-02-2018-0047

Ramayah, T., Lee, J. W., & Mohamad, O. (2010). Green product purchase intention: Some insights from a developing country. Resources Conservation and Recycling, 54, 1419–1427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.06.007

Ritter, A. M., Borchardt, M., Vaccaro, G. L. R., Pereira, G. M., & Almeida, F. (2015). Motivations for promoting the consumption of green products in an emerging country: Exploring attitudes of Brazilian consumers. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106, 507–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.066

Saepudin, D., Shojaei, A. S., Barbosa, B., & Pedrosa, I. (2023). Intention to purchase eco-friendly handcrafted fashion products for gifting and personal use: A comparison of national and foreign consumers. Behavioral Sciences, 13(2), 171. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13020171

Scott, L., & Vigar-Ellis, D. (2014). Consumer understanding, perceptions and behaviours with regard to environmentally friendly packaging in a developing nation. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 38, 642–649. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12136

Seema, B., Naman, S., Manish, D., & Asmita, C., Sushant, K. (2023). Product specific values and personal values together better explains green purchase. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser. 2023.103434

Sheng, G., Yue, B., & Xie, F. (2019). The driving mechanism of Chinese residents’ green consumption behavior from the perspective of environmental co-governance. Statistical Information Forum, 34, 109–116. https://doi.org/10.3969/ j.issn.1007-3116.2019.01.014

Singh, N., & Gupta, K. (2013). Environmental attitude and ecological behaviour of Indian consumers. Social Responsibility Journal, 9(1), 4–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/ 17471111311307787

Sudbury-Riley, L., & Kohlbacher, F. (2016). Ethically minded consumer behavior: Scale review, development, and validation. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 2697–2710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.11.005

Suki, N. M., & Suki, N. M. (2015). Consumption values and consumer environmental concern regarding green products. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 22(3), 269–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509. 2015.1013074

Szczepańska-Woszczyna, K. (2021). Management Theory, Innovation, and Organisation. A Model of Managerial Competencies; Routledge: Milton Park, UK, ISBN 9780367485528

Vanegas-Rico, M.-C., Corral-Verdugo, V., Bustos-Aguayo, J.-M., & Ortega-Andeane, P. (2022). Expectations of others’ environmental behaviour and its effect on personal pro-environmental behaviour. PsyEcology, 13, 29–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/21711976.2021.1992872

Vasiljevic-Shikaleska, A., Trpovski, G., & Gjozinska, B. (2018). Environmental awareness and pro-environmental consumer behavior. Journal of Sustainable Development, 8, 4–17.

Vivian, S., Haslam, K., Soldner, M., & Sangster, M. (2011). Assessment of European energy and carbon profiles of manual and automatic dishwashing. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 35, 187–198. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2010.00986.x

Wang, J. (2013). The effect of resource saving consciousness on resource saving behavior – an interactive effect and moderating effect model under the background of Chinese culture. Management World, 8, 77–90. https://doi.org/10.19744/j.cnki.11-1235/f.2013.08.008

Wang, Q., Song, W., & Peng, X. (2022). The behavior-driven mechanism of consumer participation in “carbon neutrality”: Based on the promotion of replacing coal with biomass briquette fuel. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19, 15133. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192215133

Wang, Z. & Wang, N. (2012). Knowledge sharing, innovation and firm performance. Expert Systems With Applications. 39(10), pp. 8899–8908

Woo, E., & Kim, Y. G. (2019). Consumer attitudes and buying behavior for green food products: From the aspect of green perceived value (GPV). British Food Journal, 121(2), 320–332. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-01-2018-0027

Yadav, S., Patel, S., Killedar, D. J., Kumar, S., & Kumar, R. (2022). Eco-innovations and sustainability in solid waste management: An Indian upfront in technological, organizational, start-ups and financial framework. Journal of Environmental Management, 302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113953

Yang, D., Lu, Y., Zhu, W., & Su, C. (2015). Going green: How different advertising appeals impact green consumption behavior. Journal of Business Research, 68(12), 2663–2675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.04.004

Zhang, J., Cherian, J., Sandhu, Y. A., Abbas, J., Cismas, L. M., Negrut, C. V., & Negrut, L. (2022). Presumption of green electronic appliances purchase intention: The mediating role of personal moral norms. Sustainability, 14, 4572. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084572

The circular economy (CE) is an increasingly popular approach to create sustainable business. The aim of a CE is to attain a sustainable society and economy by avoiding and minimising resource consumption through multiple product-and-material loops (Ellen MacArthur Foundation [EMF], 2015). Sustainable consumption (SC) is a complex and ambivalent concept composed of two visibly opposite terms-consumption and sustainability. Existing definitions nevertheless show that the main aim of SC is to reach the harmony between the satisfaction of consumer needs and preservation of the environment (Piligrimiene, Žukauskaite, Korzilius, Banyte & Dovaliene, 2020). SC entails satisfying consumer needs while reducing negative impacts caused during material extraction, production and consumption (Mont and Plepys, 2008; Cooper, 2013).

SC emphasises individual actions of consumers in the areas of acquisition, usage and disposal of goods, products and services, taking into account the impact on ecological and socioeconomic conditions for today’s and future generations (Geng, Mansouri & Aktas, 2017). According to Phipps et al. (2013), SC is a compromise between environmental, social and economic aims, acquiring, using and utilising products, seeking global welfare for the present and future generations. SC, representing the demand side of the consumption/production coin, should allow for potential changes in consumer behaviour (Phipps et al., 2013). SC patterns are necessary to realise a sustainable society and economy (Druckman & Jackson, 2010). Customer SC behaviours facilitate the efficient use of underutilised resources (e.g. sharing spare household resource) and extend the life cycle of accessed products (e.g. keeping items in good conditions for others), thereby reflecting the significant potential of sustainability in the sharing economy (SE) (Munoz & Cohen, 2017). Second-hand clothing is an example of recycling that extends the life of products by reusing. Reuse of clothing is associated with reducing the amount of disposed clothing, thereby reducing environmental pollution (Farrant, Olsen & Wangel, 2010). Second-hand and vintage clothes are getting popular due to environmental benefits and also for a personal style (Johansson, 2010).

The main purpose of this paper is to identify the importance and to determine the influence of selected types of motives on the attitudes towards using collaborative fashion consumption (CFC) applications/ platforms and willingness to use them in the future.

The Concept of CFC

Collaborative consumption (CC) is one of the new consumption trends in consumer behaviour that includes an alternative approach to meeting needs. This trend is based on access to goods without the need to own and transfer property rights. In Belk (2014), the term 'collaborative consumption’ was defined as 'people coordinating the acquisition and distribution of a resource for a fee or other compensation’. CC is dynamically developing in various areas of human activity. The popularity of CC has significantly increased due to the development of digitalisation. Owing to the dissemination of smartphones, the development of mobile technologies, Internet accessibility and the proliferation of online payment, the CC has never been so easy and widespread (Muangmee, Kot, Meekaewkunchorn, Kassakorn & Khalid, 2021; Kapoor & Vij, 2021). The growing consumer awareness of environmental concerns and anticonsumerist attitudes also contribute to the development of CC. The areas in which it is most developed include transport, tourism, education, food, clothing, healthcare and leisure (Paczka, 2020). CC is most often studied in the context of the SE (Belk, 2014), prosumption (Ritzer & Jurgenson, 2010), sharing (Belk, 2010; Lamberton & Rose, 2012), access-based consumption (Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2012) or connected consumption (Schor & Fitzmaurice, 2015). The principal idea behind all of these approaches is to promote the notion of using, as opposed to owning, products (Iran & Schrader, 2017).

According to Iran and Schrader (2017), CFC is a consumption trend 'in which consumers, instead of buying new fashion products, have access to already existing garments either through alternative opportunities to acquire individual ownership (gifting, swapping or second hand) or through usage options for fashion products owned by others (sharing, lending, renting or leasing)’. CFC can be between peers; then, we are talking about 'pure cooperation’, a form that has existed since forever, when clothes were shared between family members prior to the industrial revolution (Belk, 2014). Nowadays, it could be organised by peers themselves either through online or offline platforms. But it can also take place between businesses and end consumers; then, we are talking about 'trading cooperation’. There are companies offering either service as substitutes for product ownership (renting and leasing) or second-hand retail service to make the purchase of new products dispensable (Iran & Schrader, 2017). Finally, CFC can be mediated by a third party; then, we are talking about 'sourcing collaboration’ (Henninger, Brydges, Iran & Vladimirova, 2021). On the basis of the literature review, the following forms of CFC can be distinguished: sharing, borrowing, reuse, charity, second-hand market, SC, anti-consumption, swapping, resale, take-back schemes and repurpose. These practices result in reduced new product acquisitions, increased product reuse and extended product life cycle (Armstrong, Niinimäki, Lang & Kujala, 2016). Various forms of CFC are accepted and practiced by consumers. Some people accept one or more form(s) of CFC, while others reject the concept entirely and are against sharing their clothes (Iran, Geiger & Schrader, 2018). In the apparel industry, the SE enables consumers to have access to fashion products that would not be accessible otherwise, achieving more variety in apparel choice (Balck & Cracau, 2015).

CFC has gained an increasing amount of attention among not only consumers but also academia (Lang, Seo & Liu, 2019). Researchers identify that CFC serves to not only reduce waste and negative environmental impact (Gopalakrishnan & Matthews, 2018) but also increase sustainability in the apparel industry (Geissdoerfer, Savaget, Bocken & Hultink, 2017).

The emergence of new information and communication technologies has caused significant changes in the rules of fashion sharing. Such activities, initially carried out only with family members or friends and acquaintances, gradually began to be undertaken also with previously unknown people. Access to new technology and digital platforms makes it easier to communicate at a distance and to find people who have spare resources and those who would like to use them. More and more platforms for CFC have emerged around the world, e.g. Rent the Runway, Share Wardrobe, GlamCorner, Dress & Go, Vinted, Zalando Pre-owned and E-Garderobe.com (Lee, Jung & Lee, 2021). Such platforms are having a serious impact on the fashion industry. Contemporary SE applications create a market form in which strangers rather than kin and communities exchange garments, thereby creating new ways of provisioning goods and services as well as opportunities for CC. Many consumers are becoming more open to renting and thrifting and, as a result, businesses are adapting by making the shift from not only selling products but also offering subscription services. An individual who cannot afford to buy luxury goods can rent various designer fashion items at lower prices. It is worth noting that CFC applies to different consumer segments of the clothing market. According to experts, CFC could rapidly grow into one of the fastestgrowing segments of retail in the next 10 years (Chieng, 2021).

Hypotheses Development and Conceptual Model

Users’ motivation to participate in CFC has been the subject of research by scientists all over the world for many years. Guiot and Roux (2010) distinguished three main categories of motives for second-hand shopping: critical motivations (distance from the consumption system, ethics and ecology), economic motivations (gratificative role of price, searching for a fair price) and hedonic/recreational motivation (treasure hunting, originality, social contact and nostalgia). Padmavathy, Swapana and Paul (2019) proposed a scale to measure online second-hand shopping motivation and focussed on economic motivation (price orientation, bargaining power and critical orientation), convenience motivation (usefulness and ease of use) and ideological motivation (need to be unique, nostalgia, trust and assurances). Based on a literature review, Becker-Leifhold and Iran (2018) identified the drivers of CFC from a consumers’ perspective — hedonic motives (e.g. availability of rare items, excitement, fun, satisfaction, treasure hunting, nostalgia and social interaction), utilitarian motives (smart purchase behaviour, fair price, frugality and bargains) and biospheric motives (environment-friendly consumption, prevention of wasteful disposal and distance from the system). Zaman, Park, Kim and Park (2019) distinguished six consumer orientations relevant to second-hand clothing shopping: frugality, style consciousness, ecological consciousness, dematerialism, nostalgia proneness and fashion consciousness. Park and Armstrong (2019) classified five basic consumer motivations for collaborative apparel consumption: saving money, saving time, finding desirable product assortment, utility and no burden of ownership. Cervellon, Carey and Harms (2012) have studied the influence of nostalgia, fashion involvement, need for uniqueness, need for status, frugality and value consciousness and environmental-friendly proneness on the intention to purchase second-hand fashion pieces (and vintage pieces). Xu, Chen, Burman and Zhao (2014), in their cross-cultural study, distinguished four perceived values for purchasing second-hand clothing: economic value, hedonic value or treasure hunting, uniqueness and environmental value. The results of their study have shown significant differences in second-hand clothing consumption behaviour between US and Chinese consumers. This justifies the conduct of research in individual countries, as the behaviour of consumers from different countries may differ significantly from each other.

The subject scope of our study includes the recognition of the impact of economic and utility motives (e.g. promotions, convenience and saving time), social motives (e.g. being a part of a group of people with similar interests, image and following trends) and ecological motives (e.g. to protect/care for the natural environment, to limit excessive consumption and to extend the life of the products) on attitudes towards CFC applications and the willingness to use them in the future.

Economic and Utility Motives

The analysed literature on the consumption of used clothing suggests that pragmatic motivations based on time and money saving play an important role in shaping attitudes towards second-hand buying (Williams & Paddock, 2003). Guiot and Roux (2010) state that economic motivations are important incentives of second-hand purchase behaviour. The results of a study conducted by Cervellon et al. (2012) have shown that the main driver for the purchase of second-hand clothes is frugality. Studies indicate that economic factors play the most important role for clients when making decisions on the use of SE (Barnes & Mattsson, 2016). However, it should be noticed that the findings of the study by Won and Kim (2020) suggest that utilitarian motives (saving money or maximising utility) do not affect consumer attitude towards fashion-sharing platforms. On the other hand, the findings of Ek Styvén and Mariani (2020) indicate that economic motivations influence positively the attitude towards buying second-hand clothing on SE platforms. The study by Yan, Bae and Xu (2015) has shown that college students’ shopping frequency for second-hand clothing was predicted by price sensitivity.

Based on a review of previous research, the authors propose the following hypotheses.

Hypothesis 1a (H1a): Economic and utility motives positively influence the attitudes towards using CFC applications/platforms.

Hypothesis 1b (H1b): Economic and utility motives positively influence the willingness to use CFC applications in the future.

Social Motives

Social motives are incorporated for instance in the possibility of getting to know other people who have similar desires (Benoit, Baker, Bolton, Gruber & Kandampully, 2017). Findings from a study by Angelovska, Èeh Èasni and Lutz (2020) suggest that motives such as meeting with people and social responsibility are significant predictors of participation in the SE. A study by Yan et al. (2015) suggests that consumers who shopped for second-hand clothing might do so for social reasons (among others). Psychological factors promote people to interact on peer-to-peer (P2P) platforms and form the basis for borrowing and rental mechanisms, as well as transferring ownership through exchange, donation or purchase of used goods (Hamari, 2013; Hamari, Sjöklint & Ukkonen, 2016; Piscicelli, Cooper & Fisher, 2015).

Based on a review of previous research, the authors propose the following hypotheses.

Hypothesis 2a (H2a): Social motives positively influence the attitudes towards using CFC applications/platforms.

Hypothesis 2b (H2b): Social motives positively influence the willingness to use CFC applications in the future.

Ecological Motives

The SE is part of ethical consumerism, and participation in it can be perceived as a form of sustainable consumer behaviour (Perlacia, Duml & Saebi, 2017). Sold sales, transition, renting or transferring unwanted/unnecessary clothes contributes to the extension of the product life, reduction of production and fashion waste (Perlacia et al., 2017; Sarigöllü, Hou & Ertz, 2021). Although participation in the sharing economy may potentially have a positive impact on the environment (Botsman & Rogers, 2010) (no resource consumption), it does not seem to be a strong motivator for many consumers (Habibi et al., 2016). Furthermore, Leismann, Schmitt, Rohn and Baedeker (2013) show that 'use instead of having’ patterns may also have undesirable ecological side effects, because customers can abuse shopping, which can eliminate positive environmental effects. Some studies suggest that purchase of second-hand clothes is not driven by ecological consciousness directly but through the mediating effect of bargain hunting (Cervellon et al., 2012). Findings from the study by Won and Kim (2020) indicate that hedonic and ecological motivation affects consumer attitude towards fashion-sharing platforms. Ek Styvén and Mariani (2020) found that perceived sustainability influences positively the attitude towards buying second-hand clothing on sharing-economy platforms. On the other hand, the study by Yan et al. (2015) did not confirm the relationship between environmental attitudes and the shopping frequency for second-hand clothing among college students. Those authors noticed, however, that second-hand shoppers tend to be more environmentally conscious than non-shoppers.

The literature review findings regarding the impact of ecological motives on attitudes towards SE/CC and participation in SE/CC are ambiguous. The authors propose the following hypotheses.

Hypothesis 3a (H3a): Ecological motives positively influence the attitudes towards using CFC applications/platforms.

Hypothesis 3b (H3b): Ecological motives positively influence the willingness to use CFC applications in the future.

Attitude

According to the theory of planned behaviour, an individual’s intention to perform a certain behaviour is determined by a combination of three factors: attitudes towards the behaviour, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control (Ajzen, 1991). The assumption of the positive influence of the attitude towards CC or second-hand shopping on behaviour intention (participation in CC or buying second-hand fashion) is supported in the literature. In the study by Hamari et al. (2016), attitude had a significant positive effect on behavioural intentions to participate in CC. Ek Styvén and Mariani (2020) suggest that attitude towards buying second-hand fashion positively influences behavioural intention to buy second-hand goods on P2P-SE platforms. Won and Kim (2020) indicate that consumers’ attitudes towards fashion-sharing platforms have a positive effect on their purchase intentions.

Based on a review of past research, the authors assume that the attitude towards CFC positively affects behavioural intention and thus propose the following hypothesis.

Hypothesis 4 (H4): The attitudes towards using CFC applications/platforms positively influence the willingness to use them in the future.

The following conceptual research model is proposed (Figure 1):

Research Design

The data was collected through an online research panel (Nationwide Research Panel Ariadna) with the use of an online survey in 2021 on a total of 412 Polish respondents. The non-random sampling method was used in the selection of the research sample. The structure of the research sample corresponded to the structure of adult Poles in terms of gender, age, education level and place of residence. The dataset was created with SPSS, version 27 (IBM). A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed and a structural equation model (SEM) was developed using AMOS, version 21.0. Based on prior studies, a multi-item measurement scale was developed to measure motives and attitude. Economic and utility motives, social motives, ecological motives and attitude were each measured with four items and behaviour intention with one item. All items were measured utilising a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree).

The selection of the research sample was carried out by the quota method (selection criteria: sex, age and place of residence). The structure of the research sample is presented in Table 1.

Measurement Model

Table 2 shows the results of the CFA, including factor loadings and descriptive statistics. Two of three motives to participate as a user of CFC platforms were of relatively high importance: economics and utility motives (EU) (meanEU = 3.88) and ecological (ECO) (meanECO = 3.65). Social (SOC) motives were considered by the respondents as less important (meanSOC = 3.22).

SEM was used to test the hypothetical relationships between observable and/or latent variables in experimental and non-experimental research (Konarski, 2009, p. 15). The SEM consisted of a structural and a measurement part — the structural part of the model describes the theoretical cause-and-effect relation or correlation between the studied phenomena, while the measurement part takes place when the analysed phenomena are not directly measurable (therefore, they are represented in the constructed model by unobservable/latent variables). This means that before starting the estimation of the SEM, its measurement part should be determined and verified. One of the methods of verification of the measurement model is by the use of CFA (Bedyńska & Książek, 2012, pp. 219–223). The reliability of the measurement instrument was tested using CFA, where the results showed acceptable model fit indices (Table 3).

The evaluation of the overall measurement model (Figure 2) and the assessment of reliability and validity of the constructs were performed with a CFA. In the process of evaluating the measurement model, the discriminant and convergent validities were verified — the discriminant validity measures the extent to which the factors intended to measure a specific construct are actually unrelated (Wang & Wang, 2012). The Fornell and Larcker approach for the assessment of discriminant validity was used (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Within this approach, the average variance extracted (AVE) for each research construct should be higher than the square of the correlation between the construct and other constructs (Ode & Ayavoo, 2020). The diagonal (shown in bold with asterisks — *) elements shown in the table are the squares of multiple correlations between the research variables. As shown in Table 4, the AVE ranges from 0.57 to 0.81, while the diagonal values range from 0.75 to 0.90, indicating that the diagonal variables are higher than the AVE values (in rows); this result suggests that all constructs have appropriate discriminant validity. The data presented in the table shows that the measurement model has satisfactory discriminant validity.

Convergent validity measures the degree to which the factors measuring single constructs are consistent with each other. Convergent validity was assessed using composite reliability (CR) and AVE — the minimum values adopted in the analysis were such that AVE should be >0.5 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981), factor loadings should be >0.6 and CR should be >0.6 (Hair, Black, Babin & Anderson, 2009; Ahmed, Romeika, Kauliene, Streimikis & Dapkus, 2020; Popa & Dabija, 2019; Szczepańska-Woszczyna, 2021). On the basis of the obtained results, all three minimum values were reached, which suggests that the reliability and validity of the model and the constructs used are acceptable.

Structural Model

Based on the research conducted in the literature review, the results of CFA and the proposed hypotheses, a research model was developed and is graphically illustrated in Figure 3. All the fit indices of the SEM allow us to proceed to the verification of the research hypotheses.

Testing the Hypotheses

The test results for the hypotheses are shown in Table 5. The results indicate that ATT was influenced by EU (β = 0.410, p < 0.001), SOC (β = –0.195, p = 0.002) and ECO (β = 0.455, p < 0.001). We found that EU (β = 0.255, p < 0.001), SOC (β = –0.223, p < 0.001) and ATT (β = 0.706, p < 0.001) influenced BI. ECO has been found to be not significantly associated with BI. It should be noticed that the hypothesis regarding social motives (H2a and H2b) were not supported due to the negative effect of those factors on ATT and BI.

Discussion

Our study allowed to identify the importance and to determine the effect of economic and utility motives, social motives and ecological motives on the attitudes towards using CFC apps/platforms and behavioural intention regarding the willingness to use them. We investigated also the influence of attitude towards using CFC platforms on behavioural intention. As assumed, our study confirmed the effect of attitude on willingness to use CFC applications in the future.

The findings suggest that economic and utility motives were considered by the respondents to be the most important type of motivation for participation as a user (consumer) of CFC applications. The results confirm previous findings wherein economic/utility/frugality motivation was suggested to be a main or important driver of secondhand fashion consumption (Guiot & Roux, 2010; Cervellon et al., 2012). Furthermore, economic and utility motives significantly affected the attitude towards CFC apps and the willingness to use them in the future. Those conclusions are in line with the works of other researchers (e.g. Ek Styvén & Mariani, 2020; Yan et al., 2015). It should be recalled that the overall findings of prior studies in this area are ambiguous. In some studies, utilitarian motives (saving money or minimalising utility) did not affect consumer attitude towards fashion-sharing platforms (Won & Kim, 2020).

Social motives turned out to be the least important factor (among the three types of motivation) for participation in CFC as a consumer. While analysis of the literature suggests that social motives might be an important reason for second-hand clothing shopping behaviour (Yan et al., 2015) or can be a significant predictor of participation in the SE (Angelovska et al., 2020), our findings seem to be quite interesting in that aspect. In our research, social motives significantly affected both attitude towards CFC platforms and intention to use them in the future; however, the effect on those variables was negative.

Ecological motives were considered to be a relatively important factor for buying second-hand clothing through CFC platforms. Our study findings confirm that ecological motives positively influence the attitudes towards using CFC applications/platforms, which is in line with previous studies by Won and Kim (2020) or Ek Styvén and Mariani (2020). It should be noted, however, that our results did not support the hypothesis that those motives positively influence the willingness to use CFC applications in the future, same as in Yan et al. (2015). Ecological motivation can be seen as a quite important factor regarding participation in CFC platforms, but they may not directly affect the behavioural intention to use them.

Conclusions

The results of our research have shown that there is significant evidence to conclude that the most important motives for using online applications for collaborative fashion consumption were economic and utility motives. Moreover, their impact on attitudes towards these applications and the willingness to use them was confirmed. Past research demonstrates that second-hand consumers are more likely to be price-sensitive and motivated by low prices. Saving money is a key driver for consumers. Thus, low prices exert a major influence on consumers’ willingness to purchase second-hand goods (Cervellon et al., 2012; Guiot & Roux, 2010; Isla, 2013; Williams & Paddock, 2003). Ecological motives emerged as relatively important determinants of the use of CFC applications. Environmental and ethical benefits of garment reuse are also significant drivers according to previous research (Guiot & Roux, 2010; Waight, 2013; Xu et al., 2014). Social motives not only were the least important determinants of participation in CFC, but they seem to have a negative impact on both ATT and willingness to use CFC platforms.

From a theoretical perspective, this study contributes to the fashion literature by shedding light on the motivations for using CFC online platforms, especially in the context of the results on social motives. The findings presented in this article can be extremely valuable and useful in designing and implementing solutions to support CFC, such as mobile applications or dedicated websites. The results of our research can be used when designing activities in the field of marketing communication. In order to promote their applications/platforms, enterprises should first of all focus on economic and utility benefits, as well as on ecological aspects, and not focus on social benefits.

Limitations and future research directions

The study has several limitations. Because of the sample size and the selected method of sampling, the results cannot be treated as representative for the general population of Polish consumers who use CFC platforms to buy second-hand clothing. Due to the differences in consumer behaviour regarding various forms of participation in SE/CC, it should be kept in mind that the possibility of inference is limited only to CFC platforms. Our research was focussed on three types of motivation regarding the usage of CFC applications, so it would be a good idea to widen the spectrum of motives in future research. The research findings could be used to describe the consumer behaviour of Polish consumers; however, it should be noticed that due to cultural differences, the importance and the influence of motives for using CFC platforms can differ in other countries. It would be interesting to conduct cross-country research in that aspect. Future studies could also explore other forms of consumer behaviour regarding the usage of CFC platforms, e.g. consumer engagement.

Acknowledgements

The study was conducted within the research project Economics in the face of the New Economy financed within the Regional Initiative for Excellence programme of the Minister of Science and Higher Education of Poland, years 2019–2022, grant no. 004/RID/2018/19, financing 3,000,000 PLN.

References

1. Ahmed, R. R., Romeika, G., Kauliene, R., Streimikis, J., & Dapkus, R. (2020). ES-QUAL model and customer satisfaction in online banking: Evidence from multivariate analysis techniques. Oeconomia Copernic, 11, 59–93.

2. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.

3. Angelovska, J., Èeh Èasni, A., & Lutz, C. (2020). Turning consumers into providers in the sharing economy: Exploring the impact of demographics and motives. Ekonomska misao i praksa, 29(1), 79–100. Retrieved from https://hrcak.srce.hr/239585.

4. Armstrong, C. M., Niinimäki, K., Lang, C., & Kujala, S. (2016). A use-oriented clothing economy? Preliminary affirmation for sustainable clothing consumption alternatives. Sustainable Development, 24, 18–31. doi:10.1002/sd.1602

5. Balck, B., & Cracau, D. (2015). Empirical analysis of customer motives in the shareconomy. Working Paper Series, University of Magdeburg. Retrieved from https://www.fww.ovgu.de/fww_media/femm/femm_2015/2015_02.pdf

6. Bardhi, F., & Eckhardt, G. M. (2012). Access-based consumption: The case of car sharing, Journal of Consumer Research, 39(4), 881–898. doi:10.1086/666376.

7. Barnes, S., & Mattsson, J. (2016). Understanding current and future issues in collaborative consumption: A Four-Stage Delphi Study. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 104, 200–211. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.01

8. Becker-Leifhold, C., & Iran, S. (2018). Collaborative fashion consumption — Drivers, barriers and future pathways. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 22, 189–208. doi:10.1108/JFMM-10-2017-0109

9. Bedyńska, S., & Książek, M. (2012). Statystyczny drogowskaz 3. Praktyczny przewodnik wykorzystania modeli regresji oraz równań strukturalnych; Szkoła Wyższa Psychologii Społecznej: Warsaw, POL, pp. 159–200, ISBN 9788363354053

10. Belk, R. W. (2010). Sharing. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(5), 715–734. doi:10.1086/612649.

11. Belk, R. W. (2014). You are what you can access: Sharing and collaborative consumption online. Journal of Business Research, 67(8), 1595–1600. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres. 2013.10.001.

12. Benoit, S., Baker, T. L., Bolton, R. N., Gruber, T., & Kandampully, J. A. (2017). Triadic framework for collaborative consumption (CC): Motives, activities and resources & capabilities of actors. Journal Business Research, 79, 219–227.

13. Botsman, R., & Rogers, R. (2010). What’s mine is yours. The rise of collaborative consumption.? New York: Harper Business.

14. Cervellon, M., Carey, L., & Harms, T. (2012). Something old, something used: Determinants of women’s purchase of vintage fashion vs second-hand fashion. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 40(12), 956–974. doi:10.1108/09590551211274946

15. Chieng, F. Y. L. (2021). Collaborative fashion consumption: You don’t have to own high fashion to own it. Curtin Insight Articles. Retrieved from https://news.curtin.edu. my/insight/2021-2/collaborative-fashion-consumption-you-dont-have-to-own-highfashion-to-own-it/

16. Cooper, T. (2013). .Sustainability, Consumption and the Throwaway Culture. W: Walker S. and Giard J. (red.) The Handbook of Design for Sustainability, pp. 137–155, Bloomsbury Academic.

17. Druckman, A., & Jackson, T. (2010). The bare necessities: How much household carbon do we really need? Ecological Economics, 69(9), 1794–1804.

18. Ek Styvén, M., & Mariani, M. M. (2020). Understanding the intention to buy secondhand clothing on sharing economy platforms: The influence of sustainability, distance from the consumption system, and economic motivations. Psychology Marketing, 37(5) 1–16. doi:10.1002/mar.21334

19. Farrant, L., Olsen, S. I., & Wangel, A. (2010). Environmental benefits from reusing clothes. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 15(7), 726–736.

20. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18/3, 382–388.

21. Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N. M., & Hultink, E. J. (2017). The circular economy — A new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 757–768. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048.

22. Geng, R., Mansouri, S. A., & Aktas, E. (2017). The relationship between green supply chain management and performance: A meta-analysis of empirical evidences in Asian emerging economies. International Journal of Production Economics, 183, 245-258. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.10.008

23. Gopalakrishnan, S., & Matthews, D. (2018). Collaborative consumption: A business model analysis of second-hand fashion. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 22(3), 354–368. doi:10.1108/JFMM-05-2017-0049.

24. Guiot, D., & Roux, D. (2010). A second-hand shoppers’ motivation scale: Antecedents, consequences, and implications for retailers. Journal of Retailing, 86(4), 355–371. doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2010.08.002

25. Habibi, M. R., Davidson, A., & Laroche, M. (2017). What managers should know about the sharing economy. Business Horizons, 60(1), 113–121. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2016.09.00

26. Hair, J.F. Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed., pp. 627–686). Upper Saddle River: NJ, USA: Pearson International Edition. ISBN 9780138132637.

27. Hamari, J. (2013). Transforming homo economicus into homo ludens: A field experiment on gamification in a utilitarian peer-to-peer trading service. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 12, 236–245 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2013.01.004.

28. Hamari, J., Sjöklint, M., & Ukkonen, A. (2016). The sharing economy: Why people participate in collaborative consumption. The Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67, 2047–2059. doi:10.1002/asi.23552

29. Henninger, C. E., Brydges, T., Iran, S., & Vladimirova, K. 2021. Collaborative fashion consumption — A synthesis and future research agenda. Journal of Cleaner Production, 319, 128648.I doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128648

30. International EMF Project — Progress reports — June 2015–2016. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/international-emf-project-progress-report2015-2016

31. Iran, S., & Schrader, U. (2017). Collaborative fashion consumption and its environmental effects. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 21(4), 468–482. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.163

32. Iran, S., Geiger, A. M., & Schraeder, U. L. (2018). Collaborative fashion consumption — A cross-cultural study between Tehran and Berlin. Journal of Cleaner Production, 212, 313–323. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.163

33. Isla, V. L. (2013). Investigating second-hand fashion trade and consumption in the Philippines: expanding existing discourses. Journal of Consumer Culture, 13(3), 221–240. doi:10.1177/1469540513480167

34. Johansson, J. K. (2010). Global Marketing Strategy. Wiley International Encyclopedia of Marketing.doi:10.1002/9781444316568.wiem01024

35. Kapoor, A. P., & Vij, M. (2021). Want it, Rent it: Exploring attributes leading to conversion for online furniture rental platforms. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 16, 188–207. doi:10.4067/S0718-18762021000200113.

36. Konarski, R. (2009). Modelowanie równań strukturalnych. Teoria i praktyka (p. 15). Warsaw, Poland: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. ISBN 9788301160944

37. Lamberton, C. P., & Rose, R. L. (2012). When is ours better than mine? A framework for understanding and altering participation in commercial sharing systems, Journal of Marketing, 76(4), 109–125. doi:10.1509/jm.10.0368.

38. Lang, C., Seo, S., & Liu, C. (2019). Motivations and obstacles for fashion renting: A crosscultural comparison. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 23(4), 519–536. doi:10.1108/JFMM-05-2019-0106

39. Lee, S. E., Jung, H. J., & Lee, K.-H. (2021). Motivating collaborative consumption in fashion: Consumer benefits, perceived risks, service trust, and usage intention of online fashion rental services. Sustainability, 13, 1804. doi:10.3390/su13041804

40. Leismann, K., Schmitt, M., Rohn, H., & Baedeker, C. (2013). Collaborative consumption: Towards a resource-saving consumption culture. Resources, 2(3), 184–203. doi:10.3390/resources2030184

41. Mont, O., & Plepys, A. (2008). Sustainable consumption progress: Should we be proud or alarmed? Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(4), 531–537.

42. Muangmee, C., Kot, S., Meekaewkunchorn, N., Kassakorn, N., & Khalid, B. (2021). Factors determining the behavioral intention of using food delivery apps during COVID19 pandemics. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 16, 1297–1310. doi:10.3390/jtaer16050073

43. Munoz, P., & Cohen, B. (2017). Mapping out the sharing economy: A configurational approach to sharing business modeling. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 125, 21–37. 44. Ode, E., & Ayavoo, R. (2020). The mediating role of knowledge application in the relationship between knowledge management practices and firm innovation. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 5, 209–217.

45. Paczka, E. (2020). Collaborative consumption i jej wpływ na rozwój przedsiębiorczości w obliczu zmian pokoleniowych. Przegląd Prawa I Administracji, 120, tom 2, 749–761. doi:10.19195/0137-1134.120.104.

46. Padmavathy, C., Swapana, M., & Paul, J. (2019). Online second-hand shopping motivation — Conceptualization, scale development, and validation. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 51, 19–32. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.05.014

47. Park, H., & Armstrong, C. M. J. (2019). Is money the biggest driver? Uncovering motives for engaging in online collaborative consumption retail models for apparel. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 51, 42–50. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.05.022

48. Perlacia, A. S., Duml, V., & Saebi, T. (2017). Collaborative consumption: Live fashion, don’t own it. Beta, 31, 6–24. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2860021

49. Phipps, M., Ozanne, L. K., Luchs, M. G., Subrahmanyan, S., Kapitan, S., Catlin, J. R., & Weaver, T. (2013). Understanding the inherent complexity of sustainable consumption: A social cognitive framework. Journal of Business Research, 66(8), 1227–1234.

50. Piligrimiene, Ž., Žukauskaite, A., Korzilius, H., Banyte, J., & Dovaliene, A. (2020). Internal and external determinants of consumer engagement in sustainable consumption. Sustainability, 12(4), 1349. doi:10.3390/su12041349

51. Piscicelli, L., Cooper, T., & Fisher, T. (2015). The role of values in collaborative consumption: Insights from a product-service system for lending and borrowing in the UK. Journal of Cleaner Production, 97, 21–29, doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.07.032.

52. Popa, I. D., & Dabija, D. C. (2019). Developing the Romanian organic market: A producer’s perspective. Sustainability, 11, 467.

53. Ritzer, G., & Jurgenson, N. (2010). Production, consumption, prosumption: The nature of capitalism in the age of the digital 'prosumer’. Journal of Consumer Culture, 10(1), 13–36. doi:10.1177/1469540509354673

54. Sarigöllü, E., Hou, C., & Ertz, M. (2021). Sustainable product disposal: Consumer redistributing behaviors versus hoarding and throwing away. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(1), pp. 340–356. doi:10.1002/bse.2624

55. Schor, J. B., & Fitzmaurice, C. J. (n.d.). Collaborating and connecting: the emergence of the sharing economy. Handbook of Research on Sustainable Consumption, 410–425. doi:10.4337/9781783471270.00039

56. Szczepańska-Woszczyna, K. (2021). Management theory, innovation, and organisation. A model of managerial competencies. Milton Park, UK: Routledge. ISBN 9780367485528

57. Waight, E. (2013). Eco babies: reducing a parent’s ecological footprint with second-hand consumer goods. International Journal of Green Economics, 7(2), 197–211. doi:10.1504/IJGE.2013.057444

58. Wang, Z., & Wang, N. (2012). Knowledge sharing, innovation and firm performance. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(10), 8899–8908.

59. Williams, C. C., & Paddock, C. (2003). The meanings of informal and second hand retail channels: some evidence from Leicester. International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 13(3), 317–336. doi:10.1080/0959396032000101372

60. Won, J., & Kim, B.-Y. (2020). The effect of consumer motivations on purchase intention of online fashion — Sharing platform. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(6), 197–207. doi:10.13106/JAFEB.2020.VOL7.NO6.197

61. Xu, Y., Chen, Y., Burman, R., & Zhao, H. (2014). Second-hand clothing: A cross-cultural comparison. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 38, 670–677. doi:10.1111/ijcs.12139

62. Yan, R.-N., Bae, S.Y., & Xu, H. (2015). Second-hand clothing shopping among college students: The role of psychographic characteristics. Young Consumers, 16(1), 85–98. doi:10.1108/YC-02-2014-00429

63. Zaman, M., Park, H., Kim, Y.-K., & Park, S.-H. (2019). Consumer orientations of secondhand clothing shoppers. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 10(2), 163–176. doi: 10.1080/20932685.2019.1576060

With increasing prevalence, social networking platforms are being used by consumers for two-way communication, not only to connect with their friends and family but increasingly to connect with brands. This gives rise to a need for research enabling us to better understand consumers’ motives for engaging in social media communication, exploring why people like fanpages and write comments and posts on social media sites. Research is also needed to examine the various opportunities brands have to understand and possibly influence consumers’ behavior and actions. Much of the existing research has focused on understanding the impact of social media usage on consumer buying behavior (Nash, 2018; Hollebeek & Solem, 2017; Naylor & Lamberton, West, 2012; Erkan & Evans, 2016a; Gunawan& Huarng, 2015; Park, Lee& Han, 2007) with a particular emphasis on eWOM (Chu & Choi, 2011, Erkan & Evans, 2016b; Wolny & Mueller, 2013; Wang, Yu & Wei, 2012). While it is undoubtedly useful for brands to know this, it should be of interest to both academics and practitioners to gain a better understanding of what motivates consumers to engage in communication activities on social networks, and how brands can encourage or discourage such behaviors, which may later lead to purchase.

Social media platforms are nowadays one of the most important communication channels utilized by clothing brands (Bruhn, Schoenmueller & Schafer, 2012; Mangold & Faulds, 2009). This is primarily due to their popularity, the possibility of two-way communication (interacting directly with customers) and the ability to communicate using visual content. The last factor is particularly important for the fashion industry. It has been said that social media has become the most important runway for the fashion industry (Apparel Industry, 2010). The power and influence of social media on fashion industry is undoubted (Ahmad, Salman & Ashiq, 2015). Social media has become one of the most popular tools which creates a link between fashion brand and the consumer. This link not only gives a boost to purchase intentions but also increases two-way communication (Thackeray et al., 2008; Sashi, 2012). Social media platforms are also very valuable tools for consumers. Customers from the clothing industry use social media in their purchase process in several ways. They observe, add clothing brand profiles to friends, gather information about products, look for discounts and information about new collections and trends (Rajapaksha & Dk, 2019). They treat social media as a source of information and recommendations on clothing products (Chu & Kim, 2011). Opinions of other people and other consumers published in social media are one of the most important sources of information about clothing products.

Social media are particularly important in the context of young consumers belonging to „Generation Z” — the digital generation that lives simultaneously online and offline, spending about 4 hours daily online, mostly on social media platforms (Stachowiak-Krzyżan& Ankiel, 2019; Nask, 2019). Generation Z is one of the most numerous and active groups of social media users, they are called 'digital era leaders’ (Berg, 2017). Young people belong to the target group of many clothing brands in the fast-fashion segment. The fast-fashion phenomenon has revolutionized the clothing industry over the past decade (Gabrielli, Baghi& Codeluppi, 2013). Fast-fashion consumption is predicated on a desire for instant gratification and affordable items with short product life cycle (McNeill & Venter, 2018). Research suggests that this phenomenon is particularly salient amongst young female consumers, who have little awareness of the social impact of their fashion consumption, but exhibit the highest levels of demand for new fashion products (Morgan & Birtwistle, 2009). Young people through their outfit express meanings about oneself and create an identity (McNeill & Moore, 2015). Fashion is psychologically central to teenagers in their self-evaluation and fashion facilitates social inclusion and avoidance of bullying and self-confidence (Isaksen & Roper, 2012). For young people personal appearance and body image are crucial (Ceballos & Bejarano, 2018; Jurgensen & Guesalaga, 2017). Young consumers demonstrate a desire to keep abreast of the latest product and brand trends. Generation Z have noteworthy purchasing power (Su & Tong, 2018; Parker, Hermans & Schaefer, 2004). Their purchasing decisions regarding clothing are often influenced by influencers or idols (Majkrzak & Salerno-Kochan, 2016).

The purpose of this article is to analyze consumers’ interactions with fast-fashion brands on social networking platforms, focusing on consumers’ motives for engagement in fashion brands communication activities realized in social media such as Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest and Youtube. We use Principle Component Analysis to identify the critical factors determining the involvement of Polish representatives of Generation Z in clothing brand profiles, the main assumptions held by the survey participants regarding the clothing brands’ motives for being present and active on social media platforms, the types of the „best” social media activities conducted by clothing brand.

Conceptual background

Consumer involvement in fashion

The starting point for the development of the concept of customer engagement was the concept of relationship marketing, based on satisfaction and loyalty and building long-term relationships (Baird & Parasnis, 2011; Sashi 2012). Consumer involvement is perceived as consumer activity in relation to the company (Kumar et al., 2010; Brodie et al., 2011; Vivek, Beatty, Morgan 2012). If the consumer’s relationship with the given company is satisfying and based on emotional ties, this leads to the higher level: consumer commitment. The roots of the concept of consumer involvement should be sought in the psychology and theory of organizational behavior (Hollebeek, 2011; Brodie et al., 2013).

Consumer involvement is a multi-dimensional concept. Most often, in the literature, it is presented as a measure of the company’s activity (Kumar et al., 2010; Brodie et al., 2011; Vivek, Beatty & Morgan, 2012). Customer activity is considered in terms of purchases made, incentives directed to the customer, customer conversations about the brand (e.g. in social media) and feedback from the consumer to the company, containing suggestions for changes, in order to improve the level of services provided or product improvement (Zomerdijk, Voss 2010).

Kumar and Pansai (2017) see consumer involvement as a mechanism of influence in the process of creating added value for the company by the customer via his or her direct or indirect participation. Direct participation of the consumer in the creation of added value for the company consists of purchases made by customers, while indirect participation consists of recommendations, consumer conversations about the brand as well as customer feedback and suggestions for the company.

Fashion involvement may be understood as an attachment between consumer and fashion clothing or a relationship between consumer and brand (Su & Tong 2018). Fashion clothing is commonly considered a highinvolvement product category (Su & Tong, 2018; Naderi, 2013; Vieria, 2009; O’Cass, 2004), because of its symbolic, expressive or emotional meaning (Miller-Spillman, Reilly, Hunt-Hurst, 2012; O’Cass, 2000).

Fashion involvement refers to the extent of interest in fashion products and the amount of time, money, and attention spent on fashion products (Park, Kim & Forney, 2006). Fashion involvement can be defined by the combined impact of several important fashion-related behaviors: fashion innovativeness and time of purchase, fashion interpersonal communication, fashion interest, fashion knowledgeability, fashion awareness and reacting to changing fashion trends (Tiger, Ring & King, 1976). Fashion involvement is stronger when a product can satisfy valuable utilitarian and hedonic goals, and generate interest, enthusiasm and excitement (Khare, Mishra & Parveen, 2012). Research has shown that consumers differ in their level of involvement in fashion consumption, with younger consumers exhibiting a higher level of fashion involvement than older consumers (O’Cass, 2004). This causes them to perceive fashion consumption as highly substantial to their self-worth; moreover, they are often fashion innovators or opinion leaders among their peers (O’Cass, 2000; Ogle, Hyllegard & Yan, 2014).

Social media as a tool to engage consumers

Social media is defined as a group of online and offline applications that allow for the exchange of user-generated content including the exchange of knowledge and opinions (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). There is a variety of such online information-sharing social media platforms, including social networking platforms (e.g. Facebook), content-sharing platforms (e.g. YouTube, Instagram, Pinterest, Tik-Tok), collaborative websites (e.g. Wikipedia) and microblogging platforms (e.g. Twitter, Tumblr) (Yannopoulou at al., 2019). Nowadays, almost every single company promotes its products or services on social media in some way.

Facebook brand pages have become one of the first channels through which consumers are able to interact with brands in a direct way, by liking, sharing or commenting on brands’ posts and messages (Machado, Antunes & Miranda, 2018). With the emergence of new social networking platforms (e.g. Youtube, Instagram, Pinterest, Tik-Tok, Snapchat and others), their importance in the context of building customer engagement grew (Niyonkomezi & Kwamboka, 2020; Weitz & Einwiller, 2018;

Miranda, Antunes & Machado, 2016). The like, share and comment features of social media allow anyone to easily interact with a brand. A single brand post can receive thousands of comments from social media sites users all over the world who interact with the brand and other users, providing a platform for dialogue from which information and feedback can be easily obtained. Social-media-using consumers can increasingly integrate and act as co-creators of brand messages. They have a great opportunity to engage and actively participate in communication on the brand’s pages on social media. These actions strengthen consumers’ ties with brands, turning them into committed fans (Niyonkomezi & Kwamboka, 2020).

More and more research is being done in the context of consumer engagement in social media. Previous studies in the field of customer engagement in brand communities have focused mostly on the consequences of engagement, including concepts of satisfaction (Bowden 2009), commitment and emotional attachment to the brand (Chan & Li, 2010), empowerment (Cova & Pace, 2006; Fuller et al., 2009), consumer value (Gruen et al., 2006; Schau et al., 2009), trust (Casalo et al., 2007; Hollebeek, 2011) and loyalty (Andersen, 2005; Casalo et al., 2007). Currently, various measures are used to explore and gauge consumer engagement. Most often, researchers use the likes, shares and comments index (Vries, Gensler & Leeflang, 2012; Cvijiki & Michahelles, 2013).

The main aim of this study, therefore, was to identify the role and importance of content published on social media platforms on the purchasing decisions made by young consumers (Generation Z) in the fastfashion clothing market in Poland. More specifically, we set out to study the activity of Generation Z in social media in the context of decisions to purchase clothing, in particular:

• what activity representatives of Generation Z display on the profiles of clothing brands in social media;
• key determinants of Generation Z’s involvement in the profiles of clothing brands in social media;
• key assumptions held by Generation Z representatives regarding the presence of clothing brands in social media.

Study and methods

We empirically examined the behavior of young consumers of Generation Z in the context of their use of social media in making purchasing decisions in the fast-fashion market in Poland, using the facetoface interview method, in the period from June 2017 to January 2018. After an initial assessment, 1,000 correctly completed questionnaires were accepted for further analysis. The research tool was an interview questionnaire prepared and verified in piloting. The measuring instrument consisted of 24 questions, including 6 demographic questions. The survey was anonymous and primarily consisted of closed-end, matrix and ranking questions. In addition, the interview questionnaire contained questions requesting information about the responders’ demographic, economic and social characteristics (including sex, age, place of residence, material status, education). The survey was conducted among consumers who declared that they systematically purchase fast-fashion products. The detailed breakdown of the research sample is presented in Table 1.

Nominal and ordinal scales were used in the questionnaire, including the Likert scale, i.e. a bipolar interval scale. The nominal scales were multiple and single choice. The reliability of the construction of the questionnaire was verified by the Alpha-Cronbach test (the coefficient alpha oscillated between 0.7–0.9). In the process of empirical data analysis, the IBM SPSS Statistics tool was used to analyze the results in terms of statistical description, correlation analysis, and factor analysis.

Result and discussion

Activity of Generation Z on the profiles of clothing brands in social media

One of the goals of the study was to identify the activity of Generation Z on the profiles of clothing brands in social media. The vast majority of the surveyed consumers of Generation Z in Poland are active in social media on the profiles of clothing brands in the fast-fashion segment. Detailed results of the study in this area are presented in Table 2 and 3 and in Figure 1.

As Table 2 shows, half of the respondents declared that they „liked” (or, depending on the nomenclature of the specific platform, that they „observed”/”subscribed to” their friends) from 6 to 10 profiles of clothing brands on various social networks. Every fourth respondent was not able to indicate or did not remember how many such profiles they liked. Taking into account gender, it turns out that women like more of such profiles than men. This may be due to the fact that women are usually more interested in fashion and trends, which are topics of interest, passions and hobbies for many women. In addition, there are more clothing brands on the market that offer women’s fashion than those with products intended for men, and therefore women have a wider range of brands that they may like.

Another interesting research issue is what motives drive the representatives of Generation Z in Poland when using profiles of clothing brands in social media.

Among the most important reasons why respondents click like on the fanpage of a clothing brand or follow it on Instagram or subscribe on YouTube, the following can be distinguished: eagerness to use a discount coupon ( = 3.4), which is usually only available to fans or friends of a given brands, the desire to be up to date, follow the offerings of a given clothing brand ( = 3.28) and, importantly, becoming a fan of a clothing brand is a reaction to respondents’ satisfaction with the purchased clothing products of a given brand ( = 3.18). The least important factors included a desire to participate in the discussion ( = 2.04) and to express an opinion about a clothing brand or its products ( = 2.4). This means that young people are more likely to draw upon the opinions of other people, read their recommendations regarding specific products, and at the same time are not eager to publicly express their own reflections and experiences.

In general, women are more active on clothing brand profiles than men. Women contact clothing brands much more often and more eagerly through private messages, in which they may be looking for support from the service department, information about products, the materials used, their availability, etc. Perhaps when choosing this form of contact, women do not want to make their activities, opinions or purchasing decisions public, they do not want any of their friends to notice their activity. On the other hand, as the survey results show, men are more likely to make public their opinions about clothing products and to interact with other users of social networking sites. Women’s activity is less „public” and visible.

The critical factors determining the involvement of the Z generation in clothing brand profiles

In order to identify the key determinants of survey participants’ involvement in the profiles of clothing brands in social media, factor analysis was used. In accordance with the procedure for verifying the correctness of the application of this method, Bartlett sphericity tests were carried out and the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin index was calculated (Table 4).

The obtained KMO value is 0.679, which indicates that the sampling was adequate for using exploratory factor analysis (it can be assumed that in this case the level of correlation between the factors is high).

Factor analysis was conducted using the method of Principal Component Analysis. Based on Cattell’s scree test (a scree plot), three groups of factors were created. Then, adopting a factor loading level of 0.5 as a cut-off point, all the factors were assigned into specific groups (Table 3). The three factors combined explain nearly 57% of common variance: the first one explains 29%, the second 15% and the third 13%.

The results of factor analysis shown in Table 5 allow us to identify the following key determinants of young consumers’ involvement in the profiles of clothing brands in social media:

Factor 1: active involvement in the clothing brand profile (the opportunity to express one’s opinion, the opportunity to participate in the contests, the possibility of systematic tracking of the clothing brand’s offerings);

Factor 2: observation for measurable benefits (possibility of obtaining a discount, searching for information on clothing brands);

Factor 3: brand loyalty (the opportunity to participate in the discussion, attachment to a clothing brand).

In summary, for young consumers, the main reasons for liking clothing brand profiles is the desire to be actively involved in the clothing brand profile. Secondly, young consumers are involved in clothing brand profiles because they see additional benefits, e.g. discount coupons. Thirdly, young consumers are involved in clothing brand profiles to show their loyalty to the clothing brand, which may be the result of positive experiences with the clothing product.

The critical factors determining assumptions about clothing brands’ motives for their social media presence and activity

Another research goal was to identify the key assumptions held by the Generation Z representatives participating in the survey about the clothing brands’ motives for being present and active in social media. For this, we again used factor analysis. The procedure was the same as described in section 3.2. First, the results were subjected to Bartlett’s sphericity test and the KMO (Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin) measure was calculated. Again, both the obtained measurements confirmed the adequacy of the sample for performing factor analysis (Table 6).

Then the analysis was again conducted using the method of Principal Component Analysis. Based on Cattell’s scree test (a scree plot), two groups of factors were created. Then, adopting a factor loading level of 0.5 as a cut-off point, all the factors were assigned into specific groups (Table 7). The two factors combined explain nearly 52% of common variance: the first one explains 34% and the second 18%.

The results of factor analysis included in Table 7 allow to identify the following key factors underlying participants’ assumptions about clothing brands’ motives for their social media presence and activity:

• Factor 1: image/sales goals (working to ensure the brand image, boosting product sales, acquiring new customers);
• Factor 2: cognitive goals (imitating/following the competition, obtaining information about clients, looking for new employees).

In the opinion of young consumers surveyed, the main motives assumed to be driving the presence of fast-fashion clothing brands in social media are image and sales goals, i.e. striving to improve sales results, to attract new customers or to care for and project the brand image. The second important type of assumed motive are cognitive goals, manifested in the desire to look for employees or obtain information about their clients.

The critical factors determining the best clothing brand activities in social media

The last goal was to identify factors which determine the best clothing brand activities in social media. Once again, the procedure was the same as described in section 3.2 and 3.3. Firstly, Bartlett’s sphericity test and the KMO (Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin) measure were calculated. Again, both measurements confirmed the sampling adequacy for performing factor analysis (Table 8).

Next, Principal Component Analysis was applied. Based on Cattell’s scree test (a scree plot), two groups of factors were created. Then, adopting a factor loading level of 0.5 as a cut-off point, all the factors were assigned into specific groups (Table 9). The two factors combined explain nearly 46% of common variance: the first one explains 28%, the second 18%.

The results of the factor analysis listed in Table 9 identify the following key determinants behind the presence and activity of clothing brands:

• Factor 1: entertainment activities (posting information from the clothing industry, conducting contests, providing games and applications);
• Factor 2: information activities (announcing new clothing collections and new products in the assortment, announcing special offers
  (discounts, sales, coupons), publishing photos and video materials about products and clothing brand).

For young consumers, the most interesting activities undertaken by clothing brands in social media are entertainment activities, including conducting contests and providing games and applications. The second group of valuable activities are information activities, consisting in providing information about new clothing collections as well as special offers and sales.

Conclusions

Social media platforms are a key channel of marketing communication for clothing companies from the fast-fashion segment, in the process of the purchasing decisions made by young consumers. Research has shown that social media platforms are used by young consumers at different stages of the decision-making process. They not only generate needs, but also constitute a valuable source of inspiration at the stage of searching for opportunities to satisfy a need. Our results indicate that women add more clothing brand profiles to their lists of friends than men do. In addition, women are more active on the profiles of clothing brands in social media, are more likely to make use of discount coupons, more often like and comment on published content and share it, take part in contests, add posts with inquiries and send private messages. In turn, men are more likely to express their opinion about products and enter into discussions with other users of social media. Gender also differentiates the opinions of the respondents towards the profiles of clothing brands in social media. Women, despite the fact that they treat these profiles as another advertising medium, evaluate them positively, as useful and interesting. Social media platforms alter the roles of buyers and sellers and the relationships between them.

The use of social media allows fans to connect and interact with other users, increasing mutual satisfaction and advocacy for brands. Seeking insight into customers’ involvement, our study analyzed the influencing factors in terms of Generation Z’s involvement on the social media profiles of fashion brands. From the point of view of companies in the clothing industry, customer engagement turns customers into fans. They become brand ambassadors, more attractive, more profitable and regular customers. Customers play an important role in the value-adding process as co-creators of content and value. Customer involvement is essential to brands for retaining them and turning them into loyal customers. On the other hand, from the point of view of customers, their commitment displayed in social media can be the result of several reasons: personal motives, a desire to achieve additional benefits and as an expression of loyalty to a fashion brand.

The results of this study may serve as a valuable source of information for brand managers who are responsible for designing and implementing brand communication activities in social media. The findings may help fashion brands to better understand how to influence peer-to-peer communications and how to engage their fans on social media. Moreover, the results of this study may lay the foundation for developing a strategy to increase customer satisfaction. Marketers should continually strive to learn more about what representatives of Generation Z — both in Poland and elsewhere — expect and what content they desire.

Limitations and future research directions

This study has several limitations. Firstly, the sample is limited. The results cannot be generalized to Polish consumers overall, due to the study population being limited to young people. Although this particular group of consumers is playing an important role in the clothing market, the results do not provide a comprehensive description of consumer engagement. Therefore, further research should also be carried out to include other consumer groups and other generations.

Secondly, the test results cannot be generalized to all clothing brands on the market from various segments. The survey covered the fast-fashion clothing segment, a segment which has its own distinctive traits. For this reason, the survey results should not be generalized to other segments of the clothing market.

It should also be noted that the study reported herein only considered selected social media sites popular in the clothing industry, which are often used by young people in Poland (Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, Youtube and Pinterest). It would be interesting to continue the study, examining the communication activities of clothing brands on individual, specific social networking sites, taking into account their distinctive aspects, which would allow better insight to be gained into consumer involvement. Moreover, it would be very interesting to conduct a similar study considering the Covid-19 pandemic and its impact on consumer behavior.

References

1. Ahmad, N. Salman, A., & Ashiq, R. (2015). The impact of social media on fashion industry: Empirical investigation from Karachiites. Journal of Resources Development and Management 7, 1–7.
2. Andersen, P. H. (2005). Relationship marketing and brand involvement of professionals through web-enhanced brand communities: The case of Coloplast. Industrial Marketing Management, 34(1), 39–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2004.07.002
3. Apparel Magazine. (2010). How social media is revolutionizing the apparel industry: One message at a time. Apparel Magazine, 52(4), 1–6.
4. Baird, C. H., & Parasnis, G. (2011). From social media to social customer relationship management. Strategy and Leadership, 39(5). DOI: 10.1108/10878571111161507
5. Berg, L. (2017). Young consumers in the digital era: The selfie effect. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 42, 379–388. DOI: 10.1111/ijcs.12431
6. Bowden, J. L. H. (2009). The process of customer engagement: A conceptual framework.
   Journal of Marketing Theory and Practise, 17(1), 63–74. DOI: 10.2753/MTP10696679170105
7. Brodie, R. J., Hollebeek, L. D., Jurić, B., & Ilić, A. (2011). Customer engagement: Conceptual domain, fundamental propositions, and implications for research. Journal of Service Research, 17(3), 1–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670511411703
8. Brodie, R. J., Ilić, A., Jurić, B., & Hollebeek, L. D. (2013). Consumer engagement in a virtual brand community: An exploratory analysis. Journal of Business Research, 66(1), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.07.029
9. Bruhn, M., Schoenmueller, V., & Schafer, D. B. (2012). Are social media replacing traditional media in terms of brand equity creation? Management Research Review, 35(9), 770–790. DOI: 10.1108/01409171211255948
10. Casalo, L., Flavian, C., & Guinaliu, M. (2007). The impact of participation in virtual brand communities on consumer trust and loyalty: The case of free software. Online Information Review, 31(6), 775–792. DOI: 10.1108/14684520710841766
11. Ceballos, L. M., & Bejarano, M. (2018). Value segmentation of adolescents: A performance of appearance. International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, 11(2), 148–159. DOI: 10.1080/17543266.2017.1352039
12. Chan, K. W., & Li, S. Y. (2010). Understanding consumer-to-consumer interactions in virtual communities: The salience of reciprocity. Journal of Business Research, 63, 1033–1040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.08.009
13. Chu, S. C., & Choi, S. M. (2011). Electronic word-of-mouth in social networking sites: A cross-cultural study of the United States and China. Journal of Global Marketing, 24(3), 263–281. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08911762.2011.592461
14. Chu, S., Kim, Y. (2011). Determinants of consumer engagement in electronic. International Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 47–75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2501/IJA-30-1-047-075
15. Cova, B., & Pace, S. (2006). Brand community of convenience products: New forms of customer empowerment-the case „My Nutella the Community”. European Journal of Marketing, 40(9/10), 1087–1105. DOI: 10.1108/03090560610681023
16. Cvijikj, I. P., & Michahelles, F. (2013). Online engagement factors on Facebook brand pages.
    Social Network Analysis and Mining, 3(4), 843–861. DOI: 10.1007/s13278-013-0098-8
17. Erkan, I., & Evans, C. (2016a). Social media or shopping websites? The influence of eWOM on consumers’ online purchase intentions. Journal of Marketing Communications 24(6), 1–17. DOI: 10.1080/13527266.2016.1184706
18. Erkan, I., & Evans, C. (2016b). The influence of eWOM in social media on consumers’ purchase intentions: An extended approach to information adoption. Computers in Human Behaviour 61, 47–55. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.003
19. Fuller, J., Muhlbacher, H., Matzler, K., & Jawecki, G. (2009). Consumer empowerment through Internet-based co-creation. Journal of Management Information Systems, 26(3),71–102. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222260303
20. Gabrielli, V., Baghi, I., & Codeluppi, V. (2013). Consumption practices of fast fashion products: A consumer-based approach. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 17(2), 206–224. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMM-10-2011-0076
21. Gruen, T. W., Osmonbekov, T., & Czaplewski, A. J. (2006). EWOM: The impact of customer-to-customer online know-how exchange on customer value and loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 59(4), 449–456. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jbusres.2005.10.004
22. Gunawan, D.D., & Huarng, K. H. (2015). Viral effects of social network and media on consumers’ purchase intention. Journal of Business Research, 68(11), 2237–2241. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.06.004
23. Hollebeek, L. D. (2011). Demystifying customer brand engagement: Exploring the loyalty nexus. Journal of Marketing Management, 27(7/8), 785–807. DOI:
    10.1080/0267257X.2010.500132
24. Hollebeek, L. D., & Solem, B. A. (2017). The consumer engagement/return on social media engagement interface: Development of a conceptual model. In Bikramjit Rishi, & Subir Bandyopadhyay (eds.), Contemporary Issues in Social Media Marketing, (pp.
    132–148). DOI: 10.4324/9781315563312
25. Isaksen, K. J., & Roper, S. (2012). The commodification of self-esteem: Branding and British teenagers. Psychology & Marketing, 29(3), 117–135. DOI: 10.1002/mar.20509
26. Jurgensen, K, & Guesalaga, R. (2017). Young consumers’ innovativeness in apparel choices: A model including consumer self-confidence. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 42, 255–263. DOI: 10.1111/ijcs.12414
27. Kaplan, A. M., Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68. DOI:.org/10.1016/ j.bushor.2009.09.003
28. Khare, A., Mishra, A., & Parveen, C. (2012). Influence of collective self esteem on fashion clothing involvement among Indian women. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 16(1), 42–63. DOI: https ://doi.org/10.1108/13612 02121 1203023
29. Kumar, V., Aksoy, L., Donkers, B., Venkatesan, R., Wiesel, T., & Tillmanns, S. (2010). Undervalued or overvalued customers: Capturing total customer engagement value. Journal of Service Research, 13(3), 297–310. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670510375602
30. Kumar, V., & Pansari, A. (2017). Customer engagement: The construct, antecedents, and consequences. Journal of the Academic Marketing Science, 45(3). DOI: 10.1007/s11747-016-0485-6
31. Machado, A., Antunes, A. C., & Miranda, S. L. (2018). Consumer engagement: The amplifying effect of comments. Conference Papers: 5th European Conference on Social Media — ECSM 2018 at Limerick, Ireland.
32. Majkrzak, A. X., & Salerno-Kochan, R. (2016). The perception of apparel quality in the aspect of young consumers’ buying behaviors. Part 1. Towaroznawcze Problemy Jakości, 3(48), 22–30.
33. Mangold, W. G., & Faulds, D. J. (2009). Social media: The new hybrid element of the promotion mix. Business Horizons, 50(4), 357–365. DOI: https://doi.org/
    10.1016/j.bushor.2009.03.002
34. McNeill, L., & Moore, R. (2015). Sustainable fashion consumption and the fast fashion conundrum: Fashionable consumers and attitudes to sustainability in clothing choice.
    International Journal of Consumer Studies, 39, 212–222. DOI: 10.1111/ijcs.12169
35. McNeill, L., & Venter, B. (2018). Identity, self-concept and young women’s engagement with collaborative, sustainable fashion consumption models. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 43, 368–378. DOI: 10.1111/ijcs.12516
36. Miller-Spillman, K. A., Reilly, A., & Hunt-Hurst, P. (2012). The meanings of dress. New York, Fairchild Publications.
37. Miranda, S. L., Antunes, A. C., & Machado, A. (2016). Looking beneath the surface: How brands led to consumer engagement in Social Media. Conference Papers: 22nd IAMB Conference.
38. Morgan, L.R., & Birtwistle, G. (2009). An investigation of young fashion consumers’
    disposal habits. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33, 190–198. DOI: 10.1111/ j.1470-6431.2009.00756.x
39. Naderi, I. (2013). Beyond the fad: A critical review of consumer fashion involvement.
    International Journal of Consumer Studies, 37(1), 84–104. DOI: https ://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2011.01041.x
40. Nash, J. (2018). Exploring how social media platforms influence fashion consumer decisions in the UK retail sector. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management 23(1), 82–103. DOI: 10.1108/JFMM-01-2018-0012
41. Nask. (2019). Raport z badań „Nastolatki 3.0”. Warszawa: Państwowy Instytut Badawczy.
42. Naylor, R. W., Lamberton, C. P., & West, P. M. (2012). Beyond the „like” button: The impact of mere virtual presence on brand evaluations and purchase intentions in social media settings. Journal of Marketing, 76(6), 105–120. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1509/jm.11.0105
43. Niyonkomezi, J., & Kwamboka, J. (2020). Effect of brand communities on consumer engagement and trust. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science, 9(4), 244–252. DOI: 10.20525/ijrbs.v9i4.719
44. O’Cass, A. (2000). An assessment of consumers product, purchase decision, advertising and consumption involvement in fashion clothing. Journal of Economic Psychology, 21(5), 545–576. DOI: https ://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(00)00018-0
45. O’Cass, A. (2004). Fashion clothing consumption: Antecedents and consequences of fashion clothing involvement. European Journal of Marketing, 38(7), 869–882. DOI: https ://doi.org/10.1108/03090 560410539294
46. Ogle, J. P., Hyllegard, K. H., & Yan, R. N. (2014). An investigation of mothers’ and tween daughters’ clothing preferences and purchase intentions toward a prosocial clothing company. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 18(1), 70–84. DOI: https ://doi.org/10.1108/JFMM-09-2012-0060
47. Park, E. J., Kim, E. Y., & Forney, J. C. (2006). A structural model of fashion-oriented impulse buying behavior. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 10, 433–446.
48. Park, D. H., Lee, J., & Han, I. (2007). The effect of on-line consumer reviews on consumer purchasing intention: The moderating role of involvement. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 11(4), 125–148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2753/JEC10864415110405
49. Parker, R. S., Hermans, Ch. M., & Schaefer, A. D. (2004). Fashion consciousness of Chinese, Japanese and American teenagers. Journal of Fashion Marketing and
    Management, 8(2), 176–186. https://doi.org/10.1108/13612020410537870
50. Rajapaksha, L. B., & Dk, T. (2019). The Influence of Facebook brand page on consumer purchase intention with reference to fashion retailing industry. Sri Lanka Journal of Marketing, 5(1), 55–101.
51. Sashi, C. (2012). Customer engagement, buyer-seller relationships, and social media.
    Management Decision, 50(2), 253–272. DOI: 10.1108/00251741211203551
52. Schau, H. J., Muniz A. M., & Arnould, E.J. (2009). How brand community practices create value. Journal of Marketing, 73:30–51. DOI: 10.1509/jmkg.73.5.30
53. Stachowiak-Krzyżan, M., & Ankiel, M. (2019). Behaviours of young consumers in a virtual environment on the example of the fashion industry. Annales Universitatis Mariae CurieSkłodowska, Sectio H Oeconomia 53(1), 89–97. DOI:10.17951/h.2019.53.1.89-97
54. Su, J. Tong, X. (2018). An empirical study on Chinese adolescents’ fashion involvement. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 44, 232–242. DOI: 10.1111/ijcs.12564
55. Thackeray, R., Neiger, B., Hanson, C., & McKenzie, J. (2008). Enhancing promotional strategies within social marketing programs: Use of Web 2.0 social media. Health Promotion Practice, 9(4), 338–343. DOI: 10.1177/1524839908325335
56. Tiger, D. J., Ring, L. J., & King, C.W. (1976). Fashion involvement and buying behavior: A methodological study. Advances in Consumer Research, 03, 46–52.
57. Vieria, V. A. (2009). An extended theoretical model of fashion clothing involvement.
    Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 13(2),179–200. DOI: 10.1108/
    13612020910957707
58. Vivek, S. D., Beatty, S. E., & Morgan, R. M. (2012). Customer engagement: Exploring customer relationships beyond purchase. The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 20(2), 127–145. DOI: 10.2753/MTP1069-6679200201
59. Vries, L. J., Gensler, S., & Leeflang, P. (2012). Popularity of brand posts on brand fan pages: An investigation of the effects of social media marketing. Journal of Interactive Marketing 26(2), 83–91. DOI: 10.1016/j.intmar.2012.01.003
60. Wang, X., Yu, C., & Wei, Y. (2012). Social media peer communication and impacts on purchase intentions: A consumer socialization framework. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(4), 198–208. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2011.11.004
61. Weitzl, W. J., & Einwiller, S. (2018). Consumer engagement in the digital era. In K. A. Johnston, & M. Taylor (eds.), The handbook of communication engagement (pp. 453–473). DOI: 10.1002/9781119167600.ch31.
62. Wolny, J., & Mueller, C. (2013). Analysis of fashion consumers’ motives to engage in electronic word-of-mouth communication through social media platforms. Journal of Marketing Management, 29(5–6), 562–583. DOI:10.1080/0267257X.2013.778324
63. Yannopoulou, N., Liu, M. J., Bian, X., & Heath, T. (2019). Exploring social change through social media: The case of the Facebook group Indignant Citizens. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 43(4), 348–357. DOI: 10.1111/ijcs.12514
64. Zomerdijk, L. G., & Voss, Ch. A. (2010). Service design for experience-centric services. Journal of Service Research, 13(1), 67–82. DOI: 10.1177/1094670509351960

Zmiany obserwowane w otoczeniu społeczno-gospodarczym kraju, globalizacja oraz dynamiczny rozwój nowoczesnych technologii w znacznym stopniu implikują zarówno działalność uczelni wyższych, jak również wpływają na zmiany zachowań i model decyzyjny kandydatów na studia (Michalak i Mruk-Tomczak, 2018). Atrakcyjna oferta edukacyjna, odpowiednio zakomunikowana przyszłym studentom, może stanowić o przewadze konkurencyjnej szkoły wyższej w zmiennym otoczeniu (Hall i Witek, 2016). Obecnie absolwenci szkół średnich — kandydaci na studia, należą do najmłodszego pokolenia, zwanego pokoleniem „Z” (Mruk-Tomczak, 2019). To pokolenie zostało wychowane w świecie wirtualnym.

Młodzi ludzie żyją jednocześnie online i offline. Stały i nieograniczony dostęp do Internetu powoduje, że stanowi on najważniejszy kanał komunikacji oraz źródło informacji o otaczającym ich świecie (Kucharski i Ligocka, 2012; Kubiak, 2017). Młode osoby stanowią jedną z najliczniejszych i najaktywniejszych grup różnych serwisów społecznościowych — np. Instagram, Snapchat, Tik-Tok.

Popularność portali społecznościowych w Polsce wciąż rośnie, coraz więcej organizacji podejmuje działania określane mianem social media marketing. Dotyczy to również uczelni wyższych, których sytuacja na rynku usług edukacyjnych zmusza do zachowań przedsiębiorczych (Koszembr-Wiklik, 2015; Pabian, 2016; Koszembar-Wiklik, 2018). Nasycenie rynku oraz malejąca liczba studentów wynikająca z niżu demograficznego, powodują, że uczelnie wyższe w coraz silniejszym stopniu muszą konkurować o przyszłych studentów. Stając przed wyborem uczelni wyższej, który to wybór w znacznym stopniu może zdeterminować rodzaj przyszłej pracy zawodowej, komunikacja w świecie wirtualnym, jest konieczna. Jednocześnie działalność polskich uczelni w mediach społecznościowych a także ich wpływ na wybory przyszłych studentów stanowi stosunkowo nowy i jednocześnie bardzo dynamiczny obszar badawczy. Co więcej zrealizowane do tej pory badania zagraniczne pokazują, że działania uczelni w mediach społecznościowych wpływają na wizerunek uczelni zwłaszcza wśród studentów — zgodnie z nimi kandydaci na studia przyznają, że obecność uczelni w mediach społecznościowych i informacje zamieszczane na ich oficjalnych profilach na Facebooku oraz sposób interakcji z użytkownikami miały wpływ na ostateczną decyzję o tym, którą uczelnię wybrali (Washenko, 2013). Na świecie powszechność wykorzystania mediów społecznościowych w działaniach komunikacyjnych uczelni wyższych jest dużo większa (Chan & DiValdi, 2018; Rutter, Roper & Lettice, 2016; Peruta, Helm & Benson, 2015; Hanover Research, 2014), ponadto tworzone są już rankingi uczelni oceniające ich działania w mediach społecznościowych (np. The Higher Ed Social Media Engagement Report 2019, The UK University Social Media Rankings) (Chwiałkowska, 2014).

Media społecznościowe, dzięki swojej różnorodności, dają uczelniom wyższym różne możliwości, począwszy od działań promocyjnych wśród potencjalnych kandydatów, jak również pełnienie funkcji podnoszenia prestiżu uczelni, informowanie zainteresowanych o planowanych wydarzeniach, zdawanie relacji z organizowanych przedsięwzięć, poszerzanie wiedzy w wybranej dziedzinie, umożliwianie kontaktu z obecnymi studentami oraz absolwentami, czy angażowania studentów w życie uczelni (Ryńca i Suporek, 2018).

Na potrzeby artykułu przeprowadzono studia literaturowe, analizę dostępnych źródeł internetowych oraz ilościowe badania własne z wykorzystaniem indywidualnego kwestionariusza wywiadu.

Przedmiotem artykułu jest przybliżenie roli mediów społecznościowych w procesie decyzyjnym kandydatów na studia. Celem niniejszego artykułu jest charakterystyka Pokolenia Z oraz jego aktywności w mediach społecznościowych, ponadto identyfikacja znaczenia mediów społecznościowych w procesach decyzyjnych dotyczących dalszego kształcenia w uczelniach wyższych przyszłych kandydatów na studia. Uzyskane w procesie badawczym wyniki pomocne będą w wypracowaniu zaleceń oraz rekomendacji dla osób zawodowo zajmujących się projektowaniem skutecznych działań marketingowych w mediach społecznościowych na rzecz szkół wyższych, w tym pracowników działów marketingowych instytucji naukowych. Rozważania prowadzone są na podstawie źródeł literaturowych, danych rynkowych oraz ilościowych badań własnych autorki.

Charakterystyka pokolenia Z

Nastolatkowie, absolwenci szkół ponadgimnazjalnych, zaliczani są obecnie do generacji Z (inaczej zwana także generacją C od słowa „connected”), czyli osób, które świetnie radzą sobie z Internetem, biegle korzystają ze smartfonów i dedykowanych aplikacji mobilnych. Mówiąc o pokoleniu Z w kwestii ram czasowych, wśród badaczy i socjologów brak jednoznacznej zgodności. Niektórzy przyjmują, że jest to kohorta, która rozpoczyna się po 1990 roku, inni z kolei za datę graniczną przyjmują rok 2000 (Kostyńska, 2019). Mimo tych rozbieżności bez wątpienia można stwierdzić, że jest to pokolenie osób, które różni się od swoich poprzedników. Osoby zaliczane do poszczególnych kohort dorastały w innych warunkach społecznych, gospodarczych czy technologicznych, były świadkami różnych przełomowych wydarzeń w kraju i na świecie (np. zmiany ustrojowe w Polsce, wejście Polski do Unii Europejskiej, atak terrorystyczny na World Trace Center itp.), które determinują istotne różnice międzypokoleniowe. Przejawią się one m.in. w posiadaniu odmiennych wartości, różnych perspektyw, innych wizji przyszłości i poglądów na rzeczywistość. Socjologowie na przestrzeni czasów wyróżnili 5 pokoleń, za główne kryterium przyjmując wiek: general generation, pokolenie baby boomers, pokolenie X, pokolenie Y i najmłodsze pokolenie Z. Należy dodać, że praktycznie w przypadku każdej generacji występują rozbieżności w zakresie dat określających przedział czasowy, w którym mieszczą się osoby reprezentujące pokolenie, dotyczą one zarówno górnej, jak i dolej granicy. Pokolenie general generation obejmuje wszystkie osoby urodzone przed 1946 rokiem, czyli przed końcem II wojny światowej. Pokolenie baby boomers, to osoby urodzenie w okresie wyżu demograficznego, lata 1946–1964. Pokolenie X często określane mianem stabilnego pokolenie to osoby urodzone w latach 1965–1981/6. Z kolei pokolenie Y to pokolenie Internetu, osób urodzonych w latach 1984 do 1995/2000. Najmłodsze pokolenie Z to generacja nowych technologii, do której zalicza się, jak już zostało wspomniane, osoby urodzone po 1990. Najistotniejsze różnice pomiędzy trzema najmłodszymi pokoleniami, tj. X, Y i Z zaprezentowano w tabeli 1.

Pokolenie Z w mediach społecznościowych

Młode osoby, jak już zostało wspomniane są uzależnione od swoich smartfonów. Młode osoby żyją równocześnie online i offline. Online jest codziennie niemalże każdy nastolatek w Polsce (96%), niezależnie od płci, wieku czy typu szkoły (CBOS, 2018; Nask, 2019, Pyżaski i inni, 2019). Internet wykorzystywany jest przede wszystkim w celach: rozrywkowych (słuchanie muzyki, oglądanie wideo, granie w gry), towarzyskich (poprzez komunikatory i serwisy społecznościowe) oraz edukacyjnych (odrabianie lekcji, przygotowanie do sprawdzianów i klasówek oraz poszerzanie wiedzy, rozwój hobby i zainteresowań). Według badań każdego dnia młodzi Polacy korzystają z Internetu średnio przez 4 godziny i 12 minut na dobę (Nask, 2019). Tak wiele czasu poświęcanego przestrzeni wirtualnej potęguje popularność zjawiska multiscreeningu, czyli korzystania z wielu ekranów jednocześnie. Oglądanie telewizji i jednoczesne korzystanie z telefonu czy komputera, to popularne zjawisko właśnie wśród przedstawicieli pokolenia Z. 55% osób poniżej 24 roku życia podczas oglądania telewizji sprawdza swoje portale społecznościowe (Grabiwoda, 2019).

Korzystanie z mediów społecznościowych to wśród nastolatków jeden z najpopularniejszych sposobów spędzania czasu w sieci. Młodzież korzysta z mediów społecznościowych regularnie, kilkukrotnie dziennie, poświęcając im niemałą część swojego dnia. Mówiąc o mediach społecznościowych w Polsce warto zwrócić uwagę na strukturę demograficzną ich użytkowników. W zdecydowanej większości portali najliczniejszą grupę wiekową stanowią osoby młode w przedziale wiekowym 16–24 lata, co potwierdzają poniższe statystyki (vide rys. 1,2,3). Nastolatkowie do łączenia się z siecią najczęściej wykorzystują smartfony (94%), laptopy (58%) oraz komputery stacjonarne (29%) (Nask, 2019).

Reprezentanci pokolenia Z wykorzystują media społecznościowe w bardzo wielu celach. Internet to dla nastolatków przestrzeń rozrywki i ośrodek życia społecznego, a także źródło wielu korzyści — od poszerzania wiedzy w określonej dziedzinie, po możliwość kreowania swojego wizerunku, czy poszukiwania tożsamości.

Rośnie rola mediów społecznościowych w procesie podejmowania decyzji o wyborze przyszłej ścieżki edukacji wśród młodych osób (Buchnowska i Woźniak, 2013). Media społecznościowe stają się obecnie jednym z najważniejszych źródeł informacji dla młodego pokolenia, w tym także informacji o uczelniach wyższych.

Działania komunikacyjne uczelni wyższych w mediach społecznościowych

Dostrzegając rosnącą rolę i znaczenie mediów społecznościowych uczelnie wyższe w Polsce nie pozostają wobec trendu obojętne. Coraz częściej w działaniach komunikacyjnych szkół wyższych istotną rolę odgrywają działania w poszczególnych portalach społecznościowych. Co więcej spadająca liczba studentów, rosnąca konkurencja między uczelniami powoduje, że obecnie to nie uczelnia wybiera sobie kandydatów, ale kandydaci dokonują selekcji i wyboru szkoły wyższej. Młodzi ludzie są w dzisiejszych czasach bardziej świadomi, gdyż mają dostęp do wielu informacji, które pozwalają im porównywać i oceniać interesujące ich kierunki i uczelnie, gotowych rankingów, których wiarygodność i znaczenie rośnie z roku na rok czy też wielu opinii aktualnych studentów i absolwentów.

W trakcie procesu decyzyjnego tak samo ważne są obecnie osobiste zainteresowania jak również oferta programowa, poziom nauczania oraz perspektywa dobrego zatrudnienia i wysokich zarobków po ukończeniu studiów oraz konkretnej szkoły wyższej.

Wykorzystanie mediów społecznościowych w komunikacji marketingowej przez uczelnie wyższe może być skuteczniejsze niż w przypadku wielu innych podmiotów gospodarczych ze względu na demografię, czyli tożsamy wiek i wykształcenie najliczniejszej grupy użytkowników mediów społecznościowych i kandydatów na studia oraz zmieniające się preferencje młodych ludzi dotyczące źródeł pozyskiwania informacji o ścieżce edukacji (Buchnowska, 2013).

W tabeli 2 zaprezentowano rodzaje serwisów społecznościowych wykorzystywane przez polskie uczelnie wyższe w swoich działaniach z zakresu komunikacji marketingowej.

Zdecydowana większość wykorzystywanych portali społecznościowych wspiera przede wszystkim działania marketingowe (social media marketing) związane z budową wizerunku organizacji, prezentacją jej oferty oraz pozyskiwaniem nowych klientów. Podstawą zaletą serwisów społecznościowych jest możliwość dwustronnej komunikacji z otoczeniem. Informacje przekazywane społecznościom zgromadzonym wokół uczelni wyższych w serwisach społecznościowych dotyczą przede wszystkim:

1. samej uczelni — jej historii, tradycji, misji;
2. prowadzonej oferty edukacyjnej — w tym: kierunków studiów i efektów kształcenia) oraz ważnych informacji o procesie rekrutacyjnym;
3. działalności pracowników i studentów — w tym zarówno działalności naukowej (otrzymanie grantów, patentów) jak i pozostałej, m. in charytatywnej czy działalności na rzecz lokalnej społeczności, itp;
4. sukcesów i osiągnięć uczelni (np. osiągnięte miejsce w rankingu uczelni wyższych), pracowników (np. zajmowanie ważnych stanowisk w Państwie), studentów (np. osiągnięcia sportowe, międzynarodowe konkursy) oraz absolwentów (zajmowanie ważnych stanowisk w znanych firmach);
5. ciekawych wydarzeń na uczelni i poza nią — organizowanych konferencji, wykładów otwartych, drzwi otwartych dla kandydatów, spotkań z ciekawymi ludźmi, praktykami biznesu czy wydarzeń kulturalno-edukacyjnych (np. noc naukowców);
6. ciekawostek i nowinek ze świata nauki.

Media społecznościowe jako źródło informacji o uczelniach wyższych dla kandydatów na studia

W celu identyfikacji roli i znaczenia treści publikowanych przez uczelnie wyższe w mediach społecznościowych na decyzje podejmowane przez kandydatów na studia zrealizowano proces badawczy. Badania kandydatów na studia — licealistów ukierunkowane były na rozpoznanie roli jaką pełnią działania z zakresu marketingu społecznościowego na decyzje podejmowane przez kandydatów na studia. W procesie badań empirycznych postawiono następujące cele badawcze:

1. Identyfikacja aktywności młodych osób — kandydatów na studia w mediach społecznościowych
2. Zidentyfikowanie źródeł informacji o uczelniach wyższych wśród kandydatów na studia
3. Zidentyfikowanie przydatności profili uczelni wyższych w mediach społecznościowych
4. Ocena profili uczelni wyższych w mediach społecznościowych przez kandydatów na studia

Zakres podmiotowy badań obejmował potencjalnych kandydatów na studentów, czyli osoby w przedziale wiekowym 15–18 lat, kształcące się w liceum ogólnokształcącym w mieście Gniezno. Wielkość próby badawczej wyniosła 187 respondentów 1 . Dobór respondentów był doborem celowym spośród uczniów klasy pierwszej, drugiej i trzeciej szkoły licealnej ogólnokształcącej. Zakres przestrzenny badań obejmował miasto Gniezno. Z kolei zakres przedmiotowy przeprowadzonych badań koncentrował się na działaniach komunikacyjnych uczelni wyższych w mediach społecznościowych. Uwagę skupiono na profilach polskich uczelni wyższych w najpopularniejszych serwisach społecznościowych, wśród nich znalazł się: Facebook, Instagram, Youtube i Snapchat. Wybór ten poparty został raportami wskazującymi te serwisy jako najczęściej wykorzystywane przez branżę edukacyjną do komunikacji marketingowej i realizacji strategii marketingu społecznościowego. Zakres czasowy badań obejmuje wrzesień 2019 roku.

W zrealizowanym badaniu o charakterze ilościowym wykorzystano technikę wywiadu kwestionariuszowego bezpośredniego przy wykorzystaniu instrumentu pomiarowego w postaci kwestionariusza ankietowego składającego się z 15 pytań.

Zdecydowaną większość respondentów stanowiły kobiety (74% ogółu badanych), pozostałą część — 26% mężczyźni. Ankietowani, biorący udział w badaniu to osoby młode, w przedziale wiekowym od 15 do 18 lat.

To osoby kształcące się w liceum, w klasach 1, 2 i 3 (dla części z nich jest to szkoła ponadgimnazjalna lub szkoła ponadpodstawowa). Szczegółowa charakterystyka struktury badanej grupy z uwzględnieniem płci, wieku, poziomu kształcenia oraz miejsca zamieszkania przedstawiona została w przypisie 2 .

Zdecydowana większość respondentów korzysta z najpopularniejszych serwisów społecznościowych bardzo często — kilka razy w ciągu dnia (vide rys. 4).

Najbardziej popularnym i najczęściej użytkowanym serwisem jest Youtube. Regularnie, co najmniej kilka razy w tygodniu korzysta z niego 95% ankietowanych. Z kolei odsetek osób nieposiadających konta jest niewielki — 1,1%.

Drugim najczęściej odwiedzanym przez ankietowanych portalem społecznościowym jest Facebook. Niemalże 90% badanych korzysta z tego serwisu regularnie (co najmniej kilka razy w tygodniu i częściej), a ponad 85% korzysta z niego kilka razy dziennie. Niewielki odsetek respondentów, zaledwie 3,7%, nie posiada konta na tym serwisie, w związku z czym z niego nie korzysta (co wynika z faktu, że większość portali społecznościowych wymaga posiadania konta dla korzystania z niego).

Instagram jest trzecim pod względem popularności i częstotliwości korzystania serwisem społecznościowym wśród młodych osób biorących udział w badaniu. W regularny sposób korzysta z niego 85% badanych. Z czego zdecydowana większość (niemalże 75% ogółu) korzysta z Instagrama kilka razy w ciągu dnia, udostępniając zdjęcia lub oglądając materiały udostępnione przez innych użytkowników. 11% respondentów nie użytkuje tego portalu wcale lub nie posiada na nim konta/profilu.

Istotne różnice można zaobserwować w przypadku serwisów Tik Tok, Twitter oraz LinkedIn. Są to najmniej popularne serwisy społecznościowe wśród reprezentantów Pokolenia Z, którzy wzięli udział w badaniu.

Zdecydowana większość ankietowanych nie korzysta z tych serwisów w ogóle (ponad 3 ankietowanych). Dziwić to może w przypadku serwisu Tik Tok, który według ostatnich badań mianowany został „najpopularniejszym” serwisem społecznościowym wśród młodych osób (Burtan, 2019).

W przypadku serwisu LinkedIn niewielkie zainteresowanie wynikać może z profilu tego serwisu, który specjalizuje się w kontaktach zawodowo-biznesowych, czyli obszaru życia, który dopiero młode osoby będą rozpoczynać za kilka lat, podejmując pierwsze prace zarobkowe.

Podsumowując korzystanie z serwisów społecznościowych jest poniekąd „codziennym rytuałem” dla młodych osób, które lubią i chcą być na bieżąco z informacjami dotyczącymi ich znajomych i otoczenia, w którym przebywają. Potwierdziły to wyniki realizowanych badań jak również studia literaturowe. Ponadto, media i serwisy społecznościowe dostarczają także wielu innych informacji, np. aktualnych wydarzeń z kraju i zagranicy, z którymi młode osoby chcą być na bieżąco. Dzięki urządzeniom mobilnym, które towarzyszą młodym osobom na każdym kroku częstotliwość korzystania z najpopularniejszych serwisów społecznościowych jest niezwykle wysoka.

Reprezentanci Pokolenia Z biorący udział w badaniu spędzają dziennie stosunkowo dużo czasu w Internecie korzystając z mediów społecznościowych (vide rys. 5). Jest to przede wszystkim zasługa urządzeń mobilnych (smartfonów oraz tabletów) z zainstalowanymi aplikacjami mobilnymi. Powoduje to, że osoby młode podczas każdej wolnej chwili np.: w szkole, w środkach lokomocji czy w kolejce sklepowej korzystają z serwisów społecznościowych. Ponad 1/3 ankietowanych przeznacza na ten cel ponad 3 godziny dziennie, a 37% respondentów około 2–3 godzin. Niemalże co piąty respondent w mediach społecznościowych spędza dziennie od 1 do 2 godzin. Wyniki te znajdują odzwierciedlenie w raportach badawczych dotyczących Internetu i internautów. Polski nastolatek dziennie spędza w sieci 4 godziny i 12 minut. Co piąty badany wskazał, że każdego dnia na aktywność w Internecie poświęca przynajmniej 6 godzin, tak wynika z raportu o Państwowego Instytutu Badawczego NASK (2019). Internet jest to przestrzeń, w której żyje dzisiejsza młodzież.

Zgodnie z danymi GUS (2018) 99% gospodarstw domowych z dziećmi posiada dostęp do Internetu. 90% młodych osób do codziennego łączenia się z siecią wykorzystuje smartfony (Nask, 2019). Urządzenia mobilne stają się coraz częściej jednym z głównych urządzeń do łącznia się z siecią internetową nie tylko wśród najmłodszych internautów. W 2018 roku liczba osób łączących się z Internetem za pośrednictwem mobile pierwszy raz była wyższa niż osób robiących to za pomocą komputera (IAB Polska, 2019).

Zdecydowana większość respondentów poszukiwała już informacji o uczelniach wyższych (vide rys. 6). Co piąty ankietowany tego nie robił.

Były to w większości osoby najmłodsze, uczęszczające do pierwszej klasy szkoły licealnej, które dopiero zakończyły proces rekrutacji do szkoły licealnej i najprawdopodobniej jeszcze nie myślały o swojej dalszej drodze edukacji po zakończeniu szkoły średniej.

Najczęściej wykorzystywanym przez reprezentantów Pokolenia Z biorących udział w badaniu źródłem informacji o uczelniach wyższych są źródła internetowe, w tym strony www uczelni wyższych (ponad 60% respondentów wykorzystuje je czasami lub często). Jest to zgodne z tym, co pokazują dostępne wyniki badań — obecnie dla Pokolenia Z najważniejszym źródłem informacji pozostaje Internet (Kucharski, Szopa i Halemba, 2017; Drapińska i Gołąb, 2009; Michalak i Mruk-Tomczak, 2018). Rodzina i znajomi stanowią kolejne, bardzo cenne i często wykorzystywane źródło informacji o uczelniach wyższych, ponad połowa ankietowanych czasami lub często z nich korzysta. Cennym źródłem informacji są także serwisy społecznościowe, fora dyskusyjne oraz osoby studiujące na danej uczelni. Źródła te charakteryzują się możliwością uzyskania jak najbardziej obiektywnych i rzetelnych informacji o uczelniach wyższych, często na podstawie wiarygodnych opinii osób mających bezpośredni kontakt i doświadczenie. Najmniej popularnym i wykorzystywanym źródłem informacji o uczelniach wyższych są gazety i czasopisma oraz organizowane regularnie targi edukacyjne, na których prezentują się uczelnie wyższe wraz ze swoją ofertą edukacyjną.

Opinia reprezentantów Pokolenia Z biorących udział w badaniu na temat profili uczelni wyższych w mediach społecznościowych jest dla ponad połowy z nich neutralna (52.4% wskazań). Jednocześnie spory odsetek ankietowanych uważa je za przydatne i bardzo interesujące (45,5% odpowiedzi). Dla co szóstego ankietowanego media społecznościowe, w tym profile/fanpage uczelni wyższych stanowią kolejny środek przekazów reklamowych. Niewielki odsetek respondentów uważa te profile za mało interesujące (4,3%), publikujące nieprzydatne informacje — spam (1,6%) lub mało angażujące treści (4,8%). Wyniki te wskazują, że media społecznościowe charakteryzuje duży potencjał komunikacyjny. Działania marketingowe w nich prowadzone nie są odbierane w sposób negatywny. Postawa pozytywną, którą zadeklarował prawie co drugi respondent, interpretować można jako pewnego rodzaju zaproszenie ze strony młodych osób do rozmowy z uczelniami wyższymi za pośrednictwem tego kanału komunikacyjnego.

Reprezentanci Pokolenia Z biorący udział w badaniu empirycznym jako najatrakcyjniejsze aktywności podejmowane przez uczelnie wyższe w mediach społecznościowych wskazali informacje związane z procesem rekrutacyjnym, między innymi terminy czy zasady przyjęć (vide rys. 9).

Następnie ankietowani wskazali informacje o aktualnych wydarzeniach związanych z życiem uczelni oraz informacje o akcjach specjalnych, w które uczelnia jest czynnie zaangażowana lub które wspiera i promuje. Najmniej atrakcyjne w opinii respondentów są aktywności w postaci udostępnianych aplikacji oraz przeprowadzane na profilach uczelni wyższych konkursy. Jednocześnie należy pamiętać, że kandydaci na studia to tylko jedna z kilku grup odbiorców przekazów komunikacyjnych w związku z tym istotne jest rozpoznanie najatrakcyjniejszych aktywności w pozostałych grupach i na tej podstawie projektowanie strategii komunikacji instytucji naukowej. Działania muszą być zróżnicowane a zarazem spójne, ponadto dostosowane do wszystkich grup interesariuszy.

Podsumowanie

Polskie uczelnie uznają konieczność korzystania z mediów społecznościowych, nie tylko w kontekście budowania relacji z otoczeniem ale także jako miejsca pozyskiwania nowych studentów, co potwierdzają liczne badania prowadzone w tym obszarze (Koszembar-Wiklik, 2018; Wojciechowska, 2018; Tarczydło i Miłoń, 2019). Większość najlepszych polskich uczelni posiada konta w najpopularniejszych portalach społecznościowych i prowadzi energiczne działania komunikacyjne (Chwiałkowska, 2013; Chwiałkowska, 2014).

Przeprowadzone studia literaturowe i badania empiryczne dają podstawy do sformułowania spostrzeżeń i wniosków. Pomimo ograniczeń wynikających z doboru celowego respondentów otrzymane wyniki są zgodne z innymi badaniami prowadzonymi w tym obszarze, m.in. badaniami Instytutu Badawczego Nask. Media społecznościowe to aktywności na które młode osoby poświęcają dziennie stosunkowo dużo czasu — do kilku godzin, to naturalne dla nich miejsce rozwijania kontaktów towarzyskich, rozrywki, edukacji oraz wielu innych działań. Media społecznościowe, zaraz za osobowymi źródłami informacji takimi jak rodzina i znajomi, stanowią jedno z ważniejszych źródeł informacji o uczelniach wyższych. Strony internetowe uczelni, serwisy społecznościowe czy fora dyskusyjne to miejsca w których młode osoby poszukują informacji, opinii czy rekomendacji, które kształtują obraz uczelni wyższych i mają wpływ na ostateczne decyzje dotyczące wyboru dalszej ścieżki edukacji. Stosunek młodych osób wobec działalności uczelni wyższych w mediach społecznościowych jest pozytywny lub neutralny. Niewielki odsetek młodych osób biorących udział w badaniu zadeklarował negatywną postawę wobec nich.

Bez wątpienia nowoczesne kanały komunikacyjne związane z Internetem i mediami społecznościowymi będą odgrywały coraz istotniejszą rolę w procesach decyzyjnych kolejnych pokoleń kandydatów na studia w związku z czym koniecznością jest odpowiednie wykorzystywanie ich przez działy marketingu polskich uczelni wyższych w pozyskiwaniu kandydatów oraz projektowaniu działań komunikacyjnych. Studia literaturowe oraz wyniki przeprowadzonych badań empirycznych pozwalają na sformułowanie kilku rekomendacji dla osób odpowiedzialnych za projektowanie i realizowanie strategii komunikacyjnych instytucji naukowych:

1. Media społecznościowe powinny być traktowane jako jedno z kanałów komunikacyjnych uczelni wyższych z jej interesariuszami, w tym kandydatami na studia.
2. Komunikacja w mediach społecznościowych musi odbywać się przy wykorzystaniu różnych portali społecznościowych, ponieważ każdy z nich daje inne możliwości i funkcjonalności, które efektywnie wykorzystane pozwolą osiągnąć efekty synergii. Aktywności w ramach różnych portali społecznościowych powinny się uzupełniać a nie powielać.
3. Wkraczające na rynek usług szkolnictwa wyższego pokolenie stanowi odmienną kohortę osób, znacząco różniącą się od obecnych studentów oraz absolwentów studiów, co w znacznym stopniu determinuje formy komunikacji oraz kanały komunikacyjne z tą grupą odbiorców.
4. Przyszli kandydaci na studia oczekują w mediach społecznościowych komunikatów dotyczących procesu rekrutacyjnego, ale także informacji o aktualnych wydarzeniach w uczelni oraz organizowanych akcjach specjalnych.
5. Jednocześnie należy podkreślić, że kandydaci na studia to tylko jedna z kilku grup interesariuszy, z którymi za pośrednictwem mediów społecznościowych, komunikuje się uczelnia wyższa, w związku z czym komunikacja musi być zróżnicowana pod względem treści, formy i kanałów komunikacyjnych by zapewnić holistyczne podejście i dotarcie do wszystkich grup odbiorców, zgodne z ideą marketingu 360o.

Przypisy

1 Niewielka liczebność grupy badawczej nie pozwala na wysuwanie wniosków i uogólnień na całą populację. Uzyskane wyniki mogą jednakże stanowić pewne wsparcie w podejmowaniu decyzji, w kontekście planowania działań komunikacyjny uczelni wyższej w mediach społecznościowych.

2 Struktura respondentów 1) wg płci: 74% kobiet, 26% mężczyzn 2) wg wieku: 15 lat 21%, 16 lat 34%, 17 lat 25%, 18 lat 20% 3) wg poziomu kształcenia 1 klasa 50%, 2 klasa 28%, 3 klasa 22% 4) wg miejsca zamieszkania wieś 35%, miasto do 20 tys. mieszkańców 12%, miasto powyżej 20 do 100 tys. mieszkańców 52%, miasto powyżej 100 do 500 tys. mieszkańców 1%.

Bibliografia

1. Buchnowska, D. (2013), Wykorzystanie mediów społecznościowych przez uczelnie wyższe i studentów w świetle badań własnych, Nauki o zarządzaniu, 2(15)/2013, s.36–50
2. Buchnowska D., Woźniak M., (2013), The role and use of social media by universities ranking of universities in social media, W: Problemy konwergencji mediów, red. Kaczmarczyk, M., Rott, D., t. 2, Verbum, Sosnowiec–Praga.
3. Burtan, G., (2019), Aplikacja, którą kocha młodzież. Tik Tok zdobywa szturmem ich serca, Pobrane 28.10.2019 z: https://tech.wp.pl/aplikacja-ktora-kocha-mlodziez-tik-tokzdobywa-szturmem-ich-serca-6344819060349057a
4. CBOS, (2018), Dzieci i młodzież w internecie — korzystanie i zagrożenia z perspektywy opiekunów. Komunikat z badań, nr 129/2018.
5. Chen, E. i DiVali, M., (2018), Social media as an Engagement Toll for Students and Colleges of Pharmacy, American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, vol. 82(4)/2018.
6. Chwiałkowska, A., (2013), Polskie publiczne uczelnie wyższe w mediach społecznościowych, Marketing Instytucji Naukowych i Badawczych, vol. 4(10)/2013, s. 1–24.
7. Chwiałkowska, A., (2014), Uczelnie w mediach społecznościowych — oczekiwania adresatów a publikowane treści, Marketing Instytucji Naukowych i Badawczych, vol. 3(13)/2014, s. 1–24.
8. Drapińska, A., Gołąb, E. (2009). Narzędzia komunikacji uczelni z kandydatami na studia w świetle badań. Ekonomiczne Problemy Usług, 42, 289–295.
9. Grabiwoda, B., (2019), E-konsumenci jutra. Pokolenie Z i technologie mobilne, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Nieoczywiste.
10. Górska, Z., (2018), Polscy użytkownicy social media na koniec 2018: Messenger i Instagram rosły szybciej niż Facebook, Pobrane 02.08.2019 z: https://napoleoncat.com/pl/blog/polscy-uzytkownicy-social-media-na-koniec-2018-messenger-i-instagramrosna-szybciej-niz-facebook/
11. GUS, (2018), Społeczeństwo informacyjne w Polsce w 2018 r, Pobrane 14.11.2019 z: https://stat.gov.pl/obszary-tematyczne/nauka-i-technika-spoleczenstwo-informacyjne/ spoleczenstwo-informacyjne/spoleczenstwo-informacyjne-w-polsce-w-2018roku,2,8.html
12. Hall, H., Witek, L. (2016). Conditions, contemporary importance and prospects of higher education marketing on the example of Polish universities. Procedia Economics and Finance, Vol. 39, s. 206–211.
13. Hanover Research, (2014), Trends in Higher Education Marketing, Recruitment and Technology, Pobrane 14.11.2019 z: https://www.hanoverresearch.com/media/Trends-inHigher-Education-Marketing-Recruitment-and-Technology-2.pdf
14. IAB Polska, (2019), Raport strategiczny. Internet 2018/2019, Pobrane 14.11.2019 z: https://iab.org.pl/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/HBRP-raport-IAB-05-191.pdf
15. Kostyńska, M., (2019), Pokolenie Z czyli pokolenie nowoczesnych technologii i Internetu, Pobrane 27.10.2019 z: https://msp.money.pl/wiadomosci/poradniki/artykul/pokolenie-zczyli-pokolenie-nowoczesnych,81,0,2419537.html
16. Koszembar-Wiklik, M., (2015), Media społecznościowe w zarządzaniu komunikacją uczelni ze studentami, Kultura-Media-Teologia, nr 21/2015, s.9–22.
17. Koszembar-Wiklik, M., (2018), Marketing uczelni w mediach społecznościowych i generacja sieci, Zaszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej, seria Organizacja i Zarządzanie z.121, s.207–220.
18. Kubiak, T. (2019), Media społecznościowe jako źródło informacji rynkowej, Marketing Instytucji Naukowych i Badawczych, Vol. 24, Issue 2, s. 41–58.
19. Kucharski, A., Ligocka, M., (2012), Maturzyści o motywach i źródłach poszukiwania informacji dotyczących studiów, Opuscula Sociologica, nr 1/2012, s.45–57.
20. Kucharski, M., Szopa, R., Halemba, P. (2017). Marketingowe determinanty wyboru kierunku studiów. Marketing Instytucji Naukowych i Badawczych, 25(3/2017), 41–58.
21. Luzak, B., (2019), Kim są polscy użytkownicy Tik Tok, Pobrane 02.08.2019 z: https://yt360.pl/tiktok-w-polsce/
22. Michalak, S., Mruk-Tomczak, D., (2019), Komunikacja oferty edukacyjnej uczelni wyższej w świetle potrzeb kandydatów na studia, Handel Wewnętrzny, 4(375)/2018, s. 227–240.
23. Mruk-Tomczak, D., (2019), Znaczenie kontaktów bezpośrednich w budowaniu relacji z kandydatami na studia, Marketing Instytucji Naukowych i Badawczych, vol. 1(31)/2019, s. 63–8.
24. NASK, (2019), Nastolatki 3.0 Raport z ogólnopolskiego badania uczniów, Warszawa.
25. Pabian, A., (2016), Komunikacja marketingowa uczelni jako szansa na zdobycie przewagi konkurencyjnej, Marketing i Zarządzanie, nr 4(45), s. 193–201.
26. Peruta, A., Helm, C. & Benson, J., (2015), Engaging university alumni through social media: strategies for creating community. Presented at: International Conference on Communication, Media, Technology and Design; May 2015; Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Pobrane 04.10.2019 z: http://www.cmdconf.net/2015/pdf/15.pdf
27. Pyżalski, J., Zdrodowska, A., Tomczyk, Ł., Abramczuk, K., (2019). Polskie badanie EU Kids Online 2018. Najważniejsze wyniki i wnioski. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.
28. Rutter, R., Roper, S. & Lettice, F., (2016), Social media interaction, the university brand and recruitment performance, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69, Issue 8, p. 3096–3104.
29. Ryńca, R., Suropek, P., (2018), Znaczenie wykorzystania funkcjonalności mediów społecznych przez szkoły, Zaszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej, seria Organizacja i Zarządzanie z.130, s. 507–517.
30. Stageman, A., Berg, K., (2013), Friends, fans, and followers: a case study of Marquette University’s use of social media to engage with key stakeholders, Case Studies in Strategic Communication, Vol. 2, p. 3–34.
31. Tarczydło, B., Miłoń, J. (2019), Kampania e-marketingowa szkoły wyższej, studium przypadku, Marketing Instytucji Naukowych i Badawczych, Vol. 31, Issue 1, s. 151–172
32. Washenko, A., (2013), 2 universities tell us how they are using social media, Pobrane 10.09.2019 z: http://sproutsocial.com/insights/universities-social-media/
33. Wojciechowska, I. (2018), Skala wykorzystania social mediów przez szkoły wyższe w Polsce, Modern Management Rewiev, vol. XXIII, 25 (1/2018), s. 169–182.