The impact of product perceived value on green furniture purchase intention: The mediating role of customer value

Shi, T., Yu, S., Zhang, L., and Li, D. (2026). "The impact of product perceived value on green furniture purchase intention: The mediating role of customer value," BioResources 21(1), 95–115.

Abstract

Although consumer interest in green furniture is growing, existing research has seldom examined the underlying psychological mechanisms driving such behavior. To address this gap, data from a survey of 915 Mainland Chinese consumers were analyzed using covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM) to assess how multidimensional customer value—encompassing economic, functional, relational, and emotional dimensions—mediates the effect of perceived green value on purchase intention. The results reveal that emotional value is the strongest mediating pathway linking perceived green value to purchase intention. It also enhances consumers’ perceptions of economic, functional, and relational value. This underscores the central role of emotional engagement in motivating green furniture purchases. Theoretically, this study enriches customer value theory by demonstrating how emotional value bridges product perceptions and purchase intention in the durable green consumption context. Practically, the findings suggest that green furniture firms can strengthen purchase intention by embedding emotional resonance into product design and marketing, alongside communicating economic, functional, and relational benefits.

Download PDF

Full Article

The Impact of Product Perceived Value on Green Furniture Purchase Intention: The Mediating Role of Customer Value

Tao Shi , Shulan Yu ,* Lu Zhang, and Donglin Li

DOI: 10.15376/biores.21.1.95-115

Keywords: Green furniture; Customer perceived value; Product perceived value; Purchase intention

Contact information: College of Furnishings and Industrial Design, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China; *Corresponding author: yusl@njfu.edu.cn

Graphical Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Against the backdrop of rising global environmental awareness, the furniture industry has become a significant source of environmental pressure due to its high timber consumption, volatile organic compound emissions, and end-of-life disposal challenges (Zhang et al. 2023; Yang and Vezzoli 2024). Consequently, green furniture has attracted widespread attention worldwide and is experiencing robust market growth (Adiguzel et al. 2025). Green furniture is defined by verifiable reductions in environmental impact and protections for human health across its entire lifecycle, rather than by manufacturer claims or specific design processes (Zhu et al. 2023; Xie et al. 2024). This outcome-based standard ties certification to measurable benefits, strengthening consumer trust and avoiding perceptions of the products as merely expensive or bland (Xu et al. 2020b). Numerous studies have confirmed that conventional furniture exerts a substantial negative impact on the environment (Nam et al. 2024; Bubinek et al. 2025). However, despite these concerns, consumer acceptance of green furniture remains low, with inadequate value perceptions emerging as a primary barrier. Therefore, identifying the key factors that drive green furniture consumption behavior is of pressing practical significance.

Most existing studies on green furniture purchasing behavior focus on external factors such as demographics (Shahsavar et al. 2020), materials (Luo et al. 2023; Wang et al. 2022), design (Wang et al. 2024; Wang et al. 2024a), or production process (Luo and Xu 2023; Xu et al. 2023). However, there is a lack of research at the micro-level, particularly regarding the internal psychological mechanisms driving green purchase intention. To better understand how consumers evaluate the value of green products, it is essential to distinguish between two interrelated but distinct concepts: product perceived value and customer value. Product perceived value serves as the necessary cognitive foundation for customer value formation. It reflects consumers’ initial assessments of a product’s core environmental attributes and trustworthiness, essentially representing the product-centered environmental value proposition (Hartmann et al. 2005; Sánchez et al. 2006). Only when consumers form a basic understanding of a product’s environmental value can they further engage in higher-level evaluations of customer value. Customer value, by contrast, involves a comprehensive assessment of the perceived benefits and sacrifices associated with a product, driven by individual needs and goals (Sheth et al. 1991; Biswas and Roy 2015). As such, product perceived value is a critical precondition within the customer value framework.

However, many studies on green purchase intention treat perceived value as a unidimensional construct, failing to account for the differential roles of its various components (Dangelico et al. 2024; Shehawy and Khan 2024). Emotional value—defined as the emotional response associated with specific behaviors—plays a pivotal role in sustainable consumption contexts (ElHaffar et al. 2020; Wang et al. 2022). A lack of emotional resonance often leads consumers to favor traditional products over green alternatives. Emotional value may compensate for potential weaknesses in economic, functional, and relational value dimensions. Specifically, by enhancing emotional engagement, product perceived value can be more effectively transformed into green purchase decisions.

This study centers on the psychological mechanisms underlying consumers’ green furniture purchase decisions. Specifically, it investigates how product perceived value influences green purchase intention through customer perceived value, aiming to clarify the internal decision-making pathway and address the disconnect often observed between consumers’ cognition, attitude, and behavior toward green products.

While customer value theory has been widely applied to explain sustainable consumption behaviors (Ng et al. 2025), empirical research extending this framework to durable goods such as green furniture remains scarce—particularly regarding the role of emotional value in shaping purchase decisions. This study aimed to advance previous green purchase intention models by proposing a novel chain-mediation framework that delineates the cognitive-emotional-rational pathway through which product perceptions translate into purchase decisions. Specifically, the proposed model advances the field in three key aspects: (1) by integrating both product-centric and customer-centric constructs, it provides a more holistic view of the evaluation process; (2) it identifies emotional value as the core mediator that activates and enhances other value dimensions (economic, functional, relational), a mechanism that has been underexplored in the context of green products; and (3) unlike most studies that treat perceived value as a unidimensional construct, there is an empirical validation of a chain-mediation pathway that explains how product-level perceptions cascade through emotional and utilitarian evaluations to ultimately drive purchase decisions. Thus, this research not only extends customer value theory into the domain of durable green goods but also offers a more nuanced and actionable model for understanding and predicting green consumption behavior. The model is empirically tested using CB-SEM analysis based on 915 valid survey responses. Results reveal that green perceived utility and green trust significantly enhance green purchase intention through a chain-mediated pathway centered on emotional value. Emotional value plays a dual role: it is both a direct independent driver of green purchasing intention (parallel path) and a catalyst for strengthening other value dimensions (tandem path). This study delivers a critical theoretical advancement by offering a theoretically meaningful supplement to research practices in the domain of green furniture consumption.

FACTORS RELATED TO PRODUCT PERCEIVED VALUE

Green Perceived Utility

Green perceived utility refers to consumers’ appraisal of the positive environmental impacts generated by a product, which in turn elevates their intention to purchase green items (Biswas and Roy 2015). Studies have demonstrated that when consumers recognize features such as energy savings, carbon reduction, or the use of eco-friendly materials, their willingness to buy increases significantly (Luo et al. 2020; Fraccascia et al. 2023). As furniture is a durable good used over a long period, purchase decisions hinge more on in-depth evaluations of actual utility and brand credibility than impulsive considerations (Zanchini et al. 2022; Liu and Liu 2023). Consequently, green perceived utility effectively captures consumers’ value judgments regarding a green furniture’s environmental performance and stands as a core dimension of product perceived value.

Green Trust

Green trust reflects consumers’ confidence in a brand’s environmental commitments and the authenticity of its green claims (Chen 2013). Trust helps lower perceived risks when purchasing higher-priced green products and encourages consumers to accept favorable motivations to act sustainably (Foroudi et al. 2020). Empirical evidence shows that green trust significantly reduces risk perceptions (Shahid et al. 2024; Xiang and Liu 2024; Fu et al. 2025)—especially for eco-products with premium pricing or complex production processes—and robustly predicts green purchasing behavior (Guan et al. 2024; Rizomyliotis 2024). Thus, green trust is another essential component of product perceived value.

Customer Value Theory

Customer value theory posits that consumers’ subjective trade-off between what they give and what they gain is the fundamental driver of their behavior (Ng et al. 2025). Perceived value is a critical determinant of customer attitudes (Zhang and Zhang 2022), has been widely applied to explain various behaviors including purchase decisions (Su et al. 2019), co-creation in AI contexts (Lee et al. 2024) and trust formation (Lee et al. 2020). Although its mediating role in sustainable consumption has been acknowledged (Ng et al. 2025), its application in the green furniture domain remains underdeveloped.

Emotional Value

Emotional value relates to the positive feelings experienced when using a product or service (Kim et al. 2011). Research indicates that the pleasure, arousal, and dominance consumers feel can greatly enhance the effect of green furniture elements on purchase intention (Gao and Wu 2025). Green furniture consumption often evokes environmental identity and family interaction scenarios that trigger positive emotions (Colombo et al. 2015; Ji et al. 2025). Moreover, media exposure and social discussions can further reinforce these emotional experiences, influencing judgments of other value dimensions (Yu et al. 2024b). Thus, emotional value not only has standalone explanatory power, but it also serves as a prerequisite for eliciting other values, making it a theoretically and practically sound mediator in the decision process.

Economic Value

Economic value is defined as the utility derived from perceived reductions in short- and long-term costs (Sweeney and Soutar 2001). Green products frequently face purchase barriers due to premium pricing, particularly among budget-conscious young consumers. (Hakala et al. 2015). Customers who hold positive perceptions of a green product’s economic value are more inclined to learn about its benefits and make a purchase (Zhang et al. 2024). Given green furniture’s life-cycle advantages in energy savings and durability, economic value is a key factor in explaining purchase intention.

Functional Value

Functional value encompasses consumers’ overall assessment of a product’s physical utility and performance attributes (Chwialkowska et al. 2024). In the field of green furniture, functional evaluation is not limited to basic dimensions such as reliability and durability, but also includes the sustainability of materials (Fan et al. 2024) and clean production processes (Bartoszuk and Kowaluk 2024; Pan et al. 2024) , as well as the actual user experience of the furniture (Zhao and Xu 2023). Including functional value in the model provides a comprehensive reflection of consumers’ perceptions of how green furniture balances performance with sustainability.

Relational Value

Relational value arises from the interactive experiences between consumers and brands, communities, or other customers (Ki and Kim 2019). When consumers integrate this value with social interactions at home or in home-office settings, it continues to grow (Yu and Wu 2024). Studies demonstrate that social circles significantly influence green purchasing decisions by shaping eco-friendly home image (Xu et al. 2020b; Yu et al. 2024a). As such, relational value effectively captures the social decision-making factors beyond individual motives, adding both theoretical breadth and empirical foundation to the model.

Mediating Role of Emotional Value

Emotional value serves as a mediating variable that positively influences consumers’ green purchasing behavior (Wang et al. 2022; Ng et al. 2025). High emotional value triggers stronger green purchase tendencies (Ng and Cheung 2022); when consumers perceive strong emotional value in green furniture, they not only directly form purchase intentions but also become more satisfied with other values (economic, functional, relational), leading to actual green purchases. Accordingly, we posit that emotional value serves not only as an independent predictor of green purchase intention but also as a pivotal mediator that channels the effects of product perceived value into other value dimensions. Based on this reasoning, it is explicitly hypothesized here that emotional value both directly influences purchase intention and indirectly strengthens other forms of perceived value, which in turn shape consumers’ final decision-making.

Green Purchase Intention

Green purchase intention refers to an individual’s enduring cognitive evaluations, emotional resonance, and behavioral inclinations toward green products (Yadav and Pathak 2016). As a durable consumer good, green furniture purchase decisions rest not only on rational assessments of product and brand attributes but also on emotional identification and value resonance (Xu et al. 2020a). A positive attitude toward green furniture is thus the most critical determinant of green purchase intention. Building a comprehensive chain of perceived value is essential for deeply understanding how these intentions are formed.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Over the years, emotional value has often been invoked to explain behavioural attitudes (Tong et al. 2022; Oliveira et al. 2023), yet it has not been the focus of in-depth discussion (Grønhøj and Thøgersen 2017). In this study, green perceived utility and green trust were positioned as the core dimensions of product perceived value. The goal was, via the multidimensional structure of customer perceived value, to uncover the pathway by which green furniture purchase intentions are formed. Specifically, as consumers experience increasing green perceived utility and trust in a piece of furniture, their overall perceived value is cultivated, which in turn elicits emotional, economic, functional, and relational value. Once a sufficient chain of perceived‐value creation has been established, consumers are more likely to adopt a green purchase attitude. Drawing on prior literature linking perceived value to green purchase intention, a conceptual model (Fig. 1) is proposed with the following hypotheses:

H1. Green perceived utility positively influences (a) emotional value, (b) economic value, (c) functional value, and (d) relational value.

H2. Green trust positively influences (a) emotional value, (b) economic value, (c) functional value, and (d) relational value.

H3. Emotional value positively influences (a) economic value, (b) functional value, and (c) relational value.

H4. (a) Economic value, (b) functional value, and (c) relational value each positively influence green purchase attitude.

H5. Emotional value mediates the relationship between (a) green perceived utility and green purchase intention and (b) green trust and green purchase intention.

H6. Emotional value and (a) economic value, (b) functional value, and (c) relational value together regulate the chain between green perceived utility and green purchase intention.

H7. Emotional value and (a) economic value, (b) functional value, and (c) relational value together regulate the chain between green trust and green purchase intentions.

Fig. 1. Theoretical framework

EXPERIMENTAL

Data Collection

Data were collected through Sojump (www.sojump.com), a professional Chinese online survey platform that maintains a large nationwide panel of registered users. The platform recruited potential participants by sending out survey invitations—via email and internal messaging systems—to a random sample. Stratified by age, gender, and geographic region, this sample was designed to approximate the distribution of the national population. Judgemental sampling was employed to obtain a valid sample and reduce non-response bias (Rowley 2014), ensuring that participants could meaningfully evaluate product perceived value, emotional value, and purchase intention—consistent with methodological practices in sustainability research (Ghaffar et al. 2023; Lavuri et al. 2023).

Table 1. Distribution of the Respondents (N = 915)

Before entering the main questionnaire, a mandatory pre-screening question was conducted to confirm whether the respondents had purchased or used at least one piece of green furniture. Only participants who passed this screening were allowed to proceed with the survey, thus ensuring the relevance and validity of the sample. Therefore, individuals who did not meet these criteria were excluded from the study. Because all questions were mandatory, there were no missing values in the dataset, and a total of 948 respondents participated in the survey, excluding 33 invalid questionnaires. Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics of the respondents.

Measurements

All constructs were adapted from established scales in the literature and contextualised for this study. To ensure conceptual accuracy and appropriateness in the Chinese context, a forward-backward translation procedure was employed (Beaton et al. 2000), as the original scales were in English. Two language instructors were consulted to verify that each item accurately reflected its intended construct. Prior to full-scale administration, a pilot test with 10 individuals who had purchased green furniture in the previous three months was conducted; exploratory factor analysis revealed Cronbach’s α > 0.70 for all constructs, confirming reliability (Hair et al. 2020).

The final questionnaire was administered in Mandarin Chinese and comprised two sections: (1) demographic information (gender, age, education, income); and (2) measurement items for product perceived value (green perceived utility, green trust), customer perceived value (emotional, economic, functional, relational), and green purchase attitude. All items were rated on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = “strongly disagree” to 7 = “strongly agree”).

Specifically, the topic of measuring consumers’ willingness to buy was adapted from the study conducted by Amin and Tarun (2020). For product perceived value, the topic of green perceived utility was adapted from previous studies (Chang 2011; Dangelico et al. 2024), and the topic of green trust was adapted as well (Chen 2013; Chen and Chang 2013). For the topic of customer perceived value, both adapted from Carlson et al. 2019 and Ng et al. (2025) conducted a study that included 4 measurement dimensions with a total of 12 measurement items.

Analytical Techniques

First, the results were analyzed descriptively. Then, a two-step approach was applied using AMOS 29.0. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to assess and validate the measurement model; hypothesis testing was performed using structural equation modelling (SEM).

Given the sensitivity of the χ² statistic to large sample sizes, model fit was evaluated using multiple indices (Hu and Bentler 1998; Tabachnick and Fidell 2007): χ2/df ratio, goodness of fit index (GFI), adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI), normal fit index (NFI), incremental fit index (IFI), comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA).

Common Method Bias (CMB)

In the a priori approach, the measurement items were refined after pre-testing, using a variety of scale formats, and the items in the questionnaire were randomised to avoid bias in the respondents’ response array. The privacy of the respondents was ensured. During data collection, it was emphasised that there were no right/wrong answers. In the post hoc methodology, Harman’s one-way test was used. This test showed that 34.65% of the total variance (less than the 40% threshold) was explained by a single factor, confirming the absence of CMB (Podsakoff et al. 2003).

Measurement Model: Reliability and Validity Assessment

The measurement model was evaluated via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The model comprised seven latent constructs: Green Perceived Utility, Green Trust, Emotional Value, Economic Value, Functional Value, Relational Value, and Green Purchase Intention. Fit indices indicated excellent model fit (Anderson and Gerbing 1988); the specific values and recommended thresholds are presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Model Fitting Index

Average Variance Extracted (AVE) (suggested threshold 0.5), Composite Reliability (CR) (suggested threshold 0.7), and Cronbach’s Alpha (suggested threshold 0.7) were used to check the reliability. All factor loadings exceeded the value of 0.50; the Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for each factor exceeded 0.70, and CR and AVE were above the critical values of 0.70 and 0.50; therefore, all constructs reached the minimum thresholds for good convergent validity and reliability (Fornell and Larcker 1981; Biswas and Roy 2015), as shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Validity and Reliability of the Constructs

To investigate the discriminant validity, the Fornell and Larcker (1981) discriminant criterion was used. Table 4 shows the correlation matrix and AVE for each construct. All constructs proved discriminant validity as the AVE was higher than the squared correlation coefficient between each construct and the others.

Table 4. Discriminant Validity: AVE Square Root Values

Measurement Models: Hypothesis Testing

The structural model was assessed using SEM. Fit statistics again met or exceeded recommended criteria (Table 5). As shown in Table 6, Green Perceived Utility positively predicted Emotional Value (β = 0.316, p < .001),

Table 5. Discriminant Validity: AVE Square Root Values

Table 6. Structural Equation Model Validation Results

Economic Value (β = 0.255, p < .001), Functional Value (β = 0.184, p < .001), and Relational Value (β = 0.176, p < .001), supporting H1a–d. Green Trust likewise had significant positive effects on Emotional Value (β = 0.248, p < .001), Economic Value (β = 0.229, p < .001), Functional Value (β = 0.146, p < .001), and Relational Value (β = 0.216, p < .001), supporting H2a–d. Emotional Value significantly predicted Economic Value (β = 0.147, p < .001), Functional Value (β = 0.181, p < .001), and Relational Value (β = 0.174, p < .001), supporting H3a–c. Finally, Emotional Value (β = 0.169, p < .001), Economic Value (β = 0.126, p < .001), Functional Value (β = 0.088, p = .009), and Relational Value (β = 0.081, p = .017) each significantly predicted Green Purchase Intention, supporting H4a–d.

Mediation Analysis

To analyse the mediating role of perceived value, this study followed the recommended procedure. It is worth noting that emotional value is important as a mediator. Emotional value was found to be a significant partial mediator between Green Perceived Utility and Green Purchase Intention (β = 0.302, p < .001) and between Green Trust and Green Purchase Intention (β = 0.190, p < .001), supporting H5a and H5b.

The results of the bootstrap test using bias-corrected percentile bootstrap results were resampled 5,000 times to ensure the stability of the estimates and the accuracy of the confidence intervals. In bootstrap analyses, mediating effects are considered significant if the 95% confidence interval does not include 0 (Li and Qu 2025). Green perceived utility indirectly influences green purchase through the chain mediation of emotional value and economic value (β = 0.254, 95% CI = [0.169, 0.339]), functional value (β = 0.248, 95% CI = [0.163, 0.335]), and relationship value (β = 0.253, 95% CI = [0.168, 0.339]). These findings support H6a, H6b, and H6c. Green trust indirectly affects green purchasing through the chain mediating effects of emotional value and economic value (β=0.153, 95% CI=[0.078, 0.233]), functional value (β=0.152, 95% CI=[0.078, 0.232]), and relational value (β=0.152, 95% CI=[0.077, 0.231]) of the Chain mediation, which indirectly affects green purchase intention, thereby supporting H7a, H7b, and H7c. Table 7 summarises the mediation analyses, while the PLS results of the structural model are shown in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2. Result of structural modeling analysis

Table 7. Mediation Effect Analysis Results

DISCUSSION

Conceptual Findings

This study deepens the understanding of how consumers form green purchase intentions in the context of green furniture. Drawing on customer value theory, the findings of this work support the view that consumers’ purchase intentions are not only influenced by rational evaluations, but also by a range of emotional and multidimensional value evaluations. This is consistent with previous research on customer value theory on consumption (Ng et al. 2025).

Although this study focuses on the Chinese market, its findings align with broader global patterns. Comparative evidence shows that value drivers of green purchasing differ across regions: European consumers emphasize social image and recognition, while non-European groups value novelty, curiosity, and trust (Nekmahmud et al. 2022). In Latin America, attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control significantly predict willingness to pay for green products (García-Salirrosas et al. 2024). Within Asia, a study comparing South Korea and China found that collectivism in China positively affects green purchase intention and strengthens the role of environmental collective efficacy (Lee 2017). These patterns are consistent with recent findings that cultural norms shape sustainable consumption (Randall et al. 2024), willingness to pay varies across markets (Khan et al. 2024), and moral emotions such as anticipated pride act as universal motivators (Chae et al. 2024). Given China’s collectivist orientation, consumers may be particularly sensitive to emotional cues embedded in green products—such as environmental symbolism, family well-being, and community identity—making emotional value a more decisive mediator than in individualistic contexts. Overall, while the psychological mechanisms of green purchasing are universal, their expressions differ across cultures, underscoring the need to interpret Chinese consumers’ behavior within a global perspective.

An important finding of this study is the central mediating role of emotional value in the green furniture consumption decision process. Emotional value is both an independent and interdependent concept that links consumers’ initial perception of value with more tangeable evaluations (e.g., economic, functional, and relational considerations). This hierarchical value construction process is consistent with previous research findings that emotional engagement can amplify perceived product utility and elicit stronger consumer responses in sustainability-related decisions (Wang and Wu 2016; Lavuri et al. 2023). The progression from emotional resonance to rational evaluation reflects a “dual process” path, in which emotional cues activate deeper value interpretations, ultimately facilitating a transition from attitude to intention (Liang et al. 2019).

The findings confirm that multidimensional customer value—comprising emotional, economic, functional, and relational dimensions—offers a comprehensive framework for understanding green furniture purchase behavior. This aligns with the theoretical premise that sustainable consumption is not driven by a single motive, but rather by a constellation of factors, including emotional experience, cost–benefit evaluation, performance appraisal, and social value reinforcement. Specifically, in terms of economic value, green furniture is usually more expensive, and consumers tend to focus more on long-term returns when forming purchase intentions (Hsu et al. 2017). In terms of functional value, consumer evaluation extends beyond basic utility to include enhanced criteria such as the safety of eco-friendly materials and the sustainability of production processes, reflecting a broader set of performance expectations for green products (Cheung and To 2019). Engagement with eco-brand communities, peer recognition, and symbolic identity expression all contribute to reinforcing environmentally friendly choices. This finding is consistent with prior research linking social connectedness, symbolic consumption, and pro-environmental behavior (Fang 2024; Wu and Long 2024).

From a theoretical perspective, previous studies have paid less attention to how emotional value interacts with other value dimensions in the context of green furniture purchases (Yu et al. 2024b). This study extends the application of customer value theory and demonstrates its explanatory power in the field of durable green products. By elucidating the order and structure of these interactions, the present model provides a replicable framework for analyzing complex consumer behavior in similar high-involvement sustainable consumption contexts.

Practical Implications

This study has many practical implications and provides a scientific basis and application reference for furniture industry practitioners, marketers, and policy makers. First, the results show that green perceived utility and green trust significantly enhance consumers’ green purchasing intention through emotional value and multidimensional customer value. This finding provides guidance for green furniture companies in product development, brand communication, and marketing strategy formulation, enabling them to more specifically stimulate consumers’ emotional resonance and value identification. Secondly, the study further reveals the dynamic role of consumers’ cognition, emotion, and rational value evaluation of green furniture in purchasing decisions, providing a path for companies to integrate multidimensional value propositions in practice. Specifically, the practical implications of this study include the following:

Product value delivery and emotional resonance: Firms can highlight the environmental characteristics of furniture (such as low-carbon materials and recyclability) in product promotion, thereby enhancing consumers’ emotional resonance and trust through storytelling and the creation of a green brand image.

Multi-dimensional value experience: In brand communication and sales processes, companies may emphasize the comprehensive advantages of green furniture in terms of economic value (long-term energy savings, durability), functional value (quality, comfort), and relational value (community identity, symbolic meaning). This approach enables consumers to form a more complete understanding at both rational and emotional levels.

Interactive marketing and community building: Social media, short video platforms, and offline experience stores can be used to foster a green consumption community, thereby strengthening consumers’ sense of relational value and brand belonging.

Price and value communication: Pricing tools such as installment payments, green subsidies, and coupons can help reduce the purchase threshold. At the same time, the long-term economic benefits of green furniture may be conveyed through visualization tools (e.g., comparative tables of energy-saving returns), thereby improving consumers’ perception of cost-effectiveness.

Finally, the results of this study not only provide a practical reference for the green furniture industry, but they also provide important inspiration for other durable goods industries in improving the acceptance of green products, optimizing emotions and multi-dimensional value delivery. Other researchers can refer to the methodological framework of this study to further explore the psychological mechanism of green consumption under different product categories or cultural backgrounds.

Limitations and Future Research Directions

The research sample is limited to mainland China. Differences in cultural values may affect the formation mechanism of green trust and emotional value. Future research can test whether the mediating role of emotional value is equally significant when comparing societies with different cultural backgrounds, thereby improving the universality of the model. Furthermore, research could also focus on well-defined consumer groups within specific national or regional markets. Such an approach would maintain the advantages of using a single language and cultural context while providing deeper insights into market-specific drivers of green furniture purchase, thereby usefully complementing broader cross-cultural studies.

Secondly, this study failed to capture the dynamic process of consumers’ green cognition and behavior changing over time. Subsequent studies can use longitudinal tracking or experimental methods to further verify the causal stability of the chain mediation path. Furthermore, future research could also expand the scope of green consumption research beyond the purchase phase to the post-purchase phase. Longitudinal research examining such behavioral patterns would provide deeper insights into the lifecycle impacts of green purchasing decisions and clarify whether initial green aspirations translate into sustained environmental benefits.

In addition, although this study covers the four dimensions of perceived value, it has not yet included potential variables such as environmental responsibility and social norms. These factors may play an important role in green consumption. It is recommended to further enrich the model structure in the future. Finally, the study mainly relies on self-report data, which has the risk of social desirability bias. In the future, it can be combined with behavioral data methods such as eye tracking and virtual reality experience to improve the ecological validity and application reference value of the research conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the customer value theory, this study constructed a chain mediation model of “product perceived value-emotional value-multidimensional customer value-green purchase intention,” and it used the covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM) method to conduct an empirical test on 915 sample data.
The study found that both green perceived utility and green trust significantly and positively affect emotional value, economic value, functional value, and relationship value. Emotional value not only directly enhances green purchase intention, but it also forms a chain mediation effect by enhancing economic value, functional value and relationship value, significantly promoting consumers’ green purchase decisions.
This study systematically expounded the bridge role of emotional value in the cognition-attitude-behavior transformation path in the context of green furniture durables for the first time, verifying that emotional value has both direct influence and plays an important indirect mediation role in multidimensional customer value. This finding enriches the perspective of green consumption research and provides new evidence for explaining green purchase intention in the field of high-involvement durables.
The limitations of this study include the following: The sample was limited to mainland China, which may be affected by differences in cultural values; the cross-sectional data design cannot capture the dynamic process of consumers’ green purchasing intentions changing over time; and potential variables such as environmental responsibility and social norms are not included. Future research can further verify the applicability and stability of the model through cross-cultural sample comparison, longitudinal tracking, and experimental methods.
The results of this study can provide practical guidance for green furniture companies in product design, marketing communication, brand management, etc., and also provide reference for the government to formulate green consumption incentive policies, which will help promote the acceptance of the green furniture market and the sustainable development of the industry.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors are grateful for the support of the Joint Research Program of Nanjing Forestry University, Jiangsu Co-Innovation Center of Efficient Processing and Utilization of Forest Resources, College of Furnishings and Industrial Design (Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China), and Major Project to Promote the Implementation of the 14th Five-Year Plan for the Integrated Development of the Yangtze River Delta—Public Service Platform for Social Assistance in the Yangtze River Delta (Project Code: 2201.320000-04-04-685162).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the Declaration of Helsinki and was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the authors’ institution (protocol code 2025013, approved on 12 January 2025). The Board found the experimental design and protocol to be scientifically sound, fair, and impartial; determined that the recruitment of subjects was based on voluntary informed consent with full protection of participants’ rights, interests, and privacy; confirmed that the study posed no harm or risk to participants; and verified that there were no conflicts of interest or violations of moral, ethical, or legal standards. The Institutional Review Board agreed that the project was proceeding as planned.

Data Availability

The datasets used and analyzed in this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

REFERENCES CITED

Adiguzel, Z., Cakir, F. S., and Morgul, U. A. (2025). “Effectiveness in the furniture industry: Artificial intelligence, big data and sustainable design,” Management Decision (ahead of print). DOI: 10.1108/MD-05-2024-1022

Amin, S., and Tarun, M. T. (2020). “Effect of consumption values on customers’ green purchase intention: a mediating role of green trust,” Social Responsibility Journal 17(8), 1320-1336. DOI: 10.1108/SRJ-05-2020-0191

Anderson, J. C., and Gerbing, D. W. (1988). “Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach,” Psychological Bulletin 103(3), 411-423. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411

Bartoszuk, K., and Kowaluk, G. (2024). “Utilization of fibrous mat residues from upholstered furniture as sustainable fillers in plywood production,” Materials 17(16), 4080. DOI: 10.3390/ma17164080

Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., and Ferraz, M. B. (2000). “Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures,” Spine 25(24), 3186-3191. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014

Biswas, A., and Roy, M. (2015). “Leveraging factors for sustained green consumption behavior based on consumption value perceptions: Testing the structural model,” Journal of Cleaner Production 95, 332-340. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.042

Bubinek, R., Knaack, U., and Cimpan, C. (2025). “Reuse of consumer products: Climate account and rebound effects potential,” Sustainable Production and Consumption 54, 190-201. DOI: 10.1016/j.spc.2024.12.019

Carlson, J., Wyllie, J., Rahman, M. M., and Voola, R. (2019). “Enhancing brand relationship performance through customer participation and value creation in social media brand communities,” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 50, 333-341. DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.07.008

Chang, C. (2011). “Feeling ambivalent about going green,” Journal of Advertising 40(4), 19-32. DOI: 10.2753/JOA0091-3367400402

Chae, M.-J., Kim, Y., and Roh, T. (2024). “Consumers’ attention, experience, and action to organic consumption: the moderating role of anticipated pride and moral obligation,” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 79, article 103824. DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103824

Chen, Y.-S. (2013). “Towards green loyalty: Driving from green perceived value, green satisfaction, and green trust,” Sustainable Development 21(5), 294-308. DOI: 10.1002/sd.500

Chen, Y.-S., and Chang, C.-H. (2013). “Greenwash and green trust: The mediation effects of green consumer confusion and green perceived risk,” Journal of Business Ethics 114(3), 489-500. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-012-1360-0

Cheung, M. F. Y., and To, W. M. (2019). “An extended model of value-attitude-behavior to explain Chinese consumers’ green purchase behavior,” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 50, 145-153. DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.04.006

Chwialkowska, A., Bhatti, W. A., Bujac, A., and Abid, S. (2024). “An interplay of the consumption values and green behavior in developed markets: A sustainable development viewpoint,” Sustainable Development 32(4), 3771-3785. DOI: 10.1002/sd.2867

Colombo, B., Laddaga, S., and Antonietti, A. (2015). “Psychology and design. The influence of the environment’s representation over emotion and cognition. An ET study on Ikea design,” in: 6^th International Conference on Applied Human Factors AND Ergonomics (AHFE 2015) and the Affiliated Conferences, T. Ahram, W. Karwowski, and D. Schmorrow (eds.), Las Vegas, NV, USA, pp. 2259-2266. DOI: 10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.370

Dangelico, R. M., Fraccascia, L., and Strazzullo, S. (2024). “Determinants of the intention to purchase sustainable beer: Do gender and type of sustainable solution matter?,” Business Strategy and the Environment 33(7), 6748-6772. DOI: 10.1002/bse.3841

ElHaffar, G., Durif, F., and Dube, L. (2020). “Towards closing the attitude-intention-behavior gap in green consumption: a narrative review of the literature and an overview of future research directions,” Journal of Cleaner Production 275, article 122556. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122556

Fan, Y., Zhu, Z., Luan, J., and Liu, Y. (2024). “Exploring the application method of bamboo powder in promoting the development of sustainable outdoor furniture,” Sustainability 16(24), article 11282. DOI: 10.3390/su162411282

Fang, Z. (2024). “Greenwashing versus green authenticity: how green social media influences consumer perceptions and green purchase decisions,” Sustainability 16(23), article 10723. DOI: 10.3390/su162310723

Fornell, C., and Larcker, D. F. (1981). “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error,” Journal of Marketing Research 18(1), 39-50. DOI: 10.2307/3151312

Foroudi, P., Nazarian, A., Ziyadin, S., Kitchen, P., Hafeez, K., Priporas, C., and Pantano, E. (2020). “Co-creating brand image and reputation through stakeholder’s social network,” Journal of Business Research 114, 42-59. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.03.035

Fraccascia, L., Ceccarelli, G., and Dangelico, R. M. (2023). “Green products from industrial symbiosis: Are consumers ready for them?,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 189, article 122395. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122395

Fu, S., Hu, X., Zhang, C., and Li, Z. (2025). “A study on the influence of production and environmental information transparency on online consumers’ purchase intention of green agricultural products,” British Food Journal 127(4), 1461-1479. DOI: 10.1108/BFJ-09-2024-0889

Gao, S., and Wu, L. (2025). “Understanding consumer preferences for hedonic furniture: A push-pull-mooring analysis,” Empirical Studies of the Arts. DOI: 10.1177/02762374251320523

Grønhøj, A., and Thøgersen, J. (2017). “Why young people do things for the environment: The role of parenting for adolescents’ motivation to engage in pro-environmental behaviour,” Journal of Environmental Psychology 54, 11-19. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.09.005

García-Salirrosas, E. E., Escobar-Farfán, M., Gómez-Bayona, L., Moreno-López, G., Valencia-Arias, A., and Gallardo-Canales, R. (2024). “Influence of environmental awareness on the willingness to pay for green products: An analysis under the application of the theory of planned behavior in the Peruvian market,” Frontiers in Psychology, Frontiers 14, article 1282383. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1282383

Ghaffar, A., Islam, T., Khan, H., Kincl, T., and Sharma, A. (2023). “A sustainable retailer’s journey to sustainable practices: Prioritizing the customer and the planet,” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 74, article 103388. DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103388

Guan, D., Lei, Y., Liu, Y., and Ma, Q. (2024). “The effect of matching promotion type with purchase type on green consumption,” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78, article 103732. DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103732

Hair, J. F., Howard, M. C., and Nitzl, C. (2020). “Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis,” Journal of Business Research 109, 101-110. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.069

Hakala, I., Autio, M., and Toppinen, A. (2015). “Young Finnish and German consumers’ furniture acquisition – Wooden, inherited or just low price?,” International Journal of Consumer Studies 39(5), 445-451. DOI: 10.1111/ijcs.12189

Hartmann, P., Apaolaza Ibáñez, V., and Forcada Sainz, F. J. (2005). “Green branding effects on attitude: functional versus emotional positioning strategies,” Marketing Intelligence & Planning 23(1), 9-29. DOI: 10.1108/02634500510577447

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

Hu, L., and Bentler, P. M. (1998). “Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification,” Psychological Methods 3(4), 424-453. DOI: 10.1037/1082-989x.3.4.424

Ji, Y., Sun, Y., Qiu, S., and Geng, X. (2025). “Simultaneous multimodal measures for aesthetic evaluation of furniture color and form,” Scientific Reports 15(1), article 2920. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-87086-5

Khan, O., Varaksina, N., and Hinterhuber, A. (2024). “The influence of cultural differences on consumers’ willingness to pay more for sustainable fashion,” Journal of Cleaner Production 442, article 141024. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141024

Ki, C.-W. ‘Chloe,’ and Kim, Y.-K. (2019). “The mechanism by which social media influencers persuade consumers: The role of consumers’ desire to mimic,” Psychology & Marketing 36(10), 905-922. DOI: 10.1002/mar.21244

Kim, H.-W., Gupta, S., and Koh, J. (2011). “Investigating the intention to purchase digital items in social networking communities: A customer value perspective,” Information & Management 48(6), 228-234. DOI: 10.1016/j.im.2011.05.004

Lavuri, R., Roubaud, D., and Grebinevych, O. (2023). “Sustainable consumption behaviour: mediating role of pro-environment self-identity, attitude, and moderation role of environmental protection emotion,” Journal of Environmental Management 347, article 119106. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119106

Lee, S.-H., Choi, S.-J., and Kim, H.-W. (2020). “What makes people send gifts via social network services? A mixed methods approach,” Internet Research 30(1), 315-334. DOI: 10.1108/INTR-12-2018-0551

Lee, W. H. H., Chan, S. H. G., and Tang, B. M. (2024). “Paradigm of symbiosis as a mechanism of artificial intelligence and customers’ patronage decision in the hospitality sector: The moderating role of customer engagement,” Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research. DOI: 10.1080/10941665.2024.2363884

Lee, Y. K. (2017). “A comparative study of green purchase intention between Korean and Chinese consumers: The moderating role of collectivism,” Sustainability 9(10), article 1930. DOI: 10.3390/su9101930

Li, C., and Qu, W. (2025). “The impact of social exclusion on experiential sports consumption: the chain mediating roles of loneliness and the need for social connection,” Frontiers in Psychology 16, article 1532643. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1532643

Liang, D., Hou, C., Jo, M.-S., and Sarigollu, E. (2019). “Pollution avoidance and green purchase: The role of moral emotions,” Journal of Cleaner Production 210, 1301-1310. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.103

Liu, K.-T., and Liu, W.-Y. (2023). “Assessing the information value of wood products perceived from young consumers,” European Journal of Wood and Wood Products 81(3), 801-814. DOI: 10.1007/s00107-022-01873-9

Luo, B., Sun, Y., Shen, J., and Xia, L. (2020). “How does green advertising skepticism on social media affect consumer intention to purchase green products?,” Journal of Consumer Behaviour 19(4), 371-381. DOI: 10.1002/cb.1818

Luo, Y., and Xu, W. (2023). “Optimization of panel furniture plates rework based on intelligent manufacturing,” BioResources 18(3), 5198-5208. DOI: 10.15376/biores.18.3.5198-5208

Luo, Z., Xu, W., and Wu, S. (2023). “Performances of green velvet material (PLON) used in upholstered furniture,” BioResources 18(3), 5108-5119. DOI: 10.15376/biores.18.3.5108-5119

Nam, H. K., Choi, J., Jing, T., Yang, D., Lee, Y., Kim, Y.-R., Le, T.-S. D., Kim, B., Yu, L., Kim, S.-W., Park, I., and Kim, Y.-J. (2024). “Laser-induced graphene formation on recycled woods for green smart furniture,” ECOMAT 6(4), article 12447. DOI: 10.1002/eom2.12447

Nekmahmud, Md., Ramkissoon, H., and Fekete-Farkas, M. (2022). “Green purchase and sustainable consumption: A comparative study between European and non-European tourists,” Tourism Management Perspectives 43, article 100980. DOI: 10.1016/j.tmp.2022.100980

Ng, P. M. L., Chan, J. K. Y., Lit, K. K., Cheung, C. T. Y., Lau, M. M., Wan, C., and Choy, E. T. K. (2025). “The impact of social media exposure and online peer networks on green purchase behavior,” Computers in Human Behavior 165, article 108517. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2024.108517

Ng, P. M. L., and Cheung, C. T. Y. (2022). “Why do young people do things for the environment? The effect of perceived values on pro-environmental behaviour,” Young Consumers 23(4), 539-554. DOI: 10.1108/YC-11-2021-1411

Oliveira, J. R. de, Limongi, R., Lim, W. M., Eastman, J. K., and Kumar, S. (2023). “A story to sell: The influence of storytelling on consumers’ purchasing behavior,” Psychology & Marketing 40(2), 239-261. DOI: 10.1002/mar.21758

Pan, J., Xia, Z., Lu, J., Zhang, H., and Liu, Y. (2024). “Natural dye extracted from Pterocarpus santalinus wood waste for green dyeing and its binding mechanism with yak wool fabrics,” Industrial Crops and Products 210, article 118121. DOI: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2024.118121

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., and Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). “Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies,” The Journal of Applied Psychology 88(5), 879-903. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

Randall, T., Cousins, A. L., Neilson, L., Price, M., Hardman, C. A., and Wilkinson, L. L. (2024). “Sustainable food consumption across western and non-western cultures: A scoping review considering the theory of planned behaviour,” Food Quality and Preference 114, article 105086. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2023.105086

Rizomyliotis, I. (2024). “Consumer trust and online purchase intention for sustainable products,” American Behavioral Scientist. DOI: 10.1177/00027642241236174

Rowley, J. (2014). “Designing and using research questionnaires,” Management Research Review 37(3), 308-330. DOI: 10.1108/MRR-02-2013-0027

Sánchez, J., Callarisa, L., Rodríguez, R. M., and Moliner, M. A. (2006). “Perceived value of the purchase of a tourism product,” Tourism Management 27(3), 394-409. DOI: 10.1016/j.tourman.2004.11.007

Shahid, Z. A., Tariq, M. I., Paul, J., Naqvi, S. A., and Hallo, L. (2024). “Signaling theory and its relevance in international marketing: A systematic review and future research agenda,” International Marketing Review 41(2), 514-561. DOI: 10.1108/IMR-04-2022-0092

Shahsavar, T., Kubes, V., and Baran, D. (2020). “Willingness to pay for eco-friendly furniture based on demographic factors,” Journal of Cleaner Production 250, article 119466. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119466

Shehawy, Y. M., and Khan, S. M. F. A. (2024). “Consumer readiness for green consumption: the role of green awareness as a moderator of the relationship between green attitudes and purchase intentions,” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78, article 103739. DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103739

Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., and Gross, B. L. (1991). “Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values,” Journal of Business Research 22(2), 159-170. DOI: 10.1016/0148-2963(91)90050-8

Su, L., Li, Y., and Li, W. (2019). “Understanding consumers’ purchase intention for online paid knowledge: A customer value perspective,” Sustainability 11(19), article 5420. DOI: 10.3390/su11195420

Sweeney, J. C., and Soutar, G. N. (2001). “Consumer perceived value: The development of a multiple item scale,” Journal of Retailing 77(2), 203-220. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-4359(01)00041-0

Tabachnick, B. G., and Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics, 5^th Ed., Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education, Boston, MA, USA.

Tong, X., Chen, Y., Zhou, S., and Yang, S. (2022). “How background visual complexity influences purchase intention in live streaming: The mediating role of emotion and the moderating role of gender,” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 67, article 103031. DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.103031

Wang, C., Zhang, C., and Zhu, Y. (2024a). “Reverse design and additive manufacturing of furniture protective foot covers,” BioResources 19(3), 4670-4678. DOI: 10.15376/biores.19.3.4670-4678

Wang, J., and Wu, L. (2016). “The impact of emotions on the intention of sustainable consumption choices: Evidence from a big city in an emerging country,” Journal of Cleaner Production 126, 325-336. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.119

Wang, J., Liang, Q., Ma, X., Wei, Y., and Chen, Y. (2024). “Research on the design of growable solid wood children’s beds,” BioResources 19(4), 8257-8272. DOI: 10.15376/biores.19.4.8257-8272

Wang, L., Zhang, Q., and Wong, P. P. W. (2022). “Purchase intention for green cars among Chinese millennials: Merging the value-attitude-behavior theory and theory of planned behavior,” Frontiers in Psychology 13, article 786292. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.786292

Wang, Y., Wu, Y., Yang, F., Yang, L., Wang, J., Zhou, J., and Wang, J. (2022). “A highly transparent compressed wood prepared by cell wall densification,” Wood Science and Technology 56(2), 669-686. DOI: 10.1007/s00226-022-01372-3

Wu, M., and Long, R. (2024). “How does green communication promote the green consumption intention of social media users?,” Environmental Impact Assessment Review 106, article 107481. DOI: 10.1016/j.eiar.2024.107481

Xiang, P., and Liu, Z. (2024). “Is it both sufficient and necessary to disclose environmental information regarding the origin on consumer purchases?,” Sustainability 16(12), article 5017. DOI: 10.3390/su16125017

Xie, X., Zhu, J., Ding, S., and Chen, J. (2024). “AHP and GCA combined approach to green design evaluation of kindergarten furniture,” Sustainability 16(1), article 1. DOI: 10.3390/su16010001

Xu, X., Hua, Y., Wang, S., and Xu, G. (2020a). “Determinants of consumer’s intention to purchase authentic green furniture,” Resources Conservation and Recycling 156, article 104721. DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104721

Xu, X., Wang, S., and Yu, Y. (2020b). “Consumer’s intention to purchase green furniture: Do health consciousness and environmental awareness matter?,” Science of the Total Environment 704, article 135275. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135275

Xu, X., Xiong, X., Yue, X., and Zhang, M. (2023). “A parametric optimized method for three-dimensional corner joints in wooden furniture,” Forests 14(5), article 1063. DOI: 10.3390/f14051063

Yadav, R., and Pathak, G. S. (2016). “Young consumers’ intention towards buying green products in a developing nation: Extending the theory of planned behavior,” Journal of Cleaner Production 135, 732-739. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.120

Yang, D., and Vezzoli, C. (2024). “Designing environmentally sustainable furniture products: furniture-specific life cycle design guidelines and a toolkit to promote environmental performance,” Sustainability 16(7), article 2628. DOI: 10.3390/su16072628

Yu, S., and Wu, Z. (2024). “Research on the influence mechanism of short video communication effect of furniture brand: Based on ELM model and regression analysis,” BioResources 19(2), 3191-3207. DOI: 10.15376/biores.19.2.3191-3207

Yu, S., Zhang, H., Zheng, Q., Chu, D., Chen, T., and Chen, X. (2024a). “Consumer behavior based on the SOR model: How do short video advertisements affect furniture consumers’ purchase intentions?,” BioResources 19(2), 2639-2659. DOI: 10.15376/biores.19.2.2639-2659

Yu, S., Zhong, Z., Zhu, Y., and Sun, J. (2024b). “Green emotion: Incorporating emotional perception in green marketing to increase green furniture purchase intentions,” Sustainability 16(12), article 4935. DOI: 10.3390/su16124935

Zanchini, R., Blanc, S., Pippinato, L., Poratelli, F., Bruzzese, S., and Brun, F. (2022). “Enhancing wood products through ENplus, FSC and PEFC certifications: Which attributes do consumers value the most?,” Forest Policy and Economics 142, article 102782. DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102782

Zhang, J., and Zhang, L. (2022). “Value drivers of government issued mobile coupons usage,” Industrial Management & Data Systems 122(3), 702-728. DOI: 10.1108/IMDS-12-2020-0727

Zhang, X., Chen, K., and Li, S. (2024). “The effects of green advertising appeal and message type on purchase intention,” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 81, article 104007. DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.104007

Zhang, Z., Zhu, J., and Qi, Q. (2023). “Research on the recyclable design of wooden furniture based on the recyclability evaluation,” Sustainability 15(24), article 16758. DOI: 10.3390/su152416758

Zhao, Y., and Xu, Y. (2023). “Evaluation model for modular children’s wooden storage cabinet design,” BioResources 18(4), 7818–7838. DOI: 10.15376/biores.18.4.7818-7838

Zhu, L., Yan, Y., and Lv, J. (2023). “A bibliometric analysis of current knowledge structure and research progress related to sustainable furniture design systems,” Sustainability 15(11), article 8622. DOI: 10.3390/su15118622

Article submitted: June 28, 2025; Peer review completed: August 23, 2025; Revised version received: September 4, 2025; Accepted: October 14, 2025; Published: November 10, 2025.

DOI: 10.15376/biores.21.1.95-115