Perceived Consumer Effectiveness, CSR, and Psychological Mediators of Responsible Consumption among Vietnamese Youth

Introduction

The increasing severity of climate change, the rapid decline in natural resources, and the growth of global consumer culture have accelerated the production and consumption of goods. This trend has placed substantial pressure on the Earth's finite resources, leading to various ecological challenges, such as unsustainable land exploitation, overuse of water and energy, and worsening climate change (Asprilla-Perea et al., 2020). Against this background, Socially Responsible Consumption (SRC) has evolved from an ethical choice into a new behavioral norm.

In Vietnam, younger consumers have been emerging as a leading market force, demonstrating greater awareness and higher expectations regarding sustainable brand values. Furthermore, PwC Vietnam's Voice of the Consumer 2024 report showed that 94% of Vietnamese had experienced the impacts of climate change in their daily lives, while 54% reported being prepared to spend as much as 10% more for products made from recycled or sustainable materials (Pw, 2024). Specifically, 29% of consumers prefer brands showing social responsibility, while 76% believe that their buying choices may help address environmental issues (Pw, 2024).

Prior research indicates that CSR  is a fundamental component of SRC (Pivato et al., 2008). When making purchasing decisions, consumers tend to avoid products offered by companies that harm the environment and instead favor firms that make positive contributions to society (Mohr et al., 2001). This perception implies that socially responsible consumers consider CSR as an important criterion in their decision-making process (Becchetti et al., 2020). In addition, PCE has been recognized as an important driver of socially responsible consumption and plays a central role in shaping ethical consumption practices (Lee et al., 2014; Testa et al., 2021). This factor is particularly influential among younger generations, whose SRCBs are strongly associated with their perceived capacity to create a meaningful difference through their consumption decisions (Choi et al., 2025).

Although SRCB has been extensively examined in the international literature, empirical evidence from Vietnam remains limited, particularly regarding the simultaneous investigation of PCE and CSR in promoting socially responsible consumption among young consumers. Furthermore, prior research has primarily focused on the direct links among PCE, CSR, and SRCB, while relatively little research has examined how ATT, subjective norms, and PBC mediate these relationships. Within the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), individual behaviour is not solely driven by external factors but is also formed by their beliefs, personal evaluations, and perceived social pressures (Ajzen, 1991). Therefore, understanding the psychological mechanisms underlying socially responsible consumption requires a more comprehensive examination of these mediating factors. Responding to these gaps, this study examines whether ATT, subjective norms, and PBC mediate the links among PCE, CSR, and SRCB among young consumers from HCMC, Vietnam. By doing so, the study seeks to clarify the psychological processes that encourage socially responsible consumption practices and to offer practical implications for organizations seeking to develop effective sustainability-oriented strategies.

Theoretical Background and Research Hypotheses

Theoretical Background

TPB

TPB developed by Ajzen (1991), proposes that intention and behavior are determined by ATT, SN, and PBC. Owing to its strong explanatory power, TPB has been widely applied to socially responsible consumption. Hosta and Žabkar (2021) and Petrovskaya and Haleem (2021) used TPB to explain socially responsible consumption behavior (SRCB), while Palacios-González and Chamorro-Mera (2022) integrated TPB with the Cognition–Affection–Behavior (CAB) Model. Accordingly, TPB provides an appropriate foundation for examining the determinants of consumers’ SRCB.

Hypothesis Development

PCE in Relation to SRCB

PCE refers to consumers’ belief that their individual actions can make a meaningful contribution to addressing environmental problems (Aneesh & Prathapan, 2026). Consumers with stronger PCE are more likely to perceive responsible consumption as consequential and translate their sustainability concerns into concrete actions. Recent evidence indicates that PCE significantly predicts socially responsible consumption behaviors and increases the explanatory power of responsible consumption models among young consumers (Choi et al., 2025). Therefore, we propose that:

H1: PCE positively influences SRCB.

PCE in Relation to ATT

ATT refers to consumers’ overall favorable or unfavorable evaluation of socially responsible consumption, based on their beliefs, feelings, and judgments about the consequences of such behavior (Sinha & Annamdevula, 2025; Vishnoi et al., 2025). When consumers believe that their consumption choices can produce meaningful social and environmental outcomes, they are more likely to regard SRCB as worthwhile and desirable. Such effectiveness beliefs strengthen consumer agency and encourage more favorable evaluations of responsible consumption (Uusitalo et al., 2026). Consistent with this reasoning Choi et al. (2025) found that PCE had a significant positive effect on ATT. Therefore, we propose that:

H2: PCE positively influences ATT.

PCE in Relation to SN

SN reflects the perceived expectations of important others regarding a particular behavior (Kumar et al., 2022). In collectivist contexts, consumers are more responsive to social obligations and group expectations when making sustainable choices (Cao & Nguyen, 2024). Therefore, consumers with stronger PCE may be more likely to perceive SRCB as socially supported and expected. More recently, Nguyen and Ton (2022) further confirmed that higher levels of PCE correspond to stronger subjective norms, indicating that consumers who view their actions as effective tend to be influenced by social expectations regarding responsible consumption. Therefore, we propose that:

H3: PCE positively influences SN.

PCE in Relation to PBC

PBC refers to consumers’ perceived ease or difficulty in performing a behavior and their ability to overcome potential barriers (Liao et al., 2023). Consumers with stronger PCE are more confident that their actions can improve environmental outcomes, thereby reducing perceived difficulty and strengthening control over responsible consumption.  Nguyen and Ton (2022) found that PCE has a positive and significant influence on PBC, indicating that consumers who perceive their actions as meaningful become more confident in their ability to purchase and consume eco-friendly products. Therefore, we propose that:

H4: PCE positively influences PBC.

CSR and ATT

CSR refers to a firm’s commitment to integrating social, environmental, ethical, and economic responsibilities into its operations and contributing to societal well-being (Bianchi et al., 2026). When consumers perceive CSR initiatives as credible and aligned with societal values, they are more likely to evaluate responsible consumption positively. Empirical evidence from Vietnam further confirms that perceived CSR positively influences consumer attitudes toward sustainable products (Le et al., 2025). Therefore, we propose that:

H5: CSR positively influences ATT.

CSR and SN

CSR initiatives communicate socially and environmentally responsible standards, signaling that SRCB is supported by important referent groups and wider society. Such signals can strengthen perceived social approval and expectations toward responsible consumption. TPB-based research suggests that CSR initiatives reinforce the social expectations associated with sustainable practices (Prisco et al., 2025), while CSR communication and consumer communities can establish responsible purchasing as a socially valued behavior (Ip, 2025). Vu et al. (2022) further found that environmental CSR initiatives were positively associated with SN. Therefore, we propose that:

H6: CSR positively influences SN.

CSR and PBC

Transparent information about sustainable sourcing, environmental impacts, and socially responsible practices may make responsible consumption appear more feasible and within consumers’ control. Prisco et al. (2025) similarly suggest that CSR initiatives can shape PBC by influencing consumers’ perceptions and motivations, while accessible sustainability information may strengthen their confidence and sense of control in decision-making. Direct evidence from Vietnam further indicates that environmental CSR initiatives are positively associated with PBC (Vu et al., 2022). Therefore, we propose that:

H7: CSR positively influences PBC

ATT in Relation to SRCB

Favorable attitudes toward socially responsible consumption increase consumers’ motivation to align their purchasing and consumption practices with social and environmental values. Previous studies consistently show that ATT positively predicts sustainable consumption intention, eco-friendly apparel purchase intention, and sustainable purchase intention (Kumar et al., 2022; Cao & Nguyen, 2024; Le et al., 2025). Similar evidence indicates that favorable attitudes promote consumers’ intentions to support brands and businesses engaging in CSR practices (Ip, 2025; Bianchi et al., 2026). More directly, Choi et al. (2025) found that ATT toward SRC significantly predicted self-reported SRCB and actual SRCB measured longitudinally, confirming that favorable evaluations can translate into responsible consumption practices. Therefore, we propose that:

H8: ATT positively influences SRCB.

H11a: ATT mediates the PCE–SRCB relationship.

H11b: ATT mediates the CSR–SRCB relationship.

SN and SRCB

Perceived approval and encouragement from important referent groups can create normative pressure that motivates consumers to align their consumption practices with socially accepted standards. When family members, peers, and wider society support responsible consumption, consumers are more likely to regard SRCB as expected and adjust their behavior accordingly. Previous studies show that SN positively predicts intentions to adopt sustainable practices, including low-carbon travel and socially responsible purchasing (Liao et al., 2023; Prisco et al., 2025). Besides, SN has repeatedly been shown to predict SRCB (Petrovskaya & Haleem, 2021). Therefore, we propose that:

H9: SN positively influences SRCB.

H11c: SN mediates the PCE–SRCB relationship.

H11d: SN mediates the CSR–SRCB relationship.

PBC in Relation to SRCB

Drawing on the TPB, consumers with sufficient resources, knowledge, skills, and opportunities perceive fewer barriers to responsible consumption and are therefore more capable of translating their choices into actual behavior (Cao & Nguyen, 2024). Empirical evidence shows that PBC positively predicts sustainable consumption intention and low-carbon travel intention (Liao et al., 2023). In addition, Szulc-Obłoza and Żurek (2026) conceptualized perceived individual impact as analogous to PBC and found significant positive effects on sustainable acquisition, usage, and disposal behaviors. Moreover, Petrovskaya and Haleem (2021) also found a positive and significant relationship between PBC and SRCB. Therefore, we propose that:

H10: PBC positively influences SRCB.

H11e: PBC mediates the PCE–SRCB relationship.

H11f: PBC mediates the CSR–SRCB relationship.

Figure 1 Presents the proposed research model and summarizes the hypothesized relationships among the study constructs.

Materials and Methods

Research Process

Qualitative phase: Relevant domestic and international literature was examined to formulate the research model and design initial measurement scales. In the subsequent stage, in-depth interviews were conducted with one economics lecturer and five consumers from Generation Y and Z living in HCMC who had previously engaged in SRCBs. The purpose of these interviews was to obtain detailed insights for refining and adapting the measurement scales.

Quantitative research: In this stage, both online and offline surveys were conducted, targeting 350 participants. The survey data were screened and processed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS. After excluding invalid responses, a final sample including 313 valid questionnaires was retained for further analysis. SmartPLS 4.0 was subsequently employed for data analysis and to evaluate both the measurement and structural models.

Scale Development

The measurement items were drawn and adapted from prior research with established reliability and validity. Specifically, PCE was measured using four items based on Filipe (2015), while CSR was measured with five items derived from Vu et al. (2022). In addition, the ATT was assessed through three items Choi et al. (2025): SN was assessed with four items based on Chaudhary and Bisai (2018), and the PBC was measured with three items derived from Vu et al. (2022). Finally, SRCB was assessed through four items based on  Choi et al. (2025).

Data Collection

This study used convenience sampling to approach the target respondents. Following common SEM sample-size recommendations, the study aimed for approximately 350 responses in order to ensure sufficient data for model estimation. The survey was distributed both online and offline, with 300 online participants and 50 offline participants expected. The target respondents were Generation Y and Generation Z consumers residing in HCMC, Viet Nam.

Measurement Model Analysis

Drawing on TPB, this study examined how PCE and CSR influence SRCB. To assess the mediation effects of ATT, SN, and PBC, a bootstrapping technique was employed. In addition, PLS-SEM was applied to examine the proposed model. Data analysis was conducted with SmartPLS, allowing assessment of the measurement model, the structural model, and hypothesis testing.

Results and Discussion

Descriptive Statistics

After collecting and compiling the survey data, a total of 350 responses were obtained. Following the screening process and the removal of invalid questionnaires, 313 valid responses remained and were retained for further analysis. Consequently, the final dataset consisted of 313 observations, which served as the basis for subsequent statistical analyses.

Table 1. Sample Description (N=313)

Source: Compiled by the author from SPSS 27 output, 2026.

Table 1 summarizes the demographic profile of the 313 respondents, showing that the sample was relatively diverse. Regarding age, Generation Z (13–28 years old) accounted for the majority of respondents (61.7%), while Generation Y (29–43 years old) represented 38.3% of the sample. This distribution suggests that awareness of sustainable and socially responsible consumption has become increasingly prevalent among younger consumer groups. In terms of gender, female respondents constituted the majority of participants (58.1%) compared to male respondents (41.9%). With respect to monthly income, the 5–<10 million VND group accounted for the largest share (40.6%), followed by those earning below 5 million VND (28.1%) and the 10–<20 million VND group (16.9%). Respondents in the 20–<30 million VND and ≥30 million VND groups accounted for 8.0% and 6.4% of the sample, respectively.

In terms of education, participants holding university qualifications accounted for the largest proportion (43.8%), followed by those with vocational college or college qualifications (27.2%) and postgraduate degrees (17.6%). Respondents with secondary and high school education accounted for the smallest share (11.5%). These findings indicate that the majority of respondents possessed relatively high educational qualifications, reflecting the profile of younger consumer groups living in urban areas.

Reliability and Validity Assessment

The measurement model was evaluated using SmartPLS 4.0. As reported in Table 2, the outer loadings ranged from 0.764 to 0.883, all exceeding 0.70, which indicates satisfactory item reliability. Cronbach’s Alpha and CR also reached values higher than 0.70 for all constructs, supporting the internal consistency of the scales. Moreover, the AVE values, ranging from 0.698 to 0.758, were above the 0.50 benchmark. Thus, the measurement results provide evidence of convergent validity, showing that the observed indicators adequately represent their corresponding constructs (Hair & Alamer, 2022).

Table 2. Outer Loadings, Reliability, and Validity Testing

Source: Compiled by the author from SPSS 27 output, 2026.

The HTMT was employed to examine discriminant validity. Henseler et al. (2015) suggested that discriminant validity can be confirmed when HTMT coefficients remain lower than 0.90. This condition shows that the latent constructs are statistically distinguishable and that the measurement model satisfies the requirement for discriminant validity (Sarstedt et al., 2021). The results in Table 3 reveal that every HTMT coefficient was lower than the recommended 0.90 cut-off value. Accordingly, the constructs in the proposed model achieved acceptable discriminant validity, indicating that each construct represents a separate theoretical concept and does not substantially overlap with the remaining constructs. Overall, these findings provide additional evidence for the adequacy of the measurement scales applied in this research.

Table 3. HTMT Results for Discriminant Validity

Source: Compiled by the author from SPSS 27 output, 2026.

Structural Model Evaluation

A bootstrapping procedure with 5,000 resamples was applied to evaluate the structural model. Following Sarstedt et al. (2021), the VIF results in Table 4 show no multicollinearity problem, as all VIF coefficients were lower than the cut-off value of 5. The R² values show that the model accounts for 51.7% of ATT, 38.5% of SRCB, 20.6% of SN, and 18.5% of PBC. Thus, the model demonstrates acceptable explanatory power for the endogenous constructs.

In addition, Q² values greater than zero indicate that the model has predictive relevance (Hair & Alamer, 2022). The bootstrapping results further show that most proposed relationships were statistically significant at the 5% level. However, H2 and H11a were rejected because their p-values exceeded the accepted significance level.

Table 4. Hypothesis Results

Source: Compiled by the author from SPSS 27 output, 2026.

Table 4 reports the standardized coefficients for the direct paths as follows: PCE → SRCB = 0.126, PCE → SN = 0.360, PCE → PBC = 0.349, CSR → ATT = 0.715, CSR → SN = 0.256, CSR → PBC = 0.235, ATT → SRCB = -0.120, SN → SRCB = 0.515, and PBC → SRCB = 0.160. These findings suggest that SN and PBC positively affect SRCB. Moreover, PCE has positive effects on SN, PBC, and SRCB, while perceptions of CSR contribute to improving consumers’ ATT, SN, and PBC. Accordingly, H1, H3, H4, H5, H6, H7, H9, and H10 received empirical support. However, H2, which predicted a positive link between PCE and ATT (PCE → ATT), was rejected because this path was not statistically significant (p-value = 0.217 > 0.05).

Furthermore, the results revealed significant indirect effects for several mediating relationships. The standardized indirect effects were CSR → ATT → SRCB = -0.086, PCE → SN → SRCB = 0.185, CSR → SN → SRCB = 0.132, PCE → PBC → SRCB = 0.056, and CSR → PBC → SRCB = 0.037. Therefore, hypotheses H11b, H11c, H11d, H11e, and H11f were supported. In contrast, H11a, which proposed that ATT mediates the link between PCE and SRCB (PCE → ATT → SRCB), was rejected because the indirect effect was insignificant (p = 0.283 > 0.05). Overall, the PLS-SEM analysis confirmed eight direct relationships and five indirect relationships.

The structural model produced several theoretically meaningful findings. First, PCE had a positive and significant effect on SRCB (β = 0.126, p = 0.014), supporting H1. This result indicates that consumers who believe their individual actions can generate meaningful social and environmental outcomes are more likely to engage in responsible consumption. It is consistent with Choi et al. (2025), Filipe (2015), and Palacios-González and Chamorro-Mera (2022), who identified perceived individual effectiveness as an important driver of responsible behavior. Choi et al. (2025) similarly found that PCE positively predicted SRCB across multiple Gen Z samples.

However, PCE did not significantly influence ATT (p = 0.217), and H2 was therefore rejected. Although this result differs from Choi et al. (2025) and related TPB-based studies, it suggests that believing one’s actions are effective may not be sufficient to elicit a favorable evaluation of socially responsible consumption. Among younger consumers, ATT may depend more strongly on external influences, such as CSR communication, media exposure, social trends, product information, and perceived affordability. PCE nevertheless had significant positive effects on SN (β = 0.360, p < 0.001) and PBC (β = 0.349, p < 0.001), supporting H3 and H4. These findings suggest that consumers with stronger PCE perceive greater social encouragement and feel more capable of performing SRCB. The positive PCE–PBC relationship is consistent with Liao et al. (2023), who found that PCE strengthened consumers’ perceived control over sustainable choices (Samaranayake et al., 2024; Fritea et al., 2025; Narayana et al., 2025; Mesquita et al., 2026; Zeried, 2026).

CSR significantly strengthened all three TPB components. Specifically, CSR positively affected ATT (β = 0.715, p < 0.001), SN (β = 0.256, p < 0.001), and PBC (β = 0.235, p = 0.008), supporting H5–H7. These findings indicate that credible social and environmental commitments generate favorable evaluations of responsible consumption, reinforce perceived social approval, and make responsible purchasing appear more feasible. The CSR–ATT result is consistent with evidence that perceived CSR improves consumer evaluations of sustainable products (Le et al., 2025). The findings for SN and PBC also align with Vu et al. (2022), who showed that environmental CSR initiatives can strengthen normative expectations and perceived control surrounding green consumption.

The effects of the TPB components on SRCB were mixed. ATT had a significant but negative effect on SRCB (β = −0.120, p = 0.017). Although statistically significant, this direction contradicts the proposed positive relationship; therefore, H8 is not supported in its hypothesized direction. The finding reflects an ATT–behavior gap in which consumers may positively evaluate responsible consumption but fail to implement it when responsible alternatives entail higher prices, limited availability, insufficient information, or sacrifices in convenience and personal benefits. This interpretation is consistent with research showing that favorable sustainability attitudes do not always translate into actual consumption (Borges-Tiago et al., 2024). By contrast, SN (β = 0.515, p < 0.001) and PBC (β = 0.160, p = 0.003) positively influenced SRCB, supporting H9 and H10. Choi et al. (2025) likewise found that SN significantly predicted SRCB, while related research demonstrates that consumers’ perceived control facilitates sustainable purchasing, usage, and disposal practices.

The mediation results further clarify these mechanisms. CSR indirectly influenced SRCB through ATT (β = −0.086, p = 0.023), but the negative indirect effect indicates that CSR-enhanced attitudes did not translate into greater behavioral implementation. In contrast, SN positively mediated the effects of both PCE (β = 0.185, p < 0.001) and CSR (β = 0.132, p < 0.001) on SRCB. PBC also positively mediated the effects of PCE (β = 0.056, p = 0.005) and CSR (β = 0.037, p = 0.001). Thus, PCE and CSR appear to promote SRCB primarily by strengthening social approval and consumers’ perceived capacity to engage in responsible consumption, rather than solely by fostering favorable attitudes (Belfiore et al., 2024; Bukhary, 2024; Figueroa-Valverde et al., 2024; Karatas, 2024; Lee & Ferreira, 2024; Negreiros & Ory, 2024; Wolderslund et al., 2024; Alexandrovna et al., 2025).

Conclusion

Theoretical Implications

This study offers several theoretical contributions to the literature on SRCB. First, it provides further evidence on the consumption behavior of young consumers, particularly Gen Z and Gen Y, in an emerging market context. By focusing on young consumers in HCMC, the study clarifies how this group perceives and responds to SRCB-related issues. The findings suggest that younger consumers are increasingly aware of environmental and social concerns, but both psychological and contextual factors shape their behavioral responses. This contributes to a more specific understanding of SRCB among generational consumer groups.

Second, the study extends the application of TPB in the context of SRCB. The findings confirm that key psychological components, including ATT, SN, and PBC, play important roles in explaining SRCB. Among these factors, SN and PBC were found to have positive effects on behavior, indicating that social influence and consumers’ perceived ability to act remain important drivers of responsible consumption. In addition, the study expands the TPB framework by incorporating PCE and CSR as external factors. These factors not only influence behavior directly but also operate indirectly through psychological mechanisms (Ghiga et al., 2024; Kęska & Suchy, 2024; Kounatidis et al., 2024; Noor et al., 2024; Abdullah et al., 2025; Jagsi et al., 2025; Petronis et al., 2025; Schneider & Krüger, 2025; Wong et al., 2025; Yu et al., 2025).

Third, the finding of a negative relationship between ATT and SRCB provides an additional theoretical insight. This result suggests that positive ATT does not always lead to corresponding responsible consumption behavior. In certain contexts, consumers may express support for responsible consumption but fail to translate this ATT into actual action. This highlights the existence of an ATT–behavior gap and suggests that behavioral models should be applied flexibly when studying complex consumption domains. Overall, the study contributes to a deeper understanding of how internal beliefs, social pressure, perceived control, and CSR jointly shape SRCB (Csep et al., 2024; Jin et al., 2024; Osluf et al., 2024; Rypel et al., 2024; Fischer et al., 2025; Joungtrakul & Smith, 2025; Kebe et al., 2025; Mansour & Saeed, 2025; Musa et al., 2025; Raza et al., 2025).

Managerial Implications

The findings provide several practical implications for businesses, social marketers, and policymakers seeking to promote SRCB among young consumers. First, social marketing campaigns should strengthen consumers’ PCE. When consumers perceive that their actions are meaningful, they are more likely to respond to responsible consumption messages. Therefore, communication programs should emphasize the real impact of individual consumption decisions, such as reducing waste, supporting ethical businesses, or protecting the environment.

Second, businesses should communicate their CSR initiatives more clearly and consistently. Young consumers tend to respond positively when they perceive that firms are genuinely committed to environmental protection and social values. Therefore, companies should integrate CSR messages into marketing strategies, product communication, and brand positioning. However, these messages should be transparent, practical, and easy to understand. Instead of presenting CSR as a general corporate image-building activity, firms should demonstrate how their products, services, and operations deliver concrete benefits to society and the environment.

Third, the results show that psychological factors such as SN and PBC are important in shaping SRCB. Businesses should therefore use communication channels that can influence social expectations, such as communities, social media, reference groups, and key opinion leaders. These channels can help make responsible consumption appear more socially accepted and desirable. At the same time, firms and policymakers should reduce barriers that prevent consumers from acting responsibly. These barriers may include high product prices, limited product availability,  insufficient information, and purchasing inconvenience Practical actions may include offering affordable sustainable products, expanding distribution channels, providing clear product information, and creating incentives for responsible consumption.

Finally, because the study identifies an ATT–behavior gap, raising awareness alone may not be sufficient. Consumers may hold positive ATT toward responsible consumption but still avoid acting if the behavior is costly, inconvenient, or unclear. Therefore, businesses and policymakers should combine awareness campaigns with practical support mechanisms that make responsible consumption easier, more accessible, and more beneficial for consumers.

Limitations and Future Research Directions

Although this study provides useful insights into SRCB, several limitations should be acknowledged. First, the research focused on Gen Y and Gen Z consumers in HCMC. Therefore, the findings may not fully represent other consumer groups or consumers living in different geographical, cultural, or economic contexts. Future studies should expand the research scope to include other generations, such as Gen X and Baby Boomers, as well as consumers from different regions. This would improve the generalizability of the findings and allow comparisons across consumer segments.

Second, the proposed model mainly examined PCE, CSR, and the psychological components of TPB. However, SRCB may also be influenced by other factors, such as price sensitivity, income, environmental knowledge, trust, lifestyle, product availability, and perceived consumer sacrifice. Future research should consider adding these variables to provide a more comprehensive explanation of SRCB.

Third, this study examined SRCB in a general consumption context and did not focus on any specific product category or industry. In practice, consumer behavior may differ across sectors such as food, fashion, cosmetics, electronics, and fast-moving consumer goods. Future studies should investigate specific industries or product groups to  understand better how consumers respond to responsible consumption messages across different market contexts. Such studies could provide more targeted managerial implications and contribute to a deeper understanding of SRCB across diverse consumption settings.

Acknowledgments: The authors sincerely thank all participants who contributed to this study.

Conflict of Interest: None

Financial Support: None

Ethics Statement: This study was conducted in accordance with ethical principles governing research with human participants. Participation was voluntary, and all data were collected anonymously. No formal ethics committee approval was required for this type of survey-based research under the institutional guidelines of the Industrial University of Ho Chi Minh City.