Investigates user-generated content effects on natural food purchase intentions in Millennials and Gen Z, indicating significant impacts of argument quality and functional value.
Purpose This study aims to investigate the UGC-related and product-related factors that influence Millennials and Gen Z consumers' purchase intentions for UGC-recommended natural food products. Design/methodology/approach The data for this study were gathered from 572 social media users using an adapted questionnaire. Variance-based partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was used to analyze the factors that form the purchase intention of the UGC-recommended natural food products. Additionally, “Multi-Group Analysis” (MGA) was employed to determine whether Gen Z and Millennials were indifferent towards the same factors. Findings The findings of the study highlight that the argument quality of UGC significantly impacts consumers' purchase intentions. Further, the source credibility and homophily of the content creator impact purchase intention for UGC-recommended natural food products only when the viewer's find the information useful. Additionally, the epistemic value and functional value of UGC-recommended products are of utmost importance amongst other product-related factors. Furthermore, Millennials and Gen Z both rely on the argument quality of UGC and the functional value of the product before forming their purchase intentions. Originality/value This paper integrates the information adoption model and the theory of consumption Values to propose a novel model explaining the factors that influence young consumers' preferences for natural food products, based on the information they seek from user-generated content on social media. This model serves as a foundation to explore how information from various social media sources influences young consumers' purchasing decisions for natural food products.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chawla et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: