Submitted in part fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of.docx

Submitted in part fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
of Master of Science in Marketing management
An investigation of the trend in consuming organic food
towards consumer attitude and purchase intention in the UK
by
Supinda Kanchana-ampol
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
University of Surrey
September 2017
Word count: 14,985 words
© Supinda Kanchana-ampol
Executive summary
Over the past two decades, the industry of organic food business
has developed into an immensity from a niche market. The
revolution among the global population of organic food
consumption has changed. Particularly, Britain is the third
largest organic food market in the world leading to vitality of
the sustainable food production. Moreover, consumers have
exposed a great intention in organic products. While, self-

awareness of food safety and quality are the factors of
consumer’s concerns.
Currently, organic food consumers can easily find various
places to buy organic food as many high street chains such as
Nando’s, McDonalds, Pret, and Jamie’s Italian are offering
organic products on their menus and supermarket chains are
providing wider ranges of organic choices. As a result, organic
food market has actually become one of the popular food
business and purchase choices these days. Moreover, high price
of organic food is seen as a barrier for organic market.
On the other hand, the various factors of consumer concerns and
characteristic of organic food have an influence on consumer
purchase intention. This research aims to investigate how
various factors affect intention to buy such as taste followed by
environmental concerns, price, and health consciousness among
British consumers. Therefore, there are four main objectives of
this research including to evaluate the relationship between
consumer knowledge about organic food and purchase intention,
and to analyse the characteristics of various factors (organic
certification labels, health, taste, environment, food safety,
price, better animal welfare) that affect purchase intention, and
to identify the relationship between demographic factors and
purchase intention. The last objective aims to find the most
influential factor of organic food that affect consumer purchase
intention.
In order to achieve the research aim, a quantitative approach
was adopted. The primary and secondary data were used. The
data for this research were collected from 120 respondents by
using online questionnaires. In order to examine the data and
answer the research aim, Pearson’s correlation, Pearson Chi-
square and multiple linear regression were used. Additionally,
descriptive statistics applied in data analysis were frequency
distribution, percentage, mean and standard deviation.

The finding of this study indicates that organic certification
labels on certain products could increase purchase intention of
customer. Hence, the consumer will have a strong confidence to
eat more of organic food. Generally, British consumers hold a
positive attitude toward the consumption of organic food as
various factors including health, environmental concerns, food
safety, and better animal welfare have a strong influence on
their purchases. Moreover, the knowledge consumers have about
organic food are proved to have influence on consumer attitude
towards organic food in the UK. Finally, it could be explained
that price is considered as the barrier to increase purchase
intention of organic food while the sensory attributes didn’t
affect their purchase.
In term of managerial implication, the findings from this
research are beneficial to organic food venders and customers in
the UK and could be considered as an advice for marketers. In
term of awareness of organic food, the information about
organic food should be widely disseminated to public in various
ways in order to increase consumer knowledge.
This study proposes few recommendations for future research.
The relationship between various factors and consumers’
purchase intention could be investigated in depth analysis by
applying qualitative approach for instance, interview on focus
groups. Additionally, this research was conducted only in the
UK. In the next study therefore, it could be possible to replicate
the study into other Europe countries with different cultures.
Key words: Organic food, Organic certification labels, Health
consciousness, Food safety, Environmental friendly, Purchase
intention.
Declaration of Originality

I hereby declare that this thesis has been composed by myself
and has not been presented or accepted in any previous
application for a degree. The work, of which this is record, has
been carried out by myself unless otherwise stated and where
the work is mine, it reflects personal views and value. All
questions have been distinguished by quotation marks and all
sources of information have been acknowledged by means of
references including those of the Internet.
I agree that the University has the right to submit my work to
the plagiarism detection service Turnitin UK for originality
checks
(Supinda Kanchana-ampol)
Acknowledgements
The most challenging but inspiring tasks would be writing the
master dissertation that I have ever accomplished. After an
intensive period of three months for doing dissertation, it
demands a lot of hard works and patience. My knowledge has
been more enriched through the process of amazing tasks. This
dissertation could not be done without the support by so many
people whom I wish to show my thankfulness.

First and foremost, I would like to dedicate my sincere
gratefulness to my supervisor Dr. Ioanna Anninou for her
support, valuable advice, and feedback which were so helpful to
lead me to the right track.
Besides, this dissertation might not be completely finished
without the enthusiastic support from Thai and British friends,
colleagues and relatives who have tried the most understanding
to fill in the survey and help me sharing the online survey to
other people.
Last but not least, special thanks to my family for their great
love and support to all my life.

Table of contents
Executive Summary
...............................................................................................
.....................ii - iii
Declaration of Originality
...............................................................................................
..............IV
Acknowledgements..................................................................
........................................................V List of figures
...............................................................................................
................................. IX List of tables
...............................................................................................
.....................................X
Chapter 1:
Introduction............................................................................
......................................1
1.1 Background to research
...............................................................................................
.........1
1.2 Research aims and
objectives................................................................................
................3
1.3 Structure of this research
...............................................................................................
.......4
1.4 Chapter summary
...............................................................................................
....................4
Chapter 2: Literature review
...............................................................................................
............5
2. Consumers’ knowledge, attitude and purchasing intention
about organic foods………...............5

2.1 Concerns of consumer regarding several aspects of organic
foods...........................................5
2.1.1 Product labels in credence good
markets.....................................................................5-7
2.1.2 Health and nutritional concern
…................................................................................7-8
2.1.3 Environmental
concern…................................................................................
.............8-9
2.1.4 Food safety
concern…................................................................................
.....................9
2.1.5 Price
consciousness….......................................................................
..........................9-10
2.1.6 Animal welfare
consequences….......................................................................
..............10
2.2 Sensory attributes of organic
foods…...................................................................................
...10
2.2.1 Taste, Appearance, Size, and
Freshness…................................................................10-11
2.3 Socio -Economic factors affecting organic food
consumption..................................................11
2.3.1 Gender, Age, Economic factors, Education level, and
family size.............................11-12
2.4 Purchase intention
preferences..............................................................................
...............12-13
2.5 Consumer
attitude............................................................................. ......
..............................13-15
2.5.1 Attitude of Consumer towards Organic
Food...........................................................15-16
2.6 Consumer

knowledge........................................................................ .......
............................16-17
2.7
Hypothesis..............................................................................
..............................................17-18
2.8 Chapter
summary.................................................................................
.....................................19
Chapter 3: Research
Methodology………………………………………………….………
….20
3.1
Introduction............................................................................
...................................................20
3.2 Research
philosophy…...........................................................................
.................................. 20
3.3 Research
approach............................................................................... ..
.............................20-21
3.4 Research
Design....................................................................................
...................................21
3.4.1 Qualitative vs. Quantitative
Research..............................................................................21
3.4.2 Exploratory, Descriptive, or
Explanatory....................................................................21 -22
3.5 Research
strategies................................................................................
...................................22
3.5.1 Types of research
strategies................................................................................
........22-23
3.6 Time
horizon...................................................................................

..........................................24
3.7 Research
instruments.............................................................................
..................................24
3.7.1 Sampling
instrument...............................................................................
.........................24
3.7.2 Data collection
instruments.............................................................................
............24-26
3.7.3 Data analysis
instrument...............................................................................
..............26-27
3.8 Validity and
reliability................................................................................
........................27-28
3.9 Pilot
study.......................................................................................
.....................................28-29
3.10 Ethical
issues......................................................................................
...................................29
3.11 Chapter
summary.................................................................................
...............................29
Chapter 4: Finding and
analysis……………………...……………………………………...3
0
4.1
Introduction............................................................................
...............................................30
4.2 Participants in the
research..................................................................................
...........30-31
4.2.1

Gender....................................................................................
.......................................32
4.2.2
Age.........................................................................................
...................................32-33
4.2.3
Occupation..............................................................................
......................................33
4.2.4
Education................................................................................
.......................................34
4.2.5 Annual
income....................................................................................
............................35
4.3 Organic or Non-organic
consumer.................................................................................
.35-36
4.3.1 Reasons for not eating organic
food.............................................................................36
4.4 Purchase behaviour
trend.......................................................................................
..............37
4.4.1 The frequency of organic consumers’
purchases..........................................................37
4.4.2 Categories of organic food
purchase............................................................................38
4.4.3 Places to
purchase..................................................................................
......................39
4.5 Challenges face when purchasing organic
food...................................................................40
4.6 Consumer Knowledge regarding organic
food...............................................................41-42
4.7
Reliability...............................................................................
..........................................42-43

4.8 Descriptive
statistics..................................................................................
...........................44
4.8.1 Organic Certification
Labels.....................................................................................
...44
4.8.2
Price.......................................................................................
.................................44-45
4.8.3 Purchase
intention.................................................................................
.......................45
4.7 Statistic testing of
Hypotheses..............................................................................
..........45-46
4.7.1 Hypothesis
1.............................................................................................
....................47
4.7.2 Hypothesis
2.............................................................................................
...........…48-51
4.7.3 Hypothesis
3.............................................................................................
....................52
4.7.4 Hypothesis
4.............................................................................................
.....................53
4.7.5 Hypothesis
5.............................................................................................
......................54
4.7.6 Hypothesis
6.............................................................................................
......................55
4.7.8 Hypothesis
7.............................................................................................
......................56

4.9 Chapter
summary............................................................................. ....
.................................57
Chapter 5: Discussions.
………………………..…………………………………………….58
5.1
Introduction............................................................................
..............................................58
5.2 Discussion on hypothesis
1.............................................................................................
......58
2................................................................................... ..........
58-59
3.............................................................................................
......60
4.............................................................................. ...............
......60
5.............................................................................................
.60-61
6.............................................................................................
......61
7.............................................................................................
.61-62
5.9 Chapter
summary............................................................................. ....
................................62
Chapter 6:

Conclusion…………….………………………………………………
…………63
6.1
Introduction............................................................................
..............................................63
6.2
Conclusion..............................................................................
........................................63-64
6.3 Managerial
implication..............................................................................
.........................64
6.4 Limitation of the
research..................................................................................
.............64-65
7.3 Recommendation for further
research….............................................................................6
5
Reference................................................................................
.............................................66-78
Appendices.............................................................................
.................................................79
Appendix A: Frequencies of demographic
information..................................................79-80
Appendix B: Frequencies of purchase behaviour trend of
organic consumers..............81-84
Appendix C: Cronbach
reliability................................................................................
...85-86
Appendix D: Chi-
square.....................................................................................
................87
Appendix E:
Questionnaire..........................................................................
...................88-91
Appendix E: Ethical issue in

research............................................................................92 -
95

List of figures
Figure 1.1 The possible issues in environment
........................................................................... 2
Figure 1.2: The growth of organic farmland and organic market
share........................................3
Figure 2.1: Organic labels and informational Treatment in the
U.S.............................................6
Figure 2.2: Organic certification logos in the
UK.........................................................................7
Figure 2.3 Specific information of the organic labelling in the
EU..............................................7
Figure 2.4 The differences between functional and
constructional theory......................................14
Figure 4.1
Gender....................................................................................

.....................................32
Figure 4.2
Age.........................................................................................
.................................... 32
Figure 4.3
Occupation..............................................................................
....................................33
Figure 4.4
Education................................................................................
....................................34
Figure 4.5 Annual
income....................................................................................
........................35
Figure 4.6 Organic or Non-organic
consumers............................................................................35
Figure 4.7: Summary of reason of not eating organic
food..........................................................36
Figure 4.8: The frequency of organic consumers’
purchases.......................................................37
Figure 4.9: Summary of types of produce
purchase.....................................................................38
Figure 4.10: Summary of point of
purchase.................................................................................
39
Figure 4.12: Summary of consumer
knowledge...........................................................................41

List of tables
Table 3.1: Research
strategy...................................................................................
......................23
Table 4.1: Summary of Key Demographic Characteristics of
respondents..................................31
Table 4.2: Summary of consumer

knowledge............................................................................ ..
41
Table 4.3: Reliability Statistics of all
variables............................................................................42
Table 4.4: Item-Total
statistics..................................................................................
...................42
Table 4.5: Reliable
statistics..................................................................................
.......................43
Table 4.6: One-Sampling Statistics-Consumer attitude on
organic certification labels………...44
price..................................................45
purchase intention............................45
Table 4.9: Correlation coefficient
measurements.........................................................................
45
Table 4.10: Correlation of consumer knowledge and consumer
purchase intention....................47
Table 4.11: Correlation of health consciousness and consumer
purchase intention.....................48
Table 4.12: Correlation of taste and consumer purchase
intention...............................................49
Table 4.14: Correlation of food safety and consumer purchase
intention....................................50
Table 4.15: Correlation of better animal welfare and consumer
purchase intention....................50
Table 4.16: Pearson Chi-Square test of gender and purchase
intention........................................52
Table 4.17: Correlation of price and purchase
intention...............................................................53
Table 4.18: Correlation of challenges consumers faced and
consumer purchase intention..........54
Table 4.19: Correlation of better animal welfare and consumer

purchase intention.....................55
Table 4.20: Multiple linear
regression...............................................................................
............56
Table 4.21: Result of hypotheses
testing...................................................................... ...............
..57

93
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Background to research
The organic products as in the case of food sector has
undoubtedly entered the food market since people tend to prefer
ingredients that are produced by natural processes. To
exemplify, Rigby et al. (2001) identify that a sector of farming
is becoming progressively popular since the organic demand is
increasing faster than supply from domestic. Furthermore, they
stress the encouragement from the UK government about the
repeatedly support for the organic sector by establishing the
Organic Farming Scheme. In particular, the participants who
joined this scheme was paid over GBP 10 million (OECD,
2001). As a result of this, organic farming has grown rapidly.
Mintel (1999) also affirms that the market of organic food in the
UK has expanded significantly with annual sales increase of 30
per cent, even though it has been only a slow progress which
could be considered as undeveloped comparing to some other
European countries. Furthermore, there were several attempts to
evaluate consumer attitude toward organic food consumption,

attributes that have prevented or facilitated consumer choice of
organic food (Soil Association, 2000; Makatouni, 1999; Davies
et al., 1995; Grunert and Juhl, 1995; Roddy et al., 1994;
Hutchins and Greenhalg, 1997; Latacz‐Lohmann and Foster,
1997). According to Soil Association (2000); Makatouni (1999);
Davies et al. (1995), organic food is seen as diet without
“growth hormones” and “chemicals” which seems to be natural
and non-intense produced food.
An organic agriculture usefully offers many advantages,
especially from an environmental and socio-economic (Lobley
et al., 2013). Regarding to Lehmann (2000) cited in Baourakis
(2004), he states the most substantial advantages toward organic
farming that it is the environmental protection by spending non-
chemicals during cultivation processes. Moreover, in term of
economic improvement, organic producers can gain major
profits because of there is higher price sold in organic products
than the price of conventional produces. It seems that the
environment benefits from less threatened in natural ecology for
instance, the condition of soil is better due to the manure used
which lead to harmlessness for health. Nonetheless, Knudsen et
al. (2006) argue that organic agriculture causes possible barriers
which environmentally, socio-economically impacts and effects
the sustainability of global food systems as illustrated in figure
1.1. Additionally, organic production from green farming seems
to be inevitably correlated with global market of organic food.
During the 90’s, the trend of organic farming has been
increasing in Europe (Baourakis, 2004) in which in 2000, the
retail sales of organic products worldwide boosted to reach at
20 billion US dollars as the International Trade Centre (ITC)
revealed (IFOAM, 2001). Moreover,
Figure 1.1: The diagram shows the possible issues in
environment, socio-economic, and the sustainability in food

production systems of organic agriculture which the arrows are
indicators of possible impacts (Knudsen et al., 2006).
the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL); in
association with the International Federation Organic
Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) find that the development of
organic farmland and organic share grew up from 11.0 to 50.9
million hectares and 0.2 to 1.1 percent share respectively as
represented in figure 2.1 (Willer and Lernoud, 2017). It appears
that the growth of world organic agricultural land and the
market share has gradually increased between
1999 to 2015.
Figure 1.2: The bar chart illustrates the growth of organic
farmland and organic market share from 1999-2015 (Willer and
Lernoud, 2017)
Moreover, Allen and Kovach (2000) examine that the emergence
of organic foods are increasingly available at convenience
stores, supermarkets, and high-end restaurants not only
presented at natural or organic foods stores.
1.2 Research aims and objectives
This research focuses on consumer attitude and various
characteristics regarding purchase intention of consumers in the
UK. There are more studies on several issues of organic food’s
consumption trend which influence intentions to buy among
British consumers whilst, there are small number of information
and evidence about the relationship between various aspects of
organic food and consumer’s purchase intention. Thus, this
research intends to take an action in that minimal premises.
However, the objective of this research is to study how the
trend of organic food has impacted upon consumer attitude and
to find out the variables that mostly influence consumer to
purchase organic food. Finally, the aim of this research is to
answer the question of how various aspects regarding organic
foods have an impact on purchase intention of consumers.

In order to examine the impact of various factors influencing on
consumer’s purchase intention of organic food among organic
and non-organic consumers, the objectives of this research were
as follow:
1. To identify the relationship between consumer knowledge
about organic food and purchase intention.
2. To identify the relationship between various factor (organic
certification labels, health, taste, environment, food safety,
price, better animal welfare) and purchase intention.
3. To identify the relationship between demographic factor
(gender) and purchase intention.
4. To identify whether price is an obstacle of organic food
products to increase consumers’ purchase intention or not.
1.3 Structure of this research
This research consists of six chapters. The first chapter provides
the background of the study and outlined the research aims and
objectives. Chapter two conducts the literature review of
existing studies related to the research topic for in-depth
understanding. The next chapter is the chapter of methodology
which aims to explain the research method that will be used in
this study. Moreover, it also discusses research philosophy,
research approach, research design, data collection tool, data
analysis, Next, details of validity, reliability and ethical
considerations are also addressed. Also, seven hypotheses are
presented. The fourth chapter presents findings which analyse
from data collected from respondents. Likewise, the overview of
demographic information of respondents and the result from all
hypotheses testing by using SPSS 24 are analysed. In the
chapter five, the finding will be discussed related to the existing
literature from chapter two. Lastly, the final chapter is proposed
to conclude all findings and explain the theoretical
implications, limitation of this study and recommendation for
future research.
1.4 Chapter summary

The market of organic food is considered as one of the major
growing markets of food industry in the UK. This study mainly
focuses consumers' concerns and attitude regarding various
factors whether these have influence on intention to buy organic
foods or not.
Chapter 2: Literature review
In Chapter 2, literature review from previous findings by other
researchers related to the topic and background is presented.
This chapter attempts to highlight an outline of three main
factors influencing attitude of consumer towards organic foods.
Moreover, the definition and discussion of consumer purchase
intention and consumer attitude will be presented. Additionally,
the concept of characteristic of organic food consumers will be
explained in detail.
2. Consumers’ knowledge, attitude and purchasing intention
about organic foods:
Based on the review from previous findings in both relevant
articles and literatures. There are numerous aspects have been
discovered to have significant impacts on the attitude and
purchase intention of consumer on organic food. This segment
discusses, reviews, and summarises the influence of these
considerations on consumers’ attitude and intention to buy.
There are three main determinants combine the consequences of
studies describing the factors influence organic food purchase
which these determinants are categorised into two broad ranges:
purchasing motives and impediments to purchasing.
2.1 Concerns of consumer regarding several aspects of organic
foods:
2.1.1 Product labels in credence good markets:
In current market, there are several organic product logos which
are generated to indicate whether a certain good meets organic
standards.
More importantly, some labelling has become compulsory in
terms of representing consumer safety such as dietary
information (Roe et al. 2014). Recent studies also engage with
current discourses in revealing about labels that consumers have

positive reactions toward organic and fair-trade labels but they
have uncertainties about unfamiliar labels or general labels that
claim climate friendly (Jassen and Hamm, 2012; Sirieix et al.,
2013). In the case of organic food in the U.S. for example, the
food products are differentiated by four attribute classifications
based on product composition: organic content, environmental
impact, country of origin, and price (Batte et al., 2014).
Particularly, there are four levels of organic content features
which are as follows: 1) “100 percent organic” with the NOP
seal, 2) “Organic” with the NOP seal, 3) “Made with Organic
___”, 4) No label with specific organic ingredients (Czarnezki
and Jason, 2011;
Batte et al., 2014) as labelling specifications is shown
in figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1: Organic labels and informational Treatment in the
U.S. (adapted from USDA, n.d.)
Another notable example of the labels that are commonly used
existing in the UK to certify in compliance with organic
standards is the logos of Organic Farmers and Growers (OF&G),
Organic Food Federation, and the Soil Association as shown in
figure 2.2.
Figure 2.2
: Organic certification logos in the UK (Gerrard et
al., 2013)
Last example is the logo which is mandatory in the EU. The
common EU label for organic product legislation was
established by the revised law on product detailing rules and
their labelling control (Czarnezki and Jason, 2011). In their
comprehensive study, it is likely to develop the organic
products credibility and to facilitate the organic products
identification in the market. To be more specific, Zander et al.
(2015) indicate that the organic label contains the certain logo
with the controlling standard code number and adding with the

sign of the place where the law materials were produced as
illustrated in figure 2.3. The existence of the obligatory
labelling might be possible to be a key factor to recognise
consumer demand in order to enlarge the organic farming in the
EU. Besides, the external declaration could possibly guarantee
the organic quality which customers can simply verify by
themselves.
Figure 2.3: Specific information of the organic labelling in the
EU (Zander et al., 2015)
2.1.2 Health and nutritional concern:
Davies
et al. (1995) discovered that health appears to be the
important reason of the involvement in organic food products
consumption. Similarly, the tremendous majority of studies
emphasise that health-related motives are the main reason
customers consume organic foods (Baker et al.., 2004; Botonaki
et al., 2006; Chinnici et al., 2002; Chryssohoidis and Krystallis,
2005; Huang, 1996; Hutchins and Greenhalgh, 1995; Lusk,
2011; Lusk and Briggeman, 2009; Makatouni, 2002; Padel and
Foster, 2005; Schif- ferstein and Ophuis, 1998; Tregear et al.,
1994; Vega-Zamora,
et al., 2014; Zanoli, 2004; Zanoli and Naspetti, 2002).
The origin of the belief that consuming organic food is good for
health is the beginning of positive attitude that consumers have
towards organic food, thus they can consume it without any
doubt and fear (Suh, Eves, and Lumbers ,2012). Generally, this
issue related to chemicals-free feeling of consumers which
stated by Devcich, Pedersen and Petrie (2007). For instance, the
use of risky substances such as chemical fertilisers, pesticides,
preservatives, and artificial additives are perceived to have
serious harm on health (Hammit, 1990; Makatouni, 2002; Padel
and Foster, 2005; Zanoli and Naspetti, 2002; Zepeda and Deal,
2009). To conclude, naturalness and cleanliness could be the
predictor which encourage people to eat healthy organic foods.

The study also showed that worries about health are the
indicator of the preferences for food made from ingredients
from hundred per cent nature.
2.1.3 Environmental concern:
Organic consumers view organic foods as being environmental
friendly while, the chemicals used in agricultural processes of
conventional food products are noticed as environmentally harm
(Jolly, 1991; Ott, 1990; Wilkins and Hillers, 1994). Moreover,
consumers who have a high involvement in the issue of
environmentally and organically related such as
environmentally defence might have a tendency of strong
purchase intention and positive attitude about organic food
(Chen ,2007; Vermeir and Verbeke, 2006) Likewise, many
studies identify environmental-friendly productions as
stimulator of organic food consumption
(Baker et al., 2004; Chryssohoidis and Krystallis, 2005;
Dreezens
et al., 2005; Gracia and Magistris, 2008; Honkanen
et al., 2006; Lusk, 2011; Lusk and Briggeman, 2009;
Makatouni, 2002; Magnusson
et al., 2003; Michaelidou and Hassan, 2008; Padel and
Foster, 2005; Zepeda and Deal, 2009). Consumer behaviour is
considered to be all actions of people which link to environment
such as the usage and consumption of resources from
environment. On the other hand, some studies view nutrients,
health and taste as strong influences rather than the concerns
over environment that drive organic food purchases
(Mitsostergios and Skiadas, 1994; Magnusson
et al., 2003; Shifferstein and Ophuis, 1998; Tregear
et al., 1994; Zanoli and Naspetti, 2002). Similarly,
Aertsens
et al. (2009) argue that there has been positive attitude
of consumers towards organic food, but the number of regular
purchase intention is still low. It can be seen that environmental
factor might be one of factors towards the consumption but it

might not be the most effective aspect.
2.1.4 Food safety concern:
Many earlier studies address that the concern over food safety
has also been recognised as the important factor of organically-
produced food purchases (Jolly, 1991; Schifferstein and Ophuis,
1998; Soler
et al., 2002). Moreover, some researchers have implied
that the absent chemical farming procedures are safer than
conventional farming (Kouba, 2003; Lacy, 1992). Azam
et al. (2012) also
analyse how organic food has become popular that food
safety are the major elements increasing awareness of the
benefit offer from organic foods.
However, Organic Consumers Association (2001) notes that a
dangerous concern that represents consumers’ intention
resulting to purchase organic produces is scares of animal-
related diseases such as BSE (mad cow disease), foot and
mouth, and Escherichia coli 0157 outbreaks. Similarly,
Michaelidou and Hassan (2008) take issue with customers’
concerns that there has been a constant safety aspect in food
consumption as against to disease from animal. Physical risk
seems to be another main obstacle which leads to the decrease
of organic food consumption. Also, farming methods are a
factor involved in food safety concern (Yee
et al., 2005). It could be concluded that some consumers
might use food safety aspect as the main reason to eat but some
group of them might be seen organic food as a cause of animal
related-diseases.
2.1.5 Price consciousness:
According to the majority of literature (Aertsens
et al., 2009; Hughner, et al., 2007; Hill and
Lynchehaun, 2002; Makatouni, 2002; McEachern and Willock,
2004; Padel and Foster, 2005; Zanoli and Naspetti, 2002;

Zepeda and Deal, 2009) the expensive price of organic food
products is one of the key obstacles to increase organic food
consumption. It is known that organic farming has a high
production cost and profitability is low owing to limited number
of production. Thus, these costs are marked up price added to
consumer, organic market will then be more expensive
comparing to non-organic food products. As a result of this,
Azam
et al. (2012) state that price is a variable indicator to
predict consumer preferences towards organic food products.
Willingness to pay of consumers for organic products is
different base on product categories which vegetables and fruits
appear to be the highest number consumer’s willingness to pay
for mark-up price of organically fresh produced products
(Krystallis
et al., 2006). Likewise, Cronley
et al. (2005) note that the significant influence leading
to purchase decisions is price which consumers often use it as
the standard to verify quality. People appears to perceive that
they might receive high quality if they purchase at premium
price. For example, consumers are willing to pay a superior
price for organically-produced products (Krystallis
et al., 2006). Some studies ascertain that organic food
consumers are less concerned regarding low prices (Lusk, 2011;
Lusk and Briggeman, 2009; Mondelaers
et al., 2009; Torjusen et al., 2001). It cannot be denied
that price plays a major part as being a barrier in country that is
less developed even though price has been explored to be less
affected to organic consumption (Fotopoulos and Krystallis,
2002; Padel and Foster, 2005; Tarkiainen and Sundqvist, 2005).
To be critical, consumers of organic foods seem to rely heavily
on the price when choosing high quality product or service
which is based on purchase decision. A possible explanation is
that not all consumers are able to pay for organic products due
to financial problem such as receiving lower income in their
family.

2.1.6 Animal welfare consequences:
Organic buyers are motivated by expectations of improved
animal welfare in the system of organic productions (Aarset et
al., 2004; Hill and Lynchehaun, 2002). Specifically, Harper and
Makatouni (2002); Torjusen et al. (2001) convey that animal
welfare consists of the components of both societal and
nutritional; it is an indicator of food safety, food quality, and
ethical treatment of livestock which purchaser frequently use as
measurement. Due to no chemical substance such as growth
hormone of the entire animal treatment procedure, the natural
treatment could be the reason of the consumption of consumers.
2.2 Sensory attributes of organic foods:
Organoleptic quality is a crucial measurement towards the
acceptance of any food product which consists of the typical
sensory: taste, appearance, colour, size, and firmness (Roghelia,
2015). Similarly, Kazimierczak and Swietlikowska (2006)
emphasise a few important attributes for the acceptance of food
which are taste, appearance, and freshness.
2.2.1 Taste, Appearance, Size, and Freshness:
Taste is another feature that several studies found to be the
essential criteria in organic food purchases (Lea and Worsley,
2005; Magnusson et al., 2001; Roddy et al., 1996; Schifferstein
and Ophuis, 1998). The blind taste-tests of organic and non-
organic orange juice and milk investigated by Fillion and Arazi
(2002) for instance, they found positive perceptions of
consumers that the taste of organic orange juice tastes better
than conventional orange juice but, there is no differences
between the taste of organic and conventional milk.
Additionally, Crecente-Campo et al. (2012) noticed about
colour that organically grown fruits was less bright, darker, and
redder. To exemplify, in the study of Andrews and Reganold
(2006), they prove that organic strawberries were slightly
smaller but sweeter, enhance-looking and there were positive
preferences from consumers compared to non-organic
strawberries.

In contrast, according to Haglund et al. (1999), they discovered
that carrots which were grown conventionally were crunchier
and sweeter whereas organic carrots were too hard. In Gilsenan
et al (2010)’s study, they found no major difference from both
conventional and organic samples of baked potato regarding
colour, appearance, taste, and texture. Consequently, it is
possible that it may depends on types of fruits, vegetables, or
other organically produces which leading to specific differences
or no differences. Moreover, some consumers might use sensory
attributes of organic food as the main standard of their
purchases.
2.3 Socio -Economic factors affecting organic food
consumption:
2.3.1 Gender, Age, Economic factors, Education level, and
family size:
Many studies discovered that there are differences in socio-
economic factors which inversely affect intention to buy and
attitude (Lea and Worsley, 2005; Gracia and de Magistris, 2008,
Bartels and Reinders, 2010). It is possible that some people are
unfamiliar with the standard of organic agricultural. Whereas,
the sales of organic products might increase due to the benefits
associate with consumers which they believe the claim that it
attributes to a certain organic.
Regarding
gender, the majority of previous studies of Davies et
al. (1995); Thompson and Kidwell (1998); Lockie
et al. (2002); Urena
et al. (2008) have identified the results of organic food
consumers in general that they are more likely to be female than
male and the presence of children within family (Durham,
2007). Similarly, many authors also hold similar views that
organic food consumers are likely to be women than men
(Mathisson and Schollin, 1994; Wandel and Bugge, 1997).
Furthermore, Wandel and Bugge (1997) advocate about
age that young consumers concern about the

environment which is the main reason of their organic food
choices, but old consumers seem to be more influenced by the
purpose of their own health. Similarly, there are two consumer
types which von Alvensleben and Altmann (1987) found to have
a high level in consuming organic food but the more remarkable
is that their purchase motives are different. These refer to young
people who have a negative attitude towards conventional food
supply, but older people have positively influenced by health
consciousness.
Household income is categorised as
economic factors which has a significant effect on
purchase behaviour. Gracia and de Magistris, (2008) found that
low income consumers tend to have low preferences in
purchasing organic foods as its expensive price. Furthermore, it
can be considered that the main purchasers seem to be wealthy
(Finch, 2006).
Education level is another factor that influence purchase
preference of organic food. Consumers who have high education
are more like to pay more for organic foods (Jolly, 1991;
Wandel and Bugge, 1997). Moreover, Bellows et al. (2010);
Stobbelaar et al (2007) identify that level of education and
knowledge about organic food are positively related which
students who have higher education or college degree have more
positive attitude than less college degree students (Pelletier et
al., 2013)
Size of family, number of children in family and family
condition also have an impact on organic food’s preference.
For instance, family with the arrival of a baby, families
are mostly suggested to baby organic food (Hill and
Lynchehaun, 2002). Other authors revealed that families with
children tend to purchase organically grown produce (Freyer
and Haberkom, 2008; Tsakiridou et al., 2006). In the study
observed by Finch (2006), he concluded that if family member

became pregnant, both organic and conventional food
consumers were more likely to buy organic foods.
Consequently, demographic factors such as gender, age,
economic factors, education level, and size of family seems to
be associated with interest and purchase motives of organic
foods.
2.4 Purchase intention preferences
Howard and Sheth (1969) propose that the confidence is one of
positive antecedents of purchase intentions. Likewise, Bennett
and Harrell (1975) indicate that intentions to purchase can be
predicted by confidence as its play an important role.
Nevertheless, areas where significant differences have been
found by Laroche and Brisoux (1989) include attitudes toward
the familiarity of the brand and different brands. They reveal
that intention to buy a certain brand is positive when it is
affected by attitude regarding the same brand whereas,
adversely affected by other competing brands in choices
customers have. Regarding to Howard (1989), confidence refers
to subjective certainty of buyers that the feeling state of making
judgement on the quality towards a particular brand or the level
of certainty that individual correctly evaluate their judgement of
the brand. Specifically, purchaser might use their own
confidence as self-belief to evaluate the consequences in
advance when deciding to buy something especially, food.
2.5 Consumer attitude
There are several theories that many researchers have discussed
their views further about consumer attitudes. Eagly and Chaiken
(1993) point out that people evaluate a particular object with
some degree of favourability or disfavour which is an
expression of a psychological tendency of an attitude. It is
likely to experience or explore it by time than an occasional
situation. To exemplify, respondents who often faced
unauthorised spamming over time on advertising have negative
attitudes toward mobile advertising (Tsang, Ho, and Liang,

2004). For the formation and concept of attitude, the evaluative
judgement generated in such feature dimensions as likeable-
dislikeable, good-bad, satisfying-unpleasant, and harmful-
advantageous (Ajzen, 2001; Eagly and Chaiken, 1993; Petty and
Wegener, 1997). For instance, it can be when people categorise
items of foods as organic foods-conventional foods.
On the other hand, attitude can be classified into two parts.
Firstly, functional theory. It can be defined as the original
concept of attitude which has influenced tendency responding to
an object in desirable way (Eagly and Chaiken, 1993). Besides,
consumers occupy a state of willingness to sorts of objects that
is largely stored and endured in the memory (Katz, 1960;
Shavitt, 1990; Eagly and Chaiken, 1993). Argyriou and Melewar
(2011) have also extensively emphasised this finding that it
heavily based on memory rather than a simple categorised
evaluation which tends to be intrinsically inheritance.
Furthermore, Smith, Bruner, and White, 1956; Katz (1960) have
also suggested functional theory of attitudes that it is primary
purposes of people’s own attitudes which need to be identified
in order to predict changes. Moreover, Shavitt (1989) claims
that people see attitudes as functional which serve both
psychological stimulations and needs. These consist of the
function of knowledge, value-expressive, social-adjustive, and
utilitarian (Schlosser, 1998; Ajzen, 2001; Grewal
et al., 2004). As it has been claim, it seems possible
that people functionally form attitudes with the intention to
manage, structure, and summarise the object processing large
amounts of information that they received which they might use
situations and motivations from their salient memories to
generate the outcomes. For example, consumers functionally
implied after they firstly exposes by motivations, then their
attitudes will be formed in memory which marketers or
researchers can track it from attitudinal response in memory
(Argyriou and Melewar, 2011).
Secondly, constructive theory. Some studies view consumer

attitude as constructivists which can typically derived from
behavioural tradition. Therefore, some researchers argue that
attitudes are not repossessed in memory, but instead consumers
determine it on the point regarding to their circumstantial goals
(Bettman
et al., 1998; Schwarz and Bohner, 2001; Reed
et al., 2002). To select a preferring alternative, such
goals associate with reducing intellectual movement processing
effort, accelerating the accuracy of a decision, and minimising
undesirable emotions (Bettman
et al., 1998). Additionally, Feldman and Lynch (1988)
suggest that such goals create only temporary motivations,
which is in the process of attitude influenced by internal and
external information (Reed
et al., 2002). According to Kahneman (1973) study,
people tend to have a high attention to information which is
related to their goals. To illustrate, there are two sources which
consumers use as determinants to construct their attitudes:
direct experiences and external information received from
others (Reed
et al., 2002). There is a difference between functional
and constructive theory, hence it is not entirely different from
each theory that is illustrated in figure 2.4.
Figure 2.4: The differences between functional and
constructional theory. (Argyriou and Melewar, 2011).
Constructivism tends to be an active contextualised process,
which knowledge is possibly to be constructed by personal
experiences and previous knowledge. Particularly, in
constructivist perspective, consumers could be information
constructor who build their attitudes when they demanded to
objective reality. Thus, for example even listening to others
about product they have tried, seems to be involved in active
attempts to a new knowledge construction.
2.5.1 Attitude of Consumer towards Organic Food
The notion of organic food has found to be essentially

connected to health in many studies that it is the most
influential purchasing motives in relating to organic food. In
particular, health-related seems to be significant motives for
purchasing organic food which is demonstrated by the evidence
of the surveys from consumer (Alvensleben, 1998; Ekelund,
1989; Huang, 1996; Mathisson and Schollin, 1994; Schifferstein
and Oude Ophuis, 1998; Tregear et al., 1994; Wandel and
Bugge, 1997) which Tregear
et al. (1994) found that 54 per cent of Scottish
consumers purchased organic foods based heavily on health of
their family, while there was only 9 per cent claimed that they
concern for the environment. In addition, Aertsens
et al. (
2009), convey that organic food is perceived to be
friendly to environment and also supposed to have better taste
than conventional foods. To compare with environmental
concern, health is apparently the strongest factor of organic
food purchase motives (Alvensleben, 1998; Ekelund, 1989;
Mathisson and Schollin, 1994; Schifferstein and Oude Ophuis,
1998; Tregear et al., 1994). According to Thøgersen (2007), the
perception of consumers could be associated with universalism
value and it is believed to be the major significance when
consumers buy organic food.
2.6 Consumer knowledge
Chryssochoidis, (2000); Padel and Foster, (2005) note that
consumer knowledge is one of the positive influence of organic
food on their attitudes. Knowledge structure can be boosted by
knowing an object which affects the process activities of
consumer information in numerous ways (Alba and Hutchinson,
1987). Brucks (1985) has also identified that knowledge of
consumer can be classified as subjective knowledge, objective
knowledge, and earlier experience.
Subjective knowledge represents what consumers think they
know about product (Brucks, 1985; Park, Mothersbaugh, and

Feick, 1994). To exemplify, it might be self-assessment
knowledge and the confidence of individual customer that they
have about their own knowledge. The lack of confidence
appears to represent the low level of subjective knowledge
(Chryssochoidis, 2000; Padel and Foster, 2005). However,
objective knowledge is specific attribution of information (Park,
Mothersbaugh, and Feick, 1994) which Brucks (1985) defined it
as what consumers truly know. Finally, earlier experience might
be prior involvement with product usage or knowledge about
specific product after trial.
Although these two dimensions: subjective and objective
knowledge commonly related, Ellen (1994) contends that
subjective knowledge is more positively influential on consumer
attitude in evaluating product. In addition, the measures of
subjective knowledge seem to be more applicable in order to
describing consumer strategies because they are based on what
consumers perceive that they know. (Lee and Lee, 2009)
Another aspect that is correlated with both subjective and
objective knowledge appears to be product knowledge. Biswas
and Sherrell (1993) defined product knowledge as general
knowledge which consists of product functional features
information and differences of brand characteristics. Notably,
there are two distinct views which Alba and Hutchinson (1987)
have divided from product knowledge: familiarity and expertise.
They concluded that the number of experiences from product-
related gathered by consumer refers to familiarity, whereas
expertise is associated with the accomplishment from ability to
complete product-related tasks (Alba and Hutchinson, 1987;
Bettman and Park, 1980). Moreover, product usage or the
amount of product buying could be allied with consumer
experience.
In particular, product-related experiences are dependence on the
main accumulation of pre-remaining knowledge which is
certainly connected to subjective knowledge (Park,
Mothersbaugh, and Feick, 1994; Rudell, 1979) because cues of

product experience can positively drive it to be more
significant. Furthermore, the more experiences consumers take
are the more positive attitude they would have. Thus, it has
been demonstrated that prior experience plays a major role in
determining attitude of consumers (Sørensen
et al., 1996). Comparably, Roddy
et al. (1996) claim that consumers who have
experienced in eating organic food appear to have more positive
attitude than consumers who have no familiarity with organic
food.
Consumer can gain knowledge of organic food from many
different sources. Gracia and De Magistris (2007) revealed that
subjective knowledge of consumer is significantly influenced by
various information about organic foods which are broadly
disseminated in the market. In particular, public administration
for example, local government, announcements from ecological
organization, social media, social networks, and advertisements
seem to be strong impacts regarding knowledge of organic food,
Consequently, prior experience are also certainly considered as
crucial element that affect consumer knowledge about organic
food.
2.7 Hypothesis
Hypothesis 1
Ho: Knowledge of organic food have no influence on
consumers’ intention to buy.
H1: Knowledge of organic food have an influence on
Hypothesis 2
Ho: Consumer concerns regarding various factors (health, taste,
environment, food safety, price, better animal welfare) have no
influence on consumers’ intention to buy.
H1: Consumer concerns regarding various factors (health, taste,

environment, food safety, price, better animal welfare) have an
Hypothesis 3
Ho: Gender has no influence on an individual's intention to buy
organic food.
H1: Gender has an influence on an individual's intention to buy
organic food.
Hypothesis 4
Ho: Income has no influence on an individual's intention to buy
organic food.
H1: Income has an influence on an individual's intention to buy
organic food.
Hypothesis 5
Ho: Sensory attributes (taste, appearance, size, and freshness)
have no influence on an individual's intention to buy organic
food.
H1: Sensory attributes (taste, appearance, size, and freshness)
have an influence on an individual's intention to buy organic
food.
Hypothesis 6
Ho: Organic certification labels have no influence on
consumer’s purchase intention.
H1: Organic certification labels have an influence on
consumer’s purchase intention.
Hypothesis 7
Ho: Health consciousness is not the most influential factor
which affect consumers’ purchase intention.
H1: Health consciousness is the most influential factor which
affect consumers’ purchase intention.
2.8 Chapter summary
This chapter has shown the overview of characteristics of
organic food associated with consumer attitude and purchase
intention. Moreover, it is essential to have a clear understanding

about personal and subjective norms of consumer’s knowledge
because both of this may play a major role in attitude of
consumers. In the next chapter, methodology will be explained
in the process to achieve the findings and results.
Chapter 3: Research Methodology
3.1 Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to present the theoretical
framework and the details of research procedures which was
used in obtaining data. Moreover, the data collection methods
which were chosen for the topic were clearly justified. In
addition, the research was given the information about
participants in the study. The methodology of this research
consisted of explanation about research design, research
strategies, and research instruments. Nonetheless, the pilot
study was provided in this chapter as it compromises the
research instrument’s reliability and validity. Lastly, the
statistical method was discussed in this chapter.
3.2 Research philosophy
Understanding the research philosophy is important in this
study. Saunders
et al., (2016) defined research philosophy as beliefs
system and assumption about knowledge development. It can
help to specify a suitable method used in a study (Smith
et al., 1997). Moreover, it can be divided into five
major parts: positivism, critical realism, interpretivism,
postmodernism, and pragmatism. Positivism approaches to the
social sciences which involves functioning with observable
social reality (Saunders
et al., ,2016). Moreover, Anthony
et al., (2005) clarify by saying that “social science
positivists promoted research studies that were value-free, using
rhetorical neutrality that resulted in discoveries of social laws,

from which in time and context-free generalizations ensued”.
3.3 Research approach
According to Saunders
et al., (2016), they emphasise that there are three
different approaches to theory development in research:
deduction, induction and abduction. This research is correlated
with deductive approach which Creswell and Plano Clark (2007)
state that the deductive approach was generated from top down
which worked from theory to hypotheses to data. To illustrate, a
study has begun by exploring existing literature based on the
topic chosen. Then, hypotheses were created to test existing
theories which the testable concepts were related among one or
more variables. Moreover, appropriate data collected from
conditions in survey was analysed to test validity of hypotheses.
If the results and conclusion are positively consistent with the
premises, the theory may be true.
3.4 Research Design
3.4.1 Qualitative vs. Quantitative Research
According to Onwuegbuzie and Leech (2005), they propose that
the most view of instructors of quantitative and qualitative
research have seen themselves as competitors with each other. It
can be differentiated by the focus on the way they view natural
reality. Theorists believe in the quantitative method that
scientific principles can be used to measure validity and
reliability in a single reality, whilst qualitative theorists are
considered as different meanings for different people are
generated by multiple constructed reality and whose
interpretations are clarified depending on the researcher’s
views. In particular, qualitative research is defined as a strategy
of research with aims to gather a deep clarification of the
phenomena. Specifically, qualitative research offers the
problem insights and provides ideas (Bryman and Bell, 2007).
Creswell (2009) states that the purpose of quantitative research
is the generalisation of the findings to the population which

generally entails hypotheses which presumed from existing
theories that need to be tested.
In this study, quantitative research was selected as an approach.
As the fact that quantification in data collection and analysis
with the purpose to qualify data generalisation. Particularly,
this research attempts to acquire a large number of British
consumers by questionnaire. Hence, the most suitable approach
in this case is quantitative method. Besides, the main
concentration of this research was hypotheses testing derived
from adapting theoretical model. The relationship between
different variables, factors, attitude, and intention to purchase
was a fundamental goal to identify in this research. Based on
these rationalisations, quantitative approach was chosen.
3.4.2 Exploratory, Descriptive, or Explanatory
According to Ghauri and Grønhaug (2005), they demonstrate
that a suitable research design verifies the importance of the
empirical data however, assisting researchers to solve the
research problem with the limitation of time and resources. In
specific, Robson (2002) classifies research design into three
categories: exploratory, descriptive and explanatory.
The purpose of
exploratory research design is as the name infers, it
simply study nature of the problem to help improve
understanding of the problem but there is no intention to
provide final and conclusive evidence to exiting problems or to
answer research questions (Phopalia, 2010). Moreover, Dhawan
(2010) identifies that the object of this kind of research
involves the observation in numerous facts that the researchers
need to be ensured.
Descriptive research design intends to formulate a perceptive of
circumstances, people or events (Saunders et al., 2009). This
type of research can be used for quantitative, qualitative or both
method in combination in order to offer a specific of
information details of a situation or events (Bryman and Bell,
2007). Dhawan (2010) affirms that the purpose of quantitative

research with design of descriptive research is to the
relationship of different variables. It is applicable to answer the
questions of what, who, when, how, and where.
In
explanatory research design: aims at identifying the
relationship between variables which searching for a certain
issue explanation. In particular, it is applied to describe a
certain question of “why” (Robson, 2002).
The basic goal of this research was to investigate the
relationship among different factors toward the consumption of
organic food that might have an impact on consumer attitude
and purchase intention. Likewise, the relationship between
attitude of consumer and intention to buy were also examined.
Based on whether it was positively influenced or not between
potential factors, the interpretation of British consumer attitude
and purchase intention could be more formulated. Likewise, the
measurements among different variables were raised to test
theoretical concept and a number of population was also
indicated. Nevertheless, this study was considered as a
descriptive research design which intended to investigate the
association among different variables.
3.5 Research strategies
3.5.1 Types of research strategies
Research strategy can be considered as a crucial key in
developing a design of good research. Yin (2009) proposes
characteristics which help to choose and evaluate the most
proper strategy which are three major conditions: ‘Form of
research question’, ‘Requires control of behaviour event’ and
‘Focus on contemporary events’. Furthermore, it can be applied
by five forms based on these three conditions which there are
experiment, survey, archival analysis, history and case study
(Zikmund, 2002). These would be easily illustrated in table 3.1
below.
Table 3.1: Research strategy (Yin, 2009)

Firstly,
experiment is a method which aims to generally
verifying and establishing the validity of hypotheses. Whereas
the variables are transformed to establish the difference of
effects, Secondly,
survey is a strategy including the number of individual
sampling from a population to gather data to get statistical
generalisation on a certain topic. Thirdly,
archival analysis is an observational method where the
researchers examine accumulated archives or documents. Forth,
history is used to collect and analyse historical
document at what happened in the past, to understand the
present, and to plan the future. Fifth,
case study is an in-depth analysis which is used to study
the actual story that has been gathered to show the facts an
order relevant events. It is applied in order to organise and
analyse the potential factor to find problem and then summarise
solutions to solve the issue.
According to the purpose of this study, the most proper research
strategy which was applied is survey. All the research questions
in this study were created in the form of “what”. In specific,
there are only two strategies that support the requirement the
“what” question form: survey and archival analysis. As the
research design of this study was descriptive method and to
collect primary data, survey is the most suitable one which was
chosen. Moreover, British consumers are considered as
population. In order to analyse and conclude statistic from
population and quantified into attitude and intention to buy
organic foods, this can be reached the purpose by a sample
selected.
3.6 Time horizon
According to Saunders et al. (2016), time horizons are crucial
for the research design in methodology used and it can be

classified into two major categories namely, longitudinal
studies and cross-sectional. Longitudinal studies are repeated
over extended period whereas cross-sectional studies are used
with the limitation of specific time frame. Therefore, this
research is limited to a specific time frame thus the cross-
sectional time horizon is applied in order to consider the
relationship between relevant variables.
3.7 Research instruments
3.7.1 Sampling instrument
There are two major methods of sampling regarding to Bryman
and Bell (2007). These two methods are probability sampling
and non-probability sampling. In specific, a sampling that is
based on the fact that every member of a population chosen as
the subject has known and has equal chance is known as
probability sampling. While, non-probability sampling does not
provide equal chances of being selected to individuals which
subjects in this sampling are normally chosen by researchers’
personal judgment purpose or on the foundation of their
accessibility (Davis and Schoorman, 1995). In addition,
Saunders et al. (2016) stress that there is a lower error happened
when the sample’s size larger in generalising to the population.
In this study, the target respondents were the people who have
the experience and people who never ever familiar with organic
foods. It is possible that the most suitable sampling technique is
convenience sampling which is one of non-probability sampling
type. To exemplify, they are data sources who are conveniently
sample for researchers (Jankowics, 2000). Therefore, high level
of error might be occurred.
3.7.2 Data collection instruments
In statistical analysis, data collection has played a major role.
According to Cook and Campbell (1979), they divided the
different data sources into two categories: primary and
secondary data. Particularly, primary data is the data that
researchers collected for the first time which is factual and
original. This type of data aims at finding solutions to the
problem which this real-time data is collected specifically for

research needs’ objective includes survey, experiment, personal
interview and etc. However, there are major differences between
these two. Secondary data is the data produced by others and
can be considered as an analysis of primary data which refers to
existing data collected by organisation includes books, journal
articles, government publications, and etc. (Douglas, 2015). In
addition, the drawbacks of primary data are costly and time-
consuming while secondary data can help saving time and
money therefore, it might not cover enough details to analyse or
not match researcher’s needs which sometimes the data are
possibly fault (Schurr and Ozanne, 1985).
In this study, questionnaire is the most suitable form of data
collection (Jang, 2005). This data collection technique is widely
known and accepted. According to the purpose of this research,
this research focuses on consumer attitude and characteristic of
organic foods that affect purchase intention of consumer.
Hence, questionnaire was used to collect a large quantity of data
since it might help researcher to save cost and also the data can
be easily analysed (Pavlou, 2003). In contrast, Bowling (2005)
argues that the influences of bias might be appeared on the
responses acquired and the misunderstanding in the true
meaning of question in questionnaire could be affected the
accuracy of the data (Doney and Cannon, 1997).
Survey is a method of quantitative analysis for gathering
information in which a questionnaire is applied with the aim of
accessibly collecting data of a representative sample from
certain population. Moreover, the appropriate analysis of the
relationship of significant variables were offered.
This study was divided the questionnaire into five sections. The
questionnaire was begun with demographic and socio-economic
information. The next section was the question asking whether
the respondents consume organic foods or not. In specific,
participants who has never eaten were dragged to last question
about the reason. The third part was related to cconsumer’s
opinion towards consumption of organic food relating to
attitude and purchase intention includes frequency, places to

buy, categories of product, and the challenge consumers found.
Then, the next section was started with four main characteristics
using a Likert scale to measure the data. In specific, Likert
scale is a psychometric measurement which have been
developed to measure opinion, attitude, and belief (Likert,
1923). Respondents may be provided a series of statements
relating to a topic, in terms of indicating a level of agreement
and disagreement. The respondents were asked about factors
influence motive for purchasing organic foods, organic
certification labels, and price respectively. Whilst, 5 equals to
strongly agree, 4 means agree, 3 means either agree nor
disagree, 2 means disagree, and 1 equals to strongly disagree.
The advantages of Likert scale are efficient, inexpensive
method, and it is not difficult to understand, thus could be
likewise reducing bias of social desirability and social pressure
as anonymity on self-administered was offered. However, there
were the main seven-sub characteristics of organic foods
namely, organic certification labels, health consciousness, taste,
environmental concerns, food safety, price, and better animal
welfare. Lastly, the final section was related to purchase
intention which also using Likert scale.
3.7.3 Data analysis instrument
Data analysis is as important as data collection which need to be
determine the method of accuracy analysis. In addition, data
analysis is a process of revising, classifying, and recording the
data in a suitable manner (Yin, 2009). After the data were
prepared and collected through online survey, the method of
analysis was selected for further analysis. Bryman and Bell
(2007) affirm that there are two efficient approaches were taken
in order to analyse data: mathematical formula and computer
software. For quantitative research, data can be analysed
quantitatively by different data analysis of the software SPSS
which purposes of the study is an indicator of analysis method
chosen. Following the analysis method, this research was
applied frequencies analysis, descriptive analysis, reliability
analysis, correlation analysis, hypothesis testing, regression

analysis and etc. (Malhotra and Birks, 2003).
The aim of applying
frequencies analysis is to describe demographic
information of the respondents in terms of age, gender, and
income. It shows each alternative data which is frequently
answered by participants (Aaker et al. ,2011).
The most basic method:
descriptive statistics are applied with purpose of data
summarising. Hinkle et al. (1994) note that it reveals the simple
characteristic such as the mean, median, standard deviation,
skewness and kurtosis.
The consistency of a concept measure is examined by
reliability (Bryman and Bell ,2007) which multiple item
measure and questions invented are gauge to measure a concept
that will be further added to evaluate an overall score.
Moreover, these indicators are the most important issue that
need to be ensure whether they refer to the same thing. Hence,
Bryman and Bell (2007) confirm that Cronbach’s alpha is the
efficient tool to test the internal consistency which is processed
with SPSS. Generally, a scale of Cronbach’s alpha is accepted
over 0.6 (Pallant, 2007) the questions are more reliable when
the value is higher (Flynn
et al., 1994).
The method to increase validity and reliability is
correlation analysis which the samples accurately
represent the population. In order to apply this analysis method
to draw conclusions of the population, the value of Pearson-
correlation (R-value) is applied to measure this. The range of
value is between -1 and +1. The value of +1 indicates the
perfection of positive relation between two variables, -1
therefore, represents a totally negative relationship between two
variables (Aaker
et al., 2011).

Another approach to find the relationship between two
categorical variables is called the
Pearson Chi-square test. The Chi-square test is a non-
parametric test which use to measure the differences between
what is observed and what is expected regarding to the assumed
hypothesis. To test statistically, the size of expected frequencies
should not be performed when any cells is less than 5 (Pallant,
2016)
According to Bryman and Bell (2007), a statistical process to in
investigate the relationship between two or more variables is
multiple regression analysis. The main parameters that
need to be concentrate are Significance, Beta, Adjusted R
Square and T-value. In particular, Beta stands for regression
coefficient standardisation in which the beta value (β-value)
represents how each independent variable influences the
dependent variable. The determination of the acceptance or
rejection of hypothesis depends on significance level for
instance, hypothesis will be rejected when P-value is greater
than 0.05. While, the adjusted R square indicates the percentage
which the dependent variable can be justified by independent
variables (Bryman and Bell, 2007).
This research applied frequencies analysis to explain
respondents’ information about demographic. Whereas,
descriptive statistics were used to present the significant factors
which influence attitude of consumer and further effect on their
intention to buy organic food of market in the UK as well as
conclusions were draw related to this phenomenon. Mean value
was the main focus parameters which were analysed by using
SPSS. Nevertheless, in terms of significance level, the analysis
was conducted using Pearson correlation analysis, Pearson chi-
square and linear regression analysis. Additionally, a
description in details would be revealed in the following
chapter.

3.8 Validity and reliability
In order to examine the credibility of finding, validity was
focused. Validity indicates ability of the research whether it can
logically answer to the question that is expected to answer. Hill
(1998) claims that there are three forms of validity which
consists of content validity, construct validity and criterion
validity. First, content validity is an evaluation by person which
is determined by the accurate way of measure that allows a
person who have knowledge in specific field giving the
suggestion and feedback. Second, construct validity is the
measure of the ability of an operational definition to measure a
certain concept. (Bryman and Bell, 2007; Aaker et al., 2011).
This can be accomplished by the evaluation of Pearson’s
Correlation (Malhotra and Birks, 2003; Bryman and Bell, 2007).
A very strong correlation happened when this value is greater
than 0.8 between two variables (Bryman and Bell, 2007). Last,
the aim of criterion validity is a tool to measure how well the
scale congruently performed with other criterion variables
(Malhotra and Birks, 2003; Bryman and Bell, 2007).
To ensure the validity of the research, a person with specialise
skill in this field were requested to review through the research
which were evaluated by supervisor and however, reworked by
the researcher. This help to improve and strengthen the quality
of the study. In order to develop some questions in
questionnaire before spreading to the public, two potential
respondents were requested to read and offer some comments in
pilot study whether they fully understood and the questionnaire
provide enough alternatives. On the other hand, Pearson’s
Correlation is a tool to guarantee the construct validity of this
study.
While, reliability refers to an evaluation of the consistency of a
concept measure with an equal result without random errors
(Malhotra et al., 2013). In order to increase reliability of the
study, it is essential to describe all procedures in detail to
facilitate and allow another researcher who investigate the same
study to replicate. This assist to minimise the risk of the wrong

conclusions.
In this research, Cronbach’s alpha was used in order to check
the reliability. The high reliability of the questions was
illustrated by the result of Cronbach’s alpha.
3.9 Pilot study
Veal (1997) identifies that pilot study is applied to check the
survey before doing the actual one. The advantage of the pilot
test is to check the accuracy of the survey and solve the
problem that might occurred in some questions. Nonetheless, if
there is informality in data collection and the search for some
conclusion in exploratory research, pilot study might be used.
Moreover, the pilot study was tested on a group of interviews
consisted of 6 to 10 people. They can provide some comments
and share their opinions to the researcher then the data attained
will be qualitative data which lead to quantitative research.
In this study, six people were used for a pilot test which the
result obtained from them show a problem of misunderstanding
in some questions. Thus, the research has edited and improved
such question in order to gain the best understanding for an
effective answer.
3.10 Ethical issues
In this survey research, principles of ethic are mainly centred on
defending the right of each respondents to avoid them feeling
reluctant, unsafe, uncomfortable, and stress. Ethical
considerations in all types of research are very important. In the
first stage, the researcher was informed to submit ethical
approval form to university before collecting the data as the
study involves the data from human. Then, the ethical review
self-assessment form was viewed by researcher’s supervisor in
order to approve the project. In survey part, the survey was
carried out by the researcher which the respondents were clearly
explained that the survey was developed for academic purpose
only. To show the respect, the first page of the survey showed
the purpose of the research and told them that the information
was kept confidential. In addition, the responses from
individual participants have remained anonymous and also no

identification.
3.11 Chapter summary
This chapter primarily present the research methodology.
Research philosophy and approach were firstly outlined which
hypotheses were justified pertinently to research aims and
objectives. Next, research objectives and design were
addressed. Then, research strategy, time horizon and
instruments were clearly highlighted. Besides, variability and
reliability of data were provided. Lastly, pilot study and ethical
considerations were described. The next chapter will be focused
on the finding to answer the research objectives.
Chapter 4: Finding and analysis
4.1 Introduction
This chapter aims to present data obtained from the analysed
result from SPSS and describe the primary data collected from
120 respondents. There are three main parts in this chapter
consists of frequencies. Next, it was followed by the reliability
analysis and descriptive statistics. After that, it continued with
the result of the test from hypotheses.
4.2 Participants in the research
Factor
Frequency
Percent
Gender
Age

Occupation
Education
Annual income
Male
53
44.2
Female
67
55.8
Total
120
100.0
18-24
44
36.7
25-34
46
38.3
35-44
9
7.5

45-54
13
10.8
More than 54
8
6.7
Total
120
100.0
Employed for wages
35
29.2
Self-employed
22
18.3
A student
58
48.3
A homemaker
2
1.7
Unemployed
3
2.5
Total
120
100

Certificates
6
5.0
Diploma
7
5.8
Bachelor’s Degree
40
33.3
Master’s Degree
59
49.1
Doctoral Degree
7
5.8
Total
120
100.0
Less than £20,000
58
48.3
£20,000 -£34,999
26
21.7
£35,000 - £49,999
19
15.8

£50,000 - £74,999
7
5.8
£75,000 - £99,999
7
5.8
£100,000 - £149,999
2
1.7
£200,000 or greater
1
0.8
Total
120
100.0
Table 4.1: Summary of Key Demographic Characteristics of
respondents
4.2.1 Gender
Figure 4.1: Gender
Figure 4.1 illustrates the gender of respondents which includes
two alternatives of male and female. The number of female
participants was slightly larger than male which 55.8% are
female whereas 44.2% are male.
4.2.2 Age

Figure 4.2: Age
Regarding to figure 4.2. This bar chart presents five periods
which were used collected information about the age of
respondents. The majority of age group of respondents is the
age between 25-34 with 38.3%. Then, it was followed by 36.7%
which belongs to the age group of 18-24. However, the minority
group of respondents belongs to 35-44, 45-54, and more than 54
which are 7.5%, 10.8%, and 6.7% respectively. Age group
shows that the survey mostly represented by young adults.
4.2.3 Occupation
Figure 4.3: Occupation
Figure 4.3 shows the occupation of respondents. The majority of
respondents were student with 48.4% while 29.2% of
respondents were employer. Then, self-employed respondents
were slightly lower at 18.3%. On the other hand, the minority
group of respondents were homemaker and unemployed with
1.7% and 2.5% respectively.
4.2.4 Education
Figure 4.4: Education
Figure 4.4 illustrates the educational qualification of
respondents. It can be clearly seen that half of all respondents
of the survey have master’s degree. Moreover, second highest
number of respondents have bachelor’s degree which was 33.3%
while only 5.8% have doctoral degree and diploma. Last,
respondents who have certificates reached the lowest by 5%.

4.2.5 Annual income
Figure 4.5: Annual income
Figure 4.5 shows the annual income of respondents. It can be
found that the majority of respondents consist of low and
middle-income individuals. 47.5% of respondents have the
annual income less than £20,000. Followed by 21.7% of
respondents have £20,000-£34,999 annual income. While,
15.8% of respondents have £35,000-£49,999.
4.3 Organic or Non-organic consumer
Figure 4.6: Organic or Non-organic consumers
Figure 4.6 represents the respondents whether they are organic
and non-organic consumers. 80.8% of respondents in the survey
were the respondents who consume organic foods while only
19.1% are non-organic consumers. Therefore, the 23
respondents who answer ‘no’ were asked last question about the
reason of not consuming organic foods.
4.3.1 Reasons for not eating organic food
Figure 4.7: Summary of reason of not eating organic food
There are various reasons why 23 respondents do not eat
organic food. In figure 4.7 presents four major reasons why they
do not eat it. Mostly, they do not see much differences between
organic food and conventional food which this reached the
largest number at 8.3%. Moreover, there were only 2.5% for the
reason of the taste which they feel that they don’t like the taste.
However, the percentage of respondents who claimed that
organic food products were not available where they shop was
the same as the percentage of those who think that it was too
expensive.
4.4 Purchase behaviour trend

4.4.1 The frequency of organic consumers’ purchases
Figure 4.8: The frequency of organic consumers’ purchases
Figure 4.8 illustrates the frequency organic food purchasers
have been buying organic food products. Specifically, there
were only 2.5% of organic food purchasers who often bought it
every day. The percentage of respondents who bought it once a
week was the highest at 25% which slightly higher than who
bought several times a week at 22.5%. Then, it was followed by
once a month and few times a year purchasers with the
percentage at 16.7% and 14.2% respectively.
4.4.2 Categories of organic food purchase
Figure 4.9: Summary of types of produce purchase
From 97 respondents who were organic consumers, they were
asked how many categories of organic food products that they
purchased. In addition, they could answer more than one
categories. Figure 4.9 presents the purchase behaviour regarding
to four specific food types which the food categories selected
for the study were fruits, vegetables, poultry (eggs), and red
meat. Food products in these types are the most consumed in the
United Kingdom. Critically, the figure reveals that organic food
purchasers bought organic vegetables the most at 92.8%. For
fruits, it was the second highest which they purchased which the
percentage is at 73.2%. Finally, another two categories: poultry
(eggs) and red meat were at the lowest of 39.2% and 27.8%
which were a small difference.

4.4.3 Places to purchase
Figure 4.10: Summary of point of purchase
Active buyers were asked where they usually buy organic food.
Figure 4.10 proves that most of them (59.2%) buy it from
generic supermarket/ retailer such as Tesco, Asda and Waitrose
followed by 14.2% who buy from specialty organic/ health
store. Moreover, 5% purchase from producer or farmer market
while only 2.4% refers to three respondents who claimed they
bought it online and from all places from choices researcher
provided.
4.5 Challenges face when purchasing organic food
Figure 4.11: Challenges face when purchasing organic food
From figure 4.11, organic food buyers were provided the
choices to indicate challenges they faced when purchasing.
Most of them (59.8%) affirmed that there is a limited variety of
organic food followed by 29.9% of consumers who faced
problems with sensory attributes such as appearance, size, and
freshness. While there was 21.6% who were lack of knowledge
about organic food. Additionally, 17.5% of consumers
concerned about diseases found in organic food. Finally, the
premium price of organic food was a barrier towards their
purchases which 9.3% of them claimed that it is expensive.
However, 4.1% of them have never faced any challenges.

4.6 Consumer Knowledge regarding organic food
What do you know about organic food?
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
23
19.2
19.2
19.2
I know a lot
18
15.0
15.0
34.2
I know something
76
63.3
63.3
100.0
I know nothing
3
2.5
2.5

36.7
Total
120
100.0
100.0
Table 4.2: Summary of consumer knowledge
Figure 4.12: Summary of consumer knowledge
This section presents knowledge of respondents regarding
organic food. Particularly, all respondents were asked about
how much they know about organic food. Figure 4.12 shows a
greater number of the respondents declared the level of
knowledge they have about organic food. The percentage of
respondents who claimed they knew a lot and they knew nothing
was the lowest at 15% and 2.5% respectively. Nevertheless, the
highest percentage of respondents (63.3%) claimed that they
knew something.
4.7 Reliability
Cronbach’s Alpha
Cronbach’s Alpha Based on Standardised Items
N of Items
.874
.877
7
Table 4.3: Reliability Statistics of all variables
Item-Total Statistics
Factors
Scale Mean if Item Deleted
Scale Variance if Item Deleted
Corrected Item-Total Correlation
Squared Multiple Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted
Organic certification labels
22.29

26.207
.731
.586
.846
Health consciousness
22.02
26.208
.757
.647
.843
Taste
22.63
26.882
.570
.458
.868
Environmental concerns
22.33
26.411
.694
.669
.850
Food safety
21.92
25.931
.758
.681
.842
Price
22.54
28.439
.456
.349
.882
Better animal welfare
22.53

26.106
.645
.653
.857
Table 4.4: Item-Total statistics
It is necessary to check the reliability before testing all items
related hypotheses. Based on the collected data, reliability was
tested on each single concept individually to evaluate the degree
of stability and consistency between multiple measurements of a
variable. Generally, Cronbach alpha is the most widely applied
among researchers. According to Flynn
et al. (1994), the value over 0.6 of Cronbach alpha
representing the questionnaire is acceptable, whereas the value
above 0.6 indicating the high level of consistency of the
questionnaire (Cook and Campbell, 1979). From Table 4.3, it
can be seen that the value of Cronbach alpha of all standardised
items was larger than 0.6 which showing high reliability of all
factors in the questionnaire.
More importantly, the final column is Cronbach’s Alpha if Item
Deleted as shown in Table 4.4. As the name suggests, it
indicates the score obtained after each item from the
questionnaire was removed. Currently, the score is α = .874. If
any scores from each item in the last column increased after the
item deleted, the certain item must be deleted to make
questionnaire more reliable. Conversely, the item with score
decreased were kept.
On the other hand, item-total correlations were attained between
each factor and total scores. In order to correct for enlargement
of the correlation coefficient, Henrysson (1963) demonstrates
that the value of total item was analysed without the presence of
the item of interest. Moreover, if there are any items presenting
a low value which is smaller than 0.20 was considered as item
need to be deleted to ensure homogeneity of overall measures.
From Table 4.4, the sixth item which is price was higher than
0.20, this item is not removed as the removal of this item would

lead to a small improvement in Cronbach's alpha.
Consumer attitude
Factor
Cronbach’s Alpha
N of Items
Organic Labels
.880
3
Price
.377
2
Purchase intention
.735
2
Table 4.5: Reliable statistics
From Table 4.5, multiple measurements of a variable were
evaluated to check reliability. It can be seen that Cronbach’s
alpha of organic labels are over 0.7. This reveals that data can
be good as reliability. While, the value of purchase intention is
over 0.6. This demonstrates that it is acceptable. However, the
value below 0.6 of Cronbach’s alpha is still reliable.
4.8 Descriptive statistics
To describe the collected data, it is essential to highlight some
descriptive statistics about conceptual model of consumer
attitude, this includes the overall mean and standard deviation.
Overall, there were 97 respondents who are organic consumers.
4.8.1 Organic Certification Labels
Factor
Mean
Std. Deviation
I am familiar with Organic certification standards.
3.05
1.149
I would recognise the Organic labels when I saw it.
3.43

1.172
I always check organic certification labels before purchasing it.
3.24
1.248
organic certification labels
From the Table 4.6, there are three main items on the
questionnaire measuring attitude of respondents on certification
labels of organic food. Five levels of Likert scale are applied
which range from 5 = strongly agree, 4 = agree, 3 = neither
agree nor disagree, 2 = disagree, 1 = strongly disagree.
Specifically, the result shows that the most respondents that
would recognise and notice organic labels when they saw it
(3.43). Moreover, they always check whether there are organic
labels before they decided to buy (3.24) and there was a low
number of respondents were familiar with the labels (3.05).
4.8.2 Price
Factor
Mean
Std. Deviation
Organic food products are too expensive to buy.
2.73
1.026
I can afford its high prices of organic foods.
3.52
.831
Table 4.7: One-Sampling Statistics-Consumer attitude on price
Regarding to Table 4.7, most organic consumers think that they
can afford its high price of organic food (3.52) whereas, a small
number of them think that it is too expensive to buy (2.73).
4.8.3 Purchase intention
Factor
Mean
Std. Deviation
I intend to increase consumption of organic food

3.63
.726
I will maintain consumption of organic food.
3.87
.745
purchase intention
From Table 4.8, it can be found that most of them will maintain
consuming organic food (3.87) followed by many of them has
the intention to increase consumption of organic food (3.63).
4.9 Statistic testing of Hypotheses
Pearson’s correlation will be used to evaluate the strength and
direction of association between certain variables. Furthermore,
the Pearson coefficient can take a range of values from +1 to -1.
A value of 0 is indicator of no relationship between variables
while +1 indicates a perfect positive correlation. Therefore, the
value of -1 shows a perfect negative correlation as has shown
from Table 4.9 which illustrates the measurements of
correlation coefficient.
Strength
Positive correlation
Negative correlation
Low correlation
rho = 0.10 to 0.29
rho = - 0.10 to - 0.29
Medium correlation
rho = 0.30 to 0.49
rho = - 0.30 to - 0.49
High correlation
rho = 0.50 to 1.00
rho = - 0.50 to - 1.00
Table 4.9: Correlation coefficient measurements
A Pearson's chi-square test is used to discover the relationship
between two categorical variables which two variables should
be measured at an ordinal or nominal level. The value can be
measured by the observation at expected frequencies which if

they are the same, then χ2 = 0. If they are different from
expected frequencies, the value of χ2 goes up. The larger the
value of χ2, the more likely it is that the distributions are
significantly different.
4.9.1 Hypothesis 1
Ho: Knowledge of organic food have no influence on
H1: Knowledge of organic food have an influence on
Correlations
Sum Purchase
Sum Knowledge
Sum Purchase Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
1

97
.299**
.003
97
Sum Pearson
Knowledge Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.299**
.003
97
1
97
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-
tailed).
Table 4.10: Correlation of consumer knowledge and consumer
purchase intention
Pearson’s correlation was presented to evaluate the relationship
between consumer knowledge and their purchase intention. The
result from Table 4.10 illustrates the value of Pearson’s
correlation which was 0.299. This refers to a low positive
association between consumer knowledge and purchase
intention. Since this value is between 0.10 to 0.29 which
denotes to a low positive correlation between the mentioned
continuous variables. Additionally, the Sig. value is 0.003
which was less than p = 0.05 indicating a significant
relationship and confidence in the result. Thus, Hypothesis 1
(H1) is accepted in this case.

4.9.2 Hypothesis 2
Ho: Consumer concerns regarding various factors (health, taste,
environment, food safety, better animal welfare) have no
H1: Consumer concerns regarding various factors (health, taste,
environment, food safety, better animal welfare) have an
Correlations
Factors (Health)
Sum Purchase
Factors (Heath Pearson
Consciousness) Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
1
97
.508**
.000
97
Sum Pearson
Purchase Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.508**
.000
97
1

97
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-
tailed).
Table 4.11: Correlation of health consciousness and consumer
purchase intention
Correlations
Factors (Taste)
Sum Purchase
Factors (Taste) Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
1
97
.378**
.000
97
Sum Pearson
Purchase Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.378**
.000

Submitted in part fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of.docx

Submitted in part fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Submitted in part fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of.docx

Similar to Submitted in part fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of.docx (20)

More from lillie234567

More from lillie234567 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Submitted in part fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of.docx